Class. 
 
 •-■ •' - - e r >■ 
 
 Bnnlf . ■ C 
 
HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 SEPAEATION 
 
 INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS ; 
 
 WHICH TOOK PLACE IN THE WINTER OP 1843 AND 1843, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 ANTI-SLAVEKY QUESTION; 
 
 CONTAINING A 
 
 BRIEF ACCOUNT OF THE RISE, SPREAD, AND FINAL ADOPTION BY THE 
 
 SOCIETY, OF ITS TESTIMONY AGAINST SLAVERY,- TOGETHER 
 
 WITH A RECORD OF SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL FACTS AND 
 
 CIRCUMSTANCES RELATING TO THAT SEPARATION; 
 
 EMBRACING THE 
 
 DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY BOTH PARTIES RELATIVE THERETO; 
 
 3ome Account of the Action of other Yearly Meetings of Friend*, 
 touching the Controversy, especially that of London, etc 
 
 By WALTER EDGERTON, 
 
 CINCINNATI: 
 ACHILLES PUGH, PRINTER 
 
 120 MAIN STREET. 
 
 18 5 6, 
 
^> 
 
 l^uP 
 
 
 K 
 
 Is- 
 
 k 
 
PREFACE 
 
 It is now (the summer of 1855) between twelve and thirteen 
 years since the Separation took place in Indiana Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Friends, on the Anti-Slavery question. Owing to the 
 peculiar position which Friends, especially in the United States, 
 occupied at and near the time of the difficulty, the true state 
 of the case was very little known among them, nor could it be 
 brought before the mass of the members of Society as then 
 controlled. I trust that the feeling is now somewhat different 
 among them ; that prejudice has so far given way, that a larger 
 number, at least, will be willing to hear. Such need to see 
 the documents, and to look into the matter for themselves. 
 
 Added to this, those who were children then, even in our 
 midst, but who had no hand in the proceedings, have now 
 attained to maturity ; they see the parties, but know nothing 
 in a manner as to the real cause of the division. Many of 
 them have no means of knowing what caused the Separation, 
 nor where the blame should rightfully attach. And such as 
 may possess some means of knowledge in this respect, have 
 only detached portions of the controversy, and, therefore, are 
 very inadequately furnished. To supply this defect, by placing 
 the means of a correct understanding of the case within the 
 reach of all, as well as to serve the cause of Truth, in preserv- 
 ing a faithful record of the transactions alluded to, for the in- 
 formation of posterity, has been my object in the compilation 
 of the following history. 
 
 The plan of the work is to give both sides of the question — 
 to present what each party said for itself — leaving the reader, 
 in most instances, to decide for himself, and draw his own con- 
 clusions. It is true, I have in the Introduction exhibited the 
 conduct and practices of our early Friends on the Anti-Slavery 
 question, and, to some extent, contrasted them with the pro- 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 ceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, as connected with the 
 history of the Separation; but my object has been in this, to 
 fix the attention of the reader on the points at issue between 
 the parties, more than anything else. 
 
 I have omitted no document issued by either of the Yearly 
 Meetings, or their representatives, bearing upon the controversy, 
 that I could reasonably obtain ; indeed, none of any particular 
 importance. 
 
 In perusing the work, the reader may discover what may 
 seem to him as tautology, but he should bear in mind, that in 
 following out the plan which I have adopted (which, I think, 
 must meet the approbation of the impartial reader), of giving 
 what each party said in the controversy, it could not be other- 
 wise, so far as a repetition of the same thing occurs in the 
 documents inserted. 
 
 It may be objected by some, that the publication of such a 
 work will be likely to harrow up those unpleasant feelings 
 which attended the parties at the time of the controversy ; but 
 I feel confident that none will be hurt by it, who sincerely de- 
 sire that a knowledge of the truth should prevail. No good 
 can result to any Church by covering up its wrongs, or by suf- 
 fering the impression to remain, that those who were really in 
 the right were the transgressors, when a plain, unvarnished 
 exhibition of historical facts can remove it, even if such exhi- 
 bition should unfold grievous errors in the Church. Indeed, 
 we cannot believe that the All-powerful One, He who is holi- 
 ness, mercy and truth, and who is no respecter of persons, will 
 always suffer his cause and truth to remain prostrate. 
 
 u Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again — 
 The eternal years of God are hers ; 
 But error, wounded, writhes in pain, 
 And dies amid her worshipers." 
 
 The work was commenced several years back, but various 
 circumstances conspired to prevent its completion till the pre- 
 sent season. I trust, however, it will be none the less interest- 
 ing on account of the delay. 
 
 WALTER EDGERTON. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Introduction 9 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 The origin of the scheme of Immediate and Unconditional Emanci- 
 pation, and the Anti-Slavery movement based thereon — The appro- 
 val of that movement and its advocates by the Yearly Meeting — 
 Its change and opposition to that cause, etc - 33 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 'Report of a Sub-Committee of New Garden branch of the Commit- 
 tee, on the Concerns of the People of Color 44 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 Free Labor Convention at Spiceland — Proceedings of the Yearly 
 Meeting against the Abolitionists 47 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 Address of Joseph Sturge to Friends in the United States 50 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 Completion of the measures by the Yearly Meeting in 1842, which 
 produced the Separation 57 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 First move of the Anti-Slavery party looking toward the Re-Organiza- 
 tion of the Society 60 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 "Address of a Conference of Friends, held at Newport, Wayne 
 County, Indiana, First month 4th, 1843; to the Members of Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting." 63 
 
Tl CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Remarks on the subject of the Call by the Editor of the Free-Labor 
 Advocate — Letter and declaration of Charles Osborne. . 66 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Proceedings of the Convention to consider the subject of Re-Organiz- 
 ing the Society— Its Declaration 73 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 An Epistle to London — One to Anti-Slavery Friends 92 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 The Policy of the Leaders in the Opposition to A. S. F. changed — 
 Address of their Meetings for Sufferings, touching the Separation. 100 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Reply to the Address of the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting 107 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Some corroborative Remarks — Origin of the Use of the Term "Body" 
 —Anonymous Review of the Declaration of A. S. Friends 128 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 Defense against the Attacks of an Anonymous Reviewer. 149 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 Declaration of Sentiment of A. S. Friends < 186 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 Address of the Indiana Yearly Meeting to the Christian Profes- 
 sors, etc 192 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 "Review of an 'Address of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting to the Christian Professors in the United States, and to the 
 Citizens generally, on the subject of Slavery.' " 199 
 
CONTENTS. Vll 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 The Epistles issued by the Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, unno- 
 ticed by other Yearly Meetings, except London — Letter to the Edi- 
 tors of the "British Friend," by Elijah Coffin and others of 
 Richmond 208 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 Reply to Elijah Coffin and others by the Editors of the " British 
 Friend." 217 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Remarks by the Editor of the Free-Labor Advocate on the Corres- 
 pondence between E. Coffin and others and the Editors of the 
 British Friend — A Review by Daniel Puckett and others of certain 
 Positions and Proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, etc. 227 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 Exposition of the Sentiments and Principles of leading Members of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting relative to Slavery 239 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 "An Expostulation to those who have lately seceded from the Society 
 of Friends." 242 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 "A Reply to a Document entitled, 'An Expostulation to those who 
 have lately seceded from the Society of Friends/ 257 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 Address to the Meeting for Sufferings of London 304 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 Address to the Members of the Society of Friends individually con- 
 stituting London Yearly Meeting— Postscript touching the treat- 
 ment of Dublin Yearly Meeting 311 
 
Vlll CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 Committee appointed by London Yearly Meeting to endeavor to heal 
 the Breach — The Address of that Meeting to those who had left 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting 324 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 Epistle of Advice and Statement of Facts, etc 327 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 Account of the Proceedings of the English Committee in Iowa. , . . .337 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 Proceedings of the English Committee at Nettle Creek .343 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 English Committee at Newport — A Response to the Address carried 
 round by that Committee 347 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 In order that the reader may more fully comprehend the 
 brief history here presented, I deem it important to spread 
 before his view, a concise account of the origin of the testi- 
 mony of the Society of Friends against Slavery ; its progress 
 toward that of perfection ; the part which the Society, as a 
 body, took, at an early stage in its history, against that 
 system ; and also, of the action of individual members, in be- 
 half of the oppressed African, at the same and subsequent 
 periods. 
 
 None, I apprehend, who are acquainted with the leading 
 principles of the Society, can fail to see that they are neces- 
 sarily and pre-eminently Anti-Slavery in their tendency, hence, 
 to understand them thoroughly, and be governed by them 
 completely, is to be an Abolitionist. 
 
 George Fox, as early as the year 1671, while on the island 
 of Barbadoes, bore his testimony against the sin of Slavery in 
 the following language : 
 
 " Consider with yourselves, if you were in the same condi- 
 tion as the poor Africans, who came strangers to you, and 
 were sold to you as slaves ; I say, if this should be the con- 
 dition of you or yours, you would think it a hard measure, 
 yea, and very great bondage and cruelty. And therefore, 
 consider seriously of this, and do you for them and to them, 
 as you would willingly have them or any others do unto you, 
 were you in like slavish condition, and bring them to know the 
 Lord Christ." 
 
 Again, speaking of the advice he had given to Friends of 
 that island, he says : " I desired also, that they would cause 
 their overseers to deal mildly and gently with their negroes, 
 and not to use cruelty towards them, as the manner of some 
 had been, and after certain years of servitude, they should 
 make them free." 
 
 Notwithstanding, the sinfulness and cruelty of Slavery are 
 here recognized, yet there is an evident lack of that fullness 
 
10 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and thoroughness in his testimony which the principles of the 
 Society necessarily embrace, when fully comprehended, and for 
 which, considering his character for clearness of perception, 
 we should naturally have looked. But we have reason to 
 believe, that he, as well as other Friends of that day, were 
 under an erroneous impression, in regard to the manner in 
 which the Africans were obtained from their native land. Let 
 us imagine for a moment, that Friends had been induced to 
 believe, through the representations of artful and covetous 
 men, that the negroes brought from Africa were such as had 
 been rescued from death — prisoners of war, who would other- 
 wise have been destroyed, and their actions in purchasing 
 such assume the character of benevolence, especially should 
 they act in accordance with the advice of George Fox, above 
 quoted, to " deal gently and mildly with them," " bring them 
 to know the Lord Christ/ 9 and after certain years, to make 
 them free. Clarkson, in his history of the abolition of the 
 Slave Trade, in allusion to the early settlement of America by 
 Friends, and their action in regard to the matter before us, 
 remarks : "In these days, indeed, the purchase of them 
 (negroes) was deemed favorable to both parties, for there 
 was little or no knowledge of the manner in which they had 
 been procured as slaves. There was no charge of inconsist- 
 ency on this account, as in later times.' ' 
 
 This circumstance, in connection with the fact, that the 
 principal mission of our early Friends, was to correct the 
 errors and abuses which had crept into the Christian Church 
 in regard to doctrine, discipline and religious performances, 
 closely occupying their time and attention, may readily account 
 for so little being found on record relating to the subject of 
 Slavery, and especially so, when we reflect that they, our first 
 Friends, lived in a land far removed from the scenes of op- 
 pression connected with the system. 
 
 As regards Friends beyond the Atlantic, I find but one 
 other beside George Fox, who expressed a sentiment touching 
 the matter for many years, and that was William Edmundson, 
 a minister and resident of Ireland, who, coming to the same 
 island of Barbadoes, and where he had an opportunity of wit- 
 nessing the evils of Slavery, interested himself in behalf of 
 the sufferers. This seemed to irritate the governor of the 
 island, who appeared to think, that to make the negroes 
 Christians, " would make them rebel and cut their (masters') 
 
INTRODUCTION. 11 
 
 throats." W. E. says : " I told him it was a good work, to 
 bring them to the knowledge of God and Christ Jesus, and to 
 believe in him who died for them, and for all men, and that 
 that would keep them from rebelling or cutting any man's 
 throat. But if they did rebel, and cut their throats, as he 
 said, it would be through their own doings, in keeping them in 
 ignorance and under oppression, giving them liberty to be 
 wicked ; and on the other hand, starving them for want of 
 meat and clothes convenient, so giving them liberty in that 
 which God restrained, and restraining them in that which 
 God allowed and afforded to all men, which was meat and 
 clothes." 
 
 Although there was doubtless some progress in the right 
 direction experienced by individual members, in regard to this 
 subject, yet the first testimony of the Society in Great Britain, 
 which I find recorded, is embraced in a Minute of the Yearly 
 Meeting, held in London, in 1727, in which they say, " it is 
 the sense of this meeting, that the importing of negroes from 
 their native country and relations, by Friends, is not a com- 
 mendable nor allowed practice, and is, therefore, censured by 
 this meeting/ ' 
 
 To those who have from infancy been accustomed to hear- 
 ing " the importing of negroes from their native country," to 
 be bartered like cattle in the market, denounced as piracy — 
 as a crime demanding the utmost rigor of law for its punish- 
 ment and suppression, the language here used by a Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends, is somewhat astonishing ; but we should 
 bear in mind, that education and the customary routine of ac- 
 tion in the surrounding country, have a powerful tendency 
 with the most of men, to bar reflection and critical investiga- 
 tion. 
 
 Although the principles of the Society embrace a full, com- 
 plete and energetic testimony, not merely against the Slave 
 Trade, but Slavery itself; yet, the want of ardor and percep- 
 tion manifested in this instance, is not more strange than that 
 the apostle Peter, after • hearing the command of the Lord 
 Jesus to him and the rest of the disciples, to "go teach all 
 nations," should still act upon the principle, that none should 
 be taught but the Jews, the people of his own nation. 
 
 With regard to Friends in America, it appears that some 
 were uneasy with the practice of trading in their fellow-men, 
 frcm its first introduction amongst them, and bore their 
 
12 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 testimony against it ; but for a time it was done in a private 
 manner, yet, eventually, the subject was by this class, intro- 
 duced to the notice of Friends as a body. And it should ever 
 be borne in mind, as a useful and profitable reflection, that 
 individual action must necessarily precede that of a general, 
 united, or congressional character. 
 
 If we turn our attention to the manner in which the Society 
 of Friends became so entangled with Slavery, we shall find it 
 was through unobstructed individual agency, and that through 
 this medium alone, the Society in America gradually became 
 so completely and lamentably involved. So, also, it was 
 through individual zeal and effort, that the different Yearly 
 Meetings, in process of time, were brought to see the sinfulness 
 of the practice, and to prohibit it among their members. 
 
 Notwithstanding the truth of these remarks appears to be 
 almost self-evident, yet its rejection is a matter intimately con- 
 nected with the history of the Separation, and will be pre- 
 sented in its proper place, and I would press it upon the 
 reader, to keep this fact in view. 
 
 It appears that the Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania, thirty- 
 one years previous to the date of the Minute of London 
 Yearly Meeting, above quoted, or in 1696, advised its members 
 to " guard against future importations of African Slaves, and to 
 be particularly attentive to the treatment of those who were 
 then in their possession. 
 
 Fifteen years after this date, or in 1711, we find it but little, 
 if any, improved on the subject; it then renewed the same ad- 
 vice as given before ; but an Epistle issued by the same meet- 
 ing in 1754, exhibits a marked change of feeling and senti- 
 ment. Let an extract or two suffice to show this, 
 
 " It hath frequently been the concern of our Yearly Meet^ 
 ing to testify their uneasiness and disunity with the importa- 
 tion and purchasing of Negroes and other Slaves, and to direct 
 the overseers of the several meetings, to advise and deal with 
 such as engage therein. * * * * * 
 
 " Now, dear Friends, if we continually bear in mind the 
 royal law, of doing to others as we would be done by, we 
 should never think of bereaving our fellow-creatures of that 
 valuable blessing, liberty, nor endure to grow rich by their 
 bondage." * * * * * * * 
 
 Between the two dates last mentioned, flourished a number 
 of Friends in this Yearly Meeting, who labored zealously and 
 
INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 faithfully for the removal of the evil referred to from Society, 
 which accounts for the happy change of feeling we have no- 
 ticed. Among these were William Burling, Ralph Sandiford, 
 John Woodman, and Anthony Benezet. 
 
 The first of these took the opportunity to bear his testimony, 
 not merely against the Slave-trade, but against the system of 
 Slavery itself, in their annual meeting ; and continued the 
 practice, at each similar recurrence, for years. 
 
 Ralph Sandiford published a work in 1729, entitled, " The 
 Mystery of Iniquity in a brief Examination of the Practice of 
 the Times. " This he circulated gratuitously wherever he 
 thought it might be of use, it being "a valuable appeal in 
 behalf of the African cause.' ' " He was very earnest," it is 
 remarked, " in endeavoring to prevail upon his friends, both 
 in and out of the Society, to liberate those whom they held in 
 bondage. " 
 
 The labors of John Woolman, in this cause, would require a 
 volume fully to rehearse. He was probably the first Friend 
 who bore a complete and consistent testimony against the sin 
 of slave-holding, by endeavoring to avoid a participation in 
 the gain of oppression ; or in other words, by abstaining from 
 the use of the produce of the slave's toil. A few extracts 
 from his Journal may serve to show a little of the character of 
 his labors. 
 
 In attending the Yearly Meeting in 1758, he remarks, " The 
 case of slave keeping lay heavy upon me ; nor did I find any 
 engagement to speak directly to any other matter before the 
 meeting. When this case was opened, several faithful Friends 
 spoke weightily thereto, with which I was comforted ; and feel- 
 ing a concern to cast in my mite, I said in substance, as fol- 
 lows : In the difficulties attending us in this life, nothing is 
 more precious than the mind of Truth inwardly manifested ; 
 and it is my earnest desire that in this weighty matter we may 
 be so truly humbled as to be favored with a clear understand- 
 ing of the mind of Truth, and follow it ; this would be of 
 more advantage to the Society than any medium not in the 
 clearness of Divine wisdom. The case is difficult to some who 
 have slaves ; but if such set aside all self-interest, and come 
 to be weaned from the desire of getting estates, or even hold- 
 ing them together, when Truth requires the contrary, I believe 
 way will open that they will know how to steer through those 
 difficulties." 
 2 
 
14 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 " Many Friends/' he continues, "appeared to be deeply 
 bowed under the weight of the work, and manifested much 
 firmness in their ] e + o the cause of Truth and universal 
 righteousness on the earth. Though none openly justified the 
 practice of slave keeping in general, yet some appeared con- 
 cerned, lest the meeting should go into such measures as 
 might give uneasiness to many brethren ; alleging that if 
 Friends patiently continued under the exercise, the Lord, in 
 time to come, might open a way for the deliverance of these 
 people. " 
 
 The striking similarity of these remarks, with those used hy 
 leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting during the course 
 of the events, which it is my present purpose to record, the 
 observing reader cannot fail to discover. "If Friends," it 
 was frequently observed, " will keep in the patience and in 
 the quiet, the Lord will, in his own good time, set the slaves 
 at liberty." But let us hear John Woolman's reply to this 
 class : 
 
 " My mind is often led to consider the purity of the divine 
 Being, and the justice of his judgments ; and herein my soul 
 is covered with awfulness. I cannot omit to hint of some 
 cases, where people have not been treated with the purity of 
 justice, and the event hath been lamentable. Many slaves on 
 this continent are oppressed, and their cries have reached the 
 ears of the Most High. Such are the purity and certainty of 
 his judgments, that he cannot be partial in our favor. In in- 
 finite love and goodness, he hath opened our understandings 
 from one time to another, concerning our duty toward this peo- 
 ple ; and it is not a time for delay. Should we now be sensi- 
 ble of what he requires of us, and through respect to the pri- 
 vate interest of some persons, or through a regard to some 
 friendships which do not stand on an immutable foundation, 
 neglect to do our duty in firmness and constancy, still waiting 
 for some extraordinary means to bring about their deliverance, 
 it may be that God may answer us in this matter by terrible 
 things in righteousness." 
 
 As we have already seen, many Friends at this time kept 
 slaves, especially in the then Southern Provinces, where he 
 sometimes traveled. When among them he was careful to 
 endeavor to keep clear of the gain of oppression, even in the 
 hospitalities received at their hands. In regard to this subject 
 he remarks: "When I expected soon to leave a Friend's 
 
INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 house where I had had entertainment, if I believed that I 
 should not keep clear from the gain of oppression without 
 leaving'money, I spoke to one of the heads of the family pri- 
 vately, and desired him to accept of some pieces of silver, and 
 give them to such of the negroes as he believed would make 
 the best use of them ; and at other times I gave them to the 
 negroes myself, as the way looked clearest to me." 
 
 He published two articles or treatises, entitled, " Considera- 
 tions on the keeping of Negroes ;" the first in 1754, and the 
 second in 1762 ; both excellent documents, and well calculated 
 to arouse the dormant sensibilities of the human mind to a 
 sense of the great injustice and cruelty of the practice. 
 
 Clarkson, in his history already referred to, remarks "that 
 Anthony Benezet (the last-named Friend, and prominent la- 
 borer in the Yearly Meeting at the time to which I have called 
 attention,) may be considered as one of the most zealous, vigi- 
 lant, and active advocates, which the cause of the oppressed 
 Africans ever had. He seemed to have been born, and to 
 have lived for the promotion of it, and, therefore, he never 
 omited any, the least opportunity of serving it." 
 
 It appears that he voluntarily chose the humble situation of 
 a schoolmaster, in preference to the flattering prospect of 
 wealth by entering into mercantile operations, for which he 
 had already been prepared by an apprenticeship ; deeming 
 "wealth of no importance when compared with the enjoyment 
 of doing good." 
 
 As a means of promoting the cause of the slave, he en- 
 deavored to give his scholars a correct knowledge, and just 
 impressions concerning it ; thus instilling into their susceptible 
 minds his own benevolent principles, and eventually bringing 
 forth many advocates into the field. 
 
 Had his bright example been generally followed by teachers, 
 and those having the care of the youth, what a world of suf- 
 fering, sorrow, and crime would have been prevented ! It is 
 evident a very important change in public sentiment and feel- 
 ing is absolutely necessary to secure the triumph of the Anti- 
 slavery cause. Many of those advanced in years are entirely 
 hopeless : it is to the youth, therefore, mainly that we must 
 look for recruits to freedom's hosts ; and hence it is of the 
 first importance to diffuse a thorough Anti-slavery literature 
 throughout the country, and, by imitating the example of our 
 friend, impart that kind of instruction to the youth, which 
 
16 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 will, under the blessing of Providence, make them Aboli- 
 tionists. 
 
 But to return from this digression ; I will observe that he 
 also wrote various articles on the subject of Slavery, and pro- 
 cured their insertion in almanacs and public newspapers. 
 . In 1762, he published a work entitled, "A short Account of 
 that part of Africa inhabited by the Negroes," 
 
 About five years after this, he published another work, en- 
 titled, " An Historical Account of Guinea, its Situation, Pro- 
 duce, and the General Disposition of its Inhabitants, with an 
 Inquiry into the Rise and Progress of the Slave-trade, its Na- 
 ture and Calamitous Effects." 
 
 The last-named work seems to have been eminently useful, 
 exceeding anything previously published on the subject, in 
 spreading a correct knowledge, and in exciting a just abhor- 
 rence of the Slave-trade. 
 
 We have here presented a historical outline of individual 
 action in the Anti-slavery cause, of an important character. 
 It was individual zeal and effort, under the blessing of the 
 Head of the Church, which eventually purged the Society 
 from slave- holding. Individual members moved in advance of 
 the body, or there could have been no progress or improve- 
 ment. 
 
 Let us now again glance at the progress of London Yearly 
 Meeting on the subject. We have seen what it was up to the 
 year 1727. Thirty-one years after this date — that is to say, in 
 1758 — we find them using very different language. They 
 say, u We fervently warn all in profession with us, that they 
 carefully avoid being any way concerned in reaping the un- 
 righteous profits arising from the iniquitous practice of dealing 
 in negro, or other slaves ; whereby, in the original purchase, 
 one man selleth another, as he doth the beasts that perish, 
 without any better pretensions to a property in him than that 
 of superior force ; in direct violation of the Gospel rule, which 
 teacheth all to do as they would be done by, and to do good 
 to all. We, therefore, can do no less than, with the greatest 
 earnestness, impress it upon Friends everywhere, that they 
 endeavor to keep their hands clear of this unrighteous gain of 
 oppression." 
 
 Notwithstanding the above contains warm and energetic 
 counsel and caution, yet it is still not positively prohibitory, 
 or, in other words, it does not make such " dealing" a dis- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 17 
 
 ownable offense. But three years afterward, in 1761, this 
 was efftcted, as will be seen by the subjoined Minute of that 
 year. 
 
 " This meeting having reason to apprehend that divers 
 under our name, are concerned in the unchristian traffic in 
 negroes, doth recommend it earnestly to the care of Friends 
 everywhere to discourage as much as in them lies, a practice 
 so repugnant to our Christian profession, and to deal with all 
 such as shall persevere in a conduct so reproachful to Christ- 
 ianity ; and to disown them if they desist not therefrom.'' 
 
 In 1763, the line appears to have been drawn a lit'le closer. 
 They say: " We renew our exhortation, that Friends every- 
 where, be especially careful to keep their hands clear of giving 
 any encouragement in any shape, to the slave-trade, etc., etc. 
 
 Had this advice been strictly obeyed, it would have pre- 
 vented, not merely the furnishing of materials for the construc- 
 tion of ships, and the accommodation of their crews, for such 
 voyages, by Friends, which probably was the matter here 
 alluded to, but also the holding of Slaves (which many of them 
 were then in the practice of,) as well as prevented the use of 
 the produce of the bondman's unrequited toil ; for to many of 
 us it is now as clear as noon-day, that the use of such produce 
 is not simply an " encouragement," but the very spring of 
 life to Slavery ', and the trade in the bodies and souls of men, 
 with all their concomitant horrors. But the Yearly Meeting 
 probably never thought of the essential and necessary depend- 
 ence of this unchristian traffic " upon the holding of slaves, 
 and the use of products of the labor of men and women 
 " bought and sold ;" for, up to this date, its advices on the 
 subject, appear to Ime been confined to the traffic, without re- 
 ferring to the moving causes. But in the course of tLe next 
 nine years, some progress seems to have been made, as will 
 appear by the following Minute of. the meeting of 1772 : 
 
 " It appears that the practice of holding negroes in oppres- 
 sive and unnatural bondage, hath been so successfully dis- 
 couraged by Friends in some of the colonies, as to be consider- 
 ably lessened. We cannot but approve of these salutary 
 endeavors, and earnestly entreat they may be continued, that 
 through the favor of Divine Providence, a traffic so unmerci- 
 ful and unjust in its nature, to a part of our own species, 
 made, equally with ourselves for immortality, may come to be 
 
18 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 considered by all in its proper light, and be utterly abolished 
 as a reproach to the Christian name." 
 
 Notwithstanding all that is said in the above is strictly true, 
 yet it is evident, that they were under the same erroneous im- 
 pression which has ever since prevailed, till within a few years, 
 both in England and America, viz : that the foreign slave- 
 trade, rather than Slavery itself, is the great evil, and the first 
 object for the attack of philanthropists. It was an error of 
 judgment in this respect, that led the British abolitionists, with 
 the renowned Granville Sharp and Thomas Clarkson at their 
 head, to abandon the only true and consistent position ; that is, 
 of opposition to Slavery and the slave-trade, and to attack 
 the latter only. 
 
 It is now generally admitted by those best acquainted with 
 the subject, that there is no hope of doing away the African 
 slave-trade, while Slavery itself is allowed to exist ; and that 
 human suffering is rather increased than diminished by the 
 enactments against it. Such is the influence of gold upon the 
 cupidity of man, that as long as slaves can be sold, especially 
 under the sanction of law, men will be found, who will supply 
 the market at any hazard ; no law that can be enacted, will 
 prevent. 
 
 But to return : hitherto the Yearly Meeting appears to have 
 directed its labors on the subject exclusively to its own mem- 
 bers, but this was a field too circumscribed for the benevolent 
 principles of genuine Quakerism, or Christianity. The evil 
 was rife around them ; their country was involved in it, and 
 their fellow-men suffering its unspeakable cruelties ; a more 
 public testimony must be borne. Accordingly, that meeting 
 in 1783, caused a petition to be drawn up and presented to 
 the House of Commons, in which they represent the suffering 
 situation of the enslaved, as a subject " loudly calling for the 
 humane interposition of the Legislature," and requested an 
 embargo placed upon the traffic in human beings. 
 
 This appears to be the first act of the Meeting having a 
 general bearing on the subject, and indeed, the first petition 
 ever presented to Parliament against the slave-trade. 
 
 The same meeting recommended the subject to its standing 
 committee, the Meeting for Sufferings, which, before the close 
 of the year, issued an address to the public, in which they en- 
 deavored to enlighten the minds of their readers in regard to 
 
INTRODUCTION. 19 
 
 the cruel nature of the traffic, and ordered two thousand copies 
 printed for distribution. 
 
 An example is here presented worthy of imitation. Here 
 we see a Meeting for Sufferings performing the labor, and at- 
 tending to the duties of an " Abolition Meeting," in the strict- 
 est sense of the terms : that is, endeavoring to enlighten the 
 public mind in regard to the evils of Slavery. 
 
 This zealous and hearty action of the Society, as a body, 
 which it was now prepared to take, no doubt made way for, 
 and gave encouragement to, another very important move- 
 ment. 
 
 This was the formation of an association, called the " Quaker 
 Committee." The first meeting of this noble little band was 
 held on 7th of Seventh month, of the same year, 1783. 
 
 " They assembled to -consider what steps they should take 
 for the relief and liberation of the negro slaves in the West 
 Indies, and for the discouragement of the slave-trade on the 
 eoast of Africa." 
 
 Their names were: "William Dillwyn, George Harrison, 
 Samuel Hoare, Thomas Knowles, M. D., John Lloyd, and 
 Joseph Woods. These, it should be remembered, were all 
 Friends. There was no jealousy entertained by the Yearly 
 Meeting, or the body of Society, that some Friends entering 
 into an association for the abolition of " Slavery, would 
 imply that the rest were not Abolitionists, that the body 
 was defective in principle, in regard to the matter—" far from 
 it. The exhibition of this kind of feeling was left for after 
 ages, which will perhaps be better understood in the sequel. 
 
 The result of their first consultation, was a conviction of 
 the necessity of adopiing some measures for enlightening the 
 minds of the people respecting those evils. As the most feas- 
 ible, they agreed to make use of the public papers, appointing 
 first one, and then another of their members to write articles, 
 and have them inserted therein. 
 
 They kept regular minutes of their proceedings, and in the 
 course of the same year in which they organized, held several 
 meetings, and secured a place in no less than nine periodicals, 
 for the insertion of such matter as they deemed suitable to the 
 purpose. 
 
 In 1784, they followed the same plan, except that in addi- 
 tion, they began to print books on the subject ; and in the year 
 following, continued their labor as before. 
 
20 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 While these events were transpiring, the Society itself, was 
 actively engaged in the same work ; for the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings in 1785, recommended Quarterly Meetings, to distri- 
 bute a work entitled " A Caution to Great Britain and her 
 Colonies, in a short Eepresentation of the calamitous state of 
 the enslaved Negroes in the British Dominions/ ' and which 
 was written by Anthony Benezet, in America. 
 
 This book was accordingly distributed, and was sent to 
 many persons of note throughout the kingdom. 
 
 It is true, the work was written and published by a Friend, 
 but there was not only no objection in those days of candor 
 and simplicity in the Society, to an individual publishing 
 an article, advocating "one of our important testimonies," 
 without first submitting it to the examination of a Meeting 
 for Sufferings, but, as we have seen, the strongest kind of 
 encouragement was given to it — to this " activity" and zeal 
 in the advocacy of their principles. It is clear that it was 
 to them a source of great pleasure, to see such lively 
 interest manifested by a brother, in so good a cause, in- 
 stead of chagrin, as similar efforts of later time seem to 
 have been, to some, connected with the history of the events 
 hereafter to be presented. 
 
 On the 22d of Fifth month, 1787, those Friends consti- 
 tuting the committee referred to, who associated together 
 to promote the liberation of the negroes in the West Indies, 
 except Thomas Knowles, who was then on his death-bed, 
 met together, and they, with other Friends, united with 
 Granville Sharp, Thomas Clarkson, and Philip Sansom, in an 
 organization for the promotion of the cause of the oppressed 
 Africans. In the Sixth month following, they came to the 
 conclusion, to confine their opposition to the slave-trade alone, 
 and to adopt this title : " The Committee instituted for effecting 
 the Abolition of the Slave-trade." 
 
 Thus, an association was formed, composed of Friends and 
 ethers, which continued its labors, truly arduous, for the space 
 of twenty years, and until it effected its object, the abolition 
 of the legalized traffic in human beings in Great Britain. 
 Friends, at the time of which we are speaking, appeared to 
 entertain no fears of lowering their testimonies and the stand- 
 ard of Truth, by uniting with those who were not members, in 
 pleading the cause of humanity. And it is a fact worthy of 
 notice, that this very circumstance gave the Society one of its 
 
INTRODUCTION. 21 
 
 most able advocates, and one whose works have scarcely been 
 of less importance to the Society, than those of its most gifted 
 members. This is familiar to all who are acquainted with 
 H Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism," a work which the 
 venerable author was induced to prepare in consequence of his 
 becoming so intimately acquainted with Friends through the 
 medium above referred to. (See his introduction to the work.) 
 
 The above remarks, and their application, will be better un- 
 derstood in the sequel, as the events to which they refer are 
 unfolded ; I must, therefore, beg the reader to bear them in 
 mind. 
 
 We will now return to Friends in America. 
 
 I have already given a sketch of the proceedings of the 
 Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania, on the Anti-slavery ques- 
 tion, up to the year 1764. I do not find a record of any ad- 
 vanced step taken by that meeting for twenty years, or till in 
 1774. By a Minute of that year, all members concerned in 
 importing, selling, purchasing, giving or transferring negro or 
 other slaves, or otherwise acting in such manner as to continue 
 them in slavery beyond the term limited by law or custom, 
 were directed to be disowned. 
 
 In the year 1776, the Yearly Meeting adopted the rule that 
 those who owned slaves, and who refused to execute suitable 
 instruments for their liberation, should be disowned from the 
 Society. 
 
 Much less appears on record concerning the labors and exer- 
 cises of other Yearly Meetings in America, in regard to the 
 subject. In respect to them, Clarkson observes : "And as the 
 Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania and the Jerseys set this 
 bright example, (tLat is, to allow no member to hold slaves,) 
 so those of New England, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and 
 of the Carolinas and Georgia, in process of time, followed it." 
 Other accounts, however, state the matter a little different ; 
 that those of New England and New York, at least, did not 
 follow ; that New England adopted the rule some five or six 
 years previous — that is, in 1770, or 1771 — and that New York 
 Yearly Meeting adopted it in 1774. The Anti-slavery refor- 
 mation was, however, pretty much simultaneous throughout 
 the Society. Active, zealous, and faithful Friends were found 
 in all the Yearly Meetings: and although these met with much 
 opposition from individuals, yet I apprehend but few meetings 
 interposed a barrier to their labors ; an instance or two, how- 
 
22 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 ever, of this kind, I will introduce as bearing some, though a 
 slight resemblance to that which produced the Secession, the 
 circumstances of which it is my purpose to record. 
 
 It appears certain faithful Friends of Chester Monthly 
 Meeting, within the limits of the Yearly Meeting for Pennsyl- 
 vania, had, for some time, been laboring to convince their 
 friends that their conduct, in regard to Slavery, was wrong, 
 and the subject was introduced by Minute from that Monthly 
 Meeting to Chester Quarterly Meeting, and thence forwarded 
 to the Yearly Meeting, in 1775 ; upon the presentation of 
 which, the following Minute was adopted : 
 
 "If any Friends are concerned in the importation of negroes, 
 let them be dealt with and advised to avoid that practice, ac- 
 cording to the sense of former meetings in that behalf; and 
 that all do forbear judging or reflecting on one another, either 
 in public or private, concerning the detaining or keeping them 
 servants." 
 
 This, it seems, was all the meeting could do at that time, 
 because the controlling influences were in the practice of slave- 
 holding themselves, or indifferent as to its existence. 
 
 How true it is, that those who are in the practice of a wrong, 
 and in measure sensible of it, yet having not the moral courage 
 to live in unison with the secret intimations of Divine Truth, are 
 ever ready to invoke the spirit of forbearance and charity in 
 that matter. Even as a Yearly Meeting they can exhort " to 
 forbear judging or reflecting on one another, either in public 
 or private " for holding slaves ; and simply because they do 
 not wish to be censured for it themselves. 
 
 As soon as Friends of this Yearly Meeting, or its controlling 
 members, became in earnest to put away the evil of their own 
 doings, they could then, not only censure for the practice, but 
 finally disow T n such as would not desist ; and be sensible, too, 
 that they could do it without any breach of charity, or want 
 of " forbearance." 
 
 The opposition to the reformation and its advocates, was not, 
 in every case, as mild even as the one referred to above. 
 
 "Among the first of those who opposed the practice of slave- 
 holding was a female Friend, residing in Virginia, and for this 
 opposition she was disowned from her religious society. When 
 on her death-bed she sent for the committee who had treated 
 with her, told them that the near approach of death had not 
 altered her mind on the subject of Slavery ; and then gently 
 
INTRODUCTION, 23 
 
 waving her hand toward a very fertile and beautiful tract of 
 country that lay before her window, she said, with great so- 
 lemnity, ' Friends, the time will come when there will not be 
 Friends enough in this district to hold one meeting for worship, 
 and this garden will be turned into a wilderness.' There were, 
 at the time, seven meetings of Friends in that part of Virginia, 
 but they have all long since been deserted, and the country 
 literally desolated. " 
 
 The above narrative is taken from the British Friend, of 
 12th mo., 1854. 
 
 The whole circumstance is calculated to impress a lesson of 
 deep instruction, and to fix upon the mind the necessity of 
 individual faithfulness, even if it be at an expense of union 
 with the body, and to show clearly that meetings have greatly 
 erred ; and hence that implicit confidence in their decisions is a 
 dangerous position to occupy. 
 
 In the year 1774, the formation of an association took place 
 in Pennsylvania, " for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, and 
 the relief of free Negroes, unlawfully held in bondage." 
 
 This society was composed of Friends and others indiscrimin- 
 ately. James Pemberton, one of the most conspicuous Friends 
 in the Yearly Meeting, and Dr. Rush, a man of eminence, 
 belonging to a different denomination, were the principal agents 
 in effecting this organization. 
 
 In 1787, the association had Dr. Franklin for its president; 
 James Pemberton and Jonathan Penrose for vice-presidents ; 
 and Dr. Benjamin Rush and Tench Cox for secretaries. 
 
 Societies similar to that of Pennsylvania, were established 
 in New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, 
 and other States ; in each of which, Friends and others were 
 similarly united in promoting the great and excellent work. 
 
 We have now taken a concise view of the Rise and Progress 
 of the testimony of our Society against the Slave-trade and 
 Slavery, up to the time when its members were prohibited 
 from taking any part in the trade, or holding their fellow-men 
 in bondage ; and have seen Friends, both in England and 
 America, uniting with those not of the Society in organizations 
 for promoting the cause of the Slave in the world at large. It 
 remains to give a further sketch of their proceedings in regard 
 to this matter and particularly of such as relate to their con- 
 nection with organizations of the above description, down to a 
 more recent period. But before proceeding it may be proper 
 
24 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to state, that the most remote hint of objection to Friends 
 uniting with others in associated action, to promote the libera- 
 tion of the slave, cannot, so far as I have been able to ascer- 
 tain, be found in the records or documents of the Society of 
 those days — a time when their actions proved the sincerity of 
 their professions — when it cost them something to be abolition- 
 ists ; — not merely a good name and honorable standing in the 
 world, but, in many instances, a considerable portion of their 
 estates also. 
 
 How long the Society for Pennsylvania " For Promoting the 
 Abolitition of Slavery," and others of a similar character in 
 other States, remained efficient bodies, I have, at present, no 
 means of determining. In answer to a letter of inquiry, ad- 
 dressed to my friend, Arnold Buffum, of New York, on the 
 above and other subjects, I received the following, which I 
 deem proper to insert at large, as his testimony to certain 
 facts and circumstances relative to the matter in hand. 
 
 New York, Fifth Month 29th, 1851. 
 Walter Edgerton : — 
 
 My Dear Friend. — Thy letter making some inquiries rela- 
 tive to the position which the Society of Friends have occu- 
 pied on the Slavery question, came duly to hand, and was 
 read with pleasure. I very much regret, that by two fires, I 
 have lost a large portion of the documentary evidence which I 
 once possessed on this subject. 
 
 It has been to me a most sorrowful reflection, that the time 
 ever was, when a religious body making the high and holy 
 profession which we do, should have tolerated " trading in 
 slaves and souls of men." Such, however, was the fact, and 
 many "Friends" were slaveholders; and when, in the pro- 
 gress of light, there was raised up in our religious body one 
 individual, who saw, felt, and proclaimed that it was a sin for 
 a man to claim and exercise a chattel ownership of another 
 man's body, and to take from him the God-given right of pur- 
 suing his own happiness, this holy apostle of freedom, for 
 having proclaimed this truth, was repudiated by his brethren, 
 and excommunicated from the fellowship of the Society, furnish- 
 ing undisputable evidence, that a high profession is not a sure 
 indication of high attainments, in moral perception or in a 
 Christ-like life. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 25 
 
 But the attention of the disinterested and conscientious por- 
 tion of the Society having been drawn to a contemplation of 
 the sin of oppression, the conviction became established in 
 their minds, not merely that it was a sin to hold men in slav- 
 ery, but that it is equally sinful in the sight of God, to witness 
 these abominations existing around us, and to make no effort 
 for their abolition. The subject was brought up and discussed 
 in all the Yearly Meetings, and the friends of humanity kept 
 up a constant and active agitation, until the whole body was 
 brought under the power of Divine truth, and freedom was 
 proclaimed to all their slaves. Blessed be the memory of those 
 faithful followers of Him who came to preach deliverance to 
 the captives, they persevered in their labors of love— organ- 
 ized abolition societies in connection with the friends of hu- 
 manity of other sects — poured out the thunder of truth upon 
 the sin of oppression, until the public sentiment of the whole 
 community was so regenerated, that Slavery was abolished in 
 a majority of the original slave-holding States of this Union. 
 In England too, individual members of our religious Society 
 commenc* d the Anti-Slavery movement ; there, too, they 
 united with others, in anti-slavery organizations, and many of 
 the purest and most eminent Christians that the Society of 
 Friends has ever produced, devoted their untiring energies to 
 the great cause of Slavery abolition ; and the first movers in 
 the cause, lived to witness the blessing of God upon their 
 labors of love, in the emancipation of a million of bondsmen. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting of Friends in London, in 1830, in 
 their General Epistle, after commenting on the wickedness of 
 Slavery, Intemperance, and War, gave the following advice : 
 H We recommend to our members individually, to unite with 
 their fellow-countrymen in the measures now in progress, for 
 the removal of these evils." A more rational or Christ-like 
 sentiment never emanated from any body of men on the face 
 of the earth. It is in perfect accordance with all the preach- 
 ing and all the example of our Holy Redeemer. He always 
 practiced and directed administration to the relief of the dis- 
 tressed, with no toleration for any delay. The orthodox 
 Yearly Meetings of Friends in this country, all adopted and 
 re-printed that Christian Epistle from London, and it was sent 
 out through all the branches of the Society in this land. I 
 read it, and having had my Anti-slavery feelings somewhat 
 warmed into life, by a considerably extensive intercourse with 
 
26 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Friends in England, I felt it to be my duty to act in accordance 
 with the counsel thus put forth by the whole body of orthodox 
 Friends, both in Europe and America ; and without hesitation, 
 and I am happy to say, without any subsequent regret, I united 
 myself with eleven of my " fellow-countrymen/' in organizing 
 the first of the modern Anti-slavery Societies. The old Rhode 
 Island Abolition Society, of which my father was a member 
 before I was born, and of which I also had been a member, 
 had been consigned to the tomb, by the influence of cotton 
 and Colonizationism during my absence in Europe, and at the 
 commencement of the year 1831, we were able to find only 
 twelve persons prepared to unite in reviving the Anti-slavery 
 agitation. We remembered what God had caused it to be 
 written, that " whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, 
 he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard ;" and we 
 were led to contemplate the mournful fact, that there were two 
 millions of our countrymen suffering under the most cruel op- 
 pression — that they were so poor, that they owned no tongues 
 or lips to tell the story of their sufferings and wrongs ; or to 
 send up their cry to the ears of the people ; and we felt that 
 God had blessed us with voices to utter their cry, and we 
 dared not " keep in the quiet," in view of this awful wicked- 
 ness. My friends tried to persuade me, to " keep out of all 
 excitements and commotions/ 7 and threatened me with ex- 
 communication, if I persisted in pleading the cause of the 
 enslaved ; but I remember with joy, the reply which I gave 
 them, when I decided that I would persevere in advocating 
 the cause of those who were not permitted to plead for them- 
 selves. I regarded my responsibility toward the slave, as 
 similar to that of Dives toward Lazarus, and I felt that if I 
 left them to the mercy of dogs, I must cry in vain, for the 
 poor slave to come from Abraham's bosom to cool my tongue. 
 I saw a field open in the West, and I heard a voice saying to 
 me, " Go into the field and labor ;" and in my compliance 
 with this command, my only regret is, that I was not better 
 qualified for so important a mission, and that I was not more 
 devoted and faithful to the cause. I bless God, that I found 
 there a chosen few, who received me as one that had come to 
 bring to their ears the cry of the poor ; and who regard the 
 command of Christ, to love our neighbor as ourselves, as of 
 higher obligation than any rules of expediency adopted for 
 the sake of popular applause or of worldly gain. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 27 
 
 The Society of Friends in England, as a body and individu- 
 ally, continue in active co-operation with their fellow-country- 
 men, for the advancement of the cause of the Redeemer's 
 kingdom among men, laboring in accordance with the true 
 faith, that when the obstructions which men have interposed 
 shall be removed, God will grant that holy prayer which Jesus 
 instructed his disciples to pray ; and His kingdom will come, 
 and His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. In this 
 faith, Friends in England feel the responsibility resting upcn 
 them, to persevere in untiring labors for the abolition of viol- 
 ence, oppression, and wrong ; regarding this as man's portion 
 of the great work, preparatory to the coming of that glorious 
 day, when " all men shall see eye to eye, and God shall be all 
 and in all.** 
 
 In America, I am sorry to say, the position at present occu- 
 pied by the " Friends as a body," is very different. The love 
 of popular approbation in a sinful slave-holding nation, has 
 closed the hands and the mouths, and I fear, the consciences 
 cf a large portion of those who still use the language and 
 wear the garb of Quakerism ; and they seem to have adopted 
 the idea, that being themselves well off in the world, they 
 are under no obligation to trouble themselves with the suffer- 
 ings of others, and therefore, they have resolved to " settle 
 down in the quiet, and keep out of all excitements and com- 
 motions." It is more in accordance with their faith, to follow 
 the example of the by-passing priest and Levite, than to go 
 like the good Samaritan, to the relief cf the three millions of 
 their own countrymen who have fallen among thieves. They 
 seem to regard their Church organization, as the builders of 
 Babel regarded their tower, merely as a ladder to carry them- 
 selves to Heaven, instead of an organization of united strength 
 for warring upon the abominations which abound in the world. 
 I thank God, that there are noble exceptions to this general 
 rule, and I pray that the faithful ones scattered over the land, 
 may never falter. The day will soon come, when the lan- 
 guage will come to us individually — " Inasmuch as ye have 
 done it, or have not done it, unto one of the least of these, ye 
 have done it, or have not done it unto me." 
 
 "We have, in the signs of the times, abundant encourage- 
 ment to persevere. Twenty years ago, no man in Congress 
 dared to open his mouth against Slavery. Look at the change ; 
 senators and representatives are now elected in various states^ 
 
 
28 IHTEODUOTIOH. 
 
 expressly on the ground of opposition to Slavery ; and every 
 day the abominations of that " peculiar institution," are be- 
 coming more observed and more abhorred ; the slaves are 
 fleeing to a land of freedom, in the dominions of Queen Vic- 
 toria ; and the slave-holders are becoming terribly alarmed, 
 lest, becoming civilized and educated, they shall return to the 
 South armed with power to demand the liberation of their en- 
 slaved brethren. 
 
 Slavery or freedom for the laboring population of America, 
 has become the great agitating question of the press, the 
 stump, the legislative halls, and the pulpit ; and no subtlety or 
 contrivance can stop this agitation, so long as any portion of 
 the American people are held in bondage. Let us give no 
 sleep to our eyes, nor slumber to our eyelids, until we feel 
 that we have done our day's work, for the advancement of this 
 holy cause. If we never meet again in this world, let us se- 
 cure to ourselves an abiding hope, that we shall meet with all 
 the friends of humanity in that better world, where there is 
 no oppression, nor any disposition to cover up or tolerate 
 crime ; and to God be all the glory. 
 
 With increasing affection and love, I remain thy friend, 
 
 Arnold Buffum. 
 
 That those original Anti-Slavery societies continued for a 
 considerable time to exert a salutary influence upon the public 
 mind, is quite evident. Indeed, the manumission movement of 
 Tennessee and North Carolina, may be considered as having 
 emanated, at least in some degree, from the Anti-slavery feel- 
 ing thus engendered. 
 
 The manumission organization took its rise in Tennessee, in 
 the year 1815; and the next year was extended into North 
 Carolina. This organization was likewise composed in part, of 
 Friends, and those too, of the most worthy in the Society. 
 
 Shortly after the establishment of this organization, that is, 
 in the year 1816, the American Colonization Society was 
 formed, having for its object the removal of the free people of 
 color from the United States, to some distant part of the world. 
 The institution of this society, was one of the severest blows 
 the cause of the poor African had ever received. It was ori- 
 ginated by slave-holders, and for the purpose of draining the 
 country of its free colored population ; and in order that they 
 might be the more secure in the possession of their human 
 
INTRODUCTION. 29 
 
 chattels. It however was, and still is, a Janus-faced institu- 
 tion. In the South, it claimed not to interfere in the least, 
 with the relation of master and slave ; but in the North, it 
 claimed to be the only feasible means by which our country 
 was eventually to be purged from Slavery, and heathen Africa 
 Christianized ! Thus, with its false pretenses, many honest 
 and philanthropic, but short-sighted individuals, were induced 
 to give it their countenance and support. Many Friends 
 united with others — even with slave-holders in the effort ; and 
 North Carolina Yearly Meeting itself, at a certain time, con- 
 tributed largely to its funds. 
 
 The object, with its original projectors, as we have seen, 
 was to clear the country of its free colored population ; and 
 as they were of a class that had robbed their fellow-men of 
 all their rights, they were not such as would be likely to be 
 very scrupulous in what way they effected their object. Ac- 
 cordingly, we find the most prominent men in that organiza- 
 tion, engaged in venting bitter denunciations against that 
 oppressed people, stigmatizing them as the " vilest of nuis- 
 ances/' a " pest to the country, " etc., etc. Thus, through its 
 agents and its public men, this Society labored assiduously to 
 create a prejudice against this people, already so deeply in- 
 jured : and having succeeded in imbittering the minds of the 
 great mass of the American people against them, it then pro- 
 claimed, trumpet-tongued, that the prejudices in this country 
 against the poor negro were so great, that it was impossible for 
 him ever to be elevated here, and, therefore, he must be sent 
 away ! And now, while I write, this is the universal language 
 and argument of Colonizationists. This idea, that the slaves 
 must not be pet free, and remain here, was, and still is, the 
 grand foe to freedom, especially in the North. Some fifteen 
 years back it could have been said, I believe in truth, that 
 every party in politics, and every religious denomination in the 
 United States, were more or less contaminated by this baleful 
 influence, and many of them perfectly cold and lifeless, as to 
 any feeling for the sufferers. It had much to do in producing 
 the Separation, the history of which we are to trace, as the 
 documents I shall introduce will clearly show. In some of 
 these documents, the character and purposes of the Coloniza- 
 tion Society will be, incidentally, more fully examined. 
 
 But to return from this digression ; as before stated, many 
 Friends of Tennessee and North Carolina were actively en- 
 2* 
 
30 IKTKODUCTIOK. 
 
 gaged in the manumission enterprise. They appeared to have 
 no fear of compromising their principles by associating with 
 others in the good work, or by allowing their meeting-houses 
 to be u?ed by such an organization. There are now living 
 witnesses who will testify, that Friends were so completely 
 identified with, and in favor of, the manumission cause in those 
 days, that meetings of the organization were appointed to be 
 held in Friends' meeting-house ', without the least idea of even 
 asking for them ; and it is distinctly recollected that, at a cer- 
 tain time, a meeting for Ministers and Elders left the meeting- 
 house in which they were assembled, and retired to a school- 
 house in order to accommodate a meeting of this description. 
 
 Before leaving this part of the narrative, I will record one 
 other circumstance. 
 
 The Manumission Society at first adopted a rule to exclude 
 all slave-holders from membership therein. Some of the slave- 
 holders, as has since been evident, in order to defeat the pro- 
 ject, professed to wish to become members of the association. 
 The case was brought before that body, and a change in con- 
 stitution advocated, as affording an excellent means of increas- 
 ing their usefulness by increasing their membership ; and, 
 finally, was adopted and slave-holders admitted. This done, 
 another proposition for innovation soon followed, and that was 
 to change the name, and, consequently, the character of the 
 Association — that it should be denominated the " Manumission 
 and Colonization Society." This project succeeded also, which 
 soon terminated the existence of an institution which was 
 originally designed to promote the unconditional emancipation 
 of the slave; the moral power of which, slave-holders and 
 their allies, were astute enough to comprehend, and compre- 
 hending, most ingeniously to overthrow — a verification of the 
 Scripture declaration, that " the children of this world are 
 wiser in their generation than the children of light." 
 
 Charles Osborne, now no more, being a member of the 
 organization, was in the meeting when the proposition was 
 made to change its name and character. He was not deceived 
 by the false pretenses of the colonization scheme, and its in- 
 terested and heartless advocates. He stood up against it, and 
 voted against it alone ; of the peolpe none were with him. 
 
 A number of Friends having removed from those states and 
 settled here in Indiana, brought their Anti-slavery principles 
 and feelings with them, and, consequently, meetings having for 
 
INTBODUCTIOH. 31 
 
 their object the liberation of the slave, were held in different 
 parts of the country ; some as early as between the years 
 1815 and 1820. 
 
 Friends' meeting-houses were used for such purposes, at 
 White Water and other places, without the least hesitation. 
 No one then appeared to have any apprehensions for the con- 
 sequences of such a course. 
 
 Let us now turn back and take a further view of the action 
 of Friends on the other side of the Atlantic. We left them at 
 the close of the struggle for the abolition of the slave-trade 
 under the British government. 
 
 By a union of a number of philanthropists of Great Britain* 
 in which were included eminent members of the Society of 
 Friends, elders and ministers of the Gospel, the British and 
 Foreign Anti-slavery Society sprung into existence. 
 
 None who are acquainted with the history of the abolition 
 of slavery in the British West Indies, can, for a moment, 
 doubt the great good resulting from the united action of Friends 
 and others in promoting that object. It was while Friends in 
 England were engaged in these philanthropic efforts, that the 
 advice quoted by Arnold Buffum, on a previous page, from 
 the London Yearly Meeting's General Epistle, was issued. 
 They were in the midst of a noble, though arduous struggle 
 for the right: the liberty of a million of human beings was the 
 prize to be won. They had toiled and labored in the cause ; 
 they had listened to, and thought of the wrongs of the slave, 
 till their feelings were aroused, and they had remembered, at 
 least in degree, those in bonds as bound with them ; and call- 
 ing to mind that in the United States a^one, more than two 
 millions of Africa's children were in a like degraded and suf- 
 fering condition, no marvel they gave that advice. It was but 
 the outpouring of benevolence and sympathy for the sufferers, 
 from the deep fountain of their heart which, like the pool of 
 Bethesda, had received that agita'ion from a heavenly hand, 
 which made it a fountain of life and health to those poorest of 
 the poor, (more forlorn than "halt, lame, of blind,") who 
 were within the sphere of its influence. By its benign power, 
 eight hundred thousand souls in the West Indies, were in one 
 day, the 1st day of Eighth month, 1838, lifted from this hor- 
 rible pit of pollution, the degraded condition of things, of pro- 
 perty, chattels personal, and exalted to the station of men and 
 
32 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 women, to a condition a little lower than the angels, to be 
 crowned with glory and honor. This work, let me repeat, was 
 effected by the cordial co-operation of such Friends as William 
 Allen, William Forster, Josiah Forster, Joseph Sturge, George 
 Stacey, etc., etc., with other Christian professors. And they 
 labored, too, as we have already seen, not merely with the 
 consent of London Yearly Meeting, but in accordance with its 
 advice and earnest recommendation. 
 
 We have now presented a concise history of the action of 
 Friends from the first, both in England and America, touching 
 the subject of Slavery. The reader, I trust, will now be ena- 
 bled, understandingly, to peruse the following pages, embracing, 
 as they do, a history and record of some of the principal facts 
 and circumstances which produced the Separation, together 
 with the arguments used, and the positions taken on both sides, 
 and thereby be prepared readily to decide who were and are 
 the separatists, and who contending for the testimony of the 
 Society of Friends ; who had precedent and ancient usage on 
 their side, and who opposed it ; who were contending against 
 spiritual wickedness in high places, and who connived at it. 
 
A HISTORY 
 
 SEPARATION IN INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF TRENDS. 
 
 CHAPTEE I. 
 
 The origin of the scheme of Immediate and Unconditional Emancipa- 
 tion, and the Anti-slavery movement based thereon — The approval 
 of that movement and its advocates by the Yearly Meeting — Its 
 change and opposition to that cause, etc. 
 
 The Anti-slavery movement which seems to have occa- 
 sioned the difficulties in the Yearly Meeting, had its ori- 
 gin in the year 1832, in Boston. 
 
 The American Colonization Society, through its agents 
 and emissaries, in the fifteenth or sixteenth years of its 
 existence, had, by this time, so far succeeded in accom- 
 plishing its object, that twelve individuals were all that 
 could be found who were willing to unite in an Anti-Sla- 
 very organization. In 1833, a national organization was 
 founded in the city of Philadelphia, under the denomin- 
 ation of " The American Anti-Slavery Society." This 
 organization and that alluded to, formed in Boston the 
 year before, took an important step quite in advance of 
 any previous Anti-Slavery organization. "While all others 
 had advocated a system of gradual emancipation, these 
 boldly took the ground that nothing short of immediate 
 and unconditional freedom to all, could satisfy the de- 
 mands of justice, and fulfill the righteous law of God — 
 that as slavery was a sin, it was the duty of all engaged 
 
84 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 in it, to cease immediately, and that there could be 
 nothing to fear from the consequences of so doing. 
 
 In order that the reader may have a clear understand- 
 ing of what may be presented, it will be proper to re- 
 mark, that this doctrine, and the Colonization scheme, 
 each had its advocates in the Yearly Meeting for some 
 years previous to the Separation. Not that any willingly 
 owned themselves in favor of driving from the country 
 the free colored inhabitants, yet they favored the Colon- 
 ization Society, and contributed to its support ; and we 
 have already seen what was the tendency of the policy 
 of that society. Hence, those who supported that insti- 
 tution, supported the cruel work of expatriation, however 
 ignorant they might have been of the fact. Yet all were 
 not entirely ignorant ; there was undoubtedly a feeling 
 coincident with that engendered by the society, which 
 manifested itself in such expressions as these, which 
 were not unfrequently heard: "I am opposed to the 
 slaves being set free here amongst us ;" u would it not be 
 better for them to have a place somewhere to themselves," 
 etc., etc. 
 
 The first public expression of the Yearly Meeting 
 which I find on record, shows the advocates of uncondi- 
 tional emancipation in the ascendency at that time. It 
 was in the year 1836, and in the following language : 
 
 " We feel ourselves called upon at this time, affection- 
 ately and tenderly, to caution our dear Friends to take 
 no part in, nor render any aid to, any political associa- 
 tion on the subject of African Slavery, which is, or 
 may be founded on principles either directly or indirectly, 
 having a tendency to promote the unrighteous work of 
 expatriation, it being our settled conviction, that this 
 work as a condition to the slaves being set at liberty, is 
 unjust and oppressive." 
 
 This clearly and emphatically condemns the Coloniza- 
 tion scheme, and sanctions unconditional emancipation. 
 
 As the above shows the leading influences of the Meet- 
 ing at the time to be against the efforts of colonization- 
 ists, the following extract from the same epistle, will give 
 
INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 35 
 
 the reader an idea with what class of our fellow-country- 
 men they sympathized, and who they wished to encour- 
 age : 
 
 t; It is a satisfaction to us, to learn that there are many 
 now in our much beloved country, who, though not mem- 
 bers of our religious society, are awakened to a lively 
 sense of the iniquity and horrors of Slavery, as now 
 existing in these United States, and are made willing to 
 become on gospel principles, the open advocates for 
 suffering and degraded humanity, and are laboring on 
 the ground which we as a religious society have for many 
 years occupied, in relation to this subject; and we desire 
 to encourage them in the good work of promoting mercy, 
 righteousness and peace in the earth ; and we do most 
 affectionately desire that all our dear friends may be so 
 alive to our testimony against Slavery, that none may 
 through prejudice or otherwise, cast any discouragements 
 in the way of such as are faithfully laboring to promote 
 universal emancipation, whether such laborers be found 
 within or without the pale of our Society." 
 
 The next year, 1837, the Yearly meeting went further, 
 and urged its members to Anti-Slavery action, thus : 
 
 " And a concern has been felt to arise, that Friends 
 generally may be stirred up to renewed diligence, in 
 faithfully maintaining our testimony against Slavery, not 
 shrinking therefrom on account of opposition or the fear 
 of persecution ; but that we may individually be willing 
 in true simplicity, to inquire whether there is not some- 
 thing for us to do for this suffering portion of our fellow- 
 creatures. We do not wish any to engage in active 
 measures on any other ground than a sense of duty, and 
 in accordance with our well-known principles, yet we 
 would encourage all to a close examination as to what 
 is required at their hands, and how they may employ the 
 talents committed to them for noble purposes in the ad- 
 vancement of the blessed work of emancipation, by 
 meekly, yet boldly, either publicly or privately pleading 
 the cause of the oppressed.' 5 
 
 The Anti-Slavery party, as will appear in the sequel, 
 
So HISTOBY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 very naturally took this, not merely as permission, but 
 as earnest advice, to labor in the Anti-Slavery cause, and 
 claimed that in so doing, they were strictly in the order 
 of Society, even in not shrinking therefrom on account 
 ot opposition, which arrayed itself so powerfully against 
 them when the colonizationists gained the ascendency. 
 
 At the Yearly Meeting in 1838, the condemnation of 
 the Colonization scheme was received even in more 
 energetic and decisive language, and a just admonition 
 administered to Friends, not to give it countenance or 
 support. 
 
 " Fearing," say they, " that there are those of our 
 members occupying and contending for grounds that are 
 not in full accordance with our well-known testimonies 
 on this important subject, by too much countenancing 
 the policy of the day, which denies to that class of our 
 fellow-beings (colored people,) the capacity of enjoying 
 the natural rights of man, only on terms of expatriation, 
 or some tedious plan of preparation, we earnestly invite 
 Friends to renewed exertion on behalf of suffering hu- 
 manity, by endeavoring to spread the concern, and en- 
 lighten the minds of the people, by giving circulation to 
 such publications as are calculated to advance the cause 
 of immediate emancipation on Christian principles. 
 
 " Our religion is a pure and holy religion ; it is 
 founded on principle, and not on expediency ; it is 
 founded on the policy of the gospel, and not on the 
 policy of the world ; it requires us to do unto others as 
 we would they should do unto us. Hence, we admit, 
 without any conditions, the full enjoyment of liberty to 
 be the right of all. And we cannot consent upon any 
 contingency that the bondage of a fellow-being shall be 
 prolonged for a single day. We cannot say to him, he 
 must go to Hayti, to Liberia, or any other place, to en- 
 title him to the full enjoyment of his freedom." 
 
 In 1839, the same subject was brought to view. After 
 expressing a belief that there was an increasing interest 
 and concern felt in the minds of many Friends to pro- 
 mote the entire abolition of Slavery, the Yearly Meeting 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 37 
 
 said: " Yet, we believe there are amongst us in almost 
 every department of Society," those whose minds are too 
 indifferent on this important concern, and some others 
 who are more actively engaged, who are obstructing the 
 progress of our testimony by the doctrine of expediency, 
 and that policy by which it is proposed to remove the 
 colored population from our country, thereby contributing 
 to the support of that unchristian prejudice which denies 
 to the colored man privileges that we claim for ourselves; 
 professing much opposition to Slavery, and at the same 
 time attaching burdensome conditions to their plan of 
 emancipation. 
 
 " We desire, in brotherly love, to remind such, that our 
 testimony against Slavery is purely a religious testimony, 
 founded on the principles of the Gospel, which requires 
 that we should do unto others as we would that they 
 should do unto us — that we should break every yoke, 
 undo the heavy burden and let the oppressed go free. 
 
 " We would affectionately exhort all our dear friends 
 everywhere, to zealously maintain our Christian testi- 
 mony against Slavery, embracing every suitable oppor- 
 tunity to strengthen and encourage the friends of this 
 most righteous cause to stand firm and fear not, although 
 the enemy may boast himself for a season ; for if the 
 Lord be for us, who shall be against us ?" 
 
 Clearly as the foregoing extracts show the friends of 
 immediate and unconditional emancipation to have held 
 a controlling influence in the Yearly Meeting at the time 
 of their adoption, yet it was well known there was a 
 large number of Friends opposed to the views and senti- 
 ments therein contained — with them they went down 
 roughly. Hence, every opportunity was improved to 
 change the current of feeling in the Society, against that 
 " most righteous cause," unconditional emancipation. 
 Some of the friends of this cause entertained the idea, 
 when the subject was first brought before the Meeting, 
 that is, in 1836, that it would not be best for Friends to 
 associate with other people for its promotion. Charles 
 Osborne was one of this number. It was proposed at that 
 
38 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 
 
 time that members be advised to refrain from snch con- 
 nection. Other friends of the cause, aware of the use 
 which would eventually be made of such advice, opposed 
 its adoption. They saw that it would in all probability 
 be converted into a weapon against the cause itself. 
 
 The Colonization party, no doubt aware of the advan- 
 tage that might be taken of that advice, to sink the Anti- 
 Slavery cause in public estimation, especially as it was, 
 if not in direct terms, in fact against Friends becoming 
 members of Abolition societies, joined in advocating its 
 adoption, and thus it carried. The language used how- 
 ever, was very mild. 
 
 " It is with feelings of much tenderness that we ven- 
 ture to suggest to your consideration whether the time 
 has not arrived in which it will be most safe for members 
 of our religious Society to refrain from becoming mem- 
 bers of other societies, though their object in relation to 
 this important subject (universal emancipation), may be 
 in strict accordance with our own. 5 ' 
 
 Had the advice in relation to associating with others, 
 remained in the above form, the Anti-Slavery party 
 claimed . l at no difficulty would have arisen. But this, 
 as was foreseen, was only the starting point. In 1838, 
 at the instigation of the Colonization and anti-Abolition 
 party, it was placed in more objectionable language. 
 
 It says : " our standard of morality and religion is a 
 high and holy standard ; in associating with others not 
 of our Society for promoting benevolent objects, this 
 standard has often been lowered ; — something objection- 
 able may have been adopted — some peculiarity we deem 
 it important to maintain, may have been abandoned. 
 We deem it best for these and other reasons, that our 
 friends abstain from mixing in these associations. 
 
 As the above extracts from the Minutes of the Yearly 
 Meeting at the different dates, are more or less discussed 
 in the documents hereafter inserted, the reader is re- 
 ferred to [ .em for further information relative to the dif- 
 ferent viev^B and positions of the parties. 
 
 About this time, that is, in 1838 and 1839, the rapid 
 
INDIANA YE ABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 39 
 
 increase of Anti-Slavery associations excited the special 
 attention of the ever-watchful eye of Slavery. The in- 
 tercourse existing between the slave-holders of the South 
 and the non slave-holders of the North, was various and 
 complicated; and especially in the eastern cities, among 
 the wealthy and influential. But the commerical inter- 
 course between the parties had, without doubt, the most 
 powerful influence. Slave-holders began to manifest a 
 most inveterate hatred toward the movement ; and it be- 
 came a matter of interest with the merchants, manufac- 
 turers, etc., of those cities, as they thought, to denounce 
 the Abolitionists in order to ingratiate themselves into 
 the special favor of their southern customers, and thereby 
 secure their patronage. This class comprised a number 
 of Friends of wealth and influence in the Society, in that 
 part of the country. 
 
 If one wished to encounter a bitter opponent of the 
 Anti-Slavery movement, he had but to go to a Friend, a 
 proprietor of a large manufacturing establishment, to be 
 sure to find one. Friends, as well as others of the mer- 
 cantile and manufacturing community, looked upon that 
 movement as one calculated to deprive them of the means 
 of amassing wealth. They looked to the slave-holders 
 for their supplies of cotton, rice, sugar, etc., and in re- 
 turn to furnish them with their manufactured articles and 
 goods of all descriptions; and fancied that if the project 
 of the Aboltionists was not arrested, u their craft, by 
 which they had their wealth," would be in danger. 
 Their opposition to the Abolitionists was much upon the 
 same ground as that of the craftsmen of Ephesus to the 
 apostle Paul and his companions. True, they did not so 
 much cry out " great is Diana of the Ephesians " — great 
 is American Slavery, as " abominable and fanatical " 
 were all those who labored to turn the American people 
 against this wicked institution. Nothing could be said 
 too hard against them — nothing too false to put in circula- 
 tion about them. And this opposition, as before intima- 
 ted, originated in the higher class of community, among 
 " those of property and standing;" but it met with a 
 
40 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 hearty response from the low and vicious rabble, in nu- 
 merous acts of mobocratic violence, in the destruction of 
 halls and printing-presses devoted to the cause of free- 
 dom. This influence or prejudice, in the Eastern States, 
 at the time of which we are speaking, was so strong and 
 so overwhelming that our transatlantic Friends on Gospel 
 Missions were completely duped thereby, and made to 
 believe that the " Abolitionists were men of blood " and 
 violence, and that they designed to involve the country 
 in a servile war, etc., etc., and were induced to give cur- 
 rency to these slanders in the course of their travels 
 through the country : and this, too, from those whose 
 duty it was, according to their profession, instead of so 
 doing, to do all in their power to bind up the broken 
 hearted, proclaim liberty to the captives, and the open- 
 ing of the prison to them that were bound. They all, 
 either joined in this, the very same hue and cry with 
 which the venerable Clarkson and his noble compeers 
 were assailed, or took side with those who did. There 
 is no exception to these remarks, that I am aware of, 
 among Friends in the ministry who visited us from be- 
 yond the water. Joseph Sturge and John Candler, who 
 were not of this class, to their honor be it recorded, stood 
 above the reach of this cruel and withering influence. 
 Some demonstration of this, in regard to the former indi- 
 vidual, will appear anon. This, then, was the general 
 character of public sentiment both " within and without 
 the pale of Society n in the East, in 1838 and 1839, and 
 for several years after. 
 
 In 1840 Arnold Buffum came to this State for the pur- 
 pose of holding meetings among the people, to talk about 
 the wrongs and sufferings of the slave, and to endeavor 
 to excite an interest in his behalf. 
 
 The opposition which he encountered in the East, as 
 one of the little band who dared undertake to revive the 
 Anti-Slavery agitation, was made to follow him to the 
 West, in the shape of letters of a personally defamatory 
 character; and this could have been for no other purpose 
 than to prevent his having an influence with the people. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OE FRIENDS. 41 
 
 Abolitionists, among whom he was a prominent one, 
 were Represented to Friends here, by their eastern breth- 
 ren, as the most odious of characters. 
 
 It may be proper to state, that a number of Friends 
 who were in favor of unconditional emancipation, had, 
 as early as 1836, joined with others in the formation of 
 the State Anti-Slavery Society of Indiana, and were well 
 acquainted with the principles and aims of the Abolition- 
 ists ; hence these aspersions were keenly felt by them, 
 yet they felt that the Yearly Meeting was on their side, 
 or at least, had been for years past. The opposition 
 party, however, was greatly strengthened by this foreign 
 influence, and accordingly, feeling somewhat emboldened, 
 in the Sixth month, 1840, it so far succeeded in carrying 
 out its designs as to procure the issuing of an Epistle of 
 Advice by the Meeting for Sufferings, against Friends 
 participating in the Anti-Slavery enterprise, as well as 
 that of Colonization ; thus placing them on the same 
 ground. As it was well known that the Yearly Meeting 
 had openly condemned the Colonization scheme, the 
 friends of that project could look for no retraction in that 
 case ; hence they contented themselves with trying to ob- 
 tain a like condemnation of the Anti-Slavery movement, 
 which they did ; and Friends were now advised not to 
 join with others in Anti-Slavery associations. 
 
 It ought to be borne in mind that there was a third 
 party, if we may so speak, in the Yearly Meeting — a 
 kind of neutrals, many of them very goodly Friends, but 
 who, for lack of firmness or judgment, or perhaps both, 
 were ready to turn any way to be with the current — to be 
 in unity with what they conceived to be the leading in- 
 fluences of the Society. This may account, in some 
 degree, for the strange phase the Society now so sud- 
 denly exhibited. 
 
 The Anti-Slavery portion of Society witnessed this 
 change with deep sorrow and concern. A number of 
 them, however, confidently believed that when the 
 Yearly Meeting convened, it would disapprove the pro- 
 ceedings of the Meeting for Sufferings. They could not 
 
4:2 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 think that body could act, as they conceived, so inconsis- 
 tent with its former professions as to indorse that docu- 
 ment. But in this they were disappointed. 
 
 Charles Osborne, who was one of the most prominent 
 of the Anti-Slavery party, was absent on a religious visit 
 to the East in the forepart of this year, 1840, and did 
 not reach home till after the Meeting for Sufferings had 
 issued the document alluded to above. From his own 
 account he saw, while on this visit, the storm gathering 
 thick and dark around him. Many of his brethren there 
 could not brook the testimonies against Slavery which he 
 felt called upon to bear, and essayed to put him to silence. 
 Silence, then, was the watchword. They could find no 
 fault with his principles, but "such preaching strength- 
 ened the Abolitionists ;" he must, therefore, desist. But 
 it appears he was preserved in faithfulness to his divine 
 Master, amidst it all. 
 
 That his testimonies had a tendency to strengthen the 
 hands of Abolitionists, as anticipated, is very evident. 
 
 The following stanza, from a poem written by J. G. W. 
 on another occasion, was copied at the time into one of 
 the journals of the day, as expressive of the feelings ex- 
 cited in this class, on hearing, in a public meeting, the 
 bold and unflinching testimony of our dear friend. 
 
 Thank God for the token ! — one lip is still free — 
 One spirit untrammeled — unbending one knee — 
 Like the oak of the mountain, deep-rooted and firm, 
 Erect, when the multitude bends to the storm ; 
 "When traitors to Freedom, and Honor, and God, 
 Are bowed at an idol polluted with blood ; 
 "When the recreant North has forgotten her trust, 
 And the lip of her honor is low in the dust, — 
 Thank God that one arm from the shackle has broken ! 
 Thank God that one man, as a freeman, has spoken ! 
 
 When he reached home, he found the current had 
 completely changed. The advocates of Colonization and 
 opponents of the Anti-Slavery movement seemed in a 
 most unaccountable manner to have entirely gained the 
 ascendency. Submission to the advice, not to join with 
 others in Anti-Slavery associations, was now strenuously 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 43 
 
 demanded by this class ; but a number of the other 
 party resisted it as altogether rong, and hence, as they 
 thought, could not yield c; ience thereto. Their 
 reasons will be found in documents inserted hereafter. 
 
 The subject of abstaining from the productions of 
 Slavery, is one that had claimed the attention of some 
 of the more conscientious among Friends, from the days 
 of J. Woolman, down to the period of the events under 
 review. Charles Osborne was one, who, as early as 1818, 
 advocated the propriety and necessity of such abstinence, 
 in a periodical which he edited in Alt. Pier -ant, Ohio, 
 under the title of " The Philanthropist." 
 
 In the course of the investigations consequent upon 
 the revival of the Anti-Slavery agitation, the duty of 
 abstaining from articles produced by the extorted labor 
 of the slave, presented itself in a forcible manner to the 
 minds of many of the friends of unconditional emanci- 
 pation, so much so, that in 1841, a monthly periodical 
 denominated " The Free Labor Advocate and Anti- 
 Slavery Chronicle," was started at Newport, in this 
 State. A number of Free Labor societies of a local 
 character had been formed, and much interest in the 
 cause seemed to have been awakened in different places. 
 The standing committee appointed by the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, and the different Quarters, known as the Committee 
 on the Concerns of the People of Color, had a subject 
 before them in 1840, and recommended Friends of the 
 different branches of said committee, to endeavor to as- 
 certain what facilities existed for obtaining free labor 
 goods, and report to the next general meeting of the com- 
 mittee. This, to some extent, was attended to in one 
 of the Quarterly meetings, and a communication was 
 produced to the committee the next year, from Abraham 
 L. Pennock of Philadelphia, detailing to some extent, 
 the opportunities for obtaining such goods. But the 
 change in the ruling influence to which I have already 
 alluded, was such, that even the reading of this docu- 
 ment produced according to instruction, was obtained 
 
44 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 with difficulty, and the whole movement on the subject 
 endeavored to be quashed. 
 
 A document was produced to this meeting of the com- 
 mittee, from one of its branches, showing in a forcible 
 manner, the necessity of Friends avoiding the purchase 
 and consumption of articles produced by slaves. Its 
 being introduced and read in that body, produced a most 
 astonishing state of excitement therein. 
 
 For further particulars, see the " Declaration " in 
 another part of this work. 
 
 That the reader may be able to judge of the merit or 
 demerit of a document that produces such a state of feel- 
 ing, I present it below. 
 
 CHAPTEK II. 
 
 " Report of a Sub -Committee of JSTew Garden branch of the Committee, 
 on the Concerns of the People of Color. 
 
