MAY. 16 1918 %0] tear before it the very next morning. Thus began a series of arbitrary and despotic transactions, disgrace- ful to the character of a Christian society. It is a long and forlorn story, and we shall be obliged to confine ourselves to the prominent and essential features. The object at first seemed to be, to entrap him unwa- rily by questions into some admission which they might use to his disadvantage ; but this being seen and avoided, they then brought against him sundry complaints, such as that he had made a visit to Philadelphia, when lie must have known that they did not wish him to go thither, although he had gone witli a minute of unity from his Monthly Meeting, to attend Philadelphia 52 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. Yearly Meeting ; that he kept company with young men (who did not approve of the new views and meas- ures) such as T. B. Gould, George F. Read, etc. ; that he had written and spoken against J. J. Gurney, and spread long lists of Extracts from his doctrines. He de- nied having spoken against J. J. Gurney otherwise than in regard to his unsound doctrines, and proposed to prove the correctness of this course by reading to them the Extracts which they charged him with spreading. But they refused to listen to them, and gave him scarcely any time to vindicate himself, heaping abundance of censure upon him, demanding immediate concession, and advising him to " stay at home and be quiet." Being thus debarred from offering anything by way of showing the committee that he had done nothing; but what it was his right, and indeed, by the Discipline of that Yearly Meeting, his express duty to do; he soon after Avrote a long letter to the member first named on the committee, showing the utter inconsistency of their action, and the groundless and frivolous nature of their charges against him, and adverting to some of the errors of J. J. Gurney's sentiments against which he had been constrained to bear testimony. This letter* was eagerly seized upon by the committee, who endeavored to make out from it fresh accusations against him. They had many interviews with him, requiring him to attend upon them at various places and times for a space of about two years ; continually changing and adding to their complaints against him, but always declining to give him their charges plainly and explicitly in writing, * For tlu; whole letter, see his Journal and Correspondence, p. 279. 1841.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 53 and utterly refusing to allow him to prove the correct- ness of his conduct by adducing evidence of the errone- ous nature of J. J. Gurney's published doctrines. This they would by no means listen to, although on that cir- cumstance depended the question whether they had any cause or right whatever to call him to account. After treating with him thus for about twelve months, the Se- lect Quarterly Meeting's committee enlisted in the service the committee of the Yearly Meeting, and John Wilbur was called upon to meet nine of the former committee and six of the latter. The mode of treatment of the case by both committees was sorrowfully characterized by abundance of unjust reproaches cast upon him, and by quibbling, shuffling, and prevarication, and even di- rect falsehood, to a disgraceful extent; bearing down upon him also by numbers and assumed authority, and never allowing him a fair opportunity to show his entire innocency. * They alleged that he was guilty of detrac- tion, but would never listen to his proofs of the truth of what he had testified, and of its importance to the safety of the Society ; nor yet would they at all consent to give him a written statement of their objections against his conduct, though he repeatedly urged it upon them, in order to have their floating and vacillating accusations brought to a clear and distinct charge, which they would not be able afterwards to change, and which it would be easy for him to meet. In the spring of 1841 the Select Quarterly Meeting's committee professed to resign their care of the case to the committee of the Yearly Meeting, of which, how- * Journal ami Correspondence of John Wilbur, pp. 277 to ;ius. 54 THE SOCIETY OF FRIEXDS IN [CHAP. IX. ever, all but two of them were members ; so that with these two exceptions all the members continued (though nominally on another committee) to exercise their author- ity in the case, and by acting upon it in the last named committee they could bring the Discipline to bear on it more readily than through the committee of the Meet- ing of Ministers and Elders merely. Accordingly, in the sixth month, 1841, John Wilbur was called upon to meet about thirty members* of this committee, who resorted, in turn, to persuasion, exhor- tation, and denunciation, in order to obtain concessions from him. Finding, however, that, numerous as they were, they gained nothing, the next opportunity was concluded to be with five or six of their number, who importuned him earnestly to make even this small con- cession, " If I have done wrong, I am sorry for it ;" knowing well that if thev could brinsr him to such an avowal, they could spread the report that he had re- canted, and could still hold him subject to their author- ity. But he calmly told them that this was by no means a proper way for satisfaction to be made. He afterwards again met the committee at large, who pro- fessed to have other complaints against him, of which they had not yet told him ! He demanded to know the whole distinctly ; to which he was told "they had many others," evidently in the hope of at length intimidating him ; but they would not specify them, or verify their declaration, and continued to urge concession, which he plainly informed them he could not conscientiously make. There were some men on that committee, from * The " Narrative of Facts and Circumstances," published by the Gurney Yearly Meeting, says twenty-seven. 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 55 whom such conduct as what we have now witnessed might not be very surprising, if needful to accomplish a favorite object; but there were others who must have unconsciously and unwarily suffered their sense of jus- tice and right to be grievously blinded by their con- fidence in the leaders, and who, having thus given up their independence of judgment, saw no other way than to follow on in the track marked out for them. In the spring of 1842, fifteen members of the com- mittee attended South Kingston Monthly Meeting, and produced to it a long written complaint against John Wilbur, signed by them all; thus overstepping the con- stant usage and good order of the Society, that cases of offence must first be brought to the Preparative Meeting (where there is one) by the overseers, after proper con- sideration and endeavors for reclaiming and convincing the offender, before they are introduced to the notice of the Monthly Meeting. This complaint charged John Wilbur with departing from the order and discipline of our religious Society in circulating an anonymous pam- phlet, purporting to contain an account of the proceed- ings of London Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elder.-, when a Friend was liberated to visit this country, whose certificate had been received and united with by New England Yearly Meeting; that he had also circulated divers letters, intended to show that this Friend was not in unity with his Friends at home, and designed to close his way here; that he had indulged in a spirit of de- traction, misrepresenting the religious character of divers Friends in their own and other Yearly Meetings; that he had made divers assertions tending to induce dissatis- faction among Friends, and with the proceedings of the 56 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. Yearly Meeting, and calculated to produce division therein, to disturb the unity of different Yearly Meet- ings, and alienate the feelings of the members; that he had written a letter to one of the committee, in which he made unjust insinuations, and preferred charges against them, which they deny in point of fact ; and concluded by saying that the Select Quarterly Meet- ing's committee, having labored with him till the fifth month, 1841, the Yearly Meeting's committee had then, at their request, extended care in the case, and endeav- ored to convince him of his errors, in repeated oppor- tunities for several months, without any change in his mind ; and, therefore, they now belie\ned it their duty to recommend his case to the immediate notice and care of South Kingston Monthly Meeting. The above is briefly the substance of this complaint. Why it was signed by fifteen, and not by all the members of the committee, does not appear. The objection was urged in the meet- ing, that it was introduced in a manner inconsistent with the uniform practice of the Society; but notwithstand- ing its irregularity, the committee urged its being at- tended to at that time, saying that the authority with which they were clothed by the Yearly Meeting obviated the necessity of such preliminary proceedings. The members of the Monthly Meeting, seeing that this was a case not only very trying to their feelings, but of great general importance, and that owing to several concur- ring circumstances a smaller number of Friends were present than usual, proposed a delay of one month. But the committee insisted on their immediately pro- ceeding to appoint a committee to attend to the case, saying that if the meeting desired it, an addition could 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 57 he made to that committee at a future time. They even threatened to complain to the Quarterly Meeting against them, if the meeting did not comply with their desire. The clerk at length concluded, in accordance with their advice, to take the names of a committee, and four Friends were appointed. At the next Monthly Meeting, the year of the clerk's appointment to service having expired, a new clerk was appointed ; and one of the committee appointed on John Wilbur's case, proposing an addition to that committee, five other Friends were added to it, as had been sug- gested by the Yearly Meeting's committee the month before. But at the Monthly Meeting in the sixth month, several of the Yearly Meeting's committee attended, and objecting to the appointment made the month be- fore, of a new clerk, proposed that he should resign his post to the former one, alleging that this would tend to restore unity and harmony in the Monthly Meeting ! This, however, was not acceded to by the meeting. The former clerk, who was under the influence of the Yearly Meeting's committee, on being applied to for the books and papers of the Monthly Meeting, declined to deliver them to the new clerk, and afterwards had them con- veyed beyond the limits of the Monthly Meeting ; and the Yearly Meeting's committee acknowledged that they had advised him to that course, from an apprehension that the Monthly Meeting contemplated a separation! This, of course, was disclaimed on the part of the meeting, and the committee adduced no evidence to sustain their unwarrantable surmise. " In the seventh month, the committee in the case of vol. ir — 0 58 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. John Wilbur met for the investigation of that case. Six cf the Yearly Meeting's committee (also) attended. Before the examination of the case was commenced, J. Wilbur desired to have one or two of his friends to sit with him and assist him; and after some discussion, in which the Yearly Meeting's committee made objection to his having this privilege, the respective parties with- drew, submitting the matter to the Monthly Meeting's committee, who unanimously decided to allow J. Wil- bur the assistance of two of his friends. Upon their return the Yearly Meeting's committee still objected, and again retired a short time for consultation among themselves. On again coming in, they took decided ground that the decision of the Monthly Meeting's committee must be reversed, or they should not proceed with the opening of the case, but should leave. The Monthly Meeting's committee, on being again appealed to, declined to take from J. Wilbur the privilege they had granted, unless he should consent thereto. John Wilbur subsequently did consent to proceed without the help of his friends, as, from the determination of the Yearly Meeting's committee, no other way appeared to go forward with the case with said committee present, which was to him desirable. During the discussion of this question of allowing him assistance, which occupied the whole of the first day, the Yearly Meeting's com- mittee claimed that it was their province, after repre- senting the case on their part, to join the Monthly Meeting's committee in judging the same, a position which the Monthly Meeting's committee were not ready to allow. The Yearly Meeting's committee also, dur- ing the same discussion, denied that they were com- 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 59 plainants in this case ; and when, the next morning, they were asked by J. Wilbur whether they still per- sisted in this denial, notwithstanding their names were attached to the complaint, they made no reply!"* After the Yearly Meeting's committee had gone through with the evidence in support of their complaint, J. Wilbur, in his own defence, proposed to adduce cer- tain fundamental doctrines of the Society, and to show the inconsistency of J. J. Gurney's doctrines therewith, " because it was on account of his objection to the latter that he was complained of." But this was objected to by the Yearly Meeting's committee, they alleging that the Monthly Meeting's committee had no authority to judge of doctrines — that this belonged to the Yearly Meeting and the Meeting; for Sufferings alone — that if they went into doctrines, they would assume authority to decide that the great body of the Yearly Meeting was unsound, seeing its great unanimity in granting to J. J. Gurney a returning certificate. J. Wilbur adduced the provisions of the Discipline in his justification, and the Monthly Meeting's committee decided to allow him to proceed as proposed, " introducing such evidence and documents on these subjects as shall appear essentially to relate to the same," inasmuch as " the merits of the case essentially depend on the doctrines called in ques- tion by J. Wilbur." They gave also additional reasons for this conclusion, in that the Discipline enjoins upon "Quarterly and Monthly Meetings, and all faithful Friends" to be watchful against unsound doctrines among the members — that Monthly Meetings are often * Journal and Correspondence of J. Wilbur, p. 310. GO THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. required to judge respecting doctrines, as in receiving or disowning members, as well as by the above injunc- tion on Quarterly and Monthly Meetings and all the faithful members — and that subordinate meetings and members cannot be thus debarred from the right and duty of judging for themselves in so vital a matter, and bearing their testimony against manifest unsoundness. These arguments were unanswerable, but nevertheless the Yearly Meeting's committee, on being informed of this conclusion, immediately collected together their documents and withdrew ; clearly showing that justice was not what they aimed at, but the accomplishment of a predetermined purpose. The matter was thus left in the hands of the Monthly Meeting's committee, who continued their sittings to the conclusion of the investi- gation. At the Monthly Meeting in the seventh month, a number of the Yearly Meeting's committee attended, and again accused the meeting of an intention to make a separation. The committee in the case of John Wil- bur stated that they were not at present prepared to re- port, whereupon one of the Yearly Meeting's committee inquired whether no part of the committee were ready — a question which indicated more than it expressed — to which one of them replied, that two of the committee had a report in readiness ! The seven other members of the committee had not been consulted about it, and knew nothing of such a report. But the Yearly Meet- ing's committee advocated the reading of it. To this, however, the meeting, astonished at the boldness and irregularity of the proceeding, would not consent. Now at length it came out, who they were who were aiming 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 61 to bring about a " separation ;" for the same member of the committee who had offered the report of the two, proposed " that those who were in unity with the Yearly Meeting and with its committee, should stop in the house for a short time, at the close of the meeting." The former clerk united with this,* and wished the Women's Meeting informed of it ; and the Yearly Meeting's com- mittee encouraged it. The meeting generally, however, objected to the proposal, and showed that it appeared to be a plan for separation. This insidious project was thus frustrated. At the Quarterly Meeting of Rhode Island in the eighth month, the Yearly Meeting's committee re- ported South Kingston Monthly Meeting to be in a state of disunity, disorder, and insubordination ; and conse- quently another committee was then appointed to unite with them in visiting that Monthly Meeting, although no report had yet been made in John Wilbur's case. The two committees were in attendance at the ensu- ing Monthly Meeting held near the close of the eighth month, and claimed for the Quarterly Meeting's com- mittee not only the right to act as members of the Monthly Meeting, but that the meeting was bound to take their advice, even to the abrogation of its recorded acts for months past; a proceeding before unheard of in the Society. The Monthly Meeting expressed its will- ingness to hear and consider whatever advice the com- mittee might offer, and give it all proper weight, but claimed the right to exercise its own judgment; at the same time acknowledging itself responsible to the Quar- • Address of Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting, 1S45, page 11. 62 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. terly and Yearly Meetings, according to the Discipline, for any breach of the order of the Society. The committee in J. Wilbur's case now made a report, signed by seven of the nine, to the effect that, on a full and deliberate investigation, their judgment was, that the charges against J. Wilbur had not been sustained, but that his defence was sufficient to exonerate him from them ; as it appeared from the evidence before them, that the complaint had originated from his labors, under apprehension of religious duty, and in conformity with the Discipline, against the introduction of defective prin- ciples, and for the preservation of those ancient testimo- nies of Truth committed to us as a people. They there- fore recommended that the complaint against him be dismissed. Two of the committee presented their counter report. The report of the seven, however, notwith- standing the opposition of the Quarterly Meeting's com- mittee, was adopted by the meeting, with a very large expression of approval on the part of the members. The Monthly Meeting had appointed a committee to treat with the former clerk, on account of his disorderly conduct in withholding the books and papers of the meeting from the new clerk. At the Monthly Meeting in the tenth month, four of the Quarterly Meeting's committee of fifteen,* presented a document signed by themselves only, advising the Monthly Meeting to re- store the former clerk, to dismiss the committee in his case, to annul the records in regard to it, and to set aside and make void the decision in the eighth month in rela- tion to J. Wilbur, as entered on their minutes. The * J. Wilbur's Narrative and Exposition, p. 15G. 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. G3 four who signed this advice being asked whether the other (eleven) members of the Quarterly Meeting's com- mittee had been consulted in regard to it, acknowledged that they had not ! The meeting, taking into view the great importance of the matter, and that such a case was entirely unprecedented in the Society, and feeling the necessity for deliberation and care, concluded to postpone the further consideration of the advice till the next month. But meantime, about ten days after this, the Quarterly Meeting again occurred, and the committee reported the Monthly Meeting to be still in a state of insubordina- tion, and not in a suitable condition to transact busi- ness in conformity with the Discipline, nor consistently with our Christian profession ; and recommended that it be dissolved, and its members joined to Greenwich Monthly Meeting. This elicited much discussion, and it was clearly shown that such a course would be a direct violation of the Discipline on the part of the Quarterly Meeting. But some of the Yearly Meeting's committee asserted that this was a wrong construction of the Disci- pline. The members of South Kingston Monthly Meet- ing requested to be allowed to be heard before a com- mittee, or in some way enabled to justify themselves, before the Quarterly Meeting should proceed to such an extreme measure as the dissolution of the meeting;. But this was denied. And on one of the representatives at- tempting, as a last resort, to plead their cause before the Quarterly Meeting, he was told by the clerk (one of the Yearly Meeting's committee) to take his seat; and the latter soon read the minute dissolving South Kingston Monthly Meeting, attaching its members to Greenwich 64 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. Monthly Meeting, devolving on the latter all its un- finished business, and declaring null and void the pro- ceedings clearing John Wilbur, and all that had been done respecting the records kept back from the meeting by the former clerk ! When this decision was communicated to the Monthly Meeting of South Kingston two or three weeks after- wards, by some of the Quarterly Meeting's committee, a copy of the minute was requested by the Monthly Meeting ; but this was refused, and the committee re- tired, accompanied by a few members of the meeting. The bulk of the members remained together to take measures to appeal to the Yearly Meeting against this arbitrary and irregular measure ; and then agreed to sus- pend all farther sittings as a Monthly Meeting until their appeal should be decided. The Discipline of New England Yearly Meeting pro- vides that in cases where it is considered necessary by a Quarterly Meeting to advise a Monthly Meeting to any course, if that Monthly Meeting is dissatisfied with the advice, it " may appeal to the Yearly Meeting against the judgment of the Quarterly Meeting." But if it will not appeal, and yet will not submit to the judgment of the Quarterly Meeting, the latter shall be at liberty to dissolve the Monthly Meeting, or bring the subject before the next or succeeding Yearly Meeting. But when the dissolution is decided on by the Quarterly Meeting, " the dissolved Monthly Meeting, or any part thereof in the name of the said meeting, shall be at liberty to appeal to the next or succeeding Yearly Meeting, against such dissolution." Yet if it will not appeal, then the Quar- terly Meeting may proceed to join its members to another 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 65 Monthly Meeting ; "and until such time, shall take care that no inconvenience doth thereby ensue to any of the members of such dissolved meeting, respecting any branch of our Discipline." From this it is clear that all sudden and arbitrary action is carefully prohibited to Quarterly Meetings, and the Monthly Meetings are fully and clearly guaranteed the right of appealing, first, against the advice or judgment of the Quarterly Meeting, and secondly, against the dissolution ; and the Quarterly Meeting can- not proceed to consummate their action, until time has been given to the Monthly Meeting to decide whether to appeal or not. But here was an instance of the Quar- terly Meeting summarily dissolving the Monthly Meet- ing, and at the same time annulling its proceedings, and transferring its members and unfinished business to another, while they were deliberating concerning taking the advice — not of the Quarterly Meeting itself, as pro- vided by the Discipline — but of a small part of its com- mittee! As to the assumption to annul the proceedings of the Monthly Meeting in this summary and arbitrary manner, certainly no such power could be delegated to a Quarterly Meeting by the Discipline of any Yearly Meeting in the Society. These transactions can admit of no justification except in Rome itself. Greenwich Monthly Meeting, to which the members had been thus attached, now became the instrument for the prompt consummation of this business. John Wil- bur's case of course formed a principal feature of the proceedings against which the Monthly Meeting had concluded to appeal, and ought therefore to have been considered as essentially included in and belonging to that appeal ; but this view of it was disregarded in the G6 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IX [CHAP. IX. haste to have him disowned. At Greenwich Monthly Meeting the Yearly Meeting's committee urged, that as the addition to the committee in J. Wilbur's case had been by the Quarterly Meeting annulled with the other proceedings, it now became the duty of the original committee of four to make report to that meeting. This was opposed, on the ground that the appeal ought to suspend all further proceedings in that case; but this objection was overruled, and that committee was directed to report to a future meeting. At the next Greenwich Monthly Meeting, viz., first month 30th, 1843, the report of the tiro members of the committee of South Kingston Monthly Meeting, dated six months before, viz., seventh month 23d, 1842, without consultation, as it appeared, with the others, was presented by them, declaring that in their judgment all the charges against J. Wilbur had been substantiated, and that he was not in a situation to be continued in membership. But here it was discovered that those charges had never been read in that Monthly Meeting ! The meeting waited until the paper of complaint could be sent for, which on the messenger's return was read, the report of the two was united with by the members of the Yearly and Quarterly Meetings' committees present, and by two otheis, members of the meeting; and though objected to by several friends, the clerk, a member of the Yearly Meeting's committee, made a minute adopting it ; and in this hasty, arbitrary, and disorderly manner, unparal- leled in the annals of the Society, John Wilbur was disowned ! In violation of an express provision of the Discipline, guaranteeing to the members on all proper occasions the 1844.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 67 use of the records of the meetings, the Quarterly Meeting refused the request made to it on behalf of South Kings- ton Monthly Meeting, for a copy of the minute dissolv- ing it, against which it was preparing to appeal ; and the attempt was made more than once, by raising frivo- lous obstacles, to baffle and prevent the appeal from going forward. It seems needless to swell these recitals of repeated and disgraceful wrongs, by further details in regard to the proceedings respecting the appeal. Let it suffice to say that the same party influences impelled the Yearly Meeting to reject the allegations of the appeal, when pre- sented, and to confirm the action of Rhode Island Quar- terly Meeting; and in like manner, the next year, 1844, to reject the individual appeal of John Wilbur against the action of Greenwich Monthly Meeting and Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting in his own case, and to confirm their disownment of him contrary to all rules of disci- pline and all former usage, and obviously for the purpose of upholding a new and overwhelming party, founded upon novel views. In short, these transactions respect- ing the two appeals were characterized by the same in- justice and overbearing oppression by which the original measures appealed against had been accomplished, and were managed by the same parties. When the appoint- ment of a committee in the Yearly Meeting, to hear J. Wilbur's appeal, was completed, he requested to be allowed some one to assist him before the committee, inasmuch as, from his age (then about 70 years) and infirmity, it would be a hard task for him to perform the necessary labor in prosecuting his appeal. Many 68 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. expressed themselves in favor of granting this reason- able request, but the meeting decided against it.* I have endeavored to present these grievous events unbroken by other matter, so that the reader may more clearly see and understand the whole case. Much has been omitted for the sake of this clear view, and for brevity itself, but I believe the narrative is not distorted in any way by partiality, nor anything omitted by which its truthfulness would suffer, or the true com- plexion of the transactions be altered. But for this desire to keep the account unbroken, much might have been added, to show, on the one hand, that John Wilbur remained firm and unwavering: in his testimony against those erroneous sentiments which he clearly saw were making so baneful an inroad in the Society ; and on the other hand, that he was by no means without the sympathy and encouragement of many ex- perienced and worthy Friends, both in this land and in England, who endeavored by affectionate epistles to up- hold his hands and animate his spirit to continued con- stancy through his deep trials. Among these were such as Ann Jones, Lydia A. Barclay, George and Margaret Crosfield, Ezra Comfort, and Ann Coning ; whose warm sympathizing letters, in addition to those from various other friends nearer home, were particularly cordial to his mind. In one of Ann Jones's letters, she quoted for his encouragement a characteristic expression of Daniel Wheeler's, when, lying off the Mother Bank in the " Henry Freeling," and " suffering from the same spirit," he briefly said to a friend in reply to an expres- * Journal and Correspondence of J. W., p. 333. 1842.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 69 sion of sympathy, "The sun can shine in the Inquisi- tion \" And truly during this time of oppression by the spirit of darkness, there were many occasions when John Wilbur was mercifully given to witness that the sun of righteousness did renewedly shine forth with healing virtue, confirming his faith, and renewing his strength for the war against spiritual wickedness in high places. In the second month, 1842, while still under the treatment of the Yearly Meeting's committee, he sent an address to the Meeting for Sufferings, accompanied by extracts from J. J. Gurney's writings, desiring them to examine these, and decide touching their soundness, and then lay the result of their labors before the Society ; hoping that if rightly done, it would contribute to the safety of the body and the restoration of harmony. This address was referred to a committee for three months, and then nothing came of it. The same tacit suppression was given to a similar application from the ministers, elders, and overseers of the Island of Nan- tucket, signed by fifteen of the members in those sta- tions, all that were present at the time the document was adopted. An application of the same kind from South Kingston Monthly Meeting, in 1841, had already been disposed of with the same negation.* A number of Friends known to be opposed to the new views were now brought under censure by the same party management by which J. Wilbur's case had been laid hold of. It was not to be expected that so open and clear a testimony against J. J. Gurney's unsound doctrines as was maintained by Thomas B. Gould,' of * Depositions, etc., in Fall River Suit, Earle v. Wood, p. 156. Boston, T. It. Marvin, 1850. 70 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. Newport, would escape the efforts of the leaders to sup- press it.* But for some years, the overseers of Newport Preparative Meeting being opposed to the new doctrines and measures, nothing could be openly done towards the accomplishment of what some of the active mem- bers of the party were known to have expressed as their fixed desire, his disownment. From the year 1840, T. B. Gould had spoken a few times in the ministry. In 1843, after an irregular attempt to deal with him by the meeting of ministers and elders, to which he did not at that time belong, and subsequently by the overseers of another Preparative Meeting, the party succeeded in appointing two overseers for Newport, of their own sort, one of them clerk of the Monthly Meeting of Rhode Island and an influential member of the Yearly Meeting's committee, and the other so completely sub- jugated to that influence, that in one of the interviews soon afterwards had with T. B. Gould, he avowed to the latter, " that if some of the leaders (naming two or three) were to order him to do what he knew to be wrong, he would do it, and let them take the responsi- bility ;" adding that he thought T. B. Gould ought to do in like manner, and act according to the desire of those who wished him to give up his testimony against J. J. Gurney's doctrines ;f and advising him to "stick to the body, right or wrong!" These overseers, after several interviews, brought a complaint against him into Rhode Island Monthly Meet- * In 1840, when the Yearly Meeting of Xew England granted a return certifi- cate to J. J. Gurney, T. B. Gould was among those who openly opposed the measure. His testimony given to the Supreme Court in the Fall Itiver Suit (Depositions, etc., pp.201 to 22.)) is the most lucid 1 and valuable of any in the volume. t Letters and Memoirs of T. B. Gould, Philadelphia, 1860, p. 187. 1843.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 71 ing, without going first through the Preparative Meet- ing, according to former usage and the uniform good order of the Society, and pressed it upon the meeting for prompt action, T. B. Gould having been unexpect- edly prevented from being present that day. The irregu- larity of its introduction was the occasion of much re- mark in the meeting, shared even by some of the Gur- ney party ; but D. B., one of the overseers who brought in the complaint, urged its being then attended to, as such an opportunity might not soon again occur ! This overseer being also the clerk, made it all the more easy, and a committee was accordingly appointed, of three men and two women, to treat with him on the complaint. This committee had repeated interviews with him dur- ing a space of nine months. At the first two of these, they not only produced no copy of the complaint, but seemed really not to know what the charge was against him. But as he insisted on his right to be informed of the nature of it, at the third opportunity they brought what they said was a copy of it, but would by no means allow him to'have it in his own hand. To his appeal against such behavior, they replied by disavowing any lack of confidence in his honor or integrity ; but the one who had it said that they had been strictly enjoined by D. B. the overseer and clerk, not to let T. B. Gould have it by any means!* Thomas reminded one of these men of what he had some time previously said to him, while standing together in the meeting-house yard, that the greatest desire he had was to have him disowned, for his intimacy with J. Wilbur, and his opposition to * Letters aud Memoirs of T. B. Gould, p. 184. 72 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. J. J. Gurney. But on this being now mentioned to him in presence of the rest, he vehemently denied it, declaring, " God Almighty knows that I never said so !" Thomas told him that it really was as he had said, and cautioned him in regard to his awful denial of it; but he persisted in his appeals to the Almighty, in a manner very painful to listen to. T. B. Gould afterwards un- derstood, from his wife, that the complaint charged him with manifesting himself out of unity with Friends in their meetings for discipline, and with having accused the overseers of being actuated by a spirit of envy and malice. The latter clause was merely founded on his having objected to one of their members being brought under dealing, by alleging that one of the overseers had admitted to him that the other overseer had been actu- ated by an envious and malicious spirit against the Friend, and was resolved to have him disowned. At one of their last interviews with him, the commit- tee manifested an arbitrary and bitter spirit, still de- clining to furnish him with a copy of the complaint, but telling him that their business with him was, "to get an acknowledgment from him — that was their business;" that he knew well enough what his offence was — there was no need of talking about it, or of his seeing the complaint; that they had forgotten to bring it; and justifying the charge of disunity, by referring to certain occasions when he had objected to proposed action on the part of the Monthly Meeting, saying, this was the foundation of that part of the charge. They also ac- cused him of writing letters, and showing other letters, to produce a schism in the Society. This he denied, saying that the great object and end of his labors had 1844.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 73 been to prevent a schism, and appealed to the committee to produce or specify such letters as were spoken of. But this they could not do. Various other frivolous charges were alleged against him, and shown by him to be groundless. Towards the close of the opportunity, after a time of silence of his suggesting, he was con- strained to open his mouth among them, in brokenness and fear, appealing to the Searcher of hearts, "who knoweth what is in man, and needeth not that any man should testify unto him of man ; with the expression of a fervent desire, that He would be pleased to furnish witli wisdom, to guide amidst the storm, and strength to endure and stand firm, that so His name might not be dishonored." A feeling of solemnity spread over them, so that one of the women could do no less than respond to what he had expressed.* After nine months of this treatment by the committee, during a part of which T. B. Gould was very ill, he was one day informed by a person who happened to meet him in the street, that their last Monthly Meeting had disowned him. But as the separation to be presently mentioned had then taken place in several of the Monthly Meetings of Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting, T. B. Gould's disownment was only consummated by a separate and schismatic meeting. His own Monthly Meeting, on the separation taking place, had dismissed the complaint as groundless and false, and restored him to his standing as a member in unity. The first knowl- edge that he obtained of any written testimony of dis- ownment having been issued against him by the Gurney * Letters aud Memoirs of T. 15. G., p. 22G. VOL. II. — 7 74 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. Meeting was ten years afterwards, while attending the stormy Yearly Meeting of Ohio (at the time of the Gurney separation there), when one Zadok Street held up a paper, in much excitement, declaring it was a testi- mony of disownment of T. B. Gould. The momentous sequel of these transactions must now be told. The year 1845 was rendered sorrowfully mem- orable by the accomplishment, on the part of the adher- ents of J. J. Gurney, of an open schism in the Yearly Meeting of New England, for the purpose of sustaining the standing of that author, and consequently also the prevalent influence of his novel doctrines and practices. In Swanzey Monthly Meeting, a branch of Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting, great diversity of sentiment had existed for a considerable time on the subjects now dividing the Society, insomuch that committees ap- pointed for the selection of fresh overseers and clerks were, for about two years, unable to agree. A principal cause of this difficulty arose from the circumstance that several members of the Committee on Overseers were persistently in favor of nominating an individual whom others did not consider at all eligible, on account of an unsettled difference between him and another Friend, and also that he had aided in the circulation of a pam- phlet of J. J. Gurney's, containing unsound sentiments, and would make no concessions. This individual took offence at being thus objected to, repeatedly endeavored to get his supposed grievance before the Monthly Meet- ing, and, with a few other members, frustrated all at- tempts therein to come to an agreement or united ap- pointment of overseers or clerks. In the eighth month, 1842, on account, as was alleged, 1844.] T1IK NINETEENTH CENTURY. 75 of deficiencies in the answers to the queries, the Quar- terly Meeting appointed a committee to visit South Kingston and Swanzey Monthly Meetings. This com- mittee, along with that of the Yearly Meeting, took the same overbearing measures, in attempting to coerce the proceedings of Swanzey Monthly Meeting, as we have already seen they did with that of South Kingston. They cited before them the Monthly Meeting's Com- mittees on Overseers and Clerks, in the seventh month, 1844, and desired them to come to an agreement, and report, their proceedings to them. The Committee on Overseers then agreed on five names, several giving up their objections for the sake of coming to some definite conclusion ; but a sixtli name being urged on behalf of the party, prevented four of the committee from signing the report, as they could not conscientiously unite with that name. On learning this, the Yearly Meeting's com- mittee assumed authority to add the sixth name them- selves, which was that of the individual before spoken of as having formerly been objected to, and who had also been instrumental in defeating other nominations on the ground that they were not signed by all the com- mittee. This name, therefore, could not go forward with the approbation of the four members above mentioned. The Committee on Clerks also had not been able to agree. At the next Monthly Meeting the Yearly Meeting's committee was in attendance, and a report was presented, signed by three of the Committee of seven on Clerks ; and about the same time a document was handed in from the Yearly Meeting's committee, declaring their judg- ment of the innocence of the individual before alluded 76 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. to, and advising his appointment as overseer, along with the five others. They also advised that as the Commit- tee on Clerks had not agreed on any names to propose, the meeting should appoint two, whom they named (and who were the same as named in the report of the three above mentioned), as clerk and assistant clerk. This being urged by them upon the meeting, its right, secured by the Discipline, to appeal against the advice, was shown by reading the provisions to that effect in the Book of Discipline; but notwithstanding much objec- tion made to these arbitrary proceedings, the Yearly Meeting's committee pressed their advice upon the meeting. At length the clerk made a minute, referring the subject to the next Monthly Meeting ; basing the minute, as he said, when inquired of, on the expression of the most substantial and exemplary members of the meeting, on the fact that the nomination for clerks was made by three only out of a committee of seven mem- bers, and on the usage of the Monthly Meeting, when so greatly divided in sentiment, to wait for more unity before proceeding. Two out of a Committee of seven on Overseers, then nominated six members for that station, all belonging to the Gurney party, and including the abovementioned objectionable individual. Several of the committee said they would have signed the report, but for the retention on it of this last name ; and offered their reasons for not doing so, including the fact of his having the well- known unsettled difference with another member still pending, and likely before long to claim the notice of the Monthly Meeting. Yet the Yearly Meeting's com- mittee still urged his appointment as one of the over- 1*4 L] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 77 seers. Much objection being made to this, it was pro- posed by some, by way of compromise, that the five others should be appointed, leaving out the sixth for the present ; but tin's was refused, unless the whole report was adopted. The clerk afterwards inquired if the Yearly Meeting's committee would consent to the sub- stitution of a certain other member (also one of their own party) instead of this individual. But one of the Yearly Meeting's committee (John Meader) promptly replied, " The committee have all agreed ; it's fixed ; we can make no compromise ! " The clerk then collected the sense of the meeting, and made a minute referring the subject for one month for further consideration. The usual answers to the queries were adopted, and directed to the ensuing Quar- terly Meeting. Representatives thereto were appointed, and after a sitting of six hours the meeting concluded as usual. The ensuing Quarterly Meeting received and recog- nized the representatives and answers to the queries thus sent, with the signature of Thomas Wilbur as clerk. But at the subsequent Monthly Meeting, in the eighth month, after the clerk had taken his seat at the table, but before he had read the opening minute, John Meader, who Was not a member of that Monthly Meet- ing, rose and informed the meeting that the Quarterly Meeting had released its former committee, and had ap- pointed a number of Friends to attend that meeting, and assist in transacting the business, in appointing its officers, and in the due organization of the same; and closed his remarks by proposing that Thomas Wilbur should now leave the table, and David Shove should 78 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IX [CHAP. IX. take his seat as clerk. This outrageous proposal was promptly united with by a number of strangers then present, who, however, had given no evidence of their right to meddle with the business of the meeting, and presented no credentials, though repeatedlv urged to show their authority for thus interfering. The change of clerk was persistently pressed by John Meader, and also by some of the members of the Monthly Meeting who belonged to the innovating party, though objected to by others. The object of their desiring the proposed change was clearly seen to be to obtain control of the meeting, and thus to procure the disownment of those who stood opposed to the introduction of the spurious doctrines ; and the character of those doctrines was alluded to, with the design entertained by some to ob- tain their establishment in the Society. The important fact was also noticed, that the first prominent manifesta- tion of disunity in that Monthly Meeting had been an attempt to have a Friend dealt with for speaking against the circulation of unsound doctrines. After some further discussion, at the request of sev- eral friends, the clerk, Thomas Wilbur, proceeded to open the Monthly Meeting; whereupon John Meader repeated his desire for D. Shove to go to the table. This person accordingly approached it, aided by two of the strangers, one of whom took him by the arm and led him forward; but finding no room made for him there, he paused a moment, and at J. Meader's suggestion took another seat, where he soon began to write. Meantime the regular clerk had read the opening minute, and the meeting was proceeding with its usual business. But in the midst of this, the usurping clerk began to read from IS 1 I.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 79 ^ several papers, greatly to the disturbance of the meeting. After this, John Meader, who seemed to take the lead throughout in these disorderly proceedings, proposed to adjourn ; which was united with by some of the stran- gers and by two or three members of the meeting. Soon afterwards, while the regular clerk was reading something of the business of the meeting, John Meader again urged an adjournment, with an appearance of impatience; whereupon several others rising from their seats, the Gurney party's clerk said, " The meeting is adjourned to 3 o'clock." John Meader said that all those who should remain sitting after this, would be considered out of unity with the Yearly and Quarterly Meetings. Most of the strangers and many of the members then left the house. But the regular clerk notified Friends that the meeting had not adjourned ; and about thirty members of the meeting remained to finish the business which necessarily came before it, including the appoint- ment of overseers, and then quietly concluded. The strangers present were probably the new committee of the Quarterly Meeting alluded to by J. Meader. But if so, they ought to have produced their authority before interfering, and then limited their interference within their authority. They could have no legitimate author- ity to compel a Monthly Meeting to act contrary to its conscientious convictions. They may probably have with- held the presenting of their credentials till they got their own clerk; but it was clearly irregular in them to assume authority in that meeting, until their credentials were presented ; and as the Quarterly Meeting had accepted the answers to the queries, and the representatives ap- 80 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. pointed, under the action of the old clerk, they could have no claim now to pretend that he was not the clerk of the meeting, and refuse to hand him their credentials, if they had any. Two of them were the very same men who had endeavored already, as we have seen on page Gl, to bring about a similar disorderly separation in South Kingston Monthlv Meeting. In the afternoon, the schismatic party with their new clerk, and the Quarterly Meeting's committee, returned to the house to hold their separate meeting, styling it, nevertheless, Swanzey Monthly Meeting, and appointed their own overseers and representatives to the Quarterly Meeting. Thus commenced the memorable disruption of New England Yearly Meeting. At the Quarterly Meeting, in the eleventh month, the clerk and other leading members, many of whom had been active in promoting these disorderly proceedings, refused to receive the representatives or the usual ac- count sent by the true Swanzey Monthly Meeting with the signature of its old clerk, but accepted those from the schismatic Monthly Meeting, of their own party's setting up ; thereby identifying themselves with the schism, and with the principles on account of which it was undertaken. Thus a necessity devolved upon those who would remain faithful to the true principles of the Society, to endeavor to sustain the Quarterly Meeting and its branches on the ancient foundation. These latter, therefore, after warning and entreating the others to no purpose, and waiting till they had finished their busi- ness, remained together, appointed a clerk, received the accounts and representatives sent by the true Swanzey 1844.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. si Monthly Meeting, and transacted the other business as the Quarterly Meeting of Rhode Island.* "This," says the author of 'Considerations Addressed to " the Members of the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia ' (1846, " page SO), was analogous with the transaction in Baltimore " Yearly Meeting, when Friends left that body as soon as it " had identified itself with the Ilicksites, by the reception of " their Epistle, and the rejection of that from Friends."! Those acting with and for the Yearly and Quarterly Meetings' committees, having thus undertaken to in- augurate a separation, and this separation having now been carried through the Quarterly Meeting itself by the same parties, the subordinate meetings of Rhode Island Quarter were soon afterwards divided, both as to discipline and worship. " The Meeting for Sufferings " (says the above-cpioted author of the "Considerations," in his lucid review of these transactions), " composed principally of the same Friends " who were on the Yearly Meeting's committee, without " waiting for the judgment of the Yearly Meeting in the case, " issued a Circular to the Preparative, Monthly, and Quarterly " Meetings, giving their version of the separation and the " causes leading to it, and denouncing those as Separatists " who believed they were obliged to take the steps they did, " for the preservation of the order and discipline of the So- " ciety, and the maintenance of the faith it had been raised " up to support. The Quarterly Meeting, which had simply " refused to join in with those who separated from it, was " represented as having acted from a ' spirit of disaffection, " ' and desire for individual liberty, that is not willing to sub- " ' mit to the subordination recognized in our Discipline,' etc. * "Address of Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting of Friends," 184.'). New Vork, Piercy & Reid. t See Volume I, page 187 to 190. VOL. II. — 8 82 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [('HAP. IX. " The Meeting for Sufferings having thus stepped out of its " proper sphere, and held up their fellow-members for censure " and rejection by the Society at large, it rendered it necessary "for the Quarterly Meeting to publish their account of the " proceedings which terminated in the secession of those who " left Swanzey Monthly Meeting, and set up a meeting for " themselves, and the course it had had to pursue in order to "preserve Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting on its original " foundation."* Previous to the ensuing Yearly Meeting, a contrivance was resorted to, somewhat similar to that of the Hicks party in anticipation of the separation in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1827. But instead of increasing the numbers of their representatives, as had been done by the Hicksites, the leaders in New England proscribed those who were opposed to their proceedings, and pre- vented their appointment in several of the meetings. Thus they succeeded to a great extent (in view of what was to occur) in making the body of representatives as it were a packed jury. Such was the state of things when New England Yearly Meeting convened at Newport in the sixth month, 1845. As the transactions were peculiar, and of great importance, they may be best described in the language used by our Friends of that Yearly Meeting, in the document which they issued on the occasion for the information of their own members and of the Society at large. The fads, as stated, have never, to the writer's knowledge, been called in question, and substantial/;/ agree in all essential points with the very superficial * From "Considerations addressed to the Members of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting;" by Charles Evans, Philadelphia, 1846, page 81. 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 83 statement of this transaction in the "Narrative" put forth by the Gurney body. " At the first sitting of the Yearly Meeting, the report from "the spurious [or Gurney] Quarterly Meeting [of Rhode " Island] was read, together with those from the other quar- ters, and the representatives' names entered upon the min- " utes. The report from the genuine Rhode Island Quarterly " Meeting was afterwards read and minuted as purporting to " come from that meeting, and the representatives' names " recorded, whereupon a member of the Standing Committee " [of the Yearly Meeting] proposed a reference of the subject " to the representatives from all the Quarterly Meetings ex- " cept Rhode Island, for them to report which of the two "meetings and sets of representatives should be acknowledged " by the Yearly Meeting. " The representatives from Rhode Island Quarterly Meet- ing* objected to this proposition, upon the ground that "several of the representatives from the different quarters "were members of the Standing Committee, already impli- cated in the separation within their limits, and in the sup- " port of the unsound doctrines and disorderly practices be- " fore alluded to ; and moreover, that unfair and proscriptive " measures had been resorted to in the appointment of some "of the representatives, with a special view to the existing "controversy among us. In one Quarterly Meeting all who " were suspected of being opposed to the previous proceedings " within this Yearly Meeting, were excluded from appoint- " nient as representatives, and the members of one Monthly "Meeting belonging to that quarter were wholly excluded, " both from being appointed, and from nominating others for " representatives. At another Quarterly Meeting, members "of the Standing Committee attended, and advised against * Iu these quotations, where "the representatives from Rhode Island Quar- terly Meeting" are spoken of, allusion is of course made to that Quarterly Meeting which the leaders of the Yearly Meeting in these transactions were endeavoring to scatter and divide. 84 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. " the appointment of such as had not unity with their pro- " ceedings. " The repeated and fruitless efforts heretofore made to ob- " tain justice through the intervention of committees of the " Yearly Meeting were fully brought to view. Allusion was "also made to the evidence abundantly afforded, that such "committees, appointed in the partial and unfair manner " they ever have been, in cases involving the conduct of the " Standing Committee, are always greatly under the control of "a few influential individuals, mostl}' members of that com- " mittee. And it was further declared that the sufferings of " faithful Friends, in their endeavors to stand for the precious "cause of truth, were mainly to be attributed to the pro- ceedings of that committee, and that the sad difficulties by " which this Yearly Meeting is now encompassed, lie at their "door. The representatives from Rhode Island Quarterly " Meeting proposed that the matter should be investigated " and decided by the Yearly Meeting, without reference to a " committee, that all might have a fair opportunity to hear " and judge for themselves * "There was much expression in favor of this proposal by " Friends from different Quarterly Meetings ; but many con- " tinned to urge the reference to the representatives. Those " from Rhode Island informed the Yearly Meeting that they " could not consent to such a disposition of the case, for the " reasons which had been given. The clerk, notwithstand- ing, made a minute giving it that direction." .... "It was now proposed by Abraham Shearman, Jr., the "acting clerk, to suspend that rule of our Discipline which "requires 'the representatives to meet at the conclusion of the " l sitting on Second-day morning, and agree upon a clerk for "' the year, and report the same to the adjournment.' A " minute was made to this effect, although objected to on the " part of the representatives from Rhode Island ; and no time "being specified, it was thus left in the discretion of the rep- * This would have been in accordance with the practice during the past forty years in London Yearly Meeting, of hearing appeals in reference to faith and doctrine in the Yearly Meeting at large. See Vol. I, p. 52. 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 85 " resentatives, when they would attend to the service. The " meeting soon after adjourned to the fourth hour on Second- " day, afternoon. "Previous to the adjournment, one of the representatives "from Rhode Island distinctly proposed and requested that " Friends of that Quarterly Meeting, and such others as might " be disposed to join them therein, should take a solid oppor- " tunity of conferring together in that house, at the conclusion " of that sitting, in order that they (the representatives) might "be further ascertained of the sense and judgment of Friends, " whether they should appear before the representatives from " the different Quarterly Meetings, and defend the case which "had been referred to them in the manner above stated ; and "if not, to endeavor to see what steps it might seem proper "in the wisdom of truth for them to take under this very pe- culiar and trying state of things. This request was ex- " tended to all who desired to maintain the ancient principles " of Friends, and that the Yearly Meeting should be sustained "and held upon its original foundation. No objection was "made to it, but the clerk said the representatives would meet " in that room, on the case referred to them from Rhode Isl- "and; whereupon another of that party, who afterward "seceded, signified that we might meet in the committee " room. At the conclusion, many Friends accordingly re- " mained in the house, but finding it impossible to confer "together there freely and without interruption from others, " thej r agreed upon another time and place of meeting, and "then quietly withdrew. "Friends were introduced into deep exercise and travail of "spirit, wherein living desires were raised in the breasts of " many for best help and direction ; and when they again as- sembled, free from interruption, under an awful sense of the " importance of moving onl}- in the line of divine appointment, " they were united in judgment that it would not be right to "appear with their case before the representatives who were " then sitting in our meeting-house, and who were immedi- "ately informed of this conclusion. It was also the united "sense and judgment of Friends, that in order to sustain the 86 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. "Yearly Meeting in conformity with its long-established Dis- cipline, and upon its original ground, with the ancient doc- " trines and testimonies of the Society unimpaired, it was in- " dispensable that the representatives should meet, and agree " upon and propose a clerk to the next sitting, as by Disci- " pline and former usage is required. "The Yearly Meeting having again convened in the after- "noon, soon after the opening minute was read, Prince "Gardner [of Nantucket] on behalf of the Representatives " who met on clerks (which included all those from Rhode " Island [Smaller Body], and some from Sandwich Quarterly "Meetings), reported that they were united in proposing the " names of Thomas B. Gould for clerk, and Charles Perry for " assistant clerk, for the ensuing year. This proposal was " united with by many, but a large number opposed it, and "the former clerks continued to sit at the table. Whereupon, " those agreed to and proposed by the representatives, were "requested to take their seats at a table in a part of the house " where most of the Friends who had united in their appoint- " ment were sitting.