 " The committee appointed on the subject of Abstin- 
 ence from the use of Slave-labor Produce, having at dif- 
 ferent times had the matter under solid consideration, 
 agree to report : that we find, by examining the history 
 of our Society, that religious scruples in respect to the 
 use of slave-labor produce, were entertained by some of 
 the early advocates of freedom ; and we believe that 
 many Friends, both in Europe and America, have up to 
 the present time, manifested a concern on this important 
 subject; and some Friends have faithfully borne this 
 testimony. And in a Society capacity, Friends have 
 been advised to attend to their conscientious scruples on 
 this subject. Yet, from some cause, it has never been so 
 acted on as to bring it in as a testimony obligatory on 
 our members. 
 
 " The principal reason may have been, the great diffi- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 45 
 
 culties that have always opposed themselves to such a 
 testimony, and the trials and deprivations that it would 
 bring upon us. And notwithstanding we have long 
 since forbidden our members the privilege of purchasing 
 slaves, or of hiring them of their respective masters, we 
 have continued to participate freely in the purchase and 
 use of the produce of the extorted labor of the slave; 
 and slavery has not only continued, but has increased 
 many fold. 
 
 " And it appears to us, that our neglecting faithfully 
 to maintain and carry out this testimony against Slavery 
 in all parts, which would have led us to a refusal, as 
 much as possible, of a participation in the spoils of op- 
 pression, has very much contributed to the rendering of 
 our testimony against this unrighteous system less avail- 
 ing. 
 
 " It is evident that they who purchase the produce of 
 oppression, supply the means by which it is kept in ex- 
 istence. It is the desire of money, that induces the 
 master to drive the panting slave under the lash, to pro- 
 duce a supply of those articles for which he can find a 
 market. And just so far as we contribute to the gratifi- 
 cation of our desires, so far we hire the master to continue 
 his deeds of oppression. 
 
 11 Now, is it not clear, that the right of the slave- 
 holder to the proceeds of slave labor, is founded in his 
 claim to the person of the slave, which had its origin in 
 robbery ? And if the property claim to the person of 
 the slave originated in robbery, is it not clear that its 
 continuation through a succession of ages and genera- 
 tions can never divest it of its original character ? And 
 is it not equally clear, that the title to his labor is no 
 better than the claim to his person ? 
 
 u We are unable to perceive the difference in principle, 
 between hiring from the slave-holder his slave, and com- 
 pelling him to toil in our own fields, and purchasing the 
 fruits of his toil, produced by extortion in the fields of 
 his master. 
 
 " In practice there is this difference ; in the former 
 
46 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 case, the slave would be under our own treatment ; and 
 in the latter, we pay others for extorting his labor under 
 the rigor of the lash of the cruel taskmaster. 
 
 " If these views are correct, it will follow that the 
 time has come when Friends should be convinced that 
 consistency of conduct with the principles we profess, will 
 lead us to a careful examination of the cause or causes, 
 why our testimony against Slavery has been so ineffi- 
 cient ; and should it be found that it has been owing in 
 a great measure to our continuing to give it sanction and 
 support, by hiring others to do that which we refuse to 
 do ourselves, we certainly shall feel bound to refrain as 
 much as possible from further participation in the fruits 
 of oppression. 
 
 a If, through inattention to our duties on this subject, 
 our connection with the system has been such, that it is 
 almost or quite impossible that we can entirely abstain 
 from participating in the consumption of slave-grown 
 produce, instead of its affording us an apology for a con- 
 tinuance in thus giving our support to oppression, it 
 should beget in us much earnest solicitude, that we might 
 be enabled, even if it should be through much trial and 
 deprivation, to clear our hands of the stain of this wicked 
 system. 
 
 " The committee feels something of the responsibility 
 that should rest upon them in considering this important 
 subject, but the importance of the occasion, seems to us, 
 rather than otherwise, to demand of us an energetic and 
 zealous examination, that we may be willing and anxious 
 to know the depth of our guilt in this case ; that we no 
 longer endeavor to satisfy our troubled consciences, with 
 weak and deceitful excuses, such as that, ' I cannot see 
 that my abstaining will do anything for the abolition of 
 Slavery. 5 The abolition of Slavery should not be the 
 only consideration in the examination of this question. 
 The inquiry should be, is it morally right, thus to obtain 
 and use the goods thus fraudulently obtained from the 
 rightful owners ? And when we have fairly considered 
 and answered this question, it will become our indispens- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 47 
 
 able duty to act accordingly, leaving the consequences to 
 Hirn who holds in his own hands the disposal of events, 
 and who will do right. May we be enabled in the light 
 of Truth, clearly to discover and faithfully to perforin our 
 duty to all parties concerned ; and thus to stand acquitted 
 in the sight of that just and Omnipotent Being who 
 is no respecter of persons." 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Free Labor Convention at Spiceland — Proceedings of the Yearly 
 Meeting against the Abolitionists. 
 
 Notwithstanding the Anti-Slavery portion of Friends 
 were thus repulsed and frowned down, they deemed 
 faithfulness in the cause a matter of vital importance, 
 not only in order to clear themselves of a participation 
 in the sin of slave-holding, but as a means of enlisting 
 the public mind against the system, and therefore could 
 not abandon it. A large convention of Friends of 
 Spiceland Quarterly meeting, was held at the time of 
 that meeting preceding the Yearly Meeting in 1841, and 
 the subject of the consumption of slave-labor produce 
 was there pretty fully discussed. Many Friends then 
 appeared to be quite alive and zealous in their opposi- 
 tion to the practice. The convention closed with the 
 full prospect of having a more general meeting of the 
 Society, some time in the course of the week of Yearly 
 Meeting. When, however, that time arrived, instead of 
 there being a general meeting of this character held, the 
 very idea of any such meeting was scouted, and its 
 projectors indignantly frowned down. Were any to be 
 appointed members of the Meeting for Sufferings, it was 
 sufficient for disqualification of any one, to be known to 
 be an Abolitionist, or in favor of joining with others 
 to aid the cause of the slave. 
 
4:8 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 The clerk of the Women's Meeting was one of this 
 number, and therefore the place she occupied must be 
 filled by another in whom the meeting had confidence ; 
 but she was required to sit by to render to the Meeting 
 the aid Of her experience as clerk ; thus endeavoring to 
 secure the advantages of her qualifications, while pub- 
 licly and notoriously impugning her character as a 
 Friend. All this, though keenly felt, was patiently sub- 
 mitted to by the individual. 
 
 Some of those who had been so zealous in the conven- 
 tion spoken of, when they saw the amount of influence 
 arrayed against the cause, turned immediately round and 
 joined its opponents. Many others staggered, faltered, 
 and finally stumbled over on to the same ground ; or at 
 best, into a state of acquiescence. 
 
 But to go back a little ; the Colonization and Anti- 
 Abolition party now having gained the ascendency, and 
 not satisfied with having prohibited members of Society 
 from making any efforts for the relief of the bondman, 
 in the Meeting for Sufferings of this year, 1841, issued 
 the following prohibitory advice to Friends against grant- 
 ing the use of their meeting-houses to accommodate Anti- 
 Slavery meetings ; and the Yearly Meeting, when it con- 
 vened, sanctioned the document, and copied it into its 
 Minutes. As the reasons for issuing the advice are 
 therein offered, I give the article entire. 
 
 " To the Quarterly and Monthly meetings of Friends 
 in Indiana Yearly Meeting, and to Friends individu- 
 ally. 
 
 " Information having reached this meeting that some 
 of our meeting-houses have been opened for the purpose 
 of holding Anti-Slavery meetings and delivering lectures, 
 we feel concerned to advise against such a practice, as 
 being contrary to the general usage of Society, and of 
 hurtful tendency to our members. 
 
 " The meeting has, also, been brought into painful 
 concern on account of the publication and circulation by 
 members of this Yearly Meeting, of a recent Address 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 49 
 
 written by a member of our Society, on the subject of 
 one of our important testimonies, but which had not un- 
 dergone the examination of a Meeting for Sufferings, 
 agreeably to the requisitions of our Discipline. As such 
 acts may affect the reputation of our religious Society, 
 and may disturb its harmony, which has been the case in 
 the instance before us, we feel called upon to express our 
 disapprobation of such proceedings. There are, also, 
 some periodicals within our limits, conducted under the 
 character and style of Friends, whose object seems to be 
 the promotion and advancement of our testimony against 
 Slavery ; but not being under our supervision, we cannot 
 consistently give them our sanction, nor be responsible in 
 any way for their contents. 
 
 " And as the subject of Slavery is producing great ex- 
 citement in our land, we again tenderly advise our dear 
 friends, not to join in association with those who do not 
 profess to wait for divine direction in such important con- 
 cerns ; lest if we overact the part called for at our hands, 
 we injure the righteous cause, and suffer loss ourselves; 
 comparable to what is said of Ephraim of old, ' he mixed 
 himself among the people,' 'strangers have devoured his 
 strength and he knoweth it not.' 
 
 " It is far from the wish of this meeting to induce, on 
 the part of our members, an apathy of feeling on the 
 deeply afflicting subject of Slavery. On the contrary, we 
 desire that all may faithfully maintain this Christain tes- 
 timony, and cherish a lively interest both for the op- 
 pressed and the oppressors. Thus maintaining our 
 peaceable and Christian principles in unbroken harmony, 
 we shall, we believe, be enabled, as way may open, more 
 availingly to plead the cause of this much-injured race 
 of our fellow-men, and retain the place and influence 
 which, as a Society, we have heretofore had with the 
 rulers of our land. 
 
 u Let us, therefore, abide under the weight of this con- 
 cern, attentively watching for every right opening to 
 move therein, in our united capacity, and thus, too, when 
 clothed with the spirit of supplication, our petitions will 
 
60 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 be put up to the great Euler of the universe, that it may 
 please him to hasten the day when Ethiopia shall stretch 
 out her hands unto God, under the enjoyment of univer- 
 sal liberty*" 
 
 It may be proper to state that the address here alluded 
 to, written by a member of our Society, is the production 
 of Joseph Sturge, of England. And in order that the 
 reader may be enabled to judge whether it is of a charac- 
 ter to produce such consequences as attributed to it, I 
 will here give it a place. As respects the assertion that 
 holding Anti-Slavery meetings in our meeting-houses was 
 " contrary to the general usage of Society," the reader 
 has already been presented with proof to the contrary in 
 the Introduction to the present work. 
 
 CHAPTEE IV. 
 
 Address of Joseph Sturge to Friends in the United States. 
 
 " To the Members of the religious Society of Friends in 
 
 the United States of America. 
 
 " Dear Friends: — Having for many years believed it 
 to be my duty to devote a considerable portion of my 
 time and attention to the promotion of the abolition of 
 Slavery and the Slave-trade, I have acted in cordial co- 
 operation with the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery So- 
 ciety since its foundation. The principles of that society 
 may be briefly explained by the following extract from 
 its constitution : c That so long as Slavery exists, there is 
 no reasonable prospect of the annihilation of the Slave- 
 trade, and of extinguishing the sale and barter of human 
 beings ; that the extinction of Slavery and the Slave-trade 
 will be attained most effectually, by the employment of 
 those means, which are of a moral, religious, and pacific 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 51 
 
 character ; and that no measures be resorted to by this 
 Society, in the prosecution of its objects, but such as are 
 in entire accordance with these principles.' 
 
 u My visit to this country had reference, in a great 
 measure, to the objects for which this Society was estab- 
 lished. But although I left my native land with the gen- 
 eral approbation and full unity of my friends, they con- 
 curred with me in opinion, that any official document 5 
 beyond a certificate from my Monthly meeting, expres- 
 sive of sympathy with my engagement, might rather 
 obstruct than promote the end I had in view. I was 
 desirous of a personal interchange of sentiment with 
 many of the Abolitionists in this land, upon matters hav- 
 ing an important bearing upon our future exertions, 
 The warm attachment which I have ever felt to the reli- 
 gious Society with which I am connected, and the ready 
 co-operation of its members with their Christian neigh- 
 bors in promoting this cause in Great Britain, inclines 
 me to embrace every suitable opportunity to communi- 
 cate with Friends of this country, and I have been en- 
 couraged, not only by the great personal kindness I have 
 received from them generally, but also by the lively 
 interest expressed by most on the subject of emancipation 
 wherever I have introduced it. 
 
 " A further acquaintance with Friends in the compass 
 of three or four Yearly Meetings, in which my lot has 
 been cast, and my inquiries respecting the state of other 
 Yearly Meetings, has convinced me that a large number 
 of their most consistent members, including many aged 
 and universally respected Friends, are desirous of em- 
 bracing every right opening, both individually and col- 
 lectively, for the promotion of the abolition cause; and 
 while they are fully aware that there are reasons growing 
 out of the existing state of things, which render great 
 circumspection necessary, they can see no good ground 
 for believing that the manner in which Friends of this 
 country of a former generation, labored for the liberation 
 of the slave, was not under the guidance of the Spirit of 
 Truth. 
 
52 HIST0BY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 " This is, now, the course pursued by Friends generally 
 in England. That there may be no misapprehension as 
 to the conduct of Friends with regard to this subject in 
 Great Britain, I may mention that I am the bearer of a 
 document expressive of unity with my visit, signed by 
 William Allen, Josiah Forster, William Forster, George 
 Stacey, Samuel Fox, George W. Alexander, and Robert 
 Forster, who declare themselves fellow- members with 
 myself of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Commit- 
 tee ; this committee is composed of persons of various 
 religious denominations, among whom, it will be seen, 
 are many of the prominent members of our Meeting for 
 Sufferings. Upon the list of delegates to the late Anti- 
 Slavery Convention in London, are the names of nearly 
 one hundred well-known Friends, including those of four 
 who are, or have been, Clerks of the Yearly Meeting ; and 
 the present clerk of that meeting, my esteemed friend, Geo. 
 Stacey, took an active part, and rendered essential service 
 in the convention. The meeting-house in Grace Church 
 street, was freely granted by Friends in London, who 
 have charge of it, for the use of the convention ; and the 
 concluding sittings of that body were held in it. 
 
 " In fact, Friends generally in England think it their 
 duty to render every aid in their power to the Anti-Sla- 
 very cause, whether in their collective capacity, or indi- 
 vidually, uniting with their fellow-citizens, when they 
 can do so without any compromise of our religious prin- 
 ciples and testimonies. I speak more explicitly on this 
 point, because I have ascertained, with much concern, 
 that there is an influential portion of the Society, includ- 
 ing, I have no doubt, many sincere Abolitionists, who 
 have been so fearful that the testimonies of the Society 
 might suffer by any union with others, that they have 
 not only avoided such a co-operation themselves, but 
 have dissuaded those of their brethren who believed it 
 incumbent upon them to act otherwise ; and in one 
 Yearly Meeting, at least, I have much reason to fear they 
 have tacitly, if not actively, sanctioned the omission of 
 the names of Friends on meeting appointments, however 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 53 
 
 consistent in their conduct and concern for the welfare of 
 Society, simjly because they Lave felt it their duty to act 
 with persons of other denominations in promoting the 
 abolition of Slavery. Thus, in appearance, at least, 
 throwing the whole weight and influence of the Society 
 in its collective capacity, against a movement which, 
 although doubtless partaking of the imperfections atten- 
 dant upon all human instrumentality, has already aroused 
 the whole country to a sense of the wrongs of the slave, 
 and secured to the nominally free colored citizens, in 
 many of the States, rights of which they have been so 
 long and so unjustly deprived. 
 
 " Though I can hardly expect that anything from one 
 entertaining my views of the subject, can have much 
 weight w T ith those Friends, who, with a full understand- 
 ing of the heavy responsibility they were assuming, have 
 discountenanced Anti-Slavery exertions, and the use of our 
 meeting-houses, even by consistent members, for the pur- 
 pose of giving information on the subject ;* yet, as it has 
 occasioned me no small degree of anxiety, both in refer- 
 ence to the Anti-Slavery cause and the Society of Friends 
 itself, I believe I cannot return to my native land with 
 peace of mind, without earnestly and affectionately press- 
 ing upon such Friends the great importance of a careful 
 examination of the ground they have taken. Our un- 
 wearied adversary is sometimes permitted to lead us into 
 the most fearful errors, when he assumes the appearance 
 of an angel of light. And is there not great danger in 
 encouraging the young and inexperienced to suppose 
 that the maintenance of any of our testimonies may be 
 neglected, except when we feel a Divine intimation to 
 uphold them % And may it not open the door to great 
 
 * It is right to state that I was much encouraged by the lively expres- 
 sion of sympathy in the Anti-Slavery cause, in the Yearly Meetings of 
 Philadelphia and ]\ T ew York. That at the former place, Friends opened 
 a room in the meeting-house for my friend, John Candler, to give some 
 information on the subject; and at ^Tew York, the large meeting-house was 
 not only readily granted to him and me for the same purpose, but the 
 Clerks of the Yearly Meeting kindly gave notice and invited Friends to 
 attend. 
 
54 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 laxity in our practice? While I fully believe that the 
 true disciple of Christ will be favored with the immediate 
 guidance of the Holy Spirit, whenever it is needful to 
 direct his steps ; it appears to me especially important 
 that, in matters of self-sacrifice, and conflicting with our 
 worldly interest or reputation, we should guard against 
 being deluded into a neglect of duty, by waiting for this 
 direct, divine intimation, where the path of duty is obvi- 
 ous and clearly understood, and when testimonies are 
 concerned, which we have long considered it our duty on 
 all occasions to support. If, under such a view of the 
 subject, we do believe it to be our duty to cease to act 
 ourselves, and discourage our brethren from laboring in 
 the cause of the slave, a close examination surely is 
 needful in order to ascertain if we are consistently carry- 
 ing out the same principles in our daily walks in life — 
 in our mercantile transactions — our investments of pro- 
 perty — in our connection with public institutions, and 
 with political parties. 
 
 " It should be borne in perpetual recollection that we 
 are in no small danger of shrinking from a faithful main- 
 tenance of those testimonies which are unpopular with 
 the world, as well as of not seeing our own neglect of 
 duty, while censuring the real or supposed indiscretion 
 of others. Beside, if this good cause be really endan- 
 gered by popular excitement and the indiscretion of its 
 imprudent advocates, the obligation of consistent Friends 
 to be found at their posts, faithfully maintaining the tes- 
 timony of Truth on its behalf, is greatly increased. And 
 it is under such circumstances that I think I have seen 
 peculiar advantage and protection to our young Friends 
 in England, of having their elder brethren with them, 
 aiding them by their sympathy as well as advice and 
 counsel. I am persuaded that those who are called to 
 occupy the foremost ranks in Society, cannot be too care- 
 ful not to impose a burden upon tender consciences by 
 discouraging, either directly or indirectly, a course of 
 conduct which is sanctioned by the precepts and examples 
 of our divine Master, lest they alienate from us some of 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIEKDS. 55 
 
 his disciples, and thereby greatly injure the Society they 
 are so laudably anxious to keep fc unspotted from the 
 world. 5 
 
 " We are told on the highest authority, that ' by their 
 fruits' we are to judge of the laborers in the Christian 
 vineyard ; and while I am aware of the greater difficul- 
 ties in the way of emancipation here, as compared with 
 Great Britain, I have been almost irresistibly led to con- 
 trast the difference in the results of the course pursued 
 by Friends in the two countries. In America, during 
 the last twenty -five years, it is evident that Slavery and 
 the Slave-trade have greatly increased, and even where 
 the members of our Society are the most numerous and 
 influential the prejudice against color is as strong as in 
 any part of the world;* and Friends themselves, in many 
 places, are by no means free from this prejudice. In 
 Great Britain, Friends by Society action and by uniting 
 with their fellow-countrymen, not only contributed, under 
 Providence, in no small degree to the passage of the Act 
 of 1831 for the abolition of Slavery in the British West 
 Indies, but when it was found that the system of appren- 
 ticeship which this act introduced, was made an instrument 
 of cruel oppression to the slaves, a renewal of similar 
 labors for about twelve months, resulted in the complete 
 emancipation of our colored brethren in those colonies. 
 
 u In closing this letter, I wish to address a few words 
 to that numerous and valuable class of Friends, pre- 
 viously alluded to, with whom I deeply sympathize, who 
 are only deterred from more active exertion by their re- 
 luctance to give dissatisfaction to those whom they 
 respect. The sorrow which I feel under the consideration 
 that in parting with many of you we never probably 
 shall meet again in mutability, is softened by the persua- 
 sion that the difficulties by which you are surrounded are 
 
 * I should, I believe, do wrong to conceal the sorrow which I have felt 
 that the scheme cf African Colonization, the great support of wMch at 
 the present time appears to be hostility to Anti-Slavery efforts and an un- 
 christian prejudice against color, still has the sympathy and the active 
 aid of some members of our Society. 
 
56 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 lessening, and that some who are now opposing yon will 
 ere long join you in efforts which shall remove from the 
 minds both of Abolitionists and Slave-holders the belief 
 so generally entertained, that the Society of Friends in 
 this country are not earnestly engaged for the total and 
 immediate abolition of Slavery. No one regrets more 
 than myself that any friends to the cause of Abolition 
 should connect other topics with it, which however suit- 
 able to be discussed on their own merits must necessarily 
 interfere with this simple and momentous object. You 
 are aware of some of the circumstances which may have 
 led to the state of feeling with many in our Society which 
 we so much deplore. And it is my fervent desire that 
 none of you, in any steps you may consider it your duty 
 to take, may afford just cause of uneasiness by any com- 
 promise of Christian principle, any improper harshness 
 of language, or by the introduction of any subjects not 
 strictly belonging to the Anti-Slavery cause. Your situ- 
 ation is one of peculiar difficulty and delicacy. Both 
 from a regard to your own religious Society and the suf- 
 fering slave, you have need to exercise great watchful- 
 ness, and to cultivate feelings of brotherly love, and that 
 4 charity which suffereth long and is kind.' The beauti- 
 ful example of John Woolman, in this respect, is worthy 
 of your imitation. His labors were for years far less 
 encouraged by the leading influences of Society than your 
 own at the present time. Yet we find, in reading his 
 invaluable journal, no traces of bitterness or uncharitable 
 feeling. 
 
 " Finally, dear friends of all classes, in thus freely 
 addressing you I have written not only with a strong 
 attachment to our religious Society, but 1 trust under a 
 feeling of a degree of that love which is not confined to 
 geographical boundaries or affected by color or by clime. 
 The prayer of my heart is, that each of you may be will- 
 ing to be made instrumental in the Divine hand in faith- 
 fully maintaining our Christian testimony against Slavery; 
 bearing in mind that the labors of your ancestors have 
 greatly increased your responsibility by separating you 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 57 
 
 from those influences which so deaden the feelings and 
 harden the heart against the claims of our brethren in 
 bonds. May these considerations, viewed in connection 
 with the difficulties which obstruct the progress of eman- 
 cipation in this laud, stimulate you to increased exertion. 
 And when you are summoned to the bar of that final 
 tribunal toward which we are all hastening, may you 
 have the inexpressible consolation of reflecting that you 
 have performed all you could toward ' undoing the heavy 
 burdens and letting the oppressed go free. 5 
 
 "I am, very sincerely, your friend, 
 
 "Joseph Sturge. 
 
 "New York, Seventh mo -. 17th, 1841." 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Completion of the measures by the Yearly Meeting in 1842, which pro- 
 duced the Separation. 
 
 The issuing of the advice to exclude Anti-Slavery meet- 
 ings and lectures from our meeting-houses caused the 
 deepest sensation in the Anti-Slavery ranks, not merely 
 among Friends but all classes engaged in the work where- 
 ever Friends were located. The Anti-Slavery portion of 
 Society had witnessed with very painful interest the first 
 marked dereliction from correct principle by the Yearly 
 Meeting; but this measure was far more poignant to their 
 feelings, inasmuch as Anti-Slavery meetings were therein 
 represented to be of " hurtful tendency to our members;" 
 the opposition thus showing itself to be not merely 
 against associating with other people, but against the 
 enterprise which Friends had been endeavoring to pro- 
 mote by that association : and upon mature reflection 
 they felt constrained to disobey the advice, knowing that 
 the course urged was u contrary to the usage of Society;" 
 being also well assured that it u would be of hurtful ten- 
 dency to its members." Accordingly, wherever they had 
 
58 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 the control of meeting-houses, Anti-Slavery meetings were 
 admitted as previously had been the case. 
 
 It would seem now that the Yearly Meeting might 
 have felt that it had cleared itself of the hateful stain of 
 Abolitionism ; as it had thrown the whole weight of its 
 influence against the movement ; but the proceedings of 
 the next Yearly Meeting show the case to be different. 
 
 Meanwhile, Friends were urged to submit to the advice 
 of the body by Ministers, Elders, and Friends of every 
 description, except those truly Anti-Slavery; but with 
 various arguments. By some it was held that uncondi- 
 tional submission was absolutely necessary to the exist- 
 ence of religious society. By others, if the Meeting was 
 wrong in its advice, we must submit and throw the re- 
 sponsibility on the body. Others again contended posi- 
 tively that the advice was just right and in accordance 
 with the Divine Mind, and that we had but to submit to 
 the spirit of Truth, to submit to it. Many urged that 
 we had no right to move in advance of the body ; that 
 admitting the Abolitionists to be correct, individuals 
 should not move in the matter, till the Yearly Meeting 
 was prepared for it — -that we should not even name the 
 subject of abstinence as necessary to be attended to 
 because the Yearly Meeting had not taken it up, etc. 
 These views were urged with pertinacity in different 
 parts of the Yearly Meeting. Before the commencement 
 of the Yearly Meeting for business this year, 1842, the 
 plan of operation to enforce submission appears to have 
 been projected in secret session by a portion of the lead- 
 ers; which was in substance, that no person " opposed 
 to the advice and travail of the body," or in other words, 
 who was an Abolitionist, should be appointed on any 
 important business. At the opening of the Meeting, in 
 order to carry it out, it was proposed and sanctioned, 
 that names offered on committees should receive the 
 sanction of several Friends before taken by the clerk. 
 
 In the course of its sessions, the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings reported eight of their number as disqualified to fill 
 the stations they occupied in that body ; because, as was 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 59 
 
 well understood, they were opposed to the advices and 
 proceedings alluded to above. The Yearly Meeting ap- 
 proved its course, and addressed an " Epistle of Advice 
 to subordinate meetings and to Friends individually," 
 recommending those meetings, as will appear from the 
 following extract, to carry out the same proscriptive 
 policy to the remotest corner of Society: 
 
 " We are again concerned to warn all our dear friends 
 against joining or participating in the excitement and 
 over-active zeal of the Anti-Slavery Societies, and to be 
 cautious about the kind of reading admitted into their 
 families, as the effect of all those books and papers must 
 be pernicious which have the tendency to set one 
 part of Society against another, to lessen the value of our 
 religious testimonies in our estimation, or to make us set 
 light by the restraints of the advices or discipline of our 
 Society. Let such beware, who perceive that the popu- 
 lar excitements of the day are producing these effects 
 upon them, and seek quietness and retirement from these 
 things before it be too late. 
 
 " Friends are advised to be weighty and deliberate in 
 making appointments to any of the important stations 
 and committees in Society, so that faithful and trusty 
 Friends may be chosen ; as we believe that those who 
 have distinguished themselves by opposition or disregard 
 to the advices and travail of the body, are manifestly un- 
 suitable for important services in it, while they remain 
 in that situation." 
 
 The Anti-Slavery party alleged that if Friends were 
 to follow the advice contained in a portion of the above, 
 this Epistle could not be " admitted into their families," 
 for nothing could be more certain, as they conceived, 
 than that it would not only "have a tendency to set one 
 part of Society against another," but that it did actually 
 call upon one part to treat another as aliens and un- 
 worthy the name of brethren: not because they had 
 violated any of the principles and testimonies of the 
 Society, and thus become worthy of being treated as 
 heathen men and publicans ; but because they were 
 
60 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 endeavoring to advance them, and that, too, by means in 
 accordance with the general usage of Society and the 
 former advice of the Yearly Meeting. 
 
 We have seen that eight of the members of the Meet- 
 ing for Sufferings were to be removed and others 
 appointed in their places. Some of these appointments 
 were to take place in at least one of the Quarters where 
 the Anti-Slavery feeling was strong ; hence the necessity 
 of appointing a committee to visit subordinate meetings 
 with the aforesaid u Epistle of Advice." Twenty-two 
 Friends, men and women, were deputed to attend to this 
 business. The Select Yearly Meeting also drafted an 
 Epistle of very similar import to its subordinate meet- 
 ings, and likewise deputed a number of Friends to carry 
 it down and endeavor to enforce submission to its require- 
 ments. Extracts from this Epistle will be observed in 
 the course of the controversy, its insertion, therefore, I 
 here omit. 
 
 CHAPTEE VI. 
 
 First move of the Anti-Slavery party looking toward the re- organization 
 of the Society. 
 
 Such was the condition in which the advocates of im- 
 mediate and unconditional emancipation were now placed 
 by the system of proscriptive measures, which the Yearly 
 Meeting this year consummated. And let it be borne in 
 raind that John Meader and Christopher Healy, minis- 
 ters in attendance from the East, w T here the opposition to 
 Abolition had been raging to a fearful height, and who 
 brought a large share of it with them, had no small part 
 in producing this lamentable state of affairs. 
 
 The following extract from an editorial in the " Free 
 Labor Advocate," dated Tenth mo. 15th, 1842, will give 
 the reader an account of the closing scene at this Yearly 
 Meeting, and of what immediately followed : 
 
INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 61 
 
 " Anti-Slavery Friends being thus proscribed, and 
 feeling themselves virtually cut off from all the benefits 
 of religious society, found themselves in a very tried and 
 painful situation. Thus circumstanced, it was perfectly 
 natural and entirely reasonable that they should desire 
 to confer together for the purpose of arriving at some 
 conclusion, as to the proper course for them to pursue. 
 With this view, a Friend arose during the last sitting of 
 the Yearly Meeting, and proposed that those Friends 
 who were favorable to the Anti-Slavery cause, and who 
 felt aggrieved with the proceedings of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing should remain in the house at the rise of the meeting, 
 for the purpose of having such a conference. A con- 
 siderable expression of unity with the proposition was 
 made, and not one dissenting voice was heard. 
 
 " After the conclusion of the meeting, a large com- 
 pany assembled inside the house, many others having 
 stepped out and not yet returned. Before any opportu- 
 nity was had for conference, John Maxwell walked into 
 the minister's gallery, and in the name of the trustees, 
 demanded of those present, an immediate evacuation of 
 the house. He first called them Friends, then, as if cor- 
 recting himself, he said he did not know whether they 
 were Friends or not — he would call them people. A 
 Friend immediately proposed, that as they were arbitrar- 
 ily forbidden the use of the house for the purpose of con- 
 ferring together, those favorable to such a conference, 
 meet at Newport (ten miles north,) at 9 o'clock next 
 morning. The proposition was united with, and the 
 people retired. 
 
 " Next morning, notwithstanding many had from ne- 
 cessity started for home, a large assembly convened at 
 Newport, and continued in conference till 11 o'clock, 
 when it adjourned till 2 o'clock, p. m. } to give place to 
 the regular Week-day meeting. From 2 o'clock, the con- 
 ference continued till near sunset. Entire harmony pre- 
 vailed : the spirit of love and prayer overshadowed the 
 meeting, under the influence of which, devout sup* 
 plications went up to the throne of mercy and grace, for 
 
 4 
 
62 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 Divine counsel and aid in this hour of sore conflict ; and 
 the good presence of the Lord was sensibly felt to be 
 with ns, tendering our spirits together, and renewing our 
 resolutions in the strength afforded us, from the source 
 of all true strength to do battle against the great Jugger- 
 naut of Slavery, although in so doing, we may encounter 
 the violence of mobocratic fury, the taunts and jeers of 
 our fellow-citizens, and worse than all, the opposition and 
 censure of our fellow-members of that Society whose 
 principles we dearly love, and from whose bosom nothing 
 but dire necessity can drive us. But dear as we hold the 
 unity of the Church, we cannot sacrifice the Truth to 
 maintain it ; and we pray for strength to remain true to 
 the cause, though all men oppose it. If some of our 
 opposers had been there, and heard what we heard, and 
 felt what we felt, they would surely have been ashamed 
 of the charge so often made against us, of working in 
 our own strength. 
 
 " It was unanimously agreed, to propose to Anti- 
 Slavery Friends to be firm in the maintenance of their 
 principles, and for the purpose of promoting harmony of 
 action, to hold conferences in their respective locations." 
 
 At the above meeting or conference, it was the conclu- 
 sion of those present, to wait until it was known whether 
 the committees to which I have alluded, from the Yearly 
 Meeting and the Select body, would really carry out the 
 proscriptive measures as enjoined upon them, in remov- 
 ing from their stations the Anti-Slavery part of Society, 
 before any further action should be taken. 
 
 In the meantime, conferences at different places were 
 held as proposed. At length Friends of Newport and 
 vicinity, after witnessing the proceedings of those com- 
 mittees in New Garden Quarter, became thoroughly 
 satisfied that they were determined to carry out their in- 
 structions to the very letter, met in convention on the 4th 
 day of First mo., 1843, " for the purpose," as they say, 
 " of taking into consideration the anomalous and pecu- 
 liarly tried situation in which we are placed by the arbi- 
 trary and proscriptive measures of a portion of the So- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 63 
 
 ciety claiming to be ' the body,' [as] we are, on account 
 of a practical adherence to our testimony against Slav- 
 ery, cut off from all the beneficial privileges of member- 
 ship in that religious Society whose principles we love, 
 and whose testimonies are dear to our hearts ; and for 
 the purpose of adopting such measures as, in the open- 
 ings of Truth, may appear to be productive of unity and 
 harmony in our proceedings — the promotion of the Anti- 
 Slavery cause, and to secure to ourselves the privileges 
 and benefits of religious Society, of which we have been 
 unhappily deprived, contrary to the general usage, and 
 established order and discipline of Society. 
 
 " After mature deliberation and a free interchange of 
 sentiment, the following-named Friends were appointed 
 to prepare an address to Friends generally, setting forth 
 in a concise manner the result of our deliberation, em- 
 bracing a call for a general convention of Friends at 
 some suitable time and place, for the purpose of deliber- 
 ating more fully upon the propriety of re-organizing the 
 Yearly Meetingof Indiana upon the true principles, and in 
 accordance with the discipline and usages of the Society 
 of Friends, and in unity with the practice of the Yearly 
 Meetings of London and Dublin.'' 
 
 The committee appointed in accordance with the above 
 Minute, whose names tor sake of brevity are omitted, 
 drew up and sent forth, the following address.' 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 " Address of a Conference of Friends, held at Newport, "Wayne County, 
 Indiana., First month 4th, 1843 ; to the Members of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting." 
 
 " Dear Friends : — In deliberating at this time on the 
 momentous subject which has called us together, our 
 minds have been solemnly impressed with the very great 
 
64 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 responsibility attached to the position we occupy in the 
 religious Society of which we are members ; the influence 
 of our conduct on the A. S. cause, and the duty which 
 we owe to the community at large, as a component part 
 of the fraternity of man, and especially as responsible 
 members of the great slave-holding confederacy of the 
 United States of America. 
 
 " When we reflect, that in all probability the question, 
 whether Slavery in this country, ' shall be abolished by 
 peaceful legislation, or in the midst of bloodshed and 
 violence,' depends mainly, under Providence, on the suc- 
 cess of the great A. S. enterprise now in progress ; as 
 friends to the peace and happiness of our country, as 
 well as the deliverance of millions of our fellow-beings 
 from the unutterable horrors of ignominious bondage, 
 we cannot but be alarmed at the persevering and in- 
 creased opposition to the progress of the work, mani- 
 fested in various ways, and under various pretenses, by 
 the leading influences both in Church and State. In a 
 particular manner, we deplore the opposition of the 
 Church of Christ, so called, as presenting a greater ob- 
 stacle to the peaceable termination of Slavery, than all 
 other causes combined. And among the proscriptive 
 measures of the various religious societies in our country, 
 made use of for the purpose of preventing their members 
 from active labors in the A. S. cause, none that we know 
 of, have resorted to such a decided course of opposition 
 as Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends ; and on account 
 of the Anti-Slavery character of the Society established 
 by the labors of our fathers, none, we believe, exert so 
 powerful an influence to the disparagement of the work, 
 to the lessening the probability of its acceptance by the 
 nation, and of the peaceable accomplishment of the great 
 work of emancipation, and consequently to increase in 
 the same proportion the probability of a bloody termina- 
 tion of the evil. 
 
 With these views of the subject, it becomes us to in- 
 quire with deep concern what is required at our hands 
 in regard to this great question, and to be very careful 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 65 
 
 that we do not, for the sake of c retaining place and in- 
 fluence,' make a compromise with the opposition, and 
 add the weight of our influence to that enormous load of 
 guilt, which, like a millstone, is sinking Church and 
 State into the vortex of ruin. 
 
 M In view of the proscriptive measures put in opera- 
 tion by our opposers, it becomes our duty to inquire 
 what is required of us in order to secure the benefits of 
 religious society. 
 
 M "Without discipline, and contrary to the plain provi- 
 sions thereof, eight members of the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings were reported disqualified, and four of them re- 
 moved; the other four having been appointed by Quarterly 
 meetings, are to be removed by them from their stations, 
 without preferring any charge against them, or giving 
 them any opportunity to answer for themselves, merely 
 (as is well understood from the circumstances,) for bear- 
 ing a faithful testimony against Slavery, in accordance 
 with the practice of Friends generally of former years, 
 and with the recent earnest recommendation of London 
 Yearly Meeting, and the continued practice of our 
 brethren in England. For our Anti-Slavery principles 
 and practices, measures have been set on foot, and are 
 being carried out in practice, to exclude us from partici- 
 pating in the affairs of Society; to remove Clerks, Over- 
 seers, members of committees, and Ministers and Elders 
 from their stations, and to place us before the public 
 under the character of offenders, lying under the censure 
 of the Church. 
 
 u Being thus virtually cast out of the Society, so far as 
 regards its benefits ; it seems to us that our situation is 
 very precarious ; that in this position we are in danger, 
 either of losing respect for religious society, or of com- 
 promising our principles, in order to produce a reconcili- 
 ation with ; the body,' which is thus using all its influ- 
 ence to prevent the active exercise of our Anti-Slavery 
 principles. 
 
 "Another consideration of importance is, that in our 
 present situation our influence, as members of religious 
 
66 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 society, is lost to the Society of which we are members 
 and to the community at large. It cannot be expected 
 that, censured and proscribed as we are, our testimony 
 will be received by our opposers to the reformation of 
 the Society, or that the people generally will be likely to 
 pay that respect to our Anti-Slavery labors, which they 
 might do under different circumstances. 
 
 " Under these views, and in accordance with the 
 designs of the conference above-mentioned, we propose 
 that a General Convention of members of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting be held at Newport, Wayne Co., la., on Second- 
 day, the 6th of Second month, 1843, for the purpose set 
 forth in the foregoing Minutes of our appointment. 
 
 " We hope that Friends, those in a particular manner 
 who are favorable to the Anti-Slavery cause will feel 
 bound to attend, if practicable, in order to aid by their 
 counsels in coming to a correct decision on the momen- 
 tous subject under consideration." 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Remarks on the subject of the Call by the Editor of the Free-Labor 
 Advocate — Letter and declaration of Charles Osborne. 
 
 The object of the above call was justly deemed one of 
 incalculable importance ; and with feelings, no doubt, of 
 this kind the editors of the Free-Labor Advocate at that 
 time published the following additional, short, impres- 
 sive, and very appropriate invitation in that paper : 
 
 "friends' convention. 
 
 " We hope the Anti-Slavery Friends will not neglect 
 to attend the Convention to be at this place on the 6th of 
 next month. It is certainly an important concern ; and 
 those Friends who are not in favor of the measure pro- 
 posed for consideration, should be sure to attend and 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 67 
 
 state their objections, that nothing may be done unad- 
 visedly. It may be that the attendance of such will be 
 a means of preventing an improper movement. Now is 
 the time to make objections before any decisive steps are 
 taken. If some of our friends believe we are about to 
 pursue an improper course, it is certainly their duty to 
 endeavor to show us our error before the final step is 
 taken. Come, let us reason together.' 5 
 
 The above exhibits the spirit that prevailed in the 
 Anti-Slavery party throughout the whole struggle; that 
 is, a manifest desire for a fair, full, candid, and impartial 
 examination, without infringing on the rights and privi- 
 leges of any. They would gladly have met their strong- 
 est opposers, and listened to every argument they could 
 produce against their own principles and measures, or 
 any course they thought right to pursue ; but a directly 
 opposite course was a prominent feature in the proceed- 
 ings of the opposite party, both as regarded meetings 
 and individuals. 
 
 Charles Osborne, who, as I have already intimated, was 
 one of the most conspicuous of the Anti-Slavery party, 
 and one which, as the present work discloses, was re- 
 moved from the Meeting for Sufferings for his faithful- 
 ness to the Anti-Slavery cause, after witnessing to his 
 great sorrow the course of the Yearly Meeting, thought 
 it his duty to publish a declaration of his principles rela- 
 tive to Slavery, which, considering the position he so 
 long occupied in the Society of Friends as an approved 
 and highly esteemed Minister, I deem proper to insert at 
 large. It was written, as will appear ironi the date of 
 the accompanying letter to the editors of the Advocate 
 (which I will also lay before the reader), previous to the 
 meeting of the General Convention of Friends, and will, 
 therefore, as regards the order of time, more properly 
 come in here. 
 
 " Young's Prairie, Cass Cocxty, Michigan, 
 
 Twelfth Month 31, 1842. 
 
 " H. H. Fay and B. Stanton: 
 
 "Dear Friends : — 1 forward, for publication, my princi- 
 ples relative to Slavery, with the cause why I have been 
 
68 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 removed from the Meeting for Sufferings. Also a notice 
 to the Indiana State Anti-Slavery Society, showing that 
 I accept the appointment to the World's Convention; 
 that all may see that I am still willing to serve the cause 
 of universal emancipation as far as circumstances and 
 my humble abilities will enable me to do. Short of this, 
 I cannot conceive how I could stand clear of the sin of 
 oppression in the Divine sight. 
 
 " The present is a time of deep trial to the friends of 
 this most righteous cause ; especially in our land. Most 
 of our rulers, both in Church and State, are to be found 
 uniting in, and helping to keep up, the popular outcry 
 against Abolition ; some openly and undisguised, others 
 put on much sanctimony, and profess to be Abolitionists 
 and real friends of the slave, yet by their acts clearly 
 demonstrate that they cherish more than a common 
 'lively inter est for the oppressor? The influence of the 
 latter class, I conceive to be far more deadly and better 
 calculated to support the system of American Slavery 
 than the former. Had it not been for such religious 
 Abolitionists as these, w 7 ho love the praise of man more 
 than the praise of God, Slavery would long since have 
 been banished from our boasted land of liberty, if not 
 from the world. It is to this class of Abolition-Coloniza- 
 tionists — deplorers and suppoiters of Slavery — that we 
 have to ascribe our unprecedented trials in the Society 
 we love, the religious principles of which we have con- 
 scientiously received to hold and carry out in practice. 
 It being for this we are deemed disqualified members, 
 not fit to participate in transacting the affairs of Society, 
 it cannot be otherwise than a close and deep trial to the 
 friends of the slave. We willingly acknowledge it is to 
 us the greatest we ever met with in Society. For plead- 
 ing the cause of the oppressed, we ourselves are put in 
 bonds. We mourn for the state of our religious 
 Society — we lament because our chain and the chain of 
 our brethren in slavery are made heavy — because of the 
 attempts and exertions of our brethren to add afflic- 
 tions to our bonds! We remember those that are 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 69 
 
 in bonds as bound with them, and mourn because of the 
 oppressor. 
 
 " Where then is our consolation? I answer, in the 
 God of the oppressed — the friend of the poor and needy. 
 He saith, ' Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be 
 comforted.' fie further said to his faithful followers, 
 c Ye shall be hated of all nations for my sake.' i Marvel 
 not if the world hate you, ye know that it hated me 
 before it hated you.' Yes, my friends, this is our joy — - 
 our consolation, that we are so far like our divine Master, 
 despised and rejected of men, and not esteemed. If we 
 are persecuted, and not only bound, but put out of the 
 pale of society, we still have the consolatory evidence of 
 his Holy Spirit, with his promise, 'Be thou faithful unto 
 death and I will give thee a crown of life,' to cheer and 
 animate us, as well as to strengthen us in the belief that 
 the cause we have espoused and for which we suffer, is a 
 righteous one. Indeed for my own part, when I reflect 
 on the opposition and consequent treatment which I have 
 met with from my brethren in society because of my 
 Anti-Slavery principles and an unwillingness to denounce 
 Abolitionists, I feel inclined to respond to the language 
 of the Apostle Paul on the subject of the resurrection: 
 'If in this life only we have hope, we are of all men most 
 miserable.' 
 
 "And now, dear friends, I fervently desire that all who 
 are like our divine Master in sufferings, may also be like 
 him in spirit, in firmness, and prayer. ' Father, forgive 
 them, they know not what they do.' 
 
 "It is a lamentable fact, that among all the professed 
 Christian churches in the United States, there are none 
 to be found that are not in some way or other contribut- 
 ing to the support of Slavery. And who cannot see that 
 such a Christianity has a strong tendency to prevent the 
 advancement of righteousness on the earth, to cause the 
 heathen nations to be slow in receiving the truths of the 
 Gospel, and make infidels of many who have in degree 
 received a Christian education ? It would be a credit to 
 the Christian name were there even one society bearing 
 
70 : HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 a faithful testimony against Slavery. And we must be 
 slow indeed if we do not perceive that on us it now de- 
 volves to say, whether there shall any longer be a Society 
 of Anti-Slavery Friends in this land or not. Let all our 
 Friends who are virtually cut off from the communion 
 and fellowship of Society for their conscientious endea- 
 vors to carry out their testimony against Slavery, by 
 abstaining from slave-labor and refusing to vote for pro- 
 slavery candidates, still bear in mind that they are acting 
 in strict accordance with the spirit of the Discipline and 
 with the Gospel of Christ, and that they ought not to be 
 terrified and driven back because of church censure, nor 
 because of the cry raised against them of ' wild fanati- 
 cism,' 'disorganize^, 5 'giving their strength to the Abo- 
 litionists,' etc. For it is plain that religious duty calls 
 us to speak out and let all know that we do intend, 
 through Divine assistance, to bear a consistent testimony 
 against the sin of Slavery, as far as may be in our 
 power. For what good, we ask, will our testimony do 
 against any evil, while we continue to give it that support 
 without which it could not exist ? 
 
 u With a salutation of love to you and all our Anti- 
 Slavery friends in your parts, I remain your friend, 
 
 u Charles Osborne." 
 
 A DECLARATION. 
 
 "Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write 
 grievousness which they have prescribed, to turn aside the needy from 
 judgment, and to take away the rightf rom the poor of my people, that 
 widows may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless." — 
 Isa. x, 1, 2. 
 
 "to all to whom this may come. 
 
 " Grace be unto you, and peace from Him who came 
 'to preach deliverance to the captives,' and 'to set at 
 liberty them that are bruised.' 
 
 " I have found it to be my indispensable duty to de- 
 clare to the world my belief of the repugnancy of Slavery 
 to the Christian religion. It, therefore, remains to be 
 my continued concern to bear testimony against holding 
 our fellow-men in bondage. And at the present time, I 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 71 
 
 apprehend it to be incumbent on each individual to 
 deeply consider his own particular share in this testi- 
 mony. The slow progress in the emancipation of the 
 slaves, I lament; nevertheless, I do not despair of their 
 ultimate enlargement. 
 
 "And I desire that the friends of humanity every- 
 where may not suffer the deplorable condition of our 
 enslaved fellow-beings, to lose its force upon their minds 
 through the delay which the opposition of interested 
 men may occasion in this work of justice and mercy; 
 but rather be animated to consider that the longer the 
 opposition remains, the greater is the necessity on the 
 side of righteousness and benevolence for their steady 
 perseverance in pleading their cause. 
 
 "Amidst my sympathies for the sufferers, I do not forget 
 to cultivate those sensations which direct the mind in 
 pity toward the deplorable state of those men, whether 
 in foreign countries or our own, who promote, procure, 
 and execute the tearing away of the Africans from their 
 native land, as well as those who detain them in slavery, 
 remembering that they are men equally interested with 
 myself in the rewards of futurity. 
 
 " Believing, therefore, as I do, that a just and dread- 
 ful retribution awaits the unrepenting and obdurate op- 
 pressor, at that awful tribunal where sophistry will not 
 prevail to exculpate, I seek for, and cherish that dispo- 
 sition of mind, which can pray for these enemies of hu- 
 manity, and fervently breathe for their restoration to 
 soundness of judgment and purity of principle. 
 
 " 1 believe, also, that a proper regard to this testimony 
 would lead all the friends of humanity to conscientiously 
 avoid becoming accessory to any step whereby Slavery 
 may be strengthened or prolonged, and consequently, to 
 throw their influence in favor of immediate and uncon- 
 ditional emancipation. 
 
 u The Gospel and Slavery are as utterly irreconcilable, 
 and as much opposed to each other, as Christ and Belial, 
 light and darkness. I, therefore, do believe, that it is 
 
72 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 the imperative duty of every one that nameth the name 
 of Christ, to depart from this great iniquity. 
 
 " As relates to Colonization, I believe the American 
 Colonization Society is iniquitous ; because it traduces 
 the free people of color, sanctions and strengthens exist- 
 ing prejudice against them, discourages and opposes their 
 elevation in this country, and countenances oppression, 
 to induce them to leave their native land in quest of some 
 more hospitable region, and, at the same time, proposes 
 to secure the master in the possession of his Tinman pro- 
 perty ; thus it tends to fortify and prolong Slavery. 
 
 a And now for the clearing of Truth ; I believe it to be 
 a duty that devolves on me thus publicly to state and 
 make known that, for a conscientious adherence to the 
 foregoing principles, I have been deemed a disqualified 
 member, and removed from the Meeting for Sufferings, 
 by the leading influences of the late Indiana Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Friends. And at the time when this business was 
 before the meeting, I made a solemn appeal to them to 
 have the cause of disqualification inserted in the Minutes, 
 that wherever they might reach, the cause might appear 
 also. But this request, however just and reasonable, 
 was, after considerable discussion, denied me, contrary to 
 the minds of many Friends. 
 
 "How is the gold become dim! how is the most fine 
 gold changed ! Lam. iv, 1. 
 
 " In the love of the truth, as it is in Jesus, remember- 
 ing those that are in bonds as bound with them, I rest 
 and remain as ever, a friend to religious liberty. 
 
 " Charles Osborne. 
 
 « Twelfth mo., 1842." 
 
 It will be observed by the reader, familiar with the dis- 
 cipline of Indiana Yearly Meeting, that the writer of 
 the above took a considerable portion of it from that book, 
 from the Society's standing declaration relative to Slavery, 
 and the duty of members in regard to it, and made it his 
 own. In doing this, he appears to have had two objects 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 73 
 
 in view: first, to declare his own views and sentiments ; 
 and, secondly, to show that he was engaged in canning 
 out the very principles the Society adopted in former 
 days ; and that for doing this he was then under censure, 
 and that the scale had so changed that the "opposition of 
 interested men," which the framers of the Discipline en- 
 deavored to fortify the members of Society against, had 
 been signally arrayed against himself by members, and 
 those, too, who were leaders in the Society. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Proceedings of the Convention to consider the subject of Re-Organizing 
 the Society — Its Declaration. 
 
 At the time and place proposed for the Convention 
 which had been called, a considerable number of Friends 
 assembled. The vast importance of the subject for the 
 decision of which they had convened, seemed to spread 
 a deep and solemn feeling over the congregation — a feel- 
 ing clearly depicted in the countenances of the assembly. 
 
 After a very thorough investigation, which lasted the 
 greater part of two days, and in which every side of the 
 picture passed in review, the meeting came to the con- 
 clusion, as set forth in the following Minute: 
 
 u In consequence of the departure of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends from the true and genuine principles 
 of the Society, in regard to our testimony against Slavery, 
 and because of its arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchristian 
 measures, a meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, convened 
 at Newport, Wayne county, Indiana, and, after giving 
 the subject a serious and deliberate examination, it was 
 the unanimous conclusion that the circumstances under 
 which we are now placed, render it indispensably neces- 
 sary to separate ourselves therefrom. We, therefore, 
 now, the Seventh day of Second month, 1843, associate 
 ourselves together as a religious society, in the capacity 
 
74 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 of a Yearly Meeting, tinder the title of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, embracing in its limits 
 all those members of the Indiana Yearly Meeting, who ad- 
 here to the genuine principles of the Society, residing in 
 the district described in the Discipline of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing from which we now separate ourselves. ' ; 
 
 The meeting, then, entered into measures for a thorough 
 organization, or rather re-organization of the Society of 
 Friends. It issued various documents, including an 
 Epistle to each of the Yearly Meetings, excepting, of 
 course, that of Indiana ; and, after transacting a large 
 amount of business, all in much brotherly love, and in 
 the blessed unity of the Spirit, (a desideratum with 
 many Friends for years previous, without the possibility 
 of its realization,) the meeting closed, with the conclusion 
 to meet again on the first Second-day of the Ninth month 
 of the same j 7 ear. 
 
 Among the documents issued, the most important is a 
 Declaration, setting forth the facts, which, in the opinion 
 of the meeting, rendered it obligatory upon those who 
 composed it, to take the steps they did. Here it is: 
 
 DECLARATION. 
 
 u We feel ourselves called upon, by the circumstances 
 in which we are placed, in justice to ourselves, to the 
 Society of Friends throughout the world, to the cause of 
 truth and righteousness in the earth, and by a just regard 
 to the feelings of the community at large, to make a pub- 
 lic declaration of the causes by which we have been driven 
 into our present position. It is reasonable to expect that 
 the public should be desirous of information on this sub- 
 ject ; and we believe it right that we should make them 
 acquainted with the circumstances which have reduced 
 us to the necessity of separating from those with whom 
 we have formerly been in connection, and to organize 
 ourselves into a Society of Friends, upon the true princi- 
 ples of that Society, in w T hich we may enjoy those reli- 
 gious privileges and benefits which we highly prize, and 
 of which we have been arbitrarily and unhappily deprived 
 
INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING- OF FRIENDS, 75 
 
 by the proscriptive measures of the ruling part of the 
 Yearly Meeting. 
 
 u Before we proceed to the statement of the causes of 
 separation, it will be proper to declare that we have not 
 separated from the principles of the Society, nor from its 
 testimonies and discipline, but from that body of mem- 
 bers who have departed from our testimony against Sla- 
 very, and from a due respect to the Discipline. We wish 
 it distinctly understood that we have adopted no new 
 doctrine, nor any new system of church government ; 
 that we claim to be, in the strictest sense of the word, a 
 Society of Friends, with no other nominal distinction in 
 the title which we have adopted, than that which is ne- 
 cessary to distinguish us from those from whom we have 
 separated, and to express our adherence to our well known 
 testimony against Slavery. 
 
 u Although it is a humiliating consideration, yet by a 
 reference to the history of the past, we find that there 
 is a universal liability in all associations, both civil and 
 religious, to deterioration and corruption. Even the first 
 Christian church organization, the purest the world ever 
 witnessed, departing little by little from the Truth as it is 
 in Jesus, finally arrived at such a state of depravity, as 
 to advocate or connive at all kinds of wickedness — at the 
 very works of the devil himself, which the great Author 
 of the religion it professed, came into the world to de- 
 stroy. 
 
 "By yielding to the convictions of Truth upon their 
 "understandings, the primitive Friends were not only ena- 
 bled to discover many of the corruptions which had grad- 
 ually found their way into Christendom, but were, also, 
 induced to bear a faithful testimony against them. They 
 separated themselves from those religious communities 
 with which they were formerly connected, and in order 
 that they might have an opportunity to strengthen and 
 encourage one another in the support of their religious 
 principles and testimonies, they formed themselves into a 
 distinct religious society. 
 
 " And although they seem to have taken the greatest 
 
76 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 precaution in order to prevent a recurrence of similar cor- 
 ruptions and abuses in the Church, as appears by their 
 various lucid declarations of sentiment, their powerful 
 reasoning in support of their principles and doctrines, and 
 their forcible and scriptural definition of the power and 
 authority of the Church, as well as the duty and obliga- 
 tion resting upon its individual members, relative thereto, 
 showing that without the aid and assistance of the power 
 and spirit of God leading thereto, no decision or decree of 
 the Church is available, and that " it is the duty of each 
 individual member to assent to the judgment of Truth, 
 whether pronounced by few or many, independent of 
 any ivorldly or selfish consideration." Yet facts and cir- 
 cumstances connected with the Society in this country 
 at the present time, sorrowfully demonstrate the ineffi- 
 ciency of all this, good as it is in itself, without a frequent 
 and effectual recurrence to first principles, without that 
 deep and heartfelt concern to ascertain the Truth, and to 
 perform that which duty requires at our hands, which is 
 the only conservative exercise calculated to prevent the 
 influx of that natural depravity, as we before observed, to 
 which all such institutions are liable. 
 
 " As the Society of Friends was first gathered, and 
 that most emphatically under the influence of this concern 
 and exercise, so by the descending of the same mantle 
 upon their successors, it was enabled to see the entire 
 sinfulness of various practices, which in its infancy, 
 escaped attention ; such as buying, selling, and holding 
 slaves, the use of intoxicating drinks, etc. ; and so long 
 as it as a body continued in this situation, there was a 
 gradual approximation to perfection in its testimonies. 
 Through the unremitted labors of Woolman, Benezet, and 
 kindred spirits, Friends of the Yearly Meeting of Phila- 
 delphia cleared themselves from holding slaves, from 
 whence the concern spread to the other Yearly Meetings 
 on the continent with the same happy result. About 
 this time, James Pemberton, Warner Mifflin, and many 
 other Friends, eminent for their piety and virtue, appre- 
 hending that much advantage to the cause of the op- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 77 
 
 pressed Africans might be derived from duly enlisting all 
 classes of the community in their behalf, engaged in the 
 formation of associations for that purpose, within the 
 limits of several of the Yearly Meetings, and the most 
 gratifying consequences were the result. Under the in- 
 fluence of these societies, feelings of friendship and com- 
 miseration for this oppressed and deeply injured people 
 increased and spread through the country, until public 
 sentiment became so changed as to abolish slavery by 
 law in seven of the original states of this confederacy. 
 But after much good had been effected, through the 
 agency of these institutions, a combination of adverse 
 circumstances conspired to change the current of feeling. 
 The hand of cruel avarice became afresh nerved to its 
 unholy grasp by the prospect of extensive gain, through 
 the facilities offered by the invention of the cotton gin. 
 This prospect and desire of gain was not confined to 
 those immediately engaged in holding slaves, but ex- 
 tended with lamentable effect to many of those in the 
 Free states inclined to enter into mercantile or manufac- 
 turing operations. This class included a number of the 
 most wealthy and influential in the Society of Friends, 
 in the middle and eastern states, and the natural and 
 consequent intercourse between them and the slave- 
 holders of the south, had a direct tendency to leaven 
 them into the same lordly, pompous, and intolerant feel- 
 ing.* This circumstance, taken in connection with that 
 
 * We believe it has been owing to a considerable extent to the influ- 
 ence and agency of this class in the east, that the opponents of the 
 Anti- Slavery cause at present among us, have succeeded in so com- 
 pletely changing the character of the proceedings of our Yearly Meet- 
 ing. It has also been through their representations, or rather misrepre- 
 sentations, that some of our Trans-Atlantic brethren have been induced 
 to join them in opposition to us. They have persuaded them that a 
 difference of circumstances exist between England and America, and 
 such as to render it altogether improper to engage in an enterprise in 
 the latter, which it would be right to approve and promote in the 
 former. 
 
 This difference, however, although repeatedly asked for, and recently, 
 attempted to be given, has never been exhibited to us. On the contrary, 
 their objections to Friends joining with others, are such as all must 
 
 4* 
 
78 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 of the formation and active operation of the Colonization 
 Society, instituted mainly by slave-holders, and purposely 
 for the removal of the ' free people of color ' from the 
 country, and in order that none of the despised class 
 might enjoy liberty among us, almost sealed the fate of 
 genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society. Those asso- 
 ciations, instituted for the purpose of creating this feeling, 
 were suffered to go down, and the energies and resources 
 of the people prostituted to that of sending out of the 
 country, those who already enjoyed personal freedom, 
 instead of their being applied to the alleviation of the 
 distresses of the bondman. In short, the cold hand of 
 apathy, and the still more withering influence of an in- 
 veterate prejudice, spread almost a universal gloom around 
 the cause of African freedom. There were still, however, 
 those in different parts of the country who bore a decided 
 testimony against the spirit of the times. In 1832, a 
 resuscitation of the Anti-Slavery cause commenced in one 
 of the eastern states. 
 
 " But the appearance of animation being but small at 
 first, but little apprehension of its becoming an efficient 
 organization was entertained by many of its enemies 
 until some time afterward. And although no Anti- 
 Slavery society existed within the limits of this Yearly 
 Meeting until several years subsequent to the above date, 
 yet there were a number of those among us who bore 
 testimony against the spirit to which we have referred. 
 This number, holding an influence to some extent in the 
 Society, the Yearly Meeting in 1836, issued the following 
 Advice relative to the subject under consideration : 
 
 " ; We feel ourselves called upon at the present time, 
 affectionately and tenderly, to caution all our dear friends 
 to take no part in, nor render any aid to, any political as- 
 sociation on the subject of African Slavery, which is, or 
 may be, founded on principles either directly or in- 
 directly having a tendency to promote the unrighteous 
 
 see,urjon moderate reflection, are equally applicable to the Society on 
 both sides of the Atlantic. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 79 
 
 work of expatriation ; it being our settled conviction that 
 this work, as a condition to the slaves being liberated, is 
 unjust and oppressive. 5 Advices similar to this, were 
 issued at different successive periods, and much care 
 taken to speak in an encouraging manner, in regard to 
 those engaged in the present Anti-Slavery enterprise ; 
 ' and Friends affectionately advised to be so alive to our 
 testimony against Slavery, as, neither through prejudice 
 or otherwise, to cast any discouragement in the way of 
 those who are faithfully laboring to promote universal 
 emancipation, whether such laborers be found within or 
 without the pale of Society,' but to ; endeavor to spread 
 the concern, and enlighten the minds of the people, by 
 giving circulation to such publications as are calculated 
 to advance the cause of immediate emancipation on 
 Christian principles.' 
 
 " ' And a concern has been felt to arise, that Friends 
 generally, may be stirred up to renewed diligence, in 
 faithfully maintaining our testimony against Slavery, 
 not shrinking therefrom on account of opposition, or the 
 fear of persecution ; but that we may individually be 
 willing in true simplicity, to inquire whether there is not 
 something for us to do for this suffering portion of our 
 fellow-creatures. We do not wish any to engage in ac- 
 tive measures on any other ground than a sense of duty, 
 and in accordance with our well-known principles, yet 
 we would encourage all to a close examination as to what 
 is required at their hands, and how they may employ 
 the talents committed to them for noble purposes, in the ad- 
 vancement of the blessed work of universal emancipation, 
 by meekly, yet boldly, either publicly or privately, plead- 
 ing the cause of the oppressed.' At the same time, however, 
 some recommendations to consider whether the time had 
 not come in which it would be most safe for members of 
 our religious Society to abstain from mixing with others 
 in benevolent associations, etc., were contained in the 
 Minutes of the meeting ; and were no doubt the senti- 
 ments of some who were the real friends of immediate 
 emancipation, and weightily considered by others of this 
 
80 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 class, who like Pemberton and his worthy coadjutors in 
 the cause, had joined with others in the formation of 
 Anti-Slavery societies. But as they had become con- 
 vinced of the necessity of ' endeavoring to spread the 
 concern, and enlighten the minds of the people,' and as 
 they could not discover any plan which w r ould so effectu- 
 ally facilitate the accomplishment of this desirable object, 
 they could not for conscience' sake, abandon those socie- 
 ties which they had been instrumental in gathering ; the 
 good effects of which, had now become obvious, and thus 
 cause the interest which had been excited in behalf of 
 their suffering brethren and sisters in bonds, to languish 
 or totally disappear ; and seeing the work in which they 
 were engaged, was so highly spoken of by the meeting, 
 and that the advice on this head, was given on account of 
 a fear that some of our principles might be compromised, 
 and not in consequence of the actual existence of any- 
 thing of the kind ; they therefore continued actively en- 
 gaged as before, confidently believing that preservation 
 would be experienced in the performance of so necessary 
 a work, although it might render them at times some- 
 what more exposed. 
 
 u Here, it is worthy of remark, that ever since the issu- 
 ing of the advices repudiating the Colonization scheme, 
 there were some of our prominent members open advo- 
 cates of that institution, who appeared to have been fired 
 with indignation at the expression of such sentiments, 
 evidently entertaining a settled purpose to prostrate the 
 Anti-Slavery cause and its advocates in the Society, if 
 ever a favorable opportunity should present. And now 
 as this cause progressed, the main body of its enemies 
 who had heretofore entertained but little apprehension of 
 its success, and who had remained apparently in almost 
 a state of indifference in regard to the subject, through 
 the alarm taken and communicated by those of kindred 
 spirits in the east, and by discovering the project so 
 gratifying to their prejudices (the Colonization scheme,) 
 to sink in public estimation, in consequence of the Anti- 
 Slavery movement, together through the instrumentality 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 81 
 
 of the individuals above referred to, suddenly became 
 aroused to action, and inspired with a determination to 
 arrest its onward course. Hence, no time was lost at this 
 favorable moment, in taking occasion from the circum- 
 stances in which we were placed by the Advices referred 
 to, to cry out c insubordination,' 4 want of proper subor- 
 dination to the authority of the church,' etc. Advice in 
 regard to joining with others, from year to year grew 
 more and more positive, gradually, however, becoming 
 divested of the mask under which it was at first covered, 
 and approximating as time advanced, and as the Anti- 
 Slavery cause prospered, to the full development of that 
 Pro-Slavery spirit which has so sorrowfully found its way 
 into the bosom of Society, and which the following exhi- 
 bition of facts and circumstances will serve more fully to 
 illustrate. 
 
 " It should be recollected, that the advice of which we 
 have been speaking, was originally intended by the 
 friends of the Anti-Slavery cause, to refer to all benevo- 
 lent societies without distinction. In 1840, in the renewal 
 of the Advice, it was applied to two only, ' Abolition and 
 Colonization Societies;' the latter of which, as before 
 brought to view, had been specially condemned as being 
 unjust and oppressive in its nature and tendencies, and 
 hence it was artfully chained to the former, in order, 
 if possible, to sink its character at least to an equal 
 depth, without an open manifestation of special hostility 
 thereto. 
 
 u In 1811, the opposition becoming more emboldened, 
 it was again repeated, and confined to A. S. Societies 
 altogether ; and even the use of our meeting-houses was 
 refused to such societies for their accommodation in the 
 transaction of their business. 
 
 " At our last Yearly Meeting, in addition to this, not 
 only those who had joined in these associations, but also 
 such as had not, but yet could not for conscience' sake 
 denounce others therefor, were by special act of the 
 Meeting, deprived of any privilege in regard to the 
 transaction of any of its important business, and subor- 
 
82 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 dinate meetings were advised to pursue the same course 
 of conduct down to the most remote and inferior branches ; 
 and that ostensibly on account of their being opposed to 
 the advice and travail of the body ; while at the same 
 time, some who were the most forward in endeavoring to 
 enforce submission to this advice, were of those who 
 were actively engaged in mixed associations of a differ- 
 ent character, and in supporting, both directly and in- 
 directly, the Colonization scheme, which, as we have 
 already shown, the Yearly Meeting not only advised 
 against, but declared to be unjust and oppressive. In 
 addition to this, it is notorious that many of the same class 
 have for several years past, stood in open opposition to 
 the Advices of the Meeting, on other important subjects. 
 
 " It may be proper here to state, that in order to avoid 
 going contrary to the advice of the meeting by mixing 
 with others, and at the same time, be engaged in spread- 
 ing the concern, etc., agreeably to the requisition of the 
 body, several associations were formed in different parts, 
 composed of Friends only, for that purpose. But to our 
 astonishment, as soon as we had taken this course, lead- 
 ing members of Society, active opponents to mixed as- 
 sociations, declared this to be more objectionable than 
 the other. It was said that in Society, in Meetings for 
 Discipline, were the places to labor in this cause. 
 
 u This, we readily admit to be correct, so far as relates 
 to a reformation in Society only. But recently, when 
 this has been attended to, and the state of Society repre- 
 sented to the Yearly Meeting, although bound by disci- 
 pline, and all previous usage, as well as the very nature 
 and design of the regulation, to notice the deficiencies 
 reported, laboring for their removal, and to form the 
 summary answers to the queries of the materials received 
 from the Quarters, and notwithstanding several of these 
 reported considerable deficiency in regard to our testi- 
 mony against Slavery, yet the meeting independently, 
 and without any regard thereto, most extraordinarily 
 said, that ' Friends bear a testimony against Slavery as 
 far as appears? 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 83 
 
 "According to our Discipline relative to this subject, 
 which had its origin under the influence of that feeling 
 which instituted the first Anti-Slavery organization, not 
 only were members prohibited from holding or hiring 
 slaves, and advised to avoid becoming executors or ad- 
 ministrators to estates where slaves are bequeathed, but 
 also recommended not to be accessory to any step whereby 
 their bondage might be prolonged. Thus evidently 
 opening a door for, and inviting the exercise of a tender 
 conscience in regard to any course of conduct whatever, 
 which we might become convinced would have this effect. 
 The African committee, it is known, were appointed to 
 have the care of the concerns of the people of color 
 among us, on account of the disabilities under which 
 they labor, and their liability to be kidnapped and carried 
 into slavery. 
 
 u Being aware, upon reflection, that the consumption of 
 the proceeds of slavery was the very thing which had 
 reduced this people to a situation, demanding the ap- 
 pointment of such a committee, many Friends, members 
 of this committee, deemed it important, in order to carry 
 out its object, as well as the spirit and design of the 
 Discipline above cited, that Friends should endeavor to 
 avoid the use of such articles. Accordingly, one branch 
 of the committee forwarded a report to its general meet- 
 ing, treating the subject at some length, showing the 
 impropriety and inconsistency of Friends sustaining a 
 market for such productions. But when it was read in 
 that body, it was spurned, it was rejected with manifest 
 bitterness and contempt, and the subject prohibited being 
 introduced again into the committee upon the allegation 
 that it was foreign to its object. Supposing that the 
 subject demanded a serious examination, at least, in 
 some departments of Society, one of the Quarterly meet- 
 ings, in its reports, forwarded a proposition or request to 
 our last Yearly Meeting, to take into consideration, 
 whether the use of such products was not a support to 
 Slavery and the Slave Trade, and whether they were not 
 essentially prize goods: but when it came before that 
 
84 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 body, it refused to take any action whatever upon the 
 subject. 
 
 u Near the commencement of our last Yearly Meeting, 
 a rule was adopted, that no person who stood in oppo- 
 sition to the advice and travail of the body, should be 
 appointed on any important business in the meeting; 
 but it was evidently intended to be applied exclusively 
 to those favorable to the Anti-Slavery enterprise; for the 
 next day w T hen an important committee was to be 
 appointed, a Friend was named who had recently con- 
 tributed in a pecuniary point of view to the support of 
 the Colonization Society, which being known to some of 
 our Friends, the circumstance was referred to in a man- 
 ner showing the inconsistency of confirming such a 
 nomination with the rule adopted, seeing his conduct 
 was not only altogether contrary to the advice of a for- 
 mer meeting, but also, unlike that of Anti-Slavery 
 Friends, of such a character as to encourage that which 
 had been declared thereby to be ' unjust and oppressive.' 
 But the nomination was promptly sustained by those 
 who still retain their place and influence — they wished 
 the Friend to serve the meeting as proposed. It was 
 then publicly observed, that if, with the information 
 received, the meeting should persevere in the course it 
 seemed to be taking, it must be taken for granted that its 
 former advice against aiding the Colonization scheme was 
 now rescinded ; to all of which the meeting deigned not to 
 reply, but immediately progressed onward with its business. 
 
 " Henry Clay, the great champion of the Pro-Slavery 
 Whig party, and intended candidate for the ensuing 
 Presidency of the United States — the President of the 
 American Colonization Society — the slave-holder and 
 duelist, while on an electioneering tour to the State of 
 Indiana, attended a political meeting at Richmond, in 
 the time of Yearly Meeting, word being given out 
 that it was his intention to attend the public meeting of 
 Friends on First-day. His meeting was held on the day 
 immediately preceding this, at which time a petition was 
 presented to him, with near two thousand signatures 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 85 
 
 appended, requesting him to give liberty to those of his 
 fellow-beings whom he had long deprived of their just 
 and inalienable rights. In the course of his reply to 
 this request, he said: ; I own about fifty slaves. I con- 
 sider them as my property. We have an idea that 
 whatever the law secures as property, is property.' He 
 owned that Slavery was an evil, but, said he, ' the slaves 
 must be prepared for freedom before they can receive 
 that great boon; they must have moral cultivation. The 
 Society of Friends take the right stand in relation to 
 this subject,' etc. After this, a few Friends in behalf of 
 those who desired to ' retain their place and influence,' 
 took an opportunity to inform him that 'the Society had 
 no hand in getting up this petition — they had no unity 
 with its presentation — it was the work of a few Aboli- 
 tionists,' or words to this effect. The Clerk of the meet- 
 ing, on First-day morning, took him in his carriage 
 to meeting, Friends taking care to seat him in one of the 
 most conspicuous places in the house. After the close 
 of the meeting, men and women, Ministers and Elders 
 gathered around him in the Ministers' gallery, giving 
 the strongest evidence by their introductions and saluta- 
 tions, of the high estimation in which they held him ; he 
 in return taking care to return the compliment with all 
 the etiquette for which he is famed. 
 
 " In order properly to estimate the whole of this trans- 
 action it should be remembered, that Henry Clay was 
 only a private man. True, he was an office-seeker, but 
 not an office-holder. We were under no obligation to 
 him as a ruler. Impartial justice, therefore, would have 
 required just such treatment toward him, w T hen coming 
 into our assemblies as we would mete out to the ; poor 
 man in vile raiment' with the same grade of moral char- 
 acter, otherwise ' we are partial in ourselves and become 
 judges of evil thoughts, and are convinced of the law as 
 transgressors.' Now see the contrast. 
 
 At the time of Yearly Meeting in 1841, Charles C. 
 Burleigh, an eminent philanthropist from the East, came 
 to Richmond on a mission to plead the cause of equal 
 
 5 
 
86 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Itf 
 
 and impartial justice — to plead the cause of millions of 
 our innocent suffering brethren and sisters in bonds, who 
 are not permitted to plead for themselves. But this man 
 was treated with indignity — with utter contempt. He 
 wished to hold meetings in and about Richmond. 
 Friends closed their meeting-house doors against him, 
 the doors of the public houses in town were closed also, 
 and he was mobbed in the open street while addressing 
 the people. He is a man of irreproachable character. 
 
 Thus it is evident, so far as an extensive tissue offacts 
 and circumstances can establish, and so far as the fruit 
 of a tree can manifest its character, that the influence by 
 which the Yearly Meeting is now governed is Pro- 
 Slavery, and that unsoundness lies at the bottom of the 
 opposition with which we have been assailed. Various, 
 however, are the grounds of this opposition with diffe- 
 rent individuals, and much too complicated to be fully 
 described in our limits. But that which we doubt not is 
 occupied by the greater number, is plainly alluded to in 
 the following extract from the Epistle of Advice of 1841: 
 'Thus maintaining our peaceable and Christian principles 
 in nnbroken harmony, we shall, we believe, be enabled, 
 as way opens, more availingly to plead the cause of this 
 much-injured race of our fellow-men, and retain the 
 place and influence which, as a Society ', we have hereto- 
 fore had with the rulers of the land? 
 
 "The rulers of our land being such as have been 
 chosen by a Fro-Slavery community, are consequently 
 opposed to the Aftti-Slavery cause. They hate it — they 
 despise it. Hence it is rightly judged impossible to 
 retain a place and influence with such men, and hold 
 any connection therewith — it is, indeed, too unpopular. 
 
 "This leads us to notice some of the circumstances 
 said to exist in England and not in America, which ren- 
 ders it right to join with others in the promotion of the 
 Anti-Slavery cause in that country, while in this an 
 opposite course is necessary. In order to carry out the 
 proscriptive and disfranchising measures to which we 
 have referred, a large committee was appointed in the 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 87 
 
 Yearly Meeting, and one in the Select body to attend 
 Subordinate Meetings. These have made considerable 
 progress in the work, In one of the Quarterly meetings, 
 in their labors to prove a difference of circumstances 
 between the two countries, it was observed that, in 'Eng- 
 land, it was the wealthy and influential part of the com- 
 munity with which Friends associated-— the reverse of 
 what was in practice in this country.' And again, c that 
 it was those in the foremost ranks of society among 
 Friends, who engaged in the work there, 5 and conse- 
 quently fchat it was the opposite class who had under- 
 taken it here. In all this do we not clearly see that the 
 Cross has become a stumbling-block ? Wealth and 
 influence, or in other words, 'power makes right.' The 
 full development of this principle, truly, is that upon 
 which the whole system of American Slavery stands. 
 What has become of the self-denying example and the 
 uncompromising zeal of a Fox, a Barclay, a Penn, or of 
 the whole band of pioneers, in the reformation they 
 commenced, with these their highly professing successors 
 in a reform of no less importance to the welfare of the 
 human family ? 
 
 " Is it by thus yielding to the prejudices, or accommo- 
 dating ourselves to the corrupt views and sentiments of 
 those around us, or by conniving at their unhallowed 
 deeds, that we should seek to promote the cause of truth 
 and righteousness in the earth? In an interview which 
 some of us had with this committee, one who stands about 
 at the head of the opposition, observed that ; The Anti- 
 Slavery Societies were almost universally hated, especial- 
 ly in the South, and that if Friends should connect them- 
 selves therewith, ministers of our Society could have no 
 influence with the slaveholders, nor even travel safely 
 among them. In the exercise of his gift, if he should 
 feel it his duty to go to the South on a gospel mission, he 
 wished to be so situated as to have some influence, and 
 be in no danger of molestation whilst there.' 
 
 " This objection is a very common one, and it seems to 
 be deemed proof positive that it is well grounded, when 
 
88 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 they can refer to the friendly reception of a visit from 
 those who are opposed to these societies, evidently being 
 unmindful of, or disregarding, the Scripture declaration, 
 4 Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for 
 so did their fathers to the false prophets.' 
 