* After making a minute of the appoint- "ment of clerks, etc., the names of the representatives from " Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting of Friends were called, and " all responded thereto. The clerk then proceeded to read the " report from that meeting, in which he was greatly inter- " rupted by many in different parts of the house. Abraham " Shearman, Jr. (the former clerk), left his seat, and passing " along the ministers' gallery towards that part of it where the " clerk was standing, called upon him to desist ; hut after a short " pause, the reading was calmly proceeded in until finished. " After appointing a committee to prepare and produce to a " future sitting a more extended minute, to be entered on our " records, embracing the very trying circumstances in which " we were placed, with the ground and cause thereof, it did not ■■'appear proper, on account of the great interruption Friends * This was a part of the meeting-house, at one side of the portion occupied by the bulk of the assembly, and capable of being divided from it by a sliding par- tition ; which, however, was at this time left open. 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 87 " met with, to introduce any further business at that sitting. " The Yearly Meeting concluded to adjourn , to meet on Third- " day morning at the tenth hour ; of which the women's meet- " ing was informed, and adjourned accordingly. This fact " being reported to the separate meeting hy their messengers, " they adjourned to meet at the name place, at the ninth hour. " Among other interruptions during this sitting, Abraham " Shearman, Jr., called upon the representatives, except those "from Rhode Island, to express their dissent from the appoint- " ment of clerks ; which was done by thirty-eight of them ;* "four were in unity with the appointment, and three were "absent." .... "Friends assembled on Third-day morning, and found our "meeting-house already occupied by the separate meeting. " Whereupon, the Yearly Meeting gathered and was opened " in the yard ; the men's meeting near one end of the house, and " the women's at the other. Each meeting appointed a com- " mittee to apply to those in the house for the vacation of the " clerks' tables, for the use of the Yearly Meeting and its "clerks, and also for the transfer of the books and papers "thereof; which application having been made, and uncon- "ditionally refused, we were deprived of the reports from all " our Quarterly Meetings except Rhode Island. One repre- sentative from Salem, and three from Sandwich Quarterly " Meetings, uniting with us, were recognized as such by the " meeting ; which, with those from Rhode Island, make thir- " teen representatives to the men's meeting, who have re- " mained with Friends. "After being thus obliged to hold our meeting, both of men " and women Friends, standing in the open air for nearly two " hours, it was concluded to adjourn the Yearly Meeting to the " Baptist meeting-house in Clarke Street, which was kindly "opened for that purpose. Friends having removed from our " meeting-house yard in a body, convened again immediately at " the place proposed ; and sitting for a time together, our hearts * The " Narrative " of the (iurney i>arty says " forty-one" — perhaps inadvert- ently including the absentees. 88 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IK [CHAP. IX. were tendered and united under the cementing influence of the Great Head of the church ; who, as we feel bound reverently to acknowledge, has been pleased, in his unmerited mercy, and in a remarkable manner, to own us in the way which we go, to manifest himself among us by his Spirit, to uphold and pre- serve by his power, amid the varied conflicts which we have had to pass through for his great name's sake. Under feel- ings of deep sorrow and concern for those who have been drawn aside from the Truth, and of thankfulness to the Lord our preserver, such was the solemnity and the precious- ness of the covering which in adorable mercy was spread over us, that it was concluded to adjourn without introduc- ing any business at that time. " The subsequent sittings of the Yearly Meeting have been regularly held at the same place ; and although greatly re- duced in numbers, Friends have been mercifully favored during these several sittings, to experience renewed and abundant evidence, that he who leadeth the blind by a way which they know not, and in paths which they have not seen, is not unmindful of his people ; and that while, in the counsels of his own will, he hath permitted them to be thus sifted and very closely tried, yet that he will, in his own good time, gather the outcasts of Israel, and the dispersed of Judah, raising up judges as at the first, and counsellors as at the beginning, who shall not err in vision or stumble in judgment, but who shall be enabled, by his holy help, to lay judgment to the line, and righteousness to the plummet. For Zion was to be redeemed through judgment, and her converts with righteousness ; and we are persuaded that he who rcigneth King in the midst of Zion, will verify his an- cient promise, ' I will restore health unto thee, and I will ' heal thee of thy wounds, saith the Lord, because they called ' thee an outcast, saying, this is Zion, whom no man seeketh ' after. ' ' Behold, I will bring again the captivity of Jacob's 'tents, and have mercy on his dwelling-places; and the city ' shall be builded upon her own heap, and the palace shall ' remain after the manner thereof. And out of them shall ' proceed thanksgiving, and the voice of them that make J 845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 89 " 'merry : and I will multiply them, and they shall not he few ; " ' I will also glorify them, and they shall not be small. Their '"children also shall lie as aforetime, and their congregation " ' shall be established before me, and I will punish all that op- " 'press them.' " . . . . "The sad consequences which have necessarily followed "such a departure from sound principles and a wholesome dis- ' ' cipline, on the part of the ' leaders of the people, ' through their " assuming, and until the present time, retaining aixarbitrary "and controlling influence in the transaction of the affairs of " the church in this Yearly Meeting, have been made sorrow- " fully apparent. It is equally clear and undeniable that those " who maintain their integrity and allegiance to the sound " principles, Christian doctrines, and long-established disci- " pline of our religious Society, as originally held and supported " by the first Friends, are the Society, whether it be composed "of less or more numbers. Neither can the highest prbfes- " sums of an adherence to first principles be availing to those "who have so departed, until the offences which they have "committed, by introducing, supporting, and defending such " adverse principles, be done away, and their undisciplinary "proceedings and oppressive acts reversed. We say, that "until such have manifested a sincere repentance, by fruits " meet for the same, they must and will be accounted as Sepa- ratists from the true body and Society of Friends."* .... Tlie representatives of the Gurney party meantime met according to their instructions, and agreed to report in favor of acknowledging those appointed as represen- tatives by the separate Quarterly Meeting of Rhode Island, which, as we have seen, was identified with the schismatic and disorderly Monthly Meeting of Swanzey. Their Yearly Meeting united with their report, and rec- ognized those representatives, to the exclusion of the * Epistolary Declaration and Testimony of the Yearly Meeting of Friends for New England, 1845, page 8 to 18. 90 THE SOCIETY OP FUIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. friends of sound doctrine and discipline; and thus iden- tified themselves with the irregular and despotic acts which have been narrated, and with the unsound doc- trines which those transactions went to fasten upon the Society. This "Larger Body" of the Yearly Meeting, which, under a blind confidence in its leading men, had now launched headlong into schism, put forth a statement containing their own version of what had occurred among them, entitled a " Narrative of Facts and Cir- cumstances that have tended to produce a Separation from the Society of Friends in New England Yearly Meeting." The same circumstances that have been here related were gone over therein, with their own interpre- tations and assertions of intents and purposes, thus dif- fering mainly from the statement of the " Smaller Body " by covering up the matter of doctrines, and attributing all to a spirit of insubordination and detraction, under which, as they alleged, their own characters had been defamed as supporters of unsound doctrines. This allegation of a spirit of detraction and defamation, if true, would at once have been sufficient to condemn the party who would persist in measures having so guilty a foundation ; and the leaders of the Gurney party doubtless hoped that their official and confident assertion of the fact would lead to its being taken for granted that it was so. For they uniformly and most carefully avoided to touch the question on which they admitted themselves accused, or to admit of its being investigated, by searching into those doctrines, and showing that they did not counte- nance them. They knew that, if brought to the point, they could not clear themselves; therefore they refused 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 91 to listen, and stood on their bare assertion, that the ac- cusation -was defamation, and brought in a spirit of de- traction. Most honest men, when accused of holding or promoting dangerous doctrines, would demand to be informed, what doctrines, and in what manner they had evinced any adhesion to them. But these men, while avowing that the accusation was brought against them, would never in any instance listen to the specification (often pressed upon them), or be candid enough to face the charge, but flinched and walked away as soon as it was attempted. The oft-reiterated plea of the leaders in these transac- tions, that " doctrines were not involved in the case," was manifestly false and unjust. Indeed, as sane men, they must have known that it was false. For John Wil- bur's course in the matter was, from beginning to end, founded solely upon the unsoundness and dangerous ten- dency of J. J. Gurney's doctrines, as he often testified to them, and offered to prove by the clearest evidence. And it is well known that they always refused to listen to his evidence of it, in order to shut it out from their transactions. But some, at least, of their number knew already, or had known, that these doctrines were at va- riance with the doctrines of Quakerism, and in their better days had openly testified against them on that ground ! It is true, they issued, along with the above-mentioned "Narrative of Facts and Circumstances," a "Declara- tion on various Christian Doctrines," with solemn prot- estations of its "embracing the doctrines of the gospel, as they ever have been and are now most assuredly believed by the Society of Friends," and that it " was fully united 92 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. with and adopted by the meeting, and declared to be its Faith upon the .subjects on which it treats." But what are the subjects on which it treats? Does it go into the matter of which they had been accused, and sift it to the bottom, as honest men would have done — even that cer- tain very important departures from our ancient faith had received encouragement at their hands, by the meas- ures in which they had for years persisted? Not at all. It is mainly composed of quotations from Robert Bar- clay, George Fox, and Joseph Phipps, and from the "Testimony of the Society of Friends in America," which was issued in 1830 against the doctrines of Elias Hicks and his adherents, and signed by Elisha Bates, as clerk of the joint committee who prepared it. These quotations are good and sound, as far as they go on the subjects selected ; but as a whole they appear quite as well adapted to prove that they were not Hicksites, as for any other purpose, if not rather more so. Some of the quotations are on topics concerning which J. J. Gur- ney was never charged with diverging from the doctrines of the Society. Others contain sentiments which, on comparison, would be found at variance with those of J. J. Gurney; but the writers of the Declaration seem to have been unaware that they were thereby proving their own inconsistency, in having so strenuously sup- ported this author, as to have recklessly torn the Society to pieces in his defence. Even if this Declai-ation of Faith, as a whole, could be said to be an antidote to the doctrines of J. J. Gurney, or a disavowal of them, which can by no means be can- didly said of it, it would go no further to exonerate the party issuing it, from responsibility for the sorrowful 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 93 nature and consequences of their late transactions, than the high-sounding professions made by the Council of Constance, of being assembled and governed by " the influence of the Holy Spirit," of being "convoked with the inspiration of God," and of " having God alone before their eyes,"* could exonerate those "holy fathers," as they called themselves, from the guilt incurred by their sacrifice of that eminent martyr, John Huss, when they so solemnly and sanctimoniously delivered him up to the secular arm for consignment to the flames. But, as said above, it cannot be sustained, that this Declaration covers the ground, by any means satisfac- torily, of the allegations of unsoundness against J. J. Gurney and those who persisted in supporting him. We must bear in mind, that while the tenor of J. J. Gurney's system, as a whole, was to subvert true Quakerism, yet his mode of procedure was to undermine it by grada- tions not easily perceived by those who did not look deeper than the surface of things, rather than to alarm by a direct attack. He professed, and doubtless felt, an attachment to what he considered the proper doctrines of the Society ; modifying and superseding some of the most characteristic and fundamental by representations of his own, according to what he thought they ought to he ; pro- fessing at the same time great esteem for early Friends, while thus superseding the cherished products of their convictions. Several of their quotations from Barclay are not by any means verbally correct, and one concluding at the top of page 15 is quite imperfect, the sentence not being * "The Lives, Sentiments, and Sufferings of some Reformers before and after Luther;" by W. Hodgson, Philadelphia, 1867, p. 160. 94 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. completed. On comparison with the passage in the "Apology" (Prop, iii, Sec. ii), it appears that where Barclay has put a semicolon, they have put a period, concluding without completing the sense ! Barclay says, " Though then we do acknowledge" etc., . . . (as quoted by them); "yet we may not call them [the Scriptures] the principal fountain of all truth and knowledge, nor yet the first adequate rule of faith and manners ; because the principal fountain of truth must be the truth itself ; i. e., that whose certainty and authority depends not upon another." Perhaps they may have thought that the latter part of the sentence (beginning at "yet") was not particularly convenient to the object they had in view ; but their leaving off thus in the middle of such a sen- tence, at least renders their candor liable to be called in question. Their " Declaration " opens with the expression of earnest desires that love and charity may prevail among the members ; deplores the uncharitable accusations of a dividing spirit, by which they had been assailed, and which had filled them with astonishment and sorrow; and exhorts all to " that fervent charity which suffereth long and is kind!" And they conclude with the asser- tion, — " We entirely disclaim, and have invariably dis- claimed all views and doctrines inconsistent therewith " [this Declaration of Faith], " from whatever source they may come, or by whomsoever they may be promulgated ;" .... "nor do we countenance the receiving of any sen- timents which are at variance with those contained in our approved writers." * We might suppose that the writers * " Declaration on Various Christian Doctrines;" by the Larger Body of New- England, p. 22. 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 95 of this passage believed that their deeds for the past five years had all been buried in oblivion, when they had the boldness to present such an assertion to be sanctioned by the Yearly Meeting! Surely none could believe it to be true, but those who knew nothing of the nature of what had been passing, or who did not comprehend the meaning of such assertions, or who had given themselves up implicitly to the fascination and bondage of party spirit. Yet by the mass of the members composing the assem- bly which issued this Declaration of Faith, it was doubt- less considered to be a true statement of the doctrines still sustained by those who controlled their affairs. A large proportion of them still believed, or rather did not disbelieve, in the ancient tenets of the Society ; but they had been so long accustomed to look with unlimited con- fidence to the members of the Meeting for Sufferings and the Yearly Meeting's Standing Committee, and their habitual instruments, who together had been the main promoters of the late extraordinary measures, that they scarcely permitted themselves seriously to question the rectitude of anything whatever proposed by them. And as the quotations were principally from the writings of early Friends, they took it, of course, for granted, that they were not only correct in themselves, which they probably were, in substance, so far as they went ; but that they were also adequate to the point desired, which they certainly were not ; unless indeed that desired point were to show, that while theoretically acknowledging one system of doctrines for effect in the Yearly Meeting, this combination of its functionaries could for years, in practice, uphold and promote, even to the tearing asunder 96 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. of the body, what was fundamentally and diametrically opposite. The next year, 1846, saw a similar attempt, on the part of J. J. Grurney himself, to make an appearance of being sound in the doctrines of Friends. He also put forth a Declaration of Faith,* to suit a particular legal occasion coming on in New England ; which he affirmed before the Mayor of Norwich and two justices of the peace, and then sent it over to America. It embraced several subjects, couched in very general terms, which did not meet the points at issue ; was altogether silent on a number of others in which his writings had been proved to conflict with the views of early Friends ; and on some the observations made were even confirmatory of the charges of divergence. There were in it six distinct topics, viz. : 1. On the Holy Scriptures ; 2. Immediate and perceptible guidance of the Holy Spirit; 3. Justification; 4. The "Trinity;" 5. The resurrection ; 6. The Sabbath. In speaking of the Holy Scriptures, he quoted with approbation the unsound paragraph inserted at his own instigation in the London General Epistle of 1836, re- specting their being "the appointed means," etc., which of itself evinced that he was in opposition to ancient Friends. Respecting " the Trinity," he said that he had never thought it right to make use of that term ; but he did not say how many times he had used terms on that subject equally if not more objectionable, such as "Plu- * This proceeding may remind the reader, of a similar action of E. Hicks, in 1829, in w riting a letter to Hugh Judge, containing answers to six queries re- specting his doctrines. See Vol. I, p. 197. 1846.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 97 rality in Unity," "Plurality in Essence," "Personality of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." There is a curious coincidence between this Declaration and that put forth by the Larger Body of New Eng- land which we have just been considering ; that while they stop at a semicolon in quoting from Robert Bar- clay, he stops at a semicolon in quoting from Edward Burrough — both, apparently, to avoid a fatal plunge into self-contradiction.* In the latter case, the part thus omitted was doubtless felt to be incompatible with his known objection to the doctrine of "Christ within, the hope of glory." His purpose in quoting E. Bur- rough was to attempt to show that he united with him in a certain passage respecting justification; but, stop- ping at the semicolon, he left out an important part of E. Burrough's declaration, viz. : " which faith hath re- ceived Christ to dwell in us." He omitted, also, any allusion to E. Burrough's declaration in the same trea- tise, that none can be justified by Christ's death, "but who witness Christ within them ; " " that have not Christ in them." In short, in no single point does this Declaration de- fend him from the alleged discrepancies between his published sentiments and those of true Friends. On several subjects, such as Faith, Original Sin, the Body and Blood of Christ, Prayer, and " the Gospel," it is almost entirely silent ; as well as on the various points on which, in his " Brief Remarks," he accused our early * Not but that any one may stop, if he pleases, at a semicolon, or at a comma, or even without one, if he lias got what he wanted ; hnt if he leaves out a part of a sentence especially essential to represent his author fairly, he lays himself open to a question as to his reason or motive for rejecting the context. VOL. II. — !) 98 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. and most cherished writers of "serious mistakes." But as I have elsewhere* treated somewhat more largely on the fallacy of this Declaration of Faith, it is only needful here thus briefly to refer to it. Some extracts from a letter, said to have been written by J. J. Gurney, were published in the " Friend's Re- view," of first month 20th, 1872, which were evidently brought forward in order to prove his soundness on cer- tain points of doctrine. There is no date given to this letter, nor any information to whom it was addressed, or under what circumstances it was written. It cannot be denied that it contains sound doctrine, and was probably written for the same purpose as the "Declaration" above mentioned; and if the writer had confined himself within these views, much harm would have been spared to the Society. It should be recollected that the oppo- nents of J. J. Gurney's unsound views never denied that he had written much that was verbally sound ; but their objections were aimed at very prominent, fundamental, and dangerous errors, new among Friends, appearing in many thousand copies of his books, and which he never would retract or condemn. So did Elias Hicks at times preach apparently sound doctrine ; yet he too never would condemn or retract the unsound, which, alas, was prominent in poisoning the minds of the people. The two Declarations of Faith above alluded to were used (and probably drawn up with that special intent) as evidence in a suit before the Supreme Judicial Court for the counties of Bristol, Plymouth, etc., sitting at Plymouth, Mass., being a suit in equity, brought by * Examination of tbe Memoirs and Wriliugj of J. J. Gutney, page 129, etc. 1846.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 99 Earle and others, plaintiffs, in behalf of the Gurney party, against Wood and others, defendants, on behalf of Friends of the "Smaller Body," for possession of the mcetingdiouse and lot of ground at Fall River, belong- ing to Swanzey Monthly Meeting; the Overseers of the meeting being, by the law of Massachusetts, ex officio trustees of the property. At the time of the separation, Friends had possession or charge of the premises in question ; but the party claiming to be overseers on the part of the Gurneyites took forcible possession of the property (as the Hicksites had done before in Pennsyl- vania, etc.), taking off the locks and substituting others. Not desiring to be involved in a contest of this sort, Friends brought an action at law in the first place. Subsequently Oliver Earle and others filed a bill in equity, as plaintiffs, in the Supreme Court, thus super- seding the action at law, and reversing the position of the parties. It is much to be regretted that Friends had anything to do with bringing on this suit, which, as usual, al- though appearing to be a very clear case, ended in no benefit to the cause of Truth. During the trial it was amply testified by various witnesses,* that novel doc- * The evidence on the part of the defendants was afterwards printed in an octavo volume of pages, entitled "Depositions, etc., Earle, etc., v. Wood, etc., Supreme Court of Massachusetts." Boston, T. It. Marvin, 1850. The writer has not succeeded in ascertaining whether the evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs was ever printed. Owing to all the testimony having been taken by way of affidavit at the homes of the respective witnesses, the case is by no means so clearly developed as it might have been by viva voce examinations in open court ; and from the constant repetition of the same points by nearly all the witnesses in reply to long monotonous lists of written interrogatories, the perusal is ex- ceedingly dry and tedious, and it would not be surprising if this were one cause of the Court having paid so little attention to the testimony. The case appears to have suffered from ill management of counsel, as well as carelessness and one- sidedness of the Court. 100 THE SOCIETY OF FUIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. trines, contrary to the faith of the Society, and the per- sistent efforts to sustain them and their main author, by arbitrarily suppressing all opposition to them, had been the basis of the schism ; and likewise that the actual separation had been brought about by these efforts of the advocates of J. J. Gurney, in an irregular, disor- derly, and oppressive series of transactions, totally unau- thorized by the Discipline of that Yearly Meeting, or of any other. These circumstances were plainly brought to view also in the pleading of the counsel for Friends. But the result clearly showed the unfitness of judicial tribunals to undertake to decide momentous religious questions, or to say which of two opposing bodies is the true Society of Friends. The case was delayed for a considerable time, and was at length decided by the court in the year 1852. Judge Shaw, who pronounced the decision, displayed great ig- norance (as might have been expected) of the constitu- tion and regulations of the Society, and seemed to flounder about, with all his legal learning, like a man who had fallen into the river, and scarcely knew how to contrive his endeavors so as to be sure to come out on one particular shore, where were the greatest number of spectators. His expressions indicate that he took but little pains for accuracy of statement of various matters in the evidence, and that he took many things for granted not at all warranted by the principles or usages of the Society; such as that " each Yearly Meeting is in- dependent of all others" — that the "Committee of Suf- ferings" has "a general supervising and advisory juris- diction " — that "the Yearly Meeting has a final and controlling jurisdiction in all matters of faith and re- 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY". 101 ligious duty" — "final and conclusive" — that though the Scriptures are believed to be "the unerring guide to Christian truth," yet that " new truths may be dis- covered " from them, so as to " add something to exist- ing faith " — that therefore " some modification of their creed" may be allowable, if only it is united in by the Yearly Meeting, whose "decisions are final and infalli- ble, as well in matters of faith as of conduct" — display- ing herein a most labored attempt to claim a broad lati- tude of doctrine, and papal infallibility, for the Yearly Meetings in the Society of Friends ! " But," said the judge, with wonderful inattention to the facts and bear- ing of the testimony, " we have no evidence that any organized meeting, monthly, quarterly, or yearly, took any step as a body to promote or establish any opinion or tenet of belief not entirely correct!" "The charge on the part of J. Wilbur and his friends," of promoting the tenets of J. J. Gurney, "they denied," (as if their simple denial rebutted all the evidence) and "a Narra- tive and Declaration was put forth, in which they state their belief .... satisfactory to those who affix the imputation of heresy to that same meeting !" Where he got such an idea as that it was " satisfactory " to these, does not appear, and is merely his own assertion. With the same persistent and unwarrantable onesided- ness, the judge goes on to give the reasons inducing the court to decide that the Gurney Monthly, Quarterly, and Yearly Meetings are the legitimate meetings of the Society and entitled to the property; for that in the Monthly Meeting, David Shove, "whether regularly or irregularly, was declared, and proceeded to act, as clerk," and that " without recapitulating the evidence, which is 102 THE SOCIETY OF FRfENDS IN [CHAP. IX. very voluminous, we should be inclined to the opinion" . . . . that "Shove must be taken to be the authorized clerk," etc. — in other words, that a pretended appoint- ment, " whether regular or irregular," is to be sanctioned by the highest judicial tribunal of the State ! The judge acknowledges that evidence had been given that changes of doctrine were complained of as being connected with the difficulty, but he passes over them very lightly, as scarcely worthy of notice. Throughout the document, the reasoning is sophistical and exceedingly superficial, giving no weight to the evidence or arguments of the defendants, and showing a manifest bias to the majority, or "the Yearly Meeting." The decision concludes thus: " On the whole case, the Court are of the opinion, that the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree for the establish- ment of their title to the land and meeting-house, as prayed for in their bill." After the publication of this decision, the Meeting for Sufferings of the "Smaller Body," believing that it set forth erroneous positions in relation to the internal polity and long-established usages and principles of the Society, published " A Review of the Opinion of the Su- preme Judicial Court of Massachusetts" in the case, in which they luminously exposed the gross errors and mistakes made by the judge, and the false and flimsy reasoning; on which the decision was founded. The im- portance of the subject as a matter of history is such, that it seems best to introduce here a few detached extracts from this review, so as to set the matter in its true light. "In the first place we may remark, that doctrines grounded "upon plain Scripture testimony, as are those of the Society " of Friends, have never been admitted by them to be specAda- 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 103 "tire, a term which implies ideal, theoretical only, not prac- " tical. The doctrines of the Society of Friends are not only "practical, but they are also definite and tangible." .... " Whatever degree of firmness or decision the court may have "arrived at in relation to other principles, they appear to have " had so little conception of the stability and definiteness of the " faith of the Society of Friends, as to suppose their principles " might be very elastic and accommodating, susceptible of "being bended this way or that way to suit occasions. But " will it do to bend the Christian faith and doctrines, so as to ''meet the caprice of mere speculative reasoners ? George " Fox could be neither flattered nor driven from his unbend- " ing rule, either by Oliver Cromwell or by Charles II," etc. .... " Well aware of what has been attempted, the judge "actually advocates the right of a Yearly Meeting to modify " the creed of the Society, or in other words to change its "principles; and asserts that such a step taken by a Yearly " Meet ing should be binding upon all its subordinate meetings "and its members ! That a Yearly Meeting should have the "power to change the principles of the Society, and to com- " pel the subordinate meetings and members to follow them in " that change, or be deprived of their meeting-houses, are doc- " trines new and strange to old-fashioned Quakers, and would '"lie, we conceive, to others, upon any other ground than the " papal dogma that the Church cannot err. " .... "After this elaborate attempt to prove that a change of " principles does not alter the character or affect the identity "of a religious body, the judge declares that this 'unhappy " 'controversy arose out of a jealous;/ or apprehension, on the " 'part of some of the Quaker body, that another part were " 'covertly circulating and endeavoring to promote false doc- "' trines,' etc., .... ' which, however, they (the Gurneyite "party) denied !' But does the denial of a fact so well known "invalidate a volume of testimony clearly going to prove it V ". ... Is a denial or negative of more force in a court of "law than an affirmative V And should not so much testi- " mony as was adduced, clearly proving the Gurney party, " in all ils capacities, to have acted in support of J. J. Gurney 104 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IX [CHAP. IX. "and his doctrines (inasmuch as a man's acts are stronger "evidence than his words) have more force than a mere "denial? Can we suppose that the court could have over- " looked this important fact — that divers consistent Friends "were disowned by the Gurney party for openly expressing "their dissent from J. J. Gurney's doctrines?" " There can be no stronger proof of their attachment to ' Gur- " neyism ' than this." .... " Moreover, it was proved to the " court, that New England Yearly Meeting gave to J. J. "Gurney a returning certificate, declaring their full unity " with him, although it was objected to at the time, by those " with whom these defendants are in unity, that such certifi- " cate would be an indorsement of his doctrines : a view which "none offered to gainsay. . • . Still the Supreme Court of "Massachusetts think that, in very deed, this controversy " arose from a mere jealousy." Again : "The court say that the 'Narrative and Declaration' put " forth in 1S45 by the Gurney Yearly Meeting, ' was satisfac- " 'tory [as regards their belief] to those who affix the imputa- "'tion of heresy to that same meeting.' What foundation " there is for this assertion we know not ; certain it is that "those who affix that imputation have not expressed them- " selves satisfied with the Declaration of Faith, but the con- " trary ; holding it to be defective because it does not compre- " hend the whole of the Quaker confession of faith, nor does it " discard a single article of Gurney's unsound doctrines, which "the Gurneyite body were charged with having adopted ; and "having been so charged, it was indispensable, in order to "prove them true Quakers, that they should have specially " acquitted themselves from those heretical opinions. ... So " far was this Narrative and Declaration from being satisfac- tory to the sound body, that they immediately put forth "'Strictures' and comments upon it, setting forth their dis- " satisfaction," etc. .... "The /net was fully proved to the court, though it "seems not to have been regarded by them, that the Meeting 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 105 "for Sufferings .... took measures to spread Grurney's doc- " trines, and reported their having done so to the Yearly "Meeting, and that the Yearly Meeting acknowledged its "satisfaction therewith, and so recorded it on their book. " Thus it is proved that meetings of the highest order in the " Society, if they have not promulgated unsound doctrines of " their own, have taken effectual means to spread those of " Gurney," etc. In reference to the disorderly appointment of Shove as clerk of Swanzey Monthly Meeting in the eighth month, which the Judge had acknowledged to have been proposed " before the meeting was opened by the clerk" they say : "To appoint a new clerk before the meeting was opened by "the former, when present, is clearly an infraction upon the "order and usages of New England Yearly Meeting, which " was never before attempted ; and manifested not only a spirit " of disorder, but also of domination and tyranny. For it was " a person not belonging to that meeting who named David "Shove for clerk before the meeting was opened or organized "for the transaction of any business whatever ; in fact, before "the session had legally commenced. And, as if to render "the disorder more complete, those attending from other " parts produced no minute of appointment, or any evidence " or credentials to certify in what capacity they were present." . . . . " Well may the Judge say that D. Shove was declared "clerk 'regularly or irregularly,' and we think, with the facts "here stated, few will be at a loss to decide which. Yet in "the next paragraph the Court say. 'We should be inclined " 'to the opinion that at the August meeting, Shove must be " 1 taken to be the authorized clerk ; that those who remained "'after the adjournment was announced [by him], acted " 'irregularly, and became seceders !' .... The Judge adds, "'and if Shove was improperly elected, they should have "'sought their remedy by an appeal to the Quarterly Meet- " ' ing ' — a proposition wholly irrelevant to the case." . . . . vol. n. — 10 106 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. "Their duty clearly was to maintain the Monthly Meeting " inviolable, and they did so, forwarding their usual account " to the Quarterly Meeting." And they go on to show what the powers of commit- tees are, and are not, according to discipline and usage. In allusion to the Yearly Meeting, they quote the words of the Court, viz. But at this time the "'Yearly Meeting had done no act, refused no applica- "' tion for redress, declared no heretical opinion, nor " ' taken any step to be complained of.' " On which they make the following remarks: " It seems hardly credible that the Court could have been so " ignorant of the history of New England Yearly Meeting for " the four or live } - ears prior to the separation, as to make this " assertion. As already stated, they had given to J. J. "Gurney a full certificate of unity and approval, without re- " gard to the objection made at the time, that it would be an " indorsement of his unsound views. They had approved of "the circulation of Gurney 's books by the Meeting for Suffer- "ings, containing some of those unsound views. They had "approved and confirmed the laying down of South Kingston "Monthly Meeting, which was done in defence and for the " support of those unsound views, in a manner plainly con- trary to the provisions of the Discipline." .... "They had "also confirmed the disownment of John Wilbur, which was " effected by the direct influence and action of the Y"early "and Quarterly Meetings' committees in a manner unprece- " dented in the Society, after he had been fully and honorably "acquitted by his own Monthly Meeting, and all because of " his conscientious testimony against those unsound doc- " trines." . . . . " The Yearly Meeting had also now referred "this whole matter in controversy to men ex parte, many of " whom had prejudged it in a public manner, and thus become " a direct party to it, so that this reference — made as it was " against the consent and under the protest of the other party, 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 107 with the representatives selected as we have already shown — was at best but a poor caricature of the administration of justice and right. In doing all this, had the Yearly Meet- ing 'taken no step to be complained of?'" .... "The circumstance that it was a minority of the representatives who proposed the clerks, and a minority of the body who united with them therein, we cannot but think must have had a strong, if not a controlling influence in bringing the Court to this conclusion." .... " Those who depart from the principles of a Society, which are the bond of its union, however anxious they may be for it, can have no ' rightful authority ' to control those who have kept to first principles, be their disparity of numbers what it may. The apparent inability of tbe Court to appreciate this doctrine, that those who hold to the original principles of the Society in the Truth, must be accounted the genuine Society without regard to numbers, seems to have led to the (in our apprehension) erroneous judgment which they have rendered." "2for can a doctrinal question, such as now exists, be de- cided and settled by a Yearly Meeting itself, if one-half or more of that body, or perhaps if the controlling and influ- ential members, become, irreclairaably apostate in the doc- trines at issue ; in such case the body can only be purged by a sifting or separation, so that the sound may be disencum- bered of the unsound, and enabled, by the help of the Lord, through faithfulness and singleness of heart, to continue to support their original doctrines and testimonies. '"But for the civil tribunal to take the meeting-houses and lots from those who have always held to the Society's origi- nal principles, and for whose use they were intended, and give them to those who have brought in and adopted new doctrines, and tins too upon the plea that our doctrines may hi thus modified "<"/ changed impunity, is a greater departure from sound principles and just proceedings than we were prepared to expect at the hands of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ; and we trust we have shown that the opinion of the Court is not justly entitled to 108 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. IX. " become an authority or precedent in regard to matters sim- " ilar to those at issue in this case." Beside this Review, one of the Counsel likewise issued some close strictures on the glaring errors of the deci- sion of the Court. The following are a few of his re- marks, treating the case in a legal point of view : .... " In the investigation of this question, the usages of "the Society of Friends were proved by numerous witnesses " and the Book of Discipline ; all the transactions of the Meet- " ing were clearly proved, and the legal authorities applicable " to the case were also cited and read ; all of which were vic- " torious for the defendants ; and their counsel relied and still " relies that there was full proof that Thomas Wilbur was the ' ' true and legal clerk of that meeting, and that his records "and minutes (confirmed by the testimony) were conclusive " evidence of the appointment of the defendants as the true " and only overseers of the meeting. How could there be a " doubt ? The facts were clear, uncontroverted, and uncontro- "vertible; and, as Judge Twisden said, 'The law was on "their side.' Here are all the facts: [citing in brief from "the testimony.] .... AVho will stand up for the ' orderly " appointment of the plaintiffs?' Here was the very height " of disorcU r. Here is John Meader, with half a dozen others, "not members of the meeting, making motions and speeches " before the meeting is opened, and when called to order, claim- "ing to be committee-men from a superior meeting, anil when " called upon for the minute of their appointment, refusing to " produce it, etc., etc Was it ever known, that a nieet- "ing, and an election of this sort, has been sustained by any " court of law in Christendom ? " .... "But they say that " they were committee-men of a superior meeting. And what " of that ? The evidence in the case does not show that such, "by Quaker usages, could do anything more than advise. "But they are stripped of this pretence by not producing, or " handing in, the minute of their appointment. Such is the " law in all analogous cases." .... 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 109 " They (John Meatier and the committee, if they were such) "had no right to make the motion which they did make and "assist to consummate ; it was disorderly and void ; because '"it was made and consummated before any minute opening "'ower to sweeten and har- monize our hearts ; adding, that our Yearly Meeting had often been favored to separate under a solemn cover- ing of reverential silence, and he hoped it would be so on the present occasion. It is true that I indorsed his sentiments, for I had full unity with them; and I added the expression of my desire to his, that we might be permitted to get into stillness before the Lord, that the meeting might close under a solemn covering of good. Our Yearly Meeting certainly has the right, under divine authority, to say when and how its sittings shall terminate; and I trust we shall continue to exercise that right and authority which the Truth gives." R. M. — " I have been told .... that on Fifth-day [at the North Meeting-house] thou took Benjamin See- bohm to task, publicly in the meeting-house, for preach- ing too long, as thou wast pleased to consider it." 134 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. C. H. — " Well, Richard, if I did rebuke Benjamin for his too much speaking, he at least deserved it. He cer- tainly preached long — much too long, as I believe — and without any unction or life about it, as I could discover. It was words, mere words. And I did by him what I hope my friends will do by me, if they find me preach- ing without life and authority, as Benjamin was doing." R. M. — "Your Yearly Meeting is taking too much upon itself, in presuming to judge another Yearly Meet- ing, over whom you have no right to exercise any au- thority whatever, because it is as independent a body as your Yearly Meeting is." C. H. — " Our Yearly Meeting has just the same right, under divine authority, to express its uneasiness, or even to deal with another Yearly Meeting, as one in- dividual has to deal with another individual, under the feelings of religious concern. And one Yearly Meeting may, if needs be, set the judgment of Truth over another Yearly Meeting; for it has always been the privilege — nay, the duty — of those who are in the Truth, to judge those who are out of it." R. M. — " But how do you- know that these friends in New England are out of the Truth?" C. H. — "We know that J. J. Gurney was out of the Truth, because his own writings prove it. His doctrines are not those of the religious Society of Friends — they are spurious and unsound. And we know this ' large body ''in New England has indorsed him and his un- soundness, and disowned John Wilbur because he testi- fied against Gurney's unsound doctrines and principles ; and they thus separated themselves from the Society, and went out from us because they were not of us." 1848.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 135 R. M. — " Christopher, there is a shyness between thee and me, which was not felt in old times, and for which I cannot account. I do not believe the cause of it is in me." C. H. — " Indeed, Richard, it is very plain that there is such a shyness, but dost thou see any change in me ? Am I not what I always was since thou first knew me, the same in sentiment, the same in doctrine, the same in love and zeal for the Truth ?" R. M. — "I do not accuse thee of having changed." C. H. — " Well then, Richard, if I have not changed, thou must have done so, for we are evidently far asunder now." The steamboat arriving now at a landing-place, they separated, with an expression by R. M. that he was sorry to part so, as he wished for more conversation with his old friend. The above conversation was afterwards related by C. H. to a friend, who wrote down the sub- stance of it as above from a retentive memory. The Meeting for Sufferings, in pursuance of the di- rection of the Yearly Meeting, appointed a committee of fifteen of its members, viz., Christopher Healy, Hinch- man Haines, Ebenezer Roberts, William Evans, Daniel B. Smith, Israel W. Morris, Enoch Lewis, Samuel Hilles, William Hilles, Abraham Gibbons, Henry Cope, Morris Cope, Charles Evans, Joseph Scattergood, and William Hodgson, to make a careful investigation into the facts and circumstances connected with the origin and progress of the New England Separation, and report. The great importance of the subject thus committed to them, and the circumstance that the committee was composed of men of all shades of opinion on the state of the Society 136 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. at this crisis, will warrant our going into more detail in respect to its proceedings than would otherwise be neces- sary, or perhaps desirable. I believe it right indeed here to place on record a succinct statement of what occurred at the first sittings of the committee, inasmuch as the successive remarks unfold so clearly the different phases of opinion and bias of the respective members, which were further developed as events passed on, and which are important to be rightly understood. The subject was felt to be highly important, and the responsibility of a right treatment of it very weighty. Several Friends expressed desires that it might be faith- fully and honestly gone into. Our aged friend Hinch- man Haines expressed his sense of the great importance of the occasion, and its intimate connection with the welfare of the Society at large, and warned against the spirit, so prevalent in some, to compromise. Christopher Healy (who, in his seventy-fifth year, had come to the city to attend the committee, through much bodily weak- ness and suffering, having within a few days fallen from the top of a loaded farm wagon) united with these re- marks, exhorting to a faithful honest discharge of the important trust devolved on the committee. The Gur- ney members of the committee, however, wished to limit the examination to the written Epistles of the two bodies, addressed to us ; but this was shown to be entirely inade- quate to enable the committee to fulfil the injunction of the Yearly Meeting, to examine into the circumstances and causes of the separation. Henry Cope said that the committee ought to be governed by the same rule that governs judicial examinations, viz., " the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," with an openness to 1848.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 137 receive all evidence necessary for an arrival at the truth. Daniel B. Smith wished all to approach the investigation with minds divested of any preconceived opinions, and willing to judge, as jurymen, according to the evidence. Ebenezer Roberts followed him, with a testimony to the need of the wisdom of man being laid low, and of our humbly seeking to be enlightened by the Holy Spirit, in order to be qualified to judge righteous judgment — reviving the saying of Christ to Peter, — " Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven;" and exhorting all to gather to that Spirit of judgment which alone could rightly qualify, so that whatsoever the church should bind on earth might be bound in heaven. Samuel Hilles said that having been present [with John Pease] at the time of the sepa- ration in New England Yearly Meeting itself, he was entirely settled in his own mind ; and believing in the entire accuracy and authority of the documents issued by the " Larger Body," and knowing them to have been properly signed by " the regular clerk," he as an indi- vidual did not wish to hear any other statements than those issued by the body with whom we had always cor- responded. He would not, however, throw any difficulty in the way of others, being willing that Friends should get " once more into the track," so that we might " get along." He was answered by D. B. Smith, that the matter which he had represented as being entirely settled in his own mind, was the very question at issue. At this sitting and one the next day, the various doc- uments prominently bearing on the subject were read before the committee; and after much discussion in re- gard to future modes of proceeding, a sub-committee of 138 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. five was named, to digest the whole subject and prepare a report. During this discussion, Enoch Lewis and Israel W. Morris objected to any examination of the disciplinary proceedings of another Yearly Meeting; but Henry Cope urged the necessity of such examination, in order to develop the origin of the separation; and de- clared that it was evident from the "Narrative" put forth by the " Larger Body " itself, that they had been guilty of acts not only at variance with their own Dis- cipline and the usages of the Society, but of such an outrageous character as to be disgraceful to any body of men. William Evans said that we could only collect the facts, and state what each party had done — that it might perhaps appear that both parties had acted wrong — and he should sincerely rejoice if they could, in that case, be convinced of the wrong, and become reconciled to each other — that it would be a happy thing if this Yearly Meeting could be instrumental in bringing such a thing about — he lamented this so frequent example of separation. Daniel B. Smith, apparently aware of the weakness characterizing these remarks under existing circumstances, said that no reconciliation could be effec- tual, but such as should go to the bottom of the evil — that a wound, before it could be healed, must be probed to the bottom — else we should only be plastering it over, and making it worse instead of better. Morris Cope said that Truth was never afraid of investigation, but it was he that did evil that hated the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. Enoch Lewis felt wounded at this, taking it as a personal allusion. But Christopher Healy hoped Friends would keep low and sweet in their spirits, looking to the Master, and keeping the Lord at their 1848.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 139 right hand — that as soon as he awoke that morning, his mind was impressed with the saying of David, "I will place the Lord always before mine eyes ; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved" — and he be- lieved that as we kept our own spirits down, and kept the Lord on our right hand, we should be preserved, and the great Master would yet be known to be a "spirit of judgment to them that sit in judgment, and for strength to them that turn the battle to the gate." And then portraying the fruits of faithfulness, he exhorted Friends to submit to have their own wills brought down, and faithfully to obey the dictates of Best Wisdom. Deep silence followed ; till Israel W. Morris expressed that he did think he was willing to submit to divine di- rection ; but urgently objected to proceeding as proposed, or meddling with another Yearly Meeting's disciplinary transactions. A younger Friend then said, "that he believed that if Friends would be faithful to the point- ings of Truth, we need not fear the consequences — that indeed the only safe way appeared to him to be, for us to endeavor to know the mind of Truth, and then firmly to pursue that course, leaving results to Him who can control all to the welfare of his church — that he believed this committee would be greatly wanting to its duty, if they neglected to avail themselves of all the important evidence necessary to a correct knowledge of the case — that the originators of this difficulty in New England had taken the ground that doctrine* were not to be in- vestigated, and now we were told that discipline was not to be investigated — and if we followed such advice there could of course be no investigation at all." After some further discussion, the sub-committee was appointed; 140 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. viz., William Evans, Henry Cope, Charles Evans, Dan- iel B. Smith, and William Hodgson. This sub-committee was diligently engaged through the winter and early spring, and had many laborious and exercising opportunities together, before the pro- posed report was fully matured. But at length, after struggling through many difficulties and obstacles thrown in the way by those who desired to deprive it of its efficacy and clearness, and submitting to some very undesirable changes in order to save it from falling through altogether, the committee at large was able to present it to the Meeting for Sufferings. That meeting fully adopted it, though with strong opposition on the part of the Gurney portion of the members, and directed it to the ensuing Yearly Meeting. In this report was a detailed statement, gathered mainly, as to the facts, from the "Narrative" of the " Larger Body ;" their own account, when compared with the statement of the same facts by the "Smaller Body," appearing sufficient to prove all that was really essential to a development of the causes and progress of the actual schism. It contained also a statement of the manner in which those facts were viewed or attempted to be justified by each party; and concluded with the expression of the committee's own judgment, which it submitted to the Yearly Meeting, in relation to the character of these transactions, their bearing on the sepa- ration, and the responsibility of those concerned in them, for the breach of unity which was thus so sorrowfully brought about. The following is their judgment on the case, as expressed in the Report. Its great importance will justify the length of the quotation. 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 141 "Such is a concise statement of the facts contained in the Documents which have been submitted to us, and of the light in which the two parties respectively view them. Two sets of epistles have been presented to the Yearly Meeting, both from bodies which assert that they maintain, in their original purity, the doctrines, testimonies, and discipline of the Society. The subject is therefore placed before us for consideration without any agency of ours, and common Justice; and the cause of Truth demand that the claims of each should be impartially examined. " Although each Yearly Meeting is the judge of its owu discipline, there is an understood and implied necessity of conforming in its decisions to principles of religious duty and Christian doctrine, of civil liberty and constitu- tional right, common to us all, and always acknowledged and held as inviolable by us. For we are one people the world over. The right of membership in one Yearly Meet- ing, is a right of membership — when duly conveyed by certificate — in all. A member, let him belong where he may 7 , has the right of attending meetings for transacting the ordinary affairs of the Society, wherever they are held. When, therefore, as in the present case, two bodies come before a Yearly Meeting, both under the same title, and each claiming to be the co-ordinate branch of the Society bearing that name, it becomes its duty, under the guidance of Divine Wisdom, to inquire into the circumstances of the case, so that it may not withhold from those to whom they belong, the precious rights and privileges which membership in our Society confers. "From the statements put forth by both bodies, it appears clear to us that important principles and usages of the Society, as well as private rights, have been disregarded in the progress of the transactions therein recorded. Some of the more prominent points, in which this has been done, appear to us to be the following, viz.: " First. In the attempt to procure the disownment of a minister in the Society [John Wilbur], upon an accusation of detraction, and upon other charges, based upon or grow- 142 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. "ing out of his endeavors, in accordance with what he be- lieved to be his religious duty, to prevent the reception and " spread of sentiments contained in printed doctrinal works, "written and published by a Friend from England [.T.J. "Gurney]. then in this country; which sentiments, in com- "mon with man}- other Friends, he believed to be opposed to "the acknowledged doctrines of the Society. " Every man has the natural and religious right to express "his honest opinions, in a proper spirit and manner, upon "an)' public sentiment which he approves or disapproves. If "he spreads opinions in opposition to the principles of the " religious society to which he belongs, he is liable to excom- "munication for a departure from its faith. But to attempt "to bring a man under censure for defending the Society " against error, by warning the members against the unsound- "ness of certain published works, not only violates a plain " unquestionable right, but would be censuring him for the " faithful discharge of his religious duty as a watchman, and " giving support to opinions which as a bod}- the Society en- " tirety disapproves. The object of our Christian compact is to " bear testimony to the truth and against error; to comfort "and strengthen one another in a faithful adherence to the "truth, through the power of the Holy Spirit, that by sound " doctrine and a consistent example we may convince gain- "sayers, and that the kingdom of Christ may prevail over "darkness and error in the earth. In a work on church "government, written b\- Robert Barclay, and owned b}' the " Society every where, these views are held forth. He says: " ' We being gathered together into the belief of certain prin- " ' ciples and doctrines, without any constraint or worldly " 1 respect, but by the mere force of truth upon our under- "' standings, and its power and influence upon our hearts ; " ' these principles and doctrines, and the practices necessarily " ' 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. Xow if any one or more, so engaged with '"us, should arise to teach any doctrine or doctrines contrary 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 143 " ' to those which were the (/round of our being one, who can " ' deny but the body hath power in such a case to declare, " ' this is not according to the truth we profess, and we, there- " 'fore, pronounce such and such doctrines to be wrong, with "'which we can have no unity, nor any more spiritual '" fellowship with those that hold them, and so cut them- " 'selves oft* from being members, by dissolving the very bond '"by which we were linked together.' "This is a plain declaration of the powers of the Society, "and of the reasonableness of exercising these powers, and "that a departure in doctrine breaks the bond which had "united the party to the Society. After expressing the same "sentiments on the next page, Barclay contends that it is the ''duty of all the members to protest against every departure "from its faith. He says: 'Have not such as stand, good " 'right to cast such an one out from among them, and to "'pronounce positively, this is contrary to the truth we "'profess and own, and ought therefore to be rejected and " ' not received, nor yet he that asserts it, as one of us. And "'is not this obligatory upon all the members, seeing all "'are concerned in the like care, as to themselves, to hold " 'the right and shut out the wrong? I cannot tell if any " ' man of reason can well deny this.' Again he says: 'In " 'short, if we must preserve and keep those that are come to " ' own the truth, by the same means they were gathered and " 'brought into it, we must not cease to be plain with them, '"and tell them when they are wrong, and by sound doc- " ' trine both exhort and convince gainsayers.' " If unsouud doctrines are not to be testified against, and "the ftock warned of their pernicious influence, but the con- " sistent exercised members are to be accused of detraction, "when they declare their dissent from published errors, then " ' farewell to the maintenance of any sound doctrine in the " Church of Christ. ' This would he an inlet to the greatest "innovations, and in time might overturn the Society. How "would it be possible for ministers of the gospel, and other " religiously concerned members, to discharge their duty as "watchmen, if they are forbidden to warn the flock of sur- 144 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. "rounding danger, arising from erroneous doctrinal works? " The most substantial Friends in this land nobly and firmly "testified against the errors of Elias Hicks, both publicly and '• privately, even while he travelled with certificates as a min- "ister; and they were instrumental in guarding many from " imbibing his unsound sentiments. " Second. In a committee of the Yearly Meeting summon- " ing a member [J. W.] before it to answer certain charges " made by it, dealing with him as an offender, and requiring "him to make concessions to them, and endeavoring to in- "duce him to sign a written acknowledgment, drawn up by " a part of their own body. "The right to treat with their members, and to disown or " to accept acknowledgments from them for their errors, be- " longs exclusively to the Mont lily Meetings, under certain " rules prescribed by the Discipline. Even when a Quarterly "Meeting appoints a committee to be incorporated with a " w r eak Monthly Meeting for the support of the discipline, " the members of the committee, when named in the latter " meeting to treat with offenders, do not serve as a committee "of the Quarterly, but of the Monthly Meeting, having no "more power than any other members of it. And it is, we "think, altogether incompatible with the station which a "Yearly Meeting holds in the Society, and with universal "practice, for that body, either itself or through its commit- " tees, to attempt to deal with a member as an offender. For "as it is the highest body to which an appeal can be made "against the decisions of inferior meetings, the application " to it for redress must be in vain, if it has already made itself "a party and prejudged the case. " Third. In the same committee's drawing up a charge " against a member, bringing it immediately before his Monthly " Meeting, and insisting upon its being recorded on the min- " utes, against the urgent request of the accused that it should "be previously investigated ; thereby assuming to itself func- " tious which rightfully belong to the overseers and to the " Preparative Meeting. "The right of an accused person to have a charge against 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 145 "him brought before the overseers or the Preparative Meet- "ing, is of essential importance. There he has the liberty of " attending and of meeting the charge before it is permanently "recorded, and if he should convince the overseers or the " meeting that it is unfounded, or if it can be settled without '" going to the Monthly Meeting, the matter would end with- "out any record to hand his name down to posterity with "discredit. Whereas his rigflts as a member are virtually "suspended, so long as a charge against him remains unset- " tied on the records of the Monthly Meeting. We should "regard such a proceeding in our own Yearly Meeting as an " unconstitutional exercise of power, dangerous to the peace "and subversive of the established order of the Society. " Fourth. In the same committee's bringing the power and "authority of the Yearly Meeting to bear upon the Monthly "Meeting, by claiming the right to join the committee of the "latter in treating with the Friend [J. W.] and refusing to "him the right of opening and explaining what he alleged to " be the ground on which he had acted in the discharge of an "apprehended duty. The members of the Yearly Meeting's "committee had neither been incorporated with the Monthly " Meeting nor appointed to deal with the member. Their pre- senting themselves in this anomalous manner, seemed to "show a determination to carry a purpose respecting the " Friend, without regard to the usages and order of the Soci- " ety or the rights of the Meeting. Where a member's char- acter and privileges are at stake, the spirit and uniform " practice of our Discipline require the greatest liberality to "be shown in allowing him time and any arguments or ex- planations he thinks necessary to his defence Were he "denied the opportunity of producing evidence to clear hini- " self, such denial would quash the proceedings against him, " in an appeal before an impartial tribunal ; for the great "object in the administration of Church Discipline is, not to " criminate but to convince and reclaim those who have erred ; " and if that cannot be done, to leave no ground for charging "the church with harshness or injustice " Fifth. In the same committee's objecting at a subsequent VOL II. — 1-3 146 THE SOCIETY OF FEIENDS IN [CHAP. X. " Monthly Meeting to the reception and adoption of a report "signed by seven of the committee who had investigated the "case and declared that the charges had not been sustained ; " while they advised the reading of a report of an opposite "character signed by two of the Monthly Meeting's com- " mittee, although it was strongly objected to in the meeting. " Such a proceeding in treating with offenders is, we think, "contrary to any practice in the Society that we have ever " been acquainted with ; the principle governing in such cases, " being, that of leaning to the side of mercy and forbearance. " Sixth. In the attempt made first, by the Quarterly Meet- " ing's committee, and afterwards by the Quarterly Meeting " itself, to render null and void the minute of South Kingston " Monthly Meeting which accepted the report in the case of " the Friend alluded to, dismissed the charge against him, and " I'estored him to alibis rights as a member and minister ; " and in afterwards taking up his case by another Montbly " Meeting on the same charge, and there disowning him with- " out even going through the regular course prescribed by the " Discipline. " It is a great maxim of law and justice, that where a man "has been tried and acquitted, he cannot be again tried for " the same offence. When, therefore, Rhode Island Quarterly " Meeting set aside the minute in the case alluded to, and "directed a new trial, it violated what must ever be held to " be a fundamental principle in the administration of justice. "The only reasons assigned for this decision, were certain "appointments made in the Monthly Meeting, which it was "clearly within the power of that meeting to make, which "appointments had been recognized as valid by the Yearly "and Quarterly Meetings' committees, and for which the "individual was in no way responsible. " South Kingston Monthly Meeting being laid down, and "its members joined to Greenwich Monthly Meeting, con- " trary to the course prescribed by the Discipline of New Eng- "land Yearly Meeting; the latter [Monthly] meeting, five "months after the case had been closed, and the member fully "acquitted by his own Montbly Meeting, and thereby, accord- 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 147 "ing to the admission of both parties, 'restored to member- '• ship,' took his case upon its minutes, called for a report "from the committee originally appointed in South Kingston " Monthly Meeting, and at the next meeting received a report "signed by two of that committee, similar in all respects to "that made live months before to South Kingston Monthly " Meeting by the same two members of the committee of nine, "and which was rejected by it; and in a summary manner " immediately disowned the individual without his having "met the committee again, or the whole committee having "been together. "The Society of Friends has always guarded with scrupu- " lous care, the rights of its members. It has carefully avoided "seeking to make a man an offender ; and even when a Friend " has directly violated the Discipline, if he has not been treated "with and disowned in strict conformity with its provisions "and order, he is, where justice is done to him, reinstated on " his appeal It is an acknowledged principle among Friends, " that it is better an offender should escape disownment, than "that bis rights, guaranteed by the Discipline, should be dis- " regarded. For if meetings and committees do not keep to "the Discipline themselves, under the direction of the Head " of the Clmrch, on what right ground can an individual be " disowned for his error ? We therefore regard the whole pro- " ceedinej as at variance with the organization and discipline of " the Society.* " Seventh. In disregarding the provisions of the Discipline "of New England Yearly Meeting, in the manner of laying "down South Kingston Monthly Meeting, by Rhode Island "Quarter, and attaching its members to Greenwich Monthly " Meeting. "That Discipline prescribes the following course to be pur- " sued in such a case : ' When a Quarterly Meeting hath come " ' to a judgment respecting any difference, relative to any " • Monthly Meeting belonging to them, and notified the same "'in writing to such Monthly Meeting, the said Monthly * These, and most of the subsequent words in italics in this quotation, are put so by the present writer. 148 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. " ' Meeting ought to submit to the judgment of the Quarterly " ' Meeting ; but if such Monthly Meeting shall not be satis- " ' tied therewith, then the Monthly Meeting may appeal to " ' the Yearly Meeting, against the judgment and determina- " ' tion of the Quarterly Meeting. " ' And if a Monthly Meeting shall refuse to take the advice " 'and submit to the judgment of the Quarterly Meeting and " 'notwithstanding will not appeal against the determination " ' of the said meeting, to the Yearly Meeting; in such case, " 'the Quarterly Meeting shall be at liberty either to dissolve " 'such Monthly Meeting, or bring the affair before the next " 'or succeeding Yearly Meeting. " ' And in case a Quarterly Meeting shall dissolve a Monthly "'Meeting, the dissolved Monthly Meeting, or any part " ' thereof, in the name of the said meeting, shall be at liberty " ' to appeal to the next or succeeding Yearly Meeting, against " ' such dissolution ; but if the dissolved Monthly Meeting, or " ' a part thereof in its behalf, shall n<>l appeal to the Yearly " 'Meeting, the Quarterly Meeting shall join the members of "'the said late Monthly Meeting, to such other Monthly "'Meeting as they may think most convenient; and until "'such time, shall take care that no inconvenience doth " 'thereby ensue to the members of such dissolved meeting, " 'respecting any branch of our Discipline.' Rules of Disci- pline, etc., 1820, pp. 118, 11!). " This, to us, appears clear and explicit, rendering it neces- " sary for the Quarterly Meeting, first to come to a judgment " in relation to the difficulty existing in the Monthly Meeting, "proposed to be laid down, and to communicate that judg- " ment to it in writing ; and then to ascertain whether the "meeting, or any portion of its members, intend to appeal "from that judgment, prior to proceeding to dissolve that " meeting and to attach the members of the Monthly Meeting "to another. Now unless we admit the assumption that the " advice of a committee, or of a small part of a committee, is "equivalent to the recorded judgment of the meeting which "appoints it (an assumption which would totally change the "long-established practice of the Society), we think it clear 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 149 " that this portion of Discipline was disregarded in the disso- " lotion of South Kingston Monthly Meeting and the disposal "of its members; for that meeting had received no written "judgment from the Quarterly Meeting in the case, until it " received the minute by which it was declared to be dissolved ; "and at the same time, before the Quarterly Meeting could "have known whether the Monthly Meeting, or any part of "the members, would appeal from that judgment, they were " joined to Greenwich Monthly Meeting ; and the latter meet- "ing forthwith proceeded to exercise jurisdiction over them, "in direct violation of their rights, as guaranteed by the Dis- " cipline. " Eighth . In the manner in which the members of the Quar- " terly Meeting's committee interfered to produce a separation- " in Swauzey Monthly Meeting. "The accounts given by both parties of the Monthly Meet- " ing of Swanzey, at which the separation took place, agree "in stating, that although the clerk of the meeting (whom "both acknowledge to have been in that station, when the "meeting adjourned the month before) had taken his seat at " the table, the whole transaction of proposing a new clerk by "one who was not a member of the meeting, his being united " with by a part of the members and by others who were not "members, and the Friend proposed proceeding to act as "clerk, was consummated before any minute opening the "meeting had been made, or any minute from the Quarterly " Meeting read. Now we think it undeniable, that no portion " of the members of a Monthly Meeting, even supposing them "to be a greater number, which in this instance does not "appear to have been the case, could be justified in thus act- "ing; but that they must by such an act, subject themselves "to all the consequences of separating from their Monthly " Meeting and setting up a meeting unauthorized by the Dis- " cipline And those members who thus separated from Swan- " zey Monthly Meeting, cannot plead the authority of the "Quarterly Meeting for the course they pursued, inasmuch as "those who proposed it and assisted therein, had exhibited no "minute from that meeting, directing the Monthly Meeting 150 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. "to be reorganized, and clothing them with power to act in "the case. To us, therefore, it appears clear, that the meet- "ing which, with its old clerk at the table, proceeded in the "transaction of its business after the others had adjourned, "in no way lost its standing as Swanzey Monthly Meeting, "and that the others separated from it; and that those who, in "Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting, received the report from " the latter, and rejected that from the former, identified them- " selves with the separate meeting. " The Discipline points out the course to be pursued where " a Monthly Meeting is refractory and unwilling to take the "advice of its superior meeting, regularly conveyed to it, but " it nowhere clothes a Quarterly Meeting with the power to " select clerks and overseers for its subordinate meetings, and " to oblige these meetings to accept and appoint them. " The acts to which we have now referred, we believe to be " the most prominent among the causes that produced the sep- " aration in New England Yearly Meeting in 1845. The man- "ner in which that separation was effected is, we presume, "known by most, if not all our members. Many of those " who now constitute the Smaller Body in New England, "thought that the Yearly Meeting was not authorized sud- "denly to suspend the important rule of Discipline which re- quires the representatives to meet at the conclusion of the " first sitting and agree upon a clerk for the year, and report "the same to the adjournment. Four of the representatives "thus thinking, together with those appointed by one of the "bodies claiming to be Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting, met " and agreed upon Friends to be nominated for clerk and " assistant. Upon these names being proposed in the after- " noon sitting, and being united with by some and disapproved "by more, the separation which now exists, immediately fot "lowed. "Although the manner in which this separation was effected " was not such as, we think, affords a precedent safe to be fol- lowed in the organization of a Yearly Meeting, yet inasmuch "as those Friends who compose the Smaller Body appear to " have acted from a sincere desire to maintain the doctrines 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 151 "and discipline of the Society, and the rights secured by it " to all its members ; and had been subjected to proceedings " oppressive in their character, and in violation of the acknowl- edged principles of our church government, we believe that "they continue to be entitled to the rights of membership, "and to such acknowledgment by their brethren as maybe "necessary for securing the enjoyment of those rights. "The obstruction which exists in our Yearly Meeting, to " the holding of a correspondence with that body in New Eng- "land which has authorized or sustained the proceedings upon "which we have animadverted, does not arise from any feel- ings of hostility to them, nor from partiality to any man, " but from a conscientious belief that whatever may have been " the motive, their acts have gone to condemn many who have "been standing for the ancient faith of Friends and against " the introduction of error ; that, in so doing, wrong opinions "have received support, and the discipline and rights of mem- " hers have been violated ; and that it was the course pursued "by them in these transactions which led to the separation. "Until, therefore, those proceedings shall be rectified or an- " nulled, we see not how unit}' is to be restored." The reader of this Report will observe the full and lucid statement given of the circumstances attending the sepa- rations of the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, and that the judgment of the committee was unmistakably in favor of the claims of the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings of the " Smaller Body," to be the true meet- ings of Friends. All the irregular transactions com- jnented upon were the deeds of the larger or Gurney portion, and clearly amounted to a departure from the true order and standing of the Society, notwithstanding their majority of numbers. The report openly brands those meetings as separate meetings. How then was it, that a similar clear judgment was not sent forward in 152 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. regard to the separation in the Yearly Meeting itself, which was the necessary result of the others? It was the doing of the party of compromise. When the report came to be read in Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing, it was found, to the astonishment of some Friends, that the circumstances of the separation in the Yearly Meeting of New England were almost left out of view, being summarily disposed of in a single passage of about a dozen lines ; and the judgment of the committee on this momentous subject was frittered down to such an ambig- uous expression as is the last paragraph but one, of those above quoted. This passage appears to have been in- tended, by its instigators, to muddle the whole, and blind the judgment of the Yearly Meeting. It might have been expected that the same careful and candid consideration would have been given to these latter transactions that was given to those on which they were founded. But what does this passage say? Not that the Friends belonging to the Smaller Body, who were acknowledged and proved to have been subjected to irregular and oppressive proceedings on account of their desire to maintain inviolate the doctrines and testi- monies and discipline of the Society, were entitled to our sympathy and encouragement and recognition, as brethren and sisters engaged in the same precious cause — the cause so dear to our forefathers— no ! but a cold acknowledgment of belief, that although the manner of* the separation was not a safe precedent in the organiza- tion of a Yearly Meeting, yet as they had been thus irregularly oppressed for their testimony to the Truth, it was believed they were still entitled to the rights of membership. And here was the dark and vague charge, 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 153 that they appeared to have done something not consid- ered safe as a precedent. What had they done? They were not engaged in "organizing a Yearly Meeting." They were endeavoring to sustain New England Yearly Meeting on its original ground, against the contrivances of a powerful band of men engaged in perverting the ancient doctrines and revolutionizing the Society. The committee here made no attempt to explain in what respect their proceedings had been unsafe as a precedent, or how their rights of membership were to be protected without owning them as the Yearly Meeting; but left this blind charge as a stain upon their position, not capable of contradiction from its very vagueness. With respect to the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, they had as strictly followed the evidence adduced, as if the matter were in a court of justice, and had declared the meetings of the Smaller Body the true ones, and the others spurious. But when it came to the separation in the Yearly Meeting — that all-important matter essen- tially resulting from the former — there was no such desire manifested to enter into particulars ; nothing but a vague, one-sided, and very unfair intimation of opinion, unsupported by the smallest appearance of proof, or even of specification. The passage bears the appearance of a blot upon the whole report; of being the production of men who were suddenly arrested with alarm at the ten- dency of their own deductions, and resolved upon con- triving something at last to neutralize their force, and evade the necessary result. How could this occur ? The paragraph was prepared, aside from the com- mittee, after a very painful discussion, and afterwards was not proposed for interpolation into the Report, VOL. II. — 14 154 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. until near the close of the deliberations; it was firmly and persistently opposed by some of the committee who saw in measure its bearing and intent ; and was only submitted to, as it were, at the last moment, when but about half an hour remained before the whole would have to be submitted to those who appointed them, and under the compulsory declaration on the part of its pro- posers, that if this passage were not admitted into the report, the rest "could not be sanctioned by them; and thus the labor of the winter on this momentous subject must have fallen to the ground ! Had the committee been untrammelled by opposing views, and unanimously taken complete and comprehen- sive ground, and maintained it throughout, as men in earnest above all things for the maintenance and preser- vation of the pure truth, without fear of man, or calcu- lating dread of probable consequences, which were not in their hands, but in those of the Great Head of the church, they would moreover not have confined them- selves to a mere disciplinary examination and judgment — flagrantly oppressive and despotic as had been the measures resorted to — but they would likewise have felt it their duty to show the connection of these outrages in discipline, with the attempts made to introduce those new and unsound principles which had been proved, in the " Appeal for the Ancient Doctrines," to be circulat- ing in the Society and threatening its life. For the absence of any repressive measures on the part of those in power in New England to prevent the spread of the disease, and still more their determined opposition to the adducing of any evidence on doctrines, and their per- sistent oppression of those who were conscientiously 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 155 concerned to expose the nature of the danger, and warn their fellow-members against its inroads, if fully devel- oped, would surely have been conclusive proof of their doctrinal defection ; and would thus have furnished (we might say unquestionable) ground for a prompt and de- cided judgment, on the part of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, that the " Larger Body" in New England, which had thus departed, had left the original basis of the Society, and was no longer to be recognized as be- longing to the same household of faith. But this, which was proposed in an early stage of the proceedings, but rejected, would have defeated the plans of those who, having embraced the views of the party of compromise, were for promoting a " peace at all costs" — a "peace where there was no peace," nor coidd be any without a loss of true sight and sense to those who would thus sacrifice principle to expediency. At the Yearly Meeting in the fourth month of 1849, this "Report," after much stormy opposition to it, was, notwithstanding these deficiencies, fully adopted by a very large expression of the solid sense and judgment of the meeting ; and a copy of it was directed to be sent to each of the two Bodies in New England which had claimed our recognition by sending epistles and docu- ments. By the " Smaller Body," the report was read, cheerfully approved, and printed for circulation among the members and others. By the " Larger Body," it was not read, nor accepted, nor of course approved, nor allowed to circulate among their members any further than they could not prevent ; but a reply thereto was three years afterwards (in 1852) published by them, en- titled " A Vindication of the Disciplinary Proceedings," 156 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. etc. — showing their entire disapproval of the Philadel- phia document, and their resolution to maintain their own course. The advocates of half-way measures in and about Philadelphia now raised a cry against the "Smaller Body " of New England, on account of their having printed the Report of Philadelphia on the Separation, which had been sent to their Yearly Meeting. This publication of it was sorely distasteful to the leaders of that party, because it made known, in a way not to be evaded, the sense and judgment of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting respecting those transactions. They saw that it would thus be more difficult to repress the recogni- tion of the " Smaller Body," which the Gurneyites so strongly deprecated ; and accordingly they endeavored to prejudice the minds of Friends, and were unsparing of their blame on that " Smaller Body " for thus pre- suming to print the Report. The Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia convened as usual in the fourth month, 1850. A document acknowledging the reception of the Report on the Separation, and their unity with its development of the various transactions leading to and producing that sorrowful crisis, had been sent by the Yearly Meeting of the Smaller Body of New England addressed to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, as well as an Epistle from the Larger Body. The subject was mentioned by the clerk in connection with the Epis- tles, after the others had been read ; but it soon plainly appeared that he and Samuel Bettle, and some others, had made up their minds to stop, as far as possible, all deliberation looking? to a recognition of either of the two bodies. Nevertheless, a great discussion ensued. Many 1850.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 157 solid, experienced, and influential Friends were anxious to have the document from the Smaller Body read, and expressed themselves plainly and fully to that purpose. But the Gurney party were decidedly opposed to it, and Isaac Lloyd warned the meeting that "the crisis had come," and if they did read the document from the Smaller Body, it would "convulse the whole Society." After a time, Samuel Bettle said, "that from what had transpired, it was evident to him that no conclusion could be come to with that degree of unity that should be mani- fested on so important a subject," and proposed the post- ponement of the whole matter to another year. With this the Gurney party generally united, and a considerable number of others who had confidence in Samuel Bettle's contrivances. Many other Friends, however, objected, seeing no prospect of benefit in deferring it year after year. At length a proposal was made by some of the latter, to postpone the consideration of the question to a future sitting; but the clerk, who wished to quash it altogether, informed the meeting that there would be nothing on the minutes to call it up subsequently, and, along with S. B., strongly urged the meeting to cease from any further agitation of the matter. Very soon, without allowing further opportunity for a general ex- pression, he arbitrarily proceeded with other business. Many Friends' minds were grievously burdened, and on Fourth-day the subject was again opened. Friends of much experience and long standing in the Truth ex- pressed their feelings decidedly in favor of at least read- ing what our Friends of New England had addressed to us in acknowledgment of our communication to them. It was urged that common fairness and civility, as well 158 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. as the plainest justice, required us to hear what they had to say in reply. But all this, and the sentiments em- phatically expressed by many Friends, availed nothing. The clerk remarked that he thought this Yearly Meet- ing had done its duty, in reference to the two bodies in Isew England. It had, through the Meeting for Suffer- ings, examined their statements respectively, and in the document issued last year it had given the views of each, had endeavored to show wherein important principles had been disregarded, and had come to the conclusion that the members of the Smaller Body were to be recog- nized as members — that they were so recognized, as they were allowed to attend the meeting ! — but that a difficulty was felt in reference to the organization of the Yearly Meeting, owing to its being indispensable to maintain the subordination of meetings, etc., — adding, that we had exhorted them to become reconciled — we did not know what way might open for the restoration of harmony among them — and on that account he desired the post- ponement of the whole subject for another year. He recommended Friends to turn their attention to our own condition as a Yearly Meeting, and endeavor to build up our own waste places, etc., and then, having the power to foreclose the discussion, went on with other business. This result was to the grief of many substan- tial members, and to the great exultation of the Gurney faction, who had worked with the middle party in set- ting aside the clear judgment of the meeting. They derived much encouragement from this unexpected suc- cess, and the Yearly Meeting seemed to lose from that time all power to come to any decision whatever in re- gard to the New England question. The darkness that 1850.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 159 ensued over the meeting was very sensibly felt during the remaining sittings. The life of the assembly ap- peared to be gone. Towards the close of the Yearly Meeting, on Sixth- day, Samuel Cope, a minister from Cain Quarterly Meeting, in a weighty and impressive manner, from a burdened mind, declared his unity with the " Smaller Body" of New England, in substance as follows : " ' The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, " ' The Lord knoweth them that are his.' "I have never felt a stronger necessity laid upon me to " speak than upon the present occasion; and I must say, that " my mind has heen bowed down and burdened, through the "various sittings of this Yearly Meeting, under a painful " sense of the low state of things among us. And this remark "applies both to individuals and to meetings; and I have " borne it till I can bear it no longer in silence. "Whilst thinking of these things, I have remembered the "remarkable account which is left us concerning Mordecai " the Jew, who sat at the king's gate. It is recorded of this "humble and watchful servant of the king, that he discovered " the wicked conspiracy of Bigthana and Teresh against their "lord and master, and was thus made instrumental in saving " the king's life. Although for a time his important services "seemed to be overlooked and forgotten, yet they were re- " corded in the book of remembrance, and laid up before the "king. This same Mordecai, although he could sit in deep " humility at the king's gate, yet he would not bow down to " proud Hainan, who was so full of wrath that he determined " to destroy not Mordecai only, but all the people of Mordecai "also. For this purpose he caused a decree to be sent forth, "and sealed it with the king's ring, that all the Jews within " the kingdom should be put to the sword, vainly imagining "that he could thus root out and destroy the servants of the " living God. But at a very critical juncture, when it seemed "to all human apprehension that the destruction of the poor 160 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. feeble Jews was inevitable, tbe king's mind was troubled, and he commanded that the book of the chronicles of his kingdom should be read before him, and in it was found written that Mordecai had done what he could for the king's cause. " You may read in the Bible the sad history of those who took part in this wicked conspiracj', which was waged not against one faithful individual only, but against all the people of God ; and there learn the awful fate of those who had thus wickedly conspired against the Lord's people. " The application which I feel myself constrained to make of the history thereof is this : John Wilbur is the Mordecai of our day, who, whilst waiting and watching at the king's gate, was enabled to detect a conspiracy, which some of the Lord's professed servants had entered into, against the doctrines and testimonies and inward appearance of his Lord and King. And he was not only able to detect this conspiracy, but he was faithful in exposing it, and he was strengthened to bear a clear and faithful testimony against it in his Master's name. A record of these his honest and faithful services has been written in the Lord's book of remem- brance ; and it was because of his unflinching integrity and faithfulness therein, and because he could not be brought to bow down to the will of those who were banded together for the purpose of changing the doctrines and principles of our religious Society, that a decree has gone forth against John Wilbur and his faithful and suffering Friends in New England, to root them out of the Lord's heritage. " And mind, Friends, this decree was sealed by what pur- ports to be the King's own ring, and bears all the outward appearances of having been done in accordance with the rules of Discipline under right authority ; and it has also been sent forth and hastened to all parts of our Society, for the purpose of uniting all together against those persecuted and faithful ones. And they are even now calling upon Friends everywhere to aid them in their cruel purposes. And there are those in our Yearly Meeting, professing to sympathize with these sufferers, who think they will be clear 1850.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 161 " of John Wilbur's blood, although they will not stir a finger " to save him, but are saying in the expressive language of "conduct, ' Let not our hands be upon him, but let us leave "him to perish in that pit,' into which, like the patriarch "Joseph, the malice of his brethren had cast him! "Dear Friends, such is the conspiracy which has been "entered into against some of the Lord's faithful people. " But all this consulting and contriving in the will and wis- "dom of the creature will be rebuked to the confusion of its "authors. Yea, persuaded I am, that it will result in the "downfall of those who think to overturn the doctrines and " principles of our religious Society. " We ought surely to have read the minute from our suffer- " ing Friends in New England. We were bound to do so by " the common courtesy of life, by the usage of our religious "Society, by sympathy for our Friends, by our love for the " truth, and by our faithfulness to the cause of our Lord and " Master. ' ' I have thus endeavored to clear my hands of this evil ; " and I must add, that I am fully convinced that the Lord "owns John Wilbur, and because my Divine Master owns ' him, I own him too ; and I also own his and our suffering " Friends in New England as brethren in the fellowship of the "gospel. And this is the testimony which I have felt bound " to bear publicly this day. I could not permit this meeting " to separate without making an effort to relieve my tried and " burdened mind of some part of that painful load which has " rested upon it ; and, having done so, I am strengthened with "a renewal of belief that 'the foundation of God standeth "sure, having this seal — The Lord knoweth them that are "his.' »* The control now assumed by the middle party over the transactions of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, pre- * It is remarkable that the only notice of this memorable Yearly Meeting, to be found in the printed Journal of William Evans, who was its clerk, and whose Journal contains more than 700 closely printed Kvo. pages, is in the fol- lowing ten words: "Our Yearly Meeting was opened to-day, and was very large" (see page 471). 162 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. vented that meeting from taking firm and consistent ground in its subsequent treatment of various matters growing out of the sad condition of disunity to which the Society was now reduced. Under the timid and half-way system of measures to which it henceforth re- sorted, it refrained from anything tending toward the disownment of those who were openly identifying them- selves with the schism, and even from any clear and unmistakable course with regard to the Yearly Meet- ings which had plunged themselves into it. It was thus brought into palpable inconsistencies in its attempts to retain its position in some degree ; and some of these inconsistencies the Gurney party did not fail from time to time to expose in print. A periodical entitled the " Friends' Review " was issued weekly by some of the members of that party in Philadelphia, and in its col- umns the proceedings of the Yearly Meeting were often freely handled. It cannot be controverted that in several respects the Yearly Meeting laid itself open to much animadversion, for its timid course led it repeatedly to transgress the provisions of organic law contained in its own discipline. When it declined the usual epistolary communications with other Yearly Meetings, which had joined in the schism, it was bound by its fraternal duty to them, and by the usage of the Society, to give some plain reason for its dissatisfaction with them and suspension of the correspondence. But this it dared not do. When their ministers came to attend its sittings, they were allowed to do so, and to go all through the meetings within its limits, both for worship and discipline, but their creden- tials were not permitted to be read or noticed ; whereas 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 163 the Discipline explicitly declares,* that certificates of Friends attending the meeting from other parts under religious concern "are to be read therein." This meas- ure opened a wide door for ministers from all parts of the lapsed portions of the Society to travel and preach and insinuate their principles within its limits; whereas the true and honest course would have been to take the open ground, that such came from meetings which had joined the secession, and therefore they could not be recognized as Friends. Such a course, no doubt, might have provoked opposition at first from those favoring the seceders ; but the anticipation of this should have been no reason for so irregular a proceeding as the pal- pable and persistent violation, by the Yearly Meeting itself, of one of the plain rules of its Discipline. But still more important was the fact that, while it suspended the usual epistolary correspondence with other Yearly Meetings, it left open the far more vital correspondence through certificates of removal, by which the members were being constantly recommended "to the Christian care and oversight" of meetings which were known to have departed from the sound principles and practices of the Society, and were in intimate union with those engaged in the schism, and promoting the spread of the new doctrines. In the seventh month, 1849, assembled in Baltimore a joint Conference Committee, composed of committees appointed by the Yearly Meetings of New York, Balti- more, North Carolina, and Indiana, and the " Larger Body " of New England. The ostensible object of their * Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, page 160 of old edition. 164 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. assembling was " to take into consideration the present tried state of our Society, and to labor for its restoration to that unity and fellowship that formerly characterized it;" or, in other words, to endeavor to bring about, in Ohio and Philadelphia Yearly Meetings, a union with them in owning the Gurney party of New England as the true Yearly Meeting. The Yearly Meetings of Ohio and Philadelphia had declined to participate in the con- ference, and, from the fact that the " Larger Body " of New England was admitted as a constituent party in its deliberations on the same footing as the four other Yearly Meetings, it was plainly seen from the first that its conclusions would be altogether one-sided and pro- schismatic. This joint committee, as the result of their delibera- tions, issued an Address to the Society, in which a pro- fession was made, in general terms, of adhering to the important testimonies connected with our Christian pro- fession ; and a declaration was rather ostentatiously put forth, of the subordination due from inferior to superior meetings in the order of the Discipline. Independence was claimed for the respective Yearly Meetings, and an attempt was made to show them to be irresponsible to each other, except in case of any great departure from the distinguishing doctrines of the Society, in which case they might be admonished through the annual epistolary correspondence. But any interference with them by another, in the administration of their own discipline, was denounced as an infraction of our established order, and fraught with perilous consequences. The refusal to receive credentials issued by meetings of another Yearly Meeting was also objected to, as well as " any attempt 1852.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 165 to confer upon individuals privileges forfeited in their own meetings, or to sustain them in assumed rights to which they are not entitled." These things were evi- dently thrown out against Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing ; and the committee expressed their judgment in a somewhat threatening manner, that " it is not to be ex- pected that the great body of Friends can long remain passive, if important and vital practices and usages of our Society, which are essential to our prosperity as a people, are neglected or violated." But they made no attempt to bring forward any specific charge of such violation or neglect, nor did they in the least degree clear themselves from complicity with the " Larger Body " of New England, in the gross violations of the fundamental requisitions of gospel order and discipline, which Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had proved to have taken place there for the sustaining of the new views. This address was ably answered in 1850, and shown to be entirely ex park, futile, and illusory, in a lucid pamphlet published anonymously, supposed to be by the author of the " Considerations " of 1846. Although Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings had declined to appoint committees, or take any part in this conference, a deputation of several of the members of it attended Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1852 with the Address, and with minutes of North Carolina and Baltimore Yearly Meetings, expressive of their authority to present it to that of Philadelphia, doubtless in the hope of inducing it to sanction their positions. The minutes of those two Yearly Meetings were read, out of courtesy to those bodies, but the Yearly Meeting decided 166 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. X. not to read or accept the Address of the Committee of Conference, in whose deliberations they had previously declined to participate. This, however, left the question of New England still unsettled in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, and weakness on that point was increasing year by year. 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 1G7 CHAPTER XL PROGRESS OF THE GURNEY SCHISM WITHIN NEW YORK YEARLY MEETING. In the Yearly Meeting of New York the modernizing party, who had the control, assumed great activity upon the occurrence of the separation in New England, and by their preponderating numbers and influence were too successful in procuring a prompt acknowledgment of their brethren the " Larger Body," as the Yearly Meet- ing for New England, regardless of their many gross departures from justice and from the order of the So- ciety, for the promotion of the defection from its true principles. This " Larger Body " had appointed " cor- respondents" to countersign, or attest, all documents to be sent beyond their borders, such as certificates of re- moval, minutes of ministers travelling, epistles, etc., as a sign of their genuineness, and to thereby give them currency as if coming from the true meetings of Friends in New England. Their purpose was to get beforehand with the idea, and spread it all over the land at once, that they were not the seceders, but that the " Smaller Body" were so. A list of these correspondents was sent to the different Yearly Meetings, or to their Meet- ings for Sufferings which met in the interims, and were consequently more to be relied on for promptness ; so that the members in their respective subordinate meet- 168 THE SOCIETY OF FKIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. ings might be informed, and their action regulated ac- cordingly in such a way as to insure, without further inquiry, the recognition of all documents signed by their "correspondents," and the refusal of all those not so signed, and thereby sanction their claim to be the true Society. Amongst the rest, these lists were sent to Philadelphia and to New York. In the Meeting for Sufferings of Philadelphia the list was promptly and decidedly re- jected, as coming from a body not recognized by the Yearly Meeting. I well remember the laconic and em- phatic language of Henry Cope on that occasion : " I would as soon consent that we should receive a document from a meeting of Hicksites." Indeed there were in that meeting, at that time, but few to advocate openly the reception of such a paper. But in New York it was cordially accepted, sent down to the meetings for discipline by the Meeting for Suffer- ings, with injunctions to those meetings to conform their actions thereto, and afterwards sanctioned by the Yearly Meeting. This measure had the intended effect of fixing the various meetings for discipline at once in a recogni- tion of the " Larger Body" of New England, to a very great extent. It was an insidious device, shutting out examination or any calm deliberation on the question, wherever it was admitted. Of course, all the meetings which, with or without a knowledge of the circumstances, accepted such a list, and conformed their official action thereto, identified themselves with the meeting in New England which had issued it. But in various parts of New York Yearly Meeting, dissatisfaction was felt with the measure, and in some this was freely expressed. 1847.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 169 In Stanford Quarterly Meeting, it is said that the direc- tion of the Meeting for Sufferings was not acceded to, but that the subject was dropped, or its enforcement quietly suspended. But this, being a sort of compromise, left it open to be renewed, or tacitly acted up to, at any future time. In Scipio Quarterly Meeting there was decided oppo- sition to it ; many Friends being convinced that the body issuing this list had, by its proceedings in promo- tion of schism, forfeited its claim to be considered a Yearly Meeting of Friends, and that it was their indis- pensable duty to refrain from doing anything whereby that claim might have strength given to it, and the claim of their brethren suffering for the ancient faith might be shut out. The conscientious objections of these Friends were, however, opposed by their fellow-members favor- able to the " Larger Body," in several successive Quar- terly Meetings, until, in the fourth month, 1847, a minute was made, and sent up to the ensuing Yearly Meeting in the city of New York, to the effect that the subject had produced much exercise among them, but that they did not unite in acceding to the measure as requested. When this minute was presented to the Yearly Meeting, such was the determination of the leaders there to compass their purpose, and such was the extraordinary submissiveness of other prominent char- acters for the sake of a superficial appearance of peace, that a committee was appointed to visit Scipio Quarterly Meeting, clothed with authority to form a component part of that Quarterly Meeting, and specially directed to see that the desire of the Yearly Meeting for the rec- ognition of those lists should be carried out. VOL. II. — 15 170 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. At the succeeding Quarterly Meeting of Scipio this committee attended, and a clerk being at the table who favored their views, facilitated the success of their mis- sion. The list from New England was accordingly car- ried through the meeting by their and his influence and exertions, though firmly and weightily objected to by many Friends; and was minuted by the clerk, and sent down for the acceptance of the Monthly Meetings. The Monthly Meeting of Scipio having also a clerk favorable to these new measures, accepted the document, thus identifying itself with the Separatists in New Eng- land, and with the adherents of that party within their own Yearly Meeting. This brought many Friends there, who desired to continue to support the ancient principles of the Society, into a great strait. Some of them now felt constrained to decline the attendance of meetings for discipline held under a subordination so schismatic and irregular, believing them to be supporting that which was out of the Truth, and denying fellowship with those few who were suffering for their testimony to it, and against error. A number of these Friends, previous to the Preparative Meeting of Scipio, preceding the Quar- ( terly Meeting in the ninth month, 1847, met together to consider the trying position in which they were now placed. They agreed in judgment, that if they should participate in the business of the meetings in their present position, they would render themselves accessory to the schism ; and they were led to believe that the time had come for them to endeavor, with best help, to take a united and open stand in testimony against these innovations. Ac- cordingly they drew up a short document, expressive of their conscientious objections to the course pursued by 1847.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 171 those in apparent authority. As they had already taken the "round that they could have no part in the proceed- ings of the meetings for discipline in their new position, the only way which seemed open for them to present the paper to the other members of the Preparative Meeting was at the conclusion of the meeting for worship, imme- diately before the closing of the partition shutters be- tween the men's and the women's meetings. At the time proposed, the members assembled were accordingly informed of the character of the paper which it was proposed to read. But so clamorous an opposition to it at once arose from a number of those present, that the Friend who had risen for the purpose of reading it was unable to proceed ; and while Friends were calmly endeavoring to allay the opposition, efforts were made by some present, in an abrupt and uncivil manner, to close the shutters. There seemed, therefore, to be no way left for Friends, but to withdraw; and it was ac- cordingly proposed, that those who were concerned to support our ancient principles should retire to a dwell- ing-house adjacent. About half the meeting (as it was supposed) repaired thither, Friends walking silently to the house, under a sense of the solemnity and importance of the occasion, and believing that nothing short of be- ing driven to the last extremity could have induced them to take this step for the preservation of a conscience void of offence. " And sitting down together, at this time of "deep exercise and trial, looking to the Fountain of all "our sure mercies, they had thankfully to acknowledge " the tendering and contriting influence of Israel's un- " slumbering Shepherd, cementing their hearts together, " and melting many present into tears." 172 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. It appeared to be right to proceed with the usual business of the Preparative Meeting, as far as practica- ble; and as a number of Friends were present from North Street (another Preparative Meeting of the same Monthly Meeting), it was concluded to hold the Monthly Meeting also, in its usual course, the following week, regardless of an adjournment made by the opposing party for the accommodation of the Yearly Meeting's com- mittee. A committee was now appointed to prepare a document explanatory of the proceedings of Friends, and of the extraordinary circumstances which had led to the present crisis. This document was subsequently produced to the Monthly Meeting, where it was approved and placed on record. The following extract from it will show the position taken by these Friends to be one of vital principle, and not of mere notions or technicalities : "A lamentable schism has lately taken place amongst "Friends in New England, which we believe was occasioned "by a defection in principle, that led to the disownment of a "sound minister, in a manner very much at variance with "the spirit of Christian love ; who, we believe, was conscien- tiously, and in accordance with the Discipline of his own " Yearly Meeting, bearing a testimony against unsound doc- " trines published by conspicuous members of our Society, "which have been for a considerable time in circulation " throughout all the Yearly Meetings, and have caused much "pain and uneasiness to many honest Friends. This, to- gether with the arbitrary and high-handed course taken "against several other Friends, who appeared to be honestly "and conscientiously contending for the maintenance of our "Christian faith and discipline, we believe, produced the sep- aration — many Friends justly believing that if concerned " individuals for the prosperity of the Truth, were not perrait- " ted to hold forth the voice of warning against the spoiler of 1847.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 173 "the Lord's people, by bearing a testimony against unsound "doctrine, which appeared to be undermining our holy pro- fession, without eliciting unprecedented and undisciplinary "proceedings against them, the ground of our profession must "be inevitably changed. Under this view, we believe, a faith- "ful remnant [in New England] rallied to the standard of "ancient principle, and as their last and only resort, were "obliged to come out from among their opponents, so that " they might bear an unfettered and efficient testimony in sup- " port of the unchangeable Truth, and against those unsound "principles which were evidently increasing amongst us, and " which seemed to be working a revolution in the doctrines of "our Society, and insidiously drawing man}- from the true " place of rest and safety. This part, although embracing the "smaller number, We consider the true Society of Friends; " who are not even charged with holding or promoting un- " sound doctrine. But their opponents, although embracing "the larger number, we believe, by their actions, have for- feited their claim as the true Society, from their disownment "of sound and sincere Friends, for the cause and in the man- " ner to which we have alluded ; thus unavoidably implicating "themselves with unsoundness, and are seceders from the " Society." The Scipio Monthly Meeting of Friends of the ancient faith, held at the usual time, appointed representatives to be in attendance at the time and place of holding the Quarterly Meeting. Thus was Scipio Monthly Meeting rescued from the hands of those who were perverting an assumed authority in the church to purposes destruc- tive of the essential characteristics of our religious com- pact — who were prostituting to party purposes that beautiful order and discipline established in divine wis- dom for the government of the flock in the life and sweetness of Truth. In Hector Monthly Meeting, west of Cayuga Lake, 174 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. sound Friends had sufficient influence to prevent the acceptance of the list from New England. They also declined to recognize the authority of the Yearly Meet- ing's committee, taking the ground that it was an unpre- cedented circumstance, unauthorized by the Discipline, and at variance with the spirit of the gospel, for such a committee to be made by the Yearly Meeting a compo- nent part of an inferior meeting, for the special purpose of obliging a compliance with its direction to adopt a particular course, contrary to the conscientious convic- tions of the members; and especially as this committee was appointed by a meeting which had identified itself with the supporters of unsound doctrines, and ought not to be regarded as really having the authority which it claimed. A few of the members took an opposite view, and the Yearly Meeting's committee attempted to displace the clerk of the Monthly Meeting, and appoint one subservient to their own wishes. At length, per- ceiving that they could not prevail to frustrate the steady procedure of the Monthly Meeting, they desired their own partisans to refrain from participating in the busi- ness; and when the Monthly Meeting adjourned, they and the few members sympathizing with them remained together, instituted a separate meeting of their own, and adjourned to the following day. Hector Monthly Meet- ing appointed representatives as usual to the Quarterly Meeting. The Monthly Meeting of De Ruyter had likewise declined to receive the list from New England; and one of the representatives, who had in charge the report from that meeting for the Quarterly Meeting, was with the Friends of sound doctrine> 1848.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 175 Friends of these three Monthly Meetings, being thus freed from the schismatic proceedings and control of the committee and its adherents, held the Quarterly Meeting of Scipio at the usual time. As the meeting-house was occupied by their opponents, there seemed to them to be no other way but to hold their meeting in a school-house adjacent, rather than to go in and contend for the occu- pancy of their meeting-house. It was thought that the Quarterly Meeting as now held embraced about one-half the members of the former Quarterly Meeting. They had a favored and solemn meeting, wherein the wing of Ancient Goodness was felt to be mercifully spread over them, and his compassionate regard experienced to their great comfort. The mouths of some of their ministers were opened in a remarkable manner, and a sweet evi- dence was felt, that to those who are endeavoring to walk in the simplicity of the Truth, he is a God nigh at hand, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning; the same beneficent Preserver of his truly dedicated people, yesterday, to-day, and forever. Scipio Quarterly Meeting, thus liberated, continued to hold on its way, in a straightforward course, consistently with our ancient profession and practice. In an " Address to Friends," published by it in 1848, (from which some of the above particulars are taken,) they used the fol- lowing impressive- language, respecting the backsliding which had overtaken the Society : " For many years past, the true burden-bearers among us "have been pained to observe the relapsing condition of our "Society, gradually assimilating, in their apprehension, with "a worldly spirit ; which appears to have dimmed that clear " perception of the Truth, and the things appertaining thereto, 1 in THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XL "with which our worthy predecessors were favored, and to "have made way for multitudinous weaknesses to creep into " the church ; among which may be noted, the declension of "attending meetings in consequence of the pressure of do- " mestic concerns ; too easily giving way to drowsiness when " assembled for the solemn purpose of divine worship ; the " facility with which almost every request for membership " was acceded to, and almost every acknowledgment received, " when the applicants evinced very little conformity to the " Discipline, either by their behavior or outward appearance ; " the great difficulty with which the Discipline could be "brought to bear against some individuals', and the reluc- " tance manifested in testifying against offenders by timely " disownments. These departures from original faithfulness "by imbibing the spirit of the world, appeared to make way " for a more serious and obvious declension, that of a disaffec- " tion to some of the most important and characterizing doc- " trines of our Society, as exemplified in the preceding relation " of the state of things in this Quarterly Meeting. "And thus, dear Friends, through a measure of suffering, " have we been favored to move forward, without having any "cause to look back with regret at the course we have taken; "and although our meetings are smaller since we have met "in our present select capacity, yet have we great cause, " though often under an humbling sense of our shortcomings, "to look with confidence to him whose tender mercies are "over all his works, and whose overshadowing presence we "have found, time after time, crowning our little assemblies "with the issues of life. And being thus owned, as we hum- " bly trust, in our procedure, by the great Head of the church, "we feel encouraged to extend the language of invitation to "all sincere and honest Friends, desiring that they may, as "ability is afforded, endeavor to support the precious doc- " trines, principles, and testimonies that our honored prede- cessors felt bound to do amid great opposition, and not "shrink from the path of suffering." And in a pamphlet published in the autumn of 1848, 1848.