 "In accordance with the sweeping system of virtual 
 disownment, to which we have referred, eight members 
 of the Meeting for Sufferings were reported to the Yearly 
 Meeting as unfit for the station, under the vague charge 
 of disqualification. And the committee continued, to 
 make further report, if other obnoxious members should 
 be found. It should constantly be borne in mind that 
 the professed cause of the adoption of these proscriptive 
 measures, was that of some Friends going contrary to the 
 advice and travail of the body ; and surely a disregard of 
 the general code of discipline should not be considered of 
 less importance. That discipline authorizes the Meeting 
 for Sufferings to suggest the removal of members of that 
 body, only in consequence of their declining or greatly 
 neglecting the attendance of said meeting ; and as the 
 members alluded to were among the most regular attend- 
 ants thereof, we cannot but regard these proceedings as 
 altogether arbitrary ; for admitting the Yearly Meeting to 
 have the power to make or change discipline at pleasure 
 (as w r as observed), yet nothing of the kind has ever been 
 done without making such, a special object of considera- 
 tion. And besides this, it should be remembered that 
 the Meeting for Sufferings is a subordinate meeting, but 
 yet it reported those members, as disqualified, contrary 
 to the plain letter of Discipline, and was sustained therein 
 by the Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " When this subject came before the meeting, one of 
 those thus presented, made request in their behalf in an 
 humble and feeling manner, that the Minute should state 
 the cause of their disqualification — it was their due — ■ 
 justice demanded it. But this request, although reason- 
 able as it was, was refused to be granted by the ruling 
 party. Thus they were publicly charged with that which 
 merited ejection from that body, and yet deprived of 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 89 
 
 knowing in what it consisted, as to any official informa- 
 tion. But to return to our narrative respecting the 
 Yearly Meeting's committee and that from the Select 
 body : the work assigned them is now under rapid pro- 
 gress. Ministers and Elders who do not abandon the 
 Anti-Slavery societies, or turn their hand against such 
 as do not, or, in other words, unite with the ' advice and 
 travail of the body,' are by special direction, to be re- 
 moved from their stations. Agreeably to the course 
 adopted and most strenuously adhered to by the Yearly 
 Meeting, these committees have endeavored to prohibit 
 any examination of the subject, except on their own side. 
 They have invariably manifested a disposition in meet- 
 ings, not to hear the reasons we would advance in our 
 behalf. In short, like the poor victims for which we 
 plead, we are not permitted to plead for ourselves. 
 
 " When we take into consideration the awful state of 
 public affairs in these United States, produced through 
 the predominance of the slave-holding principle, and 
 when, by the visible signs of the times, we are warned 
 that the period cannot be very distant when Slavery will 
 be abolished, either by peaceful legislation, or in the 
 midst of violence and blood ( ; for the needy shall not 
 always be forgotten ; the expectation of the poor shall not 
 perish forever'), and when we turn in our minds to all 
 the noble and mighty achievements wrought through the 
 agency of Anti-Slavery Societies, from the first efforts of 
 Clarkson and his coadjutors to the final completion of 
 British West India emancipation, including the efforts of 
 similar societies in this country, by which the foul insti- 
 tution was abolished in seven of the original States, and 
 when we reflect upon the vast amount of Anti-Slavery 
 feeling at the present time in the United States, created 
 through these instrumentalities, and that the State Anti- 
 Slavery Society of Indiana and its auxiliaries would be 
 much weakened without our assistance, the question 
 arises, Can we then abandon the cause and be clear of our 
 brother's blood ? We cannot. 
 
 " This question being decided, the next is, is it better 
 
90 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 for us to suffer ourselves to be separately disowned, and 
 scattered abroad, to be deprived of the comforts, consola- 
 tions and preserving influence of church fellowship, or to 
 avail ourselves of our indisputable right to form a reli- 
 gious societj 7 in which we can enjoy these privileges? 
 The answer to this inquiry, we apprehend, must be obvi- 
 ous to every sober and reflecting person who has any 
 confidence in the usefulness of religious society. Conse- 
 quently w r e have deemed it our duty to adopt the latter 
 alternative. Many of us have for a considerable time 
 labored with much anxious solicitude for the restoration 
 or conversion of many of our brethren in Society, to 
 soundness of judgment and purity of principle in regard 
 to this subject, and as long as any door of hope w T as left 
 unclosed, that this object could be effected, we have been 
 made willing to suffer all the contumely they have seen 
 meet to pour upon us ; but by the proceedings already 
 referred to, we have from all appearances, been complete- 
 ly shut out from any access to the feelings and consciences 
 of a large number of our fellow members, who have 
 thereby been taught to look upon us as transgressors, 
 lying under the just and merited censure of the Society, 
 and of course unworthy of their confidence and fellow- 
 ship. And now, taking into consideration the natural 
 and legitimate consequences of the bondman's bleeding 
 cause, which must result from this unceasing and increas- 
 ing opposition to its advocates, and that by thus remain- 
 ing in a formal connection, even if we could, under pres- 
 ent circumstances, we should give countenance to its un- 
 righteous and anti-christian course; and also reflecting 
 upon the situation in which the Society here is involved 
 through the prevalence of that spirit which rejects that 
 most necessary and salutary advice of our Discipline, to 
 manage the affairs of Society in the spirit of meekness 
 and wisdom, with decency, forbearance and love to each 
 other; which issues advices and renders them equivalent 
 to positive injunctions, without listening to, or in many 
 instances even suffering the exhibition of the evidence of 
 Truth against the propriety of their adoption 5 by a fair 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 91 
 
 and candid examination thereof — which closes the ear 
 against the claims of bleeding humanity, by refusing to 
 look into the subject of consuming the produce of the 
 slave's toil, and the necessary tendency which such a 
 practice has to perpetuate his sufferings ; which will not 
 allow liberty of conscience in the performance of so obvi- 
 ous a duty as that of uniting with our fellow-citizens in 
 endeavoring to interest the community in behalf of the 
 bondman, and which tramples the discipline and order of 
 society under foot, in order to carry out its purposes ! 
 therefore we feel bound in justice to this most righteous 
 cause, and in order to clear ourselves from any participa- 
 tion in the evils and guilt which would be the unavoida- 
 ble consequence of the influence which our remaining in 
 connection therewith would yield against the cause of 
 humanity, publicly, to separate ourselves from that body, 
 to obey the Scripture injunction, ; Come out of her my 
 people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye 
 receive not of her plagues. 5 
 
 " We wish not to be understood as denying that there 
 is any Anti-Slavery feeling among the members of the 
 Yearly Meeting, from which we have now seceded; on 
 the contrary we doubt not but that many of them are 
 desirous to promote immediate and unconditional eman- 
 cipation, and are only restrained from active labors in the 
 cause by the proscriptive measures of the c Body' so 
 called ; measures which have been brought about chiefly 
 by the agency of those individuals who, we believe, are 
 too anxious to 6 retain a place and influence with the 
 rulers of the land.' Our opposers have argued for, and 
 some who have appeared to be strong Abolitionists, seem 
 to have adopted, the doctrine, that it is the duty of mem- 
 bers to yield obedience to the authority of the Yearly 
 Meeting even when its requisitions are contrary to their 
 own convictions of what is right. Such we conceive to 
 be in a very precarious situation, and in danger of 
 quenching the spirit, in order to obey the body ; and we 
 would recommend to their serious consideration an excel- 
 lent saying of William Penn : 
 
92 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " c I abhor two principles in religion, and pity them 
 that own them. The first is, obedience upon authority 
 without conviction ; and the other, destroying them that 
 differ from me, for God's sake. Such a religion is with- 
 out judgment, though not without teeth ; union is best if 
 right. Else charity. 5 
 
 "With entire consciousness of our innocence and the 
 justice of our cause, we, in humble confidence in the pro- 
 tection of the God of the oppressed, submit that cause to 
 Him who judgeth righteously. " 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 An Epistle to London — One to Anti-Slavery Friends. 
 
 The Epistle sent to London Yearly Meeting, is also a 
 document which I deem worthy of a place here. 
 
 "|The committee appointed yesterday to draft an address 
 to the different Yearly Meetings of Friends, prepared 
 them as required, with the exception of one to that of 
 Indiana, which was thought not necessary at the present 
 time, which were approved, and the Clerk directed to 
 sign them on behalf of the meeting. 
 
 That to London Yearly Meeting is as follows : 
 
 " To tlie next Yearly Meeting of Friends to he held in 
 
 London. 
 "Deab Friends: — 
 
 "Under a feeling sense of the responsibility 
 resting on us, in consequence of the peculiar situa- 
 tion in which we are placed, and the measures which we 
 have believed ourselves obliged to adopt in order to se- 
 cure the privileges of religious society, of which we have 
 been deprived by what we consider to be the arbitrary 
 proceedings of the Yearly Meeting of which we have 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 93 
 
 heretofore been members, we feel that it will be but an 
 act of candor and justice to address you. in order to make 
 you acquainted with some of the circumstances which 
 have led us to the disagreeable necessity of separating 
 from our former religious connection and associating our- 
 selves together as a distinct religious organization. All 
 we ask of you is, that you will hear us with that candor 
 with which we address you, judge of the propriety of our 
 conduct impartially, and in the light of Truth, and then 
 to extend to us that treatment which you conceive to be 
 due. We think that by a careful examination of the 
 whole case, you will readily perceive that we were placed 
 in such a situation that we could not enjoy our religious 
 privileges in our former connection, except at the expense 
 of our principles, and that in order to remain in that So- 
 ciety, we were required to cease to act in accordance 
 with our conscientious belief of required duty. As we 
 could not consent to these conditions, we were reduced 
 to the necessity of choosing, either to suffer ourselves to 
 be scattered abroad, and to lose the preserving and 
 strengthening influences of religious society altogether, 
 or to take the steps that we have taken, and establish a 
 society among ourselves, in which we can enjoy those 
 inestimable privileges. 
 
 u To us it appears clear, that we were not only justifia- 
 ble in pursuing the latter course, but that it was our im- 
 perious duty so to do. We were evidently deprived of 
 our religious privileges in, and about to be driven out of, 
 our own house (to speak figuratively), and in order to 
 shelter ourselves from the inclemencies of the weather, 
 we have been obliged to prepare another. Let not this 
 figure be misrepresented. It relates only to the organiz- 
 ation of the Church, upon the true principles, testimonies 
 and discipline of the Society of Friends. 
 
 " We feel, beloved Friends, that we have a strong 
 claim upon you for sympathy, for countenance and en- 
 couragement, inasmuch as we have been brought into our 
 present situation in consequence of pursuing a course of 
 conduct which we believed was required at our hands, 
 
94 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 and in which we have beeen encouraged by your repeated 
 and earnest advice, and the example of the most promi- 
 nent, virtuous, and influential members of your meeting. 
 The Anti-Slavery cause throughout the world is identical. 
 It is true, that its advocates do not all agree precisely as 
 to the best measures to be used in carrying it forward ; 
 but we have no knowledge of any measures advocated by 
 any body of Abolitionists, that are inconsistent with your 
 practice. A large portion of them believe in the use of 
 w r hat is termed u moral suasion," to the exclusion of po- 
 litical action ; while another class believe in, and practice 
 both. And if we are correctly informed, our Friends on 
 your side of the water also make use of both these instru- 
 mentalities. But if it were even the case, that a portion 
 of the organized associations did advocate and practice 
 measures which are impolitic, inconsistent, or immoral, 
 would that be a sufficient reason for deserting the cause? 
 The absurdity of this course will be evident, when we 
 reflect that this objection would be just as strong against 
 identifying ourselves with any of the Church organizations 
 for the promotion of Christianity. For it is evident that 
 some of them advocate and practice things which we be- 
 lieve are radical ly wrong. 
 
 • " We earnestly desire that our dear brethren of your 
 Yearly Meeting, may not be misled by the specious but 
 absurd objection that circumstances in the two countries 
 render it right for Friends in England to join in the Anti- 
 Slavery enterprise, while it is wrong for us in America 
 to do the same thing. You may rest assured that the 
 objections and arguments used here, against the practice, 
 are just as strong on one side of the water as the other ; 
 and our opposers, by condemning us, virtually condemn 
 you ; and, indeed, some do not hesitate to censure your 
 Anti-Slavery conduct in direct terms. When we reflect 
 that your Meeting has contributed largely to the funds of 
 an Anti-Slavery Society, composed of Friends and others, 
 thus giving such associations the most unequivocal evi- 
 dence of its approbation; and that in this country the 
 Yearly Meeting has taken the most energetic measures to 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 95 
 
 put down all its members who unite in such associations, 
 and even those who have not so united, but are not pre- 
 pared to unite with those prescriptive measures ; and to 
 exclude the cause and its advocates from our meeting- 
 houses, thus depriving them in many places of the oppor- 
 tunity of pleading the cause of the poor and needy, the 
 conviction is forced upon us, that there is a radical error 
 in the conduct of your Yearly Meeting, or of the old 
 Yearly Meeting of Indiana. 
 
 u The contrast is exhibited in a glaring manner in the 
 facts connected with the proposed World's Convention, to 
 be held in London in Sixth month next. The call for 
 delegates was signed, as you know, by an esteemed mem- 
 ber of your Meeting, as chairman of the Executive Com- 
 mittee of the British and Foreign A. S. Society; and for 
 responding to that call, for taking part in appointing a 
 delegate in compliance with that call, Friends here who 
 thus acted, and the Friend who received the appointment, 
 are obnoxious to severe censure. Now, can the Friends 
 who were instrumental in making that call, when they 
 meet in the capacity of the Yearly Meeting of London, 
 take any steps which shall, even by implication, cast cen- 
 sure on that delegate, and when they meet in the World's 
 Convention receive him with cordiality, as they will be 
 bound to do? We cannot, we will not believe that our 
 dear friends will act thus inconsistently, and by discoun- 
 tenancing us, give the severest blow to the Anti-Slavery 
 cause in this country which it has ever received. 
 
 "In the important measures which we have adopted, 
 we put our confidence in the great Head of the Church, 
 and in the principles of immutable Truth. We know the 
 Lord can save by many or by few; and we believe in the 
 truth of the promise of the Divine Master, 'where two 
 or three are gathered together in my name, there am 
 1 in the midst of them.' Though we may, like our 
 holy Redeemer, be 'despised and rejected of men,' yet 
 'the Lord seeth not as man seeth ; man judgeth by 
 the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh at the 
 heart,' 
 
96 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " For a more full statement of our case, we refer you 
 to the Declaration issued by this meeting; a copy of which 
 we herewith send you. 
 
 " With the salutation of our love, we remain your 
 friends." 
 
 The meeting published but one other document at this 
 time, namely, an Address to the Anti-Slavery Friends 
 within the limits of Indiana Yearly Meeting. I deem it 
 worthy the attention of the reader. It is as follows : 
 
 "address . 
 
 " To the Anti-Slavery Friends within the limits of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting. 
 
 "Dear Friends: — 
 
 " In the love of the everlasting Gospel, that 
 love which desires the present and eternal welfare 
 of the whole human family, we salute you, and wish to 
 encourage you to faithfulness in every good work. 
 
 " As many of you have not been with us at this time, 
 to witness for yourselves the unanimity, the harmony, 
 and brotherly condescension, by which our deliberations 
 have been conducted, and, above all, the holy solemnity 
 which has covered our assembly, we would say for your 
 encouragement, that the overshadowing canopy of Divine 
 regard has evidently been felt to cover us, and in rever- 
 ent humility and self-abasedness we wish to ascribe all the 
 praise to Him who has thus favored as with his holy 
 presence, to the confirming of our souls in the belief that 
 our thus assembling together has been owned by Him. 
 
 "It is only by a faithful discharge of known duty, that 
 we can be entitled to hear the joyful language addressed 
 to us, ' well done, good and faithful servant, thou hast 
 been faithful over a few things, enter thou into the joy 
 of thy Lord. 5 
 
 " Our separation from the Yearly Meeting, with which 
 we have heretofore been connected (some of the reasons 
 for which may be found in the i Declaration ' issued by 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 97 
 
 this meeting, and in various other documents which are 
 before the public), has not been made without due reflec- 
 tion, and much anxious inquiry, with breathings of soul 
 for proper direction in our tried situation, and strength 
 to perform our duty, let our sufferings, in consequence 
 thereof, be what they may. Our opposers who have been 
 instrumental in promoting those measures by which we 
 have been driven to the necessity of taking the important 
 step, have urged upon us the doctrine of subordination to 
 the Yearly Meeting as unlimited in its application, that 
 we are bound by the decisions of that body in all cases 
 whatsoever. This doctrine we hold to be an absurdity, 
 very nearly bordering upon the papal heresy of infalli- 
 bility. 
 
 " For it is clearly a Divine Truth that we are bound 
 4 to obey God rather than man.' And to contend that 
 we are absolutely bound to obey the decrees of any man 
 or body of men, is to contend for the doctrine of infalli- 
 bility. The true doctrine of subordination, we conceive 
 to be this : the members of the Church are bound to be 
 in subordination to its decisions while it acts under the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit ; because its acts, when so 
 directed, are infallible, and consequently, in accordance 
 w T ith the Divine law. To assume that the Yearly Meet- 
 ing acted under the Divine direction in requiring us to 
 cease our labors in the Anti-Slavery cause, is but to beg 
 the question. It is assuming, without proof, the very 
 thing that we deny, and which we think is abundantly 
 proved to be incorrect, by the contradictory and arbitrary 
 measures that have been adopted in relation to this sub- 
 ject. If it be admitted that the Yearly Meeting may err, 
 the whole doctrine of unqualified submission to its deci- 
 sions falls to the ground. If the doctrine contended for 
 by our opposing Friends be true, that it is the duty of 
 members to submit, even to those decrees of their Church 
 which require them to refrain from that which they firmly 
 believe God requires at their hands, or to do that which 
 they as firmly believe he forbids, then it is clear that all 
 who have, at any time, testified against what they believe 
 
93 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 to be the errors of their respective Churches, have been 
 in error. We much desire that none of our Anti-Slavery 
 Friends may be carried away by this specious but ex- 
 tremely dangerous doctrine, to the conclusion that it is 
 their duty to submit to the requirements of the body, 
 though they know them to be wrong. Though the unity 
 of the brethren is invaluable, let us remember that 
 that unity which is purchased by the sacrifice of Truth, 
 or a dereliction of duty, is not c the unity of the Spirit in 
 the bond of peace,' and can be productive of nothing but 
 bitterness, in the end. Let all be subordinate to the 
 Truth, and obey the dictates of the Spirit of Truth in 
 their own souls, and this will lead them to the true doc- 
 trine of Church subordination, which, as we said before, 
 is submission to the decisions of the Church, made under 
 the influence of the Spirit of Christ, the great Head of 
 the Church. This, clear friends, is the true doctrine of 
 Friends, and any doctrine of subordination or submis- 
 sion beyond this, proceeds from the spirit of Anti- 
 Christ. 
 
 "We wish, also, to warn our friends against the falla- 
 cious idea that they can refrain from their Anti-Slavery 
 labors without sacrificing their principles. When our 
 opposers tell you that they do not wish you to sacrifice 
 your principles, believe them not. If you are actuated 
 by true Anti-Slavery principles, they will lead you to 
 Anti-Slavery action ; and you cannot cease from the 
 latter without sacrificing the former. 
 
 "Could the apostles have ceased from their labors — 
 could they have used their influence to discourage those 
 who were laboring in the cause, by shutting the temple 
 and the synagogues against them, thus preventing them 
 to the extent of their power from all opportunity of 
 spreading the religion of Jesus — could they have declined 
 to associate with their fellow-Christians, or attend Christ- 
 ian meetings, without sacrificing their principles ? If 
 they could, then can we comply with the requirements of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends, without sacrificing 
 our Anti-Slavery principles. We are frequently told 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 99 
 
 that we are not censured for being Abolitionists. The 
 absurdity of this assertion, is as great as it would have 
 been for the father ot William Penn to have told him 
 that he did not turn him out of doors for being a Quaker; 
 or for the martyrs, when chained to the stake, surrounded 
 with fire and fagot, to have been told, that they were 
 not thus persecuted on account of their religion. Sup- 
 pose, however, we could cease our active exertions in be- 
 half of the Anti-Slavery cause, and retain our principles, 
 what would they be worth ? Like faith without works, 
 the}' would be dead. 
 
 " If all the people in the United States wore Abolition- 
 ists of this kind, of what advantage would their Aboli- 
 tion be to the suffering slave, writhing in agony and 
 clanking his chains, or to our guilty country, reeling to 
 and fro like a drunken man, under the judgments of an 
 offended God ? 
 
 u We have long believed that the time will come, 
 when the system of American Slavery will be abolished, 
 either in mercy or in judgment; and from the signs of 
 the times, we are strongly inclined to the opinion, that 
 the time draweth nigh. The ears of the Lord are open 
 to the crying of the poor, and the sighing of the needy. 
 He hath seen. He hath seen tiie affliction of his people, and 
 hath heard their groaning; and we verily believe, He 
 hath come down to deliver them. We are deeply im- 
 pressed with the conviction, that the hand of the Lord is 
 manifest in the present Anti-Slavery enterprise, that it is 
 his offer of mercy to a guilty land, which, if it be re- 
 jected, may be the last. And how soon He may turn his 
 hand in judgment upon us, none of us know. Under a 
 view of these solemn considerations, we feel an awful 
 responsibility resting on us, and are impressed with the 
 necessity of a conscientious discharge of our duty in re- 
 gard to this matter, being well assured, that a bare 
 belief of the sinfulness of Slavery, without the necessary 
 action, will not abolish the system — save our country 
 from judgment, nor ourselves from blood guiltiness. 
 
 Let us then, dear Friends, be willing to do for the 
 
100 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 advancement of this great cause, whatever our hand 
 findeth to do, and to do it with our might ; looking for 
 success in our labors, to the blessing of Him who alone 
 can prosper the work of our hands ; for we well know 
 that without such blessing, all our efforts will be unsuc- 
 cessful. ' Except the Lord build the house, they labor 
 in vain that build it; except the Lord keep the city, the 
 watchman watcheth but in vain.' 
 
 ■ 4 And now, dear brethren and sisters, suffer, we be- 
 seech you, the word of exhortation. Be increasingly 
 careful to maintain unsullied, all the doctrines and testi- 
 monies of the Gospel, as we have received them, to hold up 
 to the world. Manifest by a holy life and conversation that 
 you are truly devoted to the cause of your Holy Re- 
 deemer. Let not the world nor its allurements entice 
 you from the true simplicity of the Gospel, that all 
 around you may have the evidence, that while you are 
 engaged in the lawful concerns of time, and in the pro- 
 motion of the reformation of the world, your treasure is 
 in Heaven. 'Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but 
 rather give place unto wrath.' c As much as lieth in you, 
 live peaceably with all men,' and earnestly seek after and 
 cultivate that heavenly disposition which will enable you 
 to pray for your enemies, and in truth and sincerity to 
 say : ' Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.' " 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 The Policy of the Leaders in the Opposition to A. S. F., changed— 
 Address of their Meeting for Sufferings, touching the Separation. 
 
 As soon as the Separation was in de facto made, the 
 leaders in the proscription all at once reversed their pol- 
 icy. Instead of carrying out the advices, and those too, 
 which they had claimed to have come from Divine au- 
 thority, they violated them as completely as the Aboli- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 101 
 
 tionists had done. They immediately, at the very next 
 meetings for business, or at least, at a number of them, 
 rather went out of their way to appoint those on import- 
 ant business, who were known to be in open violation of 
 the advices and fcfavail of the body, which they had said 
 a few months previous, in a Yearly Meeting capacity, 
 rendered such manifestly unsuitable for services in it. 
 
 Their object, as every one knew, was to prevent such 
 from joining the Separation. But this was not Yearly 
 Meeting business, although, without doubt, it had the 
 sanction of the leading influences in it. Had the privi- 
 leges been granted by the Yearly Meeting only a few 
 months sooner, which were granted after the Separation 
 by some of the Subordinate meetings, that separation 
 would never have taken place. 
 
 Shortly after the close of the Yearly Meeting at New- 
 port, that is, on the 6th of Third month, the Meeting for 
 Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting was convened by 
 special call. It adopted the following Address, and cir- 
 culated it amongst the Members : 
 
 " From the Meeting for Sufferings, of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends, held at White Water, in Wayne 
 County, Indiana, by adjournments, on the 6th and 7th of 
 the Third month, 1843. 
 
 " To the Quarterly, Monthly, and Preparative Meet- 
 ings of Friends, within the limits of Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting, and, to Friends individually. 
 
 " Dear Friends : — 
 
 Ci Our Meeting has been called together at this time, 
 on a painful occasion. In the progress of the workings 
 of a spirit of activity, self-confidence, and insubordina- 
 tion, which has for some time past been apparent among 
 a portion of the members of this Yearly Meeting, an- 
 other Separation from our religious Society has been 
 effected, and a new and independent Association has 
 been organized, bearing the title of 'Indiana Yearly Meet- 
 
 5* 
 
102 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 ing of Anti-Slavery Friends.' This new organization 
 took place at Newport, within the limits of New Garden 
 Quarter, on the 7th of last month ; and those forming it, 
 proceeded, as we understand, to adopt a Discipline, to 
 appoint a Meeting for Sufferings, to address each of the 
 Yearly Meetings of Friends, and to do other such busi- 
 ness as is common in the Yearly Meetings of our reli- 
 gious society. 
 
 " We think it our duty, to give you early notice of this 
 state of things, and to apprise you that the new Associa- 
 tion is one with which, being set up out of the good 
 order, and contrary to the discipline and usages of our 
 society, we can have no correspondence or communica- 
 tion. 
 
 " In their Declaration of the causes of their Separa- 
 tion, which has recently appeared, many charges are put 
 forth, affecting unfavorably, the religious character and 
 standing of the Yearly Meeting of Friends in Indiana, 
 and many of our well-concerned members. One of these, 
 which stands conspicuous in many parts of the document, 
 and also in other publications of theirs, and which has 
 been largely circulated by them, is, that the Society com- 
 posing our Yearly Meeting is opposing the abolition of 
 Slavery ; that it, by its measures, is countenancing and 
 supporting Slave-holders, Slave-holding, and Slavery ; 
 and that our well known Christian testimony against 
 Slavery is not maintained ; in the place of which, apathy 
 and the fear of popular sentiment, have been suffered to 
 get possession ; and that lukewarmness, and the want of 
 a disposition to do anything for the slave has been the 
 consequence. Another is, that the proceedings of our 
 Yearly Meeting, in its own acts, and of the subordinate 
 meetings, in carrying out its advices, have been arbitrary, 
 proscriptive, irregular, and contrary to discipline. These, 
 and various other charges, equally untrue and unfounded 
 against the Yearly and other meetings and their com- 
 mittees, and individuals acceptably filling responsible 
 stations in Society have been made and widely circulated. 
 We have no expectation on the present occasion, of going 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 103 
 
 into an examination and refutation singly of the various 
 charges that have come to our knowledge. But we think 
 it right to take this opportunity to declare that our So- 
 ciety in this Yearly Meeting, has not relaxed in its testi- 
 mony against Slavery; that on the contrary, it is the 
 united belief of this meeting, that the testimony has been 
 growing stronger among us for many years past, and 
 that our Yearly Meeting earnestly desires to improve 
 every right opening, under the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit, to advocate the cause of universal and uncondi- 
 tional emancipation ; and to manifest, on all proper occa- 
 sions, our testimony against Slavery an,d oppression. 
 Our members have also been desired, in the Advices is- 
 sued by the Yearly Meeting, to do the same thing; not- 
 withstanding it has been thought right to advise them 
 not to mix, for that purpose, with the popular associa- 
 tions of the day. By reference to the Minutes of our 
 Yearly Meeting for the last five years or more, copies of 
 which have been furnished to the families, this will more 
 fully appear. 
 
 " In 1836, an edition of two thousand copies of an 
 Epistle on Slavery, was printed for circulation, besides 
 three thousand copies more of the same, which was con- 
 tained in the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, and fur- 
 nished to the families. In this Epistle, which was intro- 
 ductory to a valuable one received from the Yearly Meet- 
 ing of Friends in London, Friends were advised to take 
 no part in the unrighteous work of expatriation, it being 
 the judgment of the meeting that the slaves are entitled 
 to their freedom without condition ; and that conditions 
 cannot therefore be justly attached to the right to be 
 free. It was also proposed, whether it might not then 
 i be most safe for the members of our religious society to 
 refrain from becoming members of other societies, having 
 for their object, the extinction of Slavery. 
 
 " In 1837, an Address on Slavery to all in the United 
 States who professed the Christian religion, and hope for 
 salvation through the mercy and merits of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ, was adopted, and 20,000 copies 
 
104: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 printed and widely circulated. A Memorial was also sent to 
 Congress, in the same year, protesting against the annexa- 
 tion of Texas to the United States, in which it was dis- 
 tinctly set out, as the main objection to the annexation, 
 that Slavery and the Slave-trade might thereby be 
 perpetuated c to a fearful extent.' 
 
 " At the Yearly Meeting in 1838, Friends were invited 
 by the African committee, standing appointed by the 
 Yearly Meeting, to renewed exertions in behalf of suffer- 
 ing humanity, by endeavoring to spread the concern, 
 and enlighten the minds of the people, by giving circu- 
 lation to such publications as are calculated to advance 
 the cause of emancipation on Christian principles, while 
 it was also 'deemed best,' for reasons then given, that 
 our members should abstain from mixing with associa- 
 tions of those not of our Society, for the purpose. At 
 the next Yearly Meeting, the committee having been en- 
 gaged as usual, in active exertions for the good of the 
 free people of color among us, expressed their belief 
 that there was an increasing interest and concern felt in 
 the minds of many Friends, to promote the entire aboli- 
 tion of Slavery. 
 
 " In 1840, an Epistle was issued by the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, and approved by the Yearly Meeting, in 
 which the meeting expressed its satisfaction in knowing 
 that others were engaging in the work in which our 
 Society has been so long engaged, and desiring Friends 
 not to indulge in apathy or lukewarmness, nor relax their 
 labors, in all suitable openings, for the benefit of the 
 colored race; repeating, at the same time, the advice 
 before given, not to join the Abolition and Colonization 
 Societies. The Yearly Meeting also directed the reprint- 
 ing of an Epistle from the Yearly Meeting of Friends in 
 London, on the subject of Slavery, to the number of five 
 thousand copies, to be annexed to our Minutes for distri- 
 bution to the families, and the Meeting for Sufferings 
 afterward directed three thousand more for general circu- 
 lation. The attention of the Meeting for Sufferings was 
 also drawn to the subject of petitioning the Legislatures 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 105 
 
 of Indiana and Ohio, and of the general Government in 
 behalf of the African race; but no way opening, in the 
 right authority, to petition Congress, special deputations 
 of Friends were sent with petitions, this year and also 
 in 1841 again, to both the State Legislatures, in behalf 
 of the people of color, who caused the petitions to be 
 presented, and remained some time at the seats of Gov- 
 ernment engaged in active labors among the members. 
 
 " In 1841, in an Epistle to the subordinate meetings, 
 issued by the Yearly Meeting, it is said that it is far from 
 the wish of this meeting to induce, on the part of our 
 members, an apathy of feeling on the deeply affecting 
 subject of Slavery. On the contrary, a desire was ex- 
 pressed 'that all may faithfully maintain this Christian 
 testimony, and cherish a lively interest both for the 
 oppressed and oppressors ;' agiain repeating the advice 
 not to join in association with those who do not profess 
 to wait for Divine direction in such important concerns. 
 
 " In 1842, the Meeting for Sufferings directed the 
 reprint, for circulation mostly in the slave States, of 
 three thousand copies of an 'Appeal to the professors of 
 Christianity in the Southern States and elsewhere on the 
 subject of Slavery, by the representatives of the Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends for New England,' in which the hor- 
 rors of the Slave-trade are strongly set out, and in which 
 it is shown that the trade must derive its support from 
 the unrighteous system of Slavery, etc. 
 
 " In addition to the forenamed public acts of the 
 meetings, it is well known that many concerned indivi- 
 duals were also engaged, as way opened, in labors in the 
 same cause ; some of whom extended their labors into 
 the slave States. 
 
 " After all these public demonstrations of the Society 
 by our Yearly Meeting, how can it be said with any 
 degree of fairness and truth, that we have been doing 
 nothing before the public on the subject of Slavery ? 
 
 "In the exercise and travail of the Society for the last 
 few years, since the spirit of over-active zeal and insub- 
 ordination made its appearance, we have esteemed it a 
 
106 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 special favor of our heavenly Father and merciful Pre- 
 server, that the Ministers and other concerned Friends 
 from other Yearly Meetings, who have, in the prosecu- 
 tion of their religious services, visited our Yearly Meet- 
 ing and participated with us in feeling, have mostly, and 
 so far as we know without exception, approved and 
 sanctioned the Advices issued by this meeting and the 
 Yearly Meeting on the subjects relating to Slavery, and 
 have given us united support and assistance in those 
 measures of which the Separatists so loudly complain. 
 
 "In regard to the measures alluded to before as being 
 arbitrary and proscriptive, and which are set out as being 
 another cause of separation, it may be proper to remark, 
 that the proceedings alluded to, are believed to be in 
 accordance with the usages of our Society. We think 
 that the Epistle of Advice, issued by our late Yearly 
 Meeting, made out in accordance with the proceedings of 
 the meeting, in which it is said that 'those who have 
 distinguished themselves by opposition or disregard to 
 the advices and travail of the body, are manifestly un- 
 suitable for important services in it while they remain in 
 that situation,' no new principle or practice is recom- 
 mended. It has, we believe, been a common practice in 
 our Society, to leave off from all important appointments 
 and stations in the Church, such as are out of unity with 
 the body for any cause ; and all such as are standing 
 against the Discipline or Advices. It has not been com- 
 mon to disown such speedily, without first extending 
 brotherly counsel and labor for their reclamation; nor 
 were any disowned or cut off by our last Yearly Meeting; 
 measures were only adopted, in accordance with the 
 usages of Society, to discontinue from service, while they 
 remain in their present condition, persons who had given 
 much practical evidence of alienation, opposition, and 
 disunity with the proceedings and advices, and not for 
 bearing a faithful testimony against Slavery, as has been 
 erroneously stated. And we have felt ourselves reli- 
 giously concerned to proceed to do such duties as were 
 required at our hands, in mildness and tenderness, and 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 107 
 
 under the influence of heavenly love and forbearance; 
 and while it is still our concern and prayer to perform 
 faithfully, firmly, and promptly those duties required at 
 our hands, in the proper support of our discipline, and 
 the good order of the Church, it is our desire, for our- 
 selves and our members generally, to proceed cautiously, 
 mildly, and tenderly. 
 
 ' ; Finally, dear Friends, we wish you, in your testi- 
 mony against Slavery, which we desire you by no means 
 to abate, to exercise the spirit and follow the practice of 
 our dear departed friend, John Woolman, and other 
 worthy predecessors of the same practices, whom we 
 have been slanderously charged with discarding. We 
 again renewedly state, that we still adhere to our ancient 
 principles and testimony in regard to Slavery, and that 
 we desire and advocate unconditional emancipation ; be- 
 lieving that all men, without regard to color or nation, 
 are equally objects of redeeming love through Christ 
 Jesus our Lord, and equally entitled to freedom. 
 
 " Signed by direction and on behalf of the Meeting 
 aforesaid. " Elijah Coffin, 
 
 "Clerk for the present meeting? 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Reply to the Address of the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
 
 Meeting. 
 
 Upon the publication of the above, the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, of the newly organized body convened and 
 addressed those who issued it as follows: 
 
 "address 
 u To the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
 
 Meeting of Friends. 
 " Dear Friends : — 
 
 "An Address to the Quarterly, Monthly, and Prepa- 
 rative meetings, constituting your Yearly Meeting, issued 
 
108 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 by you at a called meeting on the 6th and 7th nit., has 
 been read among us ; and as we conceive there are seve- 
 ral assertions and statements contained in it calculated 
 to mislead the unsuspicious and unwary, we feel con- 
 cerned to address you for the purpose of expostulation 
 and explanation ; and to defend ourselves and the cause 
 we have espoused from what we consider to be some of 
 the erroneous charges which we think you have (perhaps 
 erroneously) made. And as you have declared in the 
 commencement of your Address, that you can have no 
 correspondence or communication with us, we proceed 
 at once to address you through the medium of the press, 
 hoping that you will read it individually, and that others 
 who have seen your charges against us, may have an 
 opportunity to see our defense. 
 
 " You say, c In the progress of the workings of a spirit 
 of activity, self-confidence, and insubordination, which 
 has for some time past been apparent among a portion 
 of the members of this Yearly Meeting, another separa- 
 tion from our religious Society has been effected,' etc. 
 
 " C A spirit of activity V Then it seems that, in your 
 opinion, a spirit of inactivity is the spirit that should 
 govern Christians. 'We have not so learned Christ.' 
 Neither by precept nor example did our holy Redeemer, 
 when personally upon earth, encourage a spirit of inacti- 
 vity. On the contrary, his life was a scene of activity; 
 He almost constantly ' went about doing good.' And by 
 his precepts he inculcated the same active philanthropy; 
 urging his followers to good works, commending the 
 good Samaritan for flying to the relief of a suffering fel- 
 low-being, and, by implication, at least, condemning the 
 high-professing priest and Levite for their inactivity in 
 neglecting to administer to the necessity of a suffering 
 brother. We find no censures heaped upon the head of 
 this Samaritan who was despised by the self-righteous 
 Scribes and Pharisees ; he was not charged with a spirit 
 of activity, of acting in his ' own will' and in his \ own 
 strength.' Neither clo we find the priest and the Levite 
 commended for waiting for a ; right opening' to adminis- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 109 
 
 ter comfort to the afflicted and help to him who had fallen 
 among thieves. We do not discover that either Christ 
 or his Apostles ever censured activity in doing good to 
 men. But he did on one occasion, at least, censure that 
 exclusive spirit which, we fear, actuates many of his pro- 
 fessed followers in our day. At a certain time John 
 said to him, ; Master, we saw one casting out devils in 
 thy name, and we forbade him because he followed not 
 with us. And Jesus said, forbid him not, he that is not 
 against us is for us.' And we firmly believe, if we are 
 sincerely engaged to follow in his footsteps, and to imi- 
 tate his example in acts of mercy and humanity and in 
 pleading the cause of the poor and needy, we shall find 
 room enough for activity, and the necessary aid of His 
 Holy Spirit will be afforded to direct our efforts and to 
 crown them with ultimate success. The truth is, we are 
 taught by the highest authority to seek out occasions of 
 activity in doing good by administering to the necessi- 
 ties, and promoting the welfare of our fellow-creatures, 
 and not to excuse ourselves and discourage others there- 
 from under a pretense of waiting for the 6 right open- 
 ings.' In this particular, as in other matters, our duty 
 is to i seek,' and the promise is, s we shall find.' 
 
 " The next charge you make against us is ' self-confi- 
 dence.- 1 Permit us to ask you by what authority you 
 make this charge. Do you find evidence of it in our 
 publications? Have we not — have not Abolitionists 
 generally, manifested in their writings, their full convic- 
 tion of the inefficiency of all their labors, unattended by 
 the sustaining hand of the God of the oppressed ? What 
 evidence, we ask again, have you that we have confi- 
 dence in our own unassisted exertions, to advance the 
 great work in which we are engaged i Tou have given 
 no proof of the truth of the charge in your Address, and 
 you may rest assured that charges without proof are but 
 weak arguments. If, upon reflection and examination, 
 you find yourselves unable to sustain this or any other 
 complaint you have made against us, will you not have 
 the candor to take it back ? 
 6 
 
110 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 "With regard to the charge of insubordination, we 
 have stated our views of true subordination, in the Ad- 
 dress to Anti-Slavery Friends, published in the proceed- 
 ings of our Yearly Meeting, which we suppose most of 
 you have read. If these views are unsound, it would 
 become you to point out that unsoundness, rather than 
 make a sweeping charge and leave it unsupported by 
 facts. While the action of the Yearly Meeting on the 
 subject of Abolition amounted to nothing more than ad- 
 vice against active labors in the cause, we do not con- 
 ceive that it was insubordination to act counter thereto in 
 compliance with our individual convictions of duty; but 
 when that advice began to be enforced as a positive rule, 
 and members filling responsible stations in society were 
 removed in consequence of their firmness in the cause, 
 when measures were put in operation with a view to the 
 laying down of meetings on this account, a proper regard 
 to subordination rendered a submission or separation ab- 
 solutely necessary, for we could no longer remain in the 
 connection, and carry out our principles, without being 
 justly obnoxious to the charge of insubordination. Dur- 
 ing the progress of the last Yearly Meeting at White 
 Water, it became evident that Anti-Slavery Friends had 
 no reason to expect any favor, but that they must give 
 up their principles or carry them out in opposition to the 
 authority of the meeting, until they should be disowned 
 or separate. This was not done hastily. Toward the 
 close of the Yearly Meeting, a proposition was publicly 
 made for Anti-Slavery Friends to remain in the house 
 at the rise of the meeting, for the purpose of conferring 
 upon their peculiarly tried situation, being virtually cast 
 out of the bosom of Society, and deprived of its benefits. 
 With this proposition considerable unity was expressed, 
 and no objection made to it. But at the rise of the 
 meeting, what was our surprise when one of your mem- 
 bers walked into the ministers 5 gallery, and in the name 
 of the Trustees of the house, addressed us, before our 
 conference commenced, first calling us Friends, and then 
 recalling it, saying he would call us people, peremptorily 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Ill 
 
 ordered us to leave the house, declaring that the door- 
 keeper would immediately proceed to close the doors and 
 windows. We were thus apparently reduced to the ne- 
 cessity of leaving the house. We then concluded to meet 
 the next day at Newport, when a conference was held for 
 the purpose of considering our situation, with a view to 
 ascertain our proper course. In this conference a unani- 
 mous desire was felt and expressed, that unity and har- 
 mony might be restored upon the right foundation. 
 Many Friends hoped that there would be a mitigation, 
 or relaxation of severity in the measures of opposing 
 Friends. With these views it was unitedly concluded 
 to wait the action of the Yearly Meeting's Committee 
 and of the subordinate meetings. But as time rolled on, 
 it became more and more evident that nothing short of 
 absolute submission on our part would produce reconcil- 
 iation ; and we became satisfied that the time had come 
 wherein we were under the necessity of organizing a re- 
 ligious society, in which we could enjoy those invaluable 
 privileges of which we had been deprived. We make 
 these statements, in order that all may know that these 
 things were not hastily done, but that we moved cau- 
 tiously and deliberately, and, as we believe, not in a 
 spirit of self-confidence, but in the fear of the Lord, and 
 under the influence of His good spirit. Our deliberations 
 were characterized by the utmost harmony, our assem- 
 blies were crowned with the solemnizing influence of the 
 Divine presence, and, by the favors bestowed upon us, 
 both immediately and instrumentally, our hearts were 
 confirmed in the belief that we were pursuing the path 
 of daty. 
 
 " In speaking of the organization of our Yearly Meet- 
 ing, you say, among other things, that those forming it, 
 proceeded, as we understand, to adopt a Discipline. Per- 
 mit us to ask you, what was your object in using this 
 mode of expression ? You speak of our Declaration as 
 having recently appeared ; in the second paragraph of 
 that Declaration, it is declared, that \ We wish it distinct- 
 ly understood, that we have adopted no new doctrine. 
 
112 HISTORY Off THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 nor any new system of church government.' And in the 
 opening of the proceedings of the Convention, it is set 
 forth as the object of that Convention, to deliberate more 
 fully upon the propriety of reorganizing the Yearly 
 Meeting of Indiana upon the true principles, and in ac- 
 cordance with the discipline and usages of the Society of 
 Friends. If you had occasion to allude to the circum- 
 stance at all, why was it not done fairly ? Why was a 
 form of expression used, which must of necessity convey 
 a false impression to the minds of all who are ignorant 
 of the real state of the case ? We appeal to your own 
 understandings. Does not your language fairly imply 
 that the discipline, which you say we have adopted, is 
 something new, something different from the published 
 Discipline of Indiana Yearly Meeting ? We appeal to 
 your sense of justice. Is it fair to use language in refer- 
 ence to the acts of others, that will convey an erroneous 
 and an unfavorable impression to the public mind ? 
 
 " Again, you say, c In their Declaration of the causes 
 of their separation, which has recently appeared, many 
 charges are put forth, affecting unfavorably the religious 
 character and standing of the Yearly Meeting of Friends 
 of Indiana, and many of our well concerned members. 
 One of these which stands conspicuous in many parts of 
 the document, and also in other publications of theirs, 
 and which has been largely circulated by them, is, that 
 the Society composing our Yearly Meeting is opposing 
 the abolition of Slavery, etc.' If you mean to convey the 
 idea, that we have charged your Yearly Meeting with 
 directly opposing the abolition of Slavery, by speaking in 
 its defense, or against its abolition, we believe no such 
 charge is to be found in our Declaration or any other 
 publication of ours. But w T e admit that we have charged 
 the Yearly Meeting and 'many of its concerned mem- 
 bers,' as you call them, with ; countenancing and sup- 
 porting, by their measures, slaveholders, slaveholding 
 and slavery,' and we gave facts in support of those 
 charges. And here let it be remarked, that generally, if 
 not always, we have exhibited the facts upon which our 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 11 3 
 
 charges are founded. In your notice of these charges, it 
 certainly became you to notice the facts given to substan- 
 tiate them, and either to show that they were not facts, or 
 that the charges were not fairly deducible from them. 
 Instead of which you have enumerated various acts of the 
 Yearly Meeting within the last seven years, as evidence 
 of its real Anti-Slavery character. We wish you dis- 
 tinctly to notice that our charges against the Yearly 
 Meeting are not that it advocates Slavery, or that it has 
 not officially and repeatedly condemned it. But that by 
 its anxiety to avoid the odium attached to the Abolition- 
 ists, and from other motives, it has exerted its influence 
 in such a way as to increase the prejudice against, and 
 opposition to, the present Anti-Slavery enterprise, and 
 consequently to retard the progress of the work, and in- 
 crease the popular excitement which seems so much to be 
 dreaded. 
 
 "We would, however, remark, with respect to the 
 Anti-Slavery publications to which you allude, as having 
 been issued by the Meeting within the last few years, 
 that it is well known that most, or all of them were 
 brought forth by the influence of those who have since 
 been proscribed, but who at that time possessed consid- 
 erable influence in the Society. It is a notorious fact, 
 that most of the Minutes, Epistles and Addresses held up 
 by you, as an evidence of your soundness, were written 
 by some of those against whom the most rigorous oppo- 
 sition has since been directed, and that those very meas- 
 ures were met at the time by the opposition of some who 
 are now among the leading members of your Society. 
 Those very acts, which you now boast of, have frequent- 
 ly been condemned by some of your most active mem- 
 bers, upon the plea that they were not really the senti- 
 ments of the Yearly Meeting, but were the works of a 
 few Abolitionists, and passed through the meeting with- 
 out due consideration. Do you not know that the re- 
 publication of the fc valuable Epistle from the Yearly 
 Meeting of London,' in 1836, of which you speak, was 
 strenuously opposed ; and that the propriety of the 
 
114: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 measure was advocated by those who are now the objects 
 of your censure? Are you, or are you not, aware that 
 the most important quotations you have made, and others 
 still more strongly tinctured with Abolition, which you 
 have either designedly or inadvertently omitted, were 
 written by some of us, and were opposed by some who 
 are now in your foremost ranks ? I)o you not know that 
 the condemnation of the Colonization scheme was most 
 strenuously opposed by the same class ? And that, final- 
 ly, the opposition grew so strong, that an Epistle of 
 Advice, prepared by a committee of the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings in Sixth month, 1839, was rejected, principally 
 on account of its hostility to Colonization ? What can be 
 plainer than that there has been a settled design in the 
 minds of some individuals strenuously devoted to Coloni- 
 zation, to prostrate the influence of those Friends who 
 were truly attached to the Anti-Slavery cause. This 
 they have succeeded in, by working upon the prejudices 
 and sectarian feelings of those who do not so well under- 
 stand the tendency of the measures in progress. Of what 
 avail, we ask, will all your professions of hostility to 
 Slavery be to the cause of suffering humanity, while it is 
 known that you use all your influence to prevent the ad- 
 vocates of that cause from getting access to the people, 
 by closing doors of meeting-houses against them, and so 
 demeaning yourselves toward them as to convince all 
 around you, that you consider them as unworthy of no- 
 tice, except to speak evil of them ; and adopt the most 
 rigid measures to prevent your members from associating 
 with them in their labors ? 
 
 " Why do you represent us as saying that Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting has 'been doing nothing before the public 
 on the subject of Slavery. 5 If you will examine our De- 
 claration, which you speak of, you will find that we have 
 quoted more from the Anti-Slavery labors of the Yearly 
 Meeting than you have ; and beside, in our quotations 
 from, and references to, those labors, we have shown the 
 Anti-Slavery feeling which some years ago, influenced to 
 a considerable extent, the deliberations of that body. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 115 
 
 For instance, you say : ; Friends were advised to take 
 no part in the unrighteous work of expatriation, it being 
 the judgment of this meeting, that the slaves are entitled 
 to their freedom without conditions. 5 Why did you ne- 
 glect to say that the advice was equally pointed against 
 rendering any aid to this work — - to any political associa- 
 tion on the subject of African Slavery, which is or may 
 be founded on principles, either directly or indirectly 
 having a tendency to promote the unrighteous work of 
 expatriation V Why, but because it would have shown 
 in a stronger light the glaring violation of this advice, 
 by the Clerk of the Yearly Meeting, in contributing to 
 the funds of the Colonization Society, which we all 
 know was in a very particular manner aimed at in the 
 expressions quoted \ 
 
 wi Again, why did you not tell the public that the 
 Tearlv Meetino; had some Years as;o, £ affection atelv ad- 
 vised Friends to be so alive to our testimony against Slav- 
 ery, as, neither through prejudice or otherwise, to cast 
 any discouragement in the way of those who are faith- 
 fully laboring to promote universal emancipation, whether 
 such laborers be found within or without the pale of our 
 Society V Why, but because the advice is so diametrically 
 opposed both to the principles and practice of those who 
 now rule in your counsels \ 
 
 " Would it not have been proper for you to have 
 quoted from the Yearly Meeting's Minutes, where, in 
 allusion to the present A. S. enterprise, it is called a 
 most righteous work \ This did not suit you, because of 
 its contrast with the opinion professed by Henry Clay, 
 and by many in the front ranks of your Yearly Meeting 
 at the present time, that the Abolitionists have put back 
 the cause of emancipation. 
 
 "Why did you not refer to the feeling of the Yearly 
 Meeting, expressed in language like this ? We rejoice that 
 others are coming up to labor on the same ground 
 which we, as a religious society, have for many years occu- 
 pied. 
 
 " Was it because it would have shown in too glaring 
 
 
 
116 HISTORY OW THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 colors the inconsistency of your present policy, in closing 
 the doors of meeting-houses against the cause and its 
 advocates, who are laboring on the same ground that we, 
 as a religious society, have for many years occupied, and 
 casting every discouragement you can in their way, and 
 proscribing your members who persevere in co-working 
 with them ? 
 
 " Should you not also have mentioned, that some 
 years ago, Friends were individually encouraged i to a 
 close examination as to what is required at their hands, 
 and how they may employ the talents committed to them 
 for noble purposes, in the advancement of the blessed 
 work of universal emancipation, by meekly yet boldly 
 either publicly or privately, pleading the cause of the 
 oppressed V But perhaps you were aware that if you had 
 quoted this advice, it would have shown too clearly the 
 palpable inconsistency of your present course in perse- 
 cuting those who are conscientiously endeavoring to act 
 in accordance with its requirements. 
 
 u It is also worthy of observation, that in your De- 
 claration of your Anti-Slavery principles, you have en- 
 tirely omitted to make it known, whether you are in 
 favor of immediate emancipation or not. And what 
 renders the omission still more remarkable, is the fact, 
 that quoting from the Minutes of 183S, where the circu- 
 lation of such publications as are calculated to advance 
 the cause of immediate emancipation is encouraged, you 
 have (shall we say carefully?) omitted the word 'imme- 
 diate.' What renders this omission still more suspicious, 
 is the declared opinion of one of your number, who was 
 appointed a member of your body in the place of one of 
 those who were said to be disqualified, that he did not 
 believe the slaves were prepared for freedom — that he 
 believed Slavery should be abolished, but that it ought 
 to be done gradually. This opinion was expressed since 
 his appointment. Still more. The prime mover of 
 nearly, if not quite all the recent measures of the Yearly 
 Meeting against A. S. Friends, one of the committee 
 appointed to carry its proscriptive measures into opera- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 117 
 
 tion, stated in a large Quarterly Meeting, that when he 
 had taken the whole subject of Slavery into considera- 
 tion, and the situation and circumstances with which we 
 are surrounded, he had never been able to determine what 
 would be the best plan for the emancipation of the slaves, 
 the best both for whites and blacks ; this was united with 
 publicly, by nearly all the committee in attendance from 
 the Yearly Meeting ; clearly implying that they were 
 not prepared to say that immediate emancipation is the 
 best plan. 
 
 Si You say, c At the next Yearly Meeting, the commit- 
 tee having been engaged as usual, in active exertions for 
 the good of the Free people of Color among us, expressed 
 their belief, that there was an increasing interest and 
 concern felt in the minds of many Friends, to promote 
 the entire Abolition of Slavery.' This opinion was no 
 doubt true; and as this feeling continued to increase, the 
 opposition also increased, and a determination was more 
 and more manifested, on the part of certain characters, 
 to destroy the influence and the standing of those Friends 
 who were zealously engaged in the A. S. enterprise. 
 This 4 increasing interest and concern, to promote the 
 entire Abolition of Slavery, was not to be thus suppressed. 
 It increased, and continued to increase, until the opposi- 
 tion could no longer restrain it by its proscription, and 
 we humbly hope that it may continue to increase, until, 
 by the blessing of Heaven, every yoke, civil, political, 
 and ecclesiasticsl shall be broken, and. every bondman 
 shall be tree. 5 
 
 " You mention the fact, that special deputations of 
 Friends were sent to the Legislatures of Ohio and Indi- 
 ana, with petitions on behalf of the People of Color in 
 these States, and that they 4 remained some time at the 
 seats of Government, engaged in active labors among 
 the members.' But you do not tell the fact, that one 
 part of those labors was to satisfy the members that the 
 petitioners had no connection with the Abolitionists. 
 They knew that Abolitionists were hated, and in order 
 
 
118 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 to make themselves and the Society respected, they took 
 the most effectual course to increase that hatred. For it 
 was enough to confirm the strongest prejudices, not only 
 of the members of the Legislatures, but of the commun- 
 ity at large, to know that Friends denied any unity with 
 the ' fanatics,' as they were commonly considered. Was 
 this in accordance with the advice, ' to be very careful 
 that we should not through prejudice or otherwise, cast 
 any discouragement in the way of those who are faithfully 
 laboring to promote universal emancipation V You men- 
 tion the reprint of 3,000 copies of an c Appeal to the 
 professors of Christianity in the Southern States and 
 elsewhere, on the subject of Slavery.' In that appeal, it 
 is stated, that the professional Churches are mainly 
 chargeable with the continuance of Slavery. Nov/ we 
 would request you, candidly and honestly to ask your- 
 selves, if it is not evident that you are exerting a greater 
 influence against the progress of the present A. S. enter- 
 prise, than any other religious body in the United States? 
 In the various localities throughout the country where 
 Friends are numerous, as a general rule, a stranger might 
 really obtain a very correct knowledge of the state of the 
 Anti-Slavery cause in the community, by learning the 
 course pursued with regard to it by Friends residing in 
 the respective neighborhoods. "Wherever Friends gener- 
 ally, especially the leading characters, have identified 
 themselves with this cause, there the community is to a 
 great extent leavened into the Anti-Slavery principles. 
 But where the contrary course of conduct has been pur- 
 sued by Friends, there the cause receives very little favor 
 from the mass of the people. The strongest opposers, 
 both in the Free and Slave States, exult in the action of 
 the ruling part of the Society of Friends, and it is com- 
 mon with those opposers, to refer to the course Friends 
 are pursuing, both collectively and individually, with re- 
 gard to this subject, in confirmation of their opinions. 
 In the numerous discussions public and private, which 
 are going on throughout the country on this subject, 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 119 
 
 there is perhaps no argument on which the opposers of 
 Abolition rely with more confidence, than that drawn 
 from the conduct of Friends. 
 
 "With regard to the countenance given to the laborers 
 in the A. S. cause, by those whom you call 4 well-con- 
 cerned members,' it was fully illustrated in the case of 
 C. C. Burleigh, to which we referred in our Declaration. 
 The contrast between this case, and the marked attention 
 paid to a Colonization agent, since in Richmond, shows 
 too clearly to be misunderstood, whether Abolition or 
 Colonization is regarded with most favor, by such men 
 as lead in your deliberations, notwithstanding the 
 Yearly Meeting but a few years ago called the former a 
 most righteous cause, and the latter ' the unrighteous 
 work of expatriation.' The attention paid to Henry 
 Clay, the great slave-holder and President of the Colon- 
 ization Society also shows conclusively, that there is far 
 more anxiety to conciliate the good opinion of slave- 
 holders and Colonizationists, that you may 6 retain place 
 and influence with the rulers of the land,' than to iden- 
 tify yourselves in feeling and interest with the humble 
 and devoted, yet despised advocates of the claims of 
 down-trodden humanity. 
 
 "After enumerating several public acts in reference to 
 Slavery, you say, ' In addition to the forenamed public 
 acts of the meetings, it is well known that many con- 
 cerned individuals were also engaged, as way opened, in 
 labors in the same cause, some of whom extended their 
 labors into the slave States.' Who were those concerned 
 individuals ? And what was the nature of their labors ? 
 We are perfectly aware that many individuals have man- 
 ifested great concern, and have labored with zeal and 
 assiduity to put down the Anti-Slavery enterprise, by 
 going up and down the country preaching down all those 
 who were influenced by ; a spirit of activity in it.' In- 
 deed it has been the principal theme of a great portion 
 of the preaching that we have had for some years. In- 
 stead of being urged to the necessity of seeking after 
 ability to perform works of humanity and mercy, and 
 
 
120 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 encourged to faithfulness in their performance, we have 
 seldom heard but little else than exhortations to 'be still,' 
 to 'get into the quiet,' with long discourses upon the dan- 
 ger of ' acting in our own wills, and in our own strength.' 
 As though it were far safer to imitate the example of the 
 Priest and Levite in passing by a perishing brother, than 
 with the good Samaritan to yield immediately to the 
 generous impulses of the heart, and feelings of sympathy 
 with the sufferings of a common humanity, which prompt 
 us to endeavor to pour the oil and the wine of consolation 
 into the bleeding wounds of the millions of our fellow- 
 beings who have fallen among thieves. If the same 
 zeal had been manifested, and the same labor bestowed 
 to promote the Anti-Slavery cause, and to recommend it 
 and its advocates to the favorable notice of the public, 
 that have been used to banish it from the Society of 
 Friends, and consequently to disgrace it before the pub- 
 lic, we are perfectly satisfied that it would have been far 
 in advance of what it is. We are also aware that one of 
 the most noted ministers and indefatigable opposers 
 among you, has been engaged, to some extent, within 
 the last year or two, in circulating an 'Appeal to the 
 citizens of the United States and Great Britain,' written 
 by him some years ago, in favor of the Colonization So- 
 ciety. If these are not the labors to which you allude, in 
 which you say ' many concerned individuals are engaged,' 
 we are entirely at a loss to understand what you mean, 
 as we suppose you cannot refer to the individual acts of 
 those you have proscribed on account of their labors, to 
 prove the Anti-Slavery character of that portion of the 
 Society wdiich now claims to be the 4 body ;' though you 
 might do so with about as much propriety as to have 
 quoted the Anti-Slavery proceedings of former years for 
 the same purpose. 
 
 ci With regard to the ' some ' whom you say ' have ex- 
 tended their labors into the slave States,' we suppose you 
 alluded to those ministers who have traveled there on 
 religious visits. We have the best evidence that some of 
 these labored, in part, while there, to convince the slave- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 121 
 
 holders that they were not in unity with the Abolitionists, 
 whom they (the slaveholders) hated, and whose influence 
 they so much dreaded ; thus, so far as those Friends had 
 any influence with the slaveholders, confirming their 
 prejudices against the A. S. enterprise. 
 
 u You say you think the proceedings of which we com- 
 plain are in accordance with the usages of Society. We 
 ask, when, until in the present case, has the Yearly Meet- 
 ing issued advice to its members, and then taken measures 
 to enforce that advice by inflicting Church censure, and 
 removing from 'the stations they occupied in the Society, 
 those who could not conscientiously comply with that 
 advice ? We are not aware of any such measures being 
 adopted in all the proceedings of the Society, until this 
 time. Mere advice cannot be recognized as law, and we 
 cannot recognize the authority of any body, either civil 
 or religious, to impose official censure, but for the viola- 
 tion of acknowledged law or discipline. We maintain 
 that by the Discipline, members of the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings cannot be removed from their stations while they 
 retain their right in Society, for any other cause than de- 
 clining or greatly nerfectino; the attendance of the meet- 
 ing. And we believe that no instance is on record in 
 the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, so far as we have 
 examined them, (which is as far back as 1827.) of the 
 removal of any member from the Meeting for Sufferings, 
 (until disowned from the Society.) on any other account 
 than request to be released, or delinquency. And if we 
 are not mistaken, in all such cases the reason is given. 
 We apprehend the only instance on record of a member 
 being stated to be disqualified, and no cause of disquali- 
 fication mentioned, is that of an individual who was dis- 
 owned, and had appealed to the Yearly Meeting, and 
 that meeting had confirmed the judgment of the Quar- 
 terly and Monthly meetings. The report of the commit- 
 tee on the appeal, together with the judgment of the 
 Yearly Meeting confirming it, were published in the 
 proceedings of the same meeting that appointed another 
 Friend in his place, on account of Ms being ; disquali- 
 
 
122 HISTORY OF THE SEPAEATION IN 
 
 fied.' So that there was no danger of misapprehension 
 about it. 
 
 " ' How then can it be said, w T ith any degree of fair- 
 ness or truth,' that the proceedings of the Meeting for 
 Sufferings and the last Yearly Meeting at White Water, 
 in removing members of the Meeting for Sufferings, upon 
 the vague charge of disqualification, who were among the 
 most diligent attenclers of that meeting, were in accord- 
 ance w T ith the usages of the Society ; when not a single 
 instance of the kind can be found on record in fifteen 
 years, if ever? And not only so but the act is contrary 
 to the plain provision of the Discipline, relative to that 
 subject. 
 
 u Is it in accordance with the usages of the Society to 
 prefer complaints against its members of such a nature 
 as to be worthy of public censure, and even to cause their 
 names to go to the world as offenders, without even in- 
 forming them of the charge against them, or giving them 
 an opportunit} 7 to answer for themselves ? Is it in ac- 
 cordance with the usages of Society to refuse to place 
 upon record, the alleged cause or misconduct of its 
 members; for which they are censured, and to pub- 
 lish that record to the world to the injury of their char- 
 acters ? 
 
 " So far from being in accordance with the former usage 
 of the Society of Friends, it is slandering the former 
 character of that Society to make the assertion. 
 
 " You express your belief that 4 it has been a common 
 practice in our Society to leave off from ail important 
 appointments and stations in the Church, such as are out 
 of unity with the body for any cause ; and all such as are 
 standing against the Discipline or advices. 5 
 
 " Permit us to inquire if you have excluded from im- 
 portant appointments and stations, those who are out of 
 unity with the body on the subject of the important doc- 
 trines of the resurrection and the general judgment ? It 
 is well known to many of us, and we think it must be 
 known to you, that many who have stood, and for aught 
 that appears, yet stand in direct opposition to the pro- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 123 
 
 ceedings of the body in this matter, still occupy sta- 
 tions of the greatest importance, and are among the 
 most forward to condemn us for being out of unity with 
 the body. 
 
 "How is it with those who are out of unity with the 
 body in regard to the boarding-school, and to the monthly 
 meeting schools? ' By their fruits ye shall know them. 5 
 If there be any truth in this maxim, it is evident that in 
 some of the Quarterly meetings, where there is the most 
 ability to maintain monthly meeting schools, there is 
 very little unity with the concern of the body in this par- 
 ticular, as they have no such schools among them. At 
 the same time it is observable that the members of those 
 meetings are among the most intolerant toward those who 
 do not unite with the advice of the body on the Anti- 
 Slavery question. 
 
 u It is a notorious fact that if every Friend who is out 
 of unity with the proceedings of the body for some cause, 
 were left off from appointments, there would be very lew 
 to appoint. And as for standing in opposition to the 
 Discipline, you have yet to show us what clause of Dis- 
 cipline those had violated who were rejected by the 
 Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " You undertake to give currency to the misrepresenta- 
 tion which has often been made, that we were not cen- 
 sured for our Abolition principles, but for insubordina- 
 tion. We are astonished that you should be guilty of 
 such an absurdity. Let us illustrate. In the early set- 
 tlement of 2s ew England rigorous laws were made against 
 the Quakers, with a view to suppress their principles and 
 practices. They were banished and forbidden to return 
 upon pain of death. Their principles impelled them to 
 return, and some of them were hanged. According to 
 your version, these persons were not hanged for their 
 Quaker principles, 'as has been erroneously stated.' 
 Surely that cause must be weak which has to be sup- 
 ported by such arguments. 
 
 M There is one portion of your Address which we have 
 passed over, that is calculated, whether so intended or 
 
124 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 not, to convey the idea to those who are unacquainted 
 with the circumstances, that our Society of Anti-Slavery 
 Friends is confined to New Garden Quarterly meeting; 
 whereas there were present at the Convention at which 
 the organization took place, members from at least six 
 Quarterly meetings, and we have already four organized 
 Quarterly, and ten Monthly meetings. 
 
 " You refer, in several places, to the advices given by 
 the Yearly Meeting to Friends not to join in associations 
 with others. 
 
 " You particularly notice the language of the report of 
 the African Committee in 183S. You say c it was deemed 
 best, for reasons then given, that our members should 
 abstain from mixing with associations of those not of our 
 Society, for the purpose.' And what were the reasons 
 then given ? By reference to the Report, we find them 
 to be as follows : 
 
 " 4 Something objectionable may have been adopted, — 
 some peculiarity we deem it important to maintain, may 
 have been abandoned. We deem it best, for these and 
 other reasons, that our Friends abstain from mixing with 
 these associations.' 
 
 "What may have been done, seems to be a strange 
 reason for abandoning a course of conduct, for the promo- 
 tion of one of the greatest works for the melioration of 
 the condition of suffering humanity, that ever engaged 
 the hearts of philanthropists, which, it must be evident, 
 has been the approved means, in the hands of an overrul- 
 ing Providence, of blotting out the odious stains of Sla- 
 very from a large portion of the earth, and preparing the 
 way for the ushering in of a great and general Jubilee, 
 when liberty shall be proclaimed throughout all the land, 
 unto all the inhabitants thereof. It is one of the clearest 
 propositions deducible from the history of the past, that 
 the hand of Divine Providence, has been signally manifest 
 in preparing the way for, and bringing about the institu- 
 tion of, A. S. Societies composed of Friends and others, 
 and in crowning their labors with happy results. And 
 the success which continues to attend the labors of these 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 125 
 
 mixed associations, in their endeavors to promote the 
 diffusion of just and enlightened views on the subject of 
 human rights, and the spread of Anti-Slavery principles 
 throughout Christendom, and even in Mohamedan coun- 
 tries, is of the most encouraging character. These facts, 
 clear and incontrovertible as the light of history and ex- 
 perience can render them, should outweigh all the argu- 
 ments, and suspicions, and fears, of sectarian prejudice, 
 and bigoted exclusiveness. But it is pretty evident that 
 the objection to mixing with others is not the great dread 
 of many of our opposers, for they manifest no repugnance 
 to associating in secular matters for the promotion of 
 their worldly interests with those of any, or of no reli- 
 gious denomination. And what puts the matter beyond 
 doubt, is the fact that when an attempt was made to form 
 associations of Friends, it was objected to with as much 
 earnestness as joining in associations with others. 
 This v proves clearly that mixing with others was only 
 the ostensible, and not the real objection with many of 
 our opposers, and that there was really a feeling of hos- 
 tility to our becoming in any manner identified with 
 Abolitionism. 
 
 " In your Address, you say to Friends, you do not want 
 their testimony against Slavery to abate; but that you 
 wish them to 'exercise the spirit and follow the prac- 
 tice of John Woolman V etc. Permit us to query with 
 you whether you exercise the spirit, and follow the prac- 
 tice of John Woolman ? Tou know, he bore his testi- 
 mony against Slavery so far as to cease to trade in, or to 
 use those articles which were produced by slaves. Can 
 you say this is your practice ? Why is it, we ask, that 
 you have refused your assent to the investigation of this 
 subject, when it has been brought before the different 
 departments of Society ? Why have you refused the 
 subject a place on the Yearly Meeting's Minutes, when 
 regularly brought up by an inferior meeting ? Why did 
 you cause the summary answers to the Queries to be 
 altered from what the subordinate meetings prepared in 
 relation to this subject ? Why should you have used 
 
 6* 
 
126 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 your influence to prevent the circulation, among Friends, 
 of the only work, that we know of, that is published in the 
 world, on the subject of Free Labor? Are not all these 
 things at variance with the practice of John Woolman ? 
 He read and informed himself on the subject of Slavery, 
 and when properly informed, he acted according to his 
 light. It appears that he was not sensible of his connec- 
 tion with Slavery until he read a work entitled, c A Cau- 
 tion and Warning to Great Britain and her Colonies,' for, 
 he says, he was then trading in rum, sugar, and molasses, 
 the product of slave-labor, and had little concern about 
 them. Yet when his eyes were opened to see his error, 
 he abandoned this trade, and sought out occasions of be- 
 nevolence on which to appropriate what he had made 
 thereby ; thus contributing to the support of the cause of 
 righteousness in the earth ; and, to use his own words, 
 4 was the first motion toward a visit to Barbadoes.' He 
 further said, 'the oppression of the slaves which I have 
 seen in several journies southward, on the continent; and 
 the report of their treatment in the West Indies, hath 
 deeply affected me, and a care to live in the spirit of 
 peace, and minister just cause of offense to none of my 
 fellow creatures, hath, from time to time, livingly revived 
 in my mind, and under this exercise, I have, for many 
 years past, declined to gratify my palate with those 
 sugars.' Now is it not the fact, that many of your tables 
 are furnished with those sugars, and the course of those 
 who abstain as he did, lightly esteemed ? John Wool- 
 man traveled much, and labored continually through evil 
 report and through good report, for the enlargement of 
 his oppressed fellow creatures. 
 
 4 Nor was he willing to have the work put off ior a 
 more convenient season ; but warned the people that if 
 they delayed, they might be visited with ' terrible tilings 
 in righteousness,' for the omission of duty. And he fur- 
 ther says, that his concern was that he ' might attend 
 with singleness of heart to the voice of the true Shepherd 
 of Israel, and be so supported as to remain unmoved.at the 
 faces ot men, 5 etc. Nor was this concern ot his a mo- 
 
IMDIANA YE ABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 12? 
 
 mentary zeal, or fire of his own kindling, but one that 
 lasted through life ; for he requested his attendants around 
 his death bed, to not give him medicine which was the 
 fruit of oppression, in case he should be deprived of his 
 senses in his last moments. 
 
 " We now come to the conclusion^ of the whole matter. 
 A portion of the people of these United States, becom- 
 ing thoroughly convinced that, in order that Slavery may 
 be abolished, and our country saved from impending niin 3 
 some means must be used to regenerate public senti- 
 ment, and change it from a deep-rooted, unholy prejudice 
 against that degraded class of human beings, who are 
 now held in abject bondage by their brethren, to a spirit 
 and practice of equal justice to all men, ; in the progress 
 of the light of truth,' have organized A. S. Societies, and 
 are actively and increasingly engaged in supporting 
 them, as affording the only measures now being put in 
 operation, having any direct tendency to bring about 
 the desired change in the views and actions of the people 
 on this subject. To the labors of the supporters of this 
 enterprise many of your acts manifest an opposition. 
 And here lies the whole difficulty, and here it must and 
 will remain, all your pretensions to the contrary notwith- 
 standing. Hence difficulties, inconsistencies, incongrui- 
 ties, and contradictions have marked the line of your 
 whole proceedings on this subject, and ever must, until 
 you either cease to call the A. S. enterprise 'a most 
 righteous cause,' 'got up in the progress of the light of 
 truth,' etc., or cease to oppose it by undervaluing the 
 characters of its supporters, by unchristianizing them, by 
 many, various, and unmeaning charges, such as the work- 
 ing of a ' spirit of activity, self-confidence, and insubor- 
 dination ;' ' working in their own strength and in their 
 own wills;' 'not waiting for a right opening;' acting 
 in an 'overactive zeal,' etc 5 etc. 
 
 " With desires that you may yet see your error and 
 retrace your steps, we remain your friends. 
 
 " Signed on behalf and by direction of the Meeting for 
 Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery 
 
128 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Friends, held at Newport, by adjournment, on the 10th 
 of Fourth month, 1843. 
 
 " Benjamin Stanton, Clerk." 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Some corroborative Remarks — Origin of the Use of the Term "Body"— 
 Anonymous review of the Declaration of A, S, Friends. 
 
 The Epistle of Advice, alluded to in the foregoing- 
 Address, which was rejected by the Meeting for Sufferings 
 in Sixth month, 1839, " on account," as the Address 
 states, "of its hostility to Colonization," it may be pro- 
 per to remark, embraced the same caution which had 
 previously been given by the Yearly Meeting, against 
 Friends joining in associations with others for the pro- 
 motion of the Anti-Slavery cause or other benevolent 
 objects, and, therefore, could not have been faulted for a 
 lack on that head. Hence the evident correctness of the 
 statement that it was rejected mainly on account of its 
 hostility to Colonization, w T hich was a prominent feature 
 in it. But this is only corroborative ; that statement was 
 made from personal knowledge by eye and ear witnesses. 
 
 In consequence of the repeated and continued asser- 
 tions made by many, that unconditional submission to 
 the advice of the body was the duty of members, the 
 term u Body," which sometimes occurs, was used after 
 the separation to refer to those w T ho hold that doctrine, 
 or to Indiana Yearly Meeting. 
 
 The Meeting for Sufferings of that body did not deign 
 to make reply to the document addressed to it, which I 
 have just quoted, nor did the Yearly Meeting itself ever 
 attempt to answer the arguments adduced nor to dis- 
 prove the positions taken in any of the various epistles, 
 addresses/ or other documents of those they called 
 " Seceders" and " Separatists," This feature in the 
 
i:\DiAKA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 129 
 
 history of this lamentable schism cannot fail to strike the 
 mind of the intelligent reader as a very significant cir- 
 cumstance. Some attempt, however, at this was made 
 by individuals. A pamphlet was sent forth to the world 
 entitled "A Review of the Declaration of a Meeting of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends," but the author, probably aware 
 of its fallacy or lack of candor, and hence dreading a pub- 
 lic castigation, prudently withheld his name. Here it is, 
 without any date ; probably it was written in Seventh 
 month, 18i3: 
 
 REVIEW 
 
 or the 
 
 DECLARATION 
 
 OF A 
 
 MEETING OF ANTI-SLAVERY FEIENDS. 
 
 Which assembled in the capacity of a Yearly Meeting^ 
 at Newport^ Indiana, Second month 1th, 18i3, ad- 
 dressed to a Friend, in answer to several inquiries 
 about the Separation in the Society of Friends in Indi- 
 ana Yearly Meeting. 
 
 "After their introduction, on pages six and seven of 
 their Minutes, in which they propose to organize them- 
 selves into a Society of Friends, in which they may enjoy 
 those religious privileges and benefits which they tell us 
 they so highly prize, and ' of which (they say) we have 
 been arbitrarily and unhappily deprived by the prescrip- 
 tive measures of the ruling part of the Yearly Meeting, 5 
 they proceed to declare, that they have not separated 
 from the principles of the Society nor from its testimo- 
 nies and discipline, 5 the difference in title which they 
 have adopted, being merely for distinction and to express 
 their adherence to the testimony of Friends against 
 Slavery. 
 
 "Remarks. — From what privilege have they been de- 
 prived by the Yearly Meeting? We may suppose our 
 
130 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 Epistle of Advice will explain. 'Friends are advised to 
 be weighty and deliberate in making appointments to 
 any of the important stations or committees in Society, 
 so that faithful and trusty Friends may be chosen ; as we 
 believe that those w T ho have distinguished themselves by 
 opposition or disregard to the advice and travail of the 
 body, are manifestly unsuitable for important services in 
 it, while they remain in that situation.' Some of the 
 leaders in this schism had distinguished themselves by 
 opposition and disregard to the advice ; and under such 
 circumstance, ought they still to be promoted in the ser- 
 vices of the Society, and put forward as though nothing 
 was the matter ? Was such ever the course of the 
 Society, in any case, since its foundation ? This is an 
 important point in this separation. The Separatists being 
 confessedly against the Advice and out of unity with the 
 proceedings of the great body of the Society, claim still 
 to do important services in it ; or as they might have said 
 more distinctly and not less truly, to rule it. Their pro- 
 portion in numbers, in the Yearly Meeting at large, is 
 very small ; not, it is probable, at a very liberal estimate, 
 over one-tenth of the members ; yet they wish to rule or 
 must separate. 
 
 "And that, so far as they had the power, they selected 
 their own men, to the exclusion of others, was a subject 
 of notice and remark for a considerable time before their 
 separation. They proceed, pages six and seven, to state 
 the ' universal liability of all associations, both civil and 
 religious, to deterioration ;' the great precaution taken 
 by early Friends to prevent it in our Society in this 
 country, and that facts and circumstances connected with 
 the Society in this country, at the present time, sorrow- 
 fully demonstrate the inefficiency of all this. 
 
 "Remarks. — The inference plainly is, that our Society 
 has, in their opinion, deteriorated, that it has departed, 
 little by little, from the Truth as it is in Jesus,' and that 
 they, not having deteriorated, but being more holy than 
 those they have left behind, make the corruption of the 
 mother church one cause of their leaving it. Those in- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 181 
 
 terested will not fail to take notice whether this is the 
 state of facts. 
 