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 177 containing "Strictures" on the Eeport of the above- mentioned Yearly Meeting's committee, etc., they ex- press the following salutary and discriminating senti- ments, in reference to the necessity of a right subordina- tion of inferior to superior meetings : " We readily admit that, except in cases where superior "meetings have changed their ground of faith, or have com- " promised their principles, all inferior meetings are very "properly accountable to them; and a due deference from "subordinate to higher meetings, while they continue to ad- "here to the same unchangeable principles of truth from "which all right order proceeded, and by which alone it can " be healthily sustained, is quite indispensable for the harmony " and safety of Society. But a moment's reflection must show "us the impropriety of sacrificing principle, merely for the " sake of sustaining an empty form of order. We believe the "design and end of all wholesome order to be the preserva- tion of the church in its primeval purity. But if the head " become corrupt and alienated from the true faith, it is very "obvious that the Discipline might, in many instances, be " converted to the suppression of what it was originally de- " signed to preserve. " When the Reformers protested against the heresies which "had beclouded the Romish Church, would not the same claim "of subordination to the rules and ordinances of Romanism, "if they had been yielded to, have completely crushed their "successful efforts? And so at that time of glorious gospel " light and liberty, when our beloved predecessors in the truth "were called to expose those corruptions which still clung to " the church, had they yielded to the appeals of order and "submission to the legally authorized and prevailing religion " of their day, how could they have brought out, and handed "to succeeding generations, those bright and clear gospel "truths, the benign effects of which appear to have pervaded "Christendom? But they firmly and patiently bore the suf- ferings consequent upon their faithfulness, or they could not VOL. II. — 16 178 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. "have obtained that standing as lights in the world. And "now it seems equally important to testify against corrup- " tions and defections which have crept into the Church, as " at that time ; and though it lead into proportionate suffer- " ing, we trust there is ground for the belief that the same "happy results may be realized. "If Friends had neglected to withdraw in 1828, when the " ruling part of the Yearly Meeting [of New York] had iden- "tified itself with the Separatists [Hicksites] of Philadelphia, " and some Quarterly Meetings could not have conscientiously "submitted, it is very clear that the Yearly Meeting could " have imposed the peculiar doctrines of the Separatists upon " them, under as fair a plea of order and subordination as it "could now force upon us doctrines that the Seceders in New "England have upheld." Thus far in relation to the Quarterly Meeting of Scipio. We may now briefly advett to the separation in Fer- risburgh Quarterly Meeting, another branch of New York Yearly Meeting, which occurred in the year 1851. Starksborough Monthly Meeting, a branch of Ferris- burgh Quarterly Meeting, had, in 1849, accepted a cer- tificate on account of marriage, issued by the Monthly Meeting of Nantucket, belonging to the " Smaller Body " of Friends of New England, and had allowed the mar- riage to take place with the sanction of the meeting, in the regular order of the Discipline, as between fellow- members. This produced dissatisfaction among those whose feelings were in unison with the " Larger Body." They accordingly carried up a complaint against the Monthly Meeting to the Quarterly Meeting, in the second month, 1850, alleging that the individual so permitted to marry (belonging to the "Smaller Body" of New England) was "not a member" of the Society. 1850.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 179 The Quarterly Meeting appointed a committee to attend to the case. This committee, being of the same com- plexion of sentiment as the complainants, reported to the next Quarter, sustaining the complaint. The case was then, in accordance with their suggestion, referred to the Yearly Meeting. Meantime, however, notwith- standing this reference, the Quarterly Meeting continued its committee, to visit Starksborough Monthly Meeting, and render such advice and assistance "as they may think proper, and way open for." In pursuance of this strange and oppressive direction, vague as it was, the committee proceeded to interfere, in an officious manner, with the proceedings of the Monthly Meeting, attempt- ing to control the choice of its clerk, and to intimidate and set at variance the members. The Monthly Meet- ing, therefore, in its own- justification, sent up to the Quarterly Meeting a statement of the grounds on which they had acted ; the separation in New England, in connection with the unsoundness of J. J. Gurney's doc- trines, being shown to be the primary cause of the diffi- culty. They also requested that the whole cause of the trouble now in the Society might be laid before the Yearly Meeting for a thorough investigation. This, however, was not acceded to by the Quarterly Meeting, but the Monthly Meeting of Starksborough was forth- with directed to be dissolved, three individuals being deputed to attend its next sitting, and to read the minute of dissolution at the close thereof. When the Monthly Meeting next occurred (viz., on the 29th of eleventh month, 1850), strong efforts were made by the party in power in the Quarter, to read the minute of dissolution before the business of the Monthly 180 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. Meeting- was transacted ; and so bent were they on car- rying out their purpose, that the Monthly Meeting, after appointing a committee to take into consideration the tried condition in which they were placed, deemed it most prudent to do no further business at that time, and adjourned to the 3d of* the first month ensuing. The minute of dissolution was then read by one of the Quarterly Meeting's committee after the adjournment of the Monthly Meeting. At the next Quarterly Meeting (in the second month, 1851), Starksborough Monthly Meeting again interceded for a hearing, and that the decision come to in its case might be rescinded. But a disposition prevailed to shut out all investigation, and to proceed summarily against the Monthly Meeting. A portion of the Quarterly Meeting, including many of its most upright and con- sistent members, were now convinced that the time had come when it was necessary to withstand the further encroachments of that spirit of schism and misrule which was disposed to put down all opposition to the spread of the new views; and a proposal was made, and acceded to by those who were concerned to maintain the ancient principles and discipline of the Society, to adjourn the Quarterly Meeting to six o'clock in the evening. The clerk was requested to enter the adjournment on the records, but he refused to comply. But the meeting convened in accordance therewith in the evening — the clerk and many others opposed to the measure not at- tending — and thus was Ferrisburgh Quarterly Meeting relieved from the control of those who had lately taken upon themselves to pervert justice within its borders, for 1851.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 181 the promotion of the power and authority of the adher- ents of J. J. Gurney and the New England separatists. After thus tracing the successive steps by which these two Quarterly Meetings were sustained as a remnant on the ancient ground of faith and practice, and consider- ing their uniform declaration throughout, that they could not identify themselves any longer with a body which in their estimation had abandoned that ancient ground, it can hardly be surprising to find that they declined to enter the Yearly Meeting in the city of New York by representatives or otherwise. Some have supposed that they should have waived their objections, and tried their success in the ensuing Yearly Meeting ; others, that they ought to have remained quietly " in the body," by which it might be that some of their fellow-members in other portions of that Yearly Meeting would have been even- tually helped to come forth against such palpable error, and that thus their influence for good might have been greater than by isolating themselves as they did. Yet we are not informed by what means they could thus have remained " in the body," without abandoning their testimony and shutting the door against future escape, or how they would have avoided being all disowned be- fore the lapse of another year, if they maintained their testimony. But these Friends believed they were driven into the position which they now occupied. The Yearly Meeting, notwithstanding their repeated solicitation of a thorough examination of the subject, had summarily rejected their cause, condemned their position, trampled upon their rights and privileges as members, turned a deaf ear to their earnest desire to be instructed in what consisted their error, if error they were in, and had gone 182 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. on in a succession of measures calculated to show its lapse from genuine Quakerism, in doctrine and practice. They thus felt that they were driven away from it by its own schismatic coui'se, and believed that with a clear conscience they could no longer do anything by which its authority as a church should be promoted or appar- ently sanctioned. They were thus left without a Yearly Meeting. Nearly a year after the separation in Ferrisburgh, that Quarterly Meeting entered into correspondence with Scipio Quarterly Meeting respecting the propriety of convening together, to take into consideration the tried condition of Friends sound in doctrine within the limits of New York Yearly Meeting. They also pro- posed a place of meeting, to which Scipio Quarter agreed, and requested them to propose a time. Ferrisburgh, in the second month, 1852, replied that the co-operation of Scipio Friends was comforting to them ; but that they desired to move no faster in this important concern than way should clearly open. They reminded their brethren of Scipio, that when the cloud rested on the tabernacle of old, Israel were to abide in their tents ; but to jour- ney forward when it was taken up and moved before them — that so it ought to be with them— that they de- sired neither to lag behind nor to go before their Guide, but to be obedient to his heavenly teaching — and they invited Friends of Scipio, if Truth should clearly open the way, to communicate further with them on the subject, either by writing, or by the personal aid of a committee. The same disposition to wait for clear evidence of divine approval of the measure proposed, and of the mode of bringing it about, prevailed in their Quarterly 1853.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 183 Meeting in the fifth month, and they communicated this to Seipio by minute; at the same time desiring them to take such further steps in communicating with them thereon, as they might be enabled clearly to see to be right. Scipio Quarterly Meeting accordingly appointed a committee to correspond with Ferrisburgh Friends, and personally to unite with them in deliberation, and in preparing an address to Friends, if, "on endeavoring after right direction," way should open to issue one. In the eighth month, an "Address to Friends within the limits of New York Yearly Meeting" was produced, and adopted by Ferrisburgh Quarter, and forwarded to Scipio, proposing to meet in the Poplar Ridge meeting- house, in Cayuga County, "on Second-day after the fourth First-day in fifth month next (1853), at 10 o'clock in the morning; that [as they said] we may unitedly take into consideration our peculiar situation, and the trials by which we are surrounded, and under the gui- dance of Best Wisdom endeavor to move forward to the upholding of the standard of Truth in that simplicity in which, in former days, it was upheld by the Yearly Meeting of New York, but which, of latter time, has been so deplorably laid waste." This proposal was laid before Seipio Quarterly Meeting in the ninth month, the men's and women's meetings being held jointly for its consideration, and, "after endeavoring for right direction in so important a concern," was united with. The meeting was accordingly held, in 1853, at the time and place proposed ; and thus the Yearly Meeting of Friends of New York holding the ancient doctrines, was sustained, apart from the schismatic influence and control of those adhering to the meeting in the city of 184 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. Xew York, which had identified itself with the innovat- ing party. It was a small body, but it was on the an- cient ground. The Yearly Meeting thus held at Poplar Ridge was drawn in brotherly love and sympathy to address an epistle to the Yearly Meeting of Xew England (." Smal- ler Body"), which that meeting, after examination into the circumstances, accepted as coming from Xew York Yearly Meeting of Friends, and issued an epistle to them in return, acknowledging its acceptance, and en- couraging their brethren to faithfulness. Satan is ever ready with stepping-stones, to lay them in convenient places for those who want an excuse for crossing the boundary between truth and error. This recognition of the little company in Xew York, meeting as a Yearly Meeting at Poplar Ridge, was soon made a ground of blame in Pennsylvania and elsewhere against the "Smaller Body" of Xew England, by some who were about to range themselves with the temporizing party, and who probably had not duly considered — and presently did not wish to consider or to acknowledge — how inconsistent and defective it would have been for that body to take any other course. It is true that the "Smaller Body " of Xew York had not the apparent advantage of the formal or established outward organi- zation (through numbers, representatives, clerks, com- mittees, etc.) in its favor, in the crisis of the separation. But a very little reflection might satisfy the candid un- biassed mind that this is, in such a crisis, a merely tech- nical advantage, affording no criterion at all of rectitude, and by no means to be placed in competition with the preservation of the soundness of our profession of Chris- 1853.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 185 tian faith, and the life of Truth in the body. That which would otherwise be true order and authority be- comes no longer true order or authority, but a dangerous imitation of it, when applied by a combination of lead- ing men holding the control, to the perversion of funda- mental truth, and to the promotion of the spread of in- novation as an overflowing stream over the whole Society. And notwithstanding the efforts made by the compro- misers to inculcate the idea that " no greater or more desolating evil can afflict the Society than the occurrence of separations,"* it must be manifest to those who desire, above all things, the maintenance of our holy profes- sion on its primitive Christian ground, that the disown- ment of faithful members for their testimony and warn- ing against error, and the authoritative permission for heresy to stalk abroad throughout our borders, unmo- lested and unrebuked, is tenfold more to be dreaded than a separation, in which the two who cannot agree, no longer attempt to walk together, and the unsound and dead branches, being dissevered, no longer corrupt and benumb with their mildew the fruit-bearing portions of the living tree. The circumstance, too, of the possession, by a meet- ing, of the same clerk as before the separation, has been greatly overrated and perverted, in regard to the influence it should have in determining the question, Which is the true Yearly, Quarterly, or Monthly Meeting? However desirable it may be, and undoubtedly is, to have the clerk of a meeting faithful to his duty in gathering the solid sense and judgment of the meeting, yet it would * " Remarks on Appointment of Clerks in Ohio Yearly Meeting," by T. Evans, Philadelphia, 1854, page 15. 186 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. be a most dangerous mistake, to hold the assent of the clerk as an indispensable evidence and criterion, under all circumstances, of the validity of a meeting's conclu- sion, and thus to place the church under the hand of any one man, whose dictate, or opinion, or determinate bias, shall control it beyond remedy, as being the only orderly expression of its legitimate judgment. The power of decision is with the church — is indeed its in- alienable prerogative and duty, so long as it is a living church, an assembly of the faithful, waiting on Christ its head. The clerk is the member appointed to gather and record its decisions and conclusions, its writer, and not its president in any sense. So our forefathers un- doubtedly looked upon it. It would, indeed, be alto- gether foreign to our principles to look upon a clerk as in any degree a presiding officer, or " moderator," in our meetings ; and if the clerk, and all other officers of a meeting, depart from the principles and essential prac- tices of our profession, they must be withstood. The faithful members, be they few or many, in or out of office, are bound to resist the innovation, as they value their own integrity, and the safety of the church. The out- cry to be raised about charity and unity, and obedience to authority, would here be altogether misplaced. And should the whole authority of a body, assuming to be a Yearly Meeting, be brought to bear against the original essential principles of the Society, or against any one of them, the subordinate meetings are by that act absolved from their allegiance to the body so lapsed from the Truth, and must take care of themselves as best they may be enabled, in pure dependence on divine wisdom. When so lamentable a crisis comes upon the church, it is no 1853.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 187 longer a question to be decided by numbers, or by what would otherw ise be the usual and authoritative practice of the organization ; but we have to fall back upon the first principles of our compact. And in looking at the records of our forefathers, we shall nowhere see that to any one man, as to a presiding officer, was given the power of controlling the judgment of the church ; nor that any assembly can be entitled to claim the authority of the Church any longer than it retains its allegiance to Christ our Holy Head. We may learn from some of the expressions of Robert Barclay, in his "Anarchy of the Ranters," or Treatise on Church Government, what were the views which our early Friends would have entertained against the inroads of heresy in the church, and their sense of the right and duty of withstanding it. In Section VI of that work he says : " If the apostles of Christ of old, and the preachers of the " everlasting gospel in this day, had told all people, however "wrong they found them in their faith and principles, our " charity and love is such we dare not judge you, nor separate " from you, but let us all live in love together, and every one "enjoy his own opinion, and all will be well; how should the " nations have been V Would not the devil love this doctrine " well, by which darkness and ignorance, error and confusion, "might still continue in the earth unreproved and uncon- "demned ? If it was needful then for the apostles of Christ "in tlie days of old to reprove, without sparing to tell the " high priests and great professors among the Jews that they " were stubborn and still-necked, and always resisted the Holy "Ghost, without being guilty of imposition or oppression, or " want of true love and charity ; and also for those messengers " the Lord raised up in this day, to reprove and cry out against "the hireling priests, and to tell the world openly, both pro- 188 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. "lessors and profane, that they were in darkness and igno- " ranee, out of the truth, strangers and aliens from the com- " monwealth of Israel ; if God has gathered a people by this "means into the belief of one and the same truth, must not "they, if they turn and depart from it, be admonished, re- " proved, and condemned (yea, rather than those that are not "yet come to the truth), because they crucify afresh unto "themselves the Lord of glory, and put him to open shame ? "It seems the apostle judged it very needful they should be " so dealt with (Titus 1 : 10), when he says : ' There are many ""unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, especially they of " 'the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped,' etc. "Were such a principle to be received or believed, that in "the church of Christ no man should be separated from, no "man condemned, or excluded the fellowship and communion " of the body, for his judgment or opinion in matter of faith, " then what blasphemies so horrid, what heresies so damna- "ble, what doctrine of devils, but might harbor itself in the "church of Christ? What need, then, of sound doctrine, if " no doctrine make unsound ? What need of convincing and "exhorting gainsayers, if to gainsay be no crime? Where "should the unity of the faithful be ? Were not this an inlet " to all manner of abomination, and to make void the whole "tendency of Christ and his apostles' doctrine, and render " the gospel of none etfect, and give a liberty to the inconstant " and giddy will of man to innovate, alter, and overturn it at " his pleasure ? "So that from all that is above mentioned we do safety con- clude, that where a people are gathered together into the "belief of the principles and doctrines of the gospel of Christ, " if any of that people shall go from their principles and assert " things false and contrary to what they have already received, " such as stand and abide firm in the faith have power by the "Spirit of God, after they have used Christian endeavors to "convince or reclaim them, upon their obstinacy, to separate '■'■from such, and to exclude them from their spiritual fellow- " ship and communion ; for otherways, if this be denied, fare- 1853.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 189 "well to all Christianity, or to the maintaining of any sound "doctrine in the church of Christ." And concerning the power of decision resting in the testimony of the Holy Spirit through the living mem- bers, lie says, in Section VII : "To give a short and }'et clear and plain answer to this " proposition, the only proper judge of controversies in the " church is the Spirit of God, and the power of deciding solely " lies in it, as having the only unerring, infallible, and certain "judgment belonging to it ; which infallibility is not necessarily "annexed to any persons, person, or places whatsoever, by vir- u tue of any office, place, or station, any one may have, or have " had, in the body of Christ. That is to say, that any have "ground to reason thus, because I am or have been such an "eminent member, therefore my judgment is infallible; or, '■•because ice are the greatest number; or, that we live in such "a noted or famous place, or the like; though some of these "reasons may and ought to have their true weight incase of "contradictor}' assertions (as shall hereafter be observed), yet "not so as upon which either mainly or only the infallible "judgment is to be placed, but upon the Spirit, as that which "is the firm and immovable foundation." And a little further he says : "Nor yet do I understand by the Church every gathering " or assembly of people who may hold sound and true princi- " pies, or hare a form of truth; for some may lose the life anal "power of godliness, who notwithstanding may retain the " form or notions of things, but yet are to be turned away "from ; because in so far (as I observed before) as sanctifica- " tion, to wit, those that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, male the 11 Church, and give the right definition to it; where that is "wholly wanting, the church of Christ ceaseth to be, and there " remains nothing but a shadow without substance. Such "assemblies, then, are like the (lead body when the soul is de- 190 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XI. 11 parted, which is no more fit to be conversed with, because it " corrupts and proves noisome to the living." On a serious consideration of the above extracts from this work of Robert Barclay's, always acknowledged by the Society as conveying its own principles on these sub- jects, and especially if we take into view the whole scope of his argument, we may, if candid to our own best feelings, meet with no difficulty in perceiving that the ground on which our Friends of the "Smaller Bodies" acted, both in New England and in New York, was consistent with the primary and vital principles of the Society, as applied against the inroads of fundamental error; although contemned by "the wisdom of the wise" of this world for its apparent weakness, and for the com- paratively small number of those engaged therein. For the words of the apostle still hold good, that " God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which arc not, to bring to naught things that are, that no flesh should glory in his presence." 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 191 CHAPTER XII. DEVELOPMENT OF THE GTJRNEY SCHISM WITHIN OHIO AND BALTIMORE YEARLY MEETINGS. For several years, within the compass of the Yearly Meeting of Ohio, the state of feeling between the advo- cates of the new views on the one hand, and the adherents of the ancient principles of the Society on the other, had been so decidedly antagonistic, that a separation would undoubtedly have been the result, much earlier than was the case, had it not been for the earnest endeavors of the clerk of that Yearly Meeting, aided by some others, disciples of the middle party of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, to keep all together and patch up a false peace. These endeavors, however, not being cor- rective of the disease, but merely palliative, though suc- cessful in retarding the outbreak, bore no convincing power effectually to allay the excitement, or alter the determination of the innovating party to accomplish their purpose of obtaining control, whenever a favorable opportunity should occur. Their avowed grievance was, that the main body of the Yearly Meeting (or, as they termed it, the clerk and his party) resisted their wishes for Ohio Yearly Meeting to identify itself with the " Larger Body " in New Eng- land. On this account, their favorite measure involved a change of the clerk ; as they hoped, if they could ac- 192 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. complish that, to have power, either to carry over the whole body with them to the desired recognition, as had been done in Indiana and North Carolina, or to produce such a separation as should, by the fallacious plea of having the clerk, etc., on their side, assume an appearance which would insure for them a prompt acknowledg- ment by other Yearly Meetings. They therefore, for several years, stoutly opposed the reappointment of Benjamin Hoyle as clerk, paying little regard to his en- deavors to pacify and conciliate them by a vacillating half-wav course, so long as he resisted their call for a definitive recognition of the Gurneyites of New England. The result was, that for a period of eight years, there were only two instances in which the representatives were able to make a united nomination for clerk of the Yearly Meeting. They were under the necessity of reporting that they could not agree ; and the Yearly Meeting, by common consent of all parties, uniformly pursued the practice which had previously obtained in the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia under like circum- stances during the Hicksite separation, of continuing the old clerks at their post until others could be regularly nominated and appointed. The Women's Yearly Meet- ing, during this time, had a clerk of opposite sentiments to those of the clerk of the men's meeting, who retained her position on the same principle under similar diffi- culties. In the Yearly Meeting of 1845, both the epistles coming from New England, where the separation had recently taken place, were read ; but no further step was then taken towards a recognition of either body. In 1846, no epistles were read from either of them, and two 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 193 Friends from the "Smaller Body" were even requested to leave the meeting — " for the purpose of avoiding dis- cussion " — as was alleged. The clerk on that occasion expressing that " he was willing " they should do so, they absented themselves from the meeting, rather than be the apparent cause of great dissension. In 1853, a mem- ber of the " Smaller Body " being again present, four sittings of the Yearly Meeting were consumed in debat- ing whether he should be excluded ; but he retained his seat, in accordance with the wishes of a large number of Friends. We see by this, what a sorrowfully divided condition the meeting presented. The clerk meanwhile held the controlling power, and would do nothing to recognize the " Smaller Body " of New England, nor yet to satisfy the Gurney party, whom he knew well to be innovators and seceders. He would only endeavor to coax them by apparently insincere or compromising professions. On the fourth of the ninth month, 1854, the Yearly Meeting assembled, as usual, in the great meeting-house at Mount Pleasant. William and Charles Evans from Philadelphia, and Eliza P. Gurney, widow of Joseph John Gurney, were present; as was also Thomas B. Gould, a minister, from Newport, Rhode Island, with his companion, members of the "Smaller Body" of New England. T. B. Gould had presented his minute or certificate to the Meeting of Ministers and Elders on the previous Seventh-day, where it was thought best not to read it, the clerk, Joseph Edgerton, more or less under the influence of the temporizing party, proposing and favoring this course. The minute of T. B.Gould's companion, who was not a member of the Select Meet- VOL. II — 17 194 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. ing, was placed upon the clerk's table of the Yearly Meeting while the meeting was engaged on the subject of credentials, but no notice was taken of it by the clerk. The Gurney party soon raised objections to these two Friends sitting in the meeting ; and after saying a great deal with a view of excluding them, they commenced to call upon them to produce their credentials, or, if they had none, to make a verbal statement of the cause of their being present. T. B. Gould upon this rose and said, "that he had come amongst them under a solemn "and convincing sense of religious duty, the concern " having long rested with much weight upon his mind, " and this time having been clearly pointed out as the " proper one for coming, after having turned the fleece "again and again, and proved the religious rectitude of "the concern. And not only so, but that his concern " had been fully united with by Rhode Island Monthly " Meeting of Friends, of which he had always been a " member ; and he had been furnished with its certifi- cate, and the indorsement of Rhode Island Quarterly "Meeting, duly signed by the clerks; which Quarterly " Meeting, after a careful investigation of the Avhole "subject, had been decided by Philadelphia Yearly " Meeting to be the true and regularly established Rhode " Island Quarterly Meeting of Friends. That these " certificates had been duly presented to the Select " Yearly Meeting the day before yesterday, but that "owing to the manifestation of a similar spirit of oppo- " sition to what had been seen here, and, as he supposed, "from a feeling of tenderness in the clerk toward those "of opposing sentiments, they were neither read there " nor introduced here. However, Friends," said he, 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 195 "you may rely upon it, that, after what has been said "here, I would not remain in this house another mo- " ment, if I had not felt it my duty, in the first place, "to come, and in the next place to remain in this meet- " ing, and if I did not also know that I have a right so " to do. So that I wish it to be distinctly understood, " that I do not consider myself as an intruder, neither " did I ever intrude myself into any place where I had " not a right to go. I do not ask for the privilege of "sitting here as a favor, I claim it as a right." He went on to show that the Monthly Meeting of Swanzey, which had issued the minute for his companion, was the genuine meeting of Friends at that place, and that the others separated from it, as they did also from the Yearly Meeting; adding: "But, Friends, they [the " Larger Body] are a body of separatists from the order "and discipline, as well as from the principles and "doctrines of Friends. By these I freely acknowledge " that I have been disowned ; but I never was, in any man- " ner, out of unity with or disowned by Friends, as so often "stated in this meeting, nor until after the separation "had occurred from Rhode Island Quarterly Meeting." Hereupon the most clamorous of the Gurney party began to say, in different parts of the house, that they were fully satisfied that it would never do to discuss this question in that public manner. " Friends," said they, "we are losing ground; let us say less, and act more "firmly;" and at once they turned upon the clerk, urg- ing him to make the meeting select, and rebuking him sharply for going on with the business as far as he had done, with those strangers present. Whereupon the clerk attempted to clear himself from the alleged 196 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. accountability, plainly showing that he did not desire their presence at all ; but tbe Gurney party would not accept his excuses, and cried out that he had previously a:id wholly disqualified himself for acting as clerk. The clerk endeavored further to clear himself, and said again aid again: "Friends, you can make the meeting as '' select as you please, and I will not object to it, provided '• you do so consistently with our principles, and do not •' appeal to the civil magistrate."* This was contemp- tuously rejected, and he was vehemently charged with treachery, in favoring or allowing the presence of the two strangers. T. B. Gould now thought it right to say, "that the clerk was in no way responsible for "their presence; that he had been scrupulously careful " not to give them the least encouragement; and that it "would be great injustice to him to charge him there- " with ; that as regarded himself, he had no wish to " deceive any one," etc. The clerk then said : "Friends, " you must see how that the individual has assumed the " whole responsibility of his being here to himself." This, however, was by no means correct ; for T. B. Gould had expressly referred the responsibility to Him who had laid upon him the concern to come thither, and who, he l;?lieved, required him to remain, and made him willing to suffer all this obloquy for the sake of His precious name and cause. After a time, the representatives were directed, as usual, to meet, and, if way opened, agree upon names to propose to the next sitting for clerk and assistant; and * "Letters and Memoirs of T. B. Gould," page 366. How the clerk expected this to be accomplished, does not appear, unless it was an invitation to them to take T. B. Gould out of the meeting-house. 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 197 the meeting then adjourned to the next morning. Dur- ing the interval, nothing was said to T. B. Gould by any one, to induce him to absent himself from the future sittings. But on the contrary, many Friends manifested their unity with him in an unmistakable manner. After the close of this first sitting, the representatives convened as usual; but it soon appeared that twelve out of the forty-two were resolutely bent on proposing new names for clerk and assistant clerk. Two others were understood to be of the same party, though not at first openly uniting in the measure. The remaining twenty-eight, who did not approve of the change, nor of the names proposed, resisted this disorganizing step, knowing it would give the control to the Gurney faction ; but they were unable, as on previous occasions, to carry forward any united nomination, the fourteen others declining to join them therein. There was no way left, but, as before, to report to the Yearly Meeting their in- ability to agree on any names to offer for its considera- tion. The next day, after the opening of the meeting by the acting clerk, one of the twelve Gurney representatives arose and said, that the representatives had conferred together, and a portion of them had agreed to propose the name of Jonathan Binns for clerk. Whereupon another Friend (Nathan Hall) informed the meeting that he had been directed, on behalf of the representa- tives, to report that they were unable to agree in bring- ing forward any name for clerk or assistant. A clam- orous expression of approval of the nomination of Jona- than Binns now took the place, for awhile, of any solid consideration of the regular report. The acting clerk 198 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. informed the party that their proceeding was altogether out of order, contrary to the discipline and usage of the Society, and to the course pursued by that Yearly Meet- ing for several years past. Much noise and confusion were made by these persons, who urged Jonathan Binns, and another proposed by them as assistant, to go to the table and take seats ; all which was decidedly objected to by a large number of Friends. The clerk, in con- formity with former usage, though perhaps somewhat hastily, without waiting the direction of the meeting, made a minute, stating that the representatives not hav- ing been able to agree, the former clerk and assistant were continued in their respective stations. This minute was sustained by a large expression of unity ; while the nomination of J. Binns was considered by many as not regularly before the meeting, and therefore not entitled to receive consideration. Those advocating this disor- derly proceeding were warned even by some of their own party, that such a measure, if persisted in, was an act of separation from the Society, and were earnestly entreated to desist therefrom. But they persisted in their attempt to divide the Yearly Meeting; and even- tually their nominees were induced to proceed to the table, obtrude themselves into the yet vacant seat of the assistant clerk, and make a minute of their own fictitious appointment. By this time the afternoon was consider- ably advanced, and the Yearly Meeting adjourned, by a regular minute made by the clerk, to 10 o'clock the next morning. The separatists remained behind in the house, pro- fessing, with their new clerk, to hold Ohio Yearly Meet- ing ; and after a time adjourned to 8 o'clock in the morn- 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 199 ing. The women who were of the same party met at the same hour, their clerk having made the minute of adjournment to such hour as the men's meeting might adjourn to. As it happened, this suited both parties ; for those who were desirous of adhering to the ancient principles and practices assembled at ten o'clock, accord- ing to the adjournment of the Men's Yearly Meeting; and finding that their clerk was among the separatists, they appointed another, and went on with the regular business of the Women's Yearly Meeting. Eliza P. Gurney had identified herself with the separatists, and William and Charles Evans were uniting with and en- couraging B. Hoyle's measures.* It was supposed by some present, that about one-third of the members in attendance seceded from the men's meeting. This meeting, after the secession, proceeded with its usual business, and adopted a document, ex- planatory of the extraordinary circumstances which had occurred, for circulation among its members and in other parts of the Society. In the last sitting, toward the close, Thomas B. Gould rose, and after some remarks respecting the Epistles which had been addressed to other Yearly Meetings, and the probability that some of them might be rejected by the bodies to which they * The printed Journal of William Evans (p. G09-10) gives an account of this Yearly Meeting. A stranger would rise from its perusal, totally ignorant of the ground of the dispute respecting clerks, on which the separation turned. In- deed, in the whole of that voluminous work, though many things are mentioned respecting the Ilicksian secession, yet in regard to the more modern schism, far more extensive and insidious in its spread over the Society, no distinct details are given, nor does the name of ,1. ,1. Gurney or of John Wilbur appear in any of its 700 pages. His remarks on separations (pp. 4S'.), 547, and 585) are exceed- ingly weak and untenable, implying that the members would not be justified in endeavoring to sustain by separation the true Society of Friends, however cor- rupt the nominal body might become. 200 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. were addressed, — which, however, would be no necessary cause of discouragement, considering the state of those bodies — he went on to remark, "that we were living in " a dark and cloudy day ; that the spirit of the world " and of the age had so blinded the eyes and hardened " the hearts of many up and down amongst Friends as " a people, that it seemed as if they would not or could "not believe, although a man should declare the Truth " unto them ; that this was a spirit of unbelief in, and "departure from the Truth ; that such was the blindness " which had happened unto Israel, that it seemed to him " there was great need, even for some who had been "eminently gifted and deeply experienced, to be so "humbled under the mighty hand of the Lord, as to "availingly put up the petition for an increase of faith ; "that so they might be able to adopt the language, " Lord, I believe, help thou mine unbelief! and that " their eyes might be opened to see the way and work "of the Lord in this our day and time, which was a "dark and stormy time. But the darkness and the " light were, in a sense, alike unto him; he had his way "in the sea, and his path in the deep waters, and his " footsteps were not known, except to such as were made "willing to follow him even to prison and to judgment ; " that clouds and darkness were round about him, but " righteousness and judgment were the habitation of his "throne. He did verily believe that it was at least by " His permission, that things were being so shaken; and " if he was not mistaken in his feelings, the language " was applicable, ' Yet once more I shake not the earth "only, but also heaven ;' and that everything that could "be shaken would be shaken, that that which was im- 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 201 " movable might remain ; yea, that He would ' overturn, " overturn, overturn,' until He shall come whose right " it is to rule and reign over all ; whose power was in itself " over all the powers of darkness, and who would yet, he " firmly and renewedly believed, be magnified in the sight " of those who had, in different degrees, become forgetful " and distrustful of his power. But it was better to trust " in the name and power of the Lord, than to put confi- " dence in princes; for the Lamb and his believing fol- " lowers would have the victory in the end, and such as "rejected Him, and turned back from following him, " would be confounded and brought to naught." He added some further weighty expressions of the same character, and a quiet solemnity afterwards per- vaded the meeting. It is evident from the foregoing statement, that though this separation* had cleared out from Ohio Yearly Meet- ing the main body of the original Gurney party there, yet a prevailing element of weakness was left — an ele- ment which, through the influence of the clerk, and a few other prominent members more or less attached to the " middle party," rapidly increased and prevented it from assuming its right position in the Truth — prevented it from bearing a practical testimony on behalf of those its brethren who were suffering for " the same testimo- nies " that itself was professing and many of its members sincerely endeavoring to uphold — prevented it from pursuing the straightforward and manly (not to say Christian) course, of holding forth the right hand of fellowship toward those in New England and New * The Letters of T. B. Gould, from page 333 to page 373, give a graphic and in- teresting account of the circumstances attending that separation. VOL. II. — 18 202 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. York Yearly Meetings who had given up their names to reproach for the cause of the ancient faith of the Society. It was owing to this influence — greatly pro- moted as it was by an inordinate confidence in certain leading individuals in Philadelphia — that thenceforth, although the original and open Gurneyites had now left them, Ohio Yearly Meeting (like that of Philadelphia) proved itself entirely inadequate, as a body, to the exi- gencies of the times, or the duties which its profession of sound doctrine entailed upon it, for the sustaining of the ark of the Lord's testimony in a day of deep revolt. It had not the courage to take any effectual steps towards the practical or disciplinary suppression of the doctrinal heresy, or towards the recognition of the " Smaller Bodies," either of New England or New York, and gradually drifted into open opposition to any such course. Yet it is very clear, that if Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had set the example in such a course, Ohio would undoubtedly have followed it. On the other hand, those engaged in making this se- cession promptly identified themselves with the "Larger Body " of New England, and with the promoters of in- novation in other parts of the Society, and were at once acknowledged as Ohio Yearly Meeting by all the other bodies controlled by the same party; including even the Yearly Meeting of London, notwithstanding the irregu- larity of their proceedings and the comparative small- ness of their numbers. In the case of New England, London had ostensibly decided to own those who had the old clerk and the preponderance in respect to num- bers ; but as this rule would not be found to answer the purpose of the party with whom they fraternized, in the 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 203 case of Ohio, the criterion was changed, and practically, though not for the name purpose, the language of Jehu was adopted, " Who is on my side f Who?'' Indiana Yearly Meeting soon took into consideration the weak- ness and small numbers of their brethren in Ohio, and turned over to them one of their Quarterly Meetings, — that of Alum Creek. The Yearly Meeting of Baltimore was one of the three bodies which, as we have seen, were prompt to rec- ognize the Gurney party of New England in the autumn of 1845; which they did without any investigation into the real merits of the case. Baltimore Yearly Meeting at that time consisted of the three Quarterly Meetings of Baltimore, Nottingham, and Dunning'a Creek, and the Half-year's Meeting of Virginia. It had been very small since the Hicksite secession of 1828, but had been recognized by the other Yearly Meetings at that crisis, on the ground of principle, without any regard to the smallness of its numbers. Unhappily most of the mem- bers had, since that time, been drawn in with the mul- titude to sanction the views and ways, and promote the success, of J. J. Gurney 's party ; yet in Nottingham Quarter there was quite a number of Friends, who were aware of the schismatic nature of the new movements, and religiously concerned, according to their measure of ability, to withstand them. When the two epistles from New England were pre- sented to Baltimore Yearly Meeting in the autumn of 1845, the clerk read to the meeting the one from the " Larger Body " (which had the usual signatures of clerk and correspondent), along with those coming from other places. He afterwards informed the meeting that there 204 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. was another paper, purporting to be an epistle from New England Yearly Meeting, with another signature; where- upon a committee was verbally appointed to examine the paper, and report whether it was suitable to be read. This committee withdrew, and shortly returned, report- ing that it contained certain charges against individuals and the Society, and was unsuitable to be read ; adding that as the regular epistle from New England had already been read in the meeting, the document in ques- tion, in their opinion, ought not to be read. Thus they took upon themselves to settle the whole question ; and the Yearly Meeting, with a large preponderance of voices, adopted their view of the case, and set aside the " Smaller Body" as if it had been clearly convicted of a secession from the Society. Some expression was made of an opposite sentiment, and it did appear that the committee had laid the meeting under an additional obligation to read the epistle, from having disclosed, or professed to represent, a portion only of its contents, and this in their own way. But the general sentiment of the meeting was in favor of the report, and the Yearly Meeting was carried over to the ranks of the new party ; and in order to rivet their action on the component parts of the Yearly Meeting, a committee of thirteen men and fifteen Avomen was appointed to visit the subordinate meetings, and " render them such advice and assistance as necessity may require, and ability be afforded to impart." Thus the individual members, as integral parts of the Yearly Meeting, became of course complicated in the connection established with the " Larger Body" of New England, and in its support in the departure from primi- tive Quakerism, and its efforts to set aside and disown 1845.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 205 all those who saw their sandy foundation, and were con- cerned to point it out, and to adhere to first principles. The main opposition to this course of the Yearly Meet- ing was from members of Nottingham Quarterly Meet- ing, in which there was a strong feeling adverse to the degenerate tendency so quickly spreading over the Society. A watchful care was now maintained in that quarter, to keep their own minutes at least clear of entries indica- tive of unity with those measures, or of owning the " Larger Body" of New England in the way of accepting certificates or other documents issued by them. And in maintaining this care, it seemed to them that at times a hand unseen was at work to help them. But these were trying times, and great watchfulness was required on the part of clerks and others, to move along with due care and circumspection ; for there was still an element in the meeting that was aiming to lead it into the popular cur- rent. For this purpose, on one occasion when the Yearly Meeting's committee was present, an effort was made by a portion of the members to change the clerks of the Quarterly Meeting, so as to obtain the control for that party ; but it met with no success; for after the nomina- tion was made, there was so evident an absence of ap- proval — such a silence over the meeting at large — that even one of the nominees declared that it was very evi- dent they were not acceptable to the meeting ; whereupon the subject was referred back to the committee with an addition, and at the next meeting the old clerk and as- sistant were reappointed. Thus Nottingham Quarterly Meeting travelled on, in trial and conflict, for some years, the sound Friends hav- ing the ascendency, but with a considerable mixture of 206 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. such as were disposed to favor the new views, and under a pressing sense of endeavors made from time to time for their subjugation to the course pursued by the Yearly Meeting. It seemed to some of these that they were almost surrounded by snares, and they saw no way of escape as yet, nor any presentation of deliverance which they could recognize as of the ordering of Truth. They continued to attend their Yearly Meetings, though in much heaviness, and returned home without relief. But Israel's unslumbering Shepherd was still watching over those who truly confided in Him, and in his own time he opened a way for their deliverance. As the time of holding the Yearly Meeting of 1854 approached, these Friends became renewedly sensible of the perilous position in which the Society was placed, more prominently so from the recent occurrences in Ohio. Under such circumstances, the prospect of again attend- ing the Yearly Meeting was fraught with solicitude, and a concern was felt lest any might, through zeal, put forth a hand unbidden to stay the tottering ark, or lest there might not be that patient waiting, quiet enduring, and firm adherence to a right course, which might bring peace to the mind in the retrospect.. They did not feel at liberty to lay plans or make contrivances beforehand, as to the course to be pursued, but felt that they must leave the result to Him who is the way, the truth, and the life, trusting that if it should please him to open a way for them, he would show it to them and go before them. The Yearly Meeting convened in Baltimore on the 23d of the tenth month, 1854. Several epistles were read from corresponding Yearly Meetings, and a com- mittee was appointed to prepare essays of epistles in 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 207 return. The clerk then informed the meeting that he had received two epistles purporting to be from Ohio Yearly Meeting, one signed by Benjamin Hoyle, as clerk, and the other by Jonathan Binns; whereupon a committee of twelve was appointed to read the papers, examine such evidence as might appear, and report to a future sitting what course, in their judgment, the Yearly Meeting should pursue in regard to those epistles and the bodies from which they issued. This committee was joined by thirteen women under similar appointment from their meeting. The committee had two sittings, and prepared a writ- ten report, in which fellowship was professed with that body of which Jonathan Binns was clerk (the Gurney meeting), and disunity with that of which B. Hoyle was clerk ; proceeding to charge the members of the latter meeting with being promoters of disorder, in opposing correspondence with another " Yearly Meeting " (viz., the Larger Body of New England), and in encouraging "disowned persons" (members of the Smaller Body) to sit in Ohio Yearly Meeting. This report was signed by nineteen of the twenty-five members of the joint committee. Six expressed disunity with it, but their voices were of no avail, and it was laid before the Yearly Meeting on Third-day afternoon, after the London gen- eral epistle had been read and disposed of. The consid- eration of the subject occupied the meeting until dusk, when the clerk, overruling the opposition to the meas- ure, read a minute adopting the report. Several voices were still raised against it, but a larger number in its favor, and it was sent into the women's meeting. The clerk of the men's meeting then read the epistle from 208 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. the Gurney body of Ohio, and it was referred to the Epistle Committee to be replied to. Samuel Cope, from Pennsylvania, who was present, then rose, and expressed himself in the following emphatic words : " Well, Friends, you have joined yourselves to that spurious body in Ohio, of which Jonathan Binns is clerk. I have no unity with it. I believe it may be said of you, as it was said of some of old, Ephraim hath joined himself unto idols; let him alone. But Judah shall cleave unto her King." A short pause ensued of deep silence, after which the clerk soon read a minute of adjournment. When he sat down, William Waring rose and said: "Are there those in this Yearly Meeting who feel bound to the law and to the testimony? Can these do otherwise than remain on their seats? Can these do otherwise than sit together and feel together ?" The clerk, and those on whose part he was acting, then withdrew, and a small number remained quietly in the house until the Committee on Epistles, which had re- mained for a time, also withdrew ; when, after a little pause, it was thought best to ask the women Friends, similarly circumstanced, to come in and sit with their brethren. A Friend going accordingly to see how they were faring, found six female Friends sitting in profound silence, who, on being invited, joined the men in solid deliberation. A precious covering of good was felt to spread over this little company, and they were reminded of the saying of our Savior to his disciples, "Ye are they who have continued with me in my temptations," etc. In the sweet owning which seemed to be unmis- takably evidenced, it was deliberately and unitedly con- cluded that it would be right to endeavor to sustain 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 209 Baltimore Yearly Meeting on its ancient ground, irre- spective of those who had now joined the schismatic bodies. This conclusion was united in by all present, including four friends from Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing, viz., Samuel Cope, Moses Bailey, Cyrus Simmons, and David Heston. The clerk, and those identified with him, having with- drawn with the books and papers, it became necessary to appoint another clerk, and William Waring was re- quested to act in that service for the remainder of the Yearly Meeting. The women retired to their own apartment, and likewise appointed a clerk, and both meetings adjourned to the next morning, to meet in a private house, as the meeting-house would be occupied by the seceded body. At subsequent sittings, they ad- dressed epistles to several Yearly Meetings, and, in con- sideration of the smallness of their number and the re- sponsibilities thus devolving upon them, it was concluded to invite the Yearly Meetings of Philadelphia and Ohio to appoint committees, if way should open for it, "to sit with this Yearly Meeting next year, and join us in considering the propriety of discontinuing it, and join- ing the members to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting." A minute was also adopted, explanatory of the extra- ordinary circumstances in which the Yearly Meeting was now placed, through the schismatic course of false brethren ; which minute contained the following expres- sions, among other remarks on this crisis : "The particulars of the lamentable difficulties in which the "various parts of our Society have been involved during a "past series of years, are so generally known, that we need " only briefly to refer to them to make our present position 210 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. " understood by the Society at large, and by coming gener- " ations. During a series of years, doctrines and practices "have obtained currency in parts of the Society of Friends, '• that are an obvious departure from what they have held and " observed in ancient times ; and there has been a diversity of " sentiment among concerned members, as to the proper course "to be pursued by meetings and individuals towards those " who may have introduced or promoted those innovations. "In different places the dissension growing out of this state " of things has resulted in the separation of Yearly, Quarterly, "and other subordinate meetings of Friends. Throughout " these separations, it may be observed, there is one portion " who are generally, if not uniformly, identified with an ad- " herence to the ancient doctrines and usages of [the] Society. "And finding the body claiming to be Ohio Yearly Meeting, " with B. Hoyle as clerk, in this connection, we own it, have " fellowship with it, and with it continue our correspondence." They did not at that time suppose that either Phila- delphia or Ohio Yearly Meeting would become so thor- oughly weakened by submission to the temporizing measures of the " middle party," as to decline correspond- ence with them from motives of slavish fear. The meeting, having finished its business, adjourned on Fifth-day, the 26th of the month, to meet again at the usual time the next year, at Nottingham, if so per- mitted. This assembly, it must be acknowledged, was unpre- cedentedly small for holding a Yearly Meeting; there being only six men and six women, members thereof, in attendance, besides the four friends above mentioned from Philadelphia Yearly Meeting.* If they had been * It must, however, be borne in mind that this small number present at that time in Baltimore, was acting on behalf of many Friends who had remained at their homes, composing a large portion of the members of Nottingham Quar- 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 211 engaged in organizing or instituting a new Yearly Meet- ing, it would have been obvious that their numbers were not sufficient to entitle them to act in so responsible a capacity. But this was not the case. They were only engaged, under a solemn conviction of duty, in endeav- oring to sustain Baltimore Yearly Meeting of Friends on its original ground, against the great defection into which most of its members had been carried, and thus to raise a standard there for the primitive principles, round which the honest-hearted might rally, who cher- ished a concern not to be swept along with that defection. And they confidently looked towards being united, in a short time, to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, as one of its constituent branches. This was under the impression that, should way open for such a course, before it could be consummated, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting would probably be relieved from the confusion in which it was then involved. Both this and that would undoubtedly have occurred, if Philadelphia Yearly Meeting had con- tinued to maintain a firm and consistent attitude, in living faith, as the Truth required at its hands. But, though "armed and carrying bows," it "turned back in the day of battle," and left all the small bodies of Friends to get along as they could. Samuel Cope afterwards acknowledged in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, with reference to this little company in Baltimore, that "he did not know that he had ever attended a meeting, where the owning presence of the Head of the church was more eminently manifested," or to that effect. He also at- terly Meeting; of whoso four representatives, three were associated in these transactions. It was i hough t that about one hundred friends attended the Yearly Meeting the next year at Nottingham. 212 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. tended the Yearly Meeting held at Nottingham three years afterwards, in company with his wife. It would thus appear that at that time he owned them. But how sorrowful, that some such eminently gifted servants of the Lord, after seeing so clearly the apostasy, and testi- fying so valiantly against it, as he did, should eventually, under the specious delusions of the middle system, which they once saw clearly through, and under the weakening influences of a continuance in its mixed atmosphere, have lost their testimony for the Truth, and the power of stand- ing upright against error ! Yet Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, in 1855, overlook- ing the principles on which it had acted in the case of the Hicksian separation in Baltimore in 1828 (see Vol. I, page 190) and under the pressure of the Gurney and middle parties, with the clerk at the head of the latter, and threats of a separation on the part of the former, declined to accept a correspondence with this small com- pany, or to accede to their request of a committee to consider of their brotherly proposal, or to own them in any way whatever. So palpable was the inconsistency of the middle party in thus casting away this little com- pany in Maryland, that they were even taunted with it in the Yearly Meeting by some on the Gurney side. It was firmly opposed by many sound Friends, who could not bow the knee to the new system — some of whom have since gone to their everlasting rest. Epistles had been addressed to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting by each of the bodies in Ohio and also in Maryland, claiming its recognition. The question pro- duced much excitement, and very long and painful dis- cussions, in the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia of 1855. 1855.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 213 The clerk, William Evans, having already identified himself, at the time of the separation in Ohio, with that body of which Benjamin Hoyle was clerk, composed of the sound members mixed with and largely controlled by the compromising party, he was of course resolute against any recognition of the Binns Meeting ; and in this way the same compromising party united with the sound members of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in sus- taining the position of that body in Ohio, which was still standing professedly, though falteringly, for the ancient doctrines ; and thus the Gurney part) 7 were put to a dis- advantage in their strenuous efforts to prevent the recognition of the Hoyle body by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. But when the question came up afterwards respecting the separation in Baltimore, no such element of weakness or disadvantage for the Gurney party ap- peared; inasmuch as the middle party were then willing to sacrifice the " Small Body " there (with which the clerk had not already identified himself) as a peace- offering to the highly excited feelings of the Gurney members. The following very careful account of the deliberations in each of these two cases on that occasion, was given in "The Friend."* "The epistles from London, Dublin, and New York having " been read, the clerk informed the meeting there were two "epistles on the table, each purporting to come from Ohio " Yearly Meeting, and it would be necessary for it to decide •• which should be read. After a short time of silence, a very "general expression in favor of reading the epistle signed by "B. Hoyle took place. There were several, numbering, as " we are informed, between twenty-six and thirty, who op- * Vol. xxviii, p. 2(>2. 214 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. "posed the reading of that epistle; only one, however, ex- " pressing the desire to have the one signed by Jonathan " Binns [the Guruey epistle] read, and five expressing the " belief that the meeting for which J. Binns acted as clerk was " the true Yearly Meeting of Ohio. The main objection urged ' ' by the greater part of those who opposed the reading of the "epistle signed by B. Hoyle, was, that a decision in favor of "the meeting for which he acted, would cut Philadelphia " Yearly Meeting off from the great body of the Society, and "therefore the whole subject ought to be postponed, and the "meeting defer coming to any conclusion on it. Some of "those who objected to the reading of this epistle, stated their "belief, that the meeting of which B. Hoyle was clerk, was " the legitimate Yearly Meeting, but they were in favor of a "postponement. Three times the judgment of the meeting "was clearly manifested, that the epistle signed by B. Hoyle "should be read; and each time the clerk rose to read it, "when, as he began, he was interrupted, and he patiently " waited until all had the opportunity of relieving their minds. " It was a trying circumstance that all the members could not " see alike on this important subject ; but the dissent from the "judgment of the great body of the meeting was by compar- atively few, and there appeared no probability of delay pro- ducing any good effect, as the circumstances of the separa- " tion in Ohio could not be changed by time,* and it was in- "cumbent on the meeting, under right authority, to come to "a decision for itself, without reference to the action of other "co-ordinate bodies, to acknowledge the true Yearly Meeting " of Ohio, and so far show its sympathy with it, in its peculiar "trials, and to express its disapprobation of the course pur- * How did this reasoning accord with the clerk's position in the Yearly Meeting of 1850, when he so earnestly exhorted Friends to a delay of judgment in regard to New England ? And how can we reconcile it with the readiness manifested hy him in the afternoon sitting, to recognize that body in Baltimore which he knew had united with the schismatic meeting in Ohio, rather than do anything to encourage the little company in Maryland who were endeavoring to sustain that Yearly Meeting on the ancient ground until they could be incorporated with Philadelphia ? It is well remembered by many, how contemptuously he designated this small company. 1855.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 215 "sued by those who separated from it. The clerk having " stated it to he the judgment of the meeting to have the ''epistle signed by B. Hoyle read at that time, after a sitting "of near five hours, it was read, and .... the meeting ad- journed. [Afternoon sitting] "The meeting being informed there ''were two epistles, each purporting to come from Baltimore " Yearly Meeting, one of which, coming from a small number, "contained a minute, suggesting the consideration of their "being united to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, the question "arose, which should be read. Considerable contrariety of " sentiment was manifested, some expressing the conviction " that, as Baltimore Yearly Meeting had acknowledged unity "with those who had separated from Ohio, it was identified " with them, and its epistles should be in like manner as theirs " rejected, especially as some of its members had left it on that " account ; while others were of the judgment that the course "pursued by Baltimore did not invalidate its character as a " Yearly Meeting ; that the separation of a part of the mem- " hers from a Yearly Meeting ought not to be encouraged, and "therefore the epistle [of the Larger Body] ought to be read.* " The latter course was finally adopted, the epistle being read, "and after reading that from North Carolina (none having "come to hand from Indiana), the meeting adjourned. f "Third-day morning, the 17th. The printed General Epistle " from London was read. The subject of preparing epistles "to other Yearly Meetings was brought before the meeting, " and some Friends expressed the belief, that under the trying " circumstances in which the Society was at present involved, " it would be right not to address those Yearly Meetings that " had come to a different conclusion relative to the separation * It was afterwards conceded by an active member of the Gurney party, that "a large majority of those who spoke" favored the reading of the epistle from the Smaller Body ; but that the clerk was evidently determined that it should not be done. t The reader will please compare the above weak reasoning (which appears to have been the ground on which The Friend reconciled the rejection of the epistle of the "Smaller Body" of Baltimore, iu 1835) with the ground on which the Yearly Meeting acted in a similar case in 1828 ; see Vol. I, p. 191. 216 THE SOCIETY" OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. " in Ohio, from that of this Yearly Meeting. The meeting, '•however, settled in the conclusion, to address as usual the "Yearly Meetings of London, Duhlin, New York [Larger '•Body], and Ohio; also, if way should open for it, those of '' Baltimore, North Carolina, and Indiana ; the latter epistles, "if prepared, to contain an affectionate remonstrance with " those meetings respectively, for the course pursued by them ''in relation to the separation in Ohio. A committee to carry " out this decision was then appointed .... " Sixth-day morning, the 2Uth. Essays of epistles to Lon- " don, Dublin, Xew York, Ohio, North Carolina, and Indiana, " being produced from the committee, they were read, adopted, "and directed to be signed and transmitted to the meetings " to which they were respectively addressed. The committee ''reported that they were not united in preparing an epistle " to Baltimore Yearly Meeting at this time. A few friends, "who had on Second-day objected to the reception of the "epistle signed by B. Iloyle. now objected to forwarding that "prepared for Ohio Yearh* Meeting; and two or three ex- pressed their dissent from the purport of part of those " epistles which were addressed to North Carolina and In- '•diana. As the meeting was drawing to a quiet close, a " friend, who had repeatedly expressed his opposition to the "course pursued by it in respect to Ohio, proposed that those "who united with him in sentiment should stop at the rise of "the meeting, and sit down in silence to feel together. His "friends, however, did not unite with him in the adoption of "such a measure, and at their urgent solicitation he withdrew " his proposition. " The above quotation is characteristic of the cautious and calculating manner in which " The Friend" was at this time accustomed to treat the subject of the difficul- ties. The reader of it, if ignorant beforehand of the cause of all that occurred in the Yearly Meeting on this occasion, would rise from its perusal with no better un- derstanding of it than before, and would need to be 1855.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 217 further informed that the contest was not about mere names and clerks, nor originally or exclusively in Ohio, but had reference to some of the vital principles of our profession, as held by our primitive worthies, the con- tinued maintenance of which was endangered through- out the Society. Another prominent and characteristic feature of this editorial, is that it cautiously abstains from anything which would indicate truly the strength, either of the Gurney portion of the meeting, or of those who advocated a firm and uncompromising course, in opposition to the inconsistent, vacillating, and time- serving policy of the clerk and middle party. Both of those sections were at this time very formidable in Phila- delphia Yearly Meeting, but the clerk and his adher- ents held the control. On the part of the Giirney members there was great earnestness, and a degree of honesty of purpose accord- ing to their opinions, though in a wrong cause. The friends who stood firm for the ancient faith and riyrht order, were at least equally earnest and honest in sup- port of their conscientious convictions. Both were sen- sible that the party which controlled the meeting was not actuated by pure integrity of principle, but by the policy of compromise, which had no convincing efficacy, and was therefore submitted to only under a sense of oppression or compulsion. In the spring of that year, Benjamin Cad wall ad er, of Bucks County, Pa., had issued, in pamphlet form. " A Letter to Friends of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting;" in which an affectionate and earnest appeal was made to his fellow-members against the half-way course pursued of late by the Yearly Meeting; showing its inconsist- vol ii. — 19 218 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. ency with the truth, and the dereliction of imperative duty which it involved. He reminded Friends that, though repeatedly importuned by other Yearly Meet- ings to resume correspondence with the Larger Body of New England, yet " in our returning epistles [to those "Yearly Meetings] we have not at any time informed " them why we discontinued it, nor why we do not re- " sume it." And, on the other hand, he earnestly asked them : " Have we faithfully and conscientiously offered " the salutation of Christian love, and extended the "right hand of gospel fellowship to those who have "been standing for the cause of their Divine Master, " but whose difficulties and discouragements have been " such as, at times, almost to cause their hands to hang " down ? " But such appeals had now but little influ- ence with the leaders of the party of compromise. The two next succeeding Yearly Meetings in Phila- delphia presented very much the same scenes of conflict without decision. In that of 1856, the reading of the epistles from the New York and Baltimore " larger body " meetings, especially the latter, was objected to by many Friends; but Samuel Bettle urged the reading of them all, saying that it would be no compromise of principle to read them, and that the question would afterwards come before us, when the subject of replying to them should be brought before the meeting. The Gurney party began to threaten separation if they were not read ; saying that the meeting would separate itself from the great body of the Society, if we persisted in this course ; and that if what was done last year (viz., the recognition of the meeting in Ohio, of which B. Hoyle was clerk) was not undone, they would be com- 1856.J THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 219 pellcd to sustain Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in con- nection with the other yearly meetings of Friends. The clerk then, after a time, read the epistle from the New York city Meeting (the Gurney meeting), and expressed his own willingness to have that from Baltimore city also read, but that he believed the mind of the meeting was against it. The meeting then adjourned. In the afternoon, Samuel Bettle, to the surprise of many Friends, who thought the matter settled, expressed his sentiment, that the epistle from Baltimore city ought now to be read. Many of the Gurney party promptly urged that this should be done. But Friends stood firm to their previously stated objections, and though many of the "middle" party wished it to be read, the mind of Truth prevailed at that time, and it was again decided not to read it. Several of the epistles from the Gurney Yearly Meetings had exhorted Philadelphia Yearly Meeting to reconsider its course before it was too late, and we should be cut off from the " great body of the Society." This furnished a handle for the party here to urge the annulling of what had been done in reference to Ohio, and the " resumption" of correspond- ence with the Larger Body of New England. After a time the clerk proposed to refer the subject to the repre- sentatives for reconsideration. This course, however, was not adopted. On Fourth-day morning, Samuel Bettle rose and said, he wished to relieve his mind of a burden he had borne for many years; adding, in substance, as follows: "That he was opposed to all separations and divisions ; he be- lieved that all that had taken place, from the days of the apostles to the present time, were caused by the evil one ; 220 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [t'HAP. XII. that he was opposed to the Hicksite separation, and be- lieved that patient labor and suffering would have been better ; that he was opposed to cutting off," etc. A friend replied to him, " that so far as our aged friend was opposed to separations from the Truth, he could fully unite with him ; but as his remarks would allow of a very different construction, he believed it right they should be corrected ; that if such views as we had now heard had been carried out in former days, there would have been no reformation from Popery, neither would our early Friends have come out from among the pro- fessors of their day." In the afternoon sitting, a document was read from London Yearly Meeting, giving a statement of their having acknowledged fellowship with the meeting in Ohio, of which Jonathan Binns was clerk (Gurney meeting), accompanied with a declaration of doctrines, made in the time of the Hicksian difficulties; which, as was plainly stated in the meeting by Morris Cope, did not cover the present ground at all, especially as Lon- don Yearly Meeting had since that time practically in- dorsed the unsound doctrines of J. J. Gurney, in their printed memorial of him. It was proposed by the Gurney party to send the London document into the women's meeting ; but this was objected to, and was not done. On Sixth-day morning, when the essays of epistles in reply to other Yearly Meetings were read, the Gurney members in quick succession proposed the erasing of all allusions, in our epistles, to Ohio Yearly Meeting, and urged the meeting not to send any epistle to that meeting. After they had spent themselves in these efforts, Friends 1856.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 221 united with the epistles, and desired to have them signed and forwarded. Samuel Bettle, Jr., then proposed that no epistles at all be sent this year ; which was supported by the Gurney party and many "middle" men; but it was concluded to adopt the epistles and send them. The meeting was now told that by this course we had cut ourselves off from most of the Yearly Meetings in the world, and those who wished to retain their rights in the Society at large, were called upon by Israel W. Morris, and several others of that party, after the clerk had read the closing minute, to come forward and sit together, to feel after what would be best for them to do. It was thought that about two hundred remained together, who appointed a committee to propose a plan of action, and then adjourned to meet in the Twelfth Street Meeting-house the next morning. The commit- tee in the morning had no plan to propose, and the as- sembly came to the conclusion, that inasmuch as Phila- delphia Yearly Meeting had regularly adjourned for this year before any action on their part, it was too late for them to attempt to sustain the Yearly Meeting, and there was no probability that London Yearly Meeting would sanction such a measure under those defective circumstances. They, therefore, dispersed without taking any further steps. In the year 1856, finding the increasing tendency among many to take a superficial view, or rest in a volun- tary ignorance of the errors of doctrine propounded in the works and course of Joseph John < rurney, and to insinuate that the objections to his sentiments were overstrained, or without just foundation, and the objectors actuated by a partisan or detracting spirit, and needlessly disturbing 222 THE SOCIETY OF FKIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. the Society's peace, the author of this work published iu Philadelphia, "An Examination of the Memoirs and Writings of Joseph J. Gurney," in 145 pages, 8vo. Herein he endeavored to draw the reader's attention to the sub- stantial character of the principles of true religion, as held and declared by our ancient Friends, with various brief passages from their writings ; and then, by copious extracts from J. J. Gurney's publications, and from the Memoirs of his Life, confronted with ample quotations from our early authors, the proof was given of the great and fundamental difference between his principles and the primitive and characteristic faith of the Society. The work was widely disseminated, but by this time such developments met with few ears to hear the truth of the matter, and fewer hearts prepared to endure hardship and obloquy in the maintenance of it. The path of error under popular leaders was more smooth and easy, and, as in the days of the prophet, " the people loved to have it so." At the next Yearly Meeting (1857), strenuous efforts were made by the Gurney party to accomplish their purpose of changing the course of the meeting; and they were partially successful, probably owing in some degree to their formidable demonstration of the previous spring. Great opposition was now made by them to the reception of the epistle from Ohio, and a proposal was made to drop all the epistolary correspondence. After much discussion, it was proposed by Samuel Bettle, to leave the whole subject to a large committee, " to take time," and report to a future Yearly Meeting. He urged the view, that " time would do a great deal," forgetting that, in stemming the current of schismatic error, the more 1857.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 223 time is wasted in a neglect of known duty, the more weakness is likely to increase, whether with individuals or the church. A great deal was said on all sides, but after two very trying sittings mainly occupied with the discussion, with threats again made of separation on the part of the Gurney members, the epistle from Ohio was finally read. A committee was afterwards appointed, to pre- pare replies to the three epistles which had been read, viz., London, Dublin, and Ohio. Israel W. Morris then called upon his friends to stop at the rise of this meeting, cautioning them not to take any further part in the business of the meeting, as it had identified itself with the Separatists (as he thought) in Ohio, and had cut itself off' from all the Yearly Meetings in the world, the great body of the Society. Quite a number of the party united with this proposal, but Samuel Bettle and others earnestly exhorted him to withdraw it. This he declined to do, unless the meeting would consent to ap- point a committee to unite with committees of other Yearly Meetings in conference on the whole subject" of our difficulties. Friends could see no safety in such reference of the matter to parties already implicated in bringing the schism upon the Society, especially as we should be, in such a case, entirely overwhelmed by numbers, and have no prospect even of a fair hearing of the true nature of the difficulties. A long and earn- est discussion ensued, some proposing one expedient and some another; among which were the dropping of the correspondence not only with London and Dublin, but with Ohio also, and the appointing of the representa- tives as a committee, to consider and report to the next 224 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XII. Yearly Meeting, what could he done to harmonize and reconcile Friends in our own and other Yearly Meetings. These two proposals were finally adopted, with the pro- viso, that the committee should not interfere to unsettle the conclusions already come to by the Yearly Meeting. After a sitting of six hours, the meeting adjourned. The minute made on the occasion was as follows: "Epistles from our brethren at their Yearly Meetings in "London and Dublin were received and now read, as was also "the printed London General Epistle. In consideration of " our present condition, and the disunity that has appeared "on some points, particularly respecting our epistolary cor- " respondence, after much time speut thereon, and the general "expression of sentiment by Friends, it was concluded to sus- " pend, for this year, an epistolary correspondence with all " the Yearly Meetings ; and the subject of the great impor- " tance and the desirableness of the restoration of unity and "harmony, both amongst the members of this Yearly Meet- "ing and in the Society at large, being brought into view, it "was, under [after?] solid deliberation, concluded to refer its "present condition to the representatives of the Quarterly "Meetings in this meeting, as a committee, now appointed "weightily to deliberate thereon, and, if way opens, to pro- " pose any measures for this meeting to adopt, which they " ma}- hope will contribute to the increase of unity ; to make " a Report to this meeting next year ; it being clearly under- " stood, that- they are not to interfere with, or unsettle, any "of the previous decisions which this meeting has come to." This Committee of Representatives, after a whole year's time for consideration of the difficulties which were the weighty subject of their appointment, were not able to agree on any measure, except to report to the next Yearly Meeting, that " the way did not open to 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 225 recommend the resumption of our correspondence with other Yearly Meetings at the present time." Thus did Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, in order to avoid a separation threatened by those who had adopted the new principles, weakly drift away, not only from any epistolary correspondence with the "smaller bodies" of New England, New York, and Maryland, but also from the "larger body" of Ohio, which professed to be up- holding the ancient doctrines, and whose position the clerk had sanctioned by his presence and co-operation at the time of the separation. It has seemed to be right to relate these circumstances somewhat in detail, that a clear understanding may be had of the entangled con- dition of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting at this time, and of the gradually increasing weight of unsoundness pressing upon it, under which it eventually gave way, and yielded to the temporizing measures of the middle party. vol. ii. — 20 226 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. CHAPTER XIII. THE SEPARATION IN IOWA, AND THE MISCHIEF EFFECTED THERE BY THE MIDDLE PARTY. We have already seen that Indiana Yearly Meeting, as a body, promptly avowed its fellowship with the " Larger Body," or Gurney Meeting of New England, soon after the occurrence of the separation there in 1845. Since that time, constant efforts had been made to shut out from the members of that very large Yearly Meet- ing the means of obtaining correct information relative to the true causes of the schism. But a small portion of the members residing in Iowa, in and near Cedar County, who had gone thither within a few years from other parts of the Society, and who liad already more or less of a correct understanding of the circumstances in which the Society was now placed, were disposed to ad- .here to the ancient faith, and to own fellowship with those who were suffering in New England and elsewhere for their testimony to that ancient faith. In the spring of 1853, a minister from Ohio settled in that vicinity, who had, some years before, expressed publicly in Ohio Yearly Meeting his unity with the " Smaller Body " of New England ; and although, after his removal into Iowa, he kept himself very quiet on- the subject, yet this expression had been treasured up against him, and circulated about where he went, and it 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 227 was determined by some in assumed authority in Indiana Yearly Meeting (to which at that time Iowa was at- tached) to have him disowned. One of the members making a social visit at his house, entered freely into conversation with him on the affairs of the Society, and after a while inquired of him what he would do, in case a separation should occur in Ohio Yearly Meeting, on the ground of the New England difficulty. To this he replied that he should maintain the position he had taken, even if he should stand alone. This avowal was reported afterwards to the members of the Select Meeting, and was by them considered and treated as a declaration of disunity with Indiana Yearly Meeting. He was visited on the subject, as a delinquent, and though he was able to show them that what he had said was by no means what they charged him with, and was enabled to clear himself to such a degree that he did not know but that they had dropped the matter, yet some months afterwards they brought a charge against him into the Select Preparative Meeting of Red Cedar, without his being informed of the continuance of any uneasiness with him ; the tenor of which complaint was, that he had manifested disunity with the body of Friends. At Red Cedar Monthly Meeting, held in the sixth month, 1854, he mentioned the course which the Select Preparative Meeting was taking against him, and his own innocence in regard to the charge ; advising the members to endeavor to obtain a correct knowledge of the difficulties in the Society, and particularly mention- ing the Philadelphia " Appeal for the Ancient Doc- trines," and the " Report on the Division in New Eng- 228 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. land," as setting forth the matter, according to his apprehension, in its true light. This was probably looked upon as an aggravation of his offence; for at the next Preparative Meeting for discipline, held at Linn, of which he was a member, a complaint was brought against him by the Overseers, charging him with mani- festing disunity with the body of Friends, and owning fellowship with the Smaller Body in New England, whose meetings, they said, were set up contrary to the order and discipline of the Society. The subject being unexpected, the Preparative Meeting was not prepared at once to forward the complaint to the Monthly Meet- ing, or to take it on minute, but verbally referred it to a committee of four Friends, to investigate the cause of complaint and report to the next meeting. At the Preparative Meeting in the eighth month, this committee made the following report, viz. : " We have given close attention to the subject, have heard " the Overseers in all they alleged against him, and after con- " ferring together were united in judgment, that there is no "just cause for such complaint, or ground on which such " charge can be sustained. We find that he is firmly attached " to the principles, the doctrines, and testimonies of our So- " ciety, as upheld by Fox, Penn, Barclay, and others of our " standard writers, and closely united to all our members in "the different Yearly Meetings who are concerned to support "them. We therefore think it best and right to dismiss the " subject." This report being satisfactory to the meeting, the sub- ject was accordingly dismissed. Yet, notwithstanding this decision of the Preparative Meeting, that there was no just cause for the complaint, 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 229 the Overseers carried it to the next Monthly Meeting; thus arbitrarily assuming the power to set aside one of the very purposes for which Preparative Meetings were instituted, and showing that the attainment of a prede- termined purpose, and not justice or gospel order, was what they aimed at. In the Monthly Meeting, not- withstanding the disorderly manner in which the com- plaint was introduced, overstepping the rights both of the individual and of the Preparative Meeting, three members of a committee of the Yearly Meeting being present, undertook to approve of its reception, alleging that extraordinary cases required extraordinary treat- ment, and that sometimes it was needful, under peculiar circumstances, to step aside from the well-known and beaten track of the Discipline ! A few members of Red Cedar Monthly Meeting united with them in support of the complaint, yet the clearly expressed judgment of the meeting was against so irregular a proceeding; but the clerk, under the influence of the new views, and of the Yearly Meeting's committee, recorded the complaint and made a minute appointing a committee to treat with the friend thereon. At this juncture the reception of the name of any friend for the appointment, w ho was known to have sympathy for the individual, or was of his way of thinking, was openly objected to, and the committee was thus " packed " in accordance with the wishes of the instigators of these irregular proceedings. This minute appointing the committee was objected to by Friends, as not being an act of the meeting, or according to its judgment ; but the clerk retained it, and proceeded with other business. When the committee came to visit the friend, they 230 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. were asked by him, whether they were willing to hear the truth, and give due place to it ; to which they re- plied, " Oh, yes, certainly we are." He then declared that the charges brought against him were not correct, and asked them whether, in case he should prove to them that they were incorrect and false, they would inform the Monthly Meeting so? They answered promptly and decidedly, " No, we will not ; that is not our business ; we were appointed to find out thy disposition of mind, and not whether the charges are correct or not !" And one of them added, "We admit thee has been quiet in regard to the New England difficulty, but there is a heavy undercurrent running, which must be stopped !" At the next Monthly Meeting, the friend thus com- plained against was requested to withdraw, after the meeting was opened for business ; but several of the members, knowing that the case was before the meeting in a disorderly manner, objected to his withdrawal, under the consideration that if the meeting allowed him to withdraw, it would in effect give countenance to this irregular proceeding. They took the ground that the clearly expressed sense and judgment of the Monthly Meeting had been against the charge being placed on minute, and therefore they could not consent to his leaving the meeting.* The Friend, however, himself proposed to leave the meeting, after the clerk should have read the minute in his case, and the committee should have reported, in case their report did not exon- erate him, and propose the dismissal of the complaint ; * This is to be regretted, inasmuch as, whether irregularly introduced and pressed, or not, the complaint had been recorded on the minutes of the Monthly Meeting, and a committee appointed to visit him, which he had received. 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 231 for he was willing that the meeting should have an op- portunity to decide the matter in his absence, as usual. But while he waited for the meeting to decide upon this proposal, one in the station of a minister proposed that the meeting should adjourn. This was united with by one or two, and though objected to by several others, the clerk soon prepared a minute, and stated that he had it in readiness, if Friends could agree on a time and place to adjourn to. It being now manifest that he was deter- mined not to act in unison with the solid sense of the meeting, but to thwart it under the influence of a party, for a corrupt, and irregular, and oppressive purpose, those holding the ancient doctrines took the matter into their own hands, and before he finished his minute of adjournment, appointed another member to serve the meeting as clerk in his place. The new clerk soon read a minute, stating in a few words the disqualification of the former clerk, and his own appointment ; after which the former clerk read his minute of adjournment, and taking his books and papers, withdrew from the house, with a considerable portion of the members (several of whom had nevertheless opposed his minuting of the complaint), leaving the rest to transact the business of the Monthly Meeting in quietness.* In regard to this extraordinary transaction, it appears that the hasty adjournment of the meeting by the clerk and a few others, can have had only one object, to pro- voke a separation, and thereby obtain for themselves the power to accomplish their purpose of disowning the minister in question, who was not of their way of think- * " Exposition of Proceedings which led to a separation in Red Cedar Monthly and Salem Quarterly Meetings." Marion, Iowa, 1855; page 8, etc. 232 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. ing. Whether it was wise in those who opposed the clerk's disorderly course, to act so promptly as they did, or whether it would not have been better to have let the matter go on, with a prospect of appealing, is a question which may admit of some doubt. They knew that this whole transaction was instituted, as implied by one of the committee, to stop the "heavy undercurrent" of op- position to the unsound doctrines introduced into the Society ; and that Indiana Yearly Meeting having already identified itself with the promotion of these un- sound doctrines and practices, any appeal to it would assuredly only confirm the oppressive measures. They were fully persuaded from what had already occurred, and from the state of things in Indiana Yearly Meeting, that their case was hopeless of any favorable countenance from those who controlled the proceedings of that body; and they believed themselves imperatively called upon (re- gardless of the painful consecpienees that must ensue, and that would ensue indeed in either case, if they re- mained firm to their convictions), to endeavor to sustain the ancient principles and practices of the Society, and to testify against the promoters of these disorderly meas- ures, as seceders from the faith and discipline of Friends. The most questionable act, on their part, if it was really questionable, was the summary displacement of the clerk who so palpably abused his office, and appointment of a new one who would truly serve the meeting, instead of thwarting its judgment for party purposes. This was an extreme measure. Was it an unjustifiable one? According to the mere letter of the Discipline, perhaps it might be so considered. But we must remember that the clerk was manifestly and persistently acting, not for 1854.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 233 the meeting that appointed him, but for a party, which had the entire control of Indiana Yearly Meeting, and was now engaged in promoting a schism through the whole Society ; that this transaction on the part of the clerk was obviously a part of that schismatic course; and that those who dissented from it, were actuated by a conscientious conviction of its schismatic character, and a sense of the obligation which lay upon them to stand for the ancient faith. Hei*ein, it seems to the writer, rests their justification in acting so promptly (instead of waiting to displace the clerk in a more regular manner, which they certainly had a right to do), and not taking the usual course of an appeal, which in this case would have been to a body implicated already in the schism. The remaining steps of this separation, involving its extension to the Quarterly Meeting, may be told in a few words. Both the bodies claiming to be Red Cedar Monthly Meeting sent up reports and representatives to the Quarterly Meeting ; the report from the Gurney party including a proposal for the laying down of Linn Preparative Meeting, as insubordinate to the Monthly Meeting. A committee was appointed to examine both reports, who suggested to the Quarterly Meeting to read the one from the Gurney party. Friends of the ancient views urged that the Quarterly Meeting should itself examine into the merits of the case, saying that they were willing that the whole matter should be in- vestigated. The meeting appeared to be about to take that course, when a member of a committee of the Yearly Meeting to visit Salem Quarterly Meeting inter- fered, saying, " Take care, Friends, mind what you are about ; it may be you will get into difficulty." The 234 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. others, feeling confident that the matter was not under- stood, still urged that the meeting should not proceed without giving them a hearing. The Yearly Meeting's committee then proposed that the Linn Preparative Meeting might be laid down, and a committee should be appointed to visit lied Cedar Monthly Meeting. This was accordingly done. But this committee declined to attend any other than the Monthly Meeting of Red Cedar belonging to the Gurney party. They, however, appointed a conference, at which Friends of the other Meeting attended, and gave an account of the reasons which had induced their present position. This account, and the discussion which ensued, seem to have had some convincing effect ; for though one or two of the committee advised them to " return to the body," and " endeavor to right it, if it had erred yet another remarked, " If I understand this people aright, they regard themselves as the legiti- mate Monthly Meeting, and say they have peace of mind in the course they have pursued. Now, to what shall we urge them to return — to disorder and confu- sion ?" And another said, " No doubt but that the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings had acted too hasty." The committee, however, made no proposition to the next Quarterly Meeting, in the fifth month, for the re- lief of these Friends, and the Quarterly Meeting again refused to receive their representatives and report. They, therefore, quietly sat until the innovating party had finished its business, and then appointed a fresh clerk, held Salem Quarterly Meeting on the ground of the ancient principles of the Society, and adjourned to meet at the meeting-house at Red Cedar. 1855.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 235 For some time afterwards this company of Friends in Iowa, notwithstanding some sources of weakness, went on in a good degree of harmony and circumspection, and increased in numbers. They appeared to bid fair to take a satisfactory place among the remnants con- cerned to stand for the ancient faith, scattered in differ- ent portions of this land. Considerable additions to the Quarterly Meeting were experienced by immigration of Friends' families from Ohio, though this was not always an element of increase of strength. Salem Quarterly Meeting then contained the three Monthly Meetings of Red Cedar, Linn, and Hesper ; Linn Monthly Meeting having a branch at Prairie Ridge. Their position as fellow testimony-bearers in the Western country was hailed with satisfaction and comfort by the smaller bodies to the eastward, who trusted that a standard was now at length raised within Indiana Yearly Meeting, to which the honest-hearted might rally for the defence of the Truth. But, alas, the devices of the enemy of all righteousness are unceasing, and especially dangerous when they work in a mystery, assuming the appearance of good. If they who controlled the proceedings of Philadel- phia and Ohio Yearly Meetings had faithfully stood to the ground which they had at first taken, they would have been led, as a matter of plain and indispensable duty, to own fellowship with the Smaller Bodies in other places, and would thus have been eminently in- strumental to their encouragement and growth in the Truth ; and there is no reasonable ground for doubt that, under such circumstances, a large body of sound Friends might have been preserved and strengthened in the 236 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. faith, whose united testimony and example would have had a powerful influence over the Society at large, in checking, if not in frustrating to a great extent, the endeavors of the advocates of innovation. But instead of this, the course of those two Yearly Meetings, under the paralyzing influence of fear, and of the half-way system, tended greatly to the discouragement and dis- memberment of all the Smaller Bodies; and on some of the members of these, who were not deeply grounded in religious experience, the effects thereof were particularly disastrous. The " middle party" in Ohio perceived that not a few of their members were emigrating to Iowa, and likely to join the meetings of this small company there, rather than connect themselves with the Gurney party. They, therefore, set themselves to work, not merely to avoid strengthening the hands of this small body of Friends, but even to weaken and scatter them, by furnishing another method by which the emigrant families from Ohio might be organized into meetings, without joining those which the leaders of that party chose to consider as separate meetings. Some of those already members of Salem Quarterly Meeting were, besides, known to be more or less weak in the faith, and easily discouraged, and this device would be a trap into which they would readily fall, and thus diminish the unity as well as the numbers of those who should stand too firm to be taken by that bait. Accordingly, regard- less of the fact that Iowa was within the compass of Indiana Yearly Meeting (which Philadelphia still recog- nized by the interchange of certificates), and that a Quarterly Meeting of Friends sound in the faith had already been sustained there, they undertook to estab- I860.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 237 lish meetings of their own within its boundaries, to be considered as belonging at first to Stillwater Quarterly Meeting, Ohio, of which Benjamin Hoyle, the leader of the Ohio middle party, was a member. Among; those who had taken the stand above de- scribed in Salem Quarterly Meeting, there were some who were somewhat favorable already to the half-way system, and others too ready with self-active schemes for sustaining the cause in which they were engaged. On the establishment of meetings in their neighbor- hoods, owned and assisted by Ohio Yearly Meeting, these were easily enticed away from the isolated and comparatively unowned "smaller body;" or if not en- ticed entirely away, were more or less loosened from their moorings, and readily gave an ear to things tend- ing still further to alienate them. . Thus disunity and disintegration began to creep in, to the great danger of that "smaller body," as many of their members left them, to join what they thought were more regularly organized meetings. The more honest-hearted portion of the members, meanwhile, endeavored to struggle against the strong tide brought to bear upon them. But nearly all the members of Red Cedar Monthly Meeting going into the snare thus laid for them, left the others very few and weak. That Monthly Meeting was therefore laid down by Salem Quarter in 18G0, and the remaining members were attached to Linn Monthly Meeting; and the meeting at Prairie Ridge was like- wise laid down, all its members, except one family, having joined the new meetings set up by Ohio. Thus, the Quarterly Meeting was now sustained by only the 238 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIII. two small Monthly Meetings of Linn (without Prairie Ridge) and Hesper. If, however, the few that remained had continued single-eyed and watchful to the Lord their helper, they would doubtless have been strengthened to stand through all. But there were still some active members amono- them, not deeply grounded in the Truth, who let in a spirit of jealousy and bitterness against the rightly ex- ercised and honestly concerned ones ; thus causing dis- unity and weakness in the meetings; and not being founded on the Rock, and some others also depending too much on man, instead of looking with a single eye to their holy head, Christ Jesus, their vision was clouded, and they were not able to discern between the true and the false, the living and the dead child. So that when the additional difficulty, caused by the separation of the King party at Poplar Ridge, in 1859,* came upon them, the storm was too strong for them, as a body, to stand against, and in 18(31 they eventually gave in to a recog- nition of the plausible pretensions of the Xew York separatists under John King. This was in fact but another insidious form of the middle system, and they were thus swallowed up almost bodily by that vortex. One of these Friends has, in a letter to the writer of this work, acknowledged that after this they seemed to have no life left to enable them to conduct the affairs of the church, or even to worship aright, and that they groped their way along without comfort or unity among themselves. In the fifth month, 1862, a few of them, being convinced that they had done wrong in acknowl- * To be narrated in the next chapter. 1862.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 289 edging the King party, could not feel at liberty any longer to meet with thern. After many trials and difficulties, arising from their scattered condition, a few, residing near Viola, in Linn County, began to meet together for divine worship in one of their houses; and continuing to look to the Shep- herd of Israel, who folio wet h his lost sheep even into the wilderness, they were mercifully sustained, and gradually strengthened to look toward reunion with their Friends of the "smaller bodies" elsewhere, who had remained faithful to the testimonies of Truth. That worthy man, Ebenezer Austin, who had maintained his integrity, was taken away by death, and his family be- came scattered ; but the rest of those residing near Viola made application, in 1873, to the General Meeting for Pennsylvania, etc., for the extension of care over them, and they were accordingly received (though far distant and much isolated) as members of Salem Monthly Meeting, Ohio, one of the branches of that General Meeting. 240 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [oHAP. XIV. CHAPTER XIV. PROGRESS OF THE MIDDLE SYSTEM — ONE OF ITS FRUITS, THE " KING " SEPARATION IN NEW YORK ANOTHER, THE LOSS OF THE LAWSUIT IN OHIO. For several years, especially since the decease of the first editor in 1851, the weekly paper called "The Friend," published in Philadelphia, had been gradually but obviously sliding more and more into a support of the views and ways of the party of compromise, called for distinction the " middle party." That periodical had now several of the most active and influential leaders of that party very much controlling its course and the tenor of its columns. While the first editor was living, favorable allusions to the " Smaller Body" of New Eng- land, and statements of the occurrence of its Yearly Meetings, were at times inserted, for the satisfaction of those interested, or for information to other Friends that those meetings were still continued to be held. But soon after his decease came a gradual hushing up of the main subject of the controversy; comparative silence as to its essential features, as affecting the unity of the Society ; and at length a systematic rejection of all papers tending to advocate the position taken by the "smaller bodies" of New England, New York, or Maryland, or even mentioning their existence as meetings; while pieces were frequently published, reflecting on those who with- 1857.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 241 stood the temporizing system now prevalent in Phila- delphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings ; and any distinct allusion to the fundamental unsoundness of principle promoted by J. J. Gurney, and sanctioned by London Yearly Meeting, and by several Yearly Meetings on this continent, appeared to be cautiously avoided, or soft- ened down into occasional vague lamentations over the worldly-minded ness and inconsistency which had over- taken the Society. But, on the other hand, a carefulness appeared still to recognize these lapsed bodies as meetings 'of Friends; their members being frequently spoken of as such, while those small remnants that were endeavoring (through much obloquy and false accusation) to stand for the ancient cause, were ignored, as if their existence were no longer worth mentioning. Many Friends had seen and sorrowfully felt this tend- ency in the paper ; and various endeavors had been made by some among the managers or " contributors," and by others from without, to arouse those concerned to a due appreciation of the need of taking a more distinct and firm stand against the fearful innovations, and in sup- port of those Friends who were engaged in a conscien- tious concern and endeavor to maintain the ancient faith. But this was without avail. In the summer of 1857, the feeling that some change ought to take place, for the security and welfare of the Society, became so prevalent with many Friends, chiefly in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, and New York, that it resulted in the sending of a Remonstrance to the "Contributors" against the lapsed course of the paper. The substance of this Remonstrance was as follows: VOL. II. — 21 242 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. " Esteemed Friends : We respectfully request your serious attention to the following brief statement of our sentiments in regard to the position occupied of late years by the paper under your control, called 'The Friend,' in respect to the sorrowful state of things now existing in our Religious So- ciety ; and we earnestly desire your prompt and effective action in accordance with the views herewith presented. "The original intention of Friends in promoting the estab- lishment of the paper, was to furnish a vehicle for the de- fence of the Truth against the assaults and misrepresenta- tions of gainsayers, whether backsliders professing to be Friends, or others who never were of us ; and likewise for the conveyance of correct information of facts calculated to' affect the interests and welfare of the Society. In the Pros- pectus (Vol. I, page 1), is the following language: ' Nor ' shall we shrink, when we think the cause of justice requires ' it, from the free examination of the public conduct of individ- ' lads, and a defence of the course pursued by Friends, where l we believe it to be misrepresented, and calumniated,'' etc. A similar intention and aim, we think, prevailed among those who conducted the paper, in the early stages of our present troubles "With such views, Friends throughout the Society were con- stantly encouraged to stand their ground against the en- croachments of the innovating spirit which has made such devastation within the camp. But for a considerable time past we have been greatly disappointed in finding a course taken by the paper, which seems like abandoning the origi- nal intent and ground, leaving the defence of the truth in great measure unattempted, numerous attacks of its oppo- nents not exposed or repelled, or even noticed, and correct information of important and deeply interesting circum- stances, entirely withheld. It is notorious that frequent publications have been issued and widely spread within the last two or three years, which are calculated to give to the inexperienced and to the youth, very erroneous views in re- gard to the cause and nature of the difficulties now distract- ing the Society, and have proved a great stumbling-block 1857.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 243 "in their way ; and yet but little attempt has appeared in " ' The Friend^ to counteract their delusive teudency and "effects, or even to warn Friends against them. It is also " known that accounts of the proceedings of sound Friends " in the remnants of Yearly Meetings preserved from the "general defection, have been entirely refused admission into "the paper. To such a degree has information of this kind "been withheld, that Friends ignorant of the circumstances '• would uot be able to gather from the columns of 1 TheFru in',' "any knowledge of the existence, at this day, of yearly or "other meetings of Friends in various parts, endeavoring to " stand firm in their testimony for the Truth and against error, "and clear of the desolating spirit which has carried such "multitudes into disunity with the true Society of Friends. " Besides this, there have been from time to time published "in the paper, essays reflecting darkly, by implication, on "sound Friends, as if they were transgressors of the Disci- " pline, and out of true order in their movements, insinuating "if not actually charging them with ' unsanctitied zeal,' etc. ; "yet in so vague and geueral a manner — without proof or " specification — as to evade being called to account, or having " such insinuations disproved. These invectives still continue "to be at times published, sometimes with open charges of a "wrong spirit against a certain class, not named, but aimed "at in such a manner as to make it obvious what class was "intended ; and sometimes by extracts from ancient Friends' "writings with certain passages italicized, in order to convey " the same charge in a covert way "Yet it has been well understood, that no replies to such "invectives woidd obtain the editorial sanction, or be per- " miffed to appear. Such articles, and such a course of the " paper, are well calculated to bewilder the minds of our " youth, and lead them to fear that genuine Quakerism has " become extinct — that there is in reality no Society of Friends " now to be found in a consistent maintenance of our original " principles and practices ; whereas they might have been in- structed that, although greatly scattered and peeled, yet a " large number of Friends (in the aggregate) is still preserved, 244 THE SOCIETY QF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. " whose concern is to maintain the ancient standard of faith "and practice unchanged, and who will doubtless be sus- ' ' tained by the great Head of the church, in their earnest en- " deavors to serve Him. At the same time, these honest and "faithful, but down-trodden and defamed ones might have "been encouraged and strengthened to stand steadfastly " through all, on the alone sure foundation. It is also under- stood, that the dissatisfaction of Friends with the above- ' ' described course of the paper is not unknown to the ' Con- " tributors,' but that it has hitherto failed to elicit from them "any efficient action to remedy the evil. "Under these circumstances, it is the painful conviction of "many Friends, that ' The Friend,' as at present conducted, "has failed to answer the design of its publication, or to fulfil " the wants and needs of the Society and the just expectations "of Friends; and that unless a very decided and speedy "change takes place, a large number of its subscribers will " withdraw their support from the paper. Still, as many "Friends feel the need at present existing, of having some " channel through which the cause of Truth may be defended, " and for the spread of correct information of facts, we may "acknowledge a preference that this vehicle may again be " ' The Friend,' "We therefore respectfully and earnestly request that "prompt measures may be taken to carry out the necessary "change in the course of the paper, and that such evidence " may be given of your intention to make ' The Friend" 1 con- formable to the needs of the present crisis, that it may be " unnecessary for Friends to resort to other means for their "relief. " We are respectfully your friends." The above document was signed by nearly two hun- dred of the subscribers and readers of The Friend; many of them ministers, elders, overseers, or other deeply concerned and consistent members. But when presented for the consideration of those to whom it was addressed, 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 245 it was treated in a slighting manner, as if it were the production of disaffected persons ; and no satisfaction was given, nor any perceptible change made in the course of the paper. Some allusion to this transaction has appeared to be necessary here, inasmuch as that periodical became a very effective instrument in fastening the mischievous system of the "middle party" on the Society, especially within the Yearly Meetings of Pennsylvania and Ohio. In the year 1858, Morris Cope, a minister residing in Chester County, Pennsylvania, published a pamphlet entitled " Av&hentic Extracts" etc., designed to show the utter incongruity of the new system, in doctrine, prac- tice, and discipline, with what Friends had ever before been accustomed to recognize as compatible with their profession, and the great necessity of firmly withstand- ing its inroads. This pamphlet was published with the printed sanction of thirteen Friends residing in or about the same vicinity, viz.: David Cope, Samuel Cope, Moses Bailey, William N. Scarlet, Solomon Lukens, Joseph Chambers, William Walter, Joshua Sharplcss, Levi Wickersham, Daniel Thompson, Abiah Cope, Ben- jamin Maule, and Joshua B. Pusey ; whose sentiments, at that time, it may fairly be supposed, were represented in the work. Its strictures were very sharp against the Gurney sys- tem, taking the ground that it was fully as " derogatory " from the true principles of Quakerism, as the system of Elias Hicks. Respecting the New England question, it took a clear and decided position in favor of the " Smaller Body/' saying (p. 25): " If those Friends who compose the ' Smaller Body ' continue " to be 'entitled to the rights of membership, and to such ac- 246 THE SOCIETV OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. " ' knowledgment by their brethren as may be necessary for " ' securing the enjoyment of those rights,' certainly they have "not seceded from the Society; and if so, do they not still " continue to hold New England Yearly Meeting as a superior, "in unity with, and to which the true Quarterly Meeting of "Rhode Island, and Monthly Meeting of Swanzey, are sub- " ordinate and constituent branches? That the precedent "would not be safe to be followed in the organization of a " (new) Yearly Meeting, does not appear to apply to the sus- " taining of a Yearly Meeting on its original organization or "ground ; and particularly so, when the maintenance of the "doctrines and discipline of the Society are acknowledged to "have been the alone ground of action. Does it not follow, " that if there is but one true Monthly Meeting of Swanzey, "and that, of the 'Smaller Body,' that as certainly, there can "be but one true Yearly Meeting of New England ; and can "that be in unity with the separate Monthly Meeting ot " Swanzey ?" Equally decided was its language in relation to the position of the "Smaller Body" of Baltimore Yearly Meeting in the separation of 1854; showing that the same principles of decision ought to be the criterion in this case, that were the ground of judgment respecting the separation of the Hicksites in Baltimore Yearly Meeting in 1828 ; the ground of decision then being not one founded on the relative numbers, or the identity of clerks, but on adherence to the original sound doctrines of the Society. In reference to the increasing tendency of many in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting to give way to weakness and indecision, this pamphlet says (p. 27): "Then upon what ground (with any degree of consistency) "can Philadelphia Yearly Meeting relax, in carrying out its " testimony against the fruits resulting from either the adop- " tion or encouragement of J. J. Gurney's sentiments ?" 