 "They say on page seven, that 'through the unre- 
 mitted labors of Woolman, Benezet, and kindred spirits. 
 Friends of the Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia cleared 
 themselves from holding slaves,' etc., and that 'about 
 this time James Pemberton, Warner Mifflin, and many 
 other Friends, eminent for their piety and virtue, appre- 
 hending that much advantage to the cause of the 
 oppressed Africans might be derived from duly enlisting 
 all classes of the community in their behalf, engaged in 
 the formation of associations for that purpose.' 
 
 u Ee?narks. — Not associations of their sort, however. 
 The modern Abolition Societies took their rise as lately 
 as 1832, and do not agree, in practice nor throughout in 
 principle, with the worthy individuals whom they name, 
 It is very apparent that the Seceders are anxious to iden- 
 tify themselves, if possible, with these worthy predeces- 
 sors, by claiming them as fellow-operators in the Anti- 
 Slavery cause ; whereas the Society they have left hold 
 and endeavor to put in practice the views of Woolman 
 and others, in regard to Slavery, yet they so far differ, 
 that they proceed to separate. Would it not be more 
 honorable in them to take their own stand ; to assert their 
 origin in 1832, and not inconsistently claim our folks 
 and reject us I Some extracts from Woolman will make 
 plain to any who understands the views and is acquainted 
 with the acts of the Seceders, whether they hold and act 
 upon his principles. Hear him. 
 
 "'In this (Philadelphia) Yearly Meeting several 
 weighty matters were considered; and toward the last, 
 that in relation to dealing with persons who purchase 
 slaves. 
 
 " ' During the several sittings of the said meeting my 
 mind was frequently covered with inicard prayer ; and 
 I could say with David, that ' tears were my meat day 
 and night.' The cause of slave-keeping lay heavy upon 
 me ; nor did I find any engagement to speak directly to 
 any other matter before the meeting. When this case 
 
182 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 was opened, several faithful Friends spoke weightily 
 thereto, with which I was comforted, and feeling a con- 
 cern to cast in my mite, I said, in substance, as follows: 
 In the difficulties attending us in this life nothing is 
 more precious than the mind of Truth inwardly mani- 
 fested; and it is my earnest desire, in this weighty mat- 
 ter, we may he so humbled as to he favored with a clear 
 understanding of the mind of Truth and follow it ; this 
 would be of more advantage to the Society than any me- 
 dium not in the clearness of Divine wisdom. The case is 
 difficult to some who have slaves, but if such set aside all 
 self-interest, and come to be weaned from the desire of 
 getting estates, or even from holding them together, when 
 Truth requires the contrary, I believe the way will open that 
 they will know how to steer through those difficulties. 
 Many Friends appeared to be deeply howed under the 
 weight of the worh^ and manifested much firmness in 
 their love to the cause of Truth and universal righteous- 
 ness on the earth.' 
 
 " ' After this 1 joined with my Friends — 
 
 in visiting Friends who had slaves, and at night we had 
 a family meeting at William Trimble's, many young 
 people being there, and it was a precious reviving oppor- 
 tunity. 
 
 a; Some whose hearts were rightly exercised about 
 them, appeared to be glad of our visit, but in some places 
 our way was more difficult ; and I often saw the necessi- 
 ty of keeping down to that root, from whence our concern 
 proceeded ; and have cause, in reverend thankfulness, 
 humbly to bow down before the Lord, who was near me, 
 and preserved my mind in calmness under some sharp 
 conflicts, and begat a spirit of sympathy and tenderness 
 toward some who were grievously entangled by the 
 spirit of this world.' 
 
 u After this, he says : c It was a time of deep exercise, 
 looking often to the Lord for his assistance, who, in un- 
 speakable kindness, favored us with the influence of that 
 spirit, which crucifies to the greatness and splendor of 
 this world.' 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 133 
 
 u Another time, having no company, he says : C I went 
 alone to their houses, and in the fear of the Lord, ac- 
 quainted them with the exercise I was under, and thus, 
 sometimes by a few words, I found myself discharged 
 from a heavy burden.' — Friends' Library, vol. IV, pp. 
 35i, 355, 356. 
 
 " How different was John TYoolman's spirit ; how dif- 
 ferent his example of waiting and labor, from theirs ! 
 
 " Fage 8. ; But after much good had been effected 
 through the agency of these institutions' — (not modern 
 Abolition institutions it should be remembered) ' a com- 
 bination of adverse circumstances conspired to change 
 the current of feeling. The hand of cruel avarice became 
 afresh nerved to its unholy grasp by the prospect of ex- 
 tensive gain, through the facilities offered by the inven- 
 tion of the cotton gin.' 
 
 M Remarks. — Is not the whole of this an assumption 
 without proof? Does it not sound like matter proceed- 
 ing from an excited lecturer, who is endeavoring to make 
 capital whereon to base his discourse ? The cotton gin 
 is a labor-saving machine, not calculated, one would 
 think, to increase, but to lessen the demand for human 
 labor. 
 
 " They proceed — 'This prospect and desire of gain 
 was not confined to those immediately engaged in hold- 
 ing slaves, but extended with lamentable effect to many 
 of those in the Free States, inclined to enter into mercan- 
 tile or manufacturing operations. This class included a 
 number of the most wealthy and influential in the Society 
 of Friends in the Middle and Eastern States ; and the 
 consequent intercourse between them and the slavehold- 
 ers of the South, had a direct tendency to leaven them 
 into the same lordly, pompous, and intolerant feeling.' 
 
 " Remarks. — Shocking picture indeed, if true. Who 
 will vouch for its truth ? Let us ' beware lest any man 
 spoil us through philosophy and vain deceit.' 
 
 " ' This circumstance,' they say, s taken in connection 
 with that of the formation and active operation of the 
 Colonization Society, instituted mainly by slayeholders* 
 
 7 
 
134 HISTOEt OF THE SEPARATION 18 
 
 and purposely for the removal of the free people of color 
 from the country, and in order that none of the des- 
 pised class might enjoy LIBERTY among us, almost sealed 
 the fate of genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society V 
 
 " Remains. — How melancholy the reflection that men 
 professing to be guided under the influence of the religion 
 of Christ, should be so far deluded as to hazard such ex- 
 pressions! What a shame to our religion I What a 
 handle for infidels ! 
 
 "The Colonization Society originated with Robert 
 Finley, of New Jersey ; and has always, it is said, re- 
 ceived more patronage at the North than at the South. 
 From the rise, many men of the best talents, of the high- 
 est order of practical benevolence, and of undoubted 
 piety, have taken an active interest in its success. What 
 a departure from charity, what a slender upon all these 
 (and such as these have always been among the leaders), 
 to say that their object was the removal of the free people 
 of color, in order that none of them might enjoy liberty 
 among as. The Colonization Society had no power, if 
 they had desired to do so, to compel free people to go to 
 Africa. They go only by their ' own consent' — this is 
 one of the first articles. None go that do not think best 
 to go. And what harm to assist any such ! The free 
 people of color are in many cases surrounded by circum- 
 stances (the existence of which we may deplore, but can 
 not prevent) which may induce them to think best to 
 remove. Most persons in the West have removed under 
 the influence of circumstances. Our forefathers came 
 from England under circumstances. Africans go to Can- 
 ada because they think best to do so; and the Separatists 
 have, many of them, at different times, assisted such, 
 even those not legally entitled to their freedom ; and yet 
 to assist them in finding a refuge from their troubles, in 
 Africa, in a way less objectionable, is declared in their 
 publications, and intimated in this Declaration, to be a 
 design to perpetuate Slavery. 
 
 " Many benevolent men, with claims as justly founded 
 as these seceders, to the credit of the most honest and 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIEHDS. 135 
 
 devoted laborers for the good of the African race, haye 
 desired to see colonies settled along the western coast of 
 Africa; Thomas Fowell Buxton, and many other Eng- 
 lish philanthropists, who are in favor of universal eman- 
 cipation, may be named as examples. Such colonies 
 form an asylum to which persons can go, who cannot be 
 freed under the laws where they are ; for there are many 
 owners of slaves who are convinced of the evil, and desire 
 to rid their hands of it, who cannot do it where they are, 
 on account of the laws. The way might also be opened 
 through such colonies, for the introduction under Divine 
 Providence, of civilization, commerce, the arts, and 
 Christianity, among the barbarous tribes of Africa, by 
 their brethren, originally of the same stock, and with 
 constitutions adapted to the climate. But the Society of 
 Friends, as such, has done but little for the Colonization 
 Society, if we except that Friends in the Southern States 
 have made use of the facilities offered by that Society, to 
 set on the shores of Africa, as entirely free persons, a 
 great many who could not remain in the South without 
 being in slavery ; and it is presumed that all the Yearly 
 Meetings have assisted them in the benevolent work, 
 Some members have also occasionally contributed small 
 sums, to assist such in going as desired to go. 
 
 u 2. ^Notwithstanding the Society of Friends has been 
 active for the good of the free persons of color, the great 
 leading concern has been for the extinction of Slavery. 
 And their labors have been active and unremitted tor 
 fifty years past, or more, in the cause. What a great 
 departure then, from ail Truth, must it be to declare to the 
 world, that Anti-Slavery feeling has at any time within 
 the last half century been almost sealed in the Society ! 
 Pious, sound-hearted, cool-headed, active laborers in the 
 cause, in our Society, will look upon such misrepresenta- 
 tion with pain and disgust. 
 
 u Page 9. ' In 1S82, a resuscitation of the Anti-Slavery 
 cause commenced in one of the Eastern States.' 
 
 "Remarks. — Why not say, c In 1832, the modern 
 Abolitionists, to the ranks of which we belong, in 
 
136 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 distinction from those of Woolman, Pemberton, Ben- 
 ezet, Mifflin, Franklin, and other Abolitionists of pre- 
 ceding years, and of the Society of Friends at the 
 present time, took their rise, and we think proper to 
 shake off the yoke of church subordination, and join with 
 these V The matter of fact would then have been fairly 
 and honestly stated. For while some might doubt the 
 propriety, none could properly deny their right to do so. 
 
 u We pass over their other remarks on page 9, and 
 those on pages 10, 11, 12, and part of 13, as containing 
 nothing worthy of refutation. Suffice it to say, that the 
 statements are not acknowledged, in the manner they 
 make them ; their spirit and bearing being particularly 
 objectionable, and most of the facts brought to view be- 
 ing unfairly represented. 
 
 u On page 13, they say: 'One branch of the' (Afri- 
 can) ' Committee forwarded a report to its general meet- 
 ing,' in 1841, ' treating the subject (of the consumption 
 of the proceeds of Slavery) at some length, showing the 
 impropriety and inconsistency of Friends sustaining a 
 market for such productions. But when it was read in 
 that body, it was spurned, it was rejected, with manifest 
 bitterness and contempt,' etc. 
 
 " Remarks. — That is one version of the story, showing 
 an example of the manner in which they relate a history 
 of the past. The following is the true one. The New 
 Garden branch of the African Committee was at that 
 time under the influence and control of persons who have 
 since seceded. They prepared and sent up to the Gen- 
 eral Committee, a long essay on the subject of Free and 
 Slave labor produce. When this was brought before the 
 committee, they had strong doubts of the propriety of 
 having it read, or descending into the consideration of 
 the subject, in that capacity ; inasmuch as it w T as alto- 
 gether foreign to the business of their appointment; and 
 as the subject was one with which Friends were already 
 acquainted. The duties of this committee are thus set 
 out in the Minute of their appointment: 'They are 
 charged with attending to the assistance and protection 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 137 
 
 of the people of color, and desired to endeavor to promote 
 their education, and moral and religious improvement of 
 those within our limits, with a view to their elevation to 
 the rank and rights of freemen.' 
 
 " But the disaffected members of the committee show- 
 ing so strong a desire to have the document read, the 
 committee at length yielded, in condescension ; entirely 
 to satisfy and gratify them, to take the time to hear it. 
 It was then read, and turned out to be an essay of like 
 character with others of their productions, containing 
 some things true, and some mixed, or at least liable to 
 objections. After the reading, it was remarked in sub- 
 stance about as follows : ' That this was a subject foreign 
 to the business of this committee, and therefore not 
 proper to be presented, or discussed by it ; that Friends 
 now all had the right, and entire undoubted privilege to 
 exercise, freely, their own conscience in abstaining from 
 anything they saw fit on conscientious ground ; a right 
 and privilege which we would be far from abridging; 
 but that we objected to the consideration of the subject in 
 this committee until it should be laid upon us as a part 
 of our business ; or to its being made a matter of disci- 
 pline ; — it being entirely a matter of conscience.' To 
 these views the main part of the committee responded, 
 and were ready to respond, but the self-active spirits of 
 some of the disaffected members were so uneasy at the 
 expression of these remarks and under this way of leaving 
 the subject, that, although Friends had in condescension 
 suffered their document to be read, they could scarcely be 
 restrained to let the committee rise in good order; as 
 some of our Friends from a distance will bear us witness. 
 
 "It should be observed that in some few meetings, 
 where the influence of the disaffected members prevailed, 
 they had been introducing into the Answers to the Queries, 
 complaints that Friends did not bear a testimony against 
 Slavery, predicated upon the use of articles supposed to 
 have been produced in slave countries. 
 
 " On page 14, they come again upon the American 
 Colonization Society, as if the members of Indiana Yearly 
 
138 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Meeting were largely engaged in Colonization, or as 
 members and contributors to that society ; neither of 
 which is the fact. There are very few Friends, if any, 
 belonging to the Yearly Meeting, who are members of 
 that society, and the contributions to its funds from 
 Friends here must have been very small. A small sum, 
 from one to three dollars, handed by a single individual, 
 and that to assist some colored persons in Tennessee, is 
 all that the seceders have been able to discover in the 
 way of recent contributions, and they have trumpeted 
 that from one part of the land to the other as a mighty 
 transgression. That contribution was not made, how- 
 ever, contrary to any Advice of the Yearly Meeting, 
 either in spirit or letter ; for our Meeting for Sufferings 
 itself, once caused near $1,000 to be contributed for pre- 
 cisely the same object, viz : to assist friends in North 
 Carolina, in helping persons of color to remove to Africa 
 and elsewhere. The Advice of the Ye-arly Meeting was 
 against participating in the work of 6 expatriation,' by 
 which it was undoubtedly meant, forcible removal, with- 
 out consent ; for this Advice was given very soon after 
 Friends of Indiana had assisted Friends of North Caro- 
 lina, as before mentioned, which is sufficient evidence 
 that voluntary removal was not opposed in the Advice. 
 If voluntary removal is what was intended by ; expatria- 
 tion, 5 every active member may probably be guilty of 
 transgression in some way or other; and if such an in- 
 terpretation be admitted, Friends could be prevented from 
 assisting people of color at all, in their removals, and 
 which none are more guilty in than many of the leading 
 seceders, who are almost continually, if not systematic- 
 ally, engaged in aiding them to escape to Canada. The 
 fact is, Friends in Indiana have taken very little part in 
 any way, in Colonization ; their feelings have been 
 mainly enlisted and directed toward amelioration and 
 general emancipation. 
 
 " The meeting therefore acted very consistently and 
 properly in passing over the remarks made by one of the 
 leading seceders, about rescinding the 6 Colonization 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 139 
 
 scheme,' and by immediately progressing on with its 
 business. 
 
 "Page 14. 'Henry Clay, the great champion of the 
 Pro-Slavery, Whig part}', and intended candidate for the 
 ensuing Presidency of the United States — the President 
 of the American Colonization Society, the slaveholder 
 and duelist, while on an electioneering tour to the State 
 of Indiana, attended a political meeting at Richmond, at 
 the time of Yearly Meeting (1842) ; word being given 
 out that it was his intention to attend the public Meeting 
 of Friends on First-day. 
 
 " Remarks. — Who gave out such word, and where was 
 it given out ? 
 
 u Page 15. ' His meeting was held on the day imme- 
 diately preceding this, at which time a petition was pre- 
 sented to him, with near two thousand signatures ap- 
 pended, requesting him to give liberty to those of his 
 fellow-beings whom he had long deprived of their just 
 rights.' 
 
 u Remarks. — It is well known that this petition was 
 got up merely for effect. It is said that it was signed by 
 men, women, children, and persons of color; and that 
 many of Henry Clay's political enemies signed it, who 
 probably cared nothing about Abolitionism, but liked 
 well enough to do something that would gall him. The 
 manner of its presentation was very reprehensible. He 
 was attached with it, in the midst of a vast concourse of 
 many thousands of his political friends, while on a visit 
 to them, at their special invitation — and upon the public 
 stand whither he had gone to address them. The petition 
 was presented by a person appearing to be a member of 
 our religious Society. Does any one think that if the 
 signers of this petition had been actuated by the sincere 
 love of the Gospel of Christ in the measure, and under a 
 sense of duty, and with any hope of making a favorable 
 impression on the mind of Henry Clay, they would have 
 taken this course for it ? Would they not have been more 
 likely to send the petition to him at his home at Ashland, 
 where he could have received and considered it coolly and 
 
140 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 calmly, aside from political bustles and political enemies ? 
 or to have presented it, by a respectful delegation, in his 
 private room at Richmond ? Such a course might have 
 been well approved. Such a one might have had a good 
 effect upon his mind. How much is it to be regretted 
 that these people, in a good cause, should act with such 
 misguided zeal. 
 
 "Page 15. 'After this, a few Friends, in behalf of 
 those who desired to ' retain their place and influence,' 
 took an opportunity to inform him that the Society (of 
 Friends) had no hand in getting up this petition,' etc. 
 
 " Remarks. — Very proper information ; and such as 
 was due to Henry Clay, and the Society of Friends, more 
 particularly as the petition had been presented by a per- 
 son who had been taken for a Friend. But the Friends 
 who gave Henry Clay this correct information, did it on 
 behalt of themselves, and are personally responsible for 
 all they said ; they were not delegated. 
 
 " Page 15. ' The Clerk of the meeting, on First-day 
 morning, took him in his carriage to meeting ; Friends 
 took care to seat him in one of the most conspicuous 
 places in the house.' 
 
 " Remarks. — What was there wrong in this ? A dis- 
 tinguished stranger visits our neighborhood on meeting 
 day; he tells a member whom he meets, that he is in- 
 clined to go to our meeting. Shall we do less than show 
 him the way \ and to find him a seat when he gets there ? 
 "Would it not be a great and reprehensible violation of all 
 good manners, courtesy, good breeding, and duty to dis- 
 respect such an intimation ? Henry Clay is distinguished 
 as an eminent politician and statesman, as a man of su- 
 perior talents, and he has long filled one of the highest 
 offices in the government. And what was done for him, 
 was done in accordance with well-defined duties in reli- 
 gious and civil society, and done in as simple a manner, 
 and with great caution to make as little parade and as 
 little disturbance as possible, and we are glad to learn 
 that Friends were generally well satisfied with what took 
 place. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FBIENDS. 141 
 
 "We are riot without feelings of gratitude to our 
 heavenly Father, that He favored us to get along with so 
 much quietness on the occasion of such a visit at so large 
 a meeting. But the Clerk of the meeting, as such, did 
 not conduct Henry Clay. The meeting had no Clerk on 
 that day, it being a public general meeting, for worship. 
 The individual who conducted him to meeting, did it upon 
 his own personal responsibility, and not as the Clerk, 
 and he must bear that responsibility. It need not, then, 
 have been any cause for separation from the Society, as 
 neither the Society nor the meeting was at all responsible 
 for Henrv Clav'S presence, or the manner of his traveling 
 to meeting. 
 
 " Fage 15. ' After the close of the meeting, men and 
 women, Ministers and Elders, gathered around him in the 
 ministers' s;aller\\ aivino- the strongest evidence bv their 
 introductions and salutations, of the high estimation in 
 which they held him ; he in turn taking care to return 
 the compliment with all the etiquette for w r hich he is 
 famed/ 
 
 u Remarlcs. — This is overstrained. iSTo such remark- 
 able demonstrations were made, as would appear from 
 their representation. The person who writes this was on 
 the spot, an eye-witness ; the writer of the Declaration, as 
 is supposed, and a great part of his leading friends, as is 
 known, were not at meeting — being at Kewport on that 
 day. An aged, infirm Friend, and worthy minister, who 
 had received kindness from Henry Clay when in severe 
 bodily affliction, among strangers, at Lexington, Ivy., in- 
 troduced him in a becoming manner to his wife, and to a 
 few other Friends near, but nothing worthy of any par- 
 ticular remark occurred, and some who were among the 
 disaffected seemed as anxious to see Henry Clay as any 
 others were.* 
 
 *It may be proper here to remark, that a contemptible tale has been 
 widely circulated, that sundry women Friends kissed Henry Clay at the 
 meeting ; and it is believed that origin and currency to this tale has 
 been given mainly by the seceders, as other persons would not be likely 
 to trouble themselves about it. Such a tale would indeed be unworthy 
 of notice and contradiction if it had not been considered of sufficient im- 
 
14:2 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " They proceed on the same page to say : ' At the time 
 of Yearly Meeting, in 1S41, Charles C. Burleigh, an em- 
 inent philanthropist, came to Richmond, on a mission to 
 plead the cause of equal and impartial justice — to plead 
 the cause of millions of our innocent suffering brethren 
 and sisters in bonds, who are not permitted to plead for 
 themselves.' 
 
 u Remark* — A great flourish this, whea the words c an 
 Abolition lecturer/ would have expressed the whole af- 
 fair. 
 
 "Page 16. ; But this man was treated with indignity 
 — with utter contempt.' 
 
 "Remarks. — Not by Friends, however, as is insinua- 
 ted. If they do not mean to say that Friends treated him 
 contemptibly, why do they state it as a cause of separa- 
 tion ? But hear them further. 
 
 uc Friends closed their meeting-house doors against 
 him, the doors of the public houses in the town were 
 closed also, and he was mobbed in the open street while 
 addressing the people.' 
 
 "Remarks. — This is also overstrained, false in insinu- 
 ation, and unsound in facts. What business would C. 0. 
 Burleigh have had in our meeting-house in Yearly Meet- 
 ing time, not being a member, except to attend a meeting 
 for worship ? This he had the most unqualified liberty to do. 
 There were few Friends in attendance, who would not 
 have offered him their own seat, if they had known him, 
 and if it had been necessary to do so in order for him to 
 be seated. 1 presume very few persons, except those 
 who have since seceded, were aware of his presence at 
 meeting. No application was made to the Trustees, in 
 his behalf, for the use of the house, to appoint a meeting ; 
 hence it must be incorrect to say that the doors were 
 closed against him, even though they know that Friends 
 
 portance for them to talk over, for the ridicule of our Society. Sufficient 
 be it to say, that no such thing occurred. 
 
 Several slanderous articles have appeared in their publications insin- 
 uating that extraordinary attention was paid to Henry Clay, because he 
 is a slaveholder, etc., etc., an insinuation no less disgusting than corrupt 
 and unfounded. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 143 
 
 are not in the practice of opening their meeting-houses 
 for the lectures of strangers. If the doors of the public 
 houses in town were not open to him, it was because the 
 houses Jiad been previously filled, as is frequently the 
 case in time of Yearly Meeting. If they have reference 
 to the meeting-houses of any other religious professors, 
 it is not necessary that we should answer for them — we 
 know nothing about it — they can answer for themselves. 
 The insinuation that Friends mobbed him in the street, 
 is detestable. It may be safely asserted, that very few, 
 if any persons of character can be found in Richmond, 
 leaving Friends out of the question, who would not most 
 decidedly disapprove of all mobbing. Isot one could 
 have been concerned in the reported mob, except bad 
 boys and persons of low character, and probably very 
 few of either. 
 
 " Page 16. ' Thus it is evident, so far as an extensive 
 tissue of facts and circumstances can establish, and so 
 far as the fruit of a tree can manifest its character, that 
 the influence by which the Yearly Meeting is now gov- 
 erned is PRO-SLAVERY, and that unsoundness lies at 
 the bottom of the opposition with which we have been 
 assailed. 5 
 
 "Remarks. — It is only by a strong exercise of chari- 
 table feeling that we can be brought to think that the 
 sentiment, expressed in this paragraph, is not willfully 
 erroneous. Examples have, however, before occurred, in 
 which, under the gloom of a thick cloud of delusion, 
 men have taken darkness for light and light for darkness, 
 and persuaded themselves to believe, through excite- 
 ments and reasonings of their own getting up, that to be 
 true which was altogether untrue. If delusion has so 
 unhappily clouded the minds of these people as to cause 
 them to imagine that the Society of Friends is in favor 
 of Slavery, it is pretty certain that it does not extend 
 itself beyond their influence ; as the public, and parti- 
 cularly the slaveholders in the slave States, are well 
 aware that Friends have long since cleared their hands 
 of this evil on conscientious ground, and that they are 
 
144 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 decidedly and firmly against slavery, in every country 
 where they are found. 
 
 " If some of the leading seceders should turn their 
 attention to themselves and seek a qualification to see, 
 in the light of Truth, whether a disposition has not been 
 growing upon them, for years, to govern our Yearly 
 Meeting in their own way, and whether, when this dis- 
 position was fairly discovered and checked, they pos- 
 sessed the meekness and humility to submit to their 
 brethren, or whether they took offense and flew off, they 
 might probably be favored to discover a reason, better 
 justified by truth than the foregoing, why they met with 
 opposition in their course. 
 
 "But hear them through the paragraph: 'Various, 
 however, are the grounds of this opposition with diffe- 
 rent individuals, and much too complicated to be fully 
 described in our limits. 
 
 " c But that which we doubt not is occupied by the 
 greater number is plainly alluded to in the following 
 extract from the Epistle of Advice of 1841 ; • Thus main- 
 taining our peaceable and Christian principles in un- 
 broken harmony, we shall, we believe, be enabled, as 
 way may open, more availingly to plead the cause of this 
 much injured race of our fellow-men, and retain the place 
 and influence which, as a Society, we have heretofore 
 had with the rulers of the land.' 
 
 "HemarJcs. — And why should we not wish to retain a 
 place in the hearts of those we desire to influence for 
 good ? If the truth is to be declared to one that has 
 departed from the right way, will it not be most effectu- 
 ally done in the spirit of kindness, in accordance with 
 4 our peaceable and Christian principles ? or shall we, if 
 we wish to convince and gain one to whom we speak, 
 approach him by calling him a thief, a liar, or a mur- 
 derer, as the case may be ? 
 
 " The insinuation," on page 17, that by being thus 
 mild, and acting up to the advice they quote, Friends 
 are ' yielding to the prejudices, or accommodating our- 
 selves to the corrupt views and sentiments of those 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Ii5 
 
 around us,' in regard to Slavery, comes without any sub- 
 stantial proof, and is believed to be groundless. 
 
 "They proceed, on the same page, to notice the case 
 of the eight members of the Meeting for Sufferings, who 
 were reported by that meeting to the Yearly Meeting as 
 having lost their usefulness in the first-named body. As 
 those eight members are among the principal leaders in 
 the schism, and the declaration w T as probably drawn up 
 by them, a sense of modesty, one would have thought, 
 ought to have prevented their making this circumstance 
 public. We should also think that any person of calm 
 mind, who knows what their proceedings have been since 
 that report, could not for a moment doubt the justice of 
 the measure. The Meeting for Sufferings is a delegated 
 body, acting under appointment, like a committee, to do 
 important business, in behalf of the Society, in the inte- 
 rim of the regular sessions of the Yearly Meeting. It 
 would indeed be strange doctrine to presume that the 
 Yearly Meeting has not power to see that it is fairly re- 
 presented by this body, which is appointed by itself for 
 the special purpose of representing it ; and that the 
 Yearly Meeting has not power to examine, dismiss, and 
 appoint others, until it shall be fairly represented. And 
 it has been a general rule in our Meeting for Sufferings, 
 which the Yearly Meeting has always recognized, that 
 the former, standing, as it does, to watch the interests of 
 the Society, has the liberty to make any suggestion or 
 proposition to the latter which the slate of society may 
 require or which may be thought proper. Xow here are 
 certain members of the Meeting for Sufferings who do 
 not represent the Yearly Meeting ; who are counteract- 
 ing and opposing its Advices ; who are so alienated in 
 their feelings that they are taking open and active mea- 
 sures directly at variance with the wishes of the meeting 
 they represent. It would be great anarchy if they must 
 be allowed to pursue their career interminably. They 
 are talked to kindly, again and again ; they are per- 
 suaded ; they are admonished by their own personal and 
 intimate friends, and by divers valuable Friends, eminent 
 
 
146 HISTORY OF THE SEPAEATION IH 
 
 for their piety, traveling from other States and countries 
 for the spread of the Gospel through our land, but all to 
 no effect. They know too much. They refuse to be per- 
 suaded. They refuse to change. And what could the 
 Meeting for Sufferings do less, with the knowledge of 
 these facts before it, than to make the suggestion to the 
 Yearly Meeting that they had lost their usefulness. The 
 Yearly Meeting would then be at liberty to act in the 
 case as it might see proper. It was nothing like disown- 
 ment, nor did it contain or contemplate any preparatory 
 Steps for it. But previously to making this suggestion, 
 a large committee was appointed in the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings, who considered the matter weightily ; and when 
 they exposed the names of the eight members alluded to, 
 a deep feeling pervaded the meeting, and almost every 
 person in the meeting, excepting the ones named, wept 
 freely — while the conviction of the propriety and neces- 
 sity of the course was so strong that a very general 
 expression of unity with the proceedings was made, 
 under feelings of deep solemnity and sorrow. 
 
 " We are informed that the seceders were consulting, 
 between this time and the time when the suggestion 
 should reach the Yearly Meeting, concerning measures 
 for defense and for the defeat of any proposition which 
 might be made in reference to their leaders. So^ it is 
 easy to see why the proposition was made in the Yearly 
 Meeting by one of them, that the Minutes should state 
 the cause of their disqualification. The object of that 
 proposition was well understood by the greater part of 
 the meeting, as soon as made. It is believed that there 
 are very few members of the Yearly Meeting who are in 
 the practice of taking an active part in its business, who 
 did not readily see that the proposition was of a political 
 nature, designed entirely to create difficulty by throwing 
 out this plausible defense, which should be at once 
 seconded by their own party. Hence the reason is plain 
 why the meeting passed on without granting a request 
 so unprecedented. 
 
 There are yet two or three pages of the Declaration 
 
iKDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIEKDS, li? 
 
 which contain no matter which will claim attention at 
 this time, further than a few general remarks. We can- 
 not now call up in review every objectionable sentence 
 and expression. The whole document is written in a 
 spirit so evidently bad toward our religious society, that 
 most impartial readers will readily see and feel it. And 
 it might be added, that the whole is written under such 
 perversions of thought, that most of the matters brought 
 to view are unfairly or incorrectly represented, or shown 
 out under false colors. It, therefore, would require more 
 time to descend into minute explanations, refutations, 
 and defense, and extend this review to a greater length 
 than can be profitably appropriated to it, without being 
 wearisome, or than was contemplated when the pen was 
 taken up. 
 
 "In reading this declaration and other publications of 
 the seceders, we seem to arrive at the following conclu- 
 sions, which may be thus stated: 
 
 " 1. That a spirit of self-confidence and independence 
 is entertained by the seceders, and a determination, on 
 their part, not to submit to the church government and 
 discipline. 
 
 u 2. They make a general and, in many cases, unex- 
 plained charge of Colonization against the Society, not 
 only in the West, but elsewhere throughout America. 
 This charge contains a slander, because w 7 hen explained 
 out in words, they interpret it to be a disposition to drive 
 from the country, without their consent, the people of 
 color generally, on account of an unjust estimation or 
 disregard of their rights, on account of unmerited preju- 
 dices against them, and for the purpose of perpetuating 
 Slavery, etc. Such a charge against our Society is be- 
 lieved to be insupportable, and the causes of it to exist 
 merely in the imagination, without reality. An exten- 
 sive knowledge of the state of feeling in our Yearly 
 Meeting convinces us that the great body of active mem- 
 bers in Society hold no views of Colonization except such 
 as are just, humane, and philanthropic, and in accord- 
 
14:8 KISTOBY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 ance with unconditional emancipation. Colonization is 
 not relied upon to extinguish Slavery. 
 
 " 3. They charge that a widely extended prejudice is 
 entertained against the African race on account of their 
 color, degradation, etc., which they say, operates against 
 their enlargement, and extends itself through the Society 
 of Friends. It will be time enough to defend ourselves 
 against this charge when proof of guilt is made. There 
 may be too much prejudice among us ; if there is, we 
 have reason to hope and believe that there is a disposi- 
 tion to be corrected, when convinced, and to endeavor to 
 come to the right standard. 
 
 " 4. They place the existence of a predominant Pro- 
 Slavery feeling in the Society, which, they say, shows 
 itself in a desire to be popular with the slaveholder, etc. ; 
 a charge which may safely be considered slanderous, and 
 rejected as unworthy of refutation. 
 
 " It should be remarked, in the close, that the religious 
 Society of Friends, in this country, has nothing to do 
 with the modern Anti-Slavery societies, or with the 
 Colonization, for good or for evil. We have once said, 
 in an Epistle, that we ' wish to say nothing to discourage 
 any Christian effort in the cause of freedom, by the first 
 of these, nor to call in question the benevolent motives 
 which influence many who are engaged in the last. Our 
 desires and prayers are, that the Lord, in his mercy, may 
 overrule the whole for good.' The same views and feel- 
 ings are still entertained. 
 
 "And for the seceders themselves, we earnestly desire 
 forgiveness for all their errors, mistakes, and irregulari- 
 ties : and that through Divine favor, they may be enabled 
 to return into a state of calmness, repentance, and fellow- 
 ship with their brethren; which, we think, would greatly 
 contribute to their own happiness and be calculated to 
 give furtherance, more effectually, to the good cause in 
 which they profess to be engaged." 
 
 As this anonymous author endeavors to make the im- 
 pression, that a certain " report," alluded to in the 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 149 
 
 Declaration as coming from a branch of the committee 
 on the concerns of the People of Color, contained objec- 
 tionable matter, and that which was not strictly true, the 
 reader may find it by turning to page 54, and by a re- 
 examination (if he has already read it) be the better pre* 
 pared to judge of the propriety of the statement. 
 
 CHAPTEE XIV. 
 
 Defense against the Attacks of an anonymous Reviewer. 
 
 The charges and misrepresentations of this nameless 
 author were met by the Meeting for Sufferings of the 
 newly-organized body, in the following manner; 
 
 DEFENSE 
 
 OF 
 
 AKTI-SLAVERY FRIENDS, 
 
 AGAINST THE SLANDEROUS ATTACKS OF AN ANONYMOUS REVLETVXR. 
 
 Issued by a Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of A. S. Friends, held at Newport, in Wayne 
 Co., Indiana, on the 25th of Eleventh month, 1843. 
 
 " A document, purporting to be a Keview of the De- 
 claration issued by our Yearly Meeting, in the Second 
 month last, having been published and widely circulated, 
 containing much that is erroneous, and intended to make 
 an unfavorable impression on the public mind, and par- 
 ticularly on the minds of distant Friends, respecting the 
 character and proceedings of A. S. Friends, we believe 
 it to be our duty to say something in our own defense, 
 and in defense of the cause of Truth, against the false 
 
150 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 charges and dark insinuations, as well as to expose 
 some of the erroneous principles contained in the Re- 
 view. 5 
 
 " If the Review had been written by an obscure indi- 
 vidual, and had not received the sanction of the most 
 active and prominent members of the Yearly Meeting, 
 by giving it a general circulation as an approved work, 
 we should not have felt ourselves under the same obliga- 
 tion to notice it. But as it is, being written (as is gener- 
 ally believed, and we have never heard of its being de- 
 nied) by the individual who has long filled the most im- 
 portant station in the Yearly Meeting, and who has been 
 re-appointed to that station since its publication ; and 
 being approved by the leading influences, both in the 
 Yearly Meeting and Meeting for Sufferings, we have to 
 regard it as entitled to the same respect or censure, as if 
 it had been issued by the Meeting for Sufferings. All it 
 lacks is the mere formality of reading in that meeting, 
 and the signature of its Clerk, and this was most probably 
 omitted, in order to avoid the responsibility, in case its 
 errors should be exposed. And as the Yearly Meeting 
 in 1841, censured members of Society for publishing an 
 address to Friends, written by Joseph Sturge, because it 
 was not approved by a Meeting for Sufferings ; so, in the 
 case before us, the writer of the review is a violator of 
 discipline, according to their own doctrine. And if it is 
 wrong to publish such a document over the author's 
 name, is it less wrong to publish it without a name ! If 
 the author of the Review had affixed his name to his pro- 
 duction, he would have been liable to the public censure 
 of the Yearly Meeting. But as he has withheld it from 
 the public, although he is known by the leading members 
 to have committed the censurable act, he is still promoted 
 to the highest place in the Society. But whether the 
 author was known or not, if it be contrary to discipline 
 (as our opposers say it is) to publish anything of the 
 kind without the approbation of the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings, it is very inconsistent for leading characters in So- 
 ciety to give it their sanction by circulating it. 
 
INDIANA TEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS, 151 
 
 " The author of the work and all who aid in its publi- 
 cation and circulation are equally guilty. Take an illns* 
 tration. Theft is a crime punishable by the civil law. 
 It', however, a thief is crafty enough to escape detection, 
 he escapes the penalty, but is he less guilty ? And if 
 the administrators of the law know who the thief is, 
 share in the plunder, and promote the thief to places of 
 trust, are they not all alike guilty? We have not. and 
 do not now. condemn individuals for publishing their 
 views (under certain circumstances) on any moral or re- 
 ligious question, but our opposers have brought them- 
 selves into the present dilemma, by maintaining this doe- 
 trine when it seems to suit their purpose, and violating 
 it when circumstances appeared to render it expedient ; 
 and they have attempted to evade the penalty of the law 
 (according to their own construction) by concealment. 
 
 " The Query, ; From what privileges have they been 
 deprived by the Yearly Meeting?- needs no other reply 
 than a reference to documents already before the public, 
 and we have no doubt but all unprejudiced persons who 
 are acquainted with the history of the past, in reference 
 to this subject, will consider this question in no other 
 light than as an insult to us, and to the good sense of the 
 community. We were deprived of every privilege of 
 Society except bare membership, and we know, whatever 
 may now be said to the contrary, that measures were in 
 train calculated to deprive us of that. Perhaps we ought 
 to have made one other exception . While we were deprived 
 of the privilege of exerting any influence in the disposi- 
 tion of the affairs of the Society, while we were denied 
 the privilege of discharging those duties which we be- 
 lieved to be required of us, and our liberty of conscience 
 denied us, we were still allowed the privilege of paying 
 as much as we pleased, toward defraying the expenses of 
 Society, 
 
 " The assertion, more than once made, that we wished 
 to rule the Yearly Meeting, is without foundation in 
 truth, and must proceed from a mind grossly perverted 
 by prejudice, or influenced by a malicious design to de- 
 
153 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 stroy our character, by misrepresentation and falsehood. 
 So far were we from wishing to rule the Yearly Meeting, 
 we stood entirely on the defensive. So far were we from 
 attempting to drive other Friends into our measures and 
 practices, we only asked for liberty to discharge our duty 
 to the slave, according to the dictates of our consciences. 
 We did not wish to compel or require others to join A. 
 S. Societies, to attend A. S. Meetings, to deliver A. S. 
 Lectures, or to read A. S. papers and publications; but 
 we plead for liberty to do any or all of those things our- 
 selves, as we believed them to be our duty, and this 
 liberty was denied us. And for the exercise of these du- 
 ties which we conscientiously believed to be required of 
 us, we have been persecuted and proscribed, and driven 
 to the necessity of seceding from the - body,' in order to 
 enjoy our rights in peace. 
 
 " The assertion, that, so far as we had power, we 
 selected our own men to the exclusion of others, is equally 
 untrue and unfounded. On the contrary, we know that 
 Anti-Slavery Friends, when they took the liberty to name 
 Friends on committees, very frequently named those 
 who were opposed to our Anti-Slavery labors, or as they 
 are commonly called c body members.' But if the charge 
 were true, we know it was the course pursued by our op* 
 posers, and directed by the Yearly Meeting to be prac- 
 ticed. Why should they condemn us for that which they 
 were guilty of themselves. 
 
 a The remarks about the deterioration of the Society 
 of Friends are remarkable. Will the writer say that it 
 has not deteriorated ? And did we say, that we had not 
 deteriorated from the ancient purity of the Society, or 
 that we were more holy than those we have left behind ? 
 Then why the self-important conclusion, that ' those in- 
 terested will not fail to take notice whether this is the 
 state of facts V 
 
 " We wish to be a little particular with regard to the 
 remarks of the reviewer, on the A. S. and Colonization 
 societies, as here is an important point in the controversy. 
 It has frequently been asserted by A. S. Friends, that 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETlKG OF FKIEKDS. 153 
 
 our opposers were not so much influenced by opposition 
 to uniting with other people in benevolent enterprises, as 
 by hostility to the present Anti-Slavery societies, or to 
 what is termed modern Abolition ; and that they, or at 
 least, many of the leaders, were favorable to the Ameri- 
 can Colonization Society. These charges have been 
 denied by many individuals, and represented as un- 
 founded and slanderous. But surely they cannot be dis- 
 puted any longer. After such sentiments as are contained 
 in the Review have been put forth by such an individual^ 
 and received the sanction of the leading members — of 
 those whose influence pervades and regulates all the 
 transactions of the Society, it cannot be denied that they 
 are the sentiments of the ruling part of the Yearly Meet- 
 ing. To prove their opposition to the present A. S. so- 
 cieties it is only necessary to quote a sentence or two 
 from the Review. After quoting from our Declaration an 
 expression made use of by us to show that Friends were 
 formerly in favor of mixed associations to promote the 
 abolition of Slavery, stating that 4 James Pemberton, 
 "Warner Mifflin, and many other Friends, eminent for 
 their piety and virtue, apprehending that much advan- 
 tage to the cause of the oppressed Africans might be de- 
 rived from duly enlisting all classes of the community in 
 their behalf, engaged in the formation of associations for 
 that purpose,' the writer of the Review says: ; Not asso- 
 ciations of their sort however. The modern Abolition 
 societies took their rise as lately as 1832, and do not 
 agree in practice, nor throughout in principle, with the 
 worthy individuals whom they name.' Now, is it not 
 plain that the objection really is to the modern A. S. 
 societies, and not to uniting with other people? The 
 argument is plainly this: 'Those worthy individuals' 
 did right in uniting with others, because the principles 
 of the societies they formed were sound, and their prac- 
 tices correct. But it is not right for Friends to join 
 modern A. S. societies, because their practice is errone- 
 ous and their principles unsound. If this is not the 
 import of the expression, it means nothing, For surely 
 
154 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 it does not touch the question, of the propriety or 
 impropriety of uniting with others for the promotion 
 of a good work, except to sanction it by claiming those 
 who are known to haye practiced it, as their people. 
 
 " As an additional evidence of hostility to the present 
 Anti-Slavery associations, hear him again. Quoting 
 from the Declaration, where we were speaking of the 
 good that had been effected by the A. S. institutions 
 which Pemberton and other Friends were instrumental 
 in establishing, the writer of the Review throws in a 
 parenthetic sentence, thus : ( i not modern Abolition insti- 
 tutions it should be remembered 5 ). Seeing then, that 
 according to their own showing, they have no objection 
 to joining A. S. societies, if they be of the right kind, 
 why have they not shown wherein the modern differ from 
 the ancient, so as to render them objectionable? If, in- 
 stead of condemning the practice of joining benevolent 
 associations altogether, the objection had only been made 
 to joining those that were established upon wrong prin- 
 ciples, and that pursued wrong practices, and had those 
 erroneous principles and practices been pointed out, we 
 might have been led to establish others that would be 
 free from these objections. 
 
 u We think we have now shown conclusively that the 
 writer of the Review, and all who have given it their 
 sanction, are not opposed to joining in mixed associa- 
 tions, the objects and principles of which they approve 9 
 but that they are opposed to the modern A. S. enterprise. 
 We are ready to admit and believe that this opposition 
 is occasioned more by the unpopularity of the cause, 
 than by any settled hostility to its principles; yet as 
 they make an objection to its principles and practices, let 
 us inquire wherein the modern Anti-Slavery societies 
 differ from those in the days of Mifflin, Pemberton, etc., 
 in order that we may discover the objectionable feature 
 in the modern, as the reviewer has not pointed it out 
 to us. 
 
 u As regards practice, we are not able to point out any 
 material difference, and as the reviewer has not shown 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 155 
 
 any, we shall take it for granted that there is none, and 
 inquire what is the difference in principle \ And here 
 we know of no difference except in one point. The old 
 societies advocated gradual emancipation — the new. 
 advocate immediatism. The old said, cease sinning by 
 degrees — the new says, leave it off immediately. It is 
 then the doctrine of immediate, as distinguished from 
 gradual emancipation that renders the modern A. S. 
 societies obnoxious to the displeasure of our reviewer 
 and his adherents. 
 
 " It seems scarcely necessary to say anything to prove 
 their attachment to the Colonization scheme, after the 
 labored defense* thereof by the reviewer. The most in- 
 credulous must be convinced that they hold the Coloniza- 
 tion Society in much more favor than the A. S. Society. 
 The former is praised and defended, while the latter is 
 treated with contempt, and represented as unworthy of 
 the patronage of such men as Mifflin, Pemberton, etc. 
 The defense of the Colonization Society seems to have 
 been the most prominent object in the reviewers mind, 
 as we believe he has devoted a greater space to it than to 
 any other topic embraced in the Review. 
 
 u It will be proper, we apprehend, to notice some of 
 his assertions on this head, and to see how they will 
 compare with facts. He quotes from our Declaration as 
 follows : 
 
 " ; This circumstance, taken in connection with that of 
 the formation and active operation of the Colonization 
 Society, instituted mainly by slaveholders and purposely 
 for the removal of the * free people of color ' from the 
 country, and in order that none of the despised class 
 might enjoy liberty among us. almost sealed the fate of 
 genuine Anti-Slavery feeling in the Society/ And then 
 says: 
 
 wi ; How melancholy the reflection that men professing 
 to be guided under the influence of the religion of 
 Christ, should be so far deluded as to hazard such ex- 
 pressions ! what a shame to our religion! what a handle 
 for infidels v 
 
156 tllSTOBY OF THS SEPARATION IK 
 
 " What are the expressions so notoriously bad, the bare 
 Utterance of which is cause of such melancholy reflec- 
 tions? We are assured by what follows that the expres- 
 sion respecting the institution of the Colonization Society 
 is particularly obnoxious to his indignation ; for he imme- 
 diately enters into a defense of that institution, commen- 
 cing thus : c The Colonization Society originated with 
 Robert Finley, of New Jersey, and has always, it is said,, 
 received more patronage at the North than at the South. 
 From the rise, many men of the best talents, of the high- 
 est order of practical benevolence, and of undoubted 
 piety, have always taken an active interest in its success,' 
 What a departure from charity, what a slander upon all 
 these (and such as these have always been among the 
 leaders), to say that their object was the removal of the 
 free people of color in order that none of them might 
 enjoy liberty among us* If it be slander to tell the truth, 
 then the language of our Declaration is slanderous. We 
 asserted that the Colonization Society was instituted 
 mainly by slaveholders, and purposely for the removal 
 of the free people of color from the country, in order that 
 none of the despised class might enjoy liberty among us. 
 That this statement is true, is susceptible of the strongest 
 evidence from the documents furnished by Colonization* 
 ists themselves. That the Colonization Society was in- 
 stituted mainly by slaveholders, is a fact too notorious 
 to need confirmation, is evident to all who are acquainted 
 with its orign, and it is difficult for us to believe that the 
 writer of the Review did not know it. But for the sake 
 of those who may not be acquainted with its history, we 
 will state some of the particulars. With whom the idea 
 of colonizing the free people of color on the coast of 
 Africa originated, is nothing to the purpose, if it could 
 be ascertained, and we presume it is unknown to any 
 person living. The institution of the society is the mat- 
 ter under consideration.' 5 
 
 " On the 23d of Twelfth month, 1816, the Legislature 
 of Virginia, passed a resolution, requesting the governor 
 to correspond with the President of the United States, for 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 157 
 
 the purpose of obtaining a territory on the coast of Africa, 
 or at some other place not within the limits of any of 
 the States, or Territorial Governments of the United 
 States, to serve as an asylum for such persons of color 
 as are now free, and may desire the same, and for those 
 who may hereafter be emancipated within this Common- 
 wealth. 
 
 &i Xear the same time a meeting was held at Washing- 
 ton, to consider this same subject. . William Jay, in his 
 4 Inquiry,' says : ' It was composed almost entirely of 
 Southern gentlemen ; Judge Washington presided, Mr. 
 Clay, Mr. Randolph, and others, took part in the discus- 
 sions which ensued, and which resulted in the organiza- 
 tion of the American Colonization Society. Judge Wash- 
 ington was chosen President, and of the seventeen Vice- 
 Presidents, only five were selected from the free States, 
 while the twelve managers were, it is believed, without 
 one exception, slaveholders.' 
 
 t; In the Appendix to the fourteenth annual Report, in 
 an attempt to prove to the slaveholders, that the Colon- 
 ization scheme is well adapted to promote their interests, 
 this language is used: ; nor should it be forgotten, that 
 most of those who met to organize the Society, and ALL 
 who expressed their sentiments on that occasion, were 
 slaveholders.' Will any one now question this part of 
 our statement, c that the Colonization Society was insti- 
 tuted mainly by slaveholders V 
 
 " Next, it devolves upon us to show that it was c pur- 
 posely for the removal of the free people of color from 
 this country.' 
 
 c * This is evident from the first article in their^ Consti- 
 tution. Here it is : 
 
 "'Art. 1. This Society shall be called the American 
 Society for Colonizing the Free People of Color in the 
 United States.' 
 
 " The second article is equally, or even more explicit 
 on this point. It reads thus : 
 
 " ' Art. 2d. The object to which its attention is to be 
 exclusively directed, is to promote and execute a plan for 
 
 3 
 
158 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 colonizing (with their own consent) the free people of 
 color residing in our country, in Africa, or such other 
 place as Congress shall deem most expedient, 5 etc. 
 
 u Thus far then we have substantiated our statement. 
 It remains now to prove that it was ' in order that 
 none of the despised class might enjoy liberty among 
 us. 5 
 
 " The Constitution of the society leaves us altogether 
 in the dark as to its motives, further than they can be 
 ascertained by the expression of its object. They do not 
 tell us why they, wished to colonize the free people of 
 color, but it is evident that it could not have been for 
 their own benefit nor for the benefit of Africa ; for it is 
 expressly set forth, that they are to be colonized ' in Afri- 
 ca, or such other place as Congress shall deem best- 5 
 Any place out of the United States. Does not this look 
 like a design to prevent them from enjoying liberty 
 among us ? But we have stronger testimony than this. 
 It is true, in one sense, as the writer of the Review says, 
 that ' the Colonization Society had no power, if they had 
 desired to do so, to compel free people to go to Africa, 5 
 but they had the power, and have used it extensively, to 
 exert such an influence as to cause the situation of free 
 colored people to be extremely unpleasant here, and thus 
 to induce them to go to Africa. Recollect, the object 
 was to promote and execute a plan for colonizing (with 
 their own consent). This plan could not be executed un- 
 less their consent could be obtained. To obtain their con- 
 sent then, was a part of their object, as much as to col- 
 onize them. They do not say their object is to colonize 
 them if they consent to go, but to colonize them w T ith their 
 consent. Those w r ho are acquainted with the history of 
 this affair know something, and those who will take the 
 trouble to examine it may know something of the diabol- 
 ical means resorted to, to obtain that consent, both in the 
 slave and free States. In order to show more conclusively 
 that the design was to prevent free colored people from 
 enjoying liberty among us, we will make a few quota- 
 tions. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 159 
 
 "'Free blacks are a greater nuisance than even slaves 
 themselves.' Address of C. C. Harper, African Repos- 
 itory, vol, XI, page 189. 
 
 " i A horde of miserable people — the objects of univer- 
 sal suspicion — subsisting by plunder.' Speech of Mercer % 
 Vice- President. 
 
 " < Of all classes of our population, the most vicious is 
 that of the free colored— contaminated themselves, they 
 extend their vices to all around them.' Speech of Henry 
 Clay, Vice-President. 12th Report, p. 21. 
 
 " 'Averse to labor, with no incentives to industry or 
 motives to respect, they maintain a precarious existence 
 by petty thefts and'plunder.' Af Rep. VI. 135. 
 
 " 'An anomalous race of beings, the most depraved 
 upon earth.' Af. Rep. TIL 135. 
 
 "We could give much more of the same character if our 
 limits would allow, and it were necessary, showing the 
 means used for carrying out the plan of the society. Is 
 it not plain that the object of these speakers and writers 
 was to excite a strong prejudice against the free colored 
 population— -to induce such measures toward them as 
 would extort their consent to removal ? Is this the lan- 
 guage of kindness and benevolence ? And are the au- 
 thors of these sentiments, the men spoken of by our re- 
 viewer, as ' men of the best talents, of the highest order 
 of practical benevolence and undoubted piety V They 
 are certainly among the leaders, and he says, ' such as 
 these have always been among the leaders.' 
 
 "As a further evidence of the tendency of the scheme 
 to promote the oppression of the free colored people in 
 this country, to obtain their consent to be expatriated, we 
 will make a few more quotations. 
 
 "'This law (a law by which a manumitted negro be- 
 comes again a slave if he remains twelve months in the 
 State), odious and unjust as it may at first view appear, 
 and hard as it may seem to bear upon the liberated negro, 
 was, doubtless, dictated by sound, policy , and its repeal 
 would be regarded by none with more unfeigned regret 
 than by the friends of African Colonization. It has 
 
160 HISTORY OF THE SE^AfcATlOtf IN 
 
 restrained many masters from giving freedom to their 
 slaves and has thereby contributed to check the growth of 
 an evil already too great and formidable. 5 Memorial of 
 Powhattan Col. Soc. to Virginia Legislature. 
 
 "'-*! am clear that whether we consider it with refer- 
 ence to the welfare of the State, or the happiness of the 
 blacks, it were better to have left them in CHAINS, than 
 to have liberated them to receive such freedom as they 
 enjoy, and greater freedom w r e cannot, must not allow 
 them. 5 Af Rep. III. 197. 
 
 " ' We do not ask that the provisions of our Constitu- 
 tion and statute book should be so modified as to relieve 
 and exalt the condition of the colored people while they 
 remain with us. Let these provisions stand in all their 
 rigor, to work out the ultimate and unbounded good of 
 these people. 5 The obvious meaning of this is, to com- 
 pel them to go to Africa. Memorial of the N. Y. State 
 Col. Soc. to the Legislature. 
 
 " Brodnax, a strong advocate of Colonization, said, in 
 the Virginia Legislature : 
 
 " 'Lt is idle to talk about not resorting to force. Every 
 body must look to the introduction of force of some kind 
 or other. If the free negroes are willing to go, they will 
 go ; if not, they must be compelled to go.' And again, 
 'all of us look to force of some kind or other, direct or in- 
 direct, moral or physical, legal or illegal. 5 
 
 " The free people of color early discovered the evil 
 tendencies and prejudicial effects of this scheme and 
 generally opposed to it. At a meeting of them held in 
 New Bedford, in 1832, the following resolutions were 
 passed. 
 
 " c Resolved, That in whatever light we view the Col- 
 onization Society, we discover nothing in it but terror, 
 prejudice, and oppression. The w T arm and beneficent 
 hand of philanthropy is not apparent in the system, but 
 the influence of the society on public opinion is more 
 prejudicial to the interests and welfare of the people of 
 color in the United States than Slavery itself. 5 
 
 " 'Resolved, That the society, to effect its purpose, the 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 161 
 
 removal of the free people of color (not the slaves) 
 through its agents, teaches the public to believe that it is 
 patriotic and benevolent to withhold from us knowledge, 
 and means of acquiring subsistence ; and to look upon 
 us as unnatural and illegal residents in this country, and 
 thus by the force of prejudice, if not by law, endeavor 
 to compel us to embark for Africa, and that, too, appa- 
 rently by our own free-will and consent.' 
 
 u Let the impartial reader now judge whether we have 
 not fully substantiated the charge that the c Colonization 
 Society was instituted mainly by slaveholders, and pur- 
 posely for the removal of the free people of color from 
 this country, in order that none of the despised class 
 might enjoy liberty among us. Where then is the 
 c shame to our religion V the c handle for infidels V They 
 consist in the facts that the charge is true, and that pro- 
 fessing Christians, well acquainted with the circum- 
 stances, should attempt to mislead the uninformed by 
 denying it. That the Colonization scheme has had the 
 effect to strengthen the chains of the slave, and that it 
 was so intended, is attested by the memorial of the Pow- 
 hattan Colonization Society to the Virginia Legislature, 
 in the following language: ^ It has restrained many 
 masters from giving liberty to their slaves, and has 
 thereby contributed to check the growth of an evil 
 already too great and formidable^ This is the society 
 which we have charged the leading characters in the old 
 Yearly Meeting with favoring, and of this charge they 
 stand convicted before the public. Whether they support 
 it for the purpose of producing these results or not, is not 
 the question at issue. It is enough that they advocate a 
 scheme having such tendencies and instituted for such 
 purposes. 
 
 "We have not charged them, as the writer intimates, 
 with relying upon Colonization, to extingish Slavery. 
 This was no part of the object in the formation of the 
 society, but directly the reverse. If we could believe 
 them ignorant enough to advocate the Colonization 
 Society as a means of abolishing Slavery, we could look 
 
162 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 upon their conduct with more charity ; and notwithstand- 
 ing the denial of such motives by the reviewer, we do 
 hope that some of those who favor the scheme, do it in 
 ignorance, not knowing its design and tendencies, but 
 looking upon it as a means of exterminating Slavery. 
 
 u This is the institution our author attempts to justify, 
 a hundredth part of the obliquity and moral turpitude of 
 the actions and principles of which cannot be disclosed 
 in our limits. He even declares in effect, that it is more 
 objectionable to assist a brother, who, having fallen 
 among thieves and been stripped, wounded, and robbed 
 of everything, has escaped them and come to our houses, 
 although naked and hungry, than to support that 
 association. 
 
 "A society, too, the funds of which go directly to pay 
 for instruments of death, and for obtaining implements 
 to defend their colony with devastation and slaughter. 
 He even dared to assert that to contribute to those funds 
 is not contrary to any Advice of the Yearly Meeting of 
 Indiana heretofore issued. In 1836, that Yearly Meeting 
 cautioned its members to take no part in, nor render any 
 aid to, any political association on the subject of African 
 Slavery, which is, or may be founded on principles either 
 directly or indirectly, having a tendency to promote the 
 unrighteous work of expatriation; it being our settled 
 conviction that this work, as a condition to the slaves 
 being set at liberty, is unjust and oppressive. In 1838, 
 it says : c fearing that there are of our members occupying 
 and contending for grounds that are not in full accordance 
 with our well known testimonies on this important sub- 
 ject, by too much countenancing the policy of the day, 
 which denies to that class of our fellow-beings the capa- 
 city of enjoying the natural rights of man, only on the 
 terms of expatriation, we earnestly invite Friends to 
 renewed exertions on behalf of suffering humanity, etc' 
 
 ' 4 Now it is well known that it is the policy of the 
 American Colonization Society and its prominent advo- 
 cates, to oppose any scheme of emancipation without 
 Colonization, and the author of the Review must know (it 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 163 
 
 cannot be otherwise) that it was this association that was 
 alluded to in the Advices above quoted, and yet he says, 
 virtually, it is not contrary to them, to aid, support, and 
 countenance this scheme ! although it is evident that he 
 endeavors to mislead his readers by representing it as 
 merely aiding in voluntary removals ; but we have seen 
 what kind of voluntary removals this society and its 
 advocates endeavor to promote. 
 
 u He says, page 6, ' the Advice of the Yearly Meeting 
 was against participating in the work of expatriation ; by 
 which it was undoubtedly meant, forcible removal.' 
 Here he, in effect, says that the Advice was against 
 directly aiding in this work. Not so ; it was against 
 aiding an association founded on principles having a 
 tendency, either directly or indirectly, to promote this 
 unrighteous work, and we have shown that such was the 
 tendency of the Colonization Society! 
 
 "Again, he endeavors to confound the principles of 
 Buxton and many other English philanthropists in regard 
 to forming colonies on the western coast of Africa, with 
 this nefarious scheme of slaveholders ; while, at the same 
 time, he must be aware that Buxton has condemned and 
 repudiated it in the most unqualified terms. 
 
 " There is one very strange feature about this little 
 anonymous document. The author, after endeavoring to 
 advocate and defend the Colonization Society as a good 
 institution, and never once uttering a syllable against 
 any of its principles or measures, says, that ' Friends of 
 Indiana have taken very little part, in any way, in Colo- 
 nization.' Now, if he really thinks it is such an institu- 
 tion as he would have us believe, why should he, in 
 endeavoring to defend the Society of Friends, declare 
 that it has taken very little part in supporting it. To us 
 it is clear that he does not believe his own representa- 
 tions of its character, or else that he has charged those 
 whom he professes to defend, with criminal apathy, in 
 neglecting to support a work, so good as he represents 
 it to be. 
 
 " But here it should be remembered, that it was not 
 
164 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 on account of the members of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
 being so largely engaged in actual colonization, or of 
 their rendering any great pecuniary support to that 
 society, that the subject was spoken of in the Declaration, 
 in either place, but to show the sentiment and feeling of 
 the leaders in the ruling party, in favor thereof, to show 
 the existence of those feelings among them which present 
 one of the most powerful barriers to the progress of the 
 cause of immediate emancipation in our country, feelings 
 which almost everywhere around us are expressed in 
 language like this : ' I am as much opposed to Slavery as 
 anybody, but I don't want the niggers set free here among 
 us.' ' If they could have a country to themselves, I 
 should be glad they were free, but I don't w T ant them 
 turned loose unless they are colonized. 5 When the same 
 sentiments are expressed by those Friends in unity with 
 the ruling party of that Yearly Meeting, they generally 
 assume a somew T hat milder form, such as, c I would 
 rather they were somewhere to themselves.' c Would it 
 not be better for both classes (whites and blacks), for the 
 colored people to be in a country of their own V etc. On 
 page 4 of the Review, the author asserts that the labors 
 of Friends, in promoting the extinction of Slavery, have 
 been active and unremitted for fifty years or more. 
 
 " It is difficult to conceive of a greater departure from 
 all truth, than there is in this Declaration. It is well 
 known that fifty or sixty years ago, and some time after, 
 many of the most prominent members of the society 
 were actively engaged in associations, organized ex- 
 pressly for the purpose of promoting the abolition of 
 Slavery, in addition to what was being done among 
 Friends as a religious society; which all w r ho are ap- 
 prised of the zeal and energy of the influential part, 
 must know, was far more than what it has accomplished 
 in that capacity at any recent date. And it is equally 
 well known, that all those societies have been suffered to 
 expire for want of this energy and zeal, with but one soli- 
 tary exception, and so completely have they remitted all 
 their efforts that a member of Society would now be con- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 165 
 
 sidered as a violator of the Advice of Society even for 
 holding membership in that very organization which. 
 Friends more than fifty years ago were instrumental in 
 establishing. 
 
 " The author proceeds, page 2, to make some extracts 
 from Woolman, which, he says, will make plain to any 
 one who understands the views and is acquainted with 
 the acts of the seceders, whether they hold and act upon 
 his principles. Various quotations are then made, care- 
 fully italicizing such passages as this: ' nothing is more 
 precious than the mind of truth inwardly manifested f 
 4 'inward prayer ;' c deeply bowed under the weight of the 
 work f c looking often to the Lord for assistance ;' ; m 
 the fear of the Lord J etc., and then winds up by saying, 
 1 how different was John Woolman's spirit, how different 
 his example of waiting and labor from theirs. 5 All this 
 is mere assertion, and all the italicizing, together with 
 his remarks, show that he, claiming to be with Woolman, 
 claims also to occupy a position entirely the reverse of 
 that held by Anti-Slavery Friends in regard to e inward 
 prayer,' 'the fear of the Lord,' etc., and discovers to us 
 much of the spirit of the Pharisee, alluded to by our 
 Lord in the parable concerning one who, with a publican, 
 went up into the temple to pray. The Pharisee stood 
 and prayed thus with himself: 4 God, I thank thee that I 
 am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, 
 or even as this publican (Abolitionist), /fast twice in the 
 week, /give tithes of all /possess,' '/pray, /fear the 
 Lord, not like these deluded, self-active spirits.' But how 
 is John Woolman's example different from the practice 
 of Anti-Slavery Friends? 'in waiting and labor. 5 When 
 we have become convinced of what was required of us, 
 we have endeavored to perform it without further waiting, 
 and not till then. Was this his doctrine and practice? 
 4 Hear him ! Should we now be sensible of what He (the 
 Lord) requires of us, and through a respect to some 
 friendships which do not stand on an immutable founda- 
 tion, neglect to do our duty in firmness and constancy, 
 still waiting for some extraordinary means to bring about 
 
166 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 their (the slaves) deliverance, it may be that God may 
 answer us in this matter by terrible things in righte- 
 ousness.' Here then is no waiting after we have ascer- 
 tained our duty, or if so, it will be at our peril. And 
 what is the difference between his and our labors? The 
 words in the following sentence, quoted from Woolman, 
 placed in italics, will show, at least, part of what he 
 thinks is different. c I joined with my friend in visiting 
 Friends who liad slaves? The inference is plain. Abo- 
 litionists generally do not go to those who have slaves, 
 as he did. The same old Pro-Slavery excuse, ' why 
 don't you go to the slaveholders, we have nothing to do 
 with Slavery here, is evidently in his mind; and he 
 would doubtless insinuate that Woolman had nothing to 
 do with talking and discussing this subject among those 
 who did not hold slaves. Now every one might and 
 should know that this was not the fact. To be sure, he 
 was not a member of an Anti-Slavery society, and for 
 the very good reason, that he died about two years before 
 the first one in America was organized, and very proba- 
 bly before such an institution was ever thought of. No 
 doubt, if an association of this kind had existed any- 
 where near him in his lifetime, he would have been a 
 member of it. But it should be recollected, that the 
 author of the document pretends to claim and unite with 
 the old Anti-Slavery organization. Will he say, that 
 that institution had nothing to do with agitating the 
 question among its members and others who were not 
 slaveholders ? He cannot do it. And yet he unites with 
 it, and condemns us for carrying out its practice. 
 
 " On page 5th, our author quotes the following from 
 the Declaration : c One branch of the (African) committee 
 forwarded a report to its general meeting (in 1841), treat- 
 ing the subject of the consumption of the proceeds of 
 Slavery at some length, showing the impropriety and 
 inconsistency of Friends sustaining a market for such 
 productions. But when it was read in that body, it was 
 spurned, it was rejected with manifest bitterness and 
 contempt. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 167 
 
 " l That ' savs he, ' is one version of the story, showing 
 an example of the manner in which they relate a history 
 of the past. The following is the true one, 5 and of 
 course, he pronounces the other false. He then proceeds 
 to state, that the committee had strong doubts of the pro- 
 priety of having it read, or descending into the considera- 
 tion of the subject in that capacity, inasmuch as it was 
 altogether foreign to the business of their appointment, 
 etc., without once noticing the argument, which all must 
 know is founded in truth, that the consumption of the 
 proceeds of Slavery was the very thing which had reduced 
 this people to a situation which demanded the appoint- 
 ment of the committee to have the care of their concerns, 
 and that therefore it w T as not - foreign to the business of 
 their' appointment, to take the subject into consideration, 
 in order to act consistently, and not pretend to be alle- 
 viating their distress with one hand and strengthening 
 its groundwork with the other. But to proceed with 
 what he says, is a true story, he remarks, £ the disaffected 
 members of the committee showed so strong a desire to 
 have the document read, the committee at length yielded 
 in condescension, entirely to satisfy and gratify them, to 
 take the time to hear it. After the reading, it was re- 
 marked in substance about as follows : That this was a 
 subject foreign to the business of this convention, and 
 therefore not proper to be presented or discussed by it; 
 that Friends now had all the right, and entire undoubted 
 privilege to exercise freely their own conscience, in ab- 
 staining from anything they saw fit on conscientious 
 ground; a right and privilege which we would be far 
 from abridging, but that we objected to the consideration 
 of the subject in this committee, until it should be laid 
 upon us as a part of our business, or to its being made a 
 matter of discipline; it being entirely a matter of con- 
 science. To these views, the main part of the commit- 
 tee responded and were ready to respond, but the self- 
 active spirits of some of the disaffected members were so 
 uneasy at the expression of these remarks, and under this 
 way of leaving the subject, that although Friends had, 
 
168 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 in condescension, suffered their document to be read, 
 they could scarcely be restrained to let the committee 
 rise in good order, as some of our Friends from a dis- 
 tance will bear us witness. 5 
 
 " We know not to what these Friends from a distance 
 will bear witness; but one thing we do know, and that 
 is, if they will bear testimony to the truth, they will not 
 contradict the statement made in the Declaration ; for 
 many of us were present in the committee, and know it 
 to be true. But this gives an opportunity to explain the 
 whole matter in regard to this subject being before that 
 committee from the commencement, which as yet has not 
 been done publicly. Before proceeding to this however, 
 we would observe, that we do not recollect that there was 
 any objection made to the subject of abstinence from 
 slave-labor produce being made a matter of discipline, 
 because it was entirely a matter of conscience ; but if it 
 was so, it only discloses another of the profound absurdi- 
 ties of that party. A matter of conscience should not 
 be made a matter of discipline! Astonishing! Friends 
 profess to be conscientiously opposed to war and fighting. 
 We should then have no discipline on that subject. 
 Conscientiously opposed to the use of oaths, therefore 
 our Discipline should be silent on this point also; and so 
 of all the rest of our testimonies which we propose to 
 bear to the world. 
 
 u In 1839, the General Committee on the concerns of 
 the People of Color, had the subject of abstinence from 
 slave-labor produce before it, and the different branches 
 thereof in the Quarterly meetings were encouraged to 
 endeavor to ascertain what facilities existed for the procur- 
 ing of free-labor goods, and directed to make report 
 thereof to the committee the next year. In 1840, after 
 the 'alarm' had been taken, alluded to in our Declara- 
 tion, when this committee met, one of the branches pro- 
 duced a letter from a Friend in the east, relative to the 
 subject and to that only, which the Clerk read in the 
 regular order as the business of the meeting. But as 
 soon as he was through with the reading, the committee 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 169 
 
 presented indeed a most astonishing picture. That 
 branch which forwarded it, was censured for presenting 
 such a document, notwithstanding what they had done 
 was in strict accordance with the requisition of the com- 
 mittee the preceding .year, and the Olerk was censured 
 also, although he had performed that only which de- 
 volved upon him as a duty, by virtue of his appointment. 
 And the committee finding itself in a condition, as was 
 said, not suitable for the transaction of business, turned 
 its attention, or at least, some of the prominent members 
 of the opposing party, to seek for some place whereon to 
 cast the blame of their then present situation, which they 
 endeavored to fasten on the spectators, a number of whom 
 were present, in consequence of the fact, that invitation 
 had previously been given out, even in the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, by members of the committee, for all to attend who 
 felt interested in the concern ; and were quietly, without 
 saying a word, listening to the proceedings of the com- 
 mittee. ' We can see now, 5 said some of them, ' what 
 we have come to, by throwing the doors open in this 
 way,' or words to this import. 
 
 u Thus finding so much unsoundness in Society in re- 
 gard to the subject, Anti-Slavery Friends found it their 
 duty to endeavor to turn the minds of Friends more par- 
 ticularly thereto, and hence the report alluded to from one 
 branch of the committee originated. When it was pre- 
 sented to the General Committee in 1841, at its first 
 sitting, probably by the Clerk, who perhaps, announced 
 its character, it was treated with such manifest contempt, 
 that one of those who spoke in favor of its being read, 
 was interrupted while endeavoring to give his views, and 
 considerable effort was used to stop him from proceeding 
 further. Again, when another of the same class arose 
 deliberately to deliver his sentiments, and one of the 
 opposite side had put in before him, was quietly standing 
 and waiting for him to get through, one among the 
 leaders of the opposition rose, manifestly under the 
 influence of great excitement, and addressing himself 
 to the individual, accosted him with, ' it is very dis- 
 
170 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 
 
 orderly for a Friend to get up and stand on his feet that 
 way.' 
 
 " Although the committee did not suffer it to be read 
 at this sitting, yet it did not decide positively against it, 
 and of course, it again came before them at the next, 
 when, in the language of our reviewer, they condescended 
 to suffer it to be read. After this was done, as all other 
 business was gone through, an Anti-Slavery Friend rose 
 and proposed that the meeting should then close. As 
 soon as he took his seat one of the principal leaders of 
 the opposition, and we have no doubt, the very person 
 who has had at least a large share in preparing the Re- 
 view under consideration, rose, and with much warmth, 
 said the committee was not ready to adjourn — he was not 
 going to sit under the reading of such a document, with- 
 out expressing his decided disapprobation of it; with 
 considerable more, which is not now recollected. Various 
 others of the same class then spoke in favor of rejecting 
 everything of the kind, and the conduct of Anti-Slavery 
 Friends was severely censured, and they charged with 
 making disturbance and disorder, which necessarily 
 drew out some expression and defense. Now, we did 
 not ask them to discuss the subject. We had no idea 
 that any good would result from such discussion under 
 the circumstances in which we were placed, but that it 
 would only lead to disorder and confusion. Our object 
 was to get the subject fairly before Friends, with the 
 hope, that the truth would silently produce its proper 
 effect upon their minds ; all we asked, was, that they 
 should ' condescend to suffer ' us to tell them what we 
 conscientiously believed was a right and consistent course 
 for Friends to pursue, and there we were willing to leave 
 it. And it was purposely to prevent disorder that the 
 Friend made the proposition above mentioned, that the 
 meeting should close as soon as the document was read. 
 But they would not permit it to be so, and the disorder 
 and confusion, which was great, was all among them- 
 selves. And yet our author says, ' they could scarcely 
 be restrained to let the committee rise in good order.' 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 171 
 
 As said an Anti-Slavery Friend at the time when we 
 were charged with creating disorder, so say we now: 
 'There is one who knows who are the authors of this 
 disorder and disturbance? and in addition, who they 
 were that not only ' could scarcely be restrained,' but 
 who would not suffer that - committee to rise in good 
 order.' 
 
 " In regard to the petition alluded to in the Declara- 
 tion, which was presented to H. Clay, he observes, that 
 4 it is well known, that this petition was got up merely 
 for effect.' Now this is an assertion without the shadow 
 of evidence of its truth, so far as we are able to ascertain, 
 except the effect alluded to, was to the liberation of the 
 slave. And we should suppose those who got it up 
 would certainly know their motives as well as any 
 others. 
 
 " Again, ' it is said, that it was signed by men, women, 
 children, and people of color ;' from which we infer 
 that he considers it very objectionable for people of color, 
 at least, to sign such a petition. These, in his opinion, 
 should not presume to ask relief for their suffering 
 brethren and sisters. Is this the sentiment of the lead- 
 ing members of the body? And is there no evidence of 
 prejudice against colored people in this? But let us 
 proceed with his remarks. ' The manner of its presen- 
 tation was very reprehensible. He was attacked with it, 
 in the midst of avast concourse of many thousands of his 
 political friends, while on a visit to them, at their special 
 invitation — and upon the public stand, whither he had 
 gone to address them. 5 Here, again, we must pause in 
 astonishment. He speaks as if he was personally ac- 
 quainted with the whole transaction, and we have no 
 doubt he is a resident of the city where it occurred, and 
 yet the assertion that he was attacked with it in public, 
 which, he says, is so reprehensible, is also utterly false ; the 
 very reverse of what was the fact. The committee to 
 present the petition, opened a correspondence with the 
 particular attendants of Henry Clay, styled the Commit- 
 tee of Keception, it being understood that this was the 
 
172 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 only means of access they could have to him, in order to 
 ascertain when and where it would suit him to have an 
 interview. It w T as agreed by this body, on the part of 
 II. Clay, that they should present him with their papers 
 on the next morning at his lodgings, it being alleged that 
 he could not possibly receive them sooner. A short 
 time after, when the committee had separated, J. Rariden 
 announced to the multitude, that if the Abolitionists had 
 any request to make of Clay, or papers to present to 
 him, it was his (Clay's) wish, that it should he done pub- 
 licly, and on that occasion. 
 
 " So that the committee to present the petition, were 
 prevented from doing it as they intended, in his private 
 room at Richmond, which the reviewer says ' might 
 have had a good effect upon his mind. 3 
 
 " One thing we learn in pages 7 and 8, which we had 
 hardly expected was the case, viz: that those who ad- 
 here to the old organization ' were generally well satisfied 
 with what took place' on First-day, in regard to the treat- 
 ment of Henry Clay, by the Cierk and other leading 
 Friends. The only effect it can possibly have, will be to 
 convince all who are not willfully blind, that their faith- 
 ful testimony against Slavery, consists in profession only. 
 If a man, a distinguished stranger of equal talents w T ith 
 Henry Clay, who had robbed his white neighbor by vio- 
 lence of half his property, or had stolen a horse from 
 him, should have visited Richmond at the same time, 
 and had told the Clerk he was inclined to go to his meet- 
 ing, would he have taken him there in his carriage and 
 led him about by the arm as a brother beloved, and 
 would Friends have conducted him into one of the most 
 conspicuous seats in the meeting-house, etc. ? And yet 
 he says in effect, it would have been a great and repre- 
 hensible violation of all good manners, courtesy, good 
 breeding, and duty not to show this respect to Henry 
 Clay, a man who is continually robbing fifty colored per- 
 sons not merely of a part, but of everything they should 
 rightfully possess. Can any person define, consistently 
 with a faithful testimony against Slavery, why such a 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 173 
 
 character should command more respect than the petty- 
 robber ? 
 
 " Page 8. < But the Clerk of the meeting, as such, did 
 not conduct Henry Clay.' 
 
 " It seems to us he need not to have taken the pains to 
 deny T that which no one supposed. We had no idea that 
 he conducted him as Clerk. The object was, to show 
 that he who had the confidence and support of the ruling 
 party thus acted, and of course that it was a pretty good 
 index to their character, unless they had shown their dis- 
 approbation of the conduct, which they did not. 
 
 " 'The meeting had no Clerk on that day, it being a 
 public general meeting for worship.' 
 