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 247 And in conclusion (p. 31) : " If in those [primitive] days there was ' no concord between "light and darkness,' between truth and error, why should "there now be? Has the foundation been changed? Or "does there still remain but the Rock and the sand, to build "upon? Should any assume a medium ground, whereon to "erect a structure ? Was it not so with the church of the " Laodiceans ? To whom this language was addressed : ' I " ' know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot. I " 'would thou wert cold or hot. So then, because thou art " ' lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of " 'my mouth !' " But this pamphlet, and others issued before and after it, had no more effect in changing the course of those who controlled the Yearly Meeting, than the Remon- strance of 1857 to the "Contributors" of The Friend had towards inducing a change in the course of that periodical. It might have been less needful to make so frequent and prominent allusion here to the compromising or middle party of Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meet- ings, were it not for the fixed persuasion, that on the heads of that party rested an awful responsibility, for the weakness that so rapidly increased in the hitherto sound portion of the members there, since the year 1846, and which soon spread its paralyzing influence elsewhere. Would that the truthfulness of history had not required it. But its development was and is an essential requi- site, both as to the past and what we have yet to con- template. We have seen some of the internal results of this spirit — truly a Laodicean spirit — tending to a prac- tical nullification of the standard which had begun to be 2 18 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. raised by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting against the inno- vations of the Gurney system. We shall now have to consider the mischievous effects which ensued elsewhere, from its course of discouraging and discountenancing, year after year, even those "Smaller Bodies" which had been fostered and encouraged in the stand they had taken for the Truth, by the open and clear testimonies against the innovations in doctrine, at first borne by Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings ; but whose isolated position may be truly traced to their faithfulness to the testimonies then so ably advocated by those Yearly Meetings. It might indeed be said of those two bodies: I have nourished and brought up children, and then cast them adrift before the enemy ! And the assertion is a very safe one, that but for the betrayal of the cause on the part of the leaders of the middle system in Phila- delphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings, the "divisions and subdivisions" which were made so much of by them as a reproach against the Smaller Bodies, would in all probability never have occurred; but a large body of Friends might have been preserved, to bear a clear and clean and efficacious testimony against the modern sys- tem of doctrine and practice. Under the plausible representations of that compro- mising system, it is a sorrowful fact, and one of the sad- dest pages in the history of our Society, that many within those Yearly Meetings, who had appeared indeed valiant for the Truth for some years, eventually gave way, and thought that nothing more could be done than to submit to the half-way temporizing measures presented, in the vain hope of a conciliation of elements essentially an- tagonistic. And when once they thus submitted, their 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 249 strength was gone. Thus the course of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting was for the future neutralized, and its former noble testimonies rendered of no practical efficacy (except as monuments of what it once was), by the deter- mination adopted, to keep all together, and at all hazards to prevent a separation of the Gurney or popular party. Can we then wonder, that such a change in its course, so unexpected, and so unwarranted by its former faith- fulness in the advocacy of the Truth, should have had a powerfully discouraging influence upon the small rem- nants of Yearly Meetings, which had hopefully looked, in their weak condition, for support and fellowship from Ohio and Pennsylvania? Those small companies could not reasonably be supposed to be exclusively composed of such as were truly baptized for the work of suffering all things for the Truth and its testimonies, and " en- during hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ." They had of course among them members of a considerable variety of degrees of experience and strength ; and the sense that after awhile came over them, that they were likely to be left to themselves, and not owned by those to whom they had almost looked up as fathers, fell like a storm upon many, against which they were not rooted deep enough to stand steadily ; and some of these gave way to an idea that the views of those controlling Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings must be met, as far as practicable; for that it would not do to be too stiff in a course which would certainly alienate those important bodies of Friends entirely from them. Then came weakness. Human reasoning usurped, with some, the place of a patient waiting on Divine Wis- dom ; and the proceedings of their small gatherings for vol. ii. — 22 250 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. the affairs of the church, which before had been charac- terized by great sweetness and harmony, began to be interfered with by unsettled and contentious spirits — the very tools for forcibly verifying the predictions of the "middle party," that the "smaller bodies" would fall to pieces. It is on this account, and because the result- ing " divisions and subdivisions" have been greatly mis- understood and grossly misrepresented, that it seems important to spend some time in endeavoring to develop their real nature, and to trace the responsibility to its true source in the spirit of temporizing which had taken pos- session of Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings. The disastrous effects produced by this spirit, outside of the limits of those two Yearly Meetings, first became apparent in the company of Friends holding New York Yearly Meeting (Smaller Body) at Poplar Ridge, in Cayuga County. This Yearly Meeting was then com- posed of remnants of the Quarterly Meetings of Scipio, Farmington, and Ferrisburgh, with a very few members in Canada, who were attached to Farmington Quarter. One of their valuable members was Job Otis, formerly of New Bedford, who had removed with his family to the neighborhood of Scipio, in 1833. His account of incipient Hicksism in New England about 1822, we have already alluded to in the first volume. True to the ancient faith, he and his wife, while residing at New Bedford, had taken very decided ground against the attempts of William Almy and other influential mem- bers, about the year 1830, to introduce some of the mod- ern views and ways promoted in the writings of J. J. Gurncy, but little known at that time on this side of the Atlantic. By their firm testimony against the spirit 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 251 then threatening the welfare of the Society in New Eng- land, some check was perhaps put to its inroads for the time; but they brought upon themselves much obloquy and enmity, and the standing of some of their opponents was such as enabled them to circulate widely abroad prejudices against Job Otis, and charges of inordinate zeal, which continued to assail him as long as he lived, fanned of late years by the known antipathy to him of certain leading men in Philadelphia, who were sensible that they could derive no help from him to their tem- porizing policy and schemes. lie was ardent in his feelings, and bold in the expression of them, and the prejudice against him had spread to his new place of abode, and worked among some who were already lean- ing toward the middle system, and looking to Phila- delphia for help. This feeling may perhaps also have been more or less partaken of by some others, both there and previously in New England, of honest intentions, but who saw not as yet, so clearly and promptly as he did, "the depths of Satan" in the incipient departures and practical unsoundness, and therefore were not pre- pared entirely to approve of his zeal and uncompro- mising earnestness. Some of these, however, are well understood to have had good unity with him at a sub- sequent period, when the innovations had become more openly developed. The result of this opposition to him was, that although he was better qualified for usefulness than many others among them at that crisis, yet care was taken to prevent him, and some united in sentiment with him, from be- ing appointed to important services or stations in that Yearly Meeting. Thus, that small body of Friends 252 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. suffered the loss of some instrumental help in these respects, and there seemed to be an increasing danger of drifting into the course of the middle system. After the decease of Job Otis, which occurred in 1856, the antipathy of the disaffected ones against him settled upon those who were concerned, as ability was afforded, to follow his example and walk in his footsteps. Jeal- ousies arose against certain Friends, with a determina- tion not to be ruled by them ; and party spirit soon eat- ing out the good and tender plant which some of them had once known springing up in their hearts, they ap- peared regardless both of the injury to their own souls and the reproach that would be brought upon the cause they were engaged in, by their contentions. They made high professions of being subject to the Holy Spirit; yet it was evident that many of them were very unwatchful against the enemy's insidious presentations ; and the prominent ones too much actuated by exalted notions of their own righteousness, and a corresponding desire to have and keep the control of affairs. The sequel showed that they (like the middle party elsewhere) were dis- posed to disregard or pervert the plain requisitions of the Discipline, in order to carry their own measures. The manuscript Journal of that faithful servant of Christ, Joseph Hoag, having been carefully left by him to the care of Friends sound in the faith, and being pro- posed for publication, furnished a handle for this con- tentious spirit to take hold of. The papers, after being for some time in the hands of a committee of their Meeting for Sufferings, were sent by them to a friend in Philadelphia, for his care in revising them, and pre- paring them for being put to the press. He had full 1857.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 253 liberty to exercise his judgment in regard to what should be proposed to be curtailed, and what retained, as the manuscript was seen to be somewhat unnecessarily volu- minous for publication. In the course of the revision, he found a passage relative to the troubles about New Bedford of 1831,* which appeared to him not to have been written with Joseph Hoag's wonted clearness from external bias, but seemed to indicate that his mind might just then have been influenced by one-sided in- formation, received from some with whom he was then mingling socially, to take an erroneous view of the state of the case, and, under this view, to write in a manner calculated to lead his readers to suppose that certain members, not named (but evidently including such as Job Otis and his wife), had been disposed to "drive furiously " with a "false zeal." It appeared to the friend having the revision in charge, that this worthy man had not understood, at the time, the efforts then making to introduce some of the very same views and ways that have since characterized the Gurney sys- tem, views which he faithfully withstood when fully developed at a subsequent period. It did not seem desirable therefore, in justice to Joseph Hoag's memory, or with a due regard to the position conscientiously taken by Job Otis and others at that juncture, to per- petuate the passage, and it was accordingly proposed to be omitted. But, when the papers were returned to Seipio, the erasure of this passage was soon noticed, and gave great umbrage to the disaffected party, who were much dis- * For some allusion to which, see page 250. 254 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. appointed at not being sustained in their hope of retain- ing -what they looked upon as a confirmation of their sentiments in regard to Job Otis. They were by no means satisfied that it should be omitted. Angry letters were sent to the friend in Philadelphia, and much stir was made about it. Job Otis had meantime been taken away by death, but this made no difference with them in regard to the passage in question. So determined were they to have it restored, that it was found best to suspend the whole matter, and the work was not pub- lished till after the separation of the malcontents from Friends in the year 1859. The disaffection began to manifest itself openly in 1857, and from that time, till it culminated in a separa- tion in the Yearly Meeting in 1859, it gave sore trouble and exercise to the honest-hearted, who were endeavor- ing to wade through their difficulties and maintain the faith and discipline of the Society, trusting in the pro- tection of the Head of the church, and relying upon the incomes of heavenly instruction graciously vouchsafed to them at times in their great need. The efforts of the disaffected party soon took the form of opposition to the right administration of the discipline in treating with offenders, and many unfounded and frivolous allegations were made against those concerned to sustain it. A female minister had, on one or two occasions, made use of a somewhat ambiguous mode of expression. This they took hold of to her disadvantage, and attempted to make her "an offender for a word;" and although she manifested her innocence of any unsound or even de- fective view of doctrine in what she had said, yet they succeeded in preventing her from being liberated by the 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 255 Monthly Meeting soon afterwards, for the accomplish- ment of a concern which she opened to it, under a feel- ing of religious duty, to attend Baltimore Yearly Meet- ing to be held at Nottingham. They also took occasion to make her case an exception in answering the Queries in the Select Preparative Meeting. Two cases occurred in 1858, which still more strongly developed the party spirit, and which indeed furnished, as it were, the pivot on which the disorderly acts which led to the separation turned. It would be very unprofit- able to follow up all the details of these cases, or to go into all the frivolous things which the party brought forward to help them to frustrate the regular course of the discipline. Suffice it to say that two female friends, caught by this party spirit, were successively visited by the overseers on account of defamation of the character of one of their fellow-members. The Discipline of that Yearly Meeting is very clear in its injunction that per- sons guilty of defamation and detraction must be faith- fully dealt with to convince them of their error, and if the efforts of Friends are not successful, they must be disowned. In these cases repeated obstacles were thrown in the way, first, against their being reclaimed, by en- couraging them to hold to their position, and then against every step taken by the overseers and the Preparative and Monthly Meetings in the further treatment of them respectively. After considerable forbearance and patient labor with them, receiving no satisfaction, Scipio Monthly Meeting disowned each of them. The individuals de- clined to recognize the acts of the Monthly Meeting, but nevertheless would take no steps to have their regularity tested by the authorized method, an appeal to the Quar- 256 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. terry, and then, if needful, to the Yearly Meeting. The propriety and necessity of an appeal in these cases was very different from what was apparent in the case of the separation in Iowa (see page 232). Here there was every prospect of a favorable hearing of such appeals. One of their own party was the clerk of the Yearly Meeting, and might probably have continued so, at least during the next year or two, had he not joined in these disorderly measures. The clerk of the Quarterly Meet- ing also was favorable to them. But in Indiana Yearly Meeting the whole body, as such, had already committed itself by joining the separatists, and therefore an appeal to it, even if successful, would have been an acknowl- edgment of it in its schismatic position. One of these females defied the action of the Monthly Meeting, and set at naught the order of the Society, by persisting in keeping her seat in the meeting for disci- pline while she was under dealing ; and was encouraged in this disorder by prominent individuals of the disaf- fected class. The overseers consequently felt it to be their duty to extend labor to some of those who had thus encouraged her in conduct so contrary to the Dis- cipline. Throughout these transactions the dissentients com- plained bitterly of supposed grievances, and afterwards put some of their complaints in print, to their own dis- advantage in the exposure of the weakness of their po- sition. Such of their allegations as were of any appar- ent force were explained or refuted by Friends ; and on examination they appear indeed exceedingly weak. Most of what they considered grievances, such as the rejection of their voices in meetings for discipline after 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 257 they had joined in these disorderly acts, were, in the true course of gospel order and church government, the unavoidable results of their contumacious course, which placed them in the attitude of defying the well-known usages and regulations of the Society. And their desire and attempts to embroil the superior meetings, in an irregular manner, with their supposed grievances, with- out having recourse to the methods prescribed by the Discipline, furnished another instance of their disposi- tion to carry things in a high-handed manner in their own way. In saying this, it is not intended to assert that there were no mistakes made, in this time of uncommon and constantly pressing trials, by those who were endeavor- ing to the best of their ability to sustain the correct line of gospel order. Undoubtedly there occurred some errors of judgment, which furnished a handle to the dis- advantage of Friends. Yet these were all minor mis- takes, made perhaps through inexperience, in a zeal for the truth, and by no means vitiating the main issue. For there was a great right and a great wrong which ran through all these transactions; and the candid mind of the true disciple, who should take the pains to wade through the mass of details in the printed statements, with his inward eye directed to the light of Truth, would probably not find much difficulty in deciding on which side respectively the right and the wrong lay.* * For detailed information on the subject, the reader might refer to an Ad- dress from New York Yearly Meeting of Friends [King party], 18">9 ; also, Some Tilings set forth for the Clearing of Truth, by way of reply to the former, Auburn, 1K.">!) ; An Exposition, etc., by the King party In support of their Ad- dress, Auburn, 18.111; and Some further Remarks for the Clearing of Truth, in reply to the Exposition, Auburn, 1860. 258 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. The leaders of these disorders, seeing that they were now coming under the care of the overseers as offenders against the discipline, began to take measures for a separation. After objecting to the appointment of a fresh overseer of the men's meeting, and to the reap- pointment of overseers in the women's, both of which measures appear to have been entirely regular, and le- gitimately effected, and also opposing the reappointment of the clerk of Scipio Monthly Meeting, one of them, at the ensuing Monthly Meeting in the second month, 1859, renewed the expression of their objections to the clerk, alleging that he had declined to take the names of their friends when proposed on appointments, on the ground of disorder; and on the same ground had refused to recognize their sentiments when offered ; that he had ignored their services in the Society; and had refused to permit any application for advice or assistance to be made to the superior meetings. On these accounts he proposed the appointment of another clerk, who would comply with their desires. In regard to this charge of the clerk having rejected certain names on appoint- ments, it may be mentioned that this was after it had been expressed by other friends that it would not be consistent with the Discipline to take the names of such as had acted disorderly. And as to the bringing of these matters before the superior meetings, it was well known that there was a plain course of procedure marked out in the Discipline, for cases of supposed individual griev- ance, which was the privilege of appeal ; to say nothing of the defective Answers to the Queries, which would be a means whereby the superior meetings could take measures for ascertaining the truth, and eventually for 1859.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 259 endeavoring in a legitimate manner to remedy the dis- orders that existed. But the dissentients wanted some- thing more summary, and would not avail themselves of either of these regular modes for relief. An individual was then nominated to serve them as clerk instead of the one reappointed the previous month, and who was now acting; and after waiting until the business was finished and the meeting concluded, they continued in the house, and went on with their separate Monthly Meeting with their newly appointed clerk. John King, the clerk of the last Yearly Meeting, was one of this disorderly company, and acted as its clerk. Thus recklessly was a separation effected from the Monthly Meeting of Scipio, by a party apparently utterly regardless of the reproach thereby brought upon the cause of truth. They certainly had no just ground for such a course, and those whom they opposed were endeavoring to sustain the gospel order of the church to the best of their ability. Scipio Quarterly Meeting had a clerk favorable to the dissentients. He therefore declined to recognize the report and representatives sent up to the Quarter from the regular Monthly Meeting of Scipio ; but placing both reports as doubtful, made a minute referring the case to the Yearly Meeting. Friends urged the incon- sistency of this course, giving countenance as it did to proceedings so disorderly as had characterized the meas- ures of the Separatists, but without avail. They, there- fore, felt themselves under a necessity to sustain the Quarterly Meeting in connection with the true order of the Discipline, by appointing a new clerk. Thus was a separation brought about also in Scipio Quarterly Meet- 260 THE SOCIETY OF FRIEXDS IN [CHAP. XIV. ing, merely on points of discipline, but actuated by a deep root of bitterness and jealousy on one part, alto- gether unworthy of our religious profession, notwith- standing the high and illusory pretensions of those who originated it. The Yearly Meeting assembled in usual course, in the fifth month, at the meeting-house on Poplar Ridge. John King, who had been clerk the foregoing year, went to the table to act in that capacity as usual for the first sitting:. But as he had fullv identified himself with all those disorderly measures, and been indeed a prominent leader in them, and teas noic under dealing on that ac- count, it was obviously unfit for him to act, and Friends could do no other than object to his assuming the posi- tion, even for opening the meeting. It was therefore mentioned that the previous clerk had disqualified him- self for acting in that capacity, and James D. Otis was named to open the Yearly Meeting for business in his stead. Several friends united with this nomination, but a number of the Separatists and a few members of Farmington Quarterly Meeting objected. After some time, however, James D. Otis was again requested to go to the table and open the meeting ; and no other friend being named for it, he did so. After various remarks had been made, Mead Attwater, a minister from Farm- ington Quarter, avowed his willingness " to acknowledge the meeting as now opened." But he then proceeded to propose a very singular measure, being no less than the suspending of the Yearly Meeting, in order to go into an investigation of the situation of subordinate meetings ! Such a proposal was somewhat similar to one made by 1859.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 201 John Comly for the Hieksites, in the troubles of 1827,* and was at best entirely premature and out of order, as the names of the representatives had not been called over, nor the reports from the Quarterly Meetings read, and therefore the Yearly Meeting was not yet duly consti- tuted for transacting business or taking any regular action. And if so suspended, how could they in that condition have undertaken any regular business? It was now stated that a person was present who had been disowned, and two who were under dealing, and they were requested to withdraw, that the meeting might be select and able to proceed with its business, and then, at a suitable time, Friends might go into an investiga- tion. But the parties so obviously intruding on the rights of the Yearly Meeting, by attending its sittings when disqualified by the plain rules of Discipline, though repeatedly requested, were not willing to with- draw. Mead Attwater continued to press his propo- sition to suspend the Yearly Meeting and go into an investigation, and several others promoted it. Friends again requested those who were disqualified from at- tendance to leave the meeting, so that they might pro- ceed to business, and then, at a suitable time, the subject of difficulty might claim attention. But these requests being all unavailing, it was at length proposed, as the only way left for making the meeting free from irregular intrusion, to adjourn until 3 o'clock ; which being ap- proved, the meeting adjourned accordingly, and after- wards proceeded with its business in the regular manner. As might have been expected, the Separatists remained, • Vol. i, p. 156. 262 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. and professed to hold the Yearly Meeting, with John King as clerk. It soon appeared that their affinities were with the half-way or "middle" party of Philadelphia; but this sorrowful occurrence was the occasion of much reproach on the cause of truth. The middle party exulted in it, as an evidence of the truth of their great dogma, that " separations were no remedy," tending, as they said it was evident they did, to reproduce themselves — "di- vision and subdivision" — and the contemptuous cry of the party thenceforth was, " Look at Poplar Ridge ! " But if perfect candor and uprightness had been their governing motive, they might have seen that this sep- aration at Poplar Ridge was a result for which they were themselves accountable in great measure, in dis- couraging and scattering weak brethren by their half- way course. It was but the completion of what had been somewhat imperfectly effected in the year 1848 ; one of those " siftings as from sieve to sieve," so often foretold. For many of these separatists had never been truly and fully prepared, by deep baptism of spirit and a thorough submission to the cross of Christ, for the position in which they had, through more or less super- ficial motives, been carried along with the others for a time. They were, in short, of too shallow root to en- dure the storm of a full consciousness that they must either be content to abide with a despised few, " every- where spoken against," and lose their hold on Phila- delphia, or so shape their measures as to please the middle party there, from whom they vainly hoped for recognition. Although, since the time of their secession, as above, 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 263 this company has remained entirely isolated, and become much reduced in numbers, yet they still continue, in 1875, to hold meetings for worship in two places, and a half-yearly meeting for discipline. The separation from Ohio Yearly Meeting, narrated in the twelfth chapter, gave rise to a suit at law, insti- tuted by the Binns party, which, not occurring till sev- eral years after the division, may be alluded to here. The result might have been easily anticipated, from the weakness of the course taken by the defendants (or mid- dle party), who ought (if they entered such a contest at all) to have stood openly and firmly in testimony against the introduction of unsound doctrines, which at least some of them well knew to have caused the separation. But evading as they did, by a cowardly compliance with the opposite party, that great characteristic feature of the whole secession (which may be said to have mainly gained the cause for Friends in the famous Hicksian suit in New Jersey), and instead of this, confining them- selves to matters of technical order, and easily made debatable, they were quite as much to be blamed as pitied when they lost their case, however erroneous the judgment of the Court. In the year 1868, the original Gurney party in Ohio, who had separated, in 1854, as the "Binns" Yearly Meeting, from the Yearly Meeting of which Benjamin Hoyle was clerk, entered suit against those of the latter, to recover, or rather to obtain, possession of the board- ing-school property of Ohio Yearly Meeting, situated at Mount Pleasant. The case was commenced in the Dis- trict Court of Common Pleas of Jefferson County, at Stcubenville, and directed by that Court up to the 2G4 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. Supreme Court of the State, as involving important and difficult questions of law. A considerable number of witnesses were examined on both sides, and their evi- dence reduced to writing and subsequently printed. But the subject of diversity of doctrines — the main life of the Avhole matter, and without which the controversy dwindles to the low position of a mere party dispute about clerks, unworthy of sincere Christians, and espe- cially reproachful to the character of the Society of Friends — was, by common consent, as appears by the evidence and by the pleadings of the counsel, carefully excluded. If the defendants (Benjamin Hoyle and others) had not belonged to the " middle party," which has done so much mischief to the cause of Truth by wrapping up the very ground of the trouble, even at the most critical times, and under the most critical cir- cumstances, this exclusion could scarcely have happened. Benjamin Hoyle, of Ohio, and Charles Evans, the editor of the Philadelphia " Friend," were among the principal witnesses for this party, and some of their testimony is remarkable indeed, showing the pitiable evasions and contradictions, and the flat formality to which they were compelled to resort by their eflbrts to avoid the vital question of doctrines. The main portion of the evidence related to small points of fact and order, at the time of the conflict re- specting clerks ; as if that question, in itself and of itself, could have been of sufficient importance (with nothing to base it upon but these points of order) to warrant such a schism in any professedly Christian church. Some of the testimony, however, was worthy of note, showing 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 265 the flimsy character of the evidence on which they based their case. George K. Jenkins, on the part of the plaintiffs, is re- corded as declaring, in reference to what occurred during the Yearly Meeting, "My conscience has nothing to do with this epiestion;" and he designated a connection of Ohio Yearly Meeting with the troubles in New England, as " getting into a broil with regard to some difficulty away off'." William J. Harrison, another of the plaintiffs' wit- nesses, stated the numbers of those attached to theBinns Yearly Meeting as 2100 at that time, including the Quarterly Meeting of Alum Creek, transferred to it by Indiana Yearly Meeting. He also stated the numbers in the last-named Yearly Meeting to be about 14,000, Western about 12,000, and Iowa from 10 to 14,000; but what authority he had for these numbers does not appear. William S. Bates, who had left the Society altogether soon after the separation, was much clearer in his state- ments respecting the usages of the Society, and partic- ularly as to the mutual connection and responsibility of Yearly Meetings, than any other of the plaintiffs' wit- nesses. He distinctly recognized the truth, that a Yearly Meeting, departing from the faith and fundamental doc- trines of the Society, "ceased to be Friends, of course," and that such departure gave other Yearly Meetings " the right to interfere."* Yet even this opportunity was not taken by the Hoyle party, to show how the * See the printed testimony in the ease, p. 98. vol. ii.— 23 266 THE SOCIETY OF FRIEXDS IN [CHAP. XIV. ancient faith had been laid waste by the measures of the Gurneyites. George Gilbert, for the defendants, testified: "I think "B. Hoyle always stood on the ground, that it was not " best to have anything to do with either body in Xew " England until the matter was settled there." Jesse Cope, also a witness for the Hoyle party, being cross-examined by plaintiffs' counsel, said, in regard to what was the matter with the Yearly Meetings with which they (the Hoyle party) did not correspond : " That would be a matter of doctrine, which I think is not to be admitted here." Soon afterwards, the Court having decided that a certain question was objectionable, and that plaintiffs " had no right to ask what the departure in doctrine was," the counsel for plaintiff's took excep- tion to the ruling of the Court ; which seems at least to indicate an inclination on their part to challenge the opposite party on the question of doctrines, as if they knew well that they would not dare to touch it. Benjamin Hoyle, being questioned :* " Then if the old clerk is at the table, there is no power to remove him ?" answered : " It was according to the settled order " of the meeting that I acted, on the ground that the " meeting had no power to appoint a new clerk when " the representatives disagree." Question by the Court. — "Suppose that at the next Yearly "Meeting you should discover that your clerk had become a " Hicksite, and that a majority of your representatives present "had embraced Hicksite doctrines, and therefore would not "he able to agree upon a clerk, and the members of the rep- * See the printed Testimony in the case of Harrison, etc., v. Hoyle, etc., in the Supreme Court of Ohio, page 120, etc. 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 267 " resentative body who had not embraced those doctrines "should report the name of a candidate for clerk, would the "meeting be compelled to keep the Hicksite clerk for another "year?" Answer. — " There is no means of removing a person for such "a cause, except by the action of the Monthly Meeting of "which he is a member, according to the rules of discipline. " There is a prescribed way, and it would be unsafe to displace " any clerk, whether Hicksite or what else. If he becomes " unsound, it is for his Monthly Meeting to take away his "right of membership, if he cannot be restored. I think the "meeting would have to retain him, notwithstanding he was "a Hicksite. The Monthly Meeting takes away his right of "membership, and their action must be dealt with by the " Quarterly Meeting. He must retain his position as clerk "until these proceedings can be gone through with." Question. — "Suppose a clerk comes to the table in liquor, "are you bound to keep a clerk at the table who is drunk "every time he goes there ?" Answer. — "I have never known such a case. If he is ap- pointed clerk, he is appointed for the ensuing year, unless "displaced by the Monthly Meeting, and his right of mem- "bership is taken away; and then, if his right of member- "ship is taken away, or he is removed by death, it is for the "representatives to report another clerk." Question. — " But suppose they could not agree V" Answer. — "That is a case that cannot occur." .... Question. — " Do you regard the Society of Friends as "a unity [unit] ?" Answer. — "I do. There is but one Society of Friends " throughout the world. I expect there is a considerable num- "ber of bodies that claim to be Yearly Meetings, the same as "we do. We have not taken away the right of any Yearly " Meeting claiming to be so; though Indiana claims to take "away the right of Ohio Yearly Meeting, we have never " taken action to take away their right.* There is a regular * Why then invade its jurisdiction by setting up Monthly Meetings within it? 268 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. " Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends claiming that char- acter in Indiana and Iowa." .... Question. — "Are there not two separate organizations call- " ing themselves the Society of Friends ?" Answer.— " Yes ; there is in Ohio Yearly Meeting, and " there are two in Xew England." Question. — " Is there a portion of your organization in "Iowa?" Answer. — " Yes ; there is a Quarterly Meeting there."* Question. — "And there is a Yearly Meeting in Iowa that " does not recognize that Quarterly Meeting ?" Answer. — " Yes." Question. — " There are two then in Iowa ?" Ansicer. — "Yes." Question. — "If your Meeting and this Quarterly Meeting "are the genuine legitimate Society of Friends, then the "Yearly Meetings of Indiana and Western, which recognized " Binns, are not meetings of the Society of Friends ?" Ansicer. — "I do not understand the question." Question. — "I mean, if yours is the only legitimate Society "of Friends in the world, then the Binns meeting and those "which affiliate with it, do not belong to the Society of "Friends?" Answer. — " I have not disfranchised any particular Society. " They do not recognize us ; we have no communication with "them whatever. They were established as legitimate, but "so far as they have identified themselves with the Binns "party, we do not recognize them." On Re-examination. — "I do not expect that Ohio Yearly " Meeting could decide upon the question as to whether In- ' 1 diana Yearly Meeting is or is not what it claims to be. " . . . . Charles Evans, of Philadelphia, testified, among other things, as follows :f * Alluding to a Monthly (and afterwards a Quarterly) Meeting set up by Ohio in Iowa, as mentioned in the last chapter, f "Testimony," Supreme Court of Ohio, Harrison, etc., v. Iloyle, etc., p. 130, etc. 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 269 Question. — What is the practice of the Yearly Meetings "on receiving ministers and members of other Yearly Meet- ings ?" Answer. — " It is usual in Yearly Meetings, Avhen ministers " come, that they present their credentials, and they are heard " in the meeting. That is the usual practice. Philadelphia "has suspended that for many j'ears, and it does not hold " itself called upon to read certificates of members which come "among them, but receive them nevertheless, and they enjoy " their rights as ministers."* .... Question. — "What appeal is there from the action of the " Yearly Meeting to a higher body, on questions of a disciplin- " ary, judicial, or legislative character, or on questions that in " any way affect the property of the Yearly Meeting ?" Answer. — " There is no authority in the Society of Friends "superior to the Yearly Meeting. Every Yearly Meeting is " an independent body — independent in itself— connected with "the Society of Friends at large through the medium of a "common faith, but holding no relation of subordination to "any part of the Society, except that which it constitutes "itself. The union is one of Christian fellowship, simply." . . . .... Question (in cross-examination). — "Why has your "correspondence with the Hoyle meeting not been contin- " ued?" Answer. — " There has been in the Society of Friends within "the last thirty years, a considerable contrariety of opinion " upon points of doctrine. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting took " its stand upon what it believed to be the doctrines of Friends, " and endeavored, as far as it could, to maintain those doctrines "and support them, while there were others who, it believed, " were endeavoring to disseminate their doctrines. These of " course held it disunited, and in the course of the correspond- " ence which took place, there was found a great contrariety of " sentiment making itself manifest in the Yearly Meeting. And " it was finally concluded that, inasmuch as the correspond- "ence was not necessary for the meeting to keep up, it would * But he omitted to say that this "suspension'' was a violation of their own Discipline. The rule remained intact, but was evaded. 270 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. "be better tbat it should be all laid to one side, and at the "time it was concluded to hold no correspondence with any " other Yearly Meeting. The Yearly Meeting of Ohio was "included in that conclusion." Question. — " I understand you hold the Yearly Meetings to " be entirely independent ?" Answer. — "Yes." .... Question [the counsel having referred to New Eng- land]. — " Then you do take cognizance of other Yearly Meet- " ings ?" Answer. — "We take cognizance so far as this, that when " the question was presented to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting " as to whether it would cut off a large number of persons from " the Society of Friends, it inquired into the position they then " occupied, and in its investigation, finding there had been, as "it believed, a violation of the discipline of New England " Yearly Meeting, they pointed that out, and sent these docu- " ments that I speak of, and then granted the rights of mem- " bership to both those bodies to attend Philadelphia Yearly " Meeting." Question. — "Do you now in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting "receive ministers accredited by the subordinate meetings in " the Binns Yearly Meeting ?" Answer. — " We never have had one present himself, or I have " no recollection of it." Question. — "Do you receive members of those meetings, and "recognize them?" Answer.- — " Since this has been mentioned to me, I do rec- ollect one, a woman friend, that had escaped my memory, " who presented her certificate. That was, like all others, " not received. We received none from any Yearly Meeting, " from neither of the bodies in Ohio, and from no other Yearly "Meeting." Question. — "You said something about her, nevertheless, " being permitted to enter the meeting as a Friend V" Answer. — "Certainly, she was." Question. — "That is what I want to know, whether any " who belong to the Binns meeting in Ohio are recognized ?" 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 271 Answer. — "The Binns party was recognized in that in- " stance, I have understood. I was not cognizant of the facts, " hut heard of her having been at different meetings within "our limits, and speaking as a minister." Question. — "Do you regard that as the practice of your "meeting in that particular, that they will so receive them ?" Answer. — "They will receive them as members of Ohio "Yearly Meeting, when they would not receive certificates "which the meeting granted to those individuals, as coming "from Ohio Yearly Meeting." Question. — "They would, nevertheless, recognize them as " ministers of the Society of Friends ?" Answer. — "Unless they had certain knowledge that they " had heen disowned from the Society." Question. — " Don't you deal with the ministers of the Hoyle "meetings in much the same way ?" Answer. — "We take no cognizance of their credentials, " hut allow them to exercise their functions." .... Question. — "If I understand you, you say that the "connection between those Yearly Meetings is simply a " Christian brotherhood, without any power over each other's "standing in that brotherhood." Answer. — "Yes." .... The Court. — " You said, a moment ago, that if a "minister or member from Binns's party should come into " your jurisdiction, you would allow him to exercise his gifts, " unless you knew he had been disowned. Suppose you knew "that Mr. Hoyle's meeting had disowned him, would it not '• prevent your recognizing him?" Answer. — " I cannot say whether it would or not " .... The Court. — *" Do you recognize the right in one " Yearly Meeting to erect or establish a Quarterly Meeting in "the jurisdiction of another'?" Question. — "JSTot under ordinary circumstances. There " may a condition of things occur in which the Yearly Meet- " ing would he obliged to go beyond the ordinary usage of the " Society in doing that." * Testimony, p. 138. 272 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. Question. — "Is there, or can there be, more than one So- "ciety of Friends?" Answer. — " There is but one Society of Friends." Question. — "Then, in the recognition of one Ohio Meeting, "you necessarily exclude the recognition of the other?" Answer. — "Yes, as a Yearly Meeting." Question. — "Then, do you recognize Yearly Meetings of "the Society elsewhere which are in correspondence with the "Biuns meeting?" Answer. — "Under peculiar circumstances it might be so." Question'. — "Would the Yearly Meeting of the Society of "Friends in Ohio be justifiable, or have a right to establish "Quarterly Meetings within the limits of other Yearly Meet- " ings of the Society of Friends ?" Answer. — " That would depend upon the action of the other " Yearly Meetings. If Ohio maintained its integrity as a " Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends, and the other " Yearly Meetings refused to allow it to avail itself of the "privileges of the Yearly Meetings ; if they refuse to recog- " nize its members, so that they cannot become incorporated "into the Yearly Meetings within the limits of which they "reside, when they have gone out of the limits of Ohio Yearly " Meeting, then it would become necessary for the Yearly "Meeting of Ohio, in order to keep up its care over its mem- " bers, to create meetings for that purpose." Question. — "Does not that simply result, if it is extended, "in the organization of two religious Societies of Friends ?" Answer. — " No." Question. — "Suppose that the Yearly Meeting of Ohio "should find members desiring to belong to its meetings all "over the country, and should organize Quarterly Meetings "in Xew England, Maryland, Iowa, Kansas, wherever there " were Yearly Meetings of the Society, would it not appear "to be the organization of two Societies of Friends ?" Answer. — "No. Allow me to explain. The Society of "Friends is a body which professes certain doctrines and tes- "timonies. While it maintains these doctrines and testi- " monies, it is the Society of Friends under all circumstances. 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 273 " It makes no difference as regards the position in which " members are placed in relation to any other body, if it "maintains these doctrines it is the Society of Friends. In "the organization of the Society of Friends, for the purpose " of exercising disciplinary care over its members, and acquir- ing and holding property, and the other things which " Yearly Meetings can perform, it is divided into a certain "number of Yearly Meetings. These Yearly Meetings are "independent of each other, so far that they exist without "the assent of the others,* and having once been established, "the others cannot take from them the character of a relig- " ious Society of Friends. They may take from them par- " ticipation in the organization which previously existed in " the Society of Friends before the difficulty occurred." Question. — "Suppose that instead of one Quarterly Meet- ing in the State of Iowa, that the Hoyle Meeting should "organize three, and that these three shall organize a sepa- rate Yearly Meeting, would there not then be two Yearly "Meetings in Iowa V Then if it extends its jurisdiction " throughout the territorial limits of the Society in the United "States, creating additional subordinate and Yearly Meet- ings, have you not then two Societies of Friends in the "United States ?" Answer. — "No. We have one Society of Friends, with " two organizations. We have but one Society of Friends, "because the Society of Friends depends, not upon the or- ganization of its meetings, which may be altered from time "to time, but depends on the maintenance of certain doc- " fcrines and principles." Question. — "Well, now, then, what objection have you to "corresponding with the Binns Meeting ?" Answer. — "It is not set up in the order of Society." Question. — " Are these Iowa Meetings, set up by the Hoyle "Yearly Meeting, in the order of Society?" Answt r. — " Yes. They are in the order, under the circum- " stances in which they are placed." * The defectiveness of these assertions must be manifest to the reader. vol. ii. — 24 274 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. Question. — "What will you do, then, with the two Meet- ings in Iowa? They will both be Yearly Meetings of "Friends, but not both Yearly Meetings in the order of So- "ciety, will they ?" Answer. — " I do not see why they are not." Question. — "Have they unity ?" Answer.— " They may not have that unity which ought to " exist." Question. — "You would recognize them both ?" Answer. — "Yes, if they maintained the doctrines of the "Society, and had been regularly set up and established." Question. — " How could such a state of things exist with- ' ' out leading to abuses, and to great confusion in all their "arrangements ?" Answer. — "It would undoubtedly lead to confusion — to a "great deal of confusion." Question. — " Is it not impracticable ?" Answer. — " It is not impracticable, because it is in exist- " ence at the present time. AVe see two bodies in Ohio calling " themselves Yearly Meetings." Question. — *"He [Thomas Evans] was a brother of yours?" Answer. — " He was." Question. — "Do you know what his opinion was on the "question of the Ohio Yearly Meeting separation ?" Answer. — " I do not." Question. — " Was he the author of a pamphlet on the sub- " ject of the Ohio separation ?" Ansioer. — "I do not know." .... Question. — " I find the 24th interrogatory (referring " to the printed testimony of the witness in the Swanzey " [N. E., 1848] case), to be as follows : 'Suppose the larger " ' part of a Yearly Meeting, when assembled in that capacity, " ' should be, together with their clerk, probably [palpably] " ' unsound, as evinced by their having promulgated or spread " ' in the Society published works containing doctrines de- " 'cidedly adverse to the doctrines of the Society of Friends, * Tcstiruouy, p. 144, etc. 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 275 "'and knowingly recommending, aiding, and defending the '"author or authors who have essayed to engraft into and " ' fasten upon the Society the said adverse doctrines ; would " ' it or not, he incumhent upon the other memhers of the "' Yearly Meeting to endeavor to maintain and uphold the " 'same upon its original Christian doctrines to the honor of " ' Truth ?' And this is puhlished as your answer : ' Such a •• • Yearly Meeting, constituted and sustained upon the origi- " ' nal doctrines and testimonies of Friends, let their numhers "'be as few as they might be, could be recognized by the '"other Yearly Meetings of Friends, although it might be " ' necessary, in order to sustain it, to enter into a new ap- " ' pointment of officers.'* Do you concur in this now ?" Answer. — " I do. So far as I see, I believe these interrog- atories and answers are mine, but I cannot recollect. As " far as I see, I concur in them. That was a question of doc- " trine.'''' This closed the examination. Here was an emphatic implication — almost a direct declaration — that doctrines were not involved in the dispute in Ohio! Had not Charles Evans known clearly to the contrary? Did he not know that the Gurney doctrines were at the very basis of the dispute? Let his various publications, ex- tending over a long series of years, testify to this, yea or nay. There was a similar evasiveness in Benjamin Hoyle's testimony in regard to doctrines being involved in this case. But both he and Charles Evans did certainly know that the same essential animus gave vitality to the contention in Ohio, which had enkindled and character- ized the contest in New England ; even the strife for prevalency between the doctrinal innovations of ( rurney- * Depositions of Defendants in Fall River Suit, p. :i()8. 27G THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. ism on the one hand, and the primitive doctrines of Friends on the other. How could they then, by such evasion, put aside the true and all-important issue, and thus place the Yearly Meeting of Ohio in the disgrace- ful attitude of a mere wrangling about two men for its clerk ? It appears clear from the testimony of witnesses on both sides, and from the pleadings of counsel on both sides, that this exclusion of all development of the true cause of the difficulty had been mutually agreed on; but there are indications which seem to show at least a probability that it was originally at the suggestion of the Hoyle party. The plaintiffs' counsel several times seemed to open the way for alluding to doctrines in their questions to the defendants' witnesses, but it was always evaded. D. D. T. Cowen, of counsel for the Hoyle party, said, in the course of his argument (p. 26) : " During the progress of the trial of this case in the Dis- " trict Court, it was dec ided in effect by the Court, and I think "properly decided, that this question [respecting the pro- priety of allowing Thomas 13. Gould to sit in the Yearly Meeting of Ohio] had no bearing on the case, and it was "incompetent to introduce testimony in relation to it. The "plaintiffs^ counsel [Binns's] put to their witness, Elwood "Ratcliff, the question: 'Was T. B. Gould in attendance at " ' Ohio Yearly Meeting, in 1854, bearing a certificate from "'the Yearly Meeting of New England, of which he was " 'clerk?' This question was objected to [of course by the opposite counsel of the Hoyle party], and the objection was "sustained. The plaintiffs' counsel [Binns's] excepted to the "ruling of the Court. (Pp. 44-5.)" In a subsequent part of his pleading the same counsel (Cowen) further says : 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 277 "The questions before this Court are questions of disci- " pline, and not of doctrine. There is no dispute about that, "and the case has been tried icith that understanding.'''' In the printed argument of Benjamin Stanton, of* counsel for the Biuns party, he says (p. 21): "Was it a question of mere personal aggrandizement, and " a struggle for place and power on the part of the candidate V "It was clear that there was something more than this. The " parties named as clerks were the representatives of parties "in the Society, and each was the representative of the sen- " timents of those by whom he was supported. Was it a dif- ference about doctrine? If it was, then clearly we may "inquire, which of the parties held the approved doctrines " of the Society V But it is agreed on all Iionrfx that there is no " dispute about doctrine — that both held the approved doc- " trines of the ancient Society of Friends. Then what was " the dispute about ?" He follows this up by a very superficial and partisan reference to the opposition made in New England to J. J. Gurney, and the separation there, charging J. Wil- bur, T. B. Gould, and their associates, with being " mal- contents and seccders ; " and then says (p. 32): "If it was a dispute about doctrines, the Court would go "into their creeds, to see which held the ancient doctrines "of the Society. But it is a question of submission to, or "departure from, the government of the Church," etc. And toward the close of his plea he makes the fol- lowing remarkable assertion : "A religious society has as much right to change its doc- " trine, as it has to change its discipline and government." On a retrospective glance at some of the above quoted evidence, it is obvious that Benjamin Hoyle endeavored 278 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. to show that under no circumstances could a Yearly Meeting disengage itself from a regularly chosen clerk, unless he had been superseded by an agreement of the representatives, or had been disowned by his own Monthly Meeting. Thus a Yearly Meeting might be subjected to the necessity of keeping in service a "drunk- en" clerk, or "a Hicksite," or one guilty of reproachful conduct, if the representatives could not agree on his suc- cessor, or there had not been timely knowledge of his faults for his own Monthly Meeting to act in the usual exercise of the discipline. A new doctrine, surely, in the Society of Friends, and only consistent with a state of lifeless formality! The entanglement of this witness, and also of Dr. Charles Evans, in their attempts to justify the action of Ohio Yearly Meeting in setting up a Monthly Meeting in Iowa, within the limits of another Yearly Meeting, while endeavoring to avoid the only justification of such action, viz., the honest declaration of their belief, accom- panied with proof, that this other Yearly Meeting had departed from the essential groundwork of the Society, and could, therefore, be no longer recognized as a meet- ing of Friends, was indeed hardly to be expected from their character as sensible men. Charles Evans, too (see page 269), must have known that a Yearly Meeting is in very deed no more inde- pendent of its brotherhood of Yearly Meetings abiding in the Truth, than an individual member is independent of his brother members ; and that if a Yearly Meeting breaks the compact by sanctioning a fundamental depar- ture from the great characteristics of the family of Yearly Meetings, it is equally liable to be called to account by 1868.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 279 those who remain faithful, as in individual cases. Else, as the Society "is a unit," what becomes of Robert Bar- clay's doctrine, as stated in his work, " The Anarchy of the Ranters, etc.?" And what becomes of C. Evans's own declaration in the "Considerations," pages 21 and 22? And what becomes of Samuel Bettle's testimony in the Hicksian suit in 1830?* Both B. Hoyle and C. Evans endeavored to make it appear that the reason for setting up an Ohio Monthly Meeting within the limits of Indiana Yearly Meeting in Iowa, was that Indiana Yearly Meeting had refused to grant privileges of membership to those emigrating from the Hoyle meeting; but such was known well enough not to have been the true reason at the time of that event. Many of the members removing to Iowa were not will- ing to be brought'' under the jurisdiction of Indiana Yearly Meeting, and the Hoyle Yearly Meeting desired to protect them from this, and at the same time to extin- guish the hopes of a small remnant who had already, as a Quarterly Meeting, separated in Iowa from the lapsed Indiana Yearly Meeting, and were in correspondence with the small body of Friends in New England. The idea of Charles Evans in regard to " one Society of Friends with two organizations," is too preposterous to be soberly entertained by any one, who considers that two organizations in one place must necessarily be an- tagonistic, and cannot, therefore, be of one and the same body. " Confusion," indeed, would be, and was, the inevitable result of such reasoning. The Supreme Court of Ohio consisted of five Judges. This Court, after long delay, decided, by a decree dated * See Vol. I, of tli is work, page 210. 280 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XIV. sixth month 20th, 1874, in favor of the plaintiffs, the Binns party. In coming to this judgment, the vote was, two in favor of giving the property to the Hoyle party, who already occupied it, and three to the Binns party. The property was accordingly delivered over to the plaintiffs — the original Gurney party represented by Jonathan Binns as clerk — on the 1st of the eighth month of the same year. It would not be worth while now to quibble about mistakes made by the Court in coming to this decision, in a case which they had so defectively set before them. They seemed to have a very imperfect acquaintance with the road on which they were travelling, and stumbled like men passing over a swamp in the dark. But not more so than might have been looked for, and, right or wrong, their judgment is now the law of the State of Ohio. The principal grounds of their opinion appear to have been, first, that J. Binns was in some way {regularly or irregularly, as Judge Shaw said in the Fall River suit) named and appointed as clerk in the Yearly Meet- ing; and, secondly, but mainly, that the standing of the body for which he acted had been afterwards sanctioned by all the other Yearly Meetings except Philadelphia, leaving out of view the " Smaller Bodies," which the Hoyle party had not dared to appear to reckon as brethren. Whether this claim will be further pursued by the Binns party taking measures to obtain the meeting- houses and other property of the Yearly Meeting on the strength of such a decision, remains to be seen. The school building at Mount Pleasant has since been destroyed by fire. 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 281 CHAPTER XV. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GENERAL MEETING FOR PENNSYLVANIA, ETC., INDEPENDENT OF PHILA- DELPHIA YEARLY MEETING. What was now the condition of affairs in the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia"? Was it not involved in iso- lation and confusion, through its own timidity and un- warrantable tampering with the inconsistencies — nay, with the sorrowful .secessions from the faith of Friends — which 2>revailed around it and in its midst? There was not one Yearly Meeting now, with which it dared to resume epistolary correspondence, for fear of a separa- tion within its own borders, either of one class or the other. Yet a far more powerful instrument of communion with the bodies lapsed into the modern views, than any epistolary correspondence could possibly be, was left open, in the unrestricted interchange of membership by certificates, in cases of a removal from one section of the nominal Society to another. By this means all the Gurncy meetings in England and America could be recognized as if they were meetings of Friends, and the members were constantly recommended to the " Christian care and oversight" of those who were well known to have departed from all but the outside form and name of Quakerism. This was a palpable element of com- plete amalgamation, as well as a frustration of all the 282 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. testimonies hitherto borne by Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing against this heresy. It was, in effect, binding back again all the Gnrney Separatists into one body with Philadelphia, and practically declaring that they were no separatists after all. Under this system the most decided advocates of schismatic doctrines and practices, coming from the most palpably schismatic Yearly Meet- ings, if intending to reside or marry within a meeting which perhaps demurred at directly receiving a certifi- cate from some of the Gurney meetings (for there were for a time a few that so demurred), needed but to stay, for a short time, within another Monthly Meeting which had no such scruple, and then by a transfer could have their membership recognized wherever they desired. Such cases were not wanting. Although Gurneyism had been declared by some of the most influential country members of the Yearly Meeting to be of equal danger with Hicksism to the true principles of Friends (see page 245), yet no disci- plinary measures were taken by which to attempt to stop its currency among the members. Many were the in- stances of active and influential members attending the yearly and other meetings of the Separatists, in contra- vention of a direct rule of the Discipline,* forbidding- such attendance. Yet they not only escaped disciplinary censure, but retained their positions of influence in the body, either as ministers, elders, overseers, or in other stations of importance; although, if they had done the same in regard to the Hicksian meetings, they would have been promptly dealt with, and, if not brought to a sense * Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, p. 70 and 71 of old edition. 1858.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 283 of their error, unquestionably disowned. The assistant clerk of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting for many years (a man long dearly beloved by the author) was one who exemplified this ; having been present with John Pease at the separation in New England, in 1845, and par- ticipated with the Separatists there, and subsequently cast in his lot openly and influentially with the Gurney party ; though formerly a valuable elder, and clear- sighted in regard to the unsoundness of J. J. Gurney's writings, while the latter Avas in this land. Nevertheless he retained his position at the clerk's table of the Yearly Meeting for many years afterwards, and his station as an elder until his decease. Eliza P. Gurney, occupying the station of a recognized minister, was another instance, equally glaring, having taken part openly in the Ohio Gurney Separation, and joined in with the others of the same class throughout the United States, without at all losing her position in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. These cases are mentioned merely as obvious evidence of the truth of the remark above made, that the provi- sions of the Discipline were totally ignored in all such instances, which were a great multitude indeed. In the Yearly Meeting itself, the Discipline was con- stantly and openly violated, not only by making use, on important services of the Society, of such as had joined the Separatists by attending their separate meetings, and constantly advocating their cause; but also in its recep- tion of individuals coining as ministers with credentials from the Gurney meetings in Great Britain or any part of America. They were allowed to sit in the Yearly Meeting, and take a part in its business, as if they were 284 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. members in unity ; and even in the Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elders ; yet when they presented their credentials, they were not allowed to be read in the meeting, contrary to an express rule of the Discipline, which declares that "the Certificates of such Friends, members of other Yearly Meetings, who from a re- ligious concern are drawn to attend this, are to be read herein."* If we look back to the former troubles from the opposite secession, in 1828, we may readily perceive that persons so circumstanced would not have been ac- knowledged as having the rights of members, and would, therefore, not have been allowed to attend meetings for discipline, or to go through the various settlements of Friends within our limits, in the line of the ministry, without let or hindrance, or even rebuke. These should have been checked in like manner, being equally en- gaged in pulling down the ancient landmarks of the Society ; and then, if they ventured to attend the Yearly Meeting, they might properly have been informed that we could not recognize them as fellow-members, nor their meetings as meetings of Friends, and, therefore, we could not accept or read their credentials. But to treat them as members and ministers, and yet refuse to read their certificates, was a plain transgression of the Discipline by the Yearly Meeting itself, for which the '''middle party " was manifestly accountable. The re- sult was, that a succession of unsound persons, claiming to be ministers of the gospel, but very unfit for that weighty service, were constantly coming from various quarters, and travelling in that capacity within our limits, * Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, page 1G0, old edition. 1859.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 285 unchecked by the body, to the great bewilderment of the youth and others, and the reproach of the Truth. At the time of the Hicksian defection, winch was no more palpable as to doctrine than this one, though more unpopular and more repulsive in some of its features, the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia took common ground with all the other Yearly Meetings which were then con- cerned to maintain the principles of the Society, that meetings or individuals implicated manifestly or pro- fessedly in unity with the seceded party were to be treated as having left the Society of Friends. This was a sound position, and indispensable for the purity and integrity of the church. Then why abandon it now? The "middle party" alleged that they were all still Friends, though involved in some errors of doctrine and practice, and that they had some sound members among them. Yet the aberration of the Yearly Meet- ings in acknowledging fellowship with the Gurneyites of New England who had inaugurated a schism for the purpose of sustaining the influence and principles of J. J. Gurney, and also with the Yearly Meeting of London, which had sanctioned his principles and liberated him to go forth to propagate them in the Society and in the world, was quite as palpable as the aberration of the Hicksites in supporting the doctrines and influence of Elias Hicks. And those departures of the Yearly Meet- ings involved the meetings and members subordinate to them, as clearly in one ease as in the other. In 1859, Joseph E. Maule published in Philadelphia, "Remarks on acknowledging Meetings of Separatists as though they were Meetings of Friends ;" detailing the manner in which the official acts of the Yearly Meetings 286 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. of Indiana and North Carolina proved them to have gone off bodily in the schism, identifying themselves with the seceded Gurney party in Ohio, and with the same departure in New England and Great Britain. This pamphlet was extensively circulated, so as to leave the members of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting without the excuse of not knowing the official actions of those bodies, or without a brotherly warning of the conse- quences of so weakly compromising the testimony for the truth and against error, which had been faithfully sustained by that Yearly Meeting in former years. The Yearly Meeting, in 1859, was exhorted to attend to the very serious subject of the interchange of mem- bership by certificates of removal, by which some of the Monthly Meetings were already thus identifying them- selves with the seceded bodies, contrary to the Disci- pline.* The rule of discipline in question, is substan- tially as follows : " If any of our members should attend the meetings of those "who have separated from us, and who have set up meetings "contrary to the order and discipline of our Religious Society, " as it is giving countenance to, and acknowledging " those meetings, as though they were the meetings of Friends, " this meeting declares that such conduct is of evil tendency, " and where such instances occur, Friends are de- " sired to extend brotherly care and labor, that the indi- viduals may be instructed and reclaimed ; and if those en- "deavors prove ineffectual, Monthly Meetings should testify "against them." If, as appears here, the members arc not to be allowed to attend the meetings of Separatists, on pain of being * Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, pages 70, 71. 1859.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 287 considered disownable, and dealt with accordingly, how could the Monthly Meetings be at liberty to scud their members to such meetings by certificate, recommending theni to their "Christian care and oversight?" Yet such was now becoming a frequent practice, under the influences of the middle system. The Yearly Meeting was reminded that one of the Monthly Meetings in Philadelphia, had laid the subject before the Quarterly Meeting as a case of difficulty, ask- ing its advice and counsel, but could obtain no satisfac- tion, and was now, to the great grief of a number of Friends, on the point of recommending some of its members by certificate to a Monthly Meeting of Indiana Yearly Meeting, which had joined the Separatists. But the meeting declined to take any action on the subject. ■This Yearly Meeting was attended by Robert Lind- say, a minister from England, who was allowed to at- tend the sittings, and took part in the concerns of the meeting, although he had previously been attending the seceded Yearly Meetings of Ohio and Indiana, and the Western, a new one established from a portion of the latter. Of his attendance of these separate meetings, the Yearly Meeting was informed. When it was pro- posed to read his certificate, the measure was opposed by a number of friends; and the meeting was distinctly told, that as London Yearly Meeting, from which he came, had entirely identified itself with the Seceders, and was, indeed, the very quarter whence the difficulties originated, the reading of his certificate by this Yearly Meeting would be ( practically) an act of separat ion from the Society. The temporizing party, with the clerk of the Yearly Meeting, alleged that as the Select Yearly 288 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [(.'HAP. XV. Meeting had concluded not to read his certificate, it would not be best to read it here. But, as the periodical paper of the Gurney party afterwards said in narrating the circumstance, the Yearly Meeting of Ministers and Elders " has no right to interfere in the business of the Yearly Meeting;"* and consequently it was not proper to bring their action, or non-action, as a rule to govern the Yearly Meeting. It was merely a subterfuge. The rule of Discipline, however, on the subject of certificates of strangers, being called for, was read; and the clerk declared that under the circumstances, he was willing the certificate should be read, alleging that he was not previously aware that the rule was as it was ! In this willingness he was supported by several of the "middle" class; yet the current of opposition to the reading of the certificate at that time prevailed, and the measure was not carried. But thus the Yearly Meeting became again involved, by its half-way course, in a double violation of its own Discipline, in allowing one to sit as a member and minister who was palpably implicated in the schism, and yet rejecting his certificate; an example plentifully followed in subsequent years. The year 1860, however, found many friends, both in Philadelphia and the country districts, disposed to submit to the influence of the half-way or middle party, and thus to allow those of the Gurney class to have their own way, practically, without let or hindrance, except in the comparatively insignificant matter of the yearly epistolary correspondence. Many were tired of the contention. An influential female minister (E. E.) * Friends' Review, vol. xii, p. 536. I860.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 289 had preached earnestly on the words of the prophet Jeremiah (ch. xlvii, v. 6) : "O thou sword of the Lord, how long will it he ere thou he quiet ? Put up thyself into thy scahbard, rest, and be still." Others saw no hope. And especially was all hope given up by many, when the dogma was freely received, launched as it were ou high authority, that "separations were no remedy," and therefore all, sound in the faith or unsound, or even opponents and innovators, must, by some means or other, be kept together. This keeping of all together was to be done by compromising some of the very fundamental features of our compact, both in doctrine and discipline. For the open and frequent avowal and promulgation of the new doctrines, especially through the press, was now connived at as if it were no breach upon the body; and the discipline was prostrated, by allowing an equal- ization of schismatical persons with sound Friends as eligible for the services and control of the Society. The Gurney portion of the members were pretty well contented with this system for the present, for it gave them full scope to carry on their measures without con- tending for them, though without the direct and open sanction of the body. Certificates for foreign ministers, though rejected by the Yearly Meeting, could be read in some one of the meetings under the control of the party, and all the novelties deemed desirable could be encouraged to the full, and with entire impunity. They were willing, therefore, to wait, in patience and hope, for a time when they would be able to take control of the Yearly Meeting themselves, being satisfied that the tendency of things was to that result. Yet there were those, in various portions of Phila- 290 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. delphia Yearly Meeting, who could not unite with these compromising measures, seeing their entire inconsistency, and their inadequacy to the crisis ; and feeling that the precious truths of the gospel, committed to our trust as a people, were not to be safely bartered away for a false peace — a mere fallacious truce with those who were engaged in substituting a new system, fundamentally at variance with the unchangeable truth as held by our worthy forefathers. This sentiment indeed was cher- ished by a considerable portion of the members in vari- ous parts ; and a few here and there were prepared to act in accordance with the conviction ; though many others, whose whole heart and soul should have been engaged to sustain the Lord's cause, when the day of trial came were found to flinch, and, under a cowardly fear, to plead the necessity of submission to the sense of the body. Though "armed and carrying bows," they "turned back in the day of battle." Thus the numbers of those who through all were truly concerned to be found standing as it were with their lives in their hands, firm for the ancient standard, without calculating con- sequences by carnal reasonings and pleas, were reduced to so small a remnant that they were even fewer than those who lapped water in the army of Gideon, who were selected as the instruments for executing the counsel of the Most High. The interchange of membership by certificates to and from the seceded bodies, at length became so frequent a practice among the several Monthly Meetings, that its inconsistency and danger engaged the solid attention of Bucks Quarterly Meeting ; many of the members thereof being convinced that it was carrying the meetings rap- I860.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 291 idly into complication with the schism. The result was that Bucks Quarter sent, up in its report to the Yearly Meeting, in the spring of 1860, a request that the sub- ject might claim its consideration, so that the Monthly Meetings might he instructed as to what course they should pursue. The Northern District Monthly Meeting in Phila- delphia had already sent up to Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting a proposition for referring this important sub- ject to the Yearly Meeting for its consideration, so that the Monthly Meetings might be instructed how to act. But the Quarterly Meeting declined to take any steps in regard to it ; one influential elder remarking that the carrying of it to the Yearly Meeting "would only cause trouble," and that " the Monthly Meetings cer- tainly had a discretionary power." Poor ground this for refusing to open the way to a safe decision of so vital a matter, on which so much diversity existed. In the eleventh month, 1859, an Appeal had been presented to Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, signed by some of the members of the Northern District Monthly Meeting in that city, on the same subject. The Quarterly Meeting refused to hear this appeal, and the appellants therefore notified the ensuing Quarter, in the second month, 1860, of their intention to carry up their appeal to the Yearly Meeting. The Quarterly Meeting declined to recognize their right of appeal, or to appoint respondents on its part, as usual, to the Yearly Meeting. Meantime the Monthly Meeting went on, recommending several of its members to one or more separate meetings within the limits of Indiana. This 292 THE SOCIETY OF FKIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. constrained the appellants to carry their appeal to the Yearly Meeting of 1860. It was as follows : "To the Yearly Meeting. "As members of the Religious Society of Friends, truly "concerned for the support of its Discipline and ancient testi- " monies, we feel constrained to appeal to the Yearly Meeting "against the course pursued by some of the members of the " Monthly Meeting of Friends of Philadelphia for the Northern "District, who have violated the Discipline of our Yearly "Meeting, by sending certificates of membership to meetings "of separatists ; thus 'giving countenance to, and acknowl- "' edging those meetings as though they were meetings of "'Friends;' [of] which our Yearly Meeting declares 'that " ' such conduct is of evil tendency, aud repugnant to the har- " 'mom - and well-being of our Religious Societ}' ;' and which "we have found to be sorrowfully true in every particular. "And we apprehend that our rights of membership in relig- " ious Societj- have been endangered by such proceedings. "And we also feel constrained to appeal against Philadel- " phia Quarterly Meeting, for refusing to hear our appeal "against those disorderly acts, as it still further jeopardizes "our rights of membership." Had these three members the right of appeal on this subject, or had they not ? The subject was a momen- tous one, affecting the whole constitution of the Society. The Discipline guarantees to every member " who thinks himself aggrieved by the judgment of his Monthly Meeting in his case," the right of appeal. This wording of the rule — "in his case" — which was probably in- tended rather as an explanation than as a limitation, — was taken advantage of, against the appellants, by the allegation that no judgment had been issued by the Monthly Meeting against them individually, that in I860.] THE NINETEENTH OENTT R Y. 293 short they had had no "case" pending in the Monthly Meeting — not having been dealt with at all as delin- qnents, or offenders against the Discipline — that the right of appeal was here confined to those who had been testified against by their Monthly Meeting — that the present matter was a mere difference of sentiment re- specting the action of the Monthly Meeting, and there- fore that it was not a proper subject for an appeal. This, however, was an unworthy quibble, for the pur- pose of setting the matter easily aside without a hearing. The subject of the appeal was well known to be of a highly important character, and it was also known that appeals more or less similar in circumstances had on various occasions in former years been presented and entertained, for the cause of justice, by the superior meetings, especially during the troubles with the disci- ples of Elias Hicks.* If not as an Appeal, yet at least as a Remonstrance against a supposed great wrong, en- dangering, in their apprehension, the rights of member- ship of those presenting it, and also of many others, as well as the safety of the Society, and its proper identity, it ought surely to have been heard, both by the Quarterly, and, if needed, by the Yearly Meeting. The Yearly Meeting of 18G0 came in due course, on the 16th of the fourth month. After it was opened for business on Second-day morning, the clerk mentioned that he found on the table a paper endorsed, "Appeal to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting;" but that none of the reports from the Quarters alluded to any appeal. He inquired what disposal should be made of it. After * See Vol. I, p. 114. 294 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. some time, he rose again, and added that, on looking into the paper, it appeared to be signed by three per- sons, and to be an appeal against their Monthly Meet- ing's action in sending certificates to Monthly Meetings of other Yearly Meetings; and, as this subject would come up from the minutes of Bucks Quarter, he in- quired whether it would not be better to postpone the consideration of it till that time. To this the appellants consented, in the full confidence that they would then be heard. On Fourth-day afternoon, the subject as brought up by Bucks Quarterly Meeting came under consideration. After a great deal had been said for and against the practice in question, some of it savory and pertinent, and much of it quite the contrary, and not needful to be repeated here ; and many of those who had formerly been relied upon as opposed to this inconsistency had given way, under the plea that way did not open to do anything, and therefore it was best to submit, the clerk made a minute, stating in substance that the subject had been "deliberately considered, and way did not open to take any step ; but that the Monthly Meetings were di- rected to keep to our Discipline in relation to that sub- ject." One of those who had been really valiant for the truth, but, under the paralyzing influence of an attach- ment to some of the half-way leaders, had previously stated his opinion that way did not open to do anything, immediately rose and said that he thought the latter part of the minute (respecting keeping to the Discipline) had better be stricken out. Solomon Lukens, an elder, who sat near the table, turned round and said, " I hope not !" But the clerk, without waiting for further ex- I860.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 295 pression, immediately ran his pen through that part of the minute, remarking, "It don't change the Discipline;" apparently regardless of the manifest fact, that though it did not change the Discipline, yet it changed the po- sition of the Yearly Meeting in relation to the Disci- pline, as it showed that the meeting was afraid to recom- mend a strict compliance therewith, which would have a ssarily resulted in the disownment of all who should persist in adhering to the apostatizing course which was the cause of all this trouble. At the next sitting, one of the appellants called the attention of the meeting to the appeal, reminding Friends that the understanding was, that it was to be attended to when the subject from Bucks Quarter was considered ; which had now been done, and the meeting appeared to be drawing towards its closing business. The clerk now attempted to check any further opening of the case ; saying that " he had expected it was understood that this matter was settled when the report from Bucks Quarter was read and disposed of, as the subject in each was similar." This was exceedingly unjust, as the appel- lants had confided in his own proposition to hear their appeal at that time, and they had had no full and fair opportunity of opening and explaining the nature and extent of their grievance, as they would have had before a committee appointed for the purpose of hearing their appeal. The clerk, moreover, as a member of the Quarter appealed against, had no right to a voice in the question, according to our Discipline. But several other members of the same Quarterly Meeting now assumed to object to any reopening of the subject, notwithstand- ing this plain previous understanding. One influential 296 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XV. member of Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting stated that he had seen the appeal addressed to that Quarter, and that it was not an appeal, but a remonstrance against sending certificates to certain meetings. Another mem- ber of the same Quarter said, he likewise had seen the appeal, and he designated it as wrong, or disorderly, for persons to come before the Yearly Meeting in this w ay ! Another member of it said, there ought to have been a committee appointed early in the Yearly Meeting, to examine the paper, and then they should have reported that it was a wrong thing, etc. Indeed, it seemed as if the members of the very Quarterly Meeting against which the appeal was presented, were the main opponents now to its being heard, in direct contravention of the Discipline. They were, however, followed by members from other Quarters, opposing any hearing of the appeal, and censuring the appellants for coming thus before the Yearly Meeting. Some then proposed that the meeting should go on with other business — which was done — and thus the appeal was rejected without being heard, in violation of the express understanding given in the early part of the meeting ! Friends who deeply felt and mourned over these departures, now lost all hope of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting doing anything effec- tive to stay the progi'ess of the secession from the true principles of the Society. They had done what they could to avert the downward course, but all their efforts had been rejected, and appeared now to be of no avail. These saw with distress, that not only was Philadel- phia Yearly Meeting entirely failing to withstand the advances of the schism in any practical and effective way, but that it was officially permitting such a series of I860.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 207 measures in the subordinate meetings as must eventuate in a complete amalgamation with those who had openly joined the secession in other places. It had now refused to interfere with this amalgamation, had stricken out from its minute even a recommendation to keep to the Discipline, and was, in its own constant practice, setting an example of placing the avowed, and active, and in- fluential Gurneyites on an equality with any other mem- bers,* when they ought to have had disciplinary mea- sures extended to them, to convince them of their errors, and if not reclaimed, to have been disowned. They saw, too, that for themselves as individuals, and for their families, there was no safety from being swallowed up in this vortex, but in firmly and openly withstanding it; although a faithful stand against it might involve the very painful necessity of calling in question the con- tinued authority in the truth, of the Yearly Meeting itself, and clearing themselves from its now lapsed and apparently hopeless position. It appeared to them that the time had fully come, for them to flee each one for his life; or, in accordance with the Avords of John Justice, a minister from Bucks County, spoken prophetically in the Northern District Meeting in the year 183th of twelfth nio., 1845. " It is very painful and grievous to me to find that there is " in circulation, and widely spread, a report, a, false report, re- " specting my dear husband ; and also respecting our dear aged 350 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. friend, Thos. Shillitoe, that they both retracted and regret- ted the plain unequivocal testimony which they separately gave forth, for the clearing of their own minds or spirits, and also as their testimony for the Truth as it is in Jesus — stating- that J. J. G.'s writings are not in accordance with those of our early Friends. Any one who reads and com- pares them must know this, and what but an aversion to receive the Truth in the simplicity and love of it can occa- sion such a stir and attempt to make a thing appear what it is not? Let those who cry out about the harmony and peace of the Society being disturbed or broken take care that they are not found among the sowers of discord. My dear husband was very ill in the beginning of 183l the usual attendees at the Confer- ence Meetings united in forming these General and Monthly Meetings, with the rules of Discipline as they stood in 1802; and others afterwards gradually joined them. Most of the other half, or midway men, fell back into the large body of the Yearly Meeting, notwithstand- ing the exposures which they had themselves made, of its apostasy from the genuine principles, practice, and discipline of the Society. These small companies of Friends, united together in a testimony for the ancient faith of the Society, were afterwards visited at different times by several Friends in the ministry from the Smaller Bodies in America; of which visits it is only necessary here to say, that they 1870.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURA. 393 were to the comfort of the few struggling ones, who were often much discouraged when looking at their own weakness and the greatness of the cause; but who still relied upon the Arm of all-availing sti-ength, knowing their fresh springs to be in Him, and were sustained by the incomes of his love and the overshadowing of his wing. The General Meeting held at Fritchley as proposed, in the early part of the first month, 1870, was attended by about twenty-five Friends, and was believed by those present to be a time of divine owning and help. Thence- forward these meetings have been regularly held at that place, and their establishment was promptly recognized, through epistolary correspondence, by the Yearly Meet- ing of Friends of New York held at Poplar Ridge, the General Meeting for Pennsylvania, etc., held at Falls- ington, and the Annual Meeting for New England, held at Newport. The Yearly Meeting held at Nottingham, in Maryland, for Baltimore, had, at its own suggestion, been merged in the General Meeting for Pennsylvania, etc., as one of its Monthly Meetings. During the spring of 1871, Thomas Drewry, of Fleet- wood, in Lancashire, under an apprehension of religious duty, drew up a document, in the nature of a Protest against the claims of the London Yearly Meeting to be considered any longer as a legitimate meeting of the Society of Friends; declaring that it had encouraged new doctrines, and was thus become a schismatic body, and no longer entitled to hold the trust properties of various kinds which had from time to time been left to its charge, for the purposes of the true Society, and for the promotion of the cause of truth as always held by vol. ii. — 34 394 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. faithful Friends. A copy of this document was sent to the Yearly Meeting of London in the fifth month, ad- dressed to the clerk, but was not suffered to be read therein. A copy was also sent (duly attested by a magis- trate) to the Government Board of "Commissioners of Charitable Trusts," in London — a Board having the power of inspecting into the faithful management of all such Trusts. This procedure was intended by him for the relief of his own mind, so far as it went; but was not expected or intended to be followed up on his part by any further legal proceedings. Its receipt by this Board was duly acknowledged. The Protest was as follows : " To ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : "I, Thomas Drewry, of Fleetwood, in the County of Lan- " caster, Grocer, do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and "affirm as follows: That I am a member of the Religious " Society of Friends, commonly called Quakers ; that I belong "to Preston Monthly Meeting, which is a constituent part of " the Quarterly Meeting of Lancashire and Cheshire, and "within the bounds of the Yearly Meeting of London ; that "I am entitled to all the rights and privileges of membership "in the Society of Friends, which rights and privileges have "not to this day been called in question by any of the consti- " tuted meetings of said Society. "2. — I declare that the adoption of, or acquiescence in new " principles and new usages, at variance with the fundamen- "tal principles originally established in the Society, is a de- parture from the original compact, and a lowering of the " ancient standard of faith, and that the Meeting so departing " becomes an alien body, and is thereby divested of all right- " ful claim to be regarded as a Meeting in communion with " the true Society of Friends. "3. — I assert that great and fundamental changes have "taken place within what is called the Society of Friends, in "recent years, in reference to Faith and Doctrine. 1871.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 395 "4. — I declare that the Yearly Meeting of London, as it is "called by the said Society, has officially embraced new Doc- " trines, and to a great extent discarded those views of primi- " tive Christianity, which, through the ordering of Infinite iL Goodness, were revived, proclaimed, published to the world, " lived \ip to, and suffered for, by Friends at the beginning "5. — I affirm that evidences of this defection abound and " are almost everywhere apparent " 0. — I assert, and am able and willing to offer clear and " ample proof, that the changes in Doctrine referred to, have " been pointed out by well-concerned Friends again and again ; " and I also assert (hat for upwards of Thirty Years at least, "true Friends have been exercised in their minds and distressed " thereby, that these have availed themselves of the opportu- " nities which the various Meetings for Discipline afforded, to "speak of the hurtful tendency of the changes in question, "but that entreaty, expostulation, remonstrance, and warn- " ing, have been alike disregarded. "7. — I affirm that nothing convincing to the true Friend "has been put forth in defence of these innovations in Doc- " trine, nor has it been shown by official documents, or other- " wise proved, wherein the Early Friends were mistaken in " their views or apprehensions of the Truth. "8. — T assert that it is nut in the power, or within the com- petency or constitutional functions, of any of the Meetings " for Church Affairs of the Society of Friends, called and "known by the name of Meetings fur Discipline, to alter, "abrogate, or abolish the Religious Principles or Doctrines of "Truth, which were held, set forth, maintained, and promul- " gated by the Founders of this People ; or to rescind, aban- "don, or annul the Religious Testimonies, Practices, and " Usages, which it was the- care and concern of our predeces- sors in the Truth, in the fear of the Lord, to maintain. " 0. — I affirm that nut even a Yearly Meeting, the highest "court as regards Faith and Practice amongst Friends, can "change the fundamental Principles of the Society, or the " Testimonies which have ever uniformly flowed from them, "and which have been left to us in trust for succeeding gen- " erations. 396 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. " 10. — I maintain that the abandonment of said Principles " is an act of Separation. "11. — I affirm, in accordance with the doctrine of our an- "cient Friends, that all who desert the Religious Principles, " which first drew together and distinguished the Society, be " they few or many, are truly Separatists, and that those who "adhere to the original faith, have the power to say to the "dissentients, You have changed your views, we can no lon- " ger acknowledge you to be in fellowship with us. " 12. — I declare that London Yearly Meeting, as it is " termed, has separated itself from the sound part of the So- "ciety ; and I affirm that the taint of Separation necessarily " reaches and attaches to all Meetings, of whatever kind, that "remain subordinate thereto, whether they be Quarterly, " Monthly, or Preparative, together with the subsidiary " Meetings thereunto belonging. "13. — Seeing that London Yearly Meeting, so called, has " sanctioned and introduced into its midst, changes and inno- "vations in Doctrine of a very important character, — seeing " that it has done that which it had no constitutional authority " to do, — seeing that it has broken the compact which bound " the Society into one body, for the support and maintenance "of the Principles and Testimonies of Truth, — I maintain " that it has become the Yearty Meeting of a body of Sepa- ratists, and, consequently, has no lawful right, title, or au- " thority to assume the name, or to exercise the functions, of " a Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends. "14.— I, therefore, under a sense of apprehended duty, " Protest against the claim or prescriptive right, set up by " this Meeting of Separatists, either by itself, or by any of its "subordinate Meetings, to have, hold, retain possession of, "deal with, or administer Trust Property, which belongs not " to it, but belongs to those who adhere to the original faith " of the Society of Friends, for whose sole use and benefit the "several TrvMs were created, by their predecessors in relig- " ions profession. "(Signed) Thomas Drewry." "Declared and affirmed at Fleetwood, in the County of 1873.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 397 " Lancaster, this Twentieth day of May, one thousand eight "hundred and seventy-one, before me, "(Signed) F.Kemp, "Justice of the Peace, acting in and for the County of Lan- caster." This Protest, direct as the attack was on the Yearly Meeting, never elicited any reply to its unanswerable charges, as would have become a people conscious of walking in the footsteps of the flock of Christ's com- panions under a false accusation ; nor was any official notice whatever taken of it ; but, like most other testi- monies against the great defection, it was consigned to a silent reception as the easiest method of quickly getting it out of sight, and keeping it from becoming known abroad or among the members. In the year 1873 the Yearly Meeting of London ap- pointed a large committee to visit its constituent meet- ings. This committee, of course, was principally com- posed of adherents to the new order of things in doctrine and practice, and the tendency of its labors was to en- courage much merely intellectual activity in religious undertakings. It resolved itself into sections for visit- ing the various portions of the Society there, and being continued for another year, made a plausible report of its engagements to the Yearly Meeting, in 1875; in which the prevalent novelties were carefully kept out of view, except the open avowal of satisfaction with the hopeful condition which they thought the Society was in, "attributable," as they believed, " in no small de- gree, to First-day Schools, Mission Meetings, and other similar agencies." What these "similar agencies" were, may be easily understood by those who have watched 398 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. the course of General, protracted, or " revival " meet- ings;* meetings purposely appointed for "prayer," in man's will and time; meetings occupied more or less in hymn-singing, and other such excitements of the natural feelings; meetings held for the "study" of the Bible by merely intellectual and literary means, and discarding or overlooking the light of Christ in the soul as the primary instructor and true interpreter; with an inor- dinate dependence also upon the circulation of super- ficial tracts, leaflets, and hymns, and an indulgence in ornamentally embellished texts and even crosses, and other religious toys and triflings, which have prevailed so greatly since the introduction of the modern doctrines, and seem like byways back to Babylon. f * The Philadelphia Friends' Review of first mo. 8th, 1876, has copied from the Loudon Friend some directions for holding these revival meetings, or, as ftiey at present style them, General Meetings. These directions seem to have been suggested in the London paper by Henry S. Newman, and their publication in the Review appears to indicate an approval of the same arrangements taking place in America. From these directions it is very evident that the ministers are expected to do just what is arranged by others for them to do — when, where, how much, or how little — for " brotherly guidance will be much needed " — the workers and the committee should " understand one another" — the "elder- ship must be in lively exercise," particularly "when there is the stimulus of novelty or numbers" — so that the committee maybe able to "give advice to a minister," and "good soldiers" may "keep rank," and not give ''rambling addresses that the people cannot follow," but must take care lest "a whole meeting be burdened because some one wishes to relieve his mind." " Meetings for preaching the gospel may be held every night," and a "conference every morning for Scripture study and prayer," and one or two Friends should be appointed to " introduce the subject for the day," etc. t Respecting the consistency of the labors of this committee, there was doubt- less some divergence of sentiment among the members visited. A letter to a friend from Samuel Evans, an aged and well-esteemed member of Lancashire Quarterly Meeting, who has long mourned over the lapsed condition of things, but who, in his 85th year, still adheres to "the body," makes the following remarks in alluding to the visit of a section of the committee at Warrington: . . . . " It was not to me a satisfactory opportunity, as I could not, while it lasted, nor have I been able since, to get over the great inconsistency of repre- sentatives of the Yearly Meeting going through the length and breadth of the land, preaching doctrines not only not in accordance with those of the Society 1849.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 399 We must now recur briefly, but a little more partic- ularly, to the attacks on Robert Barclay's " Apology," and the doctrine of" Immediate Revelation, already alluded to. Doubtless they had (kept up as they were from year to year with no rebuke from the body) a powerful influence in aid of J. J. Gurney's writings, in turning aside the faith of many in England from the ancient principles of the Society. The most prominent of the assailants was Dr. Edward Ash, of Bristol, occu- pying the station of a minister, and the last survivor of the Committee of the Yearly Meeting on the Beacon difficulty. As early as 1849 he had expressed, in a printed tract, decided objections to the republication of the " Apology " by the Society ; and three years after- wards, finding that the Meeting for Sufferings still con- tinued to offer the work for sale, he resigned his mem- bership in a letter to his Monthly Meeting. In this letter he mentioned that the parts of the "Apology" to which he objected "embrace a large portion of the doc- trinal part of the work, and have reference to subjects of primary and vital concern to the church," and " to some prominent parts of our system of discipline." In the appendix to his letter, which he put in circulation, he gave a brief specification of his objections; which may be summed up as referring to the doctrines of Im- of Friends, but subversive of them ; and yet no one makes an effort, either with pen or tongue, to lay open the iniquity of such practice." And in reference to the subsequent Quarterly Meeting, he says he "found no comfort there," add- ing, " I cannot say that I have been edified by my attendance, but have returned under a load of discouragement, from seeing those Friends, who, from their station, ought to be the leaders of the flock Zionward, associating with and aid- ing such as cause the people to err; who run before they are sent." Doubt|ess, many more would have been able to bear a similar testimony, had they with a ingle eye consulted their own best feelings in the tight of Tru(h, instead of putting confidence in man. 400 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. mediate Revelation and the Universal and Saving Li»;ht, tlie Holy Scriptures, Justification, many interpretations of Scripture considered by him as incorrect, and a prev- alency, throughout the work (the Apology) of what is "defective and erroneous." The latter clause also of the statement of the Proposition on Worship, lie said, " furnished of itself an insuperable objection," in his view, " to the adoption and circulation of the work."* It was an evidence of great defection, that the Monthly Meeting, instead of treating with Edward Ash as a manifest and open transgressor in issuing so palpable an attack upon its well-known principles, and disowning him on the failure of due efforts to reclaim him, permit- ted him quietly to depart without bearing any open testimony against his errors. He remained outside of the Society for some years, and then, believing, as he said, " that the Society had come round to his views," he was received by the Monthly Meeting again into membership, without any change of his sentiments respecting Barclay's " Apology," or any condemnation of his denial of some of the fundamental doctrines of the Society ; the Monthly Meeting considering, as was after- wards said on their behalf, " that the Society had vir- tually disowned the 'Apology' as a correct exposition * Some of the Gurney party in America may perhaps allege that they do not follow E. Ash in his denunciations of these doctrines of Fox and Barclay, knowing that they lie at the very foundation of our profession ; but we must remember that E. Ash was a disciple of J. J. Gurney, having lived at Norwich in his earlier career, and been for many years in close intimacy with him, and that I. Crewd- 6on and J. J. Gurney inculcated the very same errors, though the latter perhaps not quite so unreservedly and openly, except in his tract on "Misinterpretation of Scripture," etc. Some of them in Philadelphia are also of late attempting to induce the absurd belief that even George Fox's writings can be made to coun- tenance their inroads upon the true spiritual worship, as always held and prac- tised by Friends. 1873.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 401 of its views at that time." Accordingly, in 1873, he published another pamphlet, this time aimed ostensibly against George Fox, but really and obviously against the doctrine of Immediate Revelation and Universal and Saving Light, so powerfully promulgated by that enlightened and truly wise man, and by Robert Barclay and hundreds of others of our first Friends. In this pamphlet, though he confessed (p. 34) to a very limited knowledge of G. Fox's writings, of the character of which he says, " I know nothing beyond such as are included in the Journal," which comprises less than one- fourth of the whole ; yet he had the audacity to labor to show that eminently gifted man to have been a mere enthusiast in some of his most cherished convictions and most prominently important principles, very credulous and self-opinionated ; and to assert that " mischiefs re- sulted from his mistakes of faith and teaching." And at the same time that Ash speaks many times over in this attack, with remarkable egotism and self-confidence, of his "own conviction" of many things which he as- serts as boldly as if they were thereby alone rendered invulnerable, he inveighs against G. Fox's "facility of belief, vagueness of statement, and absence of adduced evidence," as a conspicuous fault in his writings — says that "he himself and not a few of his brethren more or less frequently mistook the workings of their own im- agination, or other natural faculties, for divine com- munication or commands" — that there were "elements in his mental character, which, had they not been coun- teracted by others, might have generated a real fanati- cism" — and alleges that he was "of small mental ac- quirements," and fell into mistakes through " his belief 402 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. that he was the recipient of immediate revelations of divine truth" — boldly asserting that he was alto- gether mistaken in supposing himself commissioned to teach as he did. The main drift, indeed, of the tract is to inculcate, by bold but unsupported assertions, the belief that the doctrine of Immediate Revelation and Universal and Saving Light, as taught by George Fox and our other early Friends, and always owned by true Friends from that day to this, was a mis- chievous mistake, a mere delusion, in accordance with his attack, many years before, on Robert Barclay ; and he clinches his argument (to his own great exultation) by the assertion (p. 40) — alas ! too true in itself — that though this doctrine has never been officially or directly disowned " by the collective body," yet it has " virtually disappeared from among us in this country [England], and I believe from the larger portion of our community in America." Soon after issuing this publication, viz., on the 23d of twelfth month, 1873, Edward Ash was taken away by death. After all this self-evident departure from and even opposition to the very groundwork of our profession, the Monthly Meeting of Bristol and Frenchay sent forth a Testimony of their unity with him as a member and minister, full of praise of his virtues; in which they designated him as "a faithful and loving minister of the gospel of Christ," and spoke of " his extreme conscien- tiousness, and his sensitiveness with regard to anything which he considered erroneous or defective in Christian doctrine;" and with regard to his ministry, that "as a minister of the gospel, he was deservedly honored amongst us" ... . that he "was largely engaged in 1873.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 403 declaring, in a clear, instructive, and comprehensive manner, the unsearchable riches of Christ." This Testi- mony concerning him "was adopted by London Yearly Meeting in 1874, though with some totally ineffectual objection, for publication among its records ; the meeting being exultingly informed by members of that Monthly Meeting, that " lie never withdrew a single statement he had made in condemnation of Barclay's Apology," and that "the Monthly Meeting was well aware that his views were unchanged." The clerk of the Yearly Meeting (J. Storrs Fry) corroborated this statement. Who can doubt that, by the adoption and approval of such a document, London Yearly Meeting publicly and knowingly sanctioned Edward Ash's course of repudia- tion of that great work, the " Apology for the True Christian Divinity," by Robert Barclay? Another minister (so-called), Robert Charleton, had also come forth in the same line as Edward Ash, in assailing the principles of Robert Barclay; and like- wise Robert Alsop, then of Stoke Newington, near Lon- don, who, early in 1873, printed "for private circula- tion" (a mere subterfuge), but spread widely abroad, a tract entitled " What is the Gospel ?" — devoted to show- ing what he supposed to be some of Barclay's mistakes. It seemed as if some of the members — nay, of the minis- ters! — of a Society in whose arising and early progress George Fox and Robert Barclay had been instruments so conspicuously made use of by the Almighty, could now never have enough, or settle down in their beds, until they had destroyed all confidence in those ancient worthies as exponents of that Society's true principles! These insidious but superficial attacks were promptly 404 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVII. replied to by several writers, some of whom had been attenders of the English Conference meetings before- mentioned ; who more or less ably defended the doctrine of Immediate Revelation as held by Friends, and clearly demonstrated the fallacy of those specious arguments, and futile attempts to prove Barclay mistaken ; refuting also all pretension to consistency in men holding such views as Ash, Charleton, and Alsop had put forth, still professing to be members and even ministers of the Society of Friends. Yet, strange to say, most of the writers of these defences of Barclay still continued to cling to the lapsed body of London Yearly Meeting. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 405 CHAPTER XVIII. CONCLUDING REMARKS — THE IDENTITY OF THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. On a retrospect of the foregoing sad development of departure from first principles, what do we now see in applying it to the present state of the heterogeneous body popularly called the Society of Friends? The nominal Society probably never was much more numer- ous than at this day. How many and opposite soever are the divisions, they all claim to be Friends. But are all to be owned as Friends, who claim the name? Schism necessarily vitiates the claim of one or the other party therein, to be the original body. What has been the result of the schisms we have been considering, in this respect? The early and local schismatic bodies — the Barnard- ites, in Ireland — the New Lights, of New England — the Beaconites, of England — as well as the Anti-Slavery Friends, of Indiana — have all passed out of existence as distinct or visible religious associations. It is true, there are yet subsisting three very small companies of dissentients from the "Smaller Bodies;" — the King party, of New York — the Lam born party, of Ohio — and the Middle party, of New England ; — but neither of these companies has any apparent probability of a continuance. No body of Friends elsewhere, large or small, owns them, or corresponds with them. Each one 406 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. of them appears totally isolated from the others, and nursing the seeds of dissolution. Leaving these then out of view, as we necessarily must, what do we see? In the first place, there is the large Society of " Hieks- ites," and their adherents through local circumstances or family tics. Xext, there is the much larger and more influential Society of " Gurneyites," and their adherents through fear, favor, affection, or views of interest. And lastly, there are the "Smaller Bodies," scattered in Pennsylvania, Xew Jersey, Maryland, Xew York, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Xew England, and Old England, and even a few in Xorway ; though the hulk of the members in the latter have recently placed themselves in connec- tion with the lapsed Yearly Meeting of London. It may be thought by some, that a fourth class should be here enumerated, viz., the middle party, which at present controls the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia. But as this class has from the first practically promoted the success of the Gurneyan system by its connivances, though sometimes in words uttering weak and unavail- ing lamentations over it, and has never given the least support (but always the contrary) to the Smaller Bodies which have become the only consistent and earnest tes- timony bearers against the doctrinal innovations of Gurneyism, and as this middle party seems most likely to succumb eventually to the gradual but continued pressure of the innovators, whom it has had no courage effectually to withstand, the Gurneyites and the Middle party must in reality be considered as of one class. We may indeed query, in case the middle party should con- tinue many years longer, whether they will not become "hewers of wood and drawers of water" for the great 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 407 majority still owned by them as the Society of Friends. Why have they not taken a more decided, consistent, and effective stand against Gurneyism ? Is it not mani- festly because they do not, after all, truly realize for themselves, nor appreciate to the full, and consequently dare not acknowledge to the world, and act consistently with that acknowledgment, that the new system of doc- trines is, equally with the Hieksian system, a fundamental departure from Quakerism, or the pure faith of the gos- pel, and therefore ought to be testified against with equal faithfulness ?* It is well known that these three claimants to the once despised and persecuted, but now flattered name of Quakerism, have no mutual fellowship one with the other, but are fundamentally opposed in principle. Yet the true Society of Friends is and must be but one, the world over. It came forth originally founded on a pure faith in Christ, the divine Head and Bridegroom ; pro- fessing and aiming (without arrogating to itself to ex- clude other seeking souls purely depending on the same Lord) to be the visibly gathered representation of the militant church — the spouse of Christ. This was a high profession ; but thus it was. Alas! alas! how has the mighty fallen ! Has it, since those days, maintained that eminent and favored position? Is Christ divided ? * If there is life in the body, and an earnest concern to avoid the inroads of error, how is it that they suiter the Twelfth Street Meeting in Philadelphia to go on year after year, openly fraternizing with the schism and promoting the glaring departures from the principles and practices of Friends? Why does not Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting, if it really wishes to stand for the ancient faith, call that Meeting to account for its long-continued course herein ? Yet their periodical paper, " The Friend," still constantly speaks of the Gurneyites as "Friends," and of their Yearly Meetings as "Sister Churches," and "Sister Yearly Meetings;" thus manifestly owning them as one people with themselves. 