 " This is a mere quibble. He need not to have told 
 that a meeting for worship has no Clerk. And he well 
 knew that it was the Clerk of the Yearly Meeting that 
 was spoken of in this quotation. And does he mean to 
 say that the Yearly Meeting had no Clerk on that day ? 
 If so, then after a sitting of the Meeting has adjourned, it 
 has none to open it the next day ! 
 
 " He declares, that the description of the treatment of 
 Henry Clay in and about the meeting-house, is over- 
 strained, etc., alleging that he was on the spot, an eye- 
 witness, and supposing that the writer of the Declaration 
 w T as not, seems to think he has the best right to know. 
 Alas ! how liable people are to be mistaken when they 
 move in ' their own will and strength!' The principal 
 writer of the Declaration was on the spot also, and no 
 doubt knew that the truth would have warranted a much 
 stronger delineation of remarkable manifestations than 
 he gave, at least some of us know it. 
 
 " Under a pretense of correcting a report that had been 
 circulated, 'that sundry women Friends had kissed Hen- 
 ry Clay at the meeting,' he appends a note. But it is 
 evident that it was for the mere purpose of charging us 
 with originating the report and giving it currency ; for 
 the editor of the Free Labor Advocate long since corrected 
 it before the public. He asserts that we ' consider it of 
 sufficient importance to talk over to the ridicule of their 
 
174 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Society.' Now, we do not believe there is a particle of 
 truth in this, for we never heard it done, of its being done, 
 or of any one among us that believed the report. 
 
 " But why did he decline noticing the report as it stood 
 corrected in the Advocate, where it was distinctly stated 
 that the kissing took place at a boarding-house in Rich- 
 mond ? Simply, because he could not deny this report, 
 and thought by denying the other, the impression would 
 be made on the public mind, that there was no such oc- 
 currence anywhere. 
 
 " The whole of this, together with such expressions as 
 the following: 'a great flourish this, when the words, 
 1 Abolition lecturer,' would have expressed the whole af- 
 fair, 5 shows conclusively, that he is strongly under the 
 influence of prejudice, and that he associates in his mind, 
 the Abolitionists, whom the Yearly Meeting, he pretends 
 to defend, once called c Christian philanthropists,' with 
 everything mean and contemptible. 
 
 ."It will be observed that he denies that Charles C. 
 Burleigh was treated with indignity and contempt by 
 Friends. 
 
 a Now, it seems to us to be impossible, for any person 
 who was present, and not willfully blind or hardened, 
 and witnessed their carriage toward him, to make such 
 a denial. When a Friend spoke to several members of 
 the Meeting for Sufferings about the use of the house for 
 Burleigh to hold a meeting in, he received the reply, 'let 
 him go to the South with his abolition, we don't want 
 any of it here.' 
 
 " After quoting the remarks that Friends closed their 
 meeting-house doors against him, etc., and stamping 
 them as false, he affects to understand them as charging 
 Friends with shutting him out of the Yearly Meeting or 
 meeting for worship, and then again, in regard to the 
 public houses in town being closed against him, he pre- 
 tends to suppose that taverns and boarding-houses were 
 alluded to. Now, this is indeed a pitiful quibble. Every 
 one who will take the pains to read the Declaration, will 
 understand perfectly well, that Friends are represented as 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 175 
 
 refusing to allow him to hold a meeting in their meeting- 
 house, and that it was those public houses in which meet- 
 ings are held in town, that were spoken of. And indeed 
 what he says, shows that he so understood the matter 
 himself, notwithstanding his pretensions to the contrary; 
 for he says, application was not made to the trustees in 
 his behalf for the use of the house, to hold a meeting in ; 
 and that ; if they have reference to the meeting-houses of 
 any other religious professors, it is not necessary that we 
 should answer for them. 5 
 
 " He says, c the insinuation that Friends mobbed Bur- 
 leigh in the street, is detestable.' 
 
 " Truly there is no such insinuation, and no candid 
 person will assert it. The most that can be made of it is, 
 that the conduct of those who treated him thus, was sup- 
 posed to have had a tendency to stimulate the mob ; 
 which we really believe was the fact. And the writer 
 himself can not believe, that if Burleigh had been treated 
 with half that respect, that was shown to Henry Clay, by 
 Friends and others, occupying responsible stations in the 
 community, he would have been mobbed by a set of bad 
 boys. 
 
 "Page 9th he makes the following quotation: 'Thus 
 it is evident, so far as an extensive tissue of facts and 
 circumstances can establish, and so far as the fruit of a 
 tree can manifest its character, that the influence by 
 which the Yearly Meeting is now governed, is Pro-Sla- 
 very, and that unsoundness lies at the bottom of the 
 opposition with which we have been assailed.' 
 
 " 'It is only (says he) by a strong exercise of charitable 
 feeling, that we can be brought to think that the senti- 
 ment expressed in this paragraph is not willfully errone- 
 ous.' 
 
 "He might with equal propriety have asserted that it 
 was with difficulty that he could be brought to think the 
 declaration of our Divine Master, ' by their fruits ye shall 
 know them,' is not erroneous, for neither he nor any 
 others have ever shown that those matters spoken of were 
 not facts. They can not show that the fruits are not as rep- 
 
176 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 resented, which are most certainly Pro-Slavery ; but yet 
 they deny that the tree is such. We have never said they 
 have not professed to be ' decidedly and firmly against 
 Slavery ; but we do say that that does not make them so ; 
 and that men do not ' gather grapes of thorns, nor figs of 
 thistles.' And it seems to us, from the position recently 
 taken, and especially in the document under consideration, 
 that their Anti-Slavery profession will shortly have to asso- 
 ciate with as strong a Fro- Slavery one ; for if they are op- 
 posed to immediate emancipation, of which we have no 
 doubt some of the leaders are, then they are in favor of 
 Slavery for a time, and therefore must be Pro-Slavery. 
 Hence, those who profess opposition to immediate emanci- 
 pation, must make a Pro-Slavery profession. This is clear. 
 " In regard to what is spoken of in the Declaration, as 
 the most common ground of opposition, namely, c a de- 
 sire to retain a place and influence with the rulers of the 
 land, 5 which was shown to be equivalent to a desire to 
 retain a place and influence with the very essence of a 
 corrupt popular sentiment, and which induced them to 
 close their meeting-houses against those whom they had 
 formerly declared were laboring on the same ground they 
 themselves had for many years occupied, and forbid their 
 members associating with them, in order to accomplish 
 that object ; he in effect queries, ' and why not do so V 
 He knew very well that Anti-Slavery Friends were not 
 opposed to retaining a place and influence with any per- 
 son, which had been acquired by a firm, uncompromising 
 adherence to sound principle and duty. He knew very 
 well that it was that policy in the Yearly Meeting that 
 trampled under foot, those whom it before denominated 
 Christian philanthropists, rather than lose their good 
 name in the world, by being identified with them, seeing 
 they had become the targets of popular fury, that was 
 spoken of in the Declaration. Why then did he not 
 meet the subject on fair ground, and if such w T as not the 
 fact, make it appear ? Again he says, ' if the truth is to 
 be declared to one that has departed from the right way, 
 will it not be most effectually done in the spirit of kind- 
 
INDIANA YEABLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 177 
 
 ness V We answer, most certainly. But should we be 
 declaring the truth to one we might wish to gain, who 
 was a thief, a liar, or murderer, should we mince the 
 matter, and fail to tell him his real condition ? Does 
 declaring the truth, in terms that cannot be misunder- 
 stood, manifest a spirit of unkindness ? Did our Saviour 
 evince a want of kindness, when he said to the Jews, 
 4 O generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damna- 
 tion of hell?' 'Woe unto you. Scribes and Pharisees, 
 hypocrites !' ' Ye fools and blind !' etc. Did the apostle 
 Paul lack the spirit of kindness, when he said to the sor- 
 cerer, £ O full of all subtil ty and all mischief, thou child 
 of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou 
 not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord V 
 
 " Page 10, he says, the insinuation on page 17, that 
 by being thus mild, and acting up to the Advice they 
 quote, ; Friends are yielding to the prejudices ; or ac- 
 commodating ourselves to the corrupt views and senti- 
 ments of those around us, in regard to Slavery, comes 
 without any substantial proof, and is believed to be 
 groundless. 5 
 
 " Every one who will take the trouble to read the 
 Declaration, will see that it is there shown, that the 
 place and influence with the rulers of the land, alluded 
 to in the Advice he speaks of, was to be retained by not 
 associating with the Abolitionists and by not giving Anti- 
 Slavery societies any countenance whatever ; and that 
 individuals of the highest standing anions; them did not 
 hesitate to avow in direct terms, that Friends should 
 have no connection with the Abolitionists because they 
 were hated, alleging that if Friends should join their so- 
 cieties they would lose their influence with the slavehold- 
 ers, etc., without saying a word against their principles. 
 It is there also shown that even the committee from the 
 Yearly Meeting took the ground that the wealthy and in- 
 fluential part of the community not being engaged in 
 Anti-Slavery societies, made it wrong for Friends to be. 
 And yet he has the temerity to state, that the Declara- 
 tion, that they have yielded to the prejudices and accom- 
 
 * 
 
178 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 modated themselves to the corrupt views and sentiments 
 of others, ' comes without any substantial proof, and is 
 believed to be groundless.' 
 
 " In regard to noticing the case of those who were 
 reported to the Yearly Meeting as disqualified members 
 of the Meeting for Sufferings, he observes. ; as those 
 eight members are among the principal leaders in the 
 schism, and this declaration was probably drawn up by 
 them, a sense of modesty, one would have thought, 
 ought to have prevented their making this circumstance 
 public.' 
 
 This is indeed adding insult to injury. After publish- 
 ing the names of four of those individuals in five thou- 
 sand copies of the printed Minutes of the Yearly Meeting 
 as offenders, it is truly astonishing that they should be 
 accused of a want of modesty in making it public, for the 
 purpose of defending their characters against the public 
 aspersions of their accusers. 
 
 " Again, he says, ' we should also think that any per- 
 son of calm mind, who knows what their proceedings 
 have been since that report, could not for a moment 
 doubt the propriety and justice of the measure.' 
 
 " This, we suppose, is a fair exhibition of the justice 
 of the party he advocates. He here, no doubt, alludes 
 to their Separation from Indiana Yearly Meeting. Now 
 let us, for the sake of argument, admit they did wrong 
 in that act. 
 
 u Then let us suppose that the writer of the Review 
 becomes exasperated at a brother, and commences a 
 tirade of abuse upon his person, and finally the sufferer's 
 patience becomes exhausted and he begins to retaliate, 
 which is certainly wrong. Now would we think that 
 any person of calm mind, who knows that he did retali- 
 ate, could for a moment doubt the propriety and justice 
 of thus abusing him, or would this retaliation prove that 
 he deserved the abuse ? 
 
 " But not so in regard to the Separation. It was made 
 under an imperious sense of duty, and not to retaliate or 
 for self- gratification. We come now to his defense of the 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 179 
 
 course pursued by the Meeting for Sufferings toward 
 these individuals. But he appears careful not to rehearse 
 the statements in the Declaration, showing conclusively 
 that it was contrary to the plain letter of Discipline. If 
 such was not the case, if it was not contrary to Discipline,, 
 why did he not cite us to the passage which justifies it? 
 6 It "would (says he) indeed be very strange doctrine to 
 presume that the Yearly Meeting has not power to see 
 that it is fairly represented by this body, which is ap- 
 pointed by itself? Here is another specimen of what an 
 "over-active zeal' will induce a man to utter. He asserts 
 that the Meeting for Sufferings is appointed by the 
 Yearly Meeting itself, and, therefore, should dismiss and 
 appoint until it is fairly represented. Xow the fact is, 
 according to Discipline, the Yearly Meeting has no power 
 to appoint more than twenty-six members to represent 
 it, and each Quarter has the power to appoint four to 
 represent it. But we suppose he cares not for the Disci- 
 pline, for by the course he and his copartners take, they 
 completely deprive the Quarters of this privilege. 
 
 " It would, indeed, be very strange doctrine, to presume 
 the Yearly Meeting has power to reserve privileges, and 
 none to grant them ; and the Discipline shows what it 
 has reserved and granted; and that all it reserved, in 
 this matter, was to appoint twenty-six members itself, 
 and that that granted to the Meeting for Sufferings, is to 
 notify the Yearly and Quarterly meetings if any of the 
 members appointed in either, have deceased or greatly 
 neglected the attendance of its meetings, in order that 
 their places may be filled ; and that granted to each 
 Quarterly meeting, is to appoint four to represent it; and 
 that to individuals appointed as members, that they 
 should remain such while members of Society, unless 
 they should request to be released or should neglect to 
 attend the meetings. This is the exact regulation of Dis- 
 cipline, according to plain and undoubted inference ; 
 there being no provision in Discipline for a change in 
 any other way ; and if the Yearly Meeting will not com- 
 ply with its own regulations, on its own part, how can it 
 
180 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 expect its subordinate branches and individual members 
 to do it ? If it wishes to reserve more power in its 
 hands, let it take up the Discipline and alter it to that 
 effect. 
 
 u He says, c it has been a general rule in our Meeting 
 for Sufferings, which the Yearly Meeting has always 
 recognized, that the former, standing, as it does, to 
 watch the interests of Society, has the liberty to make 
 any suggestion or proposition to the latter, which the 
 state of society may require, or which may be thought 
 proper. 5 
 
 " There is a great deal more cunning in this than can- 
 dor. Was it a mere proposition of the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings to the Yearly Meeting, for it to report a number 
 of its members to the Quarters, as well as Yearly Meet 
 ing, as disqualified, in order for their place to be filled 
 with others ? If this is not acting as with authority we 
 know not what is. And will he say that the Yearly 
 Meeting has always granted the Meeting for Sufferings 
 the liberty to act in any way it may think proper? If it 
 has, it has granted that which the Discipline expressly 
 forbids. 
 
 "Again, he proceeds to observe, c now here are certain 
 members of the Meeting for Sufferings, who do not 
 represent the Yearly Meeting,' etc. We would like to 
 know what he styles the Yearly Meeting. Is it that portion 
 which holds a certain set of sentiments and opinions, or 
 is it the whole body of members? If the latter, we 
 should suppose these members to which he alludes, con- 
 stituted as proper a representation as those who had dif- 
 ferent sentiments. True, we know when they come 
 together to transact business they must settle upon some 
 course to be pursued, and perhaps that course (especially if 
 it be adopted through the power of 'wealth and influence,' 
 or by the preponderance of numbers, independent of, and 
 in opposition to, the evidence of Truth, as has been the 
 case in regard to the present controversy) is wounding 
 to the feelings of many of its members, and requires a 
 violation of their conscientious principles. Must these, 
 
INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 181 
 
 therefore, for opposing this wrong, and thus endeavoring 
 to produce righteous action in that body and throughout 
 Society, be deprived of representing themselves and their 
 conscientious suffering brethren then, merely for making 
 this exertion! Must those who feel it their bounden 
 duty, in accordance with the advice of the Discipline, to 
 be accessory to no step whereby the bondage of the slaves 
 may be prolonged, be compelled to approve or connive 
 at those proceedings which cast odium and obloquy upon 
 the advocates of their immediate and unconditional free- 
 dom, and thus be accessory to that which, if it should 
 continue, would prolong the bondage of the slave inter- 
 minably ? 
 
 " These individuals, he says, have 'been talked to 
 kindly again and again, they have been persuaded and 
 admonished, but they refuse to be persuaded. They 
 refuse to change.' Here he would make his readers 
 believe that abundance of care was exercised toward 
 them in the overflowings of kindness and brotherly love. 
 But the fact is, but one of the eight was ever spoken to 
 privately to persuade him to change, and when he was 
 ; approached, in order to gain him, 5 by one of those 
 4 Friends eminent for his piety,' it was done by declaring 
 to him, 'thou art gone, fallen, and out of the life, and if 
 thou removes to Michigan thou wilt be lost forever !' etc. 
 This is the character of their persuasive language. And 
 scarcely ever did they condescend to enter into a free 
 conversation, showing that they felt willing to inquire 
 whether he or they were right. The leading feature of 
 all their interviews was, thou must submit. 
 
 " He says, ' it is easy to see why the proposition was 
 made in the Yearly Meeting that the Minutes should 
 state the cause of their disqualification, and that the 
 object of that proposition was of a political nature, 
 designed entirely to create difficulty by throwing out this 
 plausible defense.' Xow it is well known that Charles 
 Osborne was the man who made the proposition to the 
 Yearly Meeting. Hence, no wonder the writer withholds 
 his name from such a libel on his character. For we 
 
 9 
 
182 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 trust, none who are not blind with malice, will believe 
 that Charles Osborne did it merely to create a difficulty. 
 He stated publicly why the cause should be placed on 
 Minute, namely; that it was their due — justice demanded 
 it, the cause of Truth and righteousness demanded it, 
 and the cause of suffering, bleeding humanity demanded 
 it. His object was, if we may believe his own testimony, 
 that justice, truth, and righteousness might not be so 
 completely prostrated in the dust. But why should it 
 create a difficulty, or why should they suppose that any 
 would think it would, to state the truth, to state the 
 alleged cause of disqualification, if it was something they 
 had done which would justify their opposers according 
 to Discipline and usages of Society in making such an 
 allegation ? Why should it create a difficulty to place 
 these individuals in the exact position, before the public, 
 which they really occupied, and not leave the matter in 
 such a condition as for it to be supposed they had been 
 guilty of gross immorality, and were disowned? For 
 nowhere can it be found in the proceedings of the Yearly 
 Meeting that a member of the Meeting for Sufferings 
 has been reported as disqualified, except he has been dis- 
 owned, and that, perhaps, for immoral conduct. But 
 again after stating that it was their design merely to 
 create a difficulty, he says, 4 hence the reason is plain 
 why the meeting passed on without granting a request so 
 unprecedented.' This is indeed strange reasoning. A 
 person asks that which is just and reasonable (for he does 
 not pretend to show to the contrary, nor even to contra- 
 dict its being so) with a design to create difficulty, hence 
 the reason is plain, is it, why a body of people professing 
 to do justice should refuse to grant that which is just and 
 reasonable ? The request which, he says, was so unpre- 
 cedented, cannot possibly, we think, be more so than the 
 treatment toward them which made it necessary to make 
 it, as it has been clearly shown to the public, that none 
 such has been made use of, so far as the records 
 have been examined, which has been for fifteen 
 years back. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 183 
 
 "After this, he proceeds to state, c we cannot now call 
 up in review every objectionable sentence and expres- 
 sion. The whole document is written in a spirit so evi- 
 dently bad, toward our religious society, that most 
 impartial readers will readily see and feel it.' With 
 equal propriety might the Scribes and Pharisees have 
 declared to our Saviour, thy conversation to us manifests 
 a spirit so evidently bad toward us, that most impartial 
 hearers will readily see and feel it. He exposed and 
 rebuked their corrupt principles and practices, and Anti- 
 Slavery Friends have done no more in regard to that 
 party who have assumed the control of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting. 
 
 "But to proceed, our author says, 'it maybe added 
 that the whole is written under such perversions of 
 thought, that most of the matters brought to view are 
 unfairly or incorrectly represented, or shown out under 
 false colors.' We trust that every impartial reader, by this 
 time, will see where the perversion of thought and mis- 
 representation lies, for he cannot fail to discover the fact 
 that in every attempt to show the falsity of the state- 
 ments or representations contained in the Declaration, he 
 has utterly failed. True, he has denied that which it 
 would be impossible to prove either one way or the other, 
 viz. : that there were no such remarkable demonstrations 
 made, as would appear from the Declaration, in regard to 
 the treatment of Henry Clay at the meeting-house. For 
 really, they were remarkable to those who felt it their 
 duty to render honor to whom honor is due, which they 
 knew could not be to this man. While on the other 
 hand, the writer and those who are with him, ' were well 
 satisfied with the whole transaction,' and, therefore, to 
 these it was nothing remarkable. 
 
 " Let us now examine some of the articles of his 
 conclusion. ' They make a general, and, in many cases, 
 unexplained charge of Colonization against the Society, 
 etc. This charge contains a slander, because when ex- 
 plained out in words they interpret it to be a disposition 
 to drive from the country, without their consent, the 
 
184 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 people of color generally, on account of an unjust esti- 
 mation, or disregard of their rights, on account of unmer- 
 ited prejudices against them, and for the purpose of per- 
 petuating Slavery. 5 This is another misrepresentation. 
 That which they are charged with is, in the Declaration, 
 clearly explained to be a disposition to aid and counten- 
 ance the American Colonization Society. And if it has 
 been 'explained out in words to mean a disposition to 
 drive from the country without their consent, 5 the writer 
 and his copartners have done it themselves. The Decla- 
 ration nowhere intimates that Friends engaged in the 
 Colonization scheme, for the jourjpose of compelling the 
 colored people to go to Liberia, or for the purpose of per- 
 petuating Slavery. But it does, in effect, say that Friends, 
 being under the influence of prejudice against the colored 
 people, had those prejudices increased, or their efforts, in 
 behalf of immediate emancipation diminished, by the for- 
 mation of the Colonization Society, which proposed to 
 take those people out of the country who they had rather 
 were to themselves, in their own country where they be- 
 long, etc. It is useless, however, to endeavor to substan- 
 tiate a charge of the existence of this prejudice among 
 them, when the sentiment is openly avowed almost every- 
 where around us. 
 
 " It will be seen, from what has been said, and from a 
 careful examination of both documents, that all the prin- 
 cipal grounds taken, or assertions made, by the Declara- 
 tion are, by the Review under consideration, proved to be 
 true, which we will sum up in the following order: 
 " ' 1st. That a Pro-Slavery spirit exists in the Society.' 
 "This he shows by evidently opposing immediate 
 emancipation, and by declaring, in effect, that the slave- 
 holders, laying claim to a person, makes it more objec- 
 tionable to assist such person than to assist a free 
 one ; thus, to a certain extent at least, recognizing the 
 slaveholder's right to his brother, which all who are not 
 willfully blind must know at once is a Pro-Slavery posi- 
 tion. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 185 
 
 "'2d. That they have a warm feeling in favor of the 
 
 American Colonization Society.' 
 
 "This is shown to be correct by his defense of that 
 institution, and by at least tacitly owning and approving 
 all its principles, measures, and tendencies. 
 
 " ' 3d. That ever since the issuing of the Advices repu- 
 diating the Colonization scheme, there were some of our 
 prominent members, open advocates of that institution, 
 who appeared to have been fired with indignation at the 
 expression of such sentiments, evidently entertaining a 
 settled purpose to prostrate the Anti-Slavery cause and its 
 advocates in the Society, if ever a favorable opportunity 
 should present.' 
 
 "This he verifies by his allusion to a disposition in 
 some to govern the Yearly Meeting in their own way. It 
 was this disposition to promote an Anti-Slavery feeling 
 and action in the Society, and to oppose Colonization, that 
 was discovered and checked by those who entertained a 
 settled purpose to prostrate the Anti-Slavery cause and 
 its advocates. 
 
 " ' 4th. That the ruling party in the Yearly Meeting, 
 are really opposed to the present Anti-Slavery movement 
 and not merely as they professed, opposed to mixing with 
 others.' 
 
 " In regard to this, there is such an open avowal of 
 opposition to the cause in such terms as manifests the 
 most decided malignity of feeling toward it, toward 
 I modern Abolition societies,' as he terms them in con- 
 tempt, as to require only a reference thereto. 
 
 " Many of the charges, misrepresentations, insinua- 
 tions, and falsehoods contained in the Review, seem, in- 
 deed, too insignificant to notice, and had it not been for 
 the source from which they emanated, and the weight 
 of influence they may wield against the cause of Truth, 
 if suffered to go unanswered, being widely indorsed by 
 the leading characters of Indiana Yearly Meeting, we 
 should have passed over them as unworthy of attention. 
 "Signed on behalf of the meeting aforesaid. 
 
 "Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 
 
186 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 Declaration of Sentiment of A. S. Friends. 
 
 It was thought necessary at the Yearly Meeting of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends, in Ninth month, of this year, 
 1843, in order to clear the Society of certain charges, and 
 to vindicate the truth, to issue the following Declaration 
 of Sentiment : 
 
 " A DECLARATION OF SENTIMENT. 
 
 " It is a subject worthy of particular attention, that in 
 every age of the world, those who have attempted to 
 stem the torrent of public error, or to withstand the cor- 
 ruptions of the times, either in principle or practice, have 
 been subjected to the invectives of malice, or the slander- 
 ous imputations of those who have endeavored to uphold 
 and sustain those corruptions. Our blessed Lord and 
 the apostles themselves, had many grievous and false 
 charges laid against them, nor were our primitive Friends 
 at all exempted from the persecutions of this wicked 
 spirit ; and they very frequently found it necessary and 
 incumbent upon them to come boldly forth in the public 
 declaration of their principles, and in the defense of their 
 doctrines and practices, in order for the clearing of the 
 blessed truth which they professed, and thus to expose 
 and refute the slanderous imputations preferred against 
 them. And as we believe a proper regard for the pro- 
 motion of the cause of our blessed Redeemer at the pre- 
 sent day, will unquestionably lead to this course of con- 
 duct, we can but esteem it our indispensable duty, when- 
 ever circumstances of a similar character occur, to follow 
 their example in all meekness and Christian boldness. 
 
 " It is indeed to us a sorrowful circumstance, that we 
 have been driven to the necessity of separating ourselves 
 from the original organization of the Society of Friends 
 of Indiana Yearly Meeting, as the only alternative left 
 us by that body, whereby we could enjoy the privileges 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 187 
 
 and benefits of religious society, and at the same time 
 act in obedience to the dictates of a tender conscience. 
 
 " In the course of the insidious workings of the spirit 
 of opposition to the present Anti-Slavery cause (for 
 laboring to promote which, we have been driven to our 
 present position), to impress and bias the minds of the 
 people against it and its advocates, great pains have 
 been taken to represent us as holding false and erroneous 
 doctrines. 
 
 " We have been charged, at least indirectly, with de- 
 nying the immediate and special influence of the Holy 
 Spirit upon the heart; or in other words, the immediate 
 revelation of the Divine will to man ; and directly, with 
 working in our own will and strength, without waiting 
 for or receiving Divine ability, to enable us to perform 
 those works in which we were engaged. 
 
 u These charges appear to be the false deductions of a 
 censorious spirit, which have been wrested from the pro- 
 fessions we have made of the true and genuine doctrine, 
 and which we now publicly repeat in the language of 
 Scripture: c He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; 
 and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, 
 to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God. 5 
 
 " From this, and other Scripture testimony, as well as 
 the very laws of our being, we are convinced that it is 
 at all times required of us to do justly, love mercy, etc., 
 as well as to fulfill all the moral precepts of the Gospel; 
 and hence we hold that it is nothing short of presump- 
 tion, to suppose a revelation upon these revelations is 
 necessary before we should engage in works of benevo- 
 lence and charity, or any of the common or general 
 duties of life. To ask for a manifestation of the Divine 
 will, or seek to witness a display of Divine power, when 
 that will is already known, or the object to be effected 
 by that power, can be effected by the means already 
 afforded, is evidently regarded in this point of view by 
 our Saviour himself, as we learn from his reply to the 
 suggestions of the grand deceiver : ' If thou be the Son 
 of God,' said he, ; cast thyself down (from the pinnacle 
 
188 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 of the temple), for it is written, he shall give his angels 
 charge concerning thee, and in their hands they shall 
 bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against 
 a stone.' But the reply was, 'It is written, thou shalt 
 not tempt the Lord thy God. 5 And why would it be to 
 tempt God to cast himself down with an expectation of 
 being preserved from injury ? Undoubtedly, because there 
 w r as no necessity for it. Just so, in regard to waiting for 
 a special inward revelation to manifest w T hat is required 
 of us, when w T e already know it. Some of our accusers, 
 in endeavoring to make it appear that we are unsound in 
 principle, have taken the extraordinary position, that we 
 should not undertake to do any good work, without wait- 
 ing for the immediate and special impulse of the Holy 
 Spirit. Now, as principles must unavoidably have a 
 powerful effect upon the conduct of those who possess 
 them, can we at all wonder that those who hold such 
 sentiments as these, should be found in such a state of 
 inactivity as those are of whom we speak, especially in 
 regard to objects requiring pecuniary or worldly sacrifices? 
 We have ever held, and believed in the doctrine of imme- 
 diate revelation, or the communication of the will of 
 God to man ; but there is evidently a distinction to be 
 made between such extraordinary and supernatural illu- 
 minations as must alone quality for the public acts of 
 preaching the gospel, prayer, etc., and that influence of 
 the Holy Spirit, which is with all and in all (except they 
 be reprobates,) to incline them to every good word and 
 work, and to qualify for all the common general duties of 
 life; and hence, when w r e speak of no necessity of wait- 
 ing for the special impulse of the Holy Spirit in regard 
 to performing those duties, we by no means discard the 
 teachings of the good Spirit, which is placed in the hearts 
 of men universally, inclining them to live soberly, right- 
 eously, and godly in the present world; for whether we 
 eat or drink, or whatsoever we do, we should do all to 
 the glory of God. Every gift of God is good, and should 
 be received with thanksgiving, and applied to the pur- 
 poses for which he designed it. And hence the Holy 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 189 
 
 Scriptures, containing a revelation of the will of God to 
 man, in regard to all general duties, both toward God 
 and his fellow-man, as well as the light of reason and re- 
 flection, by which we may ascertain the consistency of a 
 given course of conduct with this manifestation of the 
 Divine will, are gifts which cannot be discarded without 
 rejecting the means which a gracious Providence has or- 
 dained for the guidance of man in regard to these duties. 
 All these gifts, when applied according to His will, must 
 and will completely harmonize in their legitimate effects. 
 And although it is through the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit immediately operating upon the heart, that we are 
 inclined to anything that is good — that a devout thought 
 is engendered in the heart, or that a saving knowledge 
 of God is communicated to us, yet, through the proper 
 use of the gifts above referred to, without any special or 
 extraordinary revelation, we may ascertain what is right 
 in regard to social and benevolent duties of general obli- 
 gation, and which are required of us in common with 
 others ; and it would be a manifest dereliction of duty, 
 to refuse to perform such acts, under a pretense of wait- 
 ing for a sufficient call thereto. 
 
 "Through the prejudice of a corrupt education, and 
 the influence of a traditional religion, manv have adopted 
 the sentiment, that, let Scripture, reason, and common 
 sense say what they will, in regard to what constitutes 
 those duties, it is wrong to undertake to perform any- 
 thing of the kind, without first waiting for and receiving 
 a special Divine impulse. Such sentiments being pub- 
 licly advocated by Ministers of the Society of Friends, 
 has for a considerable time past stood as a reproach 
 against it. And having taken a position in which we 
 can now testify against them, we wish to make this testi- 
 mony known to the world, being assured that they have 
 emanated from the grand adversary of man's happiness, 
 and are calculated only to hinder the progress of the 
 cause of truth and righteousness in the earth. The es- 
 pecial, supernatural and direct communication of the 
 Divine will to man. is necessarily made, only when the 
 
190 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 existing means whereby this knowledge in some respects 
 may be attained, are not adequate for the purpose. To 
 take any other view of the subject, would be virtually to 
 impeach the Almighty's attributes of boundless wisdom 
 and perfection. And we apprehend that every honest, 
 intelligent and reflecting mind must admit that it would 
 be criminal in the highest degree, in many instances 
 which might and do frequently occur, to wait or hesitate 
 a moment to act ; for instance, to rescue a brother or 
 sister from certain death or imminent danger. And 
 why would it be criminal ? Without question, because 
 his sense of what is right, would assure him of his duty 
 to act instantaneously for his brother's preservation. If, 
 therefore, this knowledge is adequate to the purpose, 
 would it not be derogatory to the character of the All- 
 wise Creator of the universe, to suppose he has required 
 us to wait for some more extraordinary manifestation in 
 regard to his will in all similar circumstances ? It is 
 therefore when duties are of such a character as are not, 
 and cannot be ascertained through those means, to be 
 such, that they are manifested so to be by the special re- 
 velation of the Spirit of God. This doctrine is fully con- 
 firmed, not only by the sentiments of our forefathers in 
 the Church, but by that which is better authority, the 
 sacred volume of inspiration. It is a declaration of an 
 eminent apostle, that ' he that knoweth to do good, and 
 doeth it not, to him it is sin. 5 Now, as it is incontro- 
 vertible that, in regard to all the social and general duties 
 of life, we may know what is good and what is required 
 of us, without this special communication of the will of 
 God ; it is therefore evident from this scripture author- 
 ity, that he who neglects to do that which he thus knows 
 to be his duty, without this extraordinary manifestation, 
 under a pretense of waiting for an immediate call, is in 
 the commission of sin. 
 
 " In regard to this subject, William Penn observes, 
 ; we have a call to do good as often as we have the 
 power and occasion.' Hence, it is evident, in the opin- 
 ion of this great man, whenever we have the ability, an 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 191 
 
 occasion constitutes the only necessary call to perform 
 every moral and social duty. 
 
 " Another charge which is constantly being preferred 
 against us is, that we are opposed to the Church govern- 
 ment and discipline of the Society of Friends. 
 
 u In treating upon this subject, it will be necessary to 
 inquire into the character of this government as origin- 
 ally instituted. Barclay, in his Anarchy of the Ranters, 
 declares that no decision or decree of the church is avail- 
 able, without the aid of the power and Spirit of God 
 leading thereto. 
 
 " Hence, it is obvious that true subordination to the 
 Church, according to original principle, consists in sub- 
 mission to those decrees only, which are made under the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit. But some of our accusers, 
 when endeavoring to fasten the charge of insubordina- 
 tion upon us, have taken the ground that no decision or 
 decree of the Church can be made but what should be 
 available ; that it is the duty of its members to submit 
 thereto, if they know it to be wrong. Who cannot see 
 that this doctrine is calculated to uphold the greatest 
 abominations in the Church, and to prevent it, when the 
 rulers may have become corrupt, from ever being reformed 
 without some miraculous interposition, by which they 
 should all become renovated at once ! 
 
 " It is the judgment of Truth alone, to which, by the 
 church government* of the Society (which has alwa} T s 
 been acknowledged,) its members are bound to be in sub- 
 ordination ; and hence, a majority being in favor of a 
 particular measure, is no certain evidence that that mea- 
 sure is right. Now, as this judgment is to be arrived at 
 through the application of the means, and by attending 
 to the gifts which the great Head of the Church has con- 
 ferred upon it, in order for the attainment of the object, 
 whether they be the Scriptures, reason and reflection, or 
 the special revelation of the Holy Spirit, according as 
 the nature of the case may demand one or the other of 
 these, or the whole of them, it follows as a matter of 
 course, that even if the majority should neglect or reject 
 
192 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 the appropriate means by which this true judgment is to 
 be arrived at, that this majority is, in the true and legiti- 
 mate sense of the term, the insubordinate part of society. 
 
 " In conclusion, we would make use of this opportu- 
 nity to declare, that we firmly believe in the doctrine of 
 immediate revelation, as held by the Society in its pris- 
 tine purity, and that w T e have never held any other view 
 whatever in regard to the matter. 
 
 " And, in regard to the ministry of the Gospel, we be- 
 lieve that the same call and qualification for the work, 
 w T hich was formerly requisite, is now as necessary as in 
 any age of the world, that the Gospel which the true 
 minister of Christ communicates to the people, is not re- 
 ceived of man, neither is he taught it, but by the revela- 
 tion of Jesus Christ. 
 
 " Signed on behalf of the Yearly Meeting of Anti- 
 Slavery Friends, held at Newport, Ind., by adjournments 
 from the 4th to the 9th of the Ninth month, 1843. 
 
 " Walter Edgerton, Clerk" 
 
 CHAPTER XYI. 
 
 Address of the Indiana Yearly Meeting to the Christian Professors, etc. 
 
 The Yearly Meeting, held at White Water, also issued 
 a document this year, on the subject of Slavery ; but a 
 portion of it having allusion to the matter of difficulty, 
 was of such a character, that the Meeting for Sufferings 
 of Anti-Slavery Friends, in the Eleventh montli follow- 
 ing, thought proper to review it. I will present the 
 reader with both documents. 
 
 "ADDRESS 
 
 " Of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
 to the Christian Professors in the United States, and 
 to the Citizens generally. 
 
 "It is with feelings of religious concern for the ad- 
 vancement of the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 193 
 
 Christ, and for the welfare of our beloved country, that 
 we believe ourselves called to address you on the subject 
 of Slavery ; a subject which essentially involves the peace 
 and happiness of the citizens of these United States, and 
 which claims their most serious consideration, and their 
 prompt and persevering exertions for its termination. 
 
 " We believe there are many in all the Christian de- 
 nominations, who, with ourselves, deplore the existence 
 of this system of iniquity and oppression, and who long 
 for its extinction. For the encouragement and strength, 
 ot such, we would state, that about eighty years ago, a 
 weighty concern came upon the Society of Friends, re- 
 specting the Slave trade, and the participation of their 
 members in the practice of holding in bondage their fel- 
 low-men of the African race. Under the conviction that 
 our Almighty Creator made of one blood, all the nations 
 of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and that the 
 enjoyment of life, liberty and happiness, is the natural 
 inherent right of all, they became convinced, through the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit on their hearts, that, consist- 
 ent with the spirit and precepts of our holy Redeemer, 
 which teaches us to do to others all things whatsoever we 
 would they should do to us, no man possesses the right 
 to hold his fellow-man in unconditional bondage. 
 
 "When this righteous concern to abolish slave-holding 
 amongst themselves first arose, many obstacles to its 
 prosecution presented, and continued for several years to 
 impede its progress ; but keeping to the ground of reli- 
 gious duty, and submitting the cause to their Lord and 
 Master, to whom they looked for wisdom and direction, 
 and who alone could soften the hearts of those who per- 
 sisted in asserting the right to retain their slaves, a num- 
 ber of enlightened and devoted men labored faithfully 
 with these, to convince them of the injustice of the prac- 
 tice. Notwithstanding the various discouragements with 
 which they had to contend, the way was finally opened 
 through His blessing, who laid this duty upon them, for 
 the entire extinction of Slavery within the limits of our 
 religious society, and having cleared itself of Slavery, it 
 
194 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 was prepared to raise an availing testimony against slave- 
 holding among others. 
 
 "After liberating their slaves, Friends proceeded to 
 remunerate those who had served their masters at an age 
 entitling them to the proceeds of their services, making 
 such compensation in very many instances, for their labor, 
 as justice dictated. They also extended a parental care 
 over them, providing schools for their literary instruction, 
 frequently holding religious meetings with them, and 
 ministering to the wants of the aged and indigent. When 
 the work of emancipation was thus generally effected, 
 they adopted rules in their Discipline against buying, 
 selling, holding and hiring slaves ; and the few members 
 who stood out in opposition to the decisions of the body 
 were, after being labored with to recover them from their 
 error, disowned, and the Society has ever since continued 
 to deny, church membership to those who violate the Dis- 
 cipline in these respects. 
 
 u Having liberated their slaves, Friends then felt reli- 
 giously engaged from time to time, under the constraining 
 power of Divine love, to urge upon their fellow-citizens, 
 both privately and publicly, the obligation which they 
 were under to accord to the enslaved African and his de- 
 scendants, the inalienable right to freedom. Memorials, 
 petitions and addresses were frequently presented to Con- 
 gress, to various Legislative bodies in the slave States, 
 and to the public, for the purpose of promoting this desi- 
 rable object. While their language was plain and une- 
 quivocal, these documents were always respectful and 
 pacific in their character. Expressions calculated to ex- 
 asperate the slaveholder, or to excite to violence and 
 insurrection on the part of the slave — as they would be 
 repugnant to the benign spirit of the Gospel, and militate 
 against the object in view, were carefully avoided. To 
 convince the master of the injustice of the system, and 
 the degradation and suffering which it inflicted on the 
 slave, and thus induce him voluntarily to break the yoke 
 and let the oppressed go free, was the design, and in 
 many cases the effect of their labors. By their judicious 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 195 
 
 proceedings, the way was opened in the minds of slave- 
 holders to hear the pleadings of Friends on behalf of the 
 poor negro ; and had this temperate and Christian spirit 
 been kept too by all those who have stepped forth pro- 
 fessedly to advocate his rights, we apprehend, the cause 
 of freedom would have made far greater progress than it 
 has — there would be less sensitiveness on this subject in 
 the mind of the master than now exists, and consequently 
 a fairer prospect that this opprobrium of the Christian 
 name, would soon be banished from our favored land. 
 
 "While we have been endeavoring to advance our tes- 
 timony against Slavery, in our own peaceable way, and 
 as we were favored with the leadings of the Spirit of 
 Truth ; we have been accused of apathy, and negligence, 
 and even of giving countenance to the system itself, be- 
 cause we could not consistently with our own convictions 
 of duty, unite with some measures which others thought 
 proper to adopt. But how much better would it be, if 
 those who profess to be opposed to Slavery were to bring 
 their testimony to bear upon the system itself, rather than 
 waste their strength and influence by publishing crimina- 
 tions against others ! And though some who have sece- 
 ded from this Yearly Meeting, and assumed the designa- 
 tion of Anti-Slavery Friends, as if they were the chief 
 defenders of the rights of the colored man, have joined 
 in with those unfounded accusations, for whose proceed- 
 ings and publications we are no longer responsible, yet 
 our abhorrence of the system of Slavery, with all its 
 dreadful consequences, remains undiminished, and we not 
 only continue as the way opens, to lift up our voice for 
 the dumb, but rejoice in the efforts which our brethren of 
 other religious persuasions are making in the same cause 3 
 under the influence of the same Christian spirit. 
 
 "It is this spirit that can soften the hard heart, break 
 every yoke, and proclaim liberty to the captive, and set 
 the oppressed free ; and we would invite the members of 
 the different religious societies to endeavor, under its 
 blessed influence, to eradicate Slavery from their respect- 
 ive churches. Let those who see the magnitude of the 
 
196 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 
 
 evil, and whose hands are clear of it, labor steadfastly 
 and faithfully with their members who have slaves, to 
 dissuade them from the practice. And may we not hope 
 that their patient labors in gospel love, would be greatly 
 instrumental, if not completely successful, in bringing 
 about the peaceful termination of this enormous evil in 
 our favored country! Were all the professors of the 
 Christian religion, in these United States, clear of hold- 
 ing their fellow-men in bondage, the system, being prac- 
 tically condemned by the religious part of the community, 
 we apprehend would soon fall to the ground. That it is 
 the will of the Great Head of the Church, that all those 
 who name the name of Christ should depart from iniquity, 
 and wash their hands in innocency respecting this evil, 
 we can have no doubt. Christ loved the Church and 
 gave himself for it, that he might present it to himself a 
 glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any 
 such thing; but that it should be holy and without blem- 
 ish. Is not Slavery, at this day of light and knowledge, 
 a dark spot and blemish in the visible Church, which 
 must contribute to lay waste its character as the Church 
 of Christ, and to retard the spreading of His kingdom in 
 the earth ? 
 
 "Have we not reason to believe that this system of 
 iniquity, upheld by many who call themselves Christians, 
 and some of them standing in the character of ministers 
 of the gospel of peace and salvation, is hanging over us 
 as a dark cloud, and is one of the great causes of the dif- 
 ficulties to which the country is subjected ? Can we ex- 
 pect the smiles of Divine Providence to be continued 
 upon us and upon our country unless we break off our 
 sins by righteousness, and our iniquities by showing 
 mercy to the poor despised slave ? It appears to us, that 
 under the blessings of our heavenly Father, the peaceful 
 abolition of Slavery by the slave States, very much de- 
 pends upon the exertions and influence of those who act 
 on Christian principle, with steady and unyielding firm- 
 ness for its removal. There is, therefore, we believe, 
 great responsibility resting upon professing Christians in 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 197 
 
 relation to this deeply affecting subject, and we desire 
 that our brethren may not slumber at their posts while 
 the enemy is within their borders, but, relying for wisdom 
 and strength upon the Head of the Church, labor in the 
 ability which He would grant to put away this sin from 
 among them. Thus they would not only receive the 
 reward of peace in their own bosoms, but be the happy 
 instruments of releasing their brethren from the crime 
 and the curse of Slavery, purifying the Church from this 
 defilement, and exalting the standard of universal right- 
 eousness in the earth. 
 
 u In that love which breathes glory to God in the high- 
 est, peace on earth and good-will to men, we would also 
 commend to the serious reflection of the slaveholders the 
 accumulated guilt of oppression, and their fearful respon- 
 sibility in subjecting to the debasing consequences of this 
 system, human beings possessing, as themselves, immortal 
 souls to be saved or lost, for whom Christ died, not that 
 they should be plunged in pollution, but that they should 
 be redeemed from all iniquity and serve him in newness 
 of life. Deeply impressed with the inestimable value of 
 human souls, our accountability to our Creator for the 
 deeds done in the body, the shortness of time, and the 
 awfulness of eternity — that all earthly things pass away 
 as the morning cloud, or the early dew, and that all the 
 wealth and honors of the world are only as vanity and 
 vexation of spirit, we look with feelings of deep concern 
 and interest, on that portion of our fellow-men, who still 
 adhere to the system and practice of Slavery, with earnest 
 desires that they may take the subject more closely into 
 consideration ; and may the Lord grant to them the light 
 of his Holy Spirit, to see the fearfulness of their stand- 
 ing, and strength to perform his whole will concerning 
 them. 
 
 "In thus addressing our fellow-citizens on this mo- 
 mentous subject, we trust we shall not be suspected of 
 party or political motives, for although our religious So- 
 ciety, in its official capacity, takes no part in the political 
 operations going on in the country, we feel a deep and 
 
 9* 
 
198 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 lively interest in the welfare of the nation. It is only as 
 the people comply with the Divine requisition to do 
 justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with God, that we 
 can reasonably hope for the Divine blessing in preserving 
 us in harmony, peace and prosperity. Our religious so- 
 ciety cannot give countenance to measures of confusion 
 and violence to attain any object whatever, for our testi- 
 mony against war is equally decisive as that against 
 Slavery ; and as we cannot resort to force or resistance 
 to the law of the land to obtain or defend our own most 
 valued rights, so neither can we do it for those of others ; 
 we believe it is our religious duty to live in active or 
 passive subordination to the government placed over us. 
 
 "In conclusion, we fervently desire that all those who 
 are implicated in the system of slave-holding, may stand 
 open to the convictions of the Spirit of Truth in their own 
 hearts, which, during the day of mercy, pleads with all, 
 to save them from their sins ; that by obeying its dictates 
 they may faithfully do their duty in setting their slaves 
 free from bondage. Were this mass of corruption and 
 iniquity removed from our beloved country, it would be 
 the opening of a new and joyful day, in which the ancient 
 prediction would be in measure realized : ' Then shall thy 
 righteousness go forth with brightness, and thy salvation 
 as a lamp that burnetii.' May all those who love the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, and desire the exaltation of his name 
 and dominion over all, be united in the spirit of prayer to 
 the God and Father of our sure mercies, that He will con- 
 tinue his forbearance and long-suffering toward our 
 guilty land, and through the workings of his mighty 
 power, change the heart of the slaveholder, and give de- 
 liverance to his oppressed and trodden-down children, 
 who are groaning under bondage. 
 
 " Signed by direction and on behalf of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends, held at White Water, in Wayne 
 County, Indiana, by adjournments from the 28th day of 
 Ninth month to the 3d day of Tenth month, inclusive, 
 1843. 
 
 "Elijah Coffin, ClerkP 
 
INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS. !;199 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 " Review of an 'Address of the Society of Friends of Indiana Yearly Meet- 
 ing to the Christian Professors in the United States, and to the Citi- 
 zens generally, on the subject of Slavery/ ' 
 
 " It is not for the sake of controversy, nor for the pur- 
 pose of injuring the character or destroying the influence 
 of the above-named Address, so far as it may have any 
 influence to promote any Anti-Slavery feeling in the 
 community, but believing as we do, that it is well calcu- 
 lated to mislead the unwary and to militate against the 
 progress of the present Anti-Slavery enterprise by insin- 
 uations against the measures of its advocates ; and believ- 
 ing also that on the success of this enterprise, as the 
 means in the hands of Divine Providence, hang the hopes 
 of the advocates of human rights for the peaceful termi- 
 nation of Slavery and the preservation of our country 
 from the judgments of offended Heaven, we feel con- 
 cerned to notice a few expressions contained in the 
 Address in connection with the attending circumstances. 
 
 "We would by no means undervalue the Anti-Slavery 
 labors of our ancestors. We believe they performed a 
 great and a glorious work in clearing the Society of 
 Slavery. They also did much to turn the attention of 
 others to the subject; and it is, probably, to the influence 
 of their labors, more than to any other means, that the 
 present Anti-Slavery organizations owe their origin; and 
 it grieves us to the heart to think that, after the example 
 and precepts of our fathers in the Church have induced 
 many philanthropists of all denominations to engage in 
 the work, their successors should pursue such a course 
 and assume such a bearing toward those laborers as in a 
 great measure to destroy their influence. The authors of 
 the Address tell us of the labors of the Society in this 
 cause from the commencement of the concern, eighty 
 years ago (we think they might have dated it some further 
 back), down to the present time. Now, much as we 
 value the faithful labors of Friends formerly, and honor 
 
200 SlSTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 them for their good works, we do not wish to overrate 
 them. We do not claim for them infallibility, or that 
 they did, in all things, the very best that might have 
 been done. Neither do we believe that the Society, of 
 late years, has acted faithfully in the cause according to 
 the example of their ancestors. 
 
 ■' Speaking of the past labors of Friends on this sub- 
 ject, they say, ' Notwithstanding the various discourage- 
 ments with which they had to contend, the way was 
 finally opened through His blessing who laid this duty 
 upon them, for the entire extinction of Slavery" within 
 the limits of our religious society; and having cleared 
 itself of Slavery, it was prepared to raise an availing 
 testimony against slave-holding among others.' Are we 
 here to infer that they mean to say the continuation of 
 Slavery in the Society of Friends for one hundred years 
 before the ; weighty concern, 5 they speak of, ' came upon 
 the Society, 5 and for many years afterward, was in conse- 
 quence of the withholding of the Divine blessing in 
 opening the way? If this is their meaning — if this is 
 what they mean by saying, ' The way was finally opened, 5 
 we would say, in reply, we do not believe it was ever 
 shut. We do not believe there was ever a time when 
 Friends might not have abandoned this sin, if they 
 would ; neither can we allow that, if they had faithfully 
 and in all things, followed the teachings of that Holy 
 Spirit they make so much profession of being guided by, 
 Slavery would ever have gained a foothold in the Soci- 
 ety ; much less have remained in it more than a century, 
 
 u We do not believe in the truth of the doctrine, that 
 way does not open at all times for the leaving off of sin- 
 ful practices, if we are disposed to do so. And none will 
 be held innocent in the continuation of, or connivance at, 
 known sins, under the plea that ' the Lord's time is the right 
 time, 5 and c the Lord will abolish it in his own time and 
 way. 5 We believe the Lord 5 s time for wickedness to be 
 abandoned is immediately ; it is not his will that indivi- 
 duals, or societies, or nations should continue in sin, day 
 after day and year after year, waiting for the Lord 5 s time to 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 201 
 
 come — for Him to ' open the way' — to c abolish the evil 
 in his own time and in his own way. 5 If they do — if 
 they resist the Lord's long-continued mercy under such a 
 fallacious pretense, ' His time icill come in which He will 
 accomplish the work,' and it may be, in the language 
 of John Woolman, ' by visiting them with terrible 
 things in righteousness. We do not mean to be under- 
 stood as saying that the above doctrine of waiting for the 
 Lord to do the work in his own time and way, is literally 
 advocated in the Address, or that the words of that im- 
 port, used above as quotations, are found there, but we 
 do say, that this sentiment and these expressions are in 
 common use among all classes of the body that issued 
 the Address, and that they are almost constantly used to 
 discourage the active labors of the Abolitionists, and they 
 are introduced here for the purpose of arriving at a better 
 understanding of what they mean by saying that ' the 
 way was finally opened through his blessing, who laid 
 the duty upon them, for the entire extinction of Slavery 
 within the limits of our religious society.' This expres- 
 sion, especially when viewed in connection with a know- 
 ledge of the use of the argument above referred to, seems 
 to us to imply that the Lord's time had not previously 
 come — that the way had been closed, and that Friends 
 could not, until the time spoken of, abandon the practice 
 of slave-holding, and that consequently, prior to that 
 time, slave-holding in the Society was not sin. If any 
 should charge us with doing them injustice in this 
 matter, let them show that this is not the unavoidable 
 result — the sum and substance of their own arguments. 
 
 " We regard this as a most dangerous doctrine, in the 
 application which many of them make of it, to this ques- 
 tion. Look at its consequences. Slavery cannot be 
 abolished till the way opens — the waj T cannot open till 
 the Lord's time come — when the Lord's time shall come 
 Slavery will be abolished. Then as Slavery is not abo- 
 lished, the way is not open, the Lord's time is not yet 
 come. Consequently its existence, at the present time, 
 is not contrary to his will, and cannot be sin, for what- 
 
202 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 ever is not contrary to his will cannot be sin. And as it 
 cannot be sinful till the way opens for its abolition, which 
 will be in the Lord's time, and as he will then abolish it 
 in his own way, it follows that Slavery never has been 
 and never can be a sin. If this is true of Slavery, it is 
 true of every other practice, and it follows again, that 
 there can be no such thing as sin in the world, and all 
 the labor of Friends to show the moral turpitude of 
 Slavery, is vain. We know they will recoil at these con- 
 clusions, but they are the legitimate conclusions drawn 
 from their own premises. We have no wish to expose 
 our friends, for the sake of the exposure or for the pur- 
 pose of injuring them; but we wish to defend the Truth, 
 and in so doing, it becomes necessary for us to expose 
 the fearful errors into w T hich they have been betrayed in 
 their anxiety to oppose the labors of the Abolitionists, 
 and particularly of A. S. Friends, both before and since 
 their separation. Let it be understood that we do not 
 charge them with wishing to perpetuate Slavery ; on the 
 contrary, we doubt not that most of them desire its ter- 
 mination, notwithstanding their present anomalous posi- 
 tion, wherein they exert a powerful Pro-Slavery influ- 
 ence, by throwing themselves in the way and obstructing 
 the progress of the labors of the great host of philanthro- 
 pists who have been raised up and are now pleading the 
 cause of immediate and unconditional emancipation. 
 
 " If it be asked, if we do not believe the Anti-Slavery 
 sentiments contained in the Address are the sentiments 
 of the meeting? We have no doubt but they are, of the 
 members generally, and were it not for the influence of a 
 few leading characters, the great majority might have 
 been in the Anti-Slavery ranks — in full unity with 
 modern Abolitionism. 
 
 "That they (that is, the ruling influences) stand 
 opposed to the present Anti-Slavery organizations, is evi- 
 dent from all their proceedings on this subject, ample 
 proof of which has been given in documents heretofore 
 issued from the Anti-Slavery press ; it is shown pretty 
 clearly in the document before us, in the various allu- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 203 
 
 sions to their own excellent method of doing the business, 
 indirectly charging the contrary upon others. They 
 speak of their own ' peaceable way,' ' keeping to the 
 ground of religious duty,' ^Friends then religiously en- 
 gaged,' ' these documents were always respectful and 
 pacific in their character.' 'Expressions calculated to 
 exasperate the slaveholders, or to excite to violence and 
 insurrection were carefully avoided.' 'By their judi- 
 cious proceedings the way was opened,' 'as we were 
 favored with the leadings of the Spirit of Truth.' 'Our 
 religious society cannot give countenance to measures of 
 confusion and violence to obtain any object whatever, for 
 our testimony against war is equally decisive as that 
 against Slavery, and as we cannot resort to force or re- 
 sistance to the laws of the land to obtain our own most 
 valued rights, so neither can we do it for those of others.' 
 That all these are so many indirect charges against the 
 Abolitionists of contrary principles and conduct, is so 
 manifest that it seems to need no proof: but if any be 
 required, it may be found in the same document in these 
 words: 'Had this temperate and Christian spirit been 
 kept to by all those who have stepped forth professedly 
 to vindicate his (the slave's) rights, we apprehend that 
 the cause of freedom would have made far greater pro- 
 gress than it has.' The persons here alluded to must 
 include at least a very large portion of the Abolitionists, 
 as a small number could not be supposed to have so 
 greatly retarded the progress of freedom. In short, this 
 is but another edition of the old story that Abolitionists 
 have put back emancipation fifty years. 
 
 "We fully believe that, as they say, Friends, after 
 'having liberated their slaves, felt religiously engaged, 
 from time to time, under the constraining power of 
 Divine love, to urge upon their fellow-citizens, both pri- 
 vately and publicly, the obligations which they were 
 under to accord to the enslaved African and his descend- 
 ants, the inalienable right to freedom.' And we know 
 that when any of their fellow-citizens became prepared 
 to labor in the same cause, Friends did not turn from 
 
204: HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 them and affect so much superiority and self-sufficiency 
 as to refuse them as co-workers. They freely and cor- 
 dially united with them in the promotion of the work, 
 not only to convince the slaveholders of their error, but 
 to promote political action, in order that the iniquitous 
 system might be abolished by law. No, they did not 
 think it necessary to clear themselves of ' political mo- 
 tives,' like our modern Friends, for in those days of plain 
 common sense, it seems to have been the opinion of all 
 the friends of the slave, that political action was the 
 necessary and legitimate result of a correct public senti- 
 ment induced by moral suasion, and the proper means of 
 ridding the country of Slavery. And the idea, that 
 political action for its removal was inconsistent with a 
 religious testimony against it, does not seem to have 
 entered their minds ; and none but those who adopt the 
 doctrine of the inconsistency of political action for the 
 removal of any evil, can with any consistency entertain 
 the idea for one moment. They would not be ' suspected 
 of party or political motives,' in addressing the commu- 
 nity on the subject of Slavery. No, indeed ! for ' they 
 feel a deep and lively interest in the welfare of the 
 nation.' Plainly insinuating that the welfare of the 
 nation would be injured by political action in favor of 
 liberty. Is this like the conduct of our early laborers in 
 the cause? most certainly not. And w 7 hy should it be 
 thought that ; political motives,' w T ith a view to the remo- 
 val of the great evil of Slavery, is more inconsistent or 
 improper than for the removal of any other moral and 
 physical evil? Will it be said that a concern to suppress 
 or prevent crime is not a religious concern ? Or that it 
 is not the legitimate object of political action to protect 
 the rights of the people against the encroachments of 
 oppression, and to promote their welfare both morally 
 and physically ? If we dare not entertain political mo- 
 tives, and resort to political action for the removal of this 
 greatest of all the moral and political evils that afflict our 
 country, then we dare not for the removal of any other 
 evil, then it is no wonder that politics are corrupt : and 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 205 
 
 we have no doubt but this view of the subject, that the 
 removal of moral evils and the promotion of virtue are 
 religious concerns, and would be ruined by being brought 
 into" politics, has done much to render the policies of the 
 nation corrupt and wicked. 
 
 " The authors of the Address say : ; Our religious so- 
 ciety in its official capacity, takes no part in the political 
 operations going on in the country. 5 Although this 
 may be true, yet it is too well known to need proof, that 
 the members generally do. They are not so fearful of 
 1 political motives,' as some may think. And their de- 
 votion to the Whig party, and sympathy with it, is so 
 apparent, that it is difficult to believe they were not mis- 
 taken, when they supposed they were not influenced by 
 1 political or party motives,' in issuing at least, this part 
 of their Address. They were not influenced by motives 
 of political abolition ; but was there not a political motive 
 in making this declaration ! Was it not made chiefly for 
 the purpose of satisfying a certain class of politicians, 
 whose feelings seem to be so nearly parallel with theirs, 
 as exhibited by public demonstrations on both sides? 
 For it is well known, that Friends generally support the 
 Whig party, and that the most popular Whig presses, in 
 return, defend and eulogize them. That Friends are not 
 afraid of political action when it suits them, and as an 
 evidence of their devotion to the Whig party, it may be 
 stated, that many of their active members attend and take 
 an active part in Whig Conventions, held to promote the 
 election of a slaveholder to the Presidency of the United 
 States ; and some years ago, previous to a Presidential 
 election, the subject was introduced into the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, and the conclusion come to, that Friends 
 should be advised to vote the Whig ticket. This was 
 certainly very nearly ' in its official capacity, though the 
 subject was not minuted.' 
 
 " From all these circumstances, taken in connection 
 with the language of the Address, we are bound to be- 
 lieve, that so far from not being influenced by political 
 motives, they were among the leading objects in view, in 
 
 10 
 
206 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 issuing the Address, and in a particular manner that part 
 of it disclaiming political motives. 
 
 " The sentiment expressed by them, that it would be 
 much better, ' if those who profess to be opposed to 
 Slavery, were to bring their testimony to bear upon the 
 system itself, rather than waste their strength and influ- 
 ence by publishing criminations against others,' is cer- 
 tainly deserving their own serious attention. They first 
 endeavored to criminate the Abolitionists, and opposed 
 them in various ways, and then, in their own defense, and 
 for the clearing the cause from reproach, the Abolitionists 
 were under the necessity of meeting those criminations 
 and that opposition, in such a way as to correct the false 
 impressions they might otherwise make upon the public 
 mind; and we can see no inducement that Abolitionists 
 could have to speak evil of Friends, if they had not 
 acted toward them in a manner very different from the 
 course pursued by Friends formerly toward the Aboli- 
 tionists of their day. We know of no criminations 
 against them but what are well founded. With respect 
 to the insinuation, that Anti-Slavery Friends consider 
 themselves the chief defenders of the rights of the colored 
 man, it is perfectly unfounded, but at the same time per- 
 fectly natural, coming from a people so jealous as they 
 have manifested themselves to be; for we have no doubt 
 but that a desire to have the honor of being the chief 
 means of abolishing Slavery, has been one great cause 
 of their opposition to those, who, while they (that is 
 Friends) were sleeping over the wrongs of the slave, 
 had got far ahead of them. We claim no such honor; 
 we do not wish to be considered ' the chief defenders of 
 the rights of the colored man. 5 We wish to do our duty. 
 We desire to see the slave liberated, and our country 
 freed from the curse of Slavery, but as to the honor that 
 may accrue in this world, our opposers may share it 
 among themselves, if they can. 
 
 " What object they had in view, in disclaiming force 
 and violence on their part, or in declaring that they 
 could not resort to force or resistance to obtain or defend 
 
INDIANA tEARLt MEETING- Ofr F&IEttDS. 207 
 
 their own rights, or those of others, we cannot conceive (as 
 their principles are well known in these respects),unless 
 it be an indirect charge upon the Abolitionists of practic- 
 ing contrary thereto ; and this, we doubt not, was the case* 
 We regard this, together with all their other insinuations 
 of the kind, as a poor and pitiful attempt to confirm the 
 prejudices of the community against the Abolitionists, 
 and as unworthy of any further notice, except merely to 
 say, that the confusion and violence attendant upon the 
 A. S. enterprise has been created by the opposition, and 
 that the responsibility rests with ponderous weight upon 
 themselves* 
 
 " They say, ' We believe it is our religious duty to 
 live in active or passive subordination to the government 
 placed over us.' If they mean by this, that it is wrong 
 to do aught which the law of the land forbids, we pro- 
 test against such doctrine as antichristian, and contrary 
 to the conduct of the faithful in various ages. 
 
 " We would observe, that whatever other object the 
 leaders had in view, in issuing the Address, these two 
 appear to have been prominent. 1st. To satisfy distant 
 Friends that they are bearing a testimony against Slavery, 
 and thus secure their confidence and unity ; and 2d, to 
 ; retain their place and influence with the rulers of the 
 land, 5 and particularly with the Whigs, by their insinua- 
 tions against the Abolitionists, and disavowal of political 
 motives. In short, they prove themselves to be just 
 such Anti-Slavery men as the mass of the people ; op- 
 posed to Slavery, and at the same time opposed to the 
 Abolitionists. And as to the petitions and memorials 
 they speak of, we think of latter days, they have been 
 few and far between, and when they have been sent, 
 pains have been taken to let it be known that the peti- 
 tioners were not modern Abolitionists, and had nothing 
 to do with them. And further, we believe it cannot be 
 shown that Indiana Yearly Meeting has ever petitioned 
 government for the abolition of Slavery anywhere, or at 
 any time, immediately or prospective, or that the Society 
 
08 SIStOBY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 anywhere in the United States has ever petitioned ex- 
 plicitly for its immediate abolition. 
 
 " In conclusion, we would say to our Friends of the 
 Old Yearly Meeting, ; Ye cannot serve two masters. 5 
 Ye cannot serve the Anti-Slavery cause, and retain a 
 popular standing with the slaveholders and a slave- 
 holding community. Therefore choose ye whom ye will 
 serve. 
 
 " Signed on behalf of the Meeting for Sufferings of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends, Elev- 
 enth month 30th, 1843. 
 
 Benjamin Stanton, Cleric, 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 The Epistles issued by the Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, unnoticed 
 by other Yearly Meetings, except London — Letter to the Editors of 
 the ' British Friend/ by Elijah Coffin and others of Richmond. 
 
 It appears that the Epistles addressed to the different 
 Yearly Meetings, at the time of the re-organization, 
 were not so much as read publicly ; and no one of the 
 Yearly Meetings designed to pay so much attention to 
 the matter as to send any official account_of having re- 
 ceived anything of the kind, but that of London. The 
 account from it, it seems, was forwarded to the Yearly 
 Meeting in Ninth month, this year, but did not reach in 
 time for the meeting. 
 
 It ought here to be observed, that notwithstanding 
 London Yearly Meeting rejected the Address of the 
 newly organized Yearly Meeting, and its overtures of 
 paternal correspondence, there was a number of warm- 
 hearted, consistent Anti-Slavery Friends in that body, 
 who, it seems, could not be induced to justify the wrong 
 for the sake of popular favor — who could not find it in 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 209 
 
 their hearts to censure the few for having labored in the 
 Anti-Slavery cause, in the same manner the most emi- 
 nent Friends in their own Yearly Meeting had done, be- 
 cause they had been condemned by the many in Indiana, 
 who opposed such labor. 
 
 Among these, were Wm. and Robert Smeal, editors of 
 the ; British Friend. 5 Those editors copied the Declara- 
 tion and a part of the Minutes of the Yearly Meeting of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends into their paper, and sent them 
 forth to the world, without casting a censure upon their 
 authors. This, it seems, was rather too keen a rebuke 
 to be borne in silence by the opposing party. 
 
 Accordingly, five of their number, two of whom were 
 known to be about at the head of that party, addressed 
 the editors in the following manner and style : 
 
 " To the Editors of the c British Friend? 
 
 "Richmond, Ixd., Eighth month 15th, 1843, 
 
 u Respected Friends. — We have been favored by a 
 friend, with the perusal of a number of your paper, 
 issued under date of Fifth month 31st, 1843, the first 
 number of the paper that we have seen, and the only 
 one that we know of in this part of the country. We 
 perceive that you copy a part of the Minutes, and the 
 whole of the Declaration of the seceders from our so- 
 ciety, within the limits of this Yearly Meeting, who 
 style themselves ' Anti-Slavery Friends.' Also, a letter, 
 addressed by Benjamin Stanton, H. H. Way, and Daniel 
 Puckett, three of the principal seceders, to James Cann- 
 ings Fuller, dated Third month 31st, 1813. You more- 
 over make some editorial remarks in relation to the 
 1 Indiana Separation, and the Anti-Slavery cause, 5 to all 
 of which, we have given attention with feelings of in- 
 terest. 
 
 " These documents, together with your remarks, take 
 up more than ten columns in your paper, without one 
 single paragraph in all the paper to counteract the preju- 
 dicial and pernicious tendency of all this matter from 
 
210 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 the seceders. In reflecting on the subject, feelings of 
 sorrow have attended our minds, while anticipating the 
 injury the circulation of such matter uncontradicted, may 
 possibly have with English people, and English Friends, 
 published as it is, with sympathy for the seceders against 
 the solemn acts, the religious professions, and the religious 
 character of one of the largest Yearly Meetings of 
 Friends in the world. Hence, even at this late period, 
 Eighth month 15th, two-and-a-half months after the 
 publication of the paper referred to, and notwithstanding 
 other later numbers may contain sufficient balancing 
 matter, we think it a duty, though apparently out of 
 season, to address you a few lines on the subject in gen- 
 eral, more particularly, as your paper professes to be 
 mainly devoted to the interests of our religious society. 
 
 " With their Minutes and Declaration we have very 
 little to do ; the last-named document contains so much 
 error, misrepresentation, and false coloring, and has been 
 written in feeling so evidently bad, toward our religious 
 society, not only in this Yearly Meeting, but in America 
 in general, that it would take much time and writing 
 effectually to expose all ; and a thick controversial pam- 
 phlet would be the result. We refer you to a Review of 
 the Declaration, herewith sent you, written in a concise 
 and mild manner, the accuracy of which is undoubted 
 by us. The Declaration, and the paper called the ' Free 
 Labor Advocate/ in which it was originally published, 
 are considered by Friends here, decidedly pernicious, on 
 account of their containing so much matter, not only 
 erroneous in itself, but which, if read and believed, would 
 have a tendency to alienate Friends one from another, 
 and from the Church, and the Truth, contrary to the ad- 
 vice of our Yearly Meeting. Among the many mis- 
 takes contained in the Declaration, no one would seem 
 wider of the mark, than the conclusion which is come to, 
 after much laborious argument, that Friends in this 
 country are favorable to Slavery (see British Friend, p. 
 70, third column). 
 
 " If this were true, we should not be surprised that 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 211 
 
 you on the other side of the water, should sympathize 
 with them. But we are confident that it is not true : 
 and we are happy to believe, that no system of false 
 reasoning or foul report can make it so. Friends here, 
 entertain a warm and decisive Anti-Slavery feeling ; and 
 they have shown it in various acts ; they are contin- 
 ually exercising it ; and as Truth may open the way, will 
 we hope, be faithful still to continue to make it appear. 
 And there is reason to believe, that their way will be 
 much cleared, by the absence of those, who, departing 
 from our well-known principles, are zealous to go to 
 work, without waiting to know and feel the sanctifying 
 power and authority of the Holy Spirit, without which, 
 we must expect that all our society proceedings will be 
 utterly fruitless of good. 
 
 " If you have seen the Epistle of our Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings to our subordinate meetings and members (a copy 
 of which we will send you herewith,) you know that 
 various charges contained in the Declaration, and other 
 publications of theirs, such as, that our Yearly Meeting 
 is opposing the Abolition of Slavery ', countenancing and 
 supporting Slaveholders, Slave- holding 3 and Slavery, 
 etc., etc., are pronounced to be false and unfounded. If 
 you have not published this document, it may be right to 
 publish it, clear of any remarks, notes, or comments of 
 the seceders — let your readers have it fairly as an official 
 document of our society. 
 
 " The seceders have been very anxious, both before 
 and since the Separation, to get themselves identified 
 with Friends in England and Ireland. Hence, no efforts 
 appear to have been spared, by writing letters, sending 
 papers, documents, etc., to prejudice Friends abroad, 
 and to enlist their sympathies in their favor. They warn 
 you against being imposed upon by our representations, 
 when we were making none (* a guilty conscience is its 
 own accuser'). (See beginning of letter to J. C. Fuller.) 
 They arrogate to themselves and their associates, the 
 credit of being the only ones in the country engaged in 
 the Anti-Slavery cause. They puff small matters into 
 
212 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 great consequence (such as Henry Clay's going to 
 Friends' meeting one First-day, as he passed through this 
 place), and endeavor to pervert them from any object 
 meant or intended, or perhaps thought of, into a favorit- 
 ism to Slavery, and desire of popularity with the world, 
 etc., and claim entire fellowship and coincidence of ac- 
 tion with Friends beyond the water. Even the sympathy 
 expressed in the editorial of your paper, has been referred 
 to, magnified and circulated with exultation — and pardon 
 us, if we take this opportunity to say, in freedom, that 
 circumstanced as you were, with none but their represen- 
 tations before you, w r e believe you went too far in your 
 sympathy. 
 
 " You seem to admit in your editorial, that the only 
 cause of Separation was Pro-Slavery on one part, and 
 Anti-Slavery on the other, c having respect,' as you say, 
 ' solely to the abolition of Slavery,' etc. Whereas, we 
 can say emphatically, and we hope, sincerely with you, 
 that this ' cause has claimed the warmest sympathies of 
 the Society since its origin,' sympathies which we still 
 profess to entertain in a lively manner. In a valuable 
 document on Slavery, lately issued by Philadelphia 
 Yearly Meeting, speaking of the time when the Society 
 cleared itself of the Slave-trade, etc., they say, ' from that 
 period to the present time, the Society has continued to 
 labor with diligence and perseverance in this righteous 
 cause, endeavoring to enlighten the public mind, re- 
 specting the enormities of the Slave-trade and Slavery, 
 to prepare the way for the extinction of these foul blots 
 upon the Christian name, and to ameliorate the condition 
 of the free people of color.' To this statement we be- 
 lieve the proceedings of the several American Yearly 
 Meetings, particularly including those in the Southern 
 slave States, w T ill bear ample witness, in opposition to 
 the statements made in the Declaration, and from various 
 other sources by the seceders. 
 
 " In addition to the erroneous matter communicated in 
 letters, such as that to J. C. Fuller, they have, where 
 they have had the influence, made use of the Anti- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 213 
 
 Slavery delegates who have gone to England, to propa- 
 gate their errors. We have lately read in an American 
 Anti-Slavery newspaper, a communication to your paper, 
 by this same J. C. Fuller, in which our society in this 
 land is shown out to great disadvantage. Such senti- 
 ments as the following, in the letter to J. C. Fuller, now 
 before us in your paper, will be looked upon with abhor- 
 rence by Friends here : - It is a icell-known fact, that 
 the influence of the Society of Friends in this country, 
 is almost universally 'understood to he opposed to the 
 Anti-Slavery enterprise.* By whom, it might be asked, 
 is it so universally understood 1 By none, we believe, 
 except the seceders, and those in their favor and under 
 their influence, and those who have borrowed their ideas 
 from them in their papers. Apart from the influence of 
 those who are now, or have once been members of our 
 religious society, we believe that the American Anti- 
 Slavery Society, would have acknowledged the Society of 
 Friends to be their forerunner and coadjutor in the Anti- 
 Slavery cause: for we would rejoice in the progress of 
 Anti-Slavery principles inculcated in the gospel spirit, 
 either through that Society, or any other that has been, 
 or may be engaged in the cause. 
 
 "It may be asked, then, what have been the causes 
 which have led to the Separation ? This is a subject we 
 would touch with delicacy. Various circumstances, of 
 course, have led to it. If you were among us, and fami- 
 lar with the state of society, you would understand it 
 better than it can be explained to you. They have come 
 out with a long declaration of causes on their part, some, 
 as we think, misrepresented ; some imaginary ; some in- 
 applicable ; and all altogether insufficient to warrant such 
 a procedure. The great weight, we think, lies at the 
 door of a few of the leaders. A few of these once had 
 considerable influence in our society. That influence, 
 and the consequent authority connected with it, they 
 seemed to wish to maintain; but when they had gone 
 into extremes or errors, they were not willing to bend to 
 good counsel. They had their adherents. And against 
 
214 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 admonition and brotherly exhortation, on one hand, were 
 opposed their obstinacy, and the support of their party, 
 on the other. Many young persons were led oft*, in a 
 zeal just awakened, and apparently unhallowed ; but 
 strongly inclined to burst forth in speech-making, etc., 
 without the sanctifying power of godliness and experi- 
 mental religion. Reverse the influence of one, two, or 
 three persons, and there probably would have been very 
 little trouble or contention, much less the setting up of a 
 new altar within our limits. 
 
 "''The cause is good? was the continual argument. 
 Many Friends were misled by this. The cause of Chris- 
 tianity is also good, but Friends would not, however, on 
 that account, think it best to yield their support to a 
 hireling ministry for its promotion, nor to justify every 
 means which others might see cause to use for its exten- 
 sion. They prefer to act in their own way. So do Friends 
 here in regard to Slavery. While we are, and have long 
 been convinced of its iniquity, and wish not to cease to 
 proclaim its inconsistency with the Gospel, we desire 
 that, in opposing it, Christian zeal may be tempered with 
 Christian prudence and forbearance. We ought to wish 
 to conciliate, and convince those who are in error, as did 
 our early Friends on this subject. We do not wish to be 
 excited to harsh or intemperate expressions. Our course 
 should be marked by discretion, no less than by persever- 
 ance. They seem to have different views and to be de- 
 termined to carry them out, as reference to the Advices of 
 our Yearly Meeting, and their opposition to them, and 
 their after conduct, abundantly demonstrate. 
 
 " You cannot reasonably suppose that so large a body 
 of Friends as remain loyal to our good order, and united 
 in the bonds of fellowship against the scattering and 
 dividing spirit, are acting on party grounds ; especially 
 when they are doing business, as in our religious meet- 
 ings, under solemn responsibility to our heavenly Judge, 
 and with desires to be rightly directed by Divine wisdom 
 in the deep trials in which we are involed. Such a sup- 
 position would do them injustice. Beside, you may be 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 215 
 
 aware, that all the Yearly Meetings on this continent, 
 entertain about the same views. (See their Epistles.) You 
 say that ' most of the American Epistles advert to the state 
 of Slavery in that country with feelings of abhorrence.' 
 Of the sincerity of this we have no doubt, nor do we doubt 
 that Indiana is properly included. You might also have 
 said, that most, if not all, the Ministers and others, from 
 other Yearly Meetings, including yours, who have been 
 traveling in the service of Truth, and who have attended 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting during the last three or four 
 years, have united with Friends in the course taken, and 
 given their support to the Advices so much spoken against 
 by the seceders. 
 
 " But while you refer to parties in this country, and 
 say that you do not wish to be identified with either, you 
 must not expect the old Yearly Meeting, as you call it, 
 will go into controversy about the matter. And we pre- 
 sume you will find yourselves under some necessity, if 
 you devote your paper mainly to the interests of the So- 
 ciety of Friends, to make a plain and unequivocal dis- 
 tinction in your preferences. If you do not, the seceders 
 will have accomplished, at least in part, what they have 
 so ardently sought after — that is, to gain your appro- 
 bation and support, and thus further to distract and 
 divide society. Contention appears to be their element; 
 disputation, discussion, and excitement, their great work. 
 Hence, prudently desiring and preferring to cultivate the 
 'unity of the spirit in the bond of peace,' Friends will not 
 incline to enter into controversy. The very act would 
 gratify what we believe is wrong in them, and essentially 
 weaken us, though we might apparently have all the vic- 
 tory of words on our side. 
 
 "We hope you will bear kindly with the brotherly 
 freedom in which we write, and in which we seem to cen- 
 sure you. We have no doubt that ; Truth is mighty and 
 will prevail, 5 and that time will make manifest, not only 
 the weaknesses and errors of our seceding members, but 
 ours also: and therefore we forbear to go into details, on 
 many matters touching the Separation, that might, per- 
 
216 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 haps, be explained to present advantage. Nor can we 
 have any just reason to doubt, that as Friends, and as 
 individuals loving the good order and the discipline of 
 the Society, you will see the propriety of standing up 
 promptly in defense of those who remain loyal to it, and 
 we hope that you may feel yourselves, in a good degree, 
 at least, relieved from your apprehension concerning our 
 favoritism to Slavery, on account of the representations 
 of those who oppose, and who have left us. 
 
 "We are grieved with the remark in the last paragraph 
 of your editorial about the Separation, in which you say, 
 you hope 'that the Yearly Meeting (of London) will be 
 induced to disclaim any sympathy with the temporizing 
 spirit so lamentably prevalent among many of our society 
 in America, whereby the reputation of the body is endan- 
 gered, and the way of Truth likely to be evil spoken of.' 
 And further, that you ' trust the stain which attaches to 
 the character of the Society of Friends in America, the 
 unchristian prejudice against our fellow-man, 'guilty of 
 a skin not colored like our own,' will shortly be removed, 
 and Friends on that continent be found in their more 
 appropriate vocation of undoing the heavy burdens, and 
 letting the oppressed go free.' 
 
 " By what authority can you say so ? While we do 
 not boast of our works, nor of our freedom from weak- 
 nesses and errors, and some defection in this as well as 
 in other wrong things, we believe, with sorrow, that you 
 have been misled by statements from prejudicial sources, 
 derived, probably from our opposers, and not entitled to 
 exactly that kind of confidence which you have placed in 
 them. We think if you were among us your minds 
 would be different. We beg you to remember, that in 
 America, in the Society of Friends of all the Yearly 
 Meetings, are to be found the long-tried friends of the 
 slave, who have devoted themselves much during a large 
 part of their lives, to the cause of humanity ; who have 
 had, and still have, the unity and support of our society ; 
 but who have not joined the Anti-Slavery societies, and 
 who would be far from affording any strength to the 
 
1MDIANA YEARLY MEETING 0# FfclEftDS. 21f 
 
 secession here ; and also, that the Society is engaged, we 
 believe, in all the Yearly Meetings, by committees and 
 otherwise, in doing good to this much injured class of 
 our fellow-men ; and that applications are frequently 
 made by the Society to legislative bodies, for the amelio- 
 ration of their condition. 
 
 " We are, respectfully, your friends, 
 
 u Elijah Coffin, Benjamin Fulghum, 
 
 John Pool, Barnabas C. Hobbs, 
 
 ¥m. Kenworthy." 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 tleplj tG Elijah Coffin and others by the Editors of the British Friend* 
 
 The Editors of the British Friend, with manly inde- 
 pendence and Christian boldness, after giving publicity 
 to the above (though, probably, it was not intended for 
 the press by its authors), inserted, in their Journal, an 
 excellent reply, which, I think, will be interesting to the 
 reader. Here it is : 
 
 4 s Indiana Yearly Meeting — the Seceders — and 
 The Anti-Slavery Cause. — Our attention has again 
 been called to this subject, by the receipt of a long letter, 
 signed by five Friends belonging to Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting, which will be found in preceding columns. Its 
 object appears to be to disabuse the minds of Friends in 
 this country, of the impressions they may have imbibed 
 from perusing the statements of the seceders, which have 
 appeared in our Journal, or by means of other publica- 
 tions. These individuals do not inform us, whether 
 they write by authority of the body of which they are 
 members, or on their own responsibility; we incline, 
 however, to the latter conclusion ; and shall now offer 
 
218 tUSTORf OF THE SEPARATION itt 
 
 some remarks on their production, and on the question 
 which it involves — the Anti-Slavery cause. 
 
 " We are pleased with the good feeling in which the 
 letter is written, though we are far from admiring those 
 portions of it, in which they ascribe, as appears to us^ 
 very unworthy motives to that portion of Friends who 
 have felt it their duty, on Anti-Slavery principle, to sepa- 
 rate from their brethren in religious profession. They 
 express something like surprise, as well as sorrow, that 
 so much matter has been published through our columns, 
 regarding the secession ; anticipate what they term the 
 injury which the circulation of it would inflict on the 
 Yearly Meeting of which they are members ; and deem 
 it their duty, though late, to endeavor to palliate such 
 apprehended injury. We presume they have, ere now, 
 seen from our subsequent numbers, that what we have 
 published, has not been, as they suppose, altogether one- 
 sided ; seeing we gave, in the British Friend for Seventh 
 month, the Epistle of Indiana Meeting for Sufferings; 
 and that, as our correspondents suggest, without note or 
 comment, either on our own part or that of the seceders ; 
 but ''fairly as an official document ' of Friends of In- 
 diana. 
 
 "Our correspondents state, that they 'have very little 
 to do' with the 'Minutes' and 'Declaration' of the seced- 
 ers. Now, we entirely differ from them herein. If they 
 intended their letter effectually to counteract the state- 
 ments of the seceding Friends, they ought to have gone 
 into an open, manly, and straightforward exhibition of 
 their own view of the question at issue. It will not do 
 for a party coming after his neighbor to search him, to 
 tell us that the 'Declaration' contains 'error, misrepre- 
 sentation, and false coloring;' something very different 
 from this must be adduced before the statements of the 
 seceders can be satisfactorily met or confuted. And as 
 regards what our correspondents call the 'evidently bad 
 feeling' evinced by the seceders toward our religious 
 society, not only in Indiana but America in general; we 
 are well satisfied that the Declaration of the seceders will 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 219 
 
 not suffer, in reference to the temper in which it is writ- 
 ten, by comparison with the 'Review' of that document, 
 noticed in our last, and to which they now refer us. 
 Even the Epistle of the Meeting for Sufferings, already 
 adverted to, does not, in our opinion, at all meet the 
 case made out by the separatists, for the step they allege 
 they were compelled to take. Indeed, the whole aim of 
 the 'Review,' as well as the letter of our correspondents, 
 is to throw blame upon those who have separated from 
 the Indiana Yearly Meeting, on the ground not only of 
 that meeting failing to evince, as they conceived, a sound 
 and lively Anti-Slavery zeal, but because they were, as 
 individuals, subjected to something like persecution on 
 account of desiring to go beyond their brethren in this 
 labor of love. 
 
 "We have already had occasion to remark, in reference 
 to the seceders, that we cannot think them in error simply 
 because of their separating from the body and establish- 
 ing another Yearly Meeting. They aver that they had 
 abundant cause for so doing. It might have teen a wiser 
 course could they have borne longer with those of diffe- 
 rent views, and even to have endured greater suffering 
 and loss of Christian privileges rather than separate; yet, 
 aware there are among them those who have long been 
 known as honest, upright, and faithful Friends, we have 
 been, and still are, disposed to give them credit for sin- 
 cerity in the step they took ; and we cannot but deprecate 
 the assumption of our correspondents in arrogating to 
 themselves and their party, that they exclusively ' wait to 
 know and feel the sanctifying power and authority of the 
 Holy Spirit,' in order to the right performance of their 
 various duties as men and as Christians. So far as we 
 have been able to observe, we feel bound to believe that 
 the seceding Friends are equally sincere and upright, in 
 intention, so long as they number among them such men 
 as Charles Osborne, and others who might be named; 
 men, who as assuredly believe as do our correspondents, 
 that except as they act under the light and guidance of 
 the Spirit of Truth, all their proceedings will be fruitless 
 
220 msToftY oir the separation m 
 
 of good. Their having been necessitated, as they 
 believe, to separate from their brethren cannot, of itself 
 deprive them of the assistance and guidance of Him who 
 is still ' nigh unto all them that call upon him ; unto all 
 that call upon him in truth. 5 The seceders profess that 
 they 'have not separated from the principles of the Soci- 
 ety, nor from its testimonies and Discipline, but from 
 that body of members who have departed from our testi- 
 mony against Slavery, and from a due respect to the 
 Discipline.' They further declare, that they 'wish it 
 distinctly understood that they have adopted no new 
 doctrine nor any new system of Church government / 
 that they claim to be, in the strictest sense of the word, 
 a society of Friends, with no other nominal distinction in 
 the title which they have adopted, than that which is neces- 
 sary to distinguish them from those whom they have left, 
 and to express their adherence to our well-known testi- 
 mony against Slavery. 5 Now, the assertion of our cor- 
 respondents, that the separatists have departed ' from our 
 well-known principles, 5 without adducing any proof, 
 must go for nothing; and until we obtain some evidence 
 that the seceders are not what they profess to be — - 
 Friends — we must continue to esteem them as brethren 
 in religious profession ; the more so, because they appre- 
 hend themselves sufferers in the Anti-Slavery cause, yet 
 desiring, in consistency and faithfulness, to support that 
 humane and truly Christian object; and not only so, but 
 we consider it to be the duty of the Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings in London, the constituted representatives of the 
 Society in this country, to enter into correspondence with 
 the seceders, in accordance with the sympathy expressed 
 at the Yearly Meeting, and in the hope that, through 
 such intercourse, way may open for their being restored 
 to unity with the Society. They appear to us to be even 
 more entitled to the sympathy of Friends in this country 
 than if they had never been connected with the body; 
 and it would seem, from the opprobrium attempted to be 
 cast upon them by those from whom they have esteemed 
 it a duty to separate, that there is but little hope of their 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 221 
 
 being 'the repairers of the breach;' it is far more pro- 
 bable that parties may be reconciled and unity restored 
 through the intervention of neutral persons. 
 
 "Our Indiana correspondents inform us, that the 'De- 
 claration 5 of the seceders, and ' the paper called the Free 
 Labor Advocate, in which it was originally published, 
 are considered by themselves and their party decidedly 
 'pernicious J on account of their containing so much 
 matter not only erroneous in itself, but which, if read and 
 believed, would have a tendency to alienate Friends from 
 one another and from the Church and the Truth, contrary 
 to the Advices of their Yearly Meeting. 5 The meaning 
 here is not very apparent. We have seen but few num- 
 bers of the paper, but such as have come into our hands 
 do not certainly, in our judgment, come up to the charac- 
 ter here affixed to that Journal. We can conceive it 
 possible that the Advocate, which appears to be con- 
 ducted by Friends, in exposing what it has deemed the 
 unsound sentiment and practice of the Society in relation 
 to Slavery, may have entitled itself, in the estimation of 
 our correspondents, as well as others, to the epithet 'per- 
 nicious; 5 especially if the generality of its Anti-Slavery 
 articles happen to be of the same complexion as one we 
 lately quoted, entitled 'A new Idea among Friends 5 — 
 wherein a prominent member of one of the Preparative 
 meetings belonging to the old Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
 is represented to have ' commented at some length on the 
 conduct of the Abolitionists (he, of course, not being one 
 of that class), and among other things, said they were 
 guilty of conveying away fugitive slaves to a land of 
 freedom — which was, in fact, stealing and secreting other 
 men 5 s property P A representation like this, if founded 
 on fact, cannot fail to have a ' pernicious 5 effect on the 
 Anti-Slavery character of one and all who hold or indorse 
 such sentiments; and so long as these views are cher- 
 ished and propagated by persons calling themselves 
 Friends, it is utterly vain to expect anything like either 
 zealous or enlightened effort among Friends in America, 
 in behalf of Abolition. 
 
 10* 
 
222 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " Our friends are very desirous to repudiate such repre- 
 sentations of their Anti- Slavery feeling as the above, 
 whether in the columns of newspapers, or in the ' Decla- 
 ration' of the 'Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery Friends;' 
 and tell us, that Friends in Indiana i entertain a warm 
 and decisive Anti-Slavery feeling' — that 'they have 
 shown it in various acts' — that ' they are continually 
 exercising it, and as Truth may open the way, will, they 
 hope, be faithful still to continue to make it appear. 
 And,' they add, 'there is reason to believe, that their 
 way will be much cleared by the absence of the seceders. 
 Referring to the Epistle of their Meeting for Sufferings, 
 our correspondents inform us that 'various charges, con- 
 tained in the Declaration and other publications of the 
 seceders, such as that our (the Indiana) Yearly Meeting 
 is opposing the abolition of Slavery ; countenancing 
 and supporting slave-holding and Slavery, etc., are pro- 
 nounced to be false and unfounded.' It is next stated, 
 that ' the seceders have been very anxious, both before 
 and since the separation, to get themselves identified 
 with Friends in England and Ireland !' That they have 
 spared no efforts 'by writing letters, sending papers, 
 documents, etc., to prejudice Friends abroad, and to 
 enlist their sympathies in their favor. They warn you 
 against being imposed upon by our representations, when 
 we were making none (a guilty conscience is its own 
 accuser'). Now really, we must remark, in this place, 
 that the memories of our correspondents are here com- 
 pletely at fault. Had they forgotten the Epistle of their 
 Meeting for Sufferings, dated the 6th and 7th of Third 
 month, 1843? (See our 7th No., page 109, Vol. 1,) in 
 which the seceding Friends are stated to have been actu- 
 ated by ' the workings of a spirit of activity, self-confi- 
 dence, and insubordination V Was not such a statement 
 as this a representation ? not to mention other charges in 
 the same Epistle; which, we believe, had arrived in this 
 country before a single line had reached us, regarding 
 the secession, from any quarter. Had not, therefore, a 
 complete obliviousness on this matter come over our 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 223 
 
 friends, they never would have permitted such a quota- 
 tion as that about ' a guilty conscience* to have found a 
 place in their letter. 
 
 " Our correspondents further inform us, that the 
 4 seceding' Friends 'arrogate to themselves and their 
 associates the credit of being the only ones in the country 
 engaged in the Anti- Slavery cause.' This we regard as 
 a decidedly overcharged picture of the seceders' senti- 
 ments; and we have never seen anything, that we 
 remember, to warrant such a representation of the 
 'Yearly Meeting of Anti- Slavery Friends? Again, it 
 is said of the seceders, • They puff small matters into 
 great consequence (such as Henry Clay's going to 
 Friends' meeting one First-day, as he passed through this 
 place),' etc. And ' even the sympathy expressed in the 
 editorial of the British Friend has,' it seems, ; been 
 referred to, magnified, and circulated with exultation — 
 and pardon us (our friends continue), if we take this 
 opportunity to say in freedom, that circumstanced as you 
 were, with none but their representations before you, we 
 believe you went too far in your sympathy.' Again, it is 
 said that in our editorial w r e ' seem to admit that the only 
 cause of separation was Pro-Slavery, on one part, and 
 Anti-Slavery, on the other.' 
 
 " In several of the foregoing quotations there is a wide 
 scope for remark ; but we must be brief. With regard 
 to the justice of the statement made by the seceders, that 
 the Indiana Yearly Meeting was ' opposing the abolition 
 of Slavery and countenancing slaveholders,' etc. ; it 
 would have been well had our correspondents — instead 
 of referring us to the Epistle of their Meeting for Suffer- 
 ings, where the allegation is pronounced to be ' false and 
 unfounded' — given us some more satisfactory evidence on 
 the subject. They do not deny the fact,, that Henry Clay was 
 countenanced and that in the most marked manner. 
 Like their friend, the writer of the ; Review' of the seced- 
 ers' ■ Declaration,' they do not say that was ' false;' they 
 only join in the attempt to palliate the affair. Now, we 
 do not hesitate to declare that such attention, paid to a 
 
224 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 slaveholder, was but a very questionable proof, to say the 
 least, of the sound Anti-Slavery feeling of Friends of 
 Indiana. The seceders, we are told, 'puf small mat- 
 ters? What? call it a small matter thus to notice so 
 notorious a dealer in the bones and blood, and sinews of 
 his fellow-man — he who, but the day before, talked with 
 such remarkable coolness (to some of these same Friends, 
 it may be) of his owning about fifty slaves, and that ' he 
 considered them his property , n 
 
 " Unchristian thought ! on what pretense soe'er 
 Of right, inherited, or else acquired; 
 Of loss, of profit, or what plea you name ! 
 To buy and sell, to barter, whip, and hold 
 In chains, a being of celestial make; 
 Of kindred form, of kindred faculties; 
 Of kindred feelings, passions, thoughts, desires; 
 Born free and heir of an immortal hope ! 
 Thought * * * only overreached in wickedness 
 By that, which aini'd to make a reasonable man 
 By legislation think; and by the sword believe" 
 
 " Instead of Henry Clay being taken to meeting by a 
 Friend in his gig, and thus, in Ms person, practically 
 countenancing slave-holding and Slavery, such a thing 
 would have been spurned by a genuine Abolitionist ; and 
 the slaveholder, on the contrary, would have had the 
 kindness done him of exhorting him to ' loose the bands 
 of wickedness ; to undo the heavy burdens ; to let the 
 oppressed go free, and to break every yoke. 5 Such faith- 
 fulness as this, it is true, would not be likely to ** retain? 
 for individuals or for Friends, in America generally — we 
 quote their own words — the place and influence which, 
 as a society, they have heretofore had with the rulers of 
 the landP' — Indiana Epistle of Advice, 1841. Away 
 with such place and influence, we say, if it is to be 
 enjoyed on condition of openly countenancing slavehold- 
 ers, instead of proclaiming, as upon ' the house-top,' that 
 Slavery is a sin in the sight of the Almighty, and ought 
 immediately to be abolished ! Are we told that our cir- 
 cumstances in this country, as regards Slavery, were very 
 different from those of our brethren in America ? We 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 225 
 
 are aware of it. Is it urged that the General Government 
 possesses no power to legislate for the different States in 
 reference to Abolition ? Of that, too, we are cognizant. 
 It has, however, absolute power over the District of 
 Columbia, to proclaim freedom as by the dash of a pen. 
 To this point Friends, in conjunction with other Aboli- 
 tionists, may unceasingly direct their pleadings till the 
 desired objects are obtained. And however different the 
 circumstances of the two countries, we can see nothing 
 which obstructs the march of emancipation, which an 
 honest zeal, on the part of Friends, guided by Christian 
 principle, would not, under the Divine blessing, be able 
 to overcome ; and ' liberty be proclaimed throughout all 
 the land unto all the inhabitants thereof.' 
 
 " Our correspondents evince some little adroitness, in 
 making us use words not to be found in our pages on 
 this subject. We allude to the expression said to have 
 appeared in our 5th Number — f Pro-Slavery on one part, 
 and Anti- Slavery on the other.' Now, we never used 
 these expressions. What we stated was, c That the Sep- 
 aration had respect solely to the abolition of Slavery.' 
 And, in our preceding Number, we remarked : ' It is 
 comforting to know, that the separation has not been oc- 
 casioned by difference on points of doctrine ; but simply 
 with reference to the course of Christian duty, in regard 
 to' Abolition. We meant our words to convey no inju- 
 rious or offensive meaning ; but that Friends of the new 
 Yearly Meeting deemed it incumbent on them to take a 
 more decided and active part in the Anti-Slavery enter- 
 prise in the United States; while those of the original 
 Yearly Meeting seemed disposed to continue their course, 
 of keeping aloof from that movement. 
 
 "The statement in the letter to J. C. Fuller, in refer- 
 ence to the ' well-known fact, that the influence of the 
 Society of Friends in America, is almost universally un- 
 derstood to be hostile to the Anti-Slavery enterprise,' 
 will, it is said, be looked upon by Friends there with ab- 
 horrence. For this we see no remedy, except by an 
 altered course upon the part of Friends. Their opposi- 
 
226 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 tion to the Anti-Slavery societies is no new thing to us ; 
 we have seen it alluded to in American papers, several 
 years ago, before there was anything like separation in 
 Indiana contemplated ; and it is the firm belief of some 
 of the most eminent Abolitionists in the two countries, 
 both among the members of our society and others. It 
 is an opposition greatly to be lamented ; but not to men- 
 tion other matters, if Friends in America continue to vote 
 for such men as John Tyler, the slaveholder^ be Pres- 
 ident, and that almost in ; one unbroken phalanx' — they 
 must be content with the character assigned them, how- 
 ever repugnant they may feel it — for surely their conduct 
 in this instance harmonizes somewhat lamely with their 
 saying, that 6 they entertain a warm and decisive Anti- 
 Slavery feeling, 5 which ' they are continually exercising, 5 
 and waiting for way to open that they c may still contine 
 to make it appear!' 
 
 " Our correspondents query, c on what authority' we 
 have spoken as we have done, in this controversy ? We 
 may briefly reply, we have had no guide but the profes- 
 sions and actions of the respective parties, both of them 
 being entire strangers to us, Charles Osborne excepted. 
 We can have no party feeling, therefore, in the matter ; 
 neither do we wish to be regarded as the organ of any 
 party. A concern that our Society in that land should 
 maintain a reputation consistent with its well-known pro- 
 fessions, in regard to Slavery, alone dictated what we 
 have written; and we may confess, that we should have 
 been most happy could we have formed, or had now 
 ground for forming, a different conclusion. 
 
 " One remark more, and we conclude. As to the num- 
 ber in ; all the Yearly Meetings who are the long- 
 tried friends of the Slave,' we can only wish it were much 
 greater than it is — but the conduct of these or even of 
 ministering Friends from this country, in this respect, or 
 in not affording any strength to the secession, is nothing 
 decisive to us of the question at issue ; so long as the 
 statements of the seceders remain unrefuted. 
 
 " To evade controversy, lest we should gratify what is 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FEIENDS. 227 
 
 wrong in others, as is pleaded by our correspondents, in 
 excuse for their not proving themselves in the right, 
 seems little to betoken confidence in their being so ; and 
 is a course neither respectful, nor commendable for its 
 justice to themselves — to their opponents — nor to those 
 whose favorable judgment is solicited in the dispute. 
 
 " We have been as desirous as our correspondents to 
 write ; in brotherly freedom, 5 which we trust will not be 
 worse received than theirs has been. ; As Friends, and 
 as individuals loving the good order of the Society, 5 we 
 would wish, according to our feeble measure, to stand up 
 in defense of such as remain loyal to it, provided they 
 are so in consistency with the spirit, and not the letter 
 merely, of our profession. Our Discipline is good in it- 
 self, but it may be an instrument of oppression in im- 
 proper hands. Trusting we have now defined, with suf- 
 ficient explicitness, how far our sympathy is to be enlisted 
 on either side, we must, for the present, leave the 
 subject. 55 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 Remarks by the Editor of the Free Labor Advocate on the Correspond- 
 ence between E. Coffin and others and the Editors of the British 
 Friend. — A Review by Daniel Puckett and others of certain Positions 
 and Proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, etc. 
 
 The editor of the Free Labor Advocate, after copying 
 the two foregoing documents into that paper, from the 
 British Friend, published some very appropriate remarks 
 relative to the correspondence, from which I take the 
 following : 
 
 "IMPORTANT CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 " Surely the writers of the letter can no longer attribute 
 the views of the editors to a lack of information, after 
 
228 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 the long and elaborate communication sent for the express 
 purpose of giving them a correct view on the subject, 
 written by those the most capable of doing it justice (or 
 injustice), of any within the pale of their Yearly Meeting. 
 It is to be hoped that the caustic and well-merited re- 
 bukes of our transatlantic Friends, will teach the letter 
 writers that wise, impartial men will discern the differ- 
 ence between reason and railing — between empty decla- 
 mation and a plain and sober statement of facts, accom- 
 panied by documentary and other substantial evidence of 
 their truth. 
 
 " The letter has been so thoroughly used up by our 
 British Friends, that there is but little left, requiring any 
 additional remarks. There are, however, a few passages 
 which it may be well briefly to notice. 
 
 " The letter writers say, ' Among the many mistakes 
 contained in the Declaration, no one would seem wider 
 of the mark, than the conclusion which is come to after 
 much laborious argument, that Friends in this country 
 are favorable to Slavery.' If they mean to say that our 
 Declaration asserts that Friends in this country are sen- 
 timentally in favor of Slavery, as their language fairly 
 implies, all the reply that seems necessary, is, that there 
 is no such assertion in our Declaration, or any other doc- 
 ument of ours. But if they mean, that the Declaration, 
 conveys the idea that their action against A. S. Friends, 
 and the Abolitionists in general, is favorable to the con- 
 tinuance of Slavery ; then, if there is no greater mistake 
 than this in the Declaration, it must be a very faultless 
 document — without mistake from beginning to end. The 
 public has already had too much evidence on this point 
 to need more. 
 
 " Further on in their letter they use the following lan- 
 guage : ; Such sentiments as the following in the letter 
 to J. C. Fuller, now before us in your paper, will be 
 looked upon with abhorrence by Friends here. It is a 
 well-known fact, that the influence of the Society of 
 Friends, in this country, is almost universally under- 
 stood to he opposed, to the Anti-Slavery enterprise? 
 
INDIANA YEARL* MEETING OF FRIENDS. 229 
 
 They then query, ; By whom is it so universally under- 
 stood V and answer the question by saying, ' By none, 
 we believe, except the seceders, and those in their favor 
 and under their influence, and those who have borrowed 
 their ideas from them in their papers. 5 Now this is all 
 extraordinary, and it is difficult to believe that they would 
 have hazarded such expressions, if they had supposed 
 they would ever have been made public in this country, 
 where the facts are well known. It is very clear, that in 
 the use of the term ' Anti-Slavery enterprise,' in the let- 
 ter to J. 0. Fuller, we intended to designate the efforts 
 now being made by those called ' modern Abolitionists,' or 
 the doctrine of immediate and unconditional emancipa- 
 tion, as taught and advocated by the modern A. S. soci- 
 eties. Now, will our letter writers have the presumption 
 to deny that the influence of the Society of Friends, in 
 this country, is almost universally understood to be op- 
 posed to this enterprise ? Dare they do it, in the face of 
 all the evidence of its truth before the public? Dare 
 they do it, when it is well known that Abolitionists so 
 regard it \ — that the most violent and determined oppo- 
 sers of the enterprise have again and again eulogized the 
 Friends, as taking the right ground on this question ? — 
 when slaveholders themselves, with H. Clay at their 
 head, known to be actuated by an implacable hatred to 
 the enterprise, have frequently claimed the Society of 
 Friends as being the right kind of Abolitionists \ — when 
 they themselves have given the most indisputable evi- 
 dence of the truth of the assertion, by taking special pains 
 to inform legislative bodies, slaveholders and the public 
 generally, that they have no connection, in any way, 
 with ' modern Abolitionists ; 3 by proscribing their mem- 
 bers for uniting with others, or for forming associations 
 among themselves for the promotion of this enterprise ; 
 by shutting their meeting-houses against the advocates of 
 the cause ; by frequently reiterating the absurd charge 
 made by H. Clay, that the Abolitionists had put back the 
 cause of emancipation, and by the well-known partiality 
 of many of them for the Colonization scheme? The 
 
 11 
 
230 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 signers of the letter under consideration can not, without 
 the most barefaced disregard to truth, deny that their in- 
 fluence is opposed to the A. Slavery enterprise, in the 
 sense in which the term is used in the letter to J. C. 
 Fuller. 
 
 u I shall dismiss this subject, at this time, by stating 
 that the letter, and the animadversions thereon, are given 
 as they are found in the British Friend, italicizing and 
 all. Let both the documents have an attentive perusal, 
 and an impartial examination, by every one who would 
 arrive at truth. I have no desire to restrict the reader to 
 one side of the question, like the letter writers, in recom- 
 mending to the editors of the British Friend to publish 
 the statement of their Meeting for Sufferings, 4 clear of 
 any remarks, notes or comments of the seceders.' Here 
 is a remarkable evidence of a lack of confidence in the 
 justice of their cause, as well as unfairness of intention. 
 Truth shuns not investigation ; but error, conscious of its 
 deformity, dreads the scrutinizing torch of critical exam- 
 ination." 
 
 "The following document, published in the 'Free 
 Labor Advocate,' in Twelfth month, of this year, 1843, 
 was written by an individual, as a review of certain po- 
 sitions and statements of Indiana Yearly Meeting and 
 some of its active members, and as a further exhibition 
 of facts, particularly relative to the treatment of Charles 
 Osborne. But its publication was deferred until it was 
 thoroughly examined in presence of Charles and a num- 
 ber of other Friends. The editor of that paper, in his 
 introduction to the article, observes that ' the principal 
 inducement to its publication, is to do an act of simple 
 justice to that devoted servant of the Lord, Charles 
 Osborne, who has been treated in a most cruel manner by 
 those who should have been his most unflinching friends. I 
 am fully prepared to say, that much of what is related, 
 took place under my own observation, and the balance I 
 have from such authority, that I fully believe the state- 
 ments are substantially correct. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 231 
 
 " Dear Friend, B. Stanton : — 
 
 " Notwithstanding our Yearly Meeting and Meeting 
 for Sufferings of Anti-Slavery Friends have shown to a 
 considerable extent, the Pro-Slavery character of the pro- 
 ceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends, and its ar- 
 bitrary, prescriptive, and unchristian measures toward 
 those of its members who have been actively engaged in the 
 present Anti-Slavery enterprise, yet it appears to me, that 
 the cause of truth and justice demands some further de- 
 velopment of facts 5 and some additional examination of 
 different points already taken into consideration. 
 
 " In the Address from the Meeting for Sufferings of 
 that Yearly Meeting, issued in Third month last, we find 
 a virtual claim to perfection, in regard to Anti-Slavery 
 principles and practices. Now, if this claim be valid— 
 if it be true, as they declare in this Address, that it is 
 an ' untrue and unfounded charge,' to say, that * Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting by its measures, is countenancing and 
 supporting slaveholders, slave-holding, and Slavery, or 
 that apathy and the fear of popular sentiment, have been 
 suffered to get possession,' then it must be evident that 
 the reverse of these is true, and consequently that they 
 are doing all that can reasonably be asked for in the 
 promotion of the abolition of Slavery. But let us examine 
 this matter for a few moments. 
 
 u Was it giving Henry Clay, the great slaveholder and 
 Pro-Slavery politician, no countenance for the Clerk of 
 the Yearly Meeting to take him in his carriage to the 
 meeting-house, to lead him about by the arm, and for 
 Friends to introduce him into one of the most conspicu- 
 ous seats in the meeting-house — to gather round him in 
 crowds, with manifest eagerness to shake his hand, and 
 be introduced to his notice? Did he not give public 
 demonstrations, that he regarded the principles of the 
 Society as coinciding with his own, when he declared 
 that ' they take the right ground in relation to this sub- 
 ject ; that the slaves must be prepared for freedom, before 
 they can receive that great boon V Where can we find 
 anything of recent date — among all the productions of 
 
232 HISTORY OF THE SEPAftATlOtf t« 
 
 slaveholders or Pro-Slavery presses, either North ot 
 South — a word spoken against the Society of Friends, 
 especially of Indiana, on account of its opposition to 
 Slavery ? Nay, on the other hand, do we not find lauda- 
 tory notices of its actions in regard to the Abolitionists 
 in these Pro-Slavery vehicles? 
 
 " If Indiana Yearly Meeting is at the present time in 
 favor of immediate and unconditional emancipation, as 
 insisted upon by individuals, and if its testimony against 
 Slavery has recently been growing stronger, and the 
 members of that body have no fear of popular sentiment, 
 as they virtually declare, why have they not corrected 
 Henry Clay's public statement in regard to their prin- 
 ciples? This declaration, coming as it did, from such a 
 noble character, has been circulated far and wide over 
 the United States, and not a word is heard from that 
 Yearly Meeting or its representatives, disclaiming the 
 sentiments attributed to them. Why this death-like 
 silence on a question of so much importance to the pre- 
 sent and eternal welfare of millions of our fellow-beings, 
 as that of saying whether they should now be set free 
 from the galling chains of Slavery, or should remain 
 bound for an indefinite period, to become prepared for free* 
 dom, under the absolute control of tyrant masters? One 
 of three things at least, must be true. They are either 
 not in favor of immediate emancipation, or else apathy 
 or the fear of popular sentiment has been suffered to get 
 possession ; their assertion to the contrary notwithstand- 
 ing. 
 
 " That a 'tear of popular sentiment' prevails, we 
 have only to refer to the Minutes of Advice of 1841, 
 where they express such a warm desire to c retain a place 
 and influence with the rulers of the land.' 
 
 " These rulers being elected according to the will and 
 sentiment of the people, may very properly be regarded as 
 the very essence of public sentiment, and it was for fear 
 of losing place, influence, etc., by a contrary course, that 
 Friends were advised not to unite with the Abolitionists* 
 What else could have induced them to make the expres- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 233 
 
 sion ? If the rulers of our land had been Anti-Slavery, 
 and such as had been chosen by Abolitionists, there would 
 have been no danger of losing ' place and influence ' 
 with them, by uniting with their constituents in the pro- 
 motion of a common cause. This is certainly a plain 
 case. It was because popular sentiment was against the 
 Abolitionists, that Friends were advised not to associate 
 with them. And indeed, individuals of high standing 
 have not hesitated to avow it in direct terms. Whether 
 in all this, there is no manifestation of a fear of popular 
 sentiment, let others judge. And if they are in favor of 
 immediate emancipation, how can it be possible they 
 entertain the proper zeal and concern for the promotion 
 of this cause (which, to deny, they say is an unfounded 
 charge), and at the same time neglect to correct the pub- 
 lic misrepresentations of Henry Clay, in regard to 
 their principles? 
 
 " Inasmuch as great pains have been taken by the 
 ruling party in the Yearly Meeting, to prostrate the 
 character and influence of Charles Osborne, a minister 
 who has long been extensively known in the Society, not 
 only in the United States, but also in Europe, it appears 
 to me but an act of justice, that the position he has occu- 
 pied before them, in relation to the Anti-Slavery cause, 
 and some, at least, of the treatment he has met with at 
 their hands, should be more generally made known, 
 while at the same time, a desire not to wound unneces- 
 sarily the feelings of individuals of our opposing Friends, 
 who have thus acted, dictates the withholding of their 
 names from the public. 
 
 " In the Meeting for Sufferings at the time of Yearly 
 Meeting in 1841, when that Epistle was about to be 
 issued, advising Friends not to open their meeting- 
 houses to Anti-Slavery societies, Charles Osborne, after 
 having opposed its being issued, without effect, being 
 aware that such a course would identify the Society with 
 the opposers of the Anti-Slavery cause, at least without 
 a clear and decided declaration in favor of the principles 
 held by the Abolitionists, and apprehending that if such 
 
234: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 must be the course of the meeting, it presented an im- 
 perious call so to do, requested that the meeting issue a 
 declaration to the world, stating what plan of emancipa- 
 tion it was in favor of, as it was well known there was a 
 diversity of sentiment in the Society ; some were in favor of 
 Colonization , some gradual emancipation , while others were 
 in favor of immediate and unconditional freedom. But the 
 meeting refused to say anything whatever on the subject. 
 
 "Here again, let us call to mind the assumption, that 
 apathy does not prevail — that their testimony has been 
 growing stronger, etc. ; and at the same time reflect that 
 many members, some in high standing, have contended, 
 at least in Quarterly and Monthly Meetings, as the query 
 asks : ' are Friends careful to bear a testimony against 
 Slavery V that, therefore, the framers of it did not mean 
 a faithful one ; and in more private circles they have 
 advanced the idea, that the query was formed in wisdom, 
 because of the difficulty there is to encounter in main- 
 taining such a testimony, and hence, that we were very 
 properly required only to bear a testimony. Some of 
 this class have taken the position, that it is evidence of 
 our maintaining such a testimony as the Discipline con- 
 templates if we do not hold slaves, or speak in favor of it ; 
 and yet, after all this, we are gravely told, that it is an 
 unfounded charge, to impute apathy to them in regard to 
 the subject. 
 
 "In relation to the measures put in operation toward 
 Anti-Slavery Friends, they say, ' we have felt ourselves 
 religiously concerned to proceed to do such duties as 
 were required at our hands, in mildness, tenderness, and 
 under the influence of Heavenly love and forbearance. 5 
 The exhibition of a few facts, will furnish data more 
 fully perhaps than has yet been done, from which this 
 assumption may be properly estimated. 
 
 " At the Meeting for Sufferings, at the time of Yearly 
 Meeting last year, when Charles Osborne and others were 
 reported as disqualified members of that body, he rose 
 and observed in the meeting, ' it will perhaps be ex- 
 pected that I should say something in regard to this 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 235 
 
 matter. I have done what I have done in the Anti- 
 Slavery cause, in the integrity of my heart, as unto God, 
 believing it better to trust in Him than in any man or 
 set of men, and He knows my heart, and He knows that 
 my prayers are for you, and for all men, and unto Him I 
 commit my cause.' But pathetic as these remarks were, 
 they availed nothing; the business progressed on, and 
 they were shortly after reported to the Yearly Meeting as 
 disqualified members, at which time he again remarked, 
 £ I have but one request to make of the meeting. I am 
 here reported, and several of my brethren with me, as 
 disqualified members of the Meeting for Sufferings. My 
 request is, that the cause of disqualification may be put 
 upon Minute, that wherever it may come, there the cause 
 may also appear. It is our due, justice demands it, the 
 cause of truth and righteousness demands it, and the 
 cause of suffering, bleeding humanity demands it. I 
 have no wish to cast reflections on any body, but in my 
 opinion, the proceedings are unjust, oppressive, cruel, 
 and unauthorized by Discipline. 5 
 
 u But the party which instituted these measures stead- 
 ily prosecuted them, notwithstanding many Friends ear- 
 nestly remonstrated against it. And here, it should be 
 remembered, that neither he nor any of the others, thus 
 publicly exposed, was ever informed that their names 
 would be reported, previous to their being read in the 
 meeting. Thus even the opportunity of requesting to be 
 released from being members of that body, rather than 
 be held up as objects of public censure, was denied them. 
 
 " Are these indeed, the fruits of Heavenly love and 
 forbearance ? 
 
 u Some time in 1810, a company of Friends visited 
 Charles Osborne, as he states, evidently in consequence of 
 the circulation of a report, that he had led an Anti- 
 Slavery lecturer into the gallery, and had taken him to 
 his house, entertained him, etc. When they were in- 
 formed that the report in regard to leading into the gal- 
 lery, was not correct, they seemed to be much pleased to 
 find he had not done 8 this great thing,' 
 
236 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 "Now let us call to mind the conducting of Henry 
 Clay to one of the most conspicuous seats in the Yearly 
 Meeting-house by this same class of Friends, and the 
 leading of him about by the arm, by the Clerk, who was 
 one of those who revolt at the idea of such treatment to- 
 ward an Abolitionist. What are we to understand by 
 this contrast in regard to what they deem proper treatment 
 toward these individuals ? Remember, apathy or a fear 
 of popular sentiment, and consequently a love of popular 
 applause does not prevail ! 
 
 " The company above referred to, at the same time 
 also interrogated him respecting his views, about form- 
 ing Friends' A. S. societies. He informed them that 
 no such societies had yet been formed, and gave them 
 some of his views, stating his conviction of the necessity 
 of Friends being actively engaged in circulating suit- 
 able publications on the subject, which was one particu- 
 lar object proposed to be effected by such societies. But 
 they all appeared to be utterly opposed to the formation 
 of such institutions, insomuch that some of them asked 
 him to promise to put a stop to the business. He 
 promptly replied, that it was in vain to ask him to pro- 
 mise to do any such thing. 
 
 " A short time previous to the last Yearly Meeting at 
 Richmond, four individuals, among whom was a minis- 
 ter from another Yearly Meeting, in an interview with 
 him, observed to him, that although he had been highly 
 approved, he was now fallen and out of the life, and that 
 if he removed to Michigan (which was his prospect), he 
 was gone forever, and that there was no chance for him 
 but to stay where he was, in the bosom of Society, and 
 make an acknowledgment that would satisfy his friends. 
 Just before the close of the Yearly Meeting last year, 
 Charles bore a short, though powerful testimony, and 
 one very appropriate to the occasion, and suitable to the 
 circumstances in which the Society was involved. After 
 which, when the meeting had closed, he was taken aside, 
 and some of the Elders of the ruling party gathered 
 around him, and as he informs us, told him positively, 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 237 
 
 that the communication above referred to c was out of the 
 life. 5 
 
 " In the course of the interview, although they said in 
 substance they had known his principles for twenty 
 years, and that they were the same now, yet they urged 
 him to come back to them, and be as he had been. He 
 tht j n referred to what had previously been enjoined upon 
 him, viz : that he must make an acknowledgment, etc. 
 
 " He was then told that if he would only go with 
 them, they would take him without any acknowledgment; 
 and one of them said he would willingly go with him as 
 a companion, into Kentucky, on a religious visit; I sup- 
 pose, to plead the cause of freedom, 6 where the evil of 
 Slavery exists,' instead of doing it here, where 4 we have 
 nothing to do with it. 5 
 
 " Here, let us reflect for a moment. It is said by 
 Ministers and Elders, virtually claiming by charging 
 others with working in their own will and strength, to be 
 acting in complete accordance with the Divine mind, 
 that there is no chance for him, but to make an acknow- 
 ledgment, and condemn his conduct to the satisfaction of 
 his Friends. 
 
 " Again, the same class, making the same exalted pro- 
 fession, after demanding of him a condemnation of his 
 conduct as required by Divine authority (because remem- 
 ber, they assume all the while to be laboring in the Lord's 
 will and time), tell him in substance, he shall not ' be 
 gone forever,' if he does not make an acknowledgment, 
 if he will only go with them ! But how go with them ? 
 Why, notwithstanding such a course would be contrary 
 to the advice contained in the proceedings of a former 
 Yearly Meeting, which in their late Address, they claim 
 as their own, just be careful to cast discouragements in 
 the way of those who are faithfully laboring to promote 
 universal emancipation, whether such laborers be found 
 within or without the pale of Societ} r . Just throw his 
 whole influence against the Abolitionists, and unite with 
 their opposers in closing meeting-houses against them, 
 and in denouncing them before the world. This is all 
 
238 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 they could ask, for he had not joined any Anti-Slavery 
 society contrary to their advice. True, he was an efficient 
 member of one in Tennessee, more than twenty-five years 
 ago, but then it was not contrary to the advice of any 
 Yearly Meeting in the world. Of what here, have we 
 an undoubted evidence ? Does truth ever contradict it- 
 self? is the Divine will subject to such 'variableness, 
 such shiftings ' and turnings ? Oh ! how has the gold 
 become dim, and the most fine gold changed! as said the 
 prophet to Jerusalem, formerly once the highly -favored 
 city ; and so may it now appropriately be said of Indi- 
 ana Yearly Meeting. ' Thy silver has become dross, thy 
 wine mixed with water, thy princes are rebellious, and 
 companions of thieves ; every one loveth gifts, and fol- 
 io weth after rewards ; they judge not the fatherless, 
 neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them.' 
 
 " If the cause of truth and righteousness and the 
 course he had pursued, demanded of him a condemna- 
 tion of his conduct before the brethren, how could they, 
 for the sake of retaining one among them who was 
 ' gone, fallen, and out of the life,' receive him without? 
 If such was not the case, upon what principle did they 
 demand the acknowledgment? Who cannot discover in 
 all this a lamentable lack of moral integrity, a succumb- 
 ing to that low principle of expediency and worldly po- 
 licy, which is far beneath the dignified character of a true 
 Christian or christian Church. 
 
 64 It is well known that the sentiments of Charles 
 Osborne in relation to this subject, are the same now, they 
 were more than twenty-five years ago ; and I am confident 
 no person w 7 ho was then, and is now acquainted with them, 
 will deny it. In that length of time, he has traveled 
 very extensively as a Minister of the Society, and with 
 the approbation thereof, perhaps as fully as any person 
 ever has. Thus we see, that he was recently censured, 
 proscribed, and put down, for doing those very things, 
 and entertaining those identical sentiments which he did 
 previously, with the entire unity and concurrence of the 
 Society, 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 239 
 
 " The above circumstances and various others of a 
 similar character can be attested if called for, by numer- 
 ous substantial witnesses. 
 
 " To the preceding document, the following note was 
 appended. 
 
 " From our own personal knowledge, and from the 
 statements of Charles Osborne himself, we the under- 
 signed, have no hesitation in saying, that the foregoing 
 statements are substantially correct. 
 
 " Daniel Puckett, Jacob Grave, 
 
 Walter Edgerton, John Shugart, 
 
 H. H. Way, Levi Coffin." 
 
 GHAPTEE XXI. 
 
 Exposition of the Sentiments and Principles of leading Members of In- 
 diana Yearly Meeting relative to Slavery. 
 
 • The following extract from the editorial columns of the 
 'Free Labor Advocate,' of Eleventh month, 1843, may 
 not be uninteresting to the reader as furnishing additional 
 evidence of the real position of the parties. 
 
 " Just before the organization of our Yearly Meeting 
 of Anti-Slavery Friends, Wm. Hobbs, on behalf and in 
 the name of the Yearly Meetings Committee, appointed 
 to visit the Subordinate meetings for the purpose of car- 
 rying into effect the arbitrary measures of the ruling 
 party, made request, in the Preparative meeting at New- 
 port, that if we, Anti-Slavery Friends, knew of any ac- 
 tive Friends of fair standing, who held unsound views in 
 reference to the subject of Slavery, such as we had some- 
 times attributed to them, and in a particular manner, if 
 we knew of any such who were opposed to aiding and 
 assisting fugitive slaves on their way to Canada, we 
 
240 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 should furnish them, the said committee, with a state- 
 ment of the case or cases, in order, as was pretended, 
 that they might deal with them for their delinquency. 
 This was the ostensible object of the request: but the 
 sequel will testify whether the real object was not to in- 
 volve us in difficulty. But Hainan was hanged on his 
 own gallows. On the morning of their called Meeting 
 for Sufferings on the Third month last, a paper, of which 
 the following is a copy, was put into the hands of Wm. 
 Hobbs, and he requested to attend to it as there would be 
 a fair opportunity during the meeting. He was informed 
 that we should take no further notice of the matter until 
 we should see that justice was not likely to be done. 
 And now, after the lapse of more than half a year, and 
 nothing been done to satisfy justice, I feel under an obli- 
 gation to lay the matter before the public. 
 
 " Joel Dixon said, he did not like such secret busi- 
 ness as hiding or assisting runaway slaves. 
 
 "George Carter said, he would not actively assist a 
 fugitive slave in making his escape, even if he knew his 
 master was in close pursuit. 
 
 " Aaron White recently said, that he believed that 
 slaves, in their present condition, are not prepared for 
 freedom ; that if they get a little liberty they want all. 
 He said he believed in emancipation, but he thought it 
 right to be effected gradually. 
 
 " Jeremiah Hubbard has said, that he believed the 
 Anti-Slavery Society ought to, and would go down, and 
 Colonization succeed ; he continues to speak against the 
 Anti-Slavery enterprise, and has repeatedly, within the 
 last two years, circulated his appeal to the citizens of the 
 United States and Great Britain, in behalf of the Colon- 
 ization Society. 
 
 " Thomas Arnett, in a committee of the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, positively condemned the practice of assisting 
 fugitive slaves in making their escape to a land of free- 
 dom, as being very wrong and inconsistent. 
 
 u Thomas Wells, when on a religious visit to the 
 meetings constituting Alum Creek Quarterly meeting, 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING 0# FRIENDS. 24i 
 
 some time ago, made a practice of censuring for assisting 
 fugitive slaves, and in some places said it would be bet- 
 ter to advise them to return to their masters. For the 
 truth of this statement, refer to Thomas Cowgill and 
 William Pearson, of Gohen Monthly meeting, and to 
 John Lewis and wife, of Alum Creek Monthly meeting. 
 
 " But a few years ago (and we know not but it is the 
 case yet), many leading Friends of Miami Quarterly 
 meeting, and particularly of Caesar's Creek Monthly 
 meeting, decidedly and earnestly opposed the practice of 
 actively aiding fugitive slaves, many times characterizing 
 it as theft ; among whom are Robert Furnas, John Spray, 
 Jesse Spray, etc., etc., etc. 
 
 " The above statements are made in compliance with 
 a request of the Yearly Meetings Committee through 
 William Hobbs, that we should furnish them with facts 
 in relation to these matters, and not out of any resent- 
 ment or ill-will to the persons named. Some of them 
 are particular friends of some of us, and we continue to 
 cherish for them feelings of high regard. 
 
 "If any of the abore charges should be denied, we 
 will furnish good authority. Let it be understood that 
 we have not pretended to give the language of the per- 
 sons named verhatim, but we think we have given the 
 substance correctly.' 5 
 
 " P. S. If time and space would admit of it, and if 
 we thought necessary, numerous instances might be given 
 of Friends more or less active in Society, holding senti- 
 ments similar to the above, and even more glaringly 
 inconsistent; but our only aim is to comply with the 
 request of the committee, by furnishing statements re- 
 specting a few of the most prominent and influential 
 m embers. '" 
 
242 HISTORY Of THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 CHAPTEE XXII. 
 
 "An Expostulation to those who have lately seceded from the Society of 
 
 Friends." 
 
 About the time of the publication of the above, an* 
 other document made its appearance in public, in the 
 form of a tract, entitled, u An Expostulation to those who 
 have lately seceded from the Society of Friends." 
 
 To this the author ventured to place his name. I will 
 here insert it. 
 
 AN EXPOSTULATION 
 
 TO THOSE WHO HAVE LATELY SECEDED PROM THE 
 RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. 
 
 " Dear Friends: — 
 
 u Although you have frequently published to the 
 world the causes that you say have led to your secession, 
 it remains a subject of surprise to me why men, hereto- 
 fore believed to be of sound and discerning minds, should 
 have separated from, perhaps, the only religious society 
 in America, that denies church-membership to slave- 
 holders, let them reside where they may, because it was 
 not opposed to Slavery. Neither is the Society silent in 
 bearing its testimony against the evils of Slavery, but is 
 on the contrary, both by its Discipline and Advices, fre- 
 quently calling the attention of its members to the sub- 
 ject. Now let us seriously examine your alleged causes, 
 and see of what they do really consist. 
 
 " You say you seceded because the Yearly Meeting 
 advised its members against joining in the popular asso- 
 ciations of the day for the promotion of the Abolition of 
 Slavery. Yet do you not find that in nearly or quite 
 every instance in which it has done so, it has called the 
 attention of its members to its testimony against that 
 evil, and exhorted them against apathy or indifference 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 243 
 
 on the subject ? Beside which, I find you claiming to 
 your own influence, and to your members while with 
 us, the authorship of the Epistle in 1836, and of the Ke- 
 port in 1838, they being the two first instances in which 
 such advice was issued. Now, if through your influence 
 the advice was given in 1836 and in 1838, how T can it be 
 any cause of your secession because it was renewed in 
 1840 and 1841 ? 
 
 " You give it as another cause of your separation from 
 the Yearly Meeting, that it ' directed its meeting-houses 
 closed against the advocates of emancipation.' But 
 when we turn to the Minutes of the meeting to see 
 whether it really did direct its meeting-houses closed 
 against the advocates of emancipation, w T e cannot find 
 such directions. Had it done so it must have directed 
 them closed against all its consistent members. We do, 
 however, find that it advised against the practice of 
 opening its meeting-houses for the purpose of holding 
 Anti-Slavery meetings and delivering lectures, as being 
 contrary to the general usage of Society and of hurtful 
 tendency to its members. Now if this advice, as you 
 say, has a tendency to weaken the cause of emancipation 
 and strengthen the bands of Slavery, why did you ever 
 publish it ? Why did you tell the slaveholder of it ? 
 Was it because you wished to strengthen his hands, 
 and weaken those of such out of the pale of our reli- 
 gious society as the Yearly Meeting has said, it was c a 
 satisfaction to it to find were awakened to a lively 
 sense of the iniquities and horrors of Slavery, as now r 
 existing in the United States, and are made willing to 
 become, on gospel principles, the open advocates of suf- 
 fering and degraded humanity, and are laboring on the 
 grounds which we, as a religious society, have for many 
 years occupied in relation to this subject ;' and which it 
 has said, it 'desires to encourage in this good work,' and 
 exhorts its members to be so alive to our testimony 
 against Slavery as to throw no discouragements in their 
 way ? You give it as a cause of your secession that it 
 would have such an effect; then, if so, why did you so far 
 
244 HISTORY 0# THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 disregard the aforesaid advice of the Yearly Meeting as 
 to publish it, and that, too, in the worst light you could ? 
 Discouraging as you say it was to them, it appears that 
 it was not as much so as you wished it to be. 
 
 " You say it directed, which you say on other occa- 
 sions is very different from advice. You say it directed 
 them closed against the advocates of emancipation ; 
 whereas it only advised against the practice of opening 
 them for the purpose of holding Anti-Slavery meetings 
 and delivering lectures. Now I cannot see how you 
 could have separated on this account, for if it is objec- 
 tionable at all, you have made it worse — if the advocates 
 of emancipation, out of the pale of our religious society, 
 would be weakened by it, you alone published it to 
 them — if the slaveholder would be strengthened by it, 
 you gave him that strength ; we did not, for whenever 
 we appear before him we appear on the side of the cause 
 of Abolition. 
 
 u I must, therefore, seek for other causes than these for 
 your separation, but before I do so 1 wish to ask you a 
 few questions: Even admitting your beloved theory, that 
 the Anti-Slavery cause means yourselves, is it a greater 
 one than the salvation of the immortal soul ? Now if a 
 portion of your members were in the practice of opening 
 your meeting-houses for the purpose of holding meetings 
 to pray by appointment for the salvation of the immor- 
 tal soul, and to deliver sermons in, having for their ob- 
 ject the same most righteous cause, would you not dis- 
 courage the practice as being contrary to the general 
 usage of Society, and of hurtful tendency to your mem- 
 bers ? and if so, would you be justly chargeable with 
 going against the cause of religion, and strengthening 
 the hands of the infidel? And if those members should 
 disregard your advice and publish you to the world and 
 other Christian professors as having thrown your influ- 
 ence on the side of anti-christianity, and offer, as an evi- 
 dence, that you directed your meeting-houses closed 
 against the advocates of the Lord Jesus Christ, would 
 you not think you were used very unfriendly ? Would 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 245 
 
 you not call such publications base slanders ? I believe 
 you would; but with no better grounds than we have to 
 call yours such, in the case before us. 
 
 " This comparison, which I believe to be a just one, 
 might be viewed a little further. You might not only be 
 accused as above, but if the supposed separatists were to 
 indulge in the same spirit some of you appear to indulge 
 in, they would in all probability endeavor to unchristian- 
 ize you altogether in the view of the public, not only be- 
 cause (as they would say) you had directed your meeting- 
 houses closed against the advocates of the Christian reli- 
 gion, but w<ould offer as an additional evidence that you 
 were no Christians, because you were not actively labor- 
 ing in their way in endeavoring to enlighten the public 
 sentiment on the subject. That you would not preach for 
 its advancement yourselves, unless divinely moved there- 
 to ; nor suffer your members to hire others to do so. 
 Thus they might endeavor to make the public believe that 
 you had no just claims to the Christian religion, but were 
 on the contrary, actively engaged in endeavoring to sup- 
 press it, with full as much regard for the truth as you 
 have in endeavoring to show that Indiana Yearly Meet- 
 ing is actively engaged in endeavoring to suppress the 
 abolition of Slavery. 
 
 " You publish, as another cause for your separation, 
 that the Yearly Meeting, by a special act, deprived you 
 of ' any privilege in regard to the transaction of any of 
 its important business,' and that 'subordinate meetings 
 were advised to pursue the same course of conduct down 
 to the most remote and subordinate branches. 5 The 
 above is what you tell the world, whether to weaken the 
 hands of those out of the pale of our religious society, 
 who are honestly laboring to promote the cause of eman- 
 cipation, and to strengthen the hands of the slaveholder 
 or not, I shall not pretend to decide. But here is what 
 the Yearly Meeting did say : c Friends are advised to be 
 weighty and deliberate in making appointments to any 
 of the important stations or committees in Society, so that 
 faithful and trusty Friends may be chosen ; as we believe 
 
 11* 
 
24:6 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 that those who have distinguished themselves by opposi- 
 tion or disregard to the advices and travail of the body, 
 are manifestly unsuitable for important services in it while 
 they remain in that situation.' Now, is this the first 
 time you ever knew Friends to advise to be weighty and 
 deliberate in making appointments to important services 
 in Society ? Why is it objectionable now, and never be- 
 fore ? Or is it, really, not its advice on this subject that 
 you object to (although you say it is), but the expression 
 of a sentiment that those who have distinguished them- 
 selves by opposition, etc., are not suitable to fill impor- 
 tant stations in Society, while they remain in that situa- 
 tion ? I suppose this is what you intended to say caused 
 you to secede. But is it not good also ? If any of its 
 members were so regardless of the Advices of the body as 
 to be engaged in endeavoring to throw discouragements 
 in the way of such out of the pale of our religious soci- 
 ety as were honestly laboring on gospel principles for the 
 abolition of Slavery, by telling them and the slaveholders 
 that the Society of Friends who had heretofore been dis- 
 tinguished for their zeal in promoting the cause of the 
 abolition of Slavery, were now throwing their weight and 
 influence in the ' Pro-Slavery scale, 5 and were now act- 
 ively engaged in endeavoring to put down the cause of 
 emancipation, would such be suitable to fill important 
 stations in Society ? Would not such as had distin- 
 guished themselves by promoting the publication of such 
 libels against the Society, be manifestly unsuitable for 
 important services in it? I think they would; and 
 that, wherever meetings were enabled to put in practice 
 the advice of the Yearly Meeting, c to be weighty and 
 deliberate in making appointments to important stations 
 or committees in Society,' such were excluded. Let us 
 view this cause for separation a little further ; and allow 
 me, without offense, to ask you candidly : did you indeed 
 secede because you were not appointed to important sta- 
 tions and committees in Society ? Do you own that you 
 seceded because you could not be appointed to some sta- 
 tion that you desired ? If not, why do you give it as a 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 247 
 
 cause of separation ? There is some evidence at least, 
 beside your giving it as a cause of your separation that 
 such was the fact, in what I am informed took place at 
 one of your caucus meetings at Newport, daring the time 
 of our Yearly Meeting, in 1842. The object of the meet- 
 ing appeared to be to endeavor to devise means to secure 
 your standing in Society, thus showing that your desires 
 for appointments were so great that you would even hold 
 meetings to endeavor to secure them. 
 
 " Another cause as given by you for your separation, 
 and so published to the world, is the removal of some 
 members from the Meeting for Sufferings without giving 
 the causes. This was not unprecedented in our Yearly 
 Meeting, ■ your assertions to the contrary notwithstand- 
 ing.' In the year 1828 a number of members were re- 
 ported by the Meeting for Sufferings to the Yearly Meet- 
 ing as delinquents, and released accordingly, and other 
 Friends appointed in their places. There was a number 
 of members of that meeting appointed by the Quarters in 
 like manner reported, but as their names are not on the 
 Yearly Meeting's Minutes, 1 can refer to them only from 
 recollection. You will perhaps say, here was a reason 
 given, and that too, one recognized by Discipline. But 
 here again your desire to have it so, has got before the 
 facts. The Minute does not say for delinquency in the 
 attendance of the Meeting for Sufferings, as the Discip- 
 line does, but simply ' delinquency ;' beside which it 
 was well known that most of them were diligent attend- 
 ers of those meetings up to near or quite the one that re- 
 ported them, and one or more of them were present at 
 that meeting. Neither had they all gone off in the sepa- 
 ration that had then taken place. There were at least 
 three of them that I remember had not, and two of those 
 three never did. Of those released in 1842, all have se- 
 ceded. You particularly complain of no reasons being 
 given for the removal in 1842, which it seems to me you 
 must see, upon the least impartial reflection, would have 
 been very improper and directly opposed to good order. 
 I think the Yearly Meeting has never given a reason for 
 
248 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 a removal from appointment in any case (and such re- 
 movals have been frequent), except in cases of death, 
 disownment from the Society, removal, or request. To 
 do so would, in my opinion, be a direct violation of that 
 clause of Discipline which says : - And to prevent the 
 introduction of all unnecessary and premature com- 
 plaints to meetings of business, it is advised, that if any 
 member shall have cause of complaint against another, it 
 be mentioned to the Overseers, who are to see that the 
 party complained of has been treated with according to 
 gospel order, previous to the case being reported to the 
 Preparative or Monthly meeting.' Now, if it is a viola- 
 tion of our order to introduce a complaint, into any of our 
 Preparative or Monthly meetings, until after the case 
 shall have been inspected by the Overseers, it would cer- 
 tainly be a greater one to introduce it into a Quarterly 
 or Yearly Meeting. If those Friends who were released 
 had been guilty of a violation of our Discipline, and had 
 on that account been reported as disqualified, and the 
 meeting had named and recorded the violation, they 
 would, in my opinion, let them have been ever so guilty, 
 have had just cause of complaint against the procedure. 
 What would or could the Yearly Meeeting do in such a 
 case? Would, or could it disown them? Would it ap- 
 point a committee to treat with them and report to next 
 Yearly Meeting ? Or, would it have directed the case to 
 the Monthly meetings to which they belonged, thus 
 taking upon itself the business of a Preparative meeting, 
 a meeting subordinate to a Monthly meeting? What 
 would the right of appeal be worth to a member disowned 
 by such a course of proceeding, the highest appellate body 
 being the accuser ? 
 
 u I know that you say the Friends removed in 1842 
 from the Meeting for Sufferings, were charged — publicly 
 censured before the world, etc. I own that they were 
 reported to the Yearly Meeting by the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings, as disqualified for usefulness in that meeting, and 
 released from the services thereof. But did that charge 
 them with any violation of Discipline, or any immoral 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 249 
 
 conduct whatever ? We know it did not, nor was it so 
 intended. How often have good and worthy members of 
 our society been named on committees, and to fill im- 
 portant stations in Society, and not appointed because 
 they were believed not to be qualified, or in other words 
 disqualified for discharging the duties thereof? Even for 
 as important stations as those of Ministers and Elders, 
 individuals are sometimes named in our Monthly meet- 
 ings, after having been approved by the Preparative and 
 Quarterly meetings of Ministers and Elders ; and there 
 objected to as not qualified. What but a spirit of ' self- 
 confidence,' could make a member even think of seceding 
 from the Society, because he was judged not qualified for 
 the important station of an Elder, Overseer, Clerk, or 
 member of the Meeting for Sufferings, or of the African 
 or Indian Committee ? And what better evidence of dis- 
 qualification can there be, than a desire for appointments 
 to important stations in Society, whereby to rule the 
 Church of Christ ? Perhaps you will say that in all such 
 cases as I have alluded to, as being in some degree com- 
 mon in our society, they were never published to the 
 world — they were only among Friends — brethren of the 
 same family, etc. ; whereas those judged disqualified in 
 1842, were, to use your own words, published to the 
 world as transgressors, and I confess in this you have 
 cause of complaint. But who are guilty ? Who told 
 ' the world' of any such procedure ? Your public prints, 
 and yours only, so far as I know or believe. Our printed 
 Minutes, and the Address to our members immediately 
 after your separation, in which alone the circumstance 
 is alluded to, were to our members alone, and not for the 
 public. I need not endeavor to show you how the publi- 
 cation, in the light in which you have held it up before 
 the world, would be calculated to weaken the hands of 
 those out of the pale of our religious society, who are 
 honestly laboring on gospel principles for the abolition 
 of Slavery, for you have done it sufficiently yourselves, 
 and upon your heads it must rest. 
 
 " In addition to the removals, in 1828, from the Meet- 
 
250 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 ing for Sufferings, which I have already noticed, there 
 were a number released from the standing committees of 
 the Yearly Meeting, on African and Indian concerns ; 
 without charging them with any immoral conduct, or any 
 departure from our faith, doctrines, or testimonies. In 
 the case of those removed from the former committee it 
 was, 1 believe, exactly in the words of the removal, in 
 1842, of which you complain, that is, for disqualification. 
 In the other case, they were merely reported and released 
 without saying they were delinquents in any respect, or 
 in any way disqualified ; which is perhaps in general, 
 the better way. As an individual, I am inclined to be- 
 lieve it is, yet while the meeting carefully avoids charg- 
 ing the individuals with any violation of our order, but 
 simply stating that they are disqualified, or delinquents; 
 if objectionable at all, it is certainly not sufficiently so to 
 justify a secession from the Society* If it was in 1842, it 
 certainly was in 1828, for a part of those released from 
 the African Committee and c held up to the world as 
 transgressors' (just as much, so far as Society was con- 
 cerned, as in any subsequent cases), had not then gone 
 off in that Separation, but were there present in the meet- 
 ing, but afterward seceded. Now the question is, was 
 the Yearly Meeting of 1828 justly chargeable with his or 
 their secession ? You will perhaps say no, for you know 
 that several of you were then active in reporting and re- 
 leleasing them. But if it was not a justifiable cause for 
 leaving our society and joining in the Separation then, 
 why is it now ? I leave it with you to consider. 
 
 u I think I have now abundantly shown that the act of 
 removal, in 1842, even if it was not the best that might 
 have been, is fully sustained by previous proceedings of 
 the Yearly Meeting, in which you, in common with other 
 members, took an active part ; it therefore only remains 
 for me on this head to notice your charge of its being 
 contrary to Discipline. In some of your publications you 
 say it was contrary to the plain letter of Discipline, while 
 in others you are a little more moderate and only say it 
 was unauthorized by Discipline. The latter you may 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 251 
 
 believe, but I can not see how you can the former, 
 although you plainly charge the Yearly Meeting in your 
 Declaration, intended for the information of the public, 
 that it was contrary to the ' plain letter of Discipline,' 
 and thus cause, I have no doubt, many to be deceived. 
 What plain letter of Discipline was violated ? Can you 
 pretend to say it was contrary to the plain letter of the 
 following clause, viz : c Any [members] declining, or 
 greatly neglecting their attendance, the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings are to notify said meeting or meetings [the meet- 
 ing by which they had been appointed] of such delin- 
 quency, in order that the places of those may be supplied 
 by new appointments.' This is a plain letter of Discip- 
 line for notifying the Yearly or Quarterly meeting, as the 
 case may be, of delinquency in the attendance of meet- 
 ings, but for no other delinquency ; yet are we on that 
 account to suppose that any other proceeding, though in 
 no way violating this or any other clause, is not only un- 
 authorized, but contrary to the plain letter of Discipline i 
 Certainly not. The Discipline directs that Quarterly 
 and Monthly meetings should appoint committees annu- 
 ally, to nominate Clerks ; now if a Preparative should be 
 in the practice of doing so also,, would it be a plain viola- 
 tion of Discipline ? In either case the Discipline is silent, 
 and therefore neither can be a violation of it. Again, 
 according to the grounds taken by you the plainest cases 
 of disqualification, even that of mental derangement, 
 could not be removed unless the subject greatly neglected 
 the attendance of the meetings, without a violation of the 
 plain letter of Discipline. 
 
 " It seems tome that I have now answered all the 
 leading causes given by you for your separation from our 
 religious Society, and that if you will in like manner 
 view the facts of the case impartially (instead of the ver- 
 sion given by them in your publications), you can find 
 no better grounds for your secession than are shown in 
 the foregoing remarks. In the situation in which you 
 are now placed, I think I am in a good degree sensible 
 of the difficulty that will attend all your efforts (should 
 
252 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 you be disposed to make any,) to enter into an impartial 
 examination ; for, in order to do so, it will be necessary 
 to divest yourselves as much as possible from the party 
 feelings you have been leavened into by the course you 
 have already taken. I, however, from a degree of expe- 
 rience, would most earnestly entreat of you, to make the 
 trial, individually. I say, from a degree of experience ; 
 for, many years ago, I became convinced in my mind, 
 and that too in a great measure through the ministry and 
 public declarations of my friend, Charles Osborne, that it 
 was best and most safe for Friends, in the maintenance 
 and support of their Christian testimonies, to dwell much 
 alone, and not be reckoned among the nations. O how 
 I have heard him in times past declare in the love and 
 fervency of the Gospel, the danger of Friends being 
 drawn away from the purity and simplicity of our pro- 
 fession, by mixing in the popular associations of the day, 
 even for the promotion of works purely benevolent. Al- 
 though we might rejoice that others had become con- 
 vinced of one or more of our Christian testimonies, it 
 would not do for us to leave our standard to go and help 
 them exalt theirs, for in so doing we should lower our 
 own. But rather, he used to say, let us thank God, and 
 take courage, rallying close to our standard, exalting it 
 as an ensign to the people, that others seeing our good 
 works, might glorify our Father who is in heaven. Thus 
 he used to plead with us, frequently naming the temper- 
 ance, Anti-Slavery, and peace societies. With me and 
 many others, such appeals to our religious feelings were 
 not in vain. But when in relation to Anti-Slavery soci- 
 eties it was proposed that Friends should form an associ- 
 ation of their own on that subject, I did not see any dan- 
 ger or inconsistency in our doing so, but, on the contrary, 
 feeling as I did, and still do, much interest in the promo- 
 tion of the cause, I thought it might advance the work. 
 In this situation I remained a considerable length of time, 
 being prevented from pushing forward such an associa- 
 tion only through the judgment of other friends, and al- 
 though I believed they wished me well, I found it hard 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 253 
 
 work to believe they wished as well to the An ti- Slavery- 
 cause as they ought. I thought if they did, they could 
 not object to such an association as was proposed. Thus 
 the accuser of the brethren was finding entrance, and it 
 was not without a considerable effort, that I was enabled 
 so far to overcome rny prejudices in favor of such an 
 institution, as to give the subject a candid and impartial 
 examination. But when I succeeded in doing so, I 
 thought, and still think, that such a course would be cal- 
 culated to divide and scatter us, both in feeling and 
 action ; and thus lessen, instead of increase, our ability 
 to do good for the advancement of the cause for which 
 the association would have been intended. Beside 
 which, other Friends might, with equal propriety, form 
 a Friends' Peace Society, others again a Friends' Tem- 
 perance Society, and so on, until we would, or might be 
 separated into as many divisions as the Jews were at the 
 time of the siege of Jerusalem, or as we have testimonies 
 to bear to the world. For it is to be presumed that the 
 members of each association would consider such Friends 
 as were not connected with them, as deficient in their 
 particular testimony. I thought I saw, that instead of 
 having our whole influence to bear against the several evils 
 of war, slavery, intemperance, and a number of others that 
 might be named, as it now does, we would at least, be in 
 great danger of having a part only, and could not in any 
 event have more than all. Perhaps some of you may say 
 my reasoning is not good, for the Society of Friends are 
 not Anti-Slavery, but Pro-Slavery. To such I would 
 say, is it an evidence that your Society is in favor of 
 war, because you have not formed a Friends' Peace Soci- 
 ety ? or that it is in favor of oaths, because you have not 
 formed a Friends' Anti-oath Association? etc., etc. I 
 have now, in addition to my expostulation with you on 
 the causes that you say forced you to secede, told you 
 how it fared with me in relation to a Friends' Anti- 
 Slavery association, mainly because the opposition to it 
 is urged by you as an evidence of our unsoundness in re- 
 lation to our testimony against Slavery, when issuing 
 
 12 
 
254 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Advices against our members joining in the popular, or 
 mixed associations of the day, and would here conclude 
 this Address after again earnestly entreating you once 
 more to give the whole subject a serious and impartial 
 examination, were it not for that pernicious publication 
 issued from the press at Newport. Unless the character 
 of that paper is changed, and made what it professes to 
 be, an Antl Slavery paper, instead of an Anti-Quaker • 
 one, vain will be your attempts to give the subject an 
 impartial examination, while you believe its version of 
 affairs. It is true that sometimes there are Anti-Slavery 
 pieces in it, but they are few and far between. Its lead- 
 ing object appears to be the condemnation of another 
 class of friends of the slave. One thing that appears as 
 inconsistent to me as your secession itself, and which, 
 like that, I scarcely know whether to attribute most to 
 selfishness or delusion, is your continually holding forth 
 to one another and the world, that the A nti Slavery 
 cause, or cause of emancipation, means yourselves and 
 your measures only. It reminds me of the grounds 
 taken by the Church of Rome against all other religions 
 societies in arrogating to itself the title of the Catholic 
 Church, and holding that all others are spurious. That 
 it, itself, is the Church of Christ on earth, just like you 
 assume to believe, that you are the Anti-Slavery cause. 
 ' How much better would it be, 5 in the words of our late 
 Yearly Meeting, 'if those who profess to be opposed to 
 Slavery were to bring their testimony to bear on the sys- 
 tem itself, rather than to waste their strength and influ- 
 ence, by publishing criminations against others.' Such 
 appears to be the present course pursued by the Cincin- 
 nati Herald, with the exception of a few pieces, generally 
 written by some of you, and which the editor appears to 
 think he must admit in order to maintain the character 
 of the paper as a free press. He says in a late number, 
 as near as I can remember (not having the paper before 
 me), that he is determined not to quarrel, or impugn the 
 motives of any man or class of men, however they may 
 differ from him in reference to the mode of advocacy, if 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 255 
 
 they are honestly engaged on the subject. A noble res- 
 olution, and far better would it be for the cause, if all the 
 friends of the slave would adopt a similar course. Look 
 at the two publications, and you will soon see that while 
 one is laboring to bring all the Anti-Slavery feeling to 
 bear upon the system of Slavery, and to expose its evil 
 both on the master and slave, and its encroachments on 
 the free States, the other appeared to fce as zealously en- 
 gaged in pushing away all feeling, all influence, all acts 5 
 that come up and join its ranks. You say much against 
 proscription, while you are full of it yourselves. Look 
 at the resolutions passed at almost any Anti-Slavery 
 meeting where you are the ruling members. Fro* 
 scription has become so much the order of the day with 
 you, on the subject of Abolition, that you are ready 
 to introduce it to aid other reforms also. At a late tem- 
 perance meeting, where two or three of your members 
 were present, one of them introduced a resolution to the 
 effect, that all who did not sign the pledge were giving 
 their aid and strength to support drunkenness. In advo- 
 cating such a resolution you were virtually saying that 
 many of your own members were giving their aid to 
 support drunkenness, just like you say our Society is 
 giving its aid to strengthen Slavery, because it advised 
 its members not to join the mixed Anti-Slavery societies 
 of the day, and at the same time claim to your influence 
 the Epistle of 1836, and Report of 1838, in which the 
 Advice was first issued. To what shall I attribute such 
 proscription from the Temperance, or Anti-Slavery cause, 
 as would induce you (though no doubt inadvertently) to 
 condemn yourselves, if not to blindness, in your course ? 
 You also say in your public paper, that at the close of the 
 meeting on First-day, at the Yearly Meeting, in 1842, 
 you saw greater honor shown to Henry Clay than you 
 had ever before seen Friends show to any man however 
 good or great — \ such eagerness to shake his blood-stained 
 hands,' etc. You then go on to say, it may however be 
 pleaded as an extenuation of the great honors bestowed 
 upon him by their eagerness to shake his blood-stained 
 
256 HISTORY Otf THE SEPARATION Itt 
 
 hands, their strong desire to evince to his mind their de- 
 termined opposition to Abolitionists. Now why all this, 
 but to endeavor to show that Friends shook hands with 
 him because he was a slaveholder; and for what, I would 
 ask, did you shake hands with him ! I confidently believe 
 that in proportion to the relative numbers in attendance 
 at that place, there were more that shook hands with him 
 who were members of Anti-Slavery societies than of those 
 w 7 ho were not. I allude to Friends only. Of those in 
 one large Preparative meeting, so far as I know or believe, 
 they were all enrolled members of Anti-Slavery societies; 
 which has led me to believe it was in a good degree so in 
 other places also. Now the question occurs, did they do 
 so to 'evince to his mind their determined opposition to 
 Abolitionists?' 1 do not believe they, or anybody else 
 did. I wish it distinctly understood, that I do not blame 
 them or anybody else for shaking hands with Henry 
 Clay or any other man, provided it be done in a friendly 
 and becoming manner ; but that to which I would call 
 your attention is the construction you put upon it. 
 
 u Many other instances of a like character to the fore- 
 going might be pointed out; but I have already written 
 more than I intended, and would now, in conclusion, so- 
 berly and candidly ask of you, what can possibly be gained 
 either to you, as Christians, or to the Anti-Slavery cause 
 by continuing in such a course? If the testimony of 
 Friends against Slavery has, in times past, had any 
 influence in the world, are not such things calculated to 
 do it away? Is not telling the slaveholder and others 
 who connive at that system of injustice and oppression, 
 that the Society of Friends are throwing their influence 
 against the cause of emancipation, strengthening their 
 hands (so far as your words are credited), as far as our 
 Society and its testimony against that evil can have any 
 effect? It seems to me that it is, and that it is a subject 
 that ought to claim your serious consideration. 
 
 " But so long as you are building one another up with 
 6uch false insinuations, as I have endeavored to point 
 out, and many more that might be mentioned, you will 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 257 
 
 find but little place to give your whole course of conduct 
 an impartial examination; which makes me the more 
 earnestly entreat of you to endeavor to clivest yourselves 
 of their baneful influence. Seek for ability to enable 
 you to cast down the accuser of the brethren, that you 
 may be enabled to see your situation as it really is, and 
 to return again to the Society from whence you have 
 gone out. Be assured that notwithstanding the unme- 
 rited abuse that some of you have poured upon us, we 
 would rejoice at your return ; believing that many of you 
 have been drawn away by being made to believe that 
 you had no other alternative, but to forsake the cause of 
 the slave or our religious society. With what grounds 
 an impartial examination will show; which, that you 
 may give it, is the earnest desire of your friend, 
 
 " George Evans. 
 
 "Spiceland, First Month, 1844." 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 "A Reply to a Document entitled 'An Expostulation to those who have 
 lately seceded from the Society of Friends. 
 
 " It is matter of astonishment, that any person pre- 
 tending to advocate the doctrine of unconditional sub- 
 mission to the Advice of the ' body' — that it is the duty 
 of members of Society to comply with such advice, right 
 or wrong, as the author of this document has clone, even 
 in a Monthly meeting, and at the same time act in open 
 violation of it, as he has in thus writing and publishing 
 this pamphlet. In 1811, the Yearly Meeting declared, 
 in regard to an Address, written by a Friend, on the 
 subject of one of our important testimonies, and circu- 
 lated without undergoing the examination of a Meeting 
 for Sufferings, that they felt called upon to express their 
 disapprobatio7i of such proceedings. How then dare 
 he, holding, as he does, that it is a duty to submit in all 
 
258 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 cases whatsoever (for he made no exception), thus noto- 
 riously to distinguish himself by opposition and disregard 
 thereto. He is, by his own showing, manifestly unsuit- 
 able for the important stations he occupies. [See 4th 
 page of 4 Expostulation.'] 
 