408 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. Are his members divided? Can any be called members of his body, or members of the church or spouse of Christ, who are denying him, either in regard to what he did for us, in that prepared body, or in what he is doing for us within us, by his blessed Spirit, as he is the Word nigh in the heart, the Light within or inward Light, the baptizer with fire and with the Holy Ghost, the great purifier and sanctifier and leader of his people ? But to come down to the question of our own day, even of the identity of the true Society of Friends. It was the doctrine of Robert Barclay and all our early Friends, and has indeed become, as it were, an acknowl- edged axiom among most serious professing Christians of the present day, that they who faithfully maintain the original fundamental doctrines and testimonies of a religious Society, have alone a rightful claim to be that Society — not those who introduce or promote innovations inconsistent with the original foundation. Would any of us be willing to acknowledge as Episcopalians, a body who should arise among them, holding and teaching Unitarian doctrines? Or as Presbyterians, such as should teach among them the doctrines and practices of the Romish church? Or could a Moravian congrega- tion, for some reason or other claiming to belong to the great Roman "Catholic" body, be by any possibility acknowledged by that body, or considered by others as having a valid claim to assume its name, in order to open its way among the people ? With respect to the Hicksian Society, it has been abundantly proved that they came forth on the avowed ground of a difference of doctrine, and in support of Elias Hicks against those who condemned his doctrinal 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 409 errors. What these were, we have already seen in the first volume of this work. Suffice it here to say, that they were destructive of the original tenets of the So- ciety. It cannot be alleged that he did not hold or teach these errors ; for he openly avowed to the sten- ographer his approval of the printed Sermons in which, as well as in his Letters, these errors were characteristic- ally abundant. Neither can it be said that his follow- ers were not aware of them ; for notwithstanding the free public animadversions upon them, they published them abroad over the land in his Sermons and otherwise, and many of them taught the very same things, and ear- nestly contended for their correctness. And to this day, large numbers of their preachers and influential mem- bers are well known to be equally unsound as to the Christian faith. It is true that at the present day there are on the other hand some estimable members of the Hicksian body, who would not wish to be supposed, as individu- als, to hold the gross errors of principle for which Elias Hicks was condemned on the one hand, while he was supported on the other. These may be said mainly to take a negative position as to doctrine, having really no living effective testimony to sound doctrine, nor any against the false. Thus they remain attached to a So- ciety which, to say the least, is tainted with a denial of " the Lord that bought them," by the public teaching of very many of its prominent teachers, as well as by the utterances of Elias Hicks — a Society which has never cleared its hands by any official disavowal of the palpable errors of these leaders; and which, indeed, no- toriously has been and still is without the power to veil, n —35 410 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. purify itself from this taint, by testifying distinctly against them and their false principles, and effectually checking their influence within its borders. Doubtless, some of their members (for whom, as individuals, I have a true respect and solicitude) lament the teachings of such evil doctrines among them ; but there it ends. Why arc they without the power to remove the taint ? Because the poison has taken too deep a hold of the body at large — too many are concerned in it — they have too long connived at it — the bulk of their people love to have it so — and they could not now clear it out from among them, in their collective capacity, for they are greatly in the minority. There are indeed but few among them who are totally clear from the influence of this poison, and qualified distinctly to perceive and act upon the difference between sound doctrine and un- sound, or even to appreciate and acknowledge the baleful influence of the latter in religious association. This is an undeniable characteristic of most even of the honest- hearted among that people, and many of them are openly favorable to great latitude of belief. Such, alas, is the benumbing result of unsafe association in religious pro- fession. One of their prominent, talented, and moderate men, Samuel M. Janney, has lately published a work in four volumes, 12mo, entitled, " A History of the Society of Friends." The fourth volume exemplifies the truth of the remarks made in the last paragraph. It is largely characterized by a dissertation (from its author's stand- point) on the Hicksian separation. In the prior portion of the volume (page 144), the author makes a sort of apology for some of E. Hicks's written sentiments, im- 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 411 plying that the letters written by him during the last year of his life (1829), should be considered as express- ing the settled opinions of that period, when he "was 81 years of age, rather than some of " an earlier date," which he thinks were written " without due consider- ation." Yet he appears very careful not to specify what sentiments these were, to which he alludes as " much to be regretted." But a little after this (on page 147), he says : " This much-abused minister of Christ, as we shall prove in the sequel, uniformly asserted his belief in the Scriptural testimony concerning the divinity and mission of Jesus Christ, and gave assurance of his sin- cerity by a holy life." Did he not know that the public have access to E. Hicks's printed Sermons, affording abundant proof to the contrary ? In a subsequent part of the same volume,* S. M. Janney makes the acknowledgment, that, "Those who are familiar with the writings of the early Friends, must have observed the deep reverence with which they speak of the blessed Jesus, as the immaculate Son of God, and Saviour of men." And on page 61, he quotes George "Whitehead as saying, "And in the same love the Son freely gave his life, yea, even himself, a ransom for all, for a testimony in due time." But he does not state how different this is from the style in which Elias Hicks always spoke of the Lord Jesus. Yet, notwithstanding these admissions, the same vol- ume is partly occupied by a superficial account of the schism in Ireland,! in which Hannah Barnard was .so conspicuous, with an obvious endeavor to screen her * Page 5:5 of his Treatise on the Separation. t For an account of which, see the first volume of this work, Chapter II. 412 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. and others from the serious charges brought against them respecting unsound doctrines, and to make it ap- pear that she was treated with harshness and irregu- larity. In the same manner, but with apparently greater care, the attempt is likewise made to cover up and keep out of view the principal evidences of error on the part of Elias Hicks, and to represent him as promulgating the doctrines of ancient Quakerism. But in endeavor- ing to do this, we shall soon see that he unintentionally proves him to have been unsound in the faith, even in the passages brought forward to show him as sound. Janney here quotes certain parts of printed Letters of E. Hicks, wherein he seems to approach sound doc- trine ; but keeps out. of view other Letters; and very numerous passages in his Sermons, wherein his ex- tremely erroneous sentiments are particularly prominent. Yet even in the parts selected carefully by S. M. Janney, we find such expressions as the following (page 142) : that "the light within" is "our only standard principle from the beginning," and "the only rule of faith and practice" — thus shutting out the Scriptures as even a "secondary rule." The apostle Paul was not of this mind when he said that they are "able to make wise unto salvation, through faith in Christ Jesus," and are " profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." On page 143, he quotes E. Hicks as saying that "all parts of them [the Scriptures] that could not be known but by revelation, were written by holy men as they were inspired by the Holy Ghost" — but adding that " when the Scriptures have directed us to this light 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 413 within, there they must stop'' — as if they were of no fur- ther use.* And (page 145) that " the Book called the Scriptures" appears "to have been the cause of fourfold more harm than good to Christendom since the apostles' days" — and (page 146) that "it is clear they [the Scrip- tures] were not in any wise accessory to this infant be- ginning of reformation " under Luther and his fellows. These latter expressions occur in what Janney admits to have been an " ill-digested letter." Of the same ten- dency is a passage quoted by Janney (at page 148), in which E. Hicks appears as querying thus with regard to the Bible: "Yet at the same time, may it not be one of the best books, if rightly used under the guidance of the Holy Spirit?" — but adding immediately, that "if abused, like every other blessing, it becomes a curse /"f On page 155, we find him quoted by Janney, as say- ing of Jesus Christ, that "he came to be a Saviour to that nation, and was limited to that nation" — and (p. 158) that lie healed them "of all their legal sins" — (p. 159) that by John's baptism Jesus received "a more * Wiliiam Penn, after declaring how the Scriptures had been " ever blessed to " him, and charging his children " to read them daily," says : " For they were given forth by holy men of God in divers ages, as they were moved of the Holy Spirit ; and are the declared and revealed mind and will of the Holy God to mankind under divers dispensations ; and they are certainly able to make the man of God perfect, through faith, unto salvation; being such a clear testi- mony to the salvation that is of God, through Christ the second Adam, the Light of the world, the quickening Spirit, who is full of grace and truth (whose light, grace, Spirit, and truth, bear witness to them in every sensible soul), as they frequently, plainly, and solemnly bear testimony to the Light, Spirit, Grace, and Truth, both in himself, and in and to his people, to their sanctifi- cation, justification, redemption, and consolation, and in all men to their visit- ation, reproof, and conviction in their evil ways " — Penn's Advice to his Children. t These expressions are in a letter of E. Hicks, in 1825, to Moses Brown, of Providence, R. I., in reply to one from tne latter, tenderly and faithfully labor- ing with him on account of his errors. See "The Friend," Philadelphia, Vol. Ill, page 333. 414 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. full effusion" of the Holy Spirit, "which qualified him for his gospel mission." On p. 160, Hicks, as quoted by Janney, places " the miraculous conception of Jesus, and of Isaac, and of John the Baptist" on an equality — and (p. 162) says that Jesus did not arrive "at a full state of sonship," "until he had gone through the last institute of the law dispensation, viz., John's watery baptism" — thus not only making the mistake of in- cluding John's baptism as a part of the dispensation of the law (whereas it was altogether intermediate), but alleging that Christ Jesus was not fully the Son of God until after he had partaken of it. Immediately he adds, " he then witnessed the fulness of the second birth, being' now born into the nature, spirit, and fulness of the heavenly Father." So that the blessed Jesus, accord- ing to Hicks, and his advocate, S. M. Janney, stood in need of regeneration — "the second birth !" And we may here understand how much E. Hicks meant, when he avowed, as he did sometimes, a belief in the Divinity of Christ. Did S. M. Janney see this, when he indorsed him as uniformly advocating the sound views of primi- tive Friends? On page 165, he is quoted by Janney as denying that the crucifixion " was an atonement for any sins but the legal sins of the Jews," and adding his belief that it " was a, full type of the inward sacrifice that every sinner must make, in giving up that sinful life of his own will, etc." — only a type, after all ! Would any man, sound in the faith of Christ, express himself after this manner, or would any man, sound in the faith of Christ sanction such expressions ? That our primitive Friends held any such sentiments as these, we may safely and totally deny. Indeed, it has been over 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 415 and again publicly demonstrated, that such allegations are only a revival of the old oft-refuted slanders put forth against Friends by their persecutors and by apostates and enemies of the Truth. As to what S. M. Janney says of the great latitude of doctrine which he thinks was allowed in the early times of the Society, it has no solid foundation. The genuine teachings and guidance of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus never led to such latitudinarianism, or to such confusion of tongues as would have been the result. The spouse of Christ was never intended — nor was the Society of the People called Quakers — to be a heterogeneous mix- ture of all sorts of opinions. The early F riends, not- withstanding all the attempts of the disciples of Elias Hicks to assert the contrary, had a firm faith — and that a sound one too — in the great truths of Christian doc- trine.* And there is ample material in the history of the Society, to prove, not only that they were no Socin- ians, but that they were alive to all attempts to pervert or misrepresent their faith in the Son of God, his mirac- ulous birth, his divine life, his propitiatory death, his resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the Father, where he now sitteth as our great high Priest, our Mediator and Intercessor. Thomas Ellvvood, in replying to George Keith's book, accusing William Penn and his brethren of Deism, says that George Keith well knew that neither he himself while he was a Friend, "nor William Penn, nor any of * This is developed with great clearness in the "Defence of the Christian Doetrines of the Society of Friends," compiled by Thomas Evans, Edward Hettle, and Joseph Roherts, Philadelphia, 1825. 416 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN' [CHAP. XVIII. " the Quakers, were ever deists — ever did deny, disown, " or disbelieve the coming, incarnation, sufferings, and "death of Christ as man outwardly in the flesh, his res- " urrection, ascension, and mediatorship — and he [G. K.] "himself has undesignedly acquitted W. Penn from his " present charge of deism, by a story he told in his first "Narrative, page 38, that upon some one urging him to "give an instance of one English Quaker that he ever "heard pray to Christ; W. Penn being present said, 'I " am an Englishman, and a Quaker, and I own I have oft "prayed to Christ Jesus — even him that was crucified.' "This he [G. K.] says was in the year 1678."* In those days the denial of these doctrines was not a prevalent or prominent error in professing Christendom ; but when such denial did occur among those belonging to the Society, means were decidedly taken to clear the body from such a reproach. A very plain evidence of this may be cited in the case of Jeffrey Bullock, who denied the divinity and atonement of Christ, and was disowned,f so early as 1675, fifteen years before the death of George Fox. We must no less emphatically deny the allegation of this author, that the controversy previous to the Separa- tion of 1827 was between ancient Quakerism, as repre- sented by Hicks, and modern error, as represented by Gurney. The views of J. J. Gurney were scarcely known at all in this land at the date when the opposi- tion to E. Hicks's errors became developed ; and those who prominently opposed him, with few exceptions, were * Life, etc., of T. Elhvood, London, 1714, p. 442. t " Historical Memoirs of the Society of Friends," by W. H., 2d edition, Phil- adelphia, p. 247. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 417 then sound in the ancient faith of the Society, and brought forward boldly and copiously the ever acknowl- edged writings of our early Friends (and not the modern ones), to prove E. Hicks's departure from the faith of the gospel. And the evidence they thus brought for- ward was cumulative and overwhelming, and clearly proved that the Hicks party had shamefully garbled and falsified the statements of ancient Friends in endeav- oring to make them say what they never meant to say. This has been thrown before the world abundantly in print, and how can such a writer as S. M. Janney be ignorant of it ? But we here see the most approved author of the pres- ent day among the Hicksites, and one of the most moderate in the expression of their views, sanctioning several of the unsound sentiments of Elias Hicks, under the erroneous plea that he was advocating the principles held by the early Friends. Can, therefore, any one reasonably doubt that the body of these people are still clinging to the same views, so far at least as they really have any characteristic doctrines ? That they are not, and never were, the doctrines of true Friends, has already been sufficiently insisted upon. It is true, as they say, that the great distinguishing principle of the Society of Friends has always been their faith in the Holy Spirit as the primary leader, and guide into all truth. But this faith never could lead any to deny the plain testi- mony of Holy Scripture to the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son and Sent of the Father, born of the Virgin Mary, and one with Him to all eternity, or to discard his death on the cross as an atonement for our sins. Therefore, their denial or evasion of these precious truths must con- vol. ii. — 36 418 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. clusively prove that their professed faith in the Holy Spirit is not a true and living and experimental faith therein, being contrary to the plain testimony of the Spirit itself. And therefore the party holding those false doctrines, or permitting them to be held and taught among them, cannot be the true Society of Friends. It behoves the honest-hearted among them, to see to it. With respect to theGurney party, and their adherents through fear, favor, affection, or views of interest — large and influential as it is — its claims to be the true Society of Friends are no less hollow than those of the Hicks party. We have seen in a previous chapter, how Lon- don Yearly Meeting clearly committed itself to a fellow- ship with the doctrines contained in the publications of J. J. Gurney, not only by frequently sending him forth as a minister in unity, but by indorsing the eulogy of his soundness contained in the official Memorial of him after his decease. We have seen, too, how that pre- viously, in 1836, they had taken upon themselves the enunciation of one of his favorite dogmas — that the Bible is " the appointed means of making known to us the blessed truths of Christianity" — "the only divinely authorized record of the doctrines which we are bound as Christians to believe, and of the moral principles which are to regulate our actions" — a dogma which opened the door wide for all the subsequent innovations. We have also seen how, afterwards, they promptly acknowledged fellowship with all the bodies in America which sepa- rated on the ground of opposition to any check being put upon the spread of his doctrines, as well as with those who went bodily, without separation among them- selves, in the same direction. And they who have 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 419 watched subsequent events have observed how largely and how rapidly not only London Yearly Meeting, but all the others involved in the same views, have gone into either actual or conniving sanction of successive practical innovations, entirely foreign to the character of Friends, but the genuine fruit of the self-activity and worldly religion cherished and promoted by the new doctrines. It may perhaps be said, on behalf of Philadelphia and Ohio Yearly Meetings, controlled as they have been of late by the middle party, that they have never officially sanctioned the departures in doctrine, but testified, years ago, against them, and may therefore now rest upon that testimony ; and that many of their members still con- tinue to lament the defection in principle and practice, and occasionally a document is put forth, deprecating certain features of its development, particularly pressing upon their attention for the time. But do not they, likewise, practically connive at the heresy, and join in with its advocates — to a degree which the pure truth could never sanction — in withholding now for many years any clear and open testimony against it as a whole, or any recognition of those who are openly standing against it — in refraining from putting the plain recpiisi- tions of the Discipline in practice against it — and, so far at least as Philadelphia Yearly Meeting is concerned, in constantly amalgamating themselves with it, and thus sanctioning the assumed position of those engaged in it, by receiving the ministers from all parts of the Gurney body, and joining their members continually thereto through the medium of certificates of membership, on removal? "We recommend this family to your Chris- 420 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS EN [CHAP. XVIII. tian care and oversight." Who can hear these words read, without knowing that it is an acknowledgment of fellowship? What act could be a more practical or emphatic acknowledgment of it ? On the other hand, no certificates are thought of as admissible to the "Smaller Bodies," or their meetings for worship to be attended by any of their members, but those who join any of these are generally promptly disowned. Well, but, it is said, the members of these large Yearly Meet- ings are still members of the Society, and we cannot cast them off : if we did, we should entirely isolate ourselves, sanction the separations which have already taken place, and promote one within our own borders, which we cannot bear to think of. Does such reasoning justify a continuing; to sanction the standing; of those who are known to be engaged in revolutionizing- the Societv? Is it not doing evil that good may come? Do they argue thus in regard to the Hicksites ? Then why per- sist in such a course with those whose doctrines are no less a departure — but a far more insidious departure — from the fundamental principles of Quakerism — of primitive Christianity ? It has become notorious that J. J. Gurney's system was antagonistic to the spirit of true Quakerism ; but not only is it adhered to by the great body of the Yearly Meetings formerly called Orthodox, to distinguish them from the followers of Elias Hicks ; but advances are made by the members, of latter years, and either tacitly or openly allowed by all those bodies, practically far beyond what was the limit of the inconsistencies during the lifetime of J. J. Gurney. These are too well known to need more than an incidental mention here. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 421 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, it is true, has avoided any official sanction of the obvious departures from many of our testimonies prevalent among the other Yearly Meetings, and to a considerable extent known also to be existing within her own limits; yet, as we have already seen, the avowed partisans of Gurneyism among its members are continued by it in places of great trust and influence, and the same class coming from other parts are received as if they were unquestionably mem- bers, and the fundamental nature of the departure on the part of the Gurney meetings is almost lost sight of, or merely alluded to as some cause of uneasiness. This was rendered particularly and renewedly evident in the action- of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1875, on the occasion of a bequest of money (about $10,000) left to it, and a like sum to three other Yearly Meetings, on the condition, twice expressed in the will, of "unity with London Yearly Meeting." After considerable discussion of so insidious a proposition, it was concluded to accept the legacy, and a Trustee was appointed to receive the money, when offered by the executors, and apply it according to the wishes of the testator! Thus the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia not only placed itself once more on a footing of brotherhood with the three Gurneyan Yearly Meetings mentioned in the will as its co-recipients, but bartered away for a sum of money and a hollow peace with the Gurney party, what little re- mained of its own testimony against the course of Lon- don Yearly Meeting. It did not dare to say whether it was or was not in unity with that meeting, whose certificates for ministers it had been for years past reject- ing; but allowed the world to take it for granted that 422 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. it had no testimony against it, by concluding to receive the money, which it was twice told in the will was to be given to a body " in unity with the London Yearly Meeting!" All the sophistical reasoning (in The Friend and elsewhere) about the application of the money to the publication of the writings of early Friends, cannot change the fact that Philadelphia Yearly Meeting has, by its conclusion to accept money left under such a pro- viso, ranged itself, quietly but undeniably, beside the other bodies which fraternize with London in its apos- tasy. The word "apostasy" is here used deliberately, and in its full sense, under the conviction that the Gur- ney system, with its results and concomitants, is fully as much an apostasy from the original and fundamental principles of the Society of Friends, as was the early Roman church from the Christianity of primitive times. Can the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia be fairly sup- posed to bear a living and faithful testimony against this great revolution, under such circumstances? Has she not already fallen from her high estate into the snares laid for her by the great enemy of truth ; and will she not be swallowed up of the vortex on whose margin she has been so long dallying with the danger, and in which so many have been carried away ? A living church must not consort with dead bodies. But when we take as it were a bird's-eye view of the condition of London Yearly Meeting, who can doubt that it has lost its vitality as a portion of the true So- ciety of Friends ? In the first place, it has sanctioned, in one way or other repeatedly, the errors of J. J. Gurney, Edward Ash, and others, amounting to an abandonment of the 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 423 Society's long-established and well-known principles respecting the universal and saving light of Christ as the primary rule of faith and practice, and the Scrip- tures as secondary to it, and a substitution for it of the Scriptures as the first guide, the only divinely author- ized record and appointed means of a knowledge of divine truth — a substitution of justification by a mere belief and confession of Christ's work without us, instead of a being made really just and holy by living faith in him, and in all that he has done and is doing for us, and obedience to him as the true light within the soul — a substitution of the activity of self in the unregenerate mind, instead of a true and humble waiting of the soul on God alone for all its fresh springs, for all its ability to do anything to His honor or its own salvation — a practical discarding of the doctrine of perfection, or the possibility and necessity of freedom from sin — a cherish- ing of the idea that prayer and praise are at the com- mand of the creaturely powers of man. And in the second place, these changes in doctrine have been fol- lowed by their genuine fruits, in a practical abandon- ment, by the body, of the testimony against tithes — an absolute discarding, by the Meeting for Sufferings, of Barclay's " Apology" as an exponent of our. principles — a suppression of almost all the ancient Queries, leaving only two mutilated ones to be answered once a year only, with many other changes in the Discipline — an allowance for, and a frequent practice of, the reading of the Bible in meetings for divine worship, and even singing of hymns therein* — meetings appointed for * A series of "Special Meetings," authorized by the Bedford Friends' Insti- tute, were held in several of the Friends' meeting-houses, etc., in London, from the 2Cth of the ninth month to the 3d of tenth month, 1875, including a " Devo- tional Meeting of Workers" (so styled in the call for the meetings), held at the 424 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. prayer, and prearrangement for the proceedings therein — music practised and taught in families and schools, and even proposed in meetings for worship — an anom- alous Missionary Association, as a wheel within a wheel, but incompatible with the Society's uniform principle and practice hitherto in regard to the ministry — the indiscriminate wholesale admission of members very questionably convinced of our religious faith — the lapse of meetings for discipline into mere debating assemblies, including even the Yearly Meeting itself — the allowance of marriages in meetings between members and non- members, and even when neither party is in member- ship* — the very general discarding of plainness in dress, Institute, and a "daily meeting for prayer, and to make arrangements for the evening meetings." ■' Ministers who contemplated attending the evening meet- ings" were informed that it was "essential for them to be acquainted with the arrangements made from day to day." At these "special meetings," Moody and Sankey's hymns were sung, and on one occasion an overseer of one of the meetings in London gave out one of them to he sung in the congregation. In the evening of Second-day of the following week, a " Meeting for religious and so- cial fellowship" was held at Devonshire House meeting-house (where the Yearly Meeting is held) by appointment of Jonathan Grubb (a son of the late Sarah L. Grubh !) In the Circular calling the meeting, " all were invited," members or not, but especially the younger members of the Quarterly Meeting, and they were in- formed that the " special object " was " mutual Christian encouragement and com- munion in the spirit of the words — ' Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to the other.' " Similar meetings were, during the autumn, held in different places in England, including one at Bolton, in the "Friends' meeting-house," which was originated by five members of a committee of Lancashire and Cheshire Quarterly Meeting; on which occasion "ministers and Christians of all denom- inations" were, in the printed handbills, " invited to join iti the work." In the " Friends' meeting-house " at Leeds five such meetings were held, the handbills announcing, in large type, "Gospel Meetings — Society of Friends — a Series of Meetings .... Several Ministers expected .... to be held .... Sunday, Nov. 14th, etc a Bible Reading (for united study of Holy Scriptures, and for Prayer) .... on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday," etc. * The number of marriages in 1874, in which one or both were non-members, was reported to the Yearly Meeting in 1875, as more than one-third of the whole, viz., 17 out of 47 or 48. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 425 language, and deportment, and of simplicity in houses and furniture, so conspicuous a testimony of our fore- fathers against the follies and extravagance of the worldly spirit — the erection of monuments or grave- stones in burial-grounds — the allowance of all sorts of attacks on our ancient principles to be published by members with impunity — meetings for studying the Bible by means of human learning and self-reliance, these meetings being adopted by the Yearly Meeting, and inserted on its List of Meetings — the substitution of such meetings in many places for the meetings for divine worship — a prevalent disposition to undervalue the important doctrinal stand taken by the Society, and to place it on a level with the platforms of other denom- inations, under a fallacious plea for charity and no judg- ing, and that controversy must be shunned by all means — a cowardly evasiveness and equivocal roundabout way of speaking, even in the issues of the Yearly Meet- ing itself, and its committees, when called by necessitv to speak of our distinctive principles — and many other departures, too numerous and too rapidly accumulating to be specified here — which plainly evince to the candid mind, that the change is a fundamental one, and that London Yearly Meeting, which once stood so faithful to the ancient standard of Truth, is no longer a true repre- sentation of Quakerism, but that its present pretence of being still a Yearly Meeting of the religious Society of Friends, is a palpable deception and imposition on those ignorant of the state of the case. These facts are well known to the members of the Yearly Meeting of Phila- delphia; yet that meeting could not, in 1875, attempt to condemn London Yearly Meeting, but was willing to 426 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. appear to the world as if in unity with it ! Was this from a desire to secure the money so conditionally be- queathed, or was it from fear of offending the open ad- vocates of J. J. Gurney ? If the former, how humiliating its position ! Or if the latter, does it not show the hope- less subserviency of that Yearly Meeting to the revo- lutionary majority in the Society? Should any attempt be made on the part of the advanced Gurneyites, as has lately been somewhat ostentatiously threatened,* to gain possession of the property of Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing by legal proceedings, there will then be no safety in the halfway course, pursued by the middle party in Ohio, by which they lost their suit;f but the almost inevitable result will be a loss of some at least of their valuable property, and consequently of their standing or prestige before the community at large, unless an open and unmistakable stand is taken on the primitive prin- ciples of the Society, with as open and candid a dec- laration that London Yearly Meeting has departed from those principles, and is no longer the " London Yearly Meeting of Friends," but a schismatic body, palming itself falsely on the world as the true Society. Rome is no longer the Christian church, profess it as highly as she may. And is not the apostasy as obvious in the one case as in the other? Within London Yearly Meeting, and by some of its prominent members, attacks, as we have already seen, have for years been continually made on Barclay's " Apology ; " and it is now openly repudiated by the Society there, and given up to the reproach of being no * " The Friend," Philadelphia, tenth month, lGth and 30th, 1875. t See pages 263 to 280 of this volume. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 427 longer acceptable as an exponent of the doctrines of Friends. The doctrinal writings of others of our an- cient worthies are equally obnoxious ; but this being the one most prominently acknowledged for the last two hundred years, is the chief object of attack. If that falls, the doctrines of which it is an exponent and advocate are got out of the way. How is it possible for any can- did person to avow the belief that those engaged in such a course, or those quietly conniving at it by continuing in religious connection with them, can have a valid claim to be considered the true Society of Friends ? This becomes still more obviously inconsistent, when we consider their action toward the " Smaller Bodies" — those who " are everywhere spoken against," by the members of the class just mentioned, and especially by those of the " middle" party. It was proved in the plainest manner that what these "Smaller Bodies" were contending for, was the continued maintenance of our ancient faith and principles, which they believed were being laid aside, and a plausible substitute established in their stead. Yet the Gurney party never would meet them on this ground ; but always contrived side issues or evasions, and charged the ''Smaller Bodies" with disregard of the Discipline, when they stood firmly aloof from them, as a last resort for safety against their schismatic and palpably irregular and revolutionary measures. The position of these "Smaller Bodies" was by no means one of factious opposition, nor of a desire or choice to stand aloof. They were, after a long course of testi- fying against the innovations, with clear and unanswered proof of the facts, but without success in stemming the 428 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. current, compelled to take the isolated stand which they now occupy, by a conscientious conviction, and in sub- mission to the manifestations of the light of truth to their minds, that their spiritual safety depended on clearing themselves from the influence of and connection with that insidious spirit, which was bringing revolution over the nominal Society, and threatening the total de- vastation of our ancient testimonies. In taking this course, they knew that they were giv- ing up many outward advantages appertaining to asso- ciation with large and established bodies, possessing fine meeting-houses, school-houses, and funds, and abun- dance of other property, as well as the general good esteem of the community at large, many of whom were not qualified to judge, nor much disposed to care, whether the original principles of Friends were aban- doned or not. Yet what was all this, to put in com- parison with the consciousness of a faithful endeavor to maintain the purity of the principles of our forefathers in the ever-blessed truth, and a belief of the approval of the Most High, testifying to their spirits that their course herein was right in His holy sight? It is true that they found themselves deserted in the hour of trial by many who had professed to hold the same views, and even by some who had been rightly "armed and carried bows" for this warfare, but who, as we have seen, " turned back in the day of battle," and "cast away the shield" of faith; and that conse- quently they were reduced to a very small number, com- pared with those who took the popular track. Yet even so was it with the primitive church, soon after our Lord's ascension; when we are told that "the number 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 429 of the names together was about one hundred and twenty." Numbers, we know, furnish no criterion of truth or righteousness. Else would the worldly spirit be the standard of truth, the world over. But the great Head of the church can work by few or by many ; and he " hath chosen the weak things of the world to con- found the things that are mighty ; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea and things which are not, to bring to naught things that are ; that no flesh should glory in his pres- ence." It is necessary to remember that the separations which resulted in the isolation of the Smaller Bodies, began in New England with the outrageous attempts of the fol- lowers of J. J. Gurney to sustain his cause, and to put down all opposition to the spread of his influence and views. The resulting isolation of the Smaller Body there, brought an additional responsibility upon faithful Friends elsewhere (especially in Ohio and Pennsylvania, where it might almost be said that they had been prom- ised effective aid and encouragement), inasmuch as, be- sides the necessity pressing upon these to sustain their own standing in the pure truth and against the new ways, they now felt that it was also their incumbent duty to own, and aid, and unite with their brethren who had already taken the stand, and whose names were "cast out as evil, for the Son of man's sake." This circumstance likewise took away the validity of the excuse so gladly seized by some of those caught in the net of the middle system, that "no way opened to take any course;" for thus a way had opened, by the sustaining of a Yearly Meeting in New England on the 430 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. ancient ground ; and it was their duty to rally to this standard for the truth, and encourage those who, in much weakness, were endeavoring to uphold it, by evincing their brotherhood with them therein, instead of standing coldly aloof from them " in the day of their distress."* But choosing, as many did in that dark day, to stand aloof from them and from all those who took the same position, and to " pass them by on the other side," such became merged in the great and overwhelming flood of the adher- ents of innovation, and are now without power to effec- tually withstand it. " Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these my brethren, ye did it not to me." Far be it from the writer to undertake to eulogize the " Smaller Bodies," or to arrogate for the members thereof any extraordinary experience in the way and work of the Lord, or any, the least ability of themselves, without his assistance, to take one step in his service, or in the working out of their souls' salvation. But they are entitled to their due, and to be judged without pre- judice by their genuine fruits, fairly and not captiously taken, and not by the fruits of dead branches which have fallen off* from them. They have never yet been even accused of a departure from the original principles of the Society; while both the others, the Hicksites and the Grurneyites, have had it plainly proved upon them. Their very position, as may be seen by a perusal of the foregoing chapters, is owing to their maintenance of these original principles against determined defection and change, or against a pusillanimous connivance at such defection. As a body, they have not assumed a profes- * Obad., 11 aud 12. 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 431 sion of lofty attainments, or any disposition to say, I am holier than thou ; but rather, I am bound to the ancient landmarks, which ye are tearing away. Neither can they be fairly charged with a spirit of vituperation ; for though, during the period of the controversy, they earnestly and firmly contended for the faith once delivered to the saints, and sustained their own ground iu proving the fallacy of the positions of their opponents ; yet since that has passed over, and they are apart, they have chiefly evinced a desire to " mind their own business," in an ear- nest endeavor to walk worthy of the vocation wherewith they are called. The property question, or any claim for the meeting-houses, school-houses, etc., they have entirely let go ; preferring to have to start as it were afresh, as to outward circumstances, rather than enter into contention with their former brethren for the things of this world. As to their fruits, it is not for them to speak ; neither is it for those to judge, whose principle is the activity of self in an unregenerate mind, which can always be doing something for self to feed upon. But this they leave to the Lord. It may be safely said that a living ministry has been raised up and sustained among them, to the refreshment of the heritage, and the convincement of serious inquirers after truth ; and that a concern is main- tained for the right administration of the Discipline. Should any good result come of their position, in the gathering once more of a people to the Lord's praise and glory, as, we confidently believe, will come in his own time unless this remnant also should prove unfaithful to its holy calling, it is felt among them that such good result will be all of and from Him, and to his honor 432 THE SOCIETY OP FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. alone. But it is not for the servant to ask what will be the result. It is his duty to do whatever is clearly called for by the Master, leaving the results to Him who alone can foresee them or control them. Much reproach has been openly and persistently cast upon the Smaller Bodies, on account of the "divisions and subdivisions" which have unhappily occurred among them, the origin and nature of which have been some- what sketched in this volume; and some advantage has been taken against them on account of sundry individ- uals who were at first among them, now walking with them no more. It is hoped, however, that in the first class of cases the candid reader may have perceived that the stand taken by the Smaller Bodies was not ac- countable for these divisions, though their weakness in some degree may have been so ; but that they were mainly brought about by the half-way system, which was so busy with its insidious work of picking off their weak or unwary members, and thus thinning their ranks. As to the individual cases of desertion of the cause, they were only what might have been looked for, in a consideration that the weakness of human nature would doubtless be eagerly seized, and gladly and artfully made use of by the adversary of Truth in a stormy day, in his disintegrating attempts against a small company everywhere spoken against, and composed of individ- uals in various stages of religious experience, some of whom were particularly open to his insinuations "as an angel of light." And it is some evidence of life in these Small Bodies, that they were able to stand firmly not- withstanding the defection of certain of their brethren, 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 433 instead of allowing the standard to be shaken or ob- scured by illusory attempts to retain them in a false position. The Smaller Bodies generally have from the first been fully sensible of their apparently insignificant numbers, and their weakness and inexperience in the work of the Lord ; and have by no means desired to set themselves up as examples for others to follow, any further than as they might be plainly seen, by those walking in the light of Truth, to be following in the footsteps of the flock of Christ's companions. Their concern, as already inti- mated, has been to clear themselves and their families from entanglement in palpable error, to "seek a right way for themselves and their little ones," to be found walking in the good old paths of their forefathers — who- ever else might depart from them, or connive at such departure ; and they have had comfort, and now have peace, in this endeavor, though by no means upholding their own course as faultless, or desiring to deny that they are in themselves a poor, and weak, and afflicted people, sustained alone by the helping hand of Him who, as they confidently believe, has led them hitherto, and who seeth not as man seeth. These "Smaller Bodies" thus spoken of, are at pre- sent (1876) composed of the remnants of the Society de- scribed in the previous pages, as the Annual Meeting of Friends for New England — the Yearly Meeting of New York, held at Poplar Ridge — the General Meeting for Pennsylvania, New Jersey, etc., including now a Monthly Meeting in Maryland, and one in Ohio, and a small meeting of Friends in Iowa — and the General Meeting of Friends for England, now held at Fritchlcy in vol. ii. — 37 434 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS IN [CHAP. XVIII. Derbyshire. These small companies of Friends are in union and fellowship with each other, and are avowedly and undeniably endeavoring to maintain the ancient faith and discipline of the Society, without compromise with modernization ; and though very few, compared with their former brethren, and at times under a feeling of great weakness, they are often sweetly sustained by a sense of the owning, and helj), and care of the Great Shepherd. In this renewed sense of his mercy, they can set up tlieir Ebenezer, knowing his faithfulness; and de- sire not to be too anxious in regard to results, or for an increase of mere numbers, without conviction of princi- ple and duty. Though often thus feeling the greatness of the cause, and their own unfitness and inability of themselves to sustain it, nevertheless they remain bound to the testimonies of Truth as held by our forefathers, and fully convinced of the rectitude of the stand taken in the fear of the Lord, and of its necessity as a means of preservation from the ensnaring downward tendency and lapse of the great body of professors of the name of Friends, from their original and characteristic principles. There are many here and there among the various professors of the name of Friends, who lament and mourn over the departures from primitive simplicity and purity ; but who have not hitherto made use of the little strength that might be afforded them, to come forth in a clear, and practical, and unmistakable testi- mony for the ancient and unchangeable truth, against this fearful and fundamental departure. The great body of what is popularly called the Society is in a re- markable state of unsettlement; novelties, one after an- other in rapid succession, are being pressed upon it; and 1876.] THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 435 it is impossible to foresee what may be the result of the next ten years' agitation. But' " a city divided against itself cannot stand" against the continued assaults of the enemy. The atmosphere is gathering dark and windy storm-clouds over the heads of those who have been abiding in the unstable tents of a temporizing policy. It may be, that a future writer may be enabled to add a third volume of momentous changes, to this History. For, we may rely upon it, the Lord will yet have a people to hold up the standard of his pure truth before the nations; and he is looking for holy and faithful deeds and life, rather than empty words. How greatly is it to be desired, that before it be too late for their own safety, all the honest-hearted ones might be enabled to see eye to eye, and, taking up the resolution of that valiant servant of Jehovah, formerly, who "was full of the Spirit of Wisdom" — "as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" — might be faithful to that attractive power which would draw into oneness all the lowly followers of the Lord Jesus, and would again grant them the unspeakable benefits of unity and communion one with another in a visible gathered church of one heart and one mind, making of a scattered remnant " a strong nation," even " an army with banners" for the Lord's blessed cause. These, abiding in faithful obedience to the Light of Christ, would not only more and more feel the inestimable value of the pure principles of the gospel, but would likewise be enabled livingly to witness to the truth of John Fothergill's words, in an epistle written in 1705 : "It "is the Life of Truth which quickens the soul to God; " if ever we become of His people indeed, it is by re- 436 FRIENDS IN NINETEENTH CENTURY. " tabling a thirst after the renewed springings up thereof " in the soul ; and this alone can keep us to be of His " people ; and whoever loseth this true thirst after Life — " humbling, bowing Life — they lose their access to God, " and that wherein alone is acceptance with the Father." For the apostle Paul told the Colossians, that Christ is " our Life," and his appearance among the saints their glory. THE END. INDEX. A. Address of joint committee of Yearly Meetings, 1849, ii, 163 Almy, William, attempts to introduce " the Beacon," i, 285 Antislayery Conference, previous to separation, ii, 27 Antislavery separation effected in In- diana, ii," 30 Antislavery friends visited by London delegation, ii, 34 Antislavery Yearly Meeting, its con- tinuance and transactions, ii, 45 Antislavery Yearly Meeting, its close, ii, 47 Appeal of Leonard Snowden against the Hicksites, i, 144 Appeal to Philadelphia Yearly Meeting against schismatic amalgamation, ii, 292 Appeals on faith and doctrine, in Lon- don Yearly Meeting, i, 52 Ash, Dr. Edward, publishes unsound books with impunity, i, 322 Ash, Dr. Edward, resigns membership from opposition to Barclay, ii, 399 Ash, Dr. Edward, received again with- out acknowledgment of error, ii, 400 Ash, Dr. Edward, afterwards attacks G. Fox in a pamphlet, ii, 401 Ash, Dr. Ed ward, Testimony approving him adopted by London Yearly Meet- ing, ii, 403 B. Baltimore Yearly Meeting, Hicksian separation, i, 186 Baltimore Yearly Meeting, separation of 1854, ii. 206 Barclay, Robert, on schisms, and au- thority of the church, ii, 187 Barclav, Robert, his "Apology" assailed, ii, 366, 403 Barclay, Robert, his " Apology," Irwin's edition of 10,000 copies, ii, 390 Barclay, Lydia Ann, her decease, ii, 375 Harnard, Hannah, her defection, i, 39 Barnard, Hannah, her appeal to Loudon, i, 45 VOL. II.— 38 Barnard, Hannah, her disownment and death, i, 49 Bates, Elisha, joins the Beaconites, i, 246 Bates, Elisha, submits to water-baptism, i, 255 Bates, Elisha, joins the Methodists, i, 287 Beacon schism, origin and progress of, i, 227 Beacon published by Isaac Crewdson, i, 247 Beacon, its doctrines similar to J. J. Gurney's, i, 248 Beacon, committee appointed in Lon- don Yearly Meeting on it, i, 262 Beacon committee, successive proceed- ings, i, 263 Beaconites, their separation consum- mated, i, 2S3 Bible declared by London Yearly Meet- ing "the only divinely authorized record," etc., i, 305 Birthright membership, ii, 378 C. Cadwallader, Benjamin, his Letter to Friends, 1855, ii, 217 "Calumny Refuted," published in de- fence of J. J. Gurney, ii, 360 "Calumny Refuted," answered by " Is it ( 'aluniny, or is it Truth " ii, 300 Certificates to and from separate meet- ings, ii, 290 Clay, Henry, attends Friends' meeting at Richmond, etc , ii, 25 Coinly, John, some of his doctrinal views, i. 161 Committee of Meeting for Sufferings to prepare "Appeal for Ancient Doc- trines," ii. 130 Committee of Meeting for Sufferings on the New England separation, ii, 135 Committee of Meeting IbrSufferings on the New England separation, their conclusions, ii, 141 Compromise party, rise of it, ii, 217 Compromise party gains control of Ohio Yearly Meeting, ii, 326 438 INDEX. Conference, first, of Friends apart from Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, ii, 299 Conference meetings commenced in England, ii, 380 "Considerations, etc.," published by C. Evans, ii, 121 Contrast of Gurney's doctrines with those of Friends, i, 341 Cope, Samuel, his address in Philadel- phia Yearly Meeting, 1830, ii, 159 Cope, Morris, publishes "Authentic Extracts," ii, 245 D. Declaration on Doctrines, by New Eng- land Gurney party, ii, 91 Declaration on Doctrines, by J. J. Gur- ney, ii, 9(5 Declension in England, in doctrine and practice, ii, 363 Decline of zeal and faith gradual, i, 17 Decline of zeal against slavery, ii, 12 Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing respecting separate meetings, ii, 286 Discipline of Philadelphia Yearly Meet- ing respecting ministers' certificates, ii, 284 Discipline grtatly changed by London Yearly Meeting, ii, 375 Drewry, Thomas, his Protest against London Yearly Meeting, ii, 394 E. Evans, Jonathan, Letter from him to Moses Brown, i, 63 Evans Charles, his "Considerations, etc.," of 1846, ii, 121 Evans, Charles, his testimony in the Ohio suit, ii, 2GS "Examination of Writings of ,T. J. Gurney " published in 185G, ii, 222 Extracts from writings of primitive Friends, called by the Hicksites "the Creed," i, 137 F. Ferrisburgb Quarterly Meeting, separa- tion in, ii, 178 Forster, William, his testimony at New Bedford, 1824, i, 95 Forster, William, his visit to the Anti- slavery Friends, ii, 34 Foster, Thomas, of Bromley, his un- soundness, i, 51 Foster, Thomas, appeals, but is finally disowned, i, 55 "Friend," the periodical paper called ths established, in Philadelphia i 170 " Friend, the," a remonstrance against its half-way course, ii, 241 Fritcblev, etc., Monthly Meetings held at, ii, 388 Fritcblev, General Meeting established at, ii, 392 G. Gauntley, William, his Address to Lon- don Meeting for Sufferings, ii,351 General Meeting held at Fallsiugton, ii, 305 General Meeting held at Fallsiugton receives Salem Monthly Meeting, ii, 344 General Meeting held in Ohio, ii, 331 General Meeting established in Eng- land, ii, 392. Gilkes, Louisa E., visits America, with J. G. S., and M. It., ii, 384 Gould, Thomas B., his interview with J. J. Gurney, i, 336 Gould, Thomas B., irregularly dealt with and disowned by separatists, ii, 70 Green, Jacob, his interview with J. J. Gurney, i, 345 Grubb, Sarah L., her warning against Beaconism in 1832. i, 234 Grubb, Sarah L , her testimony in Lon- don Yearly Meeting, 1836, i, 293 Gurney, Joseph John, begins to publish religious books, i, 232 Gurney, Joseph John, attacks "Truth Vindicated," i, 254 Gurney, Joseph John, his speech in London Yearly Meeting, 1836, i, 300 Gurney, Joseph John, declares himself " a middle man," i, 303 Gurney, Joseph John, prints his " Brief Remarks, etc.," i, 314 Gurney, Joseph John, synopsis of his main unsound views, i, 320 Gurney, Joseph John, proposes to visit America, i, 325 Gurney, Joseph John, arrives in Ameri- ca, i, 330 Gurney, Joseph John, the objection to "going behind his certificate," i, 331 Gurnev, Joseph John, bis conversation with'T. B. Gould, i, 335 Gurney, Joseph John, replies to J. Wil- burs Narrative ani Exposition ii 359 Gurney, Joseph John, sends forth a Declaration of bis belief, ii, 97 Gurney, Joseph John, his decease, and the Testimony respecting him, ii, 361 Gurneyan Yearly Meeting of Indiana, in 1875, ii, 368 Gurneyan and Hicksian defections equally fundamental, ii, 407 Gurneyites, why they cannot be the true Society of Friends, i i , 418 IXDP.X. 439 H. Half-way system shows itself in Eng- lish Conferences, ii, 386 Half-way system eventually causes their cessation, ii, 390 Harrison, John, publishes "A Lamp for the Beacon," i, 253 Havilaiut, Daniel, his prediction of fur- ther t rials, i, 175 Healy, Christopher, his interview with B. Seebohm, ii, 114 Healy, Christopher, his conversation with Richard Mott, ii, 132 Hicks, Klias, his early career, i, 100 Hicks, Klias, his indorsement of his printed Sermons, i, 100 Hicks, Elias, his doctrines concerning the Lord Jesus, i, 107 Hicks, Elias. his doctrines concerning the atonement, i, 111 Hicks, Elias, his doctrines concerning the Scriptures, i, 113 Hicks, Elias. his doctrines concerning faith, i, 116 Hicks, Klias, his doctrines concerning heaven and hell, i, 116 Hicks, Elias, his doctrines concerning the devil, i, 117 Hicks, Klias, his doctrines concerning the fall of'man, i, 119 Hicks, Klias, his doctrines concerning reason, etc., i, 120 Hicks, Elias, Joseph Hoag's conversa- tion with him, i, 124 Hicks, Elias, Joseph Whitall's inter- view with bim, i, 126 Hicks, Elias, William Jackson's inter- view with him, i, 127 Hicks, Klias, treated with by the Elders in Philadelphia, i, 132 Hicks, Klias, his followers prepare for a separation, i, 149 Hicks, Klias, his followers secede from Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, i, 152 Hicks, Klias, his followers, their state- ment of grievances, i, 160 Hicks, Elias, his followers, their sepa- rate meeting in sixth month, 1827, i, 165 Hicks, Elias, his followers, their "Year- ly Meeting" in tenth month, i, 166 Hicks, Elias, his followers, their sepa- ration from New York Yearly Meet- ing, i, 172 Hicks, Klias, his followers, their sepa- ration from Ohio Yearly Meeting, i, 180 Hicks, Klias, his followers, their sepa- ration from Baltimore Yearly Meet- ing, i, lHii Hicks, Klias, his disownment, i, 193 Hiiks t in:: his answer to Six Queries, i, 197 Hicks, Klias, his decease, i, 201 Hicksian schism, account of commence- ment, i, 100 Hicksian suits at law, i, 203 Hicksites, why they cannot be the true Society of Friends, ii, 409 Hippolytus's history of "All the Her- esies," i, vii Howard, Luke, advocates Beacon views, i, 256 Hoyle. Benjamin, takes the lead of the middle party in Ohio, ii, 326 Hoyle, Benjamin, his testimony in the Ohio suit, ii, 266 I. Identity of the Society of Friends, ii, 408 Indiana Yearly Meeting displaces eight members of Meeting for Sufferings, ii, 23 Iowa, the separation there in 1854, ii, 226 Iowa, meetings irregularly established there by Ohio middle party, ii, 236 Ireland, the schism there, of 1796, i, 29 J. Jannev, S. M., his attempts to defend Klias Hicks, ii, 410 Jones, Ann, her prayer and testimony in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, 1827, i, 157 Jones, Ann, her testimony in London Yearly Meeting, 1836, i, 298 Jones, Ann, her indorsement of her husband s testimony, ii, 349 Jones, George, his testimony against J. J. Gurney, ii, 346 Justice, John, his prophetical declara- tion, ii, 297 K. "King" Separation in New York, its origin, ii, 250 "King" Separation effected in Month- ly and Quarterly Meetings ii, 259 " King" Separation effected in the Yearly Meeting, ii, 260 Koll, Daniel, his visit to England and Norway, ii, 389 L. Lawsuit, in regard to Fall River prop- erty, N. E., ii, 99 Lawsuit in regard to Mount Pleasant property, in Ohio, ii, 263 Lawsuits "following the Hicksian seces- sion, i, 203 London Yearly Meeting, change in its constitution, ii, 377 440 INDEX. London Yearly Meeting indorses J. J. ( iurney. ii, 361 Loudon Yearly Meeting indorses Ed- ward Ash, ii, 403 London Yearly Meeting, evidences of its lapse, ii, 422 M. Maule, Joseph E., publishes " Remarks on acknowledging meetings of sepa- ratists," ii, 285 Middle Party in Ohio Y'early Meeting, ii, 128 Middle Party has no strength to with- stand the innovations, ii, 406 Monthly Meetings of the Smaller Body in Pennsylvania, etc., ii, 309 Monthly Meetings of the Smaller Body in England, ii, 388 N. New England, subdivision in, of 1863, ii, 313 New England, account of the Yearly Meeting of 1863 (smaller body), ii, 318 0. Ohio Yearly Meeting, Hicksian separa- tion from, i, 180 Ohio Yearly Meeting of 1854, and Gur- neyan separation, ii, 193 Ohio Yearly Meeting, controlled by the middle party, ii, 327 Ohio General Meeting instituted, ii, 331 Ohio General Meeting, causes of its failure, ii, 333 Ohio General Meeting addressed by that for Pennsylvania, etc., ii, 338 Ohio Lawsuit respecting Mount Pleas- ant school property, ii, 263 Osborn, Charles, his interview with J. J. Gurney, ii, 13 Osborn, Charles, and seven others dis- placed from Meeting for Sufferings, ii, 22 Otis, Job, his position in New England and New York, ii, 250 P. Penn, William, his testimony to the Holy Scriptures, ii, 413 Penn, William, said he had "often prayed to Christ Jesus," ii, 416 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1846, ii, 126 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1848, ii, 131 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1849, ii, 155 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1830, ii, 156 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting trans- gresses its own Discipline, ii, 163, 283, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1855, ii, 212 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1856, ii, 218 Philadelphia Y'early Meeting of 1857, ii, 222 Philadelphia Y'early Meeting of 1860, ii, 293 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, its laps- ing condition, ii, 302 Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of 1875, ii, 421 Pickard, Daniel, his " Expostulation on Doctrine, etc.," ii, 382, 390 Predisposing causes of weakness in the Society, i, 25 R. Resignations, J. Otis's remarks on, i, 75 Richardson, James N., his testimony against the new doctrines, ii, 358 Rickman, Priscilla, her decease in the true faith, ii, 375 Rickman, Matilda, visits America with J. G. S. and L. E. G., ii, 384 S. Salem Monthly Meeting, Ohio, extracts from its minutes, ii, 341 Salem Monthly Meeting is received as part of General Meeting of Pennsyl- vania, etc., ii, 344 Sargent, John G., his " Circular" to Friends, ii, 379 Sargent, John G., visits America, with M. R. and L. E. G., ii, 384 Scipio Quarterly Meeting, separation in, ii, 169 Seebohm, Benjamin, his visit to Bucks Quarterly Meeting, ii, 113 Seebohm, Benjamin, his conversation with C. Healy, ii, 114 Separation of t lie Hicksites from Phila- delphia Yearly Meeting, i, 152 Separation, Gurneyan, in New Eng- land Yearly Meeting, ii, 82 Separation within Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, ii, 301 Shillitoe, Thomas, openly opposes John Wilkinson, i, 258 Shillitoe, Thomas, his death, i, 311 Shillitoe, Thomas, his testimony against J. J. Gurney, i, 312 Slavery, nature of our testimony against it, ii, 11 Slavery, decline of zeal against it, ii, 12 Smaller Bodies, their position iu gen- eral, ii, 430 Snowden, Leonard, his appeal, i, 144 INDEX. 441 SnowJcn, Leonard, his restoration, i, 146 Southern Quarter attempts to change its members of Meeting for Sufifer- . inns, i, 146 South Kingston Monthly Meeting ir- regularly laid down, ii, 63 Stephenson, Isaac, his testimony at New Bedford, 1824, i, 90 Suit at Law for the Fall River prop- erty, ii, 99 Suit at Law in Ohio for Mouut Pleasant property, ii, 263 Suit in Chancery in New Jersey, i, 208 Swanzey Monthly Meeting, commence- ment of the separation there, ii, 74 T. Treffry, Henry, affecting case of his latter days, i, 287 "Truth Vindicated," published against the Beacon, i, 252 "Truth Vindicated," defended by its author against J. J. Gurney, i, 260 W. Wheeler, Daniel, his .encouragement of Samuel Rundell's pamphlet, i, 309 Wheeler, Daniel, his Journal garbled by the Meeting for Sufferings in his absence, i, 310 Wheeler, Daniel, had no unity with the modern views, i, 344 Wheeler, Daniel, his advice to J. J. Gurney, in Philadelphia, i, 344 Wheeler, Daniel, sympathized with J. Wilbur, i, 344 Wheeler, Daniel, his death in New York, i, 345 Wilbur, John, unexpectedly sees the approaching defection, i, 235 Wilbur, John, his interview with J.J. Gurney in England, i, 236 Wilbur, John, his Letters to George Crosfield, i, 240 Wilbur. John, his interview with J.J. Gurney in America, i, 335 Wilbur, John, commencement of the persecution against him, ii, 50 Wilbur, John, not permitted to offer evidence of his innocence, ii, 59 Wilbur, John, irregularly disowned by Greenwich Monthly Meeting, ii, 66 Wilbur, John, visits England a second time, ii, 3GS Wilbur, John, his peaceful decease, ii, 373 Wilkinson, John, his unsound preach- ing rebuked by T. Shillitoe, i, 258 Withy, George, his testimony against the N. E. " New lights," i, 82 Y. " Yorkshireman, The," published by Luke Howard, i, 256 n iw : BX7631.H694v.2 The Society of Friends in the nineteenth Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 1 1012 00149 8890