 "And it is equally astonishing that, advocating this 
 doctrine, which, as to its effects upon individuals and the 
 cause of Truth, must be the same as the doctrine of the 
 infallibility of the Church, he should find fault with 
 others if they should take the same ground ; that is, the 
 position of the Church of Rome in regard to her claim of 
 being the only true Church, and consequently that all 
 should obey her mandates. By comparing his position 
 with that of this Church, we shall find him cast in the 
 shade. She holds that the Church cannot err, and, there- 
 fore, all should obey. He holds, that if she does err, it 
 is our duty to obey. Thus, in either case, submission is 
 positive duty. Thus far they are alike. But she does 
 not broach the astounding absurdity of our author, that 
 it is right to do wrong, and, of course, wrong to do right ; 
 and hence he is much behind her in point of consistency. 
 
 44 When opponents exhibit a spirit of candor and a 
 disposition to elicit the Truth by stating matters of fact 
 only, and representing truly and fairly the point at issue, 
 a discussion can be prosecuted with pleasure; but the 
 course ours have taken in every document they have 
 issued, makes it a very unpleasant task, because we are 
 under the necessity of exposing and contradicting them. 
 
 14 It is worthy of remark, that the writer of this docu- 
 ment, like his predecessor, the author of the anonymous 
 Review of our Declaration, has, in endeavoring to make 
 our reasons for seceding appear as insignificant and con- 
 temptible as possible, represented us as saying, that we 
 seceded because of the existence of some one circum- 
 stance named in the ' Declaration ;' and that perhaps 
 incidentally spoken of, or referred to, as one evidence of 
 the existence of the two grand defects which we deemed 
 just cause of separation, as set forth in the first Minute 
 of our Yearly Meeting, namely, a departure, on the part 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 259 
 
 of Indiana Yearly Meeting, from the true and genuine 
 principles of Friends in regard to our testimony against 
 Slavery, and for its arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchris- 
 tian measures toward us. For instance, he says, on his 
 first page : ' You say you seceded because the Yearly 
 Meeting advised its members against joining in the 
 popular associations of the day for the promotion of the 
 abolition of Slavery.' If the reader will turn to our 
 Declaration and trace the history of that advice up to 
 the Yearly Meeting of 1842, he will find that the object 
 was to show the unsoundness of the ruling party, inas- 
 much as some of them who were endeavoring to enforce 
 submission to this advice, were actively engaged in mixed 
 associations of a different character, and in supporting, to 
 some extent, the Colonization scheme, contrary to the ad- 
 vice of the same body. And again, rendering this advice 
 against joining Anti-Slavery societies equivalent to a 
 positive injunction, was referred to, among other things, 
 in justification of our course in seceding, or as exhibit- 
 ing a necessity for it, for thereby liberty of conscience 
 was prohibited, that dearest of rights, on account of the 
 prostration of which many of our forefathers suffered 
 even unto death. These were the objects in speaking of 
 this advice, and not to give the fact of its being issued as 
 a cause in itself of separation. But if such had been 
 the case, what boy of ten years old, after reading the 
 Declaration of American Independence, would think of 
 referring to one out of the long catalogue of abuses there 
 charged upon the king of England, and then declare that 
 the American Colonies said tfcey seceded from the British 
 crown because the king had done this one act; but there 
 would be just as much sense in it, as there is in his asserting, 
 that we seceded because of the issuing of this advice, even 
 if we had given it as a reason. Much that is said in the 
 Declaration is a mere history of facts. Why did he not say 
 also that we declared we seceded because the Yearly Meet- 
 ing issued the advice to cast no discouragement in the way 
 of those who are laboring to promote universal emancipa- 
 tion ? This also is mentioned as well as the other 
 
260 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 advice. By a comparison of the facts referred to, argu- 
 ments are derived, establishing the position taken in the 
 Minutes of our Yearly Meeting already quoted. For 
 example, the treatment of Henry Clay and C. C. Bcr- 
 leigh, by Friends, is referred to; but who cannot see, 
 except our writing opposers, that these circumstances 
 were spoken of to show with whom they had the most 
 sympathy, a slaveholder or a modern Abolitionist, and 
 that the comparison was instituted to prove the grand 
 point, a departure from genuine principles, and that they 
 w T ere not mentioned as in themselves causes of separa- 
 tion ! And here I would call the attention of the reader 
 to the fact that they have never once noticed any of our 
 arguments derived from the sources just alluded to. 
 Why is it thus ? I say let the intelligent and impartial 
 decide. 
 
 " Our author queries, { do you not find that in nearly or 
 quite every instance, in which it (the Yearly Meeting) 
 has advised its members against joining in the popular 
 associations of the day for the promotion of the abolition 
 of Slavery, it has called the attention of its members to 
 its testimony against that evil, and exhorted them against 
 apathy or indifference on the subject V 
 
 "It appears that it was not consistent with the object 
 of his Expostulation, professedly conducted under a dis- 
 position to make an 'impartial examination, 5 to explain 
 the consistency of such calls and exhortations, with the 
 efforts of some of their delegations to the Legislatures of 
 Ohio and Indiana, to convince the members thereof that 
 the Society of Friends were not Abolitionists, and held no 
 connection with them. It was doubtless foreign to his 
 object to show T the consistency of such profession of Anti- 
 Slavery zeal with the conduct of some of their leaders in 
 assuring Henry Clay that the Society had no hand in 
 getting up the petition, presented to him at Richmond, 
 asking him to liberate his slaves ; or with the conduct of 
 the Yearly Meeting, in rejecting the accounts from diffe- 
 rent Quarterly meetings, that a deficiency existed among 
 Friends in regard to our testimony against Slavery; 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 261 
 
 declaring Slavery, in opposition to such evidence, that no 
 such deficiency appeared ; such accounts being mainly pre- 
 dicated, at least, in our author's own Quarterly meeting, as 
 he well knows, upon the fact that the abolition of Slavery 
 was objected to by one or more, and that one even argued 
 that Slavery was right. All these, and a host of other cir- 
 cumstances of a similar character, which might be enume- 
 rated, showing conclusively, that their professions and 
 actions were totally irreconcilable, it seems, did not come 
 within the sphere of his impartial investigations. 
 
 "Page 1, he says: ■ ISTow, if through your influence 
 the advice (not to associate with others) was given in 
 1836, and in 1S38, how can it be an}^ cause of your seces- 
 sion, because it was renewed in 1840 and in 1841?' This 
 perhaps has been sufficiently answered already, inasmuch 
 as I have shown we never gave that as a cause ; but the 
 reader should bear in mind, that it was the Anti-Slavery 
 publications, ' the Minutes, Epistles, and Address, 5 of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting of former time, which onr oppo- 
 nents held vp as evidence of their Anti-Slavery, charac- 
 ter, which we asserted were most, if not all, brought 
 forth by the influence of those they have since proscribed, 
 and whom the3 r at that time opposed, and, in so doing, 
 tried to prevent the adoption of the aforesaid documents. 
 [See both sides of the question, page 11.] It was not 
 that advice of which he speaks, which we claimed, for it 
 was that which they opposed at the time of its adoption ; 
 but this they w T ere anxious to have inserted. We ad- 
 mitted, however [see printed Minutes, first Yearly Meet- 
 ing, page 10], that some of the real friends of the cause 
 of immediate emancipation at first were opposed to mix- 
 ing with others, but they were consistent. They w^ere 
 opposed to joining any mixed association whatever: but 
 not so with the opposite class, as was evinced by their 
 conduct. And they seized the opportunity of assisting 
 to issue this advice, but with very different motives. 
 They were prompted to action by opposition to modern 
 abolition societies. [For proof, see anonymous Review, 
 which was, no doubt, written by some of those very indi- 
 
262 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 victuals.] The former class were induced to favor the 
 advice, through a fear that uniting with others might 
 lead to a compromise of our principles, not discovering 
 what use might be made of it ; for the} 7 never thought of its 
 being converted into anything more than mere advice. 
 
 "But it should be remembered, that the advice issued 
 in 1836, was merely to consider whether the time had not 
 arrived, in which it would be most safe for members of 
 our religious society to refrain from becoming members 
 of other societies, etc. Now, although there is in this 
 an apparent distrust of there being a propriety in our 
 becoming members of benevolent societies, yet I conceive 
 that those who took the subject under consideration, as 
 suggested, let them have acted as they might afterward, 
 acted in accordance with the advice. And if it had 
 been c renewed in 1840 and '41 ' in this form, and left 
 upon the same ground upon which it was originally 
 given, it would have caused no difficulty. The advice 
 contained in the last paragraph of the Report of the com- 
 mittee on the concerns of the People of Color in 1838, 
 of which he speaks, c to abstain from mixing with these 
 associations,' is a production of their own, and the adop- 
 tion of it was opposed by some, if not all, of the Aboli- 
 tionists present at the time it was made out. It is no 
 Anti-Slavery advice, neither did they hold it up as evi- 
 dence of their Anti-Slavery character, and, therefore, we 
 did not claim it. And I ask those acquainted with our 
 documents, if we have not heretofore given them credit 
 to a full share in the authorship of this advice, even in 
 its original form ? Why, then, pretend that we claimed 
 it to ourselves ? 
 
 u But it is a little remarkable that the writer of the 
 document before me, after the demonstrations we have 
 had, should endeavor to palm it upon the minds of the 
 people, that the ruling part of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
 desire to cast no discouragements in the way of modern 
 Abolitionism, or Abolition societies. This is obviously 
 his aim. Now it is well known that he is one among 
 the many who sanctioned the anonymous Review of our 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 263 
 
 Declaration, which was commended and widely circulated 
 by leading members of that party. We then hear him 
 on the back of his pretensions of love to that cause, in 
 reply to the assertion that Abolition societies have done 
 much good, saying, ; not modern Abolition institutions 
 it should be remembered,' these hold principles and 
 practices unworthy of such good men as Mifflin and 
 JPemberton. Various other expressions are used in that 
 document showing that he holds them in contempt. 
 Truly, I hope, to use his own words, we will give this 
 subject an ' impartial examination.' And in doing this, 
 it will be necessary, as he makes profession of having 
 come out of error in regard to Abolition, and, therefore, 
 I suppose, thinks he is prepared to give advice, in order 
 that it may have its just weight, to notice some particu- 
 lar facts. About the time ' the accuser of the brethren ' 
 had got possession of his mind, or ' was finding en- 
 trance, 5 he was heard to ask the question, ' how much 
 worse is it to hire a slave to work with us, and pay the 
 master, than to let the slave work under the immediate 
 control and treatment of the master, and we pay him 
 for what the slave produces ?' This was the substance of 
 the interrogatory. This makes it evident that he saw 
 the matter clearly as it is. But since the accuser of the 
 brethren has been cast out, he has been heard frequently 
 to say he c can't feel conscientious in regard to using 
 slave-labor produce,' and when on being asked how it 
 happened that he once took sides with Charles Osborne 
 in advocating the rightfulness and necessity of abstain- 
 ing from the use of such productions, he replied, he did 
 it to encourage others who did feel conscientious. He is 
 aware that the slave is held in bondage in order to ob- 
 tain the produce of his labor for consumption, but he 
 cannot feel conscientious against consuming it, and of 
 course, to be consistent, cannot feel conscientious against 
 holding slaves. When the accuser of the brethren was 
 operating in his mind, he declared himself in favor of 
 voting for Abolitionists, but when he cast him out, he 
 went and voted for Harrison, the Pro-Slavery man, and 
 
264 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Tyler, the slaveholder; and since then, when a thorough- 
 going Anti-Slavery man was before the people as a can- 
 didate for Congress, instead of voting for him, he cast 
 his suffrage for a stanch opposer of the Liberty Party, 
 and a villifier of the Abolitionists. When he was under 
 the influence of this accuser, he was strongly in favor of 
 helping fugitives to Canada, but since he has got from 
 under it, he justifies the proceedings of North Carolina 
 Yearly Meeting in censuring for such a practice in any 
 way whatever. And finally, to cap the climax, he comes 
 out with the document under review, which is a tissue of 
 unfounded accusations, either directly or by insinuation, 
 almost from beo-inniuo; to end. But here I would remark, 
 that 1 am tar from representing a person as acting under 
 the influence of the accuser of the brethren, for stating 
 truly, in a proper manner to them their position (no 
 matter what they have done), in order to correct that 
 which is wrong. If I were to, I should apply this epithet 
 to all the prophets, apostles, and good men, in every age 
 and clime. 
 
 "Page 2d, he says : 'But when we turn to the Minutes 
 of the meeting, to see whether it really did direct its 
 meeting-houses closed against the advocates of emanci- 
 pation we cannot find such directions. Had it done so, 
 it must have directed them closed against all its consis- 
 tent members.' 
 
 " I suppose he means such consistent members as he is 
 himself, who advocate emancipation by voting for slave- 
 holders, and paying the master for holding the slave, and 
 extorting his labor by the lash, and villifying modern 
 Abolitionists. Now it will be seen, by examination, that 
 in this there is an effort to make something out of noth- 
 ing. He represents us as saying that the Yearly Meet- 
 ing directed its meeting-houses closed. I should like to 
 know where he finds what he has quoted. It may be 
 possible that some individual may have thus represented 
 the matter, but I feel confident that, as a Society, we never 
 have, and we do not think of charging Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting with uttering what is written in this document 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 265 
 
 under consideration, only so far as it may indorse it. 
 But we did say that the Yearly Meeting l refused the use 
 of meeting-houses to Anti-Slavery meetings, 5 ; closed the 
 doors of meeting-houses against them,' etc., and was not 
 this the fact? Perhaps he will say they were never 
 opened ; but such was not the case, for they were ever 
 open by common consent to Anti-Slavery societies, until 
 a few years back, as a history of facts will abundantly 
 testify. I know that the Advice in 1S41 says, it was con- 
 trary to the general usage of Society, for meeting-houses 
 to be opened to Anti-Slavery meetings, but it is so far 
 from the truth, that it is a matter w T ell known, that from the 
 time the testimony was taken up, down to that at which 
 manumission societies prevailed in North Carolina and 
 Tennessee, Friends' meeting-houses were always open, 
 and in those States just referred to, in particular; for 
 whenever a society wished to hold a meeting in the 
 neighborhood of Friends, it was just appointed at their 
 meeting-house without the least consultation, and even a 
 meeting for Ministers and Elders has been known to 
 evacuate the house in order to accommodate an Anti- 
 Slavery meeting. At Richmond also, in this State, the 
 same kind of meetings were held in their meeting-house, 
 and never ivas there any other usage in the Society since 
 the testimony was taken up against Slavery, till the Col- 
 onization scheme spread its pestiferous influence among 
 Friends, and dried up to a lamentable extent the fountain 
 of brotherly love. 
 
 "As we have, at different times, shown that the Yearly 
 Meeting, in closing meeting-houses against the Abolition- 
 ists, violated its own former advice to cast no discour- 
 agements in the way of those who are faithfully laboring 
 to promote universal emancipation ; our author, no doubt, 
 aware that it was impossible to refute this charge, resorts 
 to the ridiculous subterfuge of endeavoring to make us 
 accountable for the evil effect of their misconduct, 
 merely because we have taken the liberty to express 
 publicly our disapprobation of such proceedings, and 
 thus furnishing those advocates out of the pale of our 
 
266 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION m 
 
 religious society with the encouragement, that all of 
 the Society were not disposed to treat them in such a 
 manner. 
 
 u In one of these efforts he observes: 'If any of its 
 members were so regardless of the Advices of the body, 
 as to engage in endeavoring to throw discouragements 
 in the way of such, out of the pale of our religious society, 
 as were honestly laboring on gospel principles for the 
 abolition of Slavery, by telling them and the slavehold- 
 ers, that the Society of Friends, who had heretofore been 
 distinguished for their zeal in promoting the cause of 
 the abolition of Slavery, were now throwing their weight 
 and influence in the Pro-Slavery scale, and were now 
 actively engaged in endeavoring to put down the cause 
 of emancipation, would such be suitable to fill important 
 stations in Society? Would not such as had distinguished 
 themselves by the publication of such libels against the 
 Society, be manifestly unsuitable for important services 
 in it? I think they would.' 
 
 u Here he has charged those Friends removed from the 
 Meeting for Sufferings, as well as others, with promoting 
 the publication of a libel against their society, and has 
 averred that 'such were excluded' from important ser- 
 vices in Society, on that account. 
 
 "Now, mark his declaration on page 6, the tenor of 
 which means, if it means anything at all, that their re- 
 moval was not intended to imply that they were guilty 
 of any violation of discipline or immoral conduct what- 
 ever. Thus we hear him avowing that they were re- 
 moved from that important station in Society, and pro- 
 nounced disqualified for further services in it hecause they 
 promoted the publication of a libel against the Society; 
 and then, again, in another place he, in effect, declares, 
 equally positive, that they were not removed on account 
 of any violation of discipline or immoral conduct what- 
 ever. The publication of a libel, it would seem then, is 
 no violation of discipline or immoral conduct with him. 
 Really ! is this an exponent of our author's system of 
 ethics ? We might readily suppose so from the liberal- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 267 
 
 ity with which he indulges in such publications, as I trust 
 I shall demonstrate before I am done. But he will, per- 
 haps, not like to admit that such conduct is not contrary 
 to discipline or immoral. I shall, however, leave him to 
 lay hold of whichever horn of the dilemma he may 
 choose, either to admit this, or that he has pointedly con- 
 tradicted himself in the two statements, and, therefore, 
 that one of them, at least, is a falsehood. 
 
 Again he says: fc Now if this advice (against opening 
 meeting-houses), as you say, has a tendency to weaken 
 the cause of emancipation and strengthen the bonds of 
 Slavery, why did you ever publish it? 5 And in another 
 place : ' Now 1 cannot see how you could have separated 
 on this account, for if it is objectionable at all, you made 
 it worse. 5 
 
 " It will be seen from this and his quotation from the 
 Minutes of the Yearly Meeting, that he has virtually 
 taken the position, that if the Society of Friends had 
 ever become so corrupt as to alter their Discipline, so as 
 to allow members to hold slaves, and we should make 
 known the fact, we should be chargeable with violating 
 the advice to cast no discouragements in the way of the 
 advocates of suffering and degraded humanity. Now, 
 he gives us to understand that he approves of the gen- 
 eral course of the editor of the Cincinnati ; Herald. 5 
 That course he, and every one acquainted with the paper, 
 knows, is, to expose the deteriorations and corruptions 
 of the Whig and Democratic parties in regard to human 
 rights, when, according to his doctrine, if the course of 
 these parties 6 is objectionable at all, 5 the editor is mak- 
 ing the matter worse; he is casting discouragements in 
 the way of Liberty men ; he is weakening them and 
 strengthening the slaveholder, by telling him these great 
 parties are in his favor, and much more so than in for- 
 mer time. Thus, if we are to believe in his logic, we 
 must suppose he approves of strengthening the slave- 
 holder. These arguments show to what extremities our 
 opposers are driven. It appears that our author would 
 have us understand that the way to uproot evil is to say 
 
268 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 nothing at all about it. But the Divine command is, 
 ' Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, 
 show unto the people their trangressions, and to the house 
 of Israel their sins.' Such doctrine as his, suits those 
 who 'love darkness rather than light,' and for the very 
 good reason that ' their deeds are evil,' and they do not 
 wish them exposed.* 
 
 "Again he says: c Now I cannot see how you could 
 have separated on this account (the issuing of the Advice 
 against opening meeting-houses), for if it was objection- 
 able at all, you made it worse — if the advocates of eman- 
 cipation out of the pale of our religious society, would 
 be weakened by it, you alone published it to them — if 
 the slaveholder would be strengthened by it, you gave 
 him that strength, we did not ; for whenever we appear 
 before him, we appear on the side of the cause of Aboli- 
 tion. 'Not modern Abolition, however, it should be 
 remembered;' for some of them, eager to let all know 
 whether slaveholders or not, who felt interested about 
 it, introduced the Advice, bearing against Anti-Slavery 
 societies, into one or more anti-abolition papers of Cin- 
 cinnati, which circulated in the South, from which it 
 was, no doubt, copied into Southern papers, and Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting highly eulogized for its course by the 
 slaveholders. There is very little probability of its 
 having been taken from the 'Advocate,' because but 
 
 * I would here revert to an expression passed over in its proper place. 
 Although in the instance alluded to, as in most other cases, he makes 
 the charge in an indirect and underhanded manner, yet it is no less a 
 charge on that account. In this way he avers we have been engaged in 
 endeavoring to cast discouragements in the way of the Abolitionists, 
 out of the pale of our religious society, by telling them and the slave- 
 holders, etc. 
 
 Now I am confident that he and every one of his party, must know 
 there is not one particle of truth in this statement. If we should ad- 
 mit that publishing the treatment toward them as wrong, would have 
 a tendency to discourage them (which is perfectly absurd), what evi- 
 dence is there that we, in doing it, were endeavoring to discourage 
 them. We endeavoring to discourage those with whom we have united, 
 and spent our time and substance for years in the promotion of a cause 
 alike dear to us and them ! ! 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 269 
 
 very few, if any, slaveholders will read it, it is so com- 
 pletely anti -Quaker. But he knows very well that we 
 never published it for the sake of telling the slaveholder 
 they were on his side, nor to discourage the friends of 
 the cause out of the pale of Society, notwithstanding his 
 assertion, that ; discouraging as you say it was to them, 
 it appears that it was not as much so as you wished it to 
 be. 5 It is not making known the existing opposition to 
 a good cause which constitutes a discouragement to those 
 who wish to advance that cause, but the opposition itself; 
 for to those who really desire its progress, it is a source 
 of discouragement to have matters kept dark, as our 
 author wishes to have them. They are glad to know 
 the whole amount of opposition against which they 
 have to contend, that they may direct their operations 
 to suit it. 
 
 " But a word or two more in regard to the assertion, 
 that they did not publish their proceedings against the 
 modern Abolitionists, to advocates of the cause out of the 
 pale of Society, or to the slaveholders. They have 
 printed them annually in five thousand copies of their 
 Minutes, and thrown them, as it were, broadcast over 
 the State of Ohio and Indiana, wherever there were any 
 Friends, and in various instances, much farther ; and 
 every person had, and now has, the privilege of reading 
 that can get hold of them. No obligation has ever been 
 imposed upon members to restrict the reading of those 
 documents to themselves. They stand upon precisely the 
 same ground that all other approved writings do, which 
 are in common circulation, and yet, he declares, they 
 were not published at all. I would ask him to answer 
 seriously ; did the Yearly Meeting intend that those ad- 
 vocates out of the pale of Society, who constitute in part, 
 the Anti-Slavery meetings spoken of in the Advice, and 
 to which the Yearly Meeting refused the use of the 
 meeting-houses, should never know that they were thus 
 refused the use of meeting-houses ? It is indeed, aston- 
 ishing to me, that any person c heretofore believed to be 
 of a sound and discerning mind,' should become so com- 
 
 11* 
 
270 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 pletely blinded or infatuated, as to make such assertions. 
 Was it not telling those advocates of it in the most for- 
 cible manner, and in a way not easily to be forgotten, 
 when a large concourse of them met at Spiceland, in the 
 fall of 1841, just after the issuing of the Advice, with 
 the expectation of holding the anniversary of the State 
 Society, in the meeting-house, and found it closed against 
 them contrary to previous usage, and were thus forced to 
 retire to the woods and organize the meeting standing, 
 or perchance, sitting upon some old rotten logs, while 
 the bleak winds set them to shivering like the houseless 
 outcast whose grievances they had met to redress ? Was 
 it not telling the world of their course toward us, to pub- 
 lish it as some of them did, in the 'Philadelphia Friend,' 
 a paper taken by every person who chooses so to do? 
 At the time of Yearly Meeting, in 1840, a request was 
 made on behalf of Thomas Robson, in the Meeting for 
 Sufferings, for a copy of the Epistle of Sixth month, 
 1840, issued by that meeting and approved by the Yearly 
 Meeting; the reason being given, that Thomas was going 
 to travel in the South, and wished to carry a copy with 
 him, and particularly, as he expected to call on Henry 
 Clay, and the Clerk was directed to furnish him with 
 one. How does this, together with other circumstances 
 to which I have adverted, comport with his assertion, 
 that they do not tell the slaveholders of it ! I say, it is 
 completely out of his power to cite to one instance in 
 which we have manifested such a desire or even any de- 
 sire at all, to tell the slaveholders more than others of 
 their proceedings. The principal difference, however, be- 
 tween us in this particular, is, that we publish their pro- 
 ceedings as wrong, and they publish them as right. 
 
 " ; If,' says he, c the advocates of emancipation out of 
 the pale of our religious Society would be weakened by 
 it, you alone published it to them ; if the slaveholder 
 would be strengthened by it, you gave him that strength,' 
 we did not, for whenever we appear before him, we ap- 
 pear on the side of the cause of Abolition. 
 
 " I have no doubt he has here spoken the truth in re- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 271 
 
 gard to one point, unintentionally. He tells us that they 
 do not publish that advice to the slaveholder, for whenever 
 they appear before him, they appear on the side of the cause 
 of Abolition, and, of coarse, the idea is, publishing it 5 
 would not be on that side, even if they did it themselves. 
 
 " This is exactly owning the truth of our position, that 
 just so far as they make known to the slaveholders their 
 treatment of Abolitionists, they give him their strength, 
 their weight and influence, unless they should appear 
 before him in order to condemn their conduct, as we 
 have done, so far as we have appeared before him at all, 
 in which case, they, like us, would be far from giving 
 him any strength by publishing it. But I have already 
 shown that they have willingly made known to the 
 slaveholder their conduct toward Abolitionists, and that 
 officially, and for the purpose of showing their opposi- 
 tion to modern Abolition, and therefore, according to our 
 author's own admission, they have been strengthening 
 his hands, which he calls a libel when we utter it. 
 
 "It will be observed, that in denying that the Yearly 
 Meeting directed its meeting-houses closed against the 
 advocates of emancipation, and saying that had it done 
 so, it must have directed them closed against all its con- 
 sistent members, the idea is clearly conveyed also, that 
 it did not advise against opening them to advocates of 
 emancipation, but against opening them for Anti-Slavery 
 meetings. Thus we hear him virtually denying that 
 those who constitute Anti-Slavery ''meetings, are advocates 
 of emancipation. Whose is the ; beloved theory,' that 
 'the cause of emancipation, means themselves? Let 
 the intelligent and impartial decide. 
 
 4i On page 10, after charging us without producing the 
 slightest evidence of its truth, with claiming that the 
 cause of emancipation means ourselves and our measures 
 only, he remarks : ' It reminds me of the grounds taken 
 by the Church of Rome against all other religious so- 
 cieties, in arrogating to itself the title of the Catholic 
 Church, and holding that all others are spurious.' In 
 this, as in other accusations, he has charged us without 
 
272 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 proof, with that which he is by his own words positively 
 guilty of himself. He gives us to understand on page 3, 
 that he considers the Society of Friends as the peculiar 
 or chosen people of God ; so much so, that he compares 
 them (by referring to what he says, was formerly Charles 
 Osborne's declaration) to the chosen people of Israel, for- 
 merly, and all other people, whether of ; religious socie- 
 ties ' or not, to those heathen and idolatrous nations with 
 which it was said that people were not to be reckoned. 
 Further comment is unnecessary. But why did he not, 
 in referring to Charles Osborne's former sentiments on 
 this point, state also, that at the same time he was equally 
 earnest in the love and fervency of the Gospel, to warn 
 Friends to cast no discouragements in the way of the 
 advocates out of the pale of Society — and that he was 
 opposed to closing meeting-houses against them. 
 
 " After noticing two circumstances to which we re- 
 ferred, he, in his peculiar way of reasoning, comes to the 
 conclusion, ' I must therefore seek for other reasons than 
 these, for your separation.' He does not once think of 
 showing the people that what were set forth as facts by 
 us, were false statements — those facts which we gave as 
 evidence of the departure of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
 from the true principles of the Society. The exercise of 
 a tender conscience, for which our worthy predecessors 
 suffered so extremely, and from which we were pro- 
 hibited in the Society, as set forth in the Declaration, is 
 such a trivial matter, that it is unworthy of notice, in 
 taking a view of our alleged causes. But to proceed, he 
 says: 'Even admitting your beloved theory, that the 
 Anti-Slavery cause means yourselves and your measures 
 only, is it a greater one than the salvation of the im- 
 mortal soul?' And again, on page 10, he says: 'You 
 are continually holding forth to one another and the 
 world, that the Anti-Slavery cause, or cause of emanci- 
 pation, means yourselves and your measures only.' It is 
 a little remarkable, that a person professing to desire our 
 return into fellowship with himself, should utter such a 
 wanton insult. Would we not have a brotherly time in 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 273 
 
 such a fraternity ? Who of us ever exhibited such a 
 1 theory? Who ever made such a claim? There are 
 various measures resorted to in the different parts of the 
 country, to arouse the people to the subject, that we do 
 not make use of; and again, we make use of some mea- 
 sures that others do not ; for we generally vote against 
 Slavery, while some others do not vote at all ; and where 
 or when have we held forth to one another, that these do 
 not support the Anti-Slavery cause at all — that we do 
 all the business? I defy him to point out one single in- 
 stance. It is the undeviating course of the 4 Advocate,' 
 to recognize all kinds of Abolitionists ; its columns are 
 open to them all, to advocate the cause in the way they 
 may think right, within the bounds of Christian moral- 
 ity. But it seems, because we have undertaken to repel 
 some of the slanderous imputations preferred against the 
 Abolitionists in general, as well as ourselves, and to vin- 
 dicate our course in the face of the world, we are to be 
 loaded with this calumny also. In an attempt to cast 
 dust in the eyes of the people in regard to the true cause 
 of their opposition, by feigning that it is on account of a 
 fear of compromising principles, by opening meeting- 
 houses, he institutes the following inquiry : ' Now, if a 
 portion of your members were in the practice of opening 
 your meeting-houses for the purpose of holding meetings, 
 to pray by appointment for the salvation of the immortal 
 soul, and to deliver sermons, having for their object the 
 same most righteous cause, would you not discourage the 
 practice, as being contrary to the general usage of Society, 
 and of hurtful tendency to your members V 
 
 u His argument here, being based upon that which is 
 not the point at issue, is but labor lost. The advice was 
 not against opening meeting-houses to those who prac- 
 ticed that which is contrary to our principles, but against 
 opening them to Anti-Slavery meetings^ without making 
 any distinction in regard to their practice — against open- 
 ing them to those whom the Yearly Meeting before pro- 
 nounced Christian philanthropists, laboring upon the 
 same ground which it had long occupied. 
 
274 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IH 
 
 " It will be observed, that he insinuates on page 3, that 
 we were in the practice of supporting a hireling minis- 
 try, or that which is equivalent to it, by going contrary 
 to their advice. Now, if this was the case, why were w r e 
 not dealt with for a disregard of our testimony on this 
 subject. It is evident, he does not believe it himself, not- 
 withstanding such insinuation or otherwise, that it was 
 not the intention of the Meeting for Sufferings, in report- 
 ing those eight members of that body, as disqualified, to 
 do it for what they were guilty of; for he observes on 
 page 6, c but did that charge them with any violation of 
 our discipline, or immoral conduct? We know it did 
 not, nor was it so intended.' And he well knew that 
 some of those were the most active in paying the expense 
 of Anti-Slavery lectures, which is undoubtedly the sub- 
 ject to which he alludes. But why should he pretend 
 that to ' hire,' (to use his own expression,) an Anti- 
 Slavery lecturer, is supporting a hireling ministry ! He 
 w T ould feel no scruple in hiring a man to plead his cause 
 before a court, were he like to be defrauded out of a 
 large amount of property, in order to maintain his 
 rights ; or, if he had been defrauded, to reinstate him in 
 his rights. The slaves have been defrauded, not merely 
 of all the property they would have accumulated their 
 whole life long, but of themselves also — of the dearest of 
 all rights — personal freedom ; and is it not right for 
 colored people to make use of the same privilege he 
 does — to hire some one, or more, to plead their cause ; 
 and if so, have not the Friends a right also to assist 
 them, especially when they have been defrauded to such 
 an extent as to have nothing to hire with ? Their cause 
 can be pleaded effectually, only before the court of the 
 people, and whenever the people shall give judgment in 
 their favor, their rights will be restored. But let us ex- 
 amine his position a little further. He would have us 
 understand, that he is in favor of supporting such papers 
 as the c Cincinnati Herald.' He has no objection to pay- 
 ing a man to lecture the people with his pen, one who 
 makes a living by that almost exclusively; but if the 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 275 
 
 saine person should undertake to talk to the people, 
 instead of write, as he sometimes does, why then it 
 would not do at all to pay him anything for what he 
 could do; it would be supporting a hireling ministry. 
 He would close the meeting-houses against him, and if 
 we should denominate him an eminent philanthropist, 
 pleading the cause of millions of our suffering brethren 
 and sisters in bonds, who are not permitted to plead for 
 themselves, we should hear him exclaiming with the 
 writer of the anonymous ' Review,' ■ a great flourish 
 this, when the words, an abolition lecturer, would have 
 expressed the whole affair.' 
 
 " Again, says he ; ' You have been endeavoring to 
 show that Indiana Yearly Meeting is actively engaged in 
 endeavoring to suppress the abolition of Slavery.' 
 
 " Np# I would ask why he did not represent the case 
 as it was, namely; that we gave facts, showing their op- 
 position to ' modern Abolition societies,' as they term 
 them in contempt — the opposition of some of their lead- 
 ers, at least, to immediate emancipation, and their par- 
 tiality to the Colonization scheme, granting always, how- 
 ever, that the greater amount of opposition was based upon 
 a desire to retain a place and influence with the rulers of 
 the land, which they could not do without disclaiming 
 the hated Abolitionists. This is just what we have done 
 in regard to this matter ; and who, of common sober 
 sense, does not know that people may hold these senti- 
 ments, and thus be desirous of popular favor, without 
 being actively engaged in endeavoring to suppress the 
 abolition erf Slavery, which is a charge we have never 
 made against the Yearly Meeting. 
 
 M On pages 3 and 4, he treats upon the subject of our 
 having published our grievances — the proscriptive mea- 
 sures of the Yearly Meeting, whereby we were deprived 
 of the privilege of Society, except at the expense of our 
 conscientious principles. It will be seen, he pretends 
 not to understand the object in thus making it known ; 
 4 whether,' says he, ' it was to weaken the hands of those 
 out the pale of our religious society, who are honestly 
 
276 HISTOKY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 laboring to promote the cause of emancipation, and to 
 strengthen the hands of the slaveholder, 1 shall not pre- 
 tend to decide.' As it is evident that he is acquainted 
 with our documents, can any one believe there is a par- 
 ticle of candor in such remarks ? 
 
 u After quoting the proscriptive Advice referred to, he 
 says : fc Now is this the first time you ever knew Friends 
 to advise to be weighty and deliberate in making appoint- 
 ments to important services in Society? Why is it objec- 
 tionable now, and never before?' 1 answer, this is not 
 what was objected to at all, as he and every one knows 
 who has read our Declaration. Why this continued 
 effort to mislead the reader ? The objection was, that 
 the Yearly Meeting gave as a reason for urging this 
 course, that those who had ' distinguished themselves by 
 opposition or disregard to the Advices and travail of the 
 body, are manifestly unsuitable for important services in 
 it, w T hile they remain in that situation ;' and then ap- 
 pointed open violators of such Advices, who were opposed 
 to modern Abolitionism. If the rule had been applied 
 to all impartially, who were opposed to the Advices of 
 the Yearly Meeting, and not to those who were opposed 
 to one kind of Advices, the subject, of course, would not 
 have been named in the way it was. It is a very conve- 
 nient way to be weighty and deliberate in making 
 appointments, to make violation of the Yearly Meeting's 
 Advice a test question whereby to ascertain the fitness of 
 persons for services in Society, and then, knowing them- 
 selves to be guilty of such violations, c deliberately 5 ex- 
 empt themselves from the operation of the rule and be 
 4 weighty' in applying it to others. Every one acquainted 
 with the proceedings of the ruling party, knows that 
 Abolitionists were the only violators of Advice, to which 
 this rule was applied ; but our author never once thinks 
 of explaining why this was the case. It would seem, it 
 never entered his mind, that it was the injustice of such 
 proceedings, the prohibition of liberty of conscience, and 
 the opposition to modern Abolition, which it evinced, 
 that occasioned our remarks, notwithstanding this object 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FJRIENDS. 277 
 
 is so clearly set forth in the Declaration. And now, in 
 turn, let nie query ; has it ever before been the practice 
 of the Yearly Meeting to tell a portion of its members, 
 that another portion of their fellow-members, holding 
 conscientiously different sentiments in regard to Christian 
 duty, are unworthy of their fellowship — aliens to the 
 commonwealth of Israel — and should be treated as such ? 
 Is this the way to keep the ' unity of the spirit in the bond 
 of peace?' And let me ask again, whether such is not 
 an open violation of the * plain letter of Discipline, 5 con- 
 tained in the following sentence : ; Liberty of conscience 
 being the common right of all men, and particularly 
 essential to the well-being of religious societies^ we hold 
 it to be indispensably incumbent upon us to maintain it 
 INVIOLABLY AMONG OURSELVES.' Had this 
 clause of Discipline been carried out by the ruling party, 
 there would not have been any division at all in the 
 Society. This must be obvious to all, nowithstanding 
 his insinuation to the contrary, on page 3, for we never 
 tried to urge them into our measures ; we merely wished 
 to have liberty to perform what we believed to be our 
 duty. But it seems, we are now to be treated with con- 
 temptuous ridicule for making known our grievances, as 
 though it was a mere desire for preferment that induced a 
 separation. Just think of it for a moment ; Charles Os- 
 borne, Daniel Fuckett, Martha Wooton, George Shugart, 
 and various others whom they charge with being at the 
 head of the secession, separate for the sake of appoint- 
 ments ! Now, even if they had desired such preferments, 
 they were already occupying the most important stations 
 in Society, and could have continued to occupy them un- 
 molested if they had been willing so far to have violated 
 their consciences, as to submit to the requisitions of the 
 body. Is it not the strongest evidence of the purity of 
 their motives, that they should be willing to sacrifice 
 everything like society preferment in order to maintain a 
 conscience ' void of offense' before God ? And is it not 
 conclusive evidence of the love of that party for the 
 honor that cometh from man — those society preferments 
 
 13 
 
278 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 of which he speaks, that they should suppose we could 
 be induced to violate our conscientious views in regard 
 to supporting modern Abolition societies, if we should 
 find that they were determined to deprive us of them if 
 we did not? 
 
 "They have presented this inducement in various 
 forms. Sometimes by appointing to some station those 
 who were tinctured with Abolition, thus placing them 
 under an obligation for such a favor, to be like they were 
 themselves. And they have actually succeeded in some 
 instances in drawing Friends from the support of the A. S. 
 cause by promptly seizing the opportunity, where a want of 
 firmness was discovered to make its appearance in regard 
 to their principles, to appoint them immediately on some 
 business, even while they were still in open violation of 
 the advice not to associate with others, and thus distin- 
 guishing themselves by opposition and disregard to the 
 advice of the body not to appoint such, were, therefore, 
 by their own showing manifestly unsuitable for the 
 stations they were occupying. 
 
 " Now, if prohibiting liberty of conscience is not a just 
 cause of secession, to exhibit which every one knows wrs 
 the object in referring to the proscriptive advice, I should 
 like to know what would constitute a just cause ? Does 
 he believe there ever was or can be such a cause ? We 
 might suppose from his doctrine of unconditional submis- 
 sion to the body, that he does not ; and hence he should 
 return to the 'body, 5 the good old mother church, the 
 Church of Rome, from which all other churches seceded, 
 or in opposition to which they were established. 
 
 " The very existence of the Society of Friends, accord- 
 ing to his view, is wrong. They should all return to 
 that body and submit to its requirements — cast the 
 responsibility upon it, they would be clear! This is 
 what he tells us in regard to submission to the require- 
 ments of his Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " In regard to what he says he is informed took place 
 at one of our caucus meetings at Newport, the object of 
 -which, he says, appeared to be to endeavor to devise 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 279 
 
 means to secure our standing in Society, is about like his 
 other statements. There was no meeting held for such a 
 purpose at all. But we have proof at hand that some of 
 his party held a caucus before Yearly Meeting, and there 
 planned out the proscriptive course to pursue toward us, 
 which we heard of some time before Yearly Meeting, 
 and Thomas Arnett proposed it in the meeting, accord- 
 ingly, as though it was from immediate inspiration. So 
 that it is evident that their fc desire' to put down the Abo- 
 litionists was so great that l they would even hold a 
 meeting to endeavor to devise means to secure 5 that 
 object. 
 
 fck Commencing at the bottom of page 4, he remarks, 
 'another cause given by you for your se aration, and so 
 published to the world, is the removal of some members 
 from the Meeting for Sufferings without giving the 
 causes. This w r as not unprecedented in our Yearly 
 Meeting, your assertions to the contrary, notwith- 
 standing.' 
 
 " The obvious design, here, is to create the impression 
 that he had detected an error in the statement of A. S. 
 Friends. But our statement was substantially this (See 
 both sides of the question, page 18): 
 
 kt c We believe no instance is on record in the Minutes 
 of the Yearly Meeting, so far as we have examined 
 (which is as far back as 1827), of the removal of any 
 members from the Meeting for Sufferings (until disowned 
 from Society), on any other account than request to be 
 released, or delinquency. And, if we are not mistaken, 
 in all such cases the reason is given. 5 This, it will be 
 seen, he contradicts, and in the next breath relates an 
 account of a removal in 1828 for DELINQUENCY, thus 
 at once confirming our statement. If it was not the de- 
 linquency recognized in Discipline for which they were 
 removed, we cannot help that, our statement is still cor- 
 rect. But if the representation is true, that the Meeting 
 for Sufferings did, at that time, report any of its members 
 as delinquents, appointed either by the Yearly Meeting 
 or Quarters, who w r ere diligent attenders of its meetings, 
 
280 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 and chargeable with no violation of Discipline or immo- 
 ral conduct whatever, it only shows that it transcended 
 its bounds. 
 
 " But the main point in our statement in regard to this 
 matter was, that 'the only instance on record of a mem- 
 ber being stated to be disqualified and no cause of dis- 
 qualification mentioned, is that of an individual who was 
 disowned and had appealed to the Yearly Meeting, and 
 that meeting had confirmed the judgments of the Quar- 
 terly and Monthly meetings, 5 thus making it unnecessary 
 to state it any farther than what was already on Minute. 
 Now as those removed in 1842 were declared to be dis- 
 qualified, and no cause given, contrary to previous pro- 
 ceedings above referred to, it is indeed strarge that any 
 person professing candor, with these facts before him, 
 and knowing that this was the main point at issue, as he 
 surely must, should gravely declare that he ; thought he 
 bad abundantly shown that the act of removal, in 1842, 
 was fully sustained by previous proceedings of the Yearly 
 Meeting,' without even attempting to deny cur state- 
 ment in this particular, or reconcile their proceedings 
 with those of former times. And it is equally astonish- 
 ing that he should make such declaration, knowing, as 
 he surely must, that if those removed in 1828, to which 
 he refers, had been declared disqualified, there would 
 still have been a vast difference in the two cases. They 
 did not request the meeting to state the cause of disquali- 
 fication on Minute, that wherever it appeared the cause 
 might also appear, as those did in 1842. 
 
 " It is evident that a person conscious of having vio- 
 lated the Discipline, or of having committed an immoral 
 act, would be willing to lie under such a vague charge as 
 this. The more atrocious the act, the more willing or 
 desirous would he be to have it so : while, at the same 
 time, a person not thus conscious would not be willing 
 to submit to it at all. It is, therefore, most certainly 
 conclusive proof that those who have made the request 
 felt conscious of their innocence; and the refusal to grant 
 it shows clearly also that the meeting was conscious that 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 281 
 
 its grounds for such proceedings would not bear the test 
 of investigation, or they would have complied with the 
 request. It is indeed profoundly absurd to suppose, as 
 he remarks, that fc if those Friends who were released 
 had been guilty of a violation of Discipline, and had on 
 that account been reported as disqualified, and the meet- 
 ing had named and recorded the violation, they would 
 have had just cause of complaint against the procedure;' 
 against the meeting for granting their most earnest 
 request! If they had been guilty, and had not made 
 such request, they might have had cause of complaint, if 
 it had been given and recorded, but not otherwise. 
 
 " But he has, with his peculiar genius, artfully endea- 
 vored to represent the existence of the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings as based upon the same ground as that of the 
 committees having the care of the African or Indian con- 
 cerns. But it will be recollected there is no Discipline 
 in regard to these committees at all. The Yearly Meet- 
 ing has made no laws by which to be governed in regard 
 to these ; it may change such committees every year if 
 it should see proper. 
 
 "The cases, therefore, are not at all parallel. But if 
 the meeting did, in 1828, represent any of the members 
 of those committees as having disqualified themselves, 
 and removed them accordinglj 7 , who were ; good and 
 worthy members, and had been guilty of no violation of 
 Discipline or immoral conduct whatever,' it was not 
 only a contradiction in itself, but very wrong indeed; 
 and I hope if there are any among us who had a hand 
 in the transaction, that they will be very far from justi- 
 fying it. 
 
 u I do not recollect of ever reading the production of an 
 author that embraced so much insidious, circumven- 
 tive, underhanded maneuverings as are contained in the 
 one before me. With this kind of artifice he has en- 
 deavored to identity the case of those removed in 1842, 
 with that of " good and worthy members, " who had not 
 been put upon certain appointments because it was sup- 
 posed they had not attained to that perfection of qualifi- 
 
282 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 cation which others had, or which in case of recommen- 
 ding Ministers and appointing Elders, it was necessary 
 they should. 
 
 "Now it was a perfect understanding at the time, a- 
 mong all parties, by their being reported as they were, 
 that they had disqualified themselves by what was con- 
 sidered their bad conduct, for further service in that 
 body. Will he or any person in his party deny it? I 
 know they cannot do it in truth ; and yet by his sly in- 
 sinuations, he would make his readers believe they were 
 really charged with nothing at all, and that their being 
 thus declared disqualified, was just an ordinary circum- 
 stance, of not appointing, where it was believed a quali- 
 fication for the service proposed to be performed, had not 
 been attained ! 
 
 "Are we to understand they were esteemed as good and 
 worthy members by the ruling party, when it was ob- 
 vious to all present in the meeting, that that party were 
 determined to pay no attention to what they had to say ? 
 Even one of the most pathetic appeals for justice — a re- 
 quest that they should state on Minute the cause of their 
 disqualification, that wherever it appeared the cause 
 might also appear, was rejected in the same way. Such 
 a pretense, is nothing short of an insult to the common 
 sense of those who were present. And supposing they 
 were such as he pretends they were esteemed, I ask, if it 
 does not prove our assertion correct, that the measures 
 of his party were unchristian measures? Where is the 
 person who is disposed to do right, who would think of 
 treating good and worthy members in such a manner ? 
 
 "Page 5, fc You particularly complain of no reason be- 
 ing given for the removal of the members of the Meeting 
 for Sufferings in 1842, which, it seems to me, you must 
 see upon the least impartial reflection, would have been 
 very improper and directly opposed to good order. I 
 think the Yearly Meeting has never given a reason for a 
 removal from an appointment in any case (and such re- 
 movals have been frequent) except in cases of death, dis- 
 ownment, removal or request. To do so, would, in my 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 283 
 
 opinion, be a direct violation of that clause of Discipline 
 which says,' etc. Then follows an extract from the Dis- 
 cipline, regulating the introduction of complaints into 
 meetings of business. There is something a little re- 
 markable in this. ; It would be,' he says, • directly op- 
 posed to good order, to give reasons for removing mem- 
 bers from the Meeting for Sufferings, except in cases of 
 death, disownment, removal or request.' What then, is 
 there not excepted in which it is opposed to good order 
 to report them. It is evident from his quotation of the 
 paragraph of Discipline, and his remarks thereon, that 
 he alludes to cases of individuals who conduct them- 
 selves so as to require the action of a meeting for dis- 
 cipline. The cause then why the reason was not given, 
 was, that it would be introducing that into the ; Yearly 
 Meeting' which belongs to a Preparative meeting, a 
 charge of violation of Discipline, or immoral conduct. 
 Now put this by the side of what he says on Page 6th, 
 'but did that [reporting them as disqualified] charge them 
 with any violation of Discipline or immoral conduct? we 
 know it did not nor was it so intended.' Now I ask at 
 which time did he tell the truth I 
 
 '"On page 6, he again repeats the astonishing absurdi- 
 ty, that they did not publish their proceedings against us. 
 In additon to my former remarks, I would observe, 
 that although he declares that we alone have published 
 the treatment toward those removed from the Meeting 
 for Sufferings in 1842, yet they have printed nearly or 
 quite 5000 copies of it in the Minutes, and 5000 copies 
 of a justification of it, in an Address, making nearly 8000 
 copies more than we have. And I have no doubt they 
 have circulated it four times as much in the United 
 States as we have. And even in England their Address 
 justifying it, was published in the British Friend and was 
 desired so to be by leading members in his Yearly Meet- 
 ing, and yet with much seeming candor, he avers that 
 they have not published it at all. And what reason does 
 he give for making such assertion ? Because, says he, 
 ■ those documents were for our members alone.' 
 
284 . HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION W 
 
 " Now I suppose, any person not a member of Society 
 would have as good a right to read one of these, as the 
 Advocate if he could get hold of it, and I think neither 
 our author or any of his friends would hesitate to lend 
 them to their neighbors, unless it should happen to strike 
 their minds, that by so doing they would not appear be- 
 fore them on the side of the cause of Abolition. There- 
 fore, according to his • beloved theory,' if we had so 
 worded our documents as to address them to Anti-Slavery 
 Friends alone, no matter how far they might circulate, 
 we should not have published the account at all. 
 
 "Page 7, he makes the following quotation from Disci- 
 pline. ' Any (members) declining or greatly neglecting 
 their attendance, the Meeting for Sufferings are to no- 
 tify said meeting or meetings (the meetings by which 
 they had been appointed) of such delinquency, in order 
 that the places of those may be supplied by new ap- 
 pointments.' This, he remarks, c is the plain letter of Disci- 
 pline for notifying the Yearly or Quarterly meeting, as 
 the case may be, of delinquency in the attendance of 
 meetings, but for no other delinquency ; yet are we on 
 that account to suppose that any other proceedings, 
 though in no way violating this or any other clause, is 
 not only unauthorized, but contrary to the plain letter 
 of Discipline ? certainly not.' Here it will be observ- 
 ed that he undertakes to prove, that it is not contrary 
 to the plain letter of Discipline to remove members of 
 the Meeting for Sufferings under any pretense whatever, 
 from the fact that it does not in this place prohibit it in 
 direct terms. This is his meaning, as I gather from his 
 illustration. Let us now turn to the Discipline. 
 
 " After stating the object of the Meeting for Sufferings, 
 how it is constituted — fixing the time for it to convene, 
 &c, the first paragraph winds up by saying, and ' is to be 
 subject to the following rvles? Then follow the rules, 
 five, in number. The fourth one is the paragraph he has 
 partly quoted. This rule, he admits, does not touch the 
 question of removing from membership in that body for 
 any other delinquency than that of neglect or non- 
 
INDIANA YEAKLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 285 
 
 attendance of its meetings. Can any person define how 
 the meeting can be subject to five rules and at the same 
 time institute a sixth one, embracing a matter not touch- 
 ed in the five ? Cannot any person see that the lati- 
 tude given by the addition of the sixth one, in the case 
 now before us, would be much greater than without it, 
 and would the meeting then, under such circumstances 
 be subject to, or governed by, those five rules which the 
 Discipline says it is to be ? Were I to adopt his reason- 
 ing, 1 might with equal propriety contend that it would 
 not be contrary to the plain letter of Discipline for the 
 Meeting for Sufferings to add another, and a seventh rule, 
 and report half of their number every five years, that new 
 ones might be appointed. There is plain letter of Disci- 
 pline for reporting when delinquent, ' yet are we on that 
 account to suppose that the meeting has not a right ' to 
 report half of their number every five years, in order 
 that a change might take place ? The Discipline is as si- 
 lent in this case as the other, and therefore according to 
 our author's reasoning cannot be a violation of it. But 
 he remarks further, - according to the grounds taken by 
 you the plainest cases of disqualification, even that of 
 mental derangement, could not be removed unless the 
 subject greatly neglected the attendance of the meetings, 
 without a violation of the plain letter of Discipline.' 
 
 " The Discipline provides, that in order that the Yearly 
 Meeting and its several branches may be properly repre- 
 sented in its recess, they shall each appoint a certain 
 number of Friends which shall constitute a Meeting for 
 Sufferings. And I should suppose common sense would 
 dictate, that an insane person could not represent them 
 any more properly than a deceased person. And for 
 this reason, no doubt, the Discipline is silent on the sub- 
 ject. It is astonishing with what pertinacity he and his 
 party adhere to a position directly opposed to that taken 
 by Friends in the former secession, or at least in Phila- 
 delphia Yearly Meeting, where their Discipline is substan- 
 tially the same as with us in regard to this matter. We 
 have taken the ground that they did. 
 
286 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " The arguments of our author against our position will, 
 therefore, apply with equal force against that of his own 
 party in Philadelphia. [See Foster's Reports — examina- 
 tion of Win. Evans and Holliday Jackson.] 
 
 " Before leaving this subject I would state, that the 
 proceedings of Indiana Yearly Meeting were contrary to 
 the plain letter of Discipline in another point of view, 
 and which was particularly had in mind in making the 
 statements in the Declaration. The Discipline recog- 
 nizes the right of the Quarters to be represented in the 
 Meeting for Sufferings. But that body reported a part 
 of the representatives from one of the Quarters as dis- 
 qualified, and sent on the account to that meeting in 
 order that a new appointment might take place, and the 
 Yearly Meeting sanctioned the proceedings, and then 
 adopted a rule to disqualify all who should oppose the 
 'travail of the body,' which, of course, included that to 
 make this change. The Quarter, no doubt, wished those 
 persons to represent it, but those proceedings cut it off 
 completely from enjoying that privilege. If this is not 
 a violation of the plain letter of Discipline I think there 
 is no danger of its ever being violated. 
 
 u Page 9, ■ But, when in relation to Anti-Slavery so- 
 cieties, it was proposed that Friends should form an asso- 
 ciation of their own on that subject, I did not see any 
 danger or inconsistency in our doing so, but on the con- 
 trary, feeling as I did and still do, much interest in the 
 promotion of the cause, I thought it might advance the 
 work. In this situation I remained a considerable length 
 of time, being prevented from pushing forward such an 
 association only through the judgment of other Friends, 
 and although I believed they wished me well, I found it 
 hard work to believe they wished as well to the Anti- 
 Slavery cause as they ought. I thought if they did, they 
 could not object to such an association as was proposed. 
 Thus the accuser of the brethren was finding entrance, 
 and it was not without considerable effort that I was en- 
 abled so far to overcome my prejudices in favor of such 
 an institution, as to give the subject an impartial exam- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 287 
 
 ination. But when I succeeded in doing so, I thought, 
 and still think, that such a course would be calculated to 
 divide and scatter us, both in feeling and action, and 
 thus lessen instead of increase our ability to do good for 
 the advancement of the cause for which the association 
 would have been intended.' 
 
 " It will be seen that our author professes to place 
 much confidence in impartial examination. Now if he 
 really desires to make it, why does he not, when stating 
 his belief, that forming associations among Friends, 
 would be calculated to divide and scatter us, etc., tell 
 us how it happens that a Bible Association of Friends 
 has been existing for a number of years in the United 
 States, as well as other benevolent institutions of a dif- 
 ferent character, without producing the disastrous con- 
 sequences he pretends to foresee. And in regard to 
 dividing and scattering us in feeling and action, it could 
 not possibly be worse than for some Friends to associate 
 in mixed societies, while others did not, for the promo- 
 tion of similar objects ; and why did he not show the 
 frightful results in former times in this particular ? Why 
 did he not show us that some of our most worthy 
 Friends, both in England and America, produced divi- 
 sions among Friends, by joining such associations? The 
 reason is obvious, there were no such results. And the 
 reason there were no such results is, there was little or 
 no opposition to Friends being thus engaged. 
 
 " Now it is well known that he is perfectly acquainted 
 with all these facts. Would any one then, suppose 
 that he really desires an impartial examination ? It 
 is, surely, representing the Society in a very unfavorable 
 light, to say that it would divide and scatter, for Friends 
 to be allowed to form such benevolent associations as 
 they might feel interested in establishing. He must 
 suppose that Friends are very intolerant, indeed, or 
 otherwise exceedingly jealous of what they might 'deem 
 a tax upon their own just praise, 5 if he believes that tor 
 one set of Friends to engage in active operations, for 
 the promotion of one branch of Christian duty, while 
 
 
/ 
 
 288 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 others did not, would set them at variance one against 
 another. Does he believe there is any such thing as 
 individual and special duties, or was the apostle mistaken 
 when he said, there are diversities of gifts, but the same 
 spirit. 
 
 " Now if an individual — such for instance as Elizabeth 
 Fry, of England — should engage more ardently in alle- 
 viating the condition of the poor than others, it is to be 
 presumed, according to our writer's argument, that such 
 person would consider those Friends, who were not 
 equally ardent in *hat cause with herself, as deficient in 
 the good work she was engaged in supporting ; and, 
 therefore, she should abandon it, and let the poor take 
 care of themselves till Friends all got ready. No indi- 
 vidual should advance beyond the mass ; for if one 
 might, another might also; and they would be sure to 
 associate together in some way or other for their own 
 mutual help 'and encouragement, in the promotion of a 
 common cause. 
 
 u But, in regard to the ground of his opposition to 
 Anti-Slavery associations of Friends, if I am to believe 
 his own statement, which I heard him make just after 
 he had succeeded in overcoming his ; prejudices in favor 
 of such associations, 5 it was, that such societies would 
 inevitably be merged into the mixed associations,' (mod- 
 ern Abolition Societies), or be in some way connected 
 with them, and that if we should go on in forming such 
 associations, Charles Osborne would probably be with us, 
 and if he should be, he would lose his influence in Soci- 
 ety, and thus a great deal of harm would be done by it. 
 (I give the substance). And many of us having so fre- 
 quently heard him speak of losing influence, by laboring 
 in An ti- Slavery associations, and of the necessity of 
 abandoning them, in order to retain it, by which it was 
 clearly understood that, by so doing, he and others 
 would retain such favor with the body, as to receive ap- 
 pointments and keep their important stations ; that his 
 interrogatories, insinuating that we seceded in order to 
 secure preferments in Society, come with a peculiar ill 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 289 
 
 grace from Mm, and are truly worthy of their author. 
 It is well known that he was formerly an Abolitionist ; 
 for at that time he, doubtless, thought Abolitionists were 
 going to be popular in Society, as Charles Osborne was 
 one, and also one of the foremost Friends in the Yearly 
 Meeting. It is also well known, that some of his fel- 
 low-members of the 'body,' have been dissatisfied with 
 his former abolition conduct, and have stated at different 
 times, that he ought not to be made use of in Society, 
 unless he should make an acknowledgment. He, there- 
 fore, no doubt, found it more agreeable to his feelings to 
 do it by publicly abusing the objects of their hatred in a 
 printed document, and as it were, incidentally introduc- 
 ing an admission into it, that the accuser of the brethren 
 was finding entrance into his mind when he was an Abo- 
 litionist, than to do it in any other way. And I have 
 not a shadow of doubt that he thought it necessary in 
 order to ' secure his standing in Society ;' and that it was 
 done mainly for that purpose. 
 
 "After endeavoring to show the impropriety of Friends 
 forming associations of their own to promote a good ob- 
 ject, he says : ' Perhaps some of you may say my rea- 
 soning is not good, for the Society of Friends are not 
 Anti-Slavery but Pro-Slavery. To such 1 would say, is 
 it an evidence that your society is in favor of war, be- 
 cause you have not formed a Friends' Peace Society?' 
 
 " Here he tacitly admits, that if the Society were Pro- 
 Slavery, his reasoning would not be good. That is, his 
 reasoning would not show that in that case it would 
 divide and scatter, to allow members to form Anti-Sla- 
 very associations. But if they were so perfect as to be 
 completely Anti-Slavery, why then it would divide and 
 scatter, in feeling and action, to allow them to do so. But 
 the object of these expressions, no doubt, was to insinu- 
 ate that their not having formed Anti-Slavery associa- 
 tions of their own, was of the character of evidence 
 which we are in the habit of adducing to prove their un- 
 soundness, and was intended, no doubt, to divert the mind 
 of the reader from the real cause of the separation. We 
 
290 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 have never instanced that as a proof that they were Pro- 
 Slavery. And I doubt whether ever an individual of us 
 has done it. But the opposition of his party to such 
 select Anti-Slavery associations was referred to, to prove 
 that their objections to joining Anti-Slavery societies was 
 not based upon a fear of mixing with other people, as 
 they pretended. 
 
 " Again, page 10, he says: 'Unless the character of 
 that paper (the Advocate) is changed, and made what it 
 professes to be, an Anti-Slavery paper instead of an 
 anti-Quaker one, vain will be your attempts to give 
 the subject an impartial examination, while you believe 
 its version of affairs. It is true that sometimes there are 
 Anti-Slavery pieces in it, but they are few and far 
 between.' I should like extremely well to know what he 
 calls anti-Quaker. That paper has exhibited facts, and 
 I believe nothing but facts, in regard to the opposition of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting to modern Abolition, and the 
 corrupt conduct and practice of some of its leading mem- 
 bers. And the editor has repeatedly, of late, offered the 
 use of the columns of his paper to those who may think 
 themselves or others misrepresented, to make such cor- 
 rections as they might think proper. Or, if they would 
 furnish satisfactory evidence that any statement in the 
 'Advocate' was incorrect, he would take a pleasure in 
 correcting it. And our author has been a reader of the 
 paper, and a familiar one, too, if we are to suppose he 
 knew* what he was saying when he described its char- 
 acter. Why, then, has it so happened that neither he 
 nor any other person among them, has ever attempted 
 to correct ' its version of affairs,' knowing that they had 
 the opportunity ? I think there can be but one valid 
 reason given, and that is, they knew that nothing but 
 facts were stated, notwithstanding his insinuation to the 
 contrary. 
 
 "It would appear then, that Quakerism, in his view, 
 means, that which the editor has exposed in the conduct 
 of leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting, which 
 they do not attempt to contradict. Such, for instance, 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 291 
 
 as that of Thomas Arnett uttering a falsehood, which 
 was proved upon him by some four or five witnesses, 
 and he was acquitted by the adherents of the < body, 5 
 and that of another prominent member who declared, in 
 a Preparative meeting, that Abolitionists were guilty of 
 conveying away fugitive slaves to a land of freedom, 
 which was, in fact, stealing and secreting other men's 
 property. Such sentiments and doings as these are op- 
 posed in Quakers as well as in others, by the paper, and 
 if this opposition makes it ANTI-QUAKER, what, I 
 would ask, could possibly make it a Quaker paper but 
 taking the opposite side, and advocating what it now ex- 
 poses and condemns ? If this is Quakerism, it seems to 
 me the less there is in the world the better. But I chal- 
 lenge him or any of his party to prove out the first arti- 
 cle written by the editor of any Anti-Slavery Friend in 
 that paper which controverts one single principle or tes- 
 timony professed by the Society of Friends. 
 
 " Will he say that exposing the corruptions of the Soci- 
 ety is what he is alluding to as constituting the charac- 
 ter he is pleased to affix to the paper? Then I would 
 reply, that his own favorite one, the 'Cincinnati Herald, 5 
 is an Anti-Republican paper, because it exposes the cor- 
 ruptions of this professed Republican Government. And 
 it is also in the same way an anti -Quaker paper. Some 
 of the severest articles ever published against the posi- 
 tion taken by Friends, have been published in that pa- 
 per, and I believe, were written by the editor himself. 
 His remarks concerning the last address of Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting, show that he esteems those constituting 
 that body, just about such Abolitionists as the Whig 
 Party. It is true he has of late devoted his paper more 
 to the political bearings of the question than he did for- 
 merly, and, therefore, does not now say so much about 
 the opposition of any religious society as he did. 
 
 u It may be proper here to state that we were driven 
 to the necessity of seceding in order to enjoy liberty of 
 conscience, the Yearly Meeting prohibiting us from sup- 
 porting the present Anti-Slavery enterprise as we be- 
 
 
292 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 lieved it our duty to do. Those acquainted with the ori- 
 gin and process of those difficulties know perfectly well 
 that the onset was first made upon us, that we were rep- 
 resented as working in our own will and strength, run- 
 ning before our guide, etc. Now, as the cause of the 
 slave was near to our hearts, some of us felt it right to 
 endeavor to refute those charges, and set the matter 
 right, but for so doing we were censured and charged as 
 disturbers of Society, I mean by individuals. Advices 
 became more and more positive, and thus we were driven 
 to the necessity of endeavoring to show the impropriety 
 of such Advices. Then came the charge of insubordina- 
 tion — an intention to scatter and divide Society. It was 
 still deemed a duty by some to stand up in defense of 
 what they believed to be right, against such encroach- 
 ments, and to some extent exhibited by argument the 
 cause of such proceedings, but nothing could change the 
 determination of some of our opposers to prostrate the 
 cause we had espoused and its advocates in Society. 
 When by the measures taken against us, we were driven 
 to the necessity of seceding, it became an imperative 
 duty to set forth the grounds of such an important step. 
 This required the development of many facts and circum- 
 stances before unknown to many. For this statement we 
 have been again and again falsely accused, and we have 
 as often defended ourselves against their aspersions. 
 Thus, from the commencement we have stood upon the 
 defensive, and upon that ground alone as a society. 
 And is there to be no end to their calumnies and abuses ? 
 
 u Individuals, it is true, have, since the Yearly Meet- 
 ing, become, both by connivance and otherwise, the de- 
 fenders of corrupt principles and practices touching the 
 subject of Slavery, exposed to some extent its position 
 and the conduct of prominent members, for the purpose 
 of condemning and correcting such errors, and I believe 
 very properly too. 
 
 c ' While ever a religious society does not in any way 
 defend that which is wrong or sinful, it is the duty of its 
 members not to expose the evil conduct of one individual 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 293 
 
 out of Society. But whenever it undertakes to support 
 such individual in his course, then it becomes a duty 
 for those who are in the right, to expose and condemn 
 both his conduct and that of the body that sustains him 
 in it. 
 
 u But to return to the quotation : he says it is true, that 
 sometimes there are Anti-Slavery pieces in it (the Adv.), 
 but they are few and far between. 
 
 " What, let me ask, would a stranger to the paper infer 
 from what is here presented ? 
 
 u Would he suppose that there was one column in a 
 number, that was not what our writer terms - anti-Quaker 
 matter V But the fact is, out of some thirteen or fourteen 
 which I have examined, taking in a number of those 
 which contain the longest articles, there is not more than 
 one-tenth part of the reading that has any allusion to the 
 Society of Friends, or its opposition to modern Abolition. 
 
 " And I do suppose that if all the articles were summed 
 up, that have been published in that Journal since the 
 Separation, in regard to the opposition of Friends to the 
 cause, there would not be more than one-twentieth part 
 of its contents that touches the subject at all. And if we 
 should admit that such articles are not Anti-Slavery 
 (which we do not, but believe their publication as neces- 
 sary to the advancement of the cause as that of any oth- 
 ers), there is scarcely one beside, to be found in it, or 
 but very few, but what combat the evil of Slavery in some 
 way or other. Even the articles taken from the Anti- 
 Slavery paper he pretends to approve, which it contains, 
 no person, it seems to me, of veracity, acquainted with 
 it, will say are few and far between. So it is impossible 
 to characterise his statement truly without pronouncing it 
 false. And if he is acquainted with the paper, as it would 
 seem from his remarks, it must be willfully so. If he is 
 not, it is about the same thing in substance, for supposing 
 that to be the case, he has given his readers to under- 
 stand he knew what he at the same time knew he did not 
 know. 
 
 y The only extenuating circumstance that I can think 
 
 18* 
 
294 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION W 
 
 of, if it will be considered as such at all, is, that in all 
 probability it was made under the influence of a par- 
 oxysm of anger. His ' party feelings,' it would seem, must 
 have so completely swallowed him up, that a sober, can- 
 did thought was not allowed to produce its legitimate 
 effects upon his mind. Is it not passing strange that any 
 person should come out, under the pretense of entering 
 into a candid and impartial examination — an expostula- 
 tion with us, the seceders, expressing great desire that we 
 may get from under the influence of party feeling, and at 
 the same time exhibit such an intense party feeling in 
 himself, as to manifest such a complete departure from 
 all truth as our author has done in the case before us ? 
 
 " He remarks, ' How much better it would be, if those 
 who profess to be opposed to Slavery were to bring their 
 testimony to bear on the system of Slavery itself, rather 
 than waste their strength and influence, by publishing 
 criminations against others.' 
 
 "It would have been well if he and his party had 
 thought of this sooner, for this is the very course they 
 have pursued toward us, and the Abolitionists in general. 
 Even in the last Address of their Yearly Meeting, to 
 Christian professors, the Abolitionists are slanderously 
 charged in a covert manner, by insinuation, with resort- 
 ing to measures of confusion and violence. 
 
 "These criminations are what we, as well as the edi- 
 tor of the Advocate, have endeavored to ' push away,' 
 and not any Anti-Slavery acts of theirs, because they 
 4 do not come up and join our ranks.' Now, if he and 
 the leaders in his party are the true friends of the slave, 
 as he pretends [and happy should I be if circumstances 
 did not render it impossible for me to believe it], would 
 we not find them doing that which he represents to be so 
 excellent in the editor of the Cincinnati Herald, that is, 
 * laboring to bring all the Anti-Slavery feeling to bear 
 upon the system of Slavery, and to expose its evils both 
 on the master and the slave, and its encroachments on the 
 free States V Can we believe that they regard such as a 
 good work, when making Slavery a political question has 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 295 
 
 been so frequently objected to by leaders among them, as 
 utterly wrong in the Abolitionists ? If it is a good work 
 they should certainly be at it. Will they do it, and 
 cease publishing criminations against those who are at it ? 
 And will they, with the Herald, support and advocate 
 the Liberty Party movement, and vote for Abolitionists 
 instead of slaveholders and Pro-Slavery men, as they 
 have heretofore done i We shall see. 
 
 "In order to prove that we ourselves are proscriptive, 
 be professes to give a history of a certain temperance 
 meeting. Now, this meeting was held not half a mile 
 from the writer's residence, and the fact is, there was one 
 member of his own Yearly Meeting, and but one of ours, 
 instead of two or three, as he states, and that one did not 
 advocate the resolution alluded to, as he represents, nor 
 was he in favor of its adoption, while the member of his 
 own Yearly Meeting did advocate it. Thus, according 
 to his own theory, the true history of this meeting proves 
 the proscriptive character of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
 All it seems that he could found his statement upon was, 
 that this one Anti-Slavery Friend voted against this res- 
 olution being laid on the table. Thus it appears, first 5 
 that but one Anti-Slavery Friend was present; secondly, 
 that the resolution presented was offered merely for dis- 
 cussion; thirdly, the Friend only voted against laying it 
 on the table, and lastly, that a member of his own Yearly 
 Meeting voted in the same way and in addition actually 
 advocated the resolution. 
 
 " Now, even if his history of the temperance meeting 
 was correct, and it would prove us proscriptive, then we 
 should have no difficulty to prove that Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting is Pro-Slavery ; for one of the overseers now 
 active in taking up Anti-Slavery Friends has been heard 
 to say, she would be afraid of her life if the slaves were 
 set free. And at another time, that she would be afraid 
 to go to a neighbor's house if they were set free. And 
 again, another overseer, although he owned he would 
 have no objection to helping a free colored person to 
 Canada, or anywhere else, yet he would not help a slave 
 
296 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 on his way to a land of freedom. Another Friend, who 
 has been somewhat active in assisting to disown the se- 
 ceders, has been heard to say he would as soon harbor a 
 horse-thief as a runaway negro; and yet another, who has 
 in the same way been active, has stated that Slavery 
 could not be wrong, for if it was, the first ship, that ever 
 sailed after slaves, would have been sunk to the bottom 
 of the ocean by Providential interference ; and all these 
 in our author's own Monthly meeting. Many such cir- 
 cumstances might be brought to view, but according to 
 his logic I have instanced individual cases enough to es- 
 tablish the Pro-Slavery character of his Yearly Meeting. 
 But we do not pretend to charge that body with every- 
 thing that any of its individual members have been guilty 
 of, only so far as it supports them in it, or connives at 
 their conduct, as he would most unfairly and ungener- 
 ously have done in the instance before us, even if his 
 statement were correct. And it is worthy of remark, 
 that in nearly or quite every instance he has represented 
 us as saying just what any individual may have chanced 
 to say. Now, it must be a familiar circumstance to all 
 acquainted with the course pursued by our opposers, that 
 if they can discover anything in any of our writings, 
 which they can construe to mean a charge upon the 
 Yearly Meeting (although it was not so intended), which 
 was only an individual act, they represent it as very un- 
 fair indeed. Why then do some of them turn round and 
 actually do the very same thing they have been trying to 
 detect in us? And here let me say, that notwithstanding 
 the extraordinary demonstrations of unsoundness in re- 
 gard to our testimony against Slavery, in a number of the 
 leading members of Indiana Yearly Meeting, 1 have no 
 doubt but there is a large amount of good Anti-Slavery 
 feeling in that body. Many persons remain in that con- 
 nection to whom I feel a strong attachment, being well 
 assured that it is the conduct of but a few, comparatively 
 speaking, that keeps them from acting out their Anti- 
 Slavery principles, and therefore I could not conscien- 
 tiously charge them with what their leaders have done. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 297 
 
 only so far as they continue to countenance them by sub- 
 mission to their dictation, whereby they support them in 
 their corrupt course and practice. 
 
 " But let us proceed with his remarks. He says, 4 you 
 say in your public papers that at the close of the meeting 
 on First-day, at the Yearly Meeting, in 1842, you saw 
 greater honor shown to Henry Clay than you had ever 
 seen Friends show to any man however good or great — 
 such eagerness to shake his blood-stained hand, etc. 5 
 You then go on to say, 6 ic may however be pleaded as an 
 extenuation of the great honors bestowed upon him by 
 their eagerness to shake his blood-stained hands, their 
 strong desire to evince to his mind their determined op- 
 position to Abolitionists.' 
 
 u In the first place, I would say in regard to this, why 
 does he insinuate that we, as a Society, have a public or- 
 gan, and that through such an organ we published this to 
 the world ! I am confident he knew it was not so. The 
 object undoubtedly was to create the impression that, as a 
 Society, we had made the Advocate our special organ, 
 and were accountable for everything published in it. 
 But leaving this, why should he, professing so much im- 
 partiality, garble the language of the editors. Instead 
 of what he represented, the remark is this : ' the Friends, 
 of both sexes gathered around Clay, apparently eager to 
 shake his blood-stained hands.' By a comparison of his 
 pretended quotations with what is said in the paper (See 
 Advocate, Vol. II, No. 31), it will be found that the 
 whole is unfairly set forth. The editors say, c though we 
 believe such special honors, such marked attentions were 
 never before PUBLICLY paid by Friends to any man, 
 however good or great, as were on this occasion paid to 
 this prince of slaveholders ;' but our author, it would seem, 
 carefully excludes the word publicly, which all must see 
 is of much importance in conveying their meaning. And 
 beside this, those remarks were preceded by a notice of 
 the fact that some Friends, no doubt of the leaders, 
 waited on Clay to inform him that the Society had no 
 hand in, and disapproved of, the presentation of the peti- 
 
298 HISTOEY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 tion asking him to liberate his slaves. I ask if this did 
 not furnish just grounds for the editors to suppose they 
 might wish to evince to his mind their determined oppo- 
 sition to those who did present the petition — the Aboli- 
 tionists ? And why did not our author notice and explain 
 this affair so as to show it was not a manifest demonstra- 
 tion of opposition to Abolitionists, before denying that 
 his party had any such intention of manifesting it to 
 Clay's mind by their marked attention to him? i 
 
 " Again, he says, c now, why all this, but to endeavor 
 to show that Friends shook hands with him because he 
 was a slaveholder, and for what, I would ask, did you 
 shake hands w r ith him? I confidently believe, that in 
 proportion to the relative numbers in attendance at that 
 place, there were more that shook hands w T ith him who 
 were members of Anti-Slavery societies, than those who 
 were not — I allude to Friends onlj\ Of those in one 
 large Preparative meeting, so far as I know or believe, 
 they were all enrolled members of An ti- Slavery societies, 
 which has led me to believe, it was in a good degree so 
 in other places also.' 
 
 u I suppose the object of the editors was to show w^hat 
 kind of a faithful testimony those Friends w T ere bearing 
 against Slavery, w T hile thus opposing the Abolitionists, 
 and rendering such signal honor to this prince of slave* 
 holders. But as he applies his remarks to us, I would 
 say, so far as we have alluded to this transaction, our 
 Declaration shows plainly what was our object in alluding 
 to it, viz : to compare this conduct of Friends toward a 
 popular man, though a slaveholder, with their treatment 
 of an eminent c modern ' Abolitionist, for the purpose of 
 exhibiting their departure from genuine principles in re* 
 gard to our testimony against Slavery. There was no 
 intention of saying they did it merely because he was a 
 slaveholder. We had no doubt but with their disposi- 
 tion, as manifested by their conduct, if slave-holding had 
 been as unpopular as Abolitionism, and Abolitionism as 
 popular as slave-holding, their conduct would have been 
 reversed. And we have the strongest ground for believ- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 299 
 
 ing so from their own words, for they give it as a reason 
 why they should not be identified with the Abolitionists, 
 that they may thereby retain a place and influence with 
 the rulers of the land. It was to gain the good opinions 
 of Henry Clay, who, they supposed, would be one of the 
 rulers of the land (for that was what he was seeking to 
 be made), and being a noted Whig, they were willing to 
 help forward the work, which induced them thus to act. 
 But if it should so happen that the sentiment of the 
 people should become so changed, as to elect Abolition- 
 ists, why then, according to their doctrine, they would 
 treat them with the same respect under similar circum- 
 stances, in order to retain a place and influence with 
 them, the rulers of the land. 
 
 " But it would seem from his statement, that there 
 was quite a number of Anti-Slavery Friends who 
 gathered around Henry Clay, to shake hands with him, 
 even more in proportion, than of other Friends. 4 ALL, 5 
 it is said, in one large Preparative meeting who did so 5 
 were enrolled members of Anti-Slavery societies. Now, 
 4 why all this, but to endeavor' to deceive. We know 
 very well what Preparative meeting he alludes to, and 
 the fact is, there were but two Anti-Slavery Friends from 
 it that did so; and but three that were enrolled members 
 of Anti-Slavery societies, and one of these is now a 
 member with himself. One of these told me that being 
 near the scene of action, he was himself introduced to 
 the slaveholder by the Clerk of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
 (though ' not as Clerk,' it should be remembered), and 
 that he did not then know, and has not since learned, 
 that any but one other Abolitionist, than those referred to, 
 did shake hands with him on that occasion, making four 
 enrolled members in the whole Yearly Meeting, and but 
 three Anti-Slavery Friends, among the hundreds that 
 did. But in this, according to his wonted course, he has 
 endeavored to divert the reader from the point. It was 
 the \ special honors, the marked attentions, paid to this 
 prince of slaveholders,' by their apparent eagerness to 
 shake his blood-stained hand, that were objected to. and 
 
300 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 not an ordinary shaking of hands, with which he endea- 
 vors to identify this man-worshiping transaction. It 
 was their gathering round him in almost an impenetrable 
 crowd in their eagerness to salute him. One or more of 
 the women mounted over the backs of the benches, in a 
 fruitless attempt to get at him. Some of the old Friends 
 in the yard with their hats in hand, to save them from 
 abuse, were seen pushing through the crowd to get near 
 the 4 distinguished man.' No Anti-Slavery Friend, I 
 suppose, would object to shaking hands with the greatest 
 rogue in the world, provided it was not done in a way 
 which would countenance him in his wickedness. 
 
 " At the bottom of page 11, he asks: ; What can 
 possibly be gained, either to you as Christians, or the 
 Anti-Slavery cause, by continuing in such a course V 
 
 "I think the reader, by this time, will see that we 
 have not been in such a course at all as he represents; 
 neither have we been building one another up, as he as- 
 serts, with such false insinuations as he has been endea- 
 voring to point out, but has utterly failed in the attempt. 
 Our course has been to repel the slanderous charges our 
 opposers have preferred against us, and the Abolitionists 
 in general, by the exhibition of Truth, and I believe, 
 nothing but the truth. And we expect to continue to 
 4 gain the reward of an approving conscience, if we also 
 continue in well-doing as Christians, and then the gain 
 to the Anti- Slavery cause by our course, will be, in one 
 point of view, according to our humble abilities, a 
 defense thereof, and its advocates against, not only the 
 assaults of open enemies, but the foul aspersions of 
 pseudo- Abolitionists. 
 
 u Again, he observes : ' If the testimony of Friends 
 against Slavery, has in times past had any influence in 
 the world, are not such things calculated to do it away V 
 ' Is not telling the slaveholder and others who connive at 
 that system of injustice and oppression, that the Society 
 of Friends are throwing their influence against the cause 
 of emancipation, strengthening their hands V 
 
 " In addition to my former remarks, in regard to simi- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 301 
 
 lar sentiments, in another part of the document, I would 
 say ; I believe the testimony of Friends in times past- 
 has had a powerful influence ; and it is a source of con- 
 solation to believe, as I confidently do, that all the efforts 
 of their professed successors at the present time, in 
 opposing and villifying Abolitionists, will not be able to 
 do away the effect of that testimony. It is for endeavor- 
 ing to maintain it inviolate, according to the dictates of 
 our consciences, that we have suffered untold contumely 
 and reproach by these false brethren. Their own acts, 
 and not ours, in exposing and condemning them, have 
 done away the influence of their testimony. I recently 
 witnessed an occurrence, giving positive proof of it, and 
 a number of others will testify to the same. In a col- 
 lection of Whigs, when one of their chief speakers had 
 declared himself opposed to immediate emancipation, 
 and avowed that this was the Whig doctrine, an Aboli- 
 tionist (a member of the body), turning to a Friend, re- 
 minded him, that that could not be the true doctrine of 
 the Whig party, for the members of the Society of Friends 
 were generally Whigs, and believed in immediate and 
 unconditional emancipation. But he was stopped by this 
 Whig, a man who had been in the Legislature of the 
 State, and told that such were not the principles of the 
 Society of Friends. He was willing to admit, they had 
 held such formerly, but they did not now, and gathered 
 up one of their recent documents to prove the point, and 
 one or more of the Anti-Abolitionists of the ' body,' pre- 
 sent publicly united in sentiment with him. This con- 
 clusion, it should be remembered, was arrived at without 
 the aid of any of the Abolitionists, and one even opposed 
 coming to such a conclusion. The people have the docu- 
 ments of Friends themselves, and they know what they 
 say. It is from this source, and the general carriage of 
 Friends toward modern or immediate Abolition, that the 
 opposers of the cause get their information, and not from 
 us, for they do not so generally read our papers. 
 
 " It would require a considerable extension of this re- 
 ply to notice all the errors, contradictions and false insin- 
 
 14 
 
302 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 nations contained in the pamphlet under consideration* 
 It seems to me there are but few sentences in it but what 
 contain something of the kind. As a specimen of what 
 I have passed over, I will instance his very first sentence, 
 in which he supposes that Friends constitute the only re- 
 ligious society in America, that denies church member- 
 ship to slaveholders, and virtually charges us with say- 
 ing, it is \ not opposed to Slavery. 5 
 
 " Little as I know about the matter, I could name 
 some half dozen religions societies in America which 
 deny church membership to slaveholders ; but we cannot, 
 with him, suppose their doing so is any certain evidence 
 they are right on the subject. We, however, nevei* 
 stated that Indiana Yearly Meeting was not in any degree 
 opposed to Slavery, as is here insinuated. A person 
 who advocates gradual emancipation, shows that he is to 
 some extent opposed to Slavery ; yet who cannot see 
 that he is not completely Anti-Slavery, but is in favor of 
 continuing the system for a time, and therefore so far 
 Pro-Slavery. As our author is doubtless acquainted with 
 our concessions at different times, in regard to this matter, 
 and our statement of their position relative to the subject 
 of Slavery, which I have already noticed, giving a differ- 
 ent view r from what he has presented, I cannot but regard 
 this effort and others not brought to view, as a willful and 
 deliberate attempt to deceive. 
 
 "In conclusion, I would present the reader with a 
 synopsis of this most extraordinary document. The author 
 notices a few of the circumstances or proceedings of the 
 Yearly Meeting, to which we referred, for the purpose of 
 comparing them with other proceedings of the meeting, 
 in order to prove a departure from genuine Anti-Slavery 
 principle, and then declares that we gave them as our 
 reasons for seceding. But our arguments, derived from 
 these comparisons, he never once notices at all; thus 
 proving conclusively, at least one of tw r o things, either 
 that he is devoid of common understanding, or else care- 
 ful to avoid that impartial examination he professes to 
 desire should take place. He represents us as having 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 303 
 
 seceded for the sake of appointments, because we made 
 known our grievances ; but he never deigns to notice the 
 fact so clearly exhibited, that we did it mainly to show 
 that liberty of conscience was denied us* He has en- 
 deavored to palm it upon the mind of his reader, that 
 their declaring and recording those members of the Meet* 
 ing for Sufferings, was just as an ordinary circumstance 
 of merely not appointing persons at certain times, when 
 judged not to be the appropriate ones for the service pro- 
 posed. He represents us in various instances, as saying 
 or doing, or taking a position that we never did at all, 
 and then brings forward his arguments to subvert it; 
 thus, it would seem, erecting a man of straw, for the 
 purpose of showing his dexterity in demolishing his own 
 fabrications. In almost every instance, he has endea- 
 vored with the most underhanded maneuvering to divert 
 the reader from the point at issue — to shift off on to a 
 different ground from that of the true one. He has even 
 descended into that which one would suppose a wise 
 man would blush to find himself engaged in, such being 
 so perfectly foolish, contemptible, and insignificant, 
 giving evidence that he could not, or would not under- 
 stand the plainest common-sense documents. And I 
 confess, when Hook at the positions which I have had to 
 examine, and the statements to which I have had to re- 
 ply, it appears like very small business indeed, but as 
 they were of such a character as to cast much odium if 
 believed, upon the cause of truth, I can conceive of no 
 better way than to meet him upon his own positions and 
 statements, foolish and absurd as they are. 
 
 " That an impartial examination of the conduct, senti- 
 ments, arguments, and positions exhibited on both sides 
 may take place, is my sincere desire ; and that it was 
 not the intention of the writer of the ' expostulation,' to 
 elicit such examination, but to divert the reader from it, 
 I trust I have abundantly demonstrated. 
 
 " I should indeed feel greatly rejoiced to meet with an 
 evidence from him or his party, that they were disposed 
 to listen to the convictions of conscience. And let me 
 
804 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 say, Friends, suppress it as you may (which I have the 
 strongest evidence a number of you have done in regard 
 to this matter), the time will come when you can no 
 longer stifle its voice. It will speak, and speak terror to 
 the guilty soul, to those who have stubbornly disregarded 
 its injunctions. 
 
 " Happy, thrice happy, will those be at that awful 
 day, who are prepared c to meet their naked hearts 
 alone. 5 
 
 " Spiceland, Fifth month, 1844." 
 
 " Walter Edgerton*" 
 
 CHAPTER XXIT. . 
 
 Address to the Meeting for Sufferings of Ldndoii. 
 
 In the forepart of the year 1844, the Meeting for Suf- 
 ferings thought right to issue the Address which I give 
 below. It is one of much importance as unfolding the 
 true position of the parties involved. 
 
 "From the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting of Anti- Slavery Friends, to the Meeting for 
 Sufferings of Friends in London. 
 
 "Dear Friends: — 
 
 " Notwithstanding, on the return of our friend, Ar- 
 nold Buffum, from London, who carried over our former 
 Epistle, we learned that it was not accepted by you, we 
 feel that it is right again, in brotherly love, to address 
 you. 
 
 "We know of no reason why we should not regard 
 each other as brethren, united by one common bond of 
 Christian fellowship, entertaining like views of Christian 
 duty, and practically carrying out our views by like 
 measures. 
 
 " The religion of our faith teaches us that we are to 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 305 
 
 know men by their fruits — that as a good tree bringeth 
 forth good fruits, -so a good man will manifest the charac- 
 ter of his faith by his works. 
 
 " Taking this for a criterion of judgment, we regard 
 you as one in faith with ourselves, and we feel that a loss 
 will be sustained to the cause of humanity, should two 
 bodies thus circumstanced permit any minor considera- 
 tion to estrange them from each other. It is true, we 
 have assumed a term of designation which you do not 
 use ; in our case, there was a necessity for it for the pur- 
 pose of distinction ; with you, happily, no such necessity 
 exists. 
 
 " There is no body of people in your land, bearing the 
 title of Friends, who do not actively co-operate with 
 others in promoting those measures which are needful 
 for procuring the restoration of their rights to the en- 
 slaved millions of our fellow-men ; with us it is otherwise. 
 The body with which we were formerly associated under 
 the common appellation of Friends, left us no alternative 
 but to cease from our labors in support of Anti-Slavery 
 societies (whether acting in connection with other people 
 or by ourselves alone), or submit to a system of proscrip- 
 tion and disfranchisement approximating at every step 
 to that of complete disownment therefrom (which, from 
 the measures put in train, was most undoubtedly the 
 determination ultimately to accomplish without a with- 
 drawal of our support from those societies), the former 
 we could not do and be guiltless, the latter would greatly 
 defeat the object of our labors — deprive us of those privi- 
 leges which we hold most dear, and of the power of giv- 
 ing that aid to the cause which justice and duty demanded 
 at our hands. 
 
 " We are aware that those from whom we have sepa- 
 rated, profess to bear a faithful testimony against Slavery; 
 but if they really do so, why did they adopt those pro- 
 scriptive measures which forced upon us the alternative 
 of silence or separation ? Did they allege that we were 
 guilty of any violation of good order, except our disre- 
 
306 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 gard of their injunctions to refrain from giving our sup- 
 port to the present Anti-Slavery movement ? 
 
 " When a call came from your land over the signature 
 of one of your most beloved ministers, who has since 
 been called from his devoted labors to the enjoyment of 
 his reward, summoning the friends of the enslaved to 
 meet in a general Convention in London, in the Sixth 
 month last, to promote measures for procuring their deli- 
 verance from oppression, did our opposers, by responding 
 to that call, give evidence of their sympathy with the 
 oppressed ? 
 
 "Have they read in any of their meetings, or circu- 
 lated even in their families, the Address to Christian 
 professors, unanimously adopted by that Convention? 
 Do they contribute to the support of any periodical which 
 is devoted to the advocacy of the immediate and uncon- 
 ditional emancipation of the enslaved ? 
 
 "Are they engaged in any systematical course of mea- 
 sures calculated to arouse the nation to the enormity of 
 the crime of enslaving one-sixth part of the children born 
 in our land S 
 
 " Do they not, on the contrary, manifest far greater 
 hostility to every effort for promoting the cause of uni- 
 versal emancipation, than the abominations and wicked- 
 ness of Slavery ? 
 
 " Do they not, more than any other religious denomi- 
 nation in our country, close their doors and their own 
 ears against those who are pleading the cause of the op- 
 pressed, so that if all others were to follow their example 
 in these respects, those who are thus engaged would 
 obtain no houses to speak in and nobody to hear them % 
 
 " Do they not, by their persevering hostility to the 
 abolition enterprise, give the weight of their influence 
 to the perpetuation of Slavery ? 
 
 "Has not one Yearly Meeting on this Continent, 
 recently promulgated its condemnation of the act of giv- 
 ing shelter, in any way whatever, to a fellow-creature 
 escaping from his cruel oppressor ? 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 307 
 
 "A faithful answer to these inquiries would exhibit the 
 practical testimony of their Society as bearing against 
 Abolition rather than against Slavery. 
 
 "On referring to the list of names constituting the 
 Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Soci- 
 ety, we find that a considerable majority of them are 
 among the most highly esteemed members of the Society 
 of Friends in England. In the Address issued by that 
 Committee, shortly after the formation of the Society, we 
 find a Resolution unanimously adopted by the society, in 
 these words : ; That it be recommended to the Anti- 
 Slavery Friends, throughout the world, to form Auxiliary 
 societies upon the principles of, and in connection with, 
 this society.' In the same Address they say, ; The com- 
 mittee would have felt delighted to have referred particu- 
 larly to the gigantic efforts made by the Abolitionists of 
 the United States of America, to purge their institutions 
 from the stain, and their people from the guilt, of Slav- 
 ery * * but their limits forbid.' 
 
 "Again, in the third annual Report, we find the fol- 
 lowing language of encouragement to faithfulness in the 
 cause held out to us by a society measurably controlled 
 by the most prominent members of your Yearly Meeting: 
 ^ Resolved unanimously, That this meeting regards with 
 deep interest the enlightened efforts and noble sacrifices 
 of the Abolitionists of the United States of America in the 
 sacred cause of human freedom; and, while it sympathizes 
 with them in their struggles, heartily rejoices in the more 
 extensive prevalence, and in the certain and not far dis- 
 tant triumph, of their principles ; and publicly renews the 
 offer of its warm and steady co-operation.' 
 
 "By the same Report we learn, that 'the standing 
 committee of the Society of Friends, from funds at its 
 disposal,' presented to the Anti-Slavery society the sum of 
 £800, giving a practical demonstration of the effectual con- 
 currence of English Friends with the Anti-Slavery cause. 
 
 " What Yearly Meeting in America has given any 
 evidence of this kind, of the reality of its testimony 
 against Slavery ? 
 
308 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 a We believe that in addition to our duty as members 
 of religious society, we have high responsibilities de- 
 volved upon us as men, as citizens of the State, and as 
 members of the human family; and we sincerely pray 
 that we may be preserved from that spirit of selfishness 
 which would as effectually shut us from the exercise of 
 Christian philanthropy, as would a seclusion from the 
 world within the walls of a monastery. We remember that 
 our divine Master prayed his Father, not that he should 
 take his disciples out of the world, but that he should keep 
 them from the evil. 
 
 " So long as intemperance, oppression, and war 
 abound in the world, we believe there is something for 
 us to do, beside merely sending out an annual expression 
 of our testimony against those great abominations. 
 
 a We believe that those terrible evils are to be done 
 away by the dissemination of light among the nations, 
 impressing upon the understanding and the conscience 
 of the people a deep and abiding conviction of the great 
 immorality of those popular customs, which sink the 
 mass of mankind into a condition of wretchedness and 
 woe, and tend powerfully to perpetuate among them 
 moral degradation and crime. We know of no instru- 
 mentality by which this important work is likely to be 
 accomplished, but by the organization of associations 
 expressly for this purpose ; and we feel it to be consistent 
 with our own peace of mind, and with the best interests 
 of Society, that we should, like you, co-operate with 
 Christian philanthropists of all denominations who, by 
 their willingness to devote themselves to so good a work, 
 give the best evidence that they are influenced by the 
 spirit of Divine love. 
 
 " We have been encouraged to go forward in this way, 
 in our endeavors to promote the abolition of Slavery and 
 to establish the true doctrine of human rights, not only 
 by your example and recommendations, as already cited 
 from the Anti-Slavery reports, but more especially, by 
 the triumphant issue of your labors in the cause of bleed- 
 ing humanity, as evinced in the abolition of Slavery in 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 309 
 
 the British West India colonies, and by the repeated 
 Advices issued from your own body and from the Yearly 
 Meeting of Friends in London, urging Friends in Ame- 
 rica to greater faithfulness in advocating the cause of the 
 down-trodden and oppressed. 
 
 " In the 23d number of the Herald of Peace, published 
 in London, we find a statement exhibiting the very im- 
 portant fact that, by the timely interposition of the Peace 
 Society of New York a war between the United States 
 and Mexico was most happily averted. Had no such 
 society existed, it appears highly probable that instead 
 of peace being preserved, the American Continent might 
 ere now have been watered w T ith the blood of men slain 
 in the field of battle. Shall we rejoice at the good results 
 of the philanthropic labors of other men, and refuse our- 
 selves to participate with them in their labors ? This 
 instance, to our mind, furnishes a striking illustration of 
 the blessing of Divine goodness attendant on the Chris- 
 tian efforts of associated action in promoting the peace 
 and happiness of mankind. Although we cannot but 
 feel conscious, as we before observed, of the existence of 
 a similarity of religious principles and views of Christian 
 duty between us, yet having once tendered to you the 
 right hand of fellowship, we should, perhaps, have been 
 contented not to have repeated it, had it not been for a 
 deep and abiding conviction resting upon our minds, that 
 the enlargement of our brethren and sisters in suffering 
 and bonds is deeply involved in the matter. While the 
 relation, which now exists, continues between us, the 
 opposers of the Anti-Slavery cause will refer to it as 
 positive evidence that our Anti-Slavery course, and con- 
 sequently that of the Abolitionists of the nation, is wrong, 
 and, therefore, should not be countenanced in the least 
 degree whatever, for our opposers have openly, in a 
 recent anonymous publication, declared in the most une- 
 quivocal terms their hostility to modern Abolition socie- 
 ties. Again, it is, and will continue to be referred to, to 
 prove the oft repeated and senseless assertion, that Abo- 
 lition in this country is entirely a different thing from 
 
310 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 what it is in your land, and thus the whole weight of 
 your influence is and will be made to bear against the 
 whole Anti-Slavery movement in our country. Under 
 this view, which is most certainly a correct one, the sub- 
 ject assumes an aspect of the utmost importance. And 
 here permit us to quote to you the language of your 
 Yearly Meeting, to Friends of Indiana, in 1836. 'It is 
 with lively feelings of interest in the welfare and pros- 
 perity of your country, that we venture to suggest to your 
 consideration whether there are not indications of an 
 approaching crisis in this momentous question, in which 
 it will mainly depe?id, under Divine Providence, on the 
 faithful conduct of those who act on Christian princi- 
 ples, whether Slavery shall he abolished in your land by 
 peaceful legislation or by confusion and violence? 
 
 "This sentiment has been effectually sealed upon our 
 minds; and hence it is that we deem it of the first impor- 
 tance, that those who act on Christian principle, should 
 be faithful, consistent, and uncompromising in their 
 course, otherwise will they not inevitably condemn them- 
 selves in the things which they allow ? 
 
 "In humble reliance upon the God of the oppressed, 
 we have come out from among those who sought to 
 abridge our rights, to plead the cause of the suffering 
 and the dumb, and we have taken our stand on the same 
 ground, so long and so successfully occupied by you, and 
 we now, once more come to you, tendering the hand of 
 Christian fellowship in your labors of love, in which we 
 shall rejoice, in our humble sphere; to co-operate with 
 you for promoting the removal of the abuses which bru- 
 talize and degrade men, and fill the world with wretched* 
 ness and crime, asking of you a brotherly return. 
 
 " Should you deem this proposal of a friendly corres- 
 pondence worthy of acceptance, we ask the favor of 
 having this communication read also in your Yearly 
 Meeting, with a request of that meeting to forward to us 
 a few lines, opening the way to a permanent corre- 
 spondence. 
 
 "And now may the God of all grace guide and direct 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. Sll 
 
 both you and ns in all our labors for the advancement of 
 the cause of the Redeemer's kingdom among men, and 
 to Him be all the glory, now and forever, Amen. 
 
 " Signed in and by direction of the meeting aforesaid, 
 held by adjournments on the 22d and 23d of Second 
 month, 1844. " Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 
 
 CHAPTEE XXY. 
 
 Address to the Members of the Society of Friends individually consti- 
 tuting London Yearly Meeting — Postscript touching the Treatment of 
 Dublin Yearly Meeting. 
 
 Two Epistles, one from London and the other from 
 Dublin, were sent this year to the Meeting for Sufferings 
 of Indiana Yearly Meeting and put in circulation, con- 
 taining serious reflections upon the Society of Anti-Sla- 
 very Friends. In consequence of this, when the annual 
 meeting of that Society was held, it addressed the follow- 
 ing to Friends individually of London Yearly Meeting, 
 and appended a postscript thereto, touching the treatment 
 of Dublin Yearly Meeting. It was induced to pursue 
 this course, because those meetings had refused to accept 
 any communication from it, and there appeared to be no 
 other way to be heard. 
 
 " ADDRESS 
 
 " To the Members of the Society of Friends individually, 
 constituting London Yearly Meeting. 
 
 "Dear Friekds: — 
 
 " We have at this time received a copy of a Minute o 
 London Yearly Meeting, which, it seems, was intended? 
 
312 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 for our last Yearly Meeting, but which did not come to 
 hand till it had passed ; showing that our Address to that 
 body was not read or accepted by it. And as this seems 
 to be the only opportunity now left us, whereby we can 
 unburden our minds to you, we have thought proper 
 thus publicly to address you. In the first place, we 
 would observe that it is with feelings of much regret 
 that we feel constrained at the present time, to notice a 
 document recently put in circulation by the Meeting for 
 Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting, purporting to be 
 an Epistle from the Meeting for Sufferings of London 
 Yearly Meeting, evidently containing reflections of a 
 serious character against us. 
 
 " The first sentiment to which we would refer, is the 
 following : ' While the irregularity of the proceedings of 
 those who have separated themselves, is thus altogether 
 discountenanced by Friends in this country, we feel 
 bound to observe that the designation of 'A. S. Friends, 5 
 assumed by them, implies a surrender on your part, of 
 the testimony of the Society against Slavery ; which we 
 are fully convinced is unwarranted.' The question here 
 occurs, what is meant by the term, ' irregularity of pro- 
 ceeding V We are informed by the Minute of London 
 Yearly Meeting that that Yearly Meeting was of the judg- 
 ment that it w T ould be a departure from good order to 
 accept the communication of our Yearly Meeting, sent to 
 that body last year. It is evident, therefore, that their 
 being 'fully convinced,' as they observed in regard to the 
 premises, proceeded from testimony all on one side, as 
 that from our Yearly Meeting could not be heard. Does 
 our law, as Friends and as Christians, condemn a man 
 unheard, and without even listening to the evidences he 
 may offer in his favor ? If not, by what rule are hun- 
 dreds of persons condemned at once in the same way ? 
 Is it any less wrong, because many are affected by it ? 
 They tell Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, that they 
 are especially desirous that the manifestation of an open 
 and brotherly feeling toward us, should be cherished by 
 them. The very anomalous position which our Friends 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 313 
 
 of that Yearly Meeting have taken, in various respects, 
 warrants us in remarking, that example speaks much 
 louder than precept. While they recommend this course 
 to Friends of the old Yearly Meeting of Indiana, they, 
 themselves, are so far from an open and brotherly feeling 
 toward us, that they will not even hear us in our own de- 
 fense. Is this brotherly ? Is it kind ? We do not forget 
 the reasons assigned, that it would be a departure from 
 good order to read or accept a communication from us ; 
 but we have yet to learn what right order would thereby 
 be violated. Would they not read and accept a respect- 
 ful address from almost any body of professed Christians 
 in the world, who make no claim of being Friends ? 
 And if they are disposed, as the American Yearly Meet- 
 ings have been, they would read one from the Indians 
 with much pleasure ; even from such as make no preten- 
 sions to Christianity at all. Receiving and reading our 
 Address need not necessarily imply an acknowledgment 
 of the correctness of our course. They could, after an 
 examination of the evidences, if they had thereby found 
 to their satisfaction that we were wrong, have recorded 
 their judgment and the reasons whereon it was founded. 
 That would have been right. If they really feel con- 
 cerned for our welfare, why should they not speak to 
 us in ' an open and brotherly manner,' as they recom- 
 mend to our opposers, and show us, as brethren ought to 
 do, wherein we are wrong ? If it is contrary to good 
 order to read our communications, or to speak to us, we 
 cannot see how it is in accordance with good order to 
 speak about us, and against us, without first, at least, 
 hearing our defense. 
 
 " And to shift the subject a little ; can any person sup- 
 pose, that if a majority of Friends in America, or even a 
 majority of the leading influences alone, of Indiana Yearly 
 Meeting, had adopted our course, and the minority had 
 seceded and left us on that account, that they would 
 not have acknowledged our course to be right ? It can- 
 not be. We are confirmed in this view, from various 
 circumstances, and first, our course, in regard to this 
 
814 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Iff 
 
 question, is that which they have pursued in their coun* 
 try. Secondly, they have individually, in the capacity 
 of members of the Executive Committee of the British and 
 Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, and in various other ways, 
 given their countenance and support to the Anti-Slavery 
 movement in this country, set on foot in the very man- 
 ner, for activity in which we were driven to the necessity 
 of seceding, which, we suppose, is the irregularity to 
 which they refer. Hence it is plain that they would 
 have been heartily glad if Friends generally in this 
 country had been actively engaged with those they have, 
 as members of the Executive Committee, so highly eulo* 
 gized, and to which their Yearly Meeting exhorted in 
 plain and unequivocal terms, in the General Epistle of 
 1830. 
 
 " What, then, is the principle by which they are gov- 
 erned? It is nothing short of this; the majority should 
 rule. It is scarcely necessary to remark, as all must 
 readily see, that this is in direct opposition to one of the 
 fundamental principles of the Society. 
 
 u And to what point, dear friends, will such principles 
 and measures lead us ? If the existing organization of 
 Society, and the preservation of the common order of set- 
 ting up a Yearly Meeting, be considered of more impor- 
 tance than righteousness and purity, are we not fallen 
 back into papal heresy ? And if this doctrine had been 
 adhered to, by George Fox and all the early reformers, 
 could there have been such a body in the world as the 
 Society of Friends at the present time ? Hence it is, 
 that we are constrained to declare, that justice and right 
 did, and still does demand an impartial examination into 
 the facts relative to the controversy, totally independent 
 of numbers or originality of organization, and a decision 
 according to the evidence from both sides, before declar- 
 ing that they were fully convinced that we were in the 
 wrong, as is the evident import of their expressions. If, 
 however, they had been so kind as to have manifested 
 an open and brotherly feeling toward us, sufficient to 
 have accepted our testimony or evidence in our own 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 315 
 
 defense, they would have seen that the designation, Anti- 
 Slavery, did not attach itself to those we have left, 
 according to their own showing. 
 
 "They declared it to be of hurtful tendency, to mem- 
 bers of Society, to open meeting-houses for the purpose 
 of holding Anti-Slavery meetings. It was not against 
 opening them to a particular, designated kind, whose 
 practice was shown to be wrong, but against opening 
 them to Anti-Slavery meetings, in the broadest sense of 
 the term. They also, in another Minute of Advice, where 
 they caution Friends not to join in the over-active zeal 
 of A. S. societies, virtually and in effect, charged all 
 Anti-Slavery societies with being over-actively zealous* 
 In a Minute of Advice issued by the Select Yearly Meet- 
 ing in 1842, to the Select Quarters, they made the follow- 
 ing declaration: 'The meeting, in an especial manner, 
 was exercised in regard to some of the members of this 
 body joining Anti- Slavery societies in opposition to the 
 repeated advice of this Yearly Meeting.' 
 
 "From what has been said, it is clear that they op- 
 posed Anti-Slavery in its broadest and most unqualified 
 sense, and not any particular kind of Anti-Slavery action, 
 and, consequently, that they opposed and proscribed us 
 for being Anti-Slavery. And to us it is clear, that 5 
 although we adopted the designation alluded to, the cir- 
 cumstances under which we were placed, and the lan- 
 guage and treatment of our opposing friends, naturally 
 imposed it upon us. And if it implies an entire surren- 
 der on their part, of their testimony against Slavery, as 
 is clearly signified by the document under consideration, 
 our opposers themselves are accountable for it, inas- 
 much as they publicly surrendered all affinity of feeling 
 for all Anti-Slavery measures and actions. We would 
 not, however, be understood to say that they did not, at 
 the same time, profess to be firmly opposed to Slavery. 
 We are aware that this was the fact. But the explana- 
 tion of this incongruity is their business and not ours. 
 
 "An examination of our writings will show that we 
 have not, at any time, charged them with not being in 
 
S16 HISTORY 0# THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 any degree opposed to Slavery. And we are totally un^ 
 able to see why the assumption of the distinctive appel> 
 lation of Anti-Slavery on our part, should imply an en- 
 tire surrender of their testimony. 
 
 " Let us illustrate. A Yearly Meeting, after having 
 held and advocated the doctrine of immediate emancipa- 
 tion, changes its opinions, and adopts the sentiment that 
 gradual emancipation is the best plan. Now, who can- 
 not see that in this there would be a partial surrender of 
 our testimony against Slavery, and that should a portion 
 of that Yearly Meeting continue, at the same time, to 
 hold the doctrine of immediate emancipation, the term 
 Anti-Slavery could, with much more propriety, be ap- 
 plied to them than the others. And we have given the 
 evidences, which our opposers have never pretended to 
 controvert, showing that their testimony is, indeed, a 
 crippled one, independent of their opposition to modern 
 abolition societies. Witness the actions of their mem- 
 bers in voting for slaveholders and Pro-Slavery men, and 
 their free use of slave-labor produce, and the prohibition 
 of the examination of the abstinence question, in the 
 Yearly Meeting, together with the eulogies passed upon 
 them by some of the open and avowed advocates of per- 
 petual Slavery, in one of which it was stated, that they 
 took the right ground in relation to this subject, that is, 
 that the slaves must be prepared for freedom before 
 they should receive that great boon. This declaration 
 being publicly made, has never since been contradicted, 
 though they have been reminded of it at different 
 times. 
 
 "And if it were not harsh to quote our London Friends 
 against themselves, we could show that they had appre- 
 hensions that the testimony of our opposers against Sla- 
 very, was not as it should be ; for they say they c believe 
 if they were sufficiently alive to the bearings of this 
 great subject, upon the welfare, temporally and spiritu- 
 ally of mankind, they would be more prompt in finding, 
 and faithful in availing themselves of opportunities for 
 individual effort, and thus be instrumental in hastening 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 317 
 
 the time when all unchristian prejudices and distinctions 
 should be swept away.' This is, truly, our sentiment. 
 And it was because we were more prompt in finding and 
 faithful in availing ourselves of opportunities for this in- 
 dividual effort, which they say is our duty to do, and 
 which efforts our opposers endeavored to prohibit, that 
 we have been forced to the necessity of assuming a cor- 
 respondent distinctive appellation from those who refused 
 to be thus prompt and faithful. 
 
 " In another place, the Meeting for Sufferings of Lon- 
 don, observes: -it has seemed to us, that the circum- 
 stances of the case which have been the immediate cause 
 of your addressing our meeting, call in an especial 
 manner, for the exercise of patience, forbearance and 
 charity ; we would also express our warm and affection- 
 ate desire, that Friends may, in the feeling of Christian 
 love and interest toward those who have left, be enabled 
 in the meekness of wisdom, to extend to them the lan- 
 guage of invitation to return to the unity of the body, 
 and that the way to this desirable end, may in all re- 
 spects be made as easy as a due regard to the order of 
 truth will permit. 5 
 
 u Now, the question occurs, what would be a due re- 
 gard to the order of truth, in the estimation of our trans- 
 atlantic Friends ? Would it not be for our opposers to 
 undo all that they have done, contrary to the known 
 practice and advice of those Friends ? Are we to sup- 
 pose they would advise to a course contrary to the order 
 of truth, if they knew it? 
 
 " Viewing those Friends as consistent, we must sup- 
 pose that their idea of an observance of a due regard to 
 the order of truth, would induce our opposers to rescind 
 their advice against opening meeting-houses to Anti- 
 Slavery meetings, and that against Friends joining with 
 others in the Anti-Slavery cause, and all others, casting 
 odium upon it, for all these are contrary to the order of 
 truth, in the view of our English Friends, as is evinced 
 by their continued and persevering action in direct oppo- 
 
 14* 
 
318 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 sition thereto. It must also necessarily embrace an 
 obliteration of all the Minutes and proceedings standing 
 against us for going in opposition to that which is con- 
 trary to the order of truth, in the view of those Friends, 
 for it would surely take all this to make the way for a 
 return, as easy as a due regard to that order would per- 
 mit. If this is the idea intended to be conveyed by our 
 friends, which it must be, if they are consistent, we ap- 
 prove of the exhortation. 
 
 " It is in this way alone, unless our judgment should 
 be convinced that we are in error, that a re-union can be 
 effected, while we retain our allegiance to Him whose 
 right it is to rule in the hearts of all men, and who de- 
 clared, I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory 
 will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven 
 images. 
 
 " Can we suppose that they would have us obtain a 
 unity with those we have left, at the expense of our 
 Anti-Slavery efforts, in regard to which they havp spoken 
 so highly of us, we being of the American Abolitionists, 
 which they as members of the Executive Committee, re- 
 ferred to in such terms of commendation. Such a sup- 
 position would be placing them in a very unfavorable 
 light indeed. Nor yet would it place them in a much 
 more favorable position to suppose they do not know, 
 that to return to a unity with the body, while those ad- 
 vices remain unrepealed, would be an actual abandon- 
 ment of those very efforts which they have exhorted us 
 to be prompt in using. 
 
 "And we would here observe, we hope and trust there 
 never will be a re-union while that body retains the po- 
 sition it has taken in regard to the Anti-Slavery cause, 
 unless we should be convinced that we are mistaken in 
 relation to this point. And in order to a just settlement 
 of the controversy, we ask investigation. We hold our- 
 selves ready, should any body of Friends, either in Eng- 
 land or America, feel disposed to do us the justice to 
 examine the evidences on both sides, and act as umpire 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 319 
 
 between us and our opposing Friends, to make all ne- 
 cessary arrangements on our part to bring about such an 
 event. 
 
 " Such a course is not unprecedented. An instance 
 of this kind may be found in Gouglrs history, in case of 
 the separation of Wilkinson, Story and others. There 
 is, however, a difference in the two cases, so far as the 
 present has been tested, and it remains for time to show, 
 whether that difference will continue. Wilkinson and 
 his fellow-seceders were unwilling to come to a public 
 discussion of the difficulties between them and those they 
 left, while the others were anxious for it. In the present 
 case, the seceders have been all the time very anxious for 
 such a discussion, while those they have left, have mani- 
 fested a great aversion to it. 
 
 " It is highly probable that you are not aware of many 
 things with which we have to contend, as many of them 
 have not come to the public eye, one of which we will 
 here mention, and which, we believe, did more to pros- 
 trate the friends of the slave in Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
 than any other act, owing to its secret character, and 
 although we may be thought by some to violate a fafth 
 reposed in us, by making public that which was designed 
 only for the benefit of one department in Society, yet if 
 there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed, nor 
 hid, that shall not be made known, we trust, under the 
 present peculiar circumstances, we shall be excused for 
 setting it forth in our own defense. We allude to the 
 Epistle of Advice, issued by the Yearly Meeting of 
 Ministers and Elders of Indiana, in 1843, which we have 
 quoted in the foregoing, but of which, we deem it proper 
 to give a more full account. That meeting found on the 
 reports from one of the Quarters, an answer (which ori- 
 ginated in a Select Preparative, where there were none 
 of that body who had in any way connected themselves 
 with A. S. societies), to the query, ' Are Friends in unity 
 one with another, and with the meetings to which they 
 belong,' that they were, except that they differed in their 
 views relative to Friends joining A. S. societies; where- 
 
320 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 upon a committee was appointed, to take the subject into 
 consideration, and if way should open, to prepare an 
 Address or Epistle of Advice to the subordinate meetings, 
 and to propose the names of a suitable number of Friends 
 to attend with it, and labor where such deficiencies 
 existed. That committee reported at a future sitting, an 
 epistle, together with a committee of twenty-seven Min- 
 isters and Elders to carry it down to the subordinate 
 meetings, and see to the enforcing of the advice therein 
 contained, which report was received, the committee ap- 
 pointed, and they directed to proceed to their work of 
 suppressing all Anti-Slavery labors, which were then 
 being carried forward by individuals connected with that 
 body. We will not here state the extreme lengths to 
 which this committee went, for the removal of every ves- 
 tige of Abolitionism within their jurisdiction, but we will 
 take a few quotations from their document, and ask our 
 English Friends, how many Ministers and Elders they 
 had at that time, who were not offenders in the opinion 
 of that Select Yearly Meeting. Take the following quo- 
 tations : 
 
 •' c The meeting in an especial manner was exercised 
 in regard to some of the members of this body joining 
 Anti-Slavery societies, in opposition to the repeated ad- 
 vice of the Yearly Meeting. And in respect to others 
 who are giving their strength and encouragement to 
 those individuals who have thus acted.' ' The spirit 
 which would set at naught the advice of the Yearly 
 meeting, it J§ believed, is not qualified to administer the 
 discipline. If Ministers and Elders disregard the solemn 
 acts of the Yearly Meeting, the example to our young 
 Friends would be highly injurious.' Here, the reader 
 will perceive that the exercise of the meeting, was in 
 regard to some of its members joining Anti-Slavery so- 
 cieties, and not for joining societies of other kinds, and 
 that the meeting was also exercised on account of others, 
 who were giving their strength that way, but who had 
 not connected themselves with any Anti-Slavery organ- 
 ization. And here are the reasons. The Yearly Meet- 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 321 
 
 ing had advised against Anti-Slavery action, on the part 
 of its members, and if ministers and elders should dis- 
 regard that advice, and continue to labor, their example 
 would induce young Friends to do so likewise. Friends 
 would soon be called Abolitionists, and lose ' their place 
 and influence with the rulers of the land.' Therefore all 
 ministers and elders who remained in connection with 
 Anti-Slavery organizations, or favored those who were 
 thus connected, were believed to be under the influence 
 of that spirit which disqualified them for administering 
 the discipline, even in a Preparative meeting. Thus 
 being borne down and pressed upon, many who had 
 hitherto given proof of much usefulness in the Anti- 
 Slavery enterprise, were induced to cease their labors, 
 and now stand numbered with that host of opponents 
 against which the friends of the bondman have to con- 
 tend. 
 
 " But to return to the subject. Where would the min- 
 isters and elders of London Yearly Meeting have been, 
 if the same measures had been forced upon them, which 
 were upon us ? Even the departed W. Allen, would have 
 been numbered with transgressors for the labor which^he 
 wrought in his day, as certainly as that Charles Osborne, 
 and others now bear reproach for their labors in the same 
 cause, on this side the Atlantic. 
 
 " In conclusion, dear Friends, we would remark, that 
 in our opinion, a very great responsibility rests upon you 
 individually, in regard to this matter, both as respects 
 the character and usefulness of the Society in America, 
 and the cause of the suffering slave, whose chains are 
 riveted by the acts of a great majority of Friends in this 
 country. We feel deeply and firmly attached to the 
 principles, doctrines, testimonies and practice of the So- 
 ciety, as originally held and maintained; and hope ever 
 so to remain, being assured that they are those of Truth; 
 and although your Yearly Meeting may not acknowledge 
 us as Christian brethren (notwithstanding we have care- 
 fully put in practice its advice), but has taken sides with 
 those who have deprived us of the privileges of Society 
 
322 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 for obeying its injunction, yet we hope ever to remain 
 fellow-laborers with you in the cause of Christ. 
 
 " Signed on behalf of Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. 
 Friends, held at Newport, Wayne county, Indiana; 
 Ninth month, 1844. 
 
 " Walter Edgerton, ) rl v 
 Kebecca Edgerton." \ OCer/C6 - 
 
 u P. S. — We have at this time received a copy of a 
 Minute from the Yearly Meeting in Ireland, stating that 
 that meeting can neither read nor accept any communica- 
 tion from this Yearly Meeting or any of its subordinate 
 branches. We find also in a document purporting to be 
 an Epistle from the Standing Committee of the same 
 Yearly Meeting, to the Meeting for Sufferings of Indiana, 
 now in circulation in this country, similar information. 
 And as this is the only way we can come before the 
 members of that body, we would offer to them a few re- 
 marks thereon. 
 
 "In that Epistle, they observe 4 no communication 
 from that called Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, 
 having been offered to our Yearly Meeting, it was spared 
 the necessity of manifesting its disunity with a move- 
 ment so inconsistent with the good order of our Society, 
 by issuing a declaration of refusal to recognize or corre- 
 spond with a body thus constituted. How constituted ? 
 Self-organized, no doubt. This is evidently the reason 
 intended to be given, for refusing to correspond. Now, 
 it is a fact well known, that some years ago, a small 
 body of Friends in Baltimore seceded from the body, and 
 organized a Yearly Meeting of their own. Their case 
 and ours are exactly parallel as regards the manner in 
 which their meeting was constituted, except that they se- 
 parated by Minute of adjournment, but this could not 
 possibly make any difference in the principle. Did the 
 Yearly Meeting of Ireland or London on that occasion, 
 declare that movement to be inconsistent with the good 
 order of our society ? Nay, did they not sympathize 
 with and commend them for the act I And if there were 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 323 
 
 such an occurrence to take place among Friends in 
 America now, as did then, would they make such a de- 
 claration in relation to it ? We believe those who 
 seceded in that instance, proceeded to issue a declaration 
 disowning the body en masse, as we have done in the 
 present instance, and that for thus seceding, the body 
 disowned them individually, as our opposers have us. 
 But your Yearly Meeting holds correspondence with 
 them (the seceders,) and refused us the right hand of fel- 
 lowship for doing as these Friends did. 
 
 " It must, we think, be obvious to all, that the reason 
 assigned for their course is not the real one. As an ad- 
 ditional evidence of this fact, we quote their own words 
 as follows : 
 
 " ' We rejoice in believing that the testimony of our 
 Society against the complicated iniquities inseparable 
 from the system of Slavery, continues to be FAITHFUL- 
 LY upheld by our beloved brethren in various parts of 
 America. 5 Now this, if it is not designedly ambiguous, 
 all must see was intended to contradict the representa- 
 tions of those publications (probably some of ours), which 
 they say were in circulation among their members. The 
 substance of these representations, if they were ours, were, 
 that our opposers were not bearing a faithful testimony 
 against Slavery. It is a matter of serious regret that a 
 body of Friends should so obviously be led by such a 
 temporizing spirit, for it is sufficiently plain, from what 
 we have just quoted, that they did not believe our state- 
 ments, and consequently that we had no just cause of 
 separation, as Friends of Baltimore had. Why then did 
 they not state that fact ? Why do they evade coming to 
 the point, by giving that for the reason, which, by their 
 own showing, as we have above exhibited, was not the 
 reason ? 
 
 " They make much profession of attachment to the 
 cause of our Holy Redeemer, and strongly recommend to 
 listen to the voice of the true Shepherd, and not follow 
 the voice of the stranger. 
 
 " Now let us say to the members of that Yearly Meet- 
 
324: HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 ing, it is painful to find our confidence in the professions 
 of such a body wrested from us by the above considera- 
 tions. Would listening to the voice of the true Shepherd 
 lead to such a policy ? Would it lead your Yearly Meet* 
 ing to reject the evidences in our favor while receiving 
 the bare assertions of our opposers, unattended by a par- 
 ticle of evidence whatever ? Did not this true Shepherd 
 command his followers, ' As ye would that men should 
 do unto you do you even so unto them.' And were they 
 doing as they would be done by in their proceedings 
 against us ? We appeal to the witness for God in your 
 consciences for an answer. 
 
 " We KNOW, and the world knows, but more espe- 
 cially the slaveholders know, that Friends in America do 
 not bear a faithful testimony against Slavery. The evi- 
 dences of this are to some extent before you in the docu- 
 ments we have issued, which we would hope have been 
 duly circulated among you. Those evidences our oppo- 
 sers have never the first time attempted to controvert, 
 but have contented themselves with denying the exist- 
 ence of that which those evidences establish." 
 
 CHAPTER XXYI. 
 
 Committee appointed by London Yearly Meeting to endeavor to heal the 
 Breach — The Address of that Meeting to those who had left Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting. 
 
 The Anti-Slavery party, among Friends, had, as al- 
 ready shown, entertained a high estimation of the Anti- 
 Slavery character of Friends in England, and although 
 after the Separation they seemed to be held at a distance, 
 they were unwilling to believe that the body of Friends 
 there could be so warped aside as ultimately to reject 
 those, though the smaller number, who claimed to follow 
 their own example, without a thorough examination and 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 325 
 
 investigation into the alleged causes of Separation. Un- 
 der these views the information of the appointment of a 
 committee, by London Yearly Meeting, to endeavor to 
 heal the breach and produce reconciliation, was received 
 with some cheering hope on the part of Anti-Slavery 
 Friends, that justice, though delayed, would come at last. 
 
 The committee was appointed in Fifth month, 1845, at 
 which time the Yearly Meeting also adopted an Address 
 and directed it, not to a Yearly Meeting of Friends, nor 
 to Friends even, but to those who had withdrawn from 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting of Friends. 
 
 Those who were deputed to bring it over, and labor to 
 induce a compliance with its injunctions, were Wm.Fors- 
 ter, George Stacey, Josiah Forster and John Allen. 
 Here it is : 
 
 xt From our Yearly Meeting, held in London, by adjournments 
 from the 21st of the Fifth Month, to the 31st of the same, in- 
 clusive, 1845. 
 
 u To THOSE WHO HAVE RECENTLY WITHDRAWN FRO^I INDIANA YEARLY MEET- 
 ING of Friends : 
 
 " Dear Friends: — This meeting has from time to time 
 been introduced into a feeling of much brotherly concern 
 and interest on your behalf, in consequence of your hav- 
 ing withdrawn from the body of Friends in Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting ; and those feelings are attended with an 
 earnest and affectionate solicitude for your re-union with 
 them. 
 
 u We have a strong sense of the preciousness and the 
 safety of true gospel unity. We are enjoined to submit 
 ourselves one to another in the fear of God ; to be subject 
 one to another, and to be clothed with humility. This 
 subjection one to another in love, greatly promotes that 
 individual growth in grace which all the faithful follow- 
 ers of Christ can not but desire may be their blessed ex- 
 perience. 
 
 " The considerations which have led us to address you 
 are confirmed by reflecting on the comfort and strength 
 
 15 
 
326 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 which have arisen from that Christian fellowship and 
 harmony which have prevailed in our religions society, to 
 so large an extent, from its rise to the present period ; 
 which we can only ascribe to the power of the Holy 
 Spirit, so conspicuously manifested in its first gathering ; 
 and every interruption to which blessings, must be re- 
 garded as a very serious evil. 
 
 u We cannot adequately set forth the sense we have of 
 the extent to which, where the precious bond of religious 
 fellowship is seen to be in danger, we are individually 
 called upon to refrain from insisting on our own judg- 
 ment, rather than do anything which could contribute to 
 its dissolution. The living members of the body will 
 watch carefully against such a tendency, seeking to be 
 endued with all long-suffering, meekness and love, 
 
 " Trusting that on the fundamental doctrines of the 
 Gospel, and on the spirituality of divine worship, there 
 exists no essential difference between you and the body 
 from which you have withdrawn, we have felt much con- 
 cern and sorrow on hearing that you have discontinued 
 assembling with them to present yourselves before the 
 Lord. Accept, we beseech you, our earnest and affec- 
 tionate entreaty, that you will relinquish your separate 
 meetings for this purpose — will wholly discontinue them, 
 and again assemble for the public worship of Almighty 
 God with those with whom you have been accustomed 
 thus to meet. 
 
 " In extending this invitation, we are not insensible to 
 those humiliations by which the accepting it may be ac- 
 companied. We feel tenderly for you in thinking of your 
 present circumstances. But, whatever may be the sacri- 
 fices which attend such a course of conduct as that which 
 we thus venture to recommend, we believe that were it 
 taken in the reverent fear and love of God, with a single 
 eye to his honor, and to the service of our Lord and Re- 
 deemer, it would bring that peace to the soul which pass- 
 eth understanding ; that the blessing of the Most High 
 would rest upon it, both as it affects you and your be- 
 loved ofispring ; and that in your latter days, a retrospect 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OE ERlENDS. 327 
 
 on this course would bring a comfort to the soul which 
 would amply compensate for all that you may have to do 
 or to endure in connection therewith* 
 
 " With sincere desires that the wisdom which is from 
 above, which is pure, peaceable, gentle and easy to be 
 entreated, may be granted to every one of you on the pe- 
 rusal and calm consideration of this our affectionate Ad* 
 dress, we are your friends. 
 
 " Signed in and on behalf of the meeting, by 
 " George Stagey, 
 " Clerk to the meeting this year^ 
 
 CHAPTER XXVII. 
 
 Epistle of Adrice and Statement of Facts, etc. 
 
 The deputation arrived in this country in time to at- 
 tend the Yearly Meeting, at White Water, in Tenth 
 month. 
 
 It would be difficult for the reader to form any just 
 conception of the feelings of A. S. Friends, as every ves- 
 tige of hope vanished, by the successive developments of 
 the object and plans of the committee as set forth in the 
 following Epistle of Advice and statement of facts, issued 
 by the Meeting for Sufferings shortly after the committee 
 commenced its business ; 
 
 " EPISTLE OF ADVICE 
 
 statement of facts, etc. 
 
 " At a special meeting of the Meeting for Sufferings of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends, held at Newport, Indiana, Tenth 
 month 13th, 1845, 
 
828 HISTORY 0# TdE SEPARATION ifcf 
 
 u The following document was produced by a commit- 
 tee appointed for that purpose, and read ; and after due 
 deliberation was united with and adopted, and directed 
 to the particular attention of all Anti-Slavery Friends : 
 
 " Dear Friends : — As a body set apart to represent 
 the Yearly Meeting during its recess, we feel it to be a 
 solemn duty, to address you at the present time, on a 
 subject which we deem of vital importance to the pros- 
 perity of our religious society, and to the general interest 
 of humanity and the credit of the Christian religion* 
 Our object is to exhort you to faithfulness and steadfast- 
 ness in the maintenance of those principles, and religious, 
 social relations whereunto we have been called, and in 
 which we have so often experienced the solemnizing 
 presence of the holy Head of the Church, covering our 
 assemblies as with a mantle, filling our hearts with love 
 to God and love to man, and confirming our souls, with- 
 out doubt, in the belief that the Lord owned, and gra- 
 ciously condescended to be with us in our religious 
 meetings. 
 
 u We are apprehensive that a time of trial awaits us ; 
 and our earnest desire and prayer is, that all our mem- 
 bers may dwell so deep in the fountain of Divine love, 
 and live so near to the spring of life, keeping a single eye 
 to the pointings of Truth, as to be preserved from being 
 led away from the path of rectitude by the influence of 
 man. 
 
 " You are aware that the late Yearly Meeting in Lon- 
 don appointed a committee to come to this country, in 
 consequence of the division that had taken place in Indi- 
 ana Yearly Meeting. And though we could not ascer- 
 tain, previous to their arrival, the precise nature of their 
 appointment, or the extent of their mission, yet we un- 
 derstood they were to bring over an Address from their 
 Yearly Meeting, to us, and from various sources of infor- 
 mation, we were led to believe, at least to hope, that they 
 would examine into the cause of difficulty among us, see 
 which party, or whether both parties had erred, and offer 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 329 
 
 their advice, as friendly mediators, to either or both par- 
 ties, and thus endeavor to produce a reconciliation upon 
 the ground of truth and justice. With this view of the 
 subject, we rejoiced in the prospect of their visit, and 
 looked forward with hope to the commencement and final 
 result of their labors. 
 
 " We well remember that London Yearly Meeting had 
 repeatedly, in its Epistles, earnestly entreated Friends in 
 this country to increased activity in behalf of the slave, 
 and once, in its General Epistle (in 1830), advised 
 Friends everywhere, to take part with their fellow coun- 
 trymen, in this and other works of humanity. We knew 
 that Friends in England were largely engaged in this 
 cause, in the same manner with ourselves, and that at 
 least two of the committee (Josiah Forster and George 
 Stacey) were eminently conspicuous among the Aboli- 
 tionists of Great Britain ; and we could not conceive that 
 either the Yearly Meeting of London, or its committee, 
 would, when they fully understood the matter (and we 
 hoped the committee would take measures to get full in- 
 formation on the subject), virtually uphold our opposers, 
 in placing us out of the unity and harmony of religious 
 Society, and effectually depriving us of its blessed privi- 
 leges, or that they would unite in placing us under con- 
 demnation, for following the Advice of that Yearly 
 Meeting and imitating the practice of its most conspicu- 
 ous members, and even of the committee now among us, 
 when at home ; particularly without an impartial exami- 
 nation of the merits of the case. The committee may 
 say, as many of the members of Indiana Yearly Meeting 
 have said, that they do not censure us for our Anti-Sla- 
 very course, but for setting up separate meetings. But 
 it is all sophistry ! The setting up of separate meetings 
 was the natural and legitimate result of the proscriptive 
 measures heaped upon us for our Anti-Slavery course ; 
 as there was no other possible w T ay for us to enjoy the 
 benefits of religious society ; and any censure placed upon 
 us for setting up separate meetings, is censure for our la- 
 bors in the cause of the slave. 
 
330 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 " But we must proceed to make some development of 
 the present posture of affairs ; and, so far as they have 
 come to our knowledge, the future prospects of the com- 
 mittee. This we shall do in a hasty sketch of events 
 which have transpired since their arrival at Richmond. 
 The sources of information from which the following state- 
 ment is compiled, we believe to be entirely reliable : 
 
 " On the first day of the Yearly Meeting at Richmond, 
 the Minute of the appointment of the committee was 
 read, and one of their number made some remarks rela- 
 tive to their mission. They also proposed the appoint- 
 ment of a committee, by the meeting, to give them such 
 information as they might wish for. The meeting com- 
 plied with the request, taking the precaution to have 
 every name approved before it was taken down by the 
 Clerk. With this committee the London committee have 
 had several interviews, of the nature of which we are 
 not fully informed. 
 
 u They attended the Yearly Meeting throughout, and 
 we are informed, some of them expressed much satisfac- 
 tion at finding Friends doing more for the colored people 
 than they (the committee) anticipated. 
 
 " They expressed no disapprobation of their course in 
 regard to A. S. Friends, of their general bearing toward 
 the Anti-Slavery cause, nor of their voting for slavehold- 
 ers and Pro* Slavery men. 
 
 " The information of what passed in the meeting was 
 communicated by their own members. 
 
 " The day after the meeting concluded, being the day 
 on which the mid-week meeting of the ; body members' 
 was held at Newport, the London committee attended it, 
 went to the house of a ; body Friend' for dinner, and 
 after dinner made a social visit to Charles Osborne, at 
 Levi Coffin's, of perhaps half an hour. They returned 
 to Richmond the same evening. This is all the instance, 
 so far as we are informed, of their paying any attention 
 to A. S. Friends since their arrival, except as a few have 
 sought an interview with them since that time. Several 
 other Friends were present during their visit to Charles 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 331 
 
 Osborne, in the course of which some intimations of 
 their intended course were given, and it was understood 
 that they intended to set out for White Lick the next 
 day. 
 
 "After they left Newport, several Anti-Slavery Friends 
 thought it necessary to confer a little on the circum- 
 stances of the case, and the result of the conference was 
 the following communication, which was delivered to 
 them in Richmond, next day, by three of the Friends 
 who had signed it : 
 
 "'Newport, Tenth month 8th, 1845. 
 
 " ' William Forster, Josiah Forster, George Stacey, and 
 John Allen ; 
 
 " c Esteemed Friends : — Being solemnly impressed with 
 the importance of your mission to this country, and duly 
 appreciating the arduous nature of the undertaking, we 
 cannot but express our earnest desire and hope that your 
 labors may be blessed to the promotion of the cause of 
 truth and righteousness, and that when you return to your 
 own land, you may bear with you the consoling reflection 
 that, through the Divine aid, you have been instrumental 
 in uniting Friends, in this country, in a hearty and effi- 
 cient co-operation in their endeavors to undo the heavy 
 burdens, and to let the oppressed millions in this land of 
 boasted liberty go free. 
 
 u c As you must be sensible that we, as Anti-Slavery 
 Friends, feel a deep interest in the progress and final 
 result of your labors, we hope you will duly appreciate 
 our motives, and, at least, give us credit for candor in 
 making to you the following suggestions : 
 
 " ; We understand that your object is to endeavor to 
 re-unite Friends of Indiana Yearly Meeting, who have 
 been separated in consequence of different sentiments as 
 to their proper course on the Anti-Slavery question, and of 
 the measures which resulted from this difference of 
 opinion. We are now two Yearly Meetings, and we 
 have understood the object of your visit to be, to act as 
 mediators between us, that we may become united again. 
 Need we suggest to you the propriety of endeavoring to 
 
332 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 stand, as much as possible, uncommitted to either side, 
 and so far as information may be wanted to endeavor to 
 procure it in that way which shall be least likely to lead 
 you to partial conclusions, or to give either party room 
 to distrust your impartiality? 
 
 "■'Now, so far as we have understood your course, 
 since entering upon the object of your mission, and your 
 plans for the future, we feel bound to say, we cannot view 
 them in a light that is satisfactory. 
 
 " ' You have thrown yourselves, as it were, into the 
 bosom of one of the parties, to the neglect almost entirely 
 of the other, the only exception, that we know of, being 
 a visit of a few minutes to Charles Osborne. You 
 attended their Yearly Meeting throughout, and requested 
 the appointment of a committee of information ; with 
 which committee, we understand, you have consulted as 
 to your future operations, thus giving strength to the idea 
 that you are altogether on their side. The result of your 
 counsels, so far as we understand your plan of future 
 operations, appears to us exceptionable in several parti- 
 culars. We understand that you expect to call A. S. 
 Friends together in their respective neighborhoods, be- 
 ginning with some of the remote and small meetings, 
 and to read to them the Address from the London Yearly 
 Meeting. 
 
 "'Our objection to this course will suggest itself to 
 your minds without our naming it. It may be a master- 
 stroke of policy to attack our outposts, for the purpose of 
 weakening our forces, in an attempt to destroy our 
 organization, if that is the object aimed at, but we very 
 much doubt whether it is the course that can be recon- 
 ciled with the object of your mission, as generally under- 
 stood. Here, or at least in this vicinity, is the great 
 body of A. S. Friends — here our Yearly Meeting is 
 held — here, it was expected you w r ould meet us in coun- 
 sel, and for this purpose our aged Friend, Charles 
 Osborne, is here, not doubting that if you had anything 
 for us, here would be the place to receive it. And here, 
 still seems to us, is at least the place to begin. We do 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 333 
 
 not presume to dictate, but we take the liberty to ask you 
 to reconsider your proposed plan. Whatever course you 
 may see proper to pursue toward A, S. Friends, or what- 
 ever advice you may have to give them, or propositions 
 to make to them, we think it reasonable that they should 
 be commenced here instead of at our remote and small 
 meetings. And especially if you intend to convene A. 
 S. Friends to hear the Address, we would request you to 
 commence here. In conclusion, dear Friends, we would 
 suggest to you, that if you persist in that course which 
 evidently implies a design to weaken us by operating 
 upon our remote meetings or outposts, we shall feel our- 
 selves justifiable in taking such measures as may appear 
 to be advisable to guard our Friends against any impro- 
 per influence. 
 
 " 'Now we will just add, that if we are under wrong 
 impressions, we hope to be set right; for it is painful to 
 us to harbor an unfavorable thought respecting Friends 
 for whom we have long entertained so high a regard as 
 we have for those whom we are now addressing. 
 
 " ' We expected you would take steps to inquire into 
 the particulars of our difficulty, see where the wrong was, 
 and endeavor to remove it. But if this is not your inten- 
 tion, then we have been mistaken in the object of your 
 visit. We have spoken plainly, but not in an unfriendly 
 feeling, and hope you will attribute it to no other motive 
 than a desire that the right may prosper. 
 
 u ' With the salutation of our love, we remain your 
 sincere Friends, 
 
 u; Henry H. Way, Benjamin: Thomas, 
 
 Egbert B. Bailey, Benjamin Stanton, 
 
 Charles Osborne, Daniel Puckett, 
 
 Catherine Coffin, Ruth Maulsby, 
 
 Margaret Baldwin, Jonathan Hough, 
 
 James Maulsby, George Shugart, jr. 
 
 Levi Coffin, Samuel Charles.' 
 
 "After they had read the communication, the three 
 Friends who delivered it had an interview with them. 
 
334 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 They were informed by the committee, that from the lan- 
 guage of the communication, they supposed there was a 
 mistake in regard to the object of their mission. Stated, 
 in substance, that they did not consider themselves as 
 mediators, that the concern of London Yearly Meeting, 
 the purport of the Address, and their object, were simply 
 to endeavor to prevail upon us to discontinue our meet- 
 ings for worship, and to attend the meetings for worship 
 of the 'body. 5 
 
 " When asked if they would not advise that our meet- 
 ings for Discipline should be laid down, as well as meet- 
 ings for worship? they said they had nothing to say 
 about our meetings for Discipline. It was stated to them 
 that A. S. Friends had understood their object to be, to 
 promote a re-union, and they were asked, if they would 
 advise us to condemn our conduct, or make acknowledg- 
 ments to the Monthly meetings by which we were dis- 
 owned. They replied, that they had nothing to say, or 
 it was no part of their business to say anything about our 
 making acknowledgments. So that the object of their 
 mission — the great object in view, in crossing the wide 
 Atlantic and traversing a large portion of this western 
 country, appears to be, solely, to annihilate the religious 
 Society of A. S. Friends, and to persuade its members to 
 attend those of the * body.' A privilege not denied to 
 any person. 
 
 " They seemed to have no view of inquiring into the 
 circumstances that caused the Separation, but George 
 Stacey said, that he could conceive of no possible circum- 
 stances in which he could be placed, that would justify 
 him in suffering himself to be alienated from the body of 
 Society. Thus fully indorsing the doctrine, either that 
 the body of Friends is infallible, or that, let it become as 
 corrupt as it may, its members are not justifiable in 
 leaving it. 
 
 "And Josiah Forster said, that dearly as he loved the 
 Anti-Slavery cause, he could not, under any circum- 
 stances, suffer it to be compared with the union of the 
 Society of Friends. Our Friends, who had this interview 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 335 
 
 with the committee, do not pretend to give their words 
 verbatim, but the substance. 
 
 "At parting, the editor of the Free Labor Advocate 
 was advised to ' be quiet, 5 and a hope expressed, that if 
 he would do so, their labors would be attended with 
 success. 
 
 u It may be proper to state in addition, that during the 
 interview, they were informed that if they wished to see 
 Anti-Slavery Friends together and to read to them the 
 Address from London, they might have the opportunity 
 at Newport, at the close of the anniversary of the State 
 Anti-Slavery Society, of seeing more than they would be 
 likely to see at any other time or place. They assented 
 to the probability of that being the case, but expressed 
 the opinion, and asked our A. S. Friends if they did not 
 think it was correct, that they would have more influence 
 with our members by convening them in their respective 
 little neighborhoods, than by meeting a large body in 
 Newport; though they had previously asserted that they 
 had no view to ; outposts/ or motives of policy in their 
 
 {>roposed plan of visiting the remote neighborhoods and 
 eaving the principal body of A. S. Friends in this vici- 
 nity till their return. 
 
 "The following morning, the three A. S. Friends who 
 had the interview with the committee, addressed to them 
 the following note, which, we suppose, was delivered to 
 them before they left Richmond for the West, intending, 
 as we are informed, to go pretty directly to Iowa. 
 
 " ' Newport, Ia., Tenth month 10th, 1845. 
 "'William Forster, Josiah Forster, George Stacey, 
 and John Allen : 
 
 " ; Esteemed Friends : — Since our interview with you 
 yesterday, we have, upon due reflection, concluded to 
 address to you a brief note, just to inform you that we 
 are no better satisfied with your proposed course than we 
 were before, but on the contrary, our dissatisfaction has 
 increased, in consequence of the discovery that your ob- 
 ject is the annihilation of our religious society of A. S. 
 
336 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 Friends, without making any attempt to induce the old 
 Yearly Meeting to do anything toward opening the way 
 for our re-union, upon terms which we think we can con- 
 sistently accept. Now, we wish you to know, that we, 
 as well as you, highly value the unity and harmony of 
 religious society, which we now enjoy in an eminent 
 degree, and feel ourselves bound to endeavor to maintain 
 our present position until there is a prospect of enjoying 
 those privileges in some other way. We do not intend 
 by this to ask you to alter your course, but to let you 
 know that which A. S. Friends will take; that they are 
 bound to take such measures as they deem best, to preserve 
 our religious society in unity and harmony. And that 
 neither the editor of the Advocate, nor any other A. S. 
 Friend, will feel under any obligation to 4 be quiet, 5 in the 
 sense in which we understood the advice to be given 
 yesterday. " 'Benjamin Stanton, 
 
 Levi Coffin, H. H. Way.' 
 
 u Our object is to warn A. S. Friends that our reli- 
 gious society is assailed, with a view to its prostration. 
 Our measures are purely defensive, and in these endea- 
 vors to preserve the unity, harmony, and integrity of our 
 members, by warning them of the attack, we feel our- 
 selves fully justifiable in setting forth the foregoing facts, 
 remembering the Scripture declaration, that ' in vain is 
 the snare laid in the sight of any bird.' We have 
 thought it better to set forth the facts that have led us to 
 the discovery of the objects which the committee aim at, 
 rather than to state their objects, without confirming 
 them by the facts. 
 
 " And now, in conclusion, beloved Friends, we would 
 again exhort you to trust in the Lord, remembering that 
 in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength. Trust not 
 in man, whose breath is in his nostrils. As we are thus 
 concerned to dwell near the source of unfailing strength, 
 the fear of man will be banished, and we shall be enabled 
 to adopt the language c the Lord is my helper, I will not 
 fear what man shall do unto me. 5 
 
 " Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 
 
V 
 
 INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 33? 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 Account of the Proceedings of the English Committee in Iowa. 
 
 The deputation, far from entertaining the least dispose 
 tion to comply with the wishes of the body of Anti- Sla- 
 very Friends, immediately proceeded to the consumma- 
 tion of their plans in visiting the remote branches first. 
 
 The following is a short account of their first labors, 
 commencing in Iowa, and was furnished by a number of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends of that place : 
 
 " The committee having left Richmond pretty directly 
 after the Yearly Meeting there, arrived at Salem on First- 
 day evening, the 26th of Tenth month ; where they com*- 
 menced their labors with A. S. Friends by calling all 
 our members together, who met them in conference on 
 Third-day the 28th inst., at 11 o'clock A. M. After 
 the meeting had been gathered a few minutes, George 
 Stacey arose to his feet, made a few remarks explanatory 
 of their mission, read the Minute of their appointment, 
 and then the Address from London Yearly Meeting to 
 A. S. Friends, earnestly recommending the discontinuing 
 of meetings for worship, and that we attend the meetings 
 for worship of those with whom we Were formerly asso- 
 ciated in religious fellowship. A serious and deliberate 
 consideration of the contents of the Address was earn- 
 estly recommended by the committee, each one of them 
 briefly remarking on the great value of Christian fellow- 
 ship and gospel unity, and of the exercise and travail of 
 London Yearly Meeting on account of our secession. 
 
 u William Forster expressed, in a feeling manner, his 
 gratitude for the opportunity with us, and bore witness 
 to the precious solemnity that covered the meeting. 
 
 u The committee were informed that our English 
 brethren did not know what they were asking of us, when 
 they required our return to those from whom we have 
 separated, without a removal of the causes of the sepa^- 
 ration. 
 
338 msTORY OF THE SEFAttATIOH Xtf 
 
 "And Friends were feelingly and earnestly recom- 
 mended to look to Him who is abundantly able to direct 
 and protect his dependent followers as man cannot do* 
 Near the close of their interview with us, the committee 
 informed the meeting, that they had a wish to visit us in 
 our families, and a few Friends expressed a willingness 
 for them to do so. 
 
 "The committee then retired— A. S. Friends continu- 
 ing in conference. After a pretty full and free expres- 
 sion of sentiment on the advice contained in the Address, 
 and the labors of the committee, the meeting nominated 
 a few Friends to draw up and present to the committee 
 our views briefly on the subject, and the reasons why we 
 could not accede to the proposition, or comply with their 
 advice. 
 
 " The following is a copy of the address to the com- 
 mittee, which was presented to them early the next morn- 
 ing after the conference ; and they informed that they had 
 privilege to visit us in our families. 
 
 < •' Salem, Iowa, Tenth mo. %8th, 1845. 
 
 " \ Esteemed Friends, William Forster, Josiah Forster, 
 George Stacey, and John Allen. 
 
 ut Upon duly considering the advice contained in the 
 Address to us from London Yearly Meeting, to discon- 
 tinue our meetings for worship, and attend the meetings 
 for worship of those with whom we were formerly asso- 
 ciated in religious fellowship, we believe it right to in- 
 form you, through this medium, that we cannot accede 
 to the proposition, for the following reasons: 
 
 ut First, because we occupy our present position more 
 from necessity than choice, having no alternative left us, if 
 we would enjoy the benefit of religious society. Second, 
 because we believe it would be a virtual surrender of our 
 A. S. principles. Third, because by so doing we would 
 not be securing to ourselves the benefits of religious soci- 
 ety, nor the fellowship and unity so desirable, unless we 
 are acknowledged by those you advise us to return to, as 
 Friends in unity, with full privilege to continue our 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 339 
 
 active exertions in the A. S. cause, as Truth may dictate, 
 being accountable to the Society for violations of the dis- 
 cipline only : but, on the other hand, we should lose the 
 benefits of religious society, and the fellowship and unity 
 which stand not in word only, but in the life and power 
 of the Truth ; which fellowship we believe we have often 
 been favored to feel since our separate organization. 
 Fourth, because by so doing our influence in a society 
 capacity will be lost, and thus, instead of advancing the 
 cause of truth and righteousness on the earth, we would 
 become a hinderance. And fifth, because we are in unity 
 with Indiana Yearly Meeting of A. S. Friends, and be- 
 lieve the Advice should claim the attention of our Meet- 
 ing for Sufferings. 
 
 " 'And, in conclusion, we would further state, that we 
 can but view the course of London Yearly Meeting, and 
 your course as a committee, as very extraordinary. That 
 without ever entering into an impartial examination of 
 the causes that led to the difficulty that exists between 
 us, and those we were formerly associated with in reli- 
 gious fellowship, you enter into judgment, and require 
 us to return, without an effort to remove the causes of 
 the difficulty that separates us ; which removal would 
 open the way for us to return on principles that would 
 have a tendency to restore the unity that is so desirable, 
 but which cannot be restored without the removal of those 
 causes. 
 
 " f In love we remain your friends. ~ 
 
 " ■ Signed on behalf of the members of Salem Monthly 
 meeting of A. S. Friends. 
 
 U4 Aaron Street, Jr., Thomas Frazier, Henderson Lew- 
 elling, Marmaduke Jay, Wm. Lewelling, Gideon Frazier, 
 Elizabeth Lewelling, Anna Johnson, Hannah Blackledge, 
 Cyrena Lewelling.' 
 
 " On Sixth day, the 31st of Tenth month, the Monthly 
 meeting of the 'body 'was held at Salem, which the 
 committee attended, and we understand by some who 
 attended, that one of the committee alluded to the sub- 
 ject of the Separation, and advised Friends, if any of the 
 
340 liisfoRir of the separation is 
 
 seceders from them should return, to receive them again 
 into fellowship; but said nothing about preparing the 
 way for our return, by removing the causes of the sepa- 
 ration. 
 
 u Some of our members felt that they could not be 
 well satisfied to let the committee pass away from us, 
 without soliciting another conference between them and 
 A. S. Friends collectively ; to which proposition they 
 assented, remarking, at the same time, to those who 
 made the request, that they had no liberty to enter into 
 an examination or discussion of the causes of difference 
 between us and those from whom we have separated, and 
 should not feel bound to answer questions that would 
 commit them. 
 
 " Another conference was accordingly held on the 
 seventh day of Eleventh month, at 10 o'clock A. M., 
 through the course of which a full and free expression 
 w r as given by A. S. Friends, on the course pursued by our 
 English brethren ; and the committee was faithfully 
 warned of the tendency of their labors among us, and that 
 we were fully of the opinion that they would inevitably 
 tend to widen the breach between us and those from whom 
 w r e separated, instead of healing it, by placing censure 
 on us for our course, and strengthening and establishing 
 our opposers in their arbitrary, proscriptive, and unchris- 
 tian measures toward us ; and that it would have a ten- 
 dency to retard the work of emancipation in the United 
 States, by throwing the weight of the influence of the 
 Society* of Friends in England and America, against the 
 honest laborers in the cause. That the most violent op- 
 posers to the righteous cause, and bitter haters of the 
 colored man, and of his rights, that we have to contend 
 with, feel it to be one of their strongholds ; as they fre- 
 quently throw up to us the position of the Society of 
 Friends on this subject ; and have already referred exult- 
 ingly to the course of the committee, as an evidence 
 that we are wrong. 
 
 " The committee remarked, that they supposed we 
 would give them credit for their Anti-Slavery labors* 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OP FRIENDS. 341 
 
 They were informed that we could not give them credit for 
 any A. S. labors since they arrived in the United States ; 
 inasmuch as they had carefully avoided attending the Anni- 
 versary of the Indiana State Anti-Slavery Society, and had 
 not attended any other A. S. meetings ; and that it was 
 our belief, if they had maintained their A. S. principles 
 boldly and faithfully since coming to this country, and 
 opposed the time-serving spirit of Friends in this country, 
 they might have been instrumental in removing the diffi- 
 culty existing between us and Indiana Yearly Meeting, 
 and thereby have given strength to that righteous cause 
 which they profess to love so dearly at home. The com- 
 mittee took the position that London Yearly Meeting had 
 not the authority to act as a mediator between the con- 
 tending parties here, as that meeting did not stand in the 
 relation to Indiana Yearly Meeting, of a Yearly Meeting 
 to a Quarterly meeting, and had no right to call it to an 
 account for its acts ; and, therefore, they could not enter 
 into an investigation of the circumstances of the difficulty. 
 " They were informed that we were sensible of that 
 fact, but that London or any other Yearly Meeting has 
 the right, in brotherly love, to offer its services as medi- 
 ator between contending parties in our religious society; 
 and that the same concern by which they profess to have 
 been actuated in their course, would have justified them 
 in offering their services in this case as mediators, and 
 of entering into an impartial examination of the causes 
 of the difficulty, and to have given such counsel and ad 
 vice to either or both parties, as might have been appro- 
 priate, and calculated to remove the difficulty between 
 us. And that they had just the same right to act in 
 that way, as they have in the way they are acting. The 
 committee at different times alluded to the circumstance 
 of our agreement on the fundamental doctrines and prin- 
 ciples of Friends ; and that the only difference between 
 us and Indiana Yearly Meeting, was in the manner of 
 carrying out our Anti-Slavery principles. They were 
 informed that we believed the difference between us and 
 members of the Indiana Yearly Meeting amounted to a 
 
 15* 
 
342 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 total lack on their part, of acting efficiently in the cause; 
 which continues to be manifested by their refusing to 
 identify themselves with the Abolitionists of the United 
 States — by voting for slaveholders and Pro-Slavery 
 men — by the indiscriminate use of the productions of 
 slavery ; and by refusing to open their meeting-house 
 doors to A. S. lecturers, thus discountenancing the de- 
 voted laborers in the good cause, whatever may be their 
 moral worth. 
 
 u These are some of the obstacles that stand in the 
 way of a reunion; and our English brethren, in their 
 efforts to effect a re-union, have entirely declined to ex- 
 amine into, and endeavor to remove those with other 
 causes of difference. 
 
 " On one of the committee (Josiah Forster) express- 
 ing, as they had severally done in their family labors, an 
 opinion that the circumstances in America are so differ- 
 ent from what they are in England, that it is not best for 
 Friends to unite with others in the A. S. cause as they 
 do in England ; he was asked for his reason for such a 
 conclusion, and to explain the circumstances of differ- 
 ence ; and he acknowledged he had no reason matured 
 for it. They were then told that the objection had often 
 been made to us, and the objectors had as often failed 
 to give a reason for if; and that we believed the differ- 
 ence between the two countries, in relation to the Anti- 
 Slavery cause, is, that in England it is popular, and in 
 America it is unpopular ; and that we should have to 
 conclude that this is the only reason that can be rendered 
 for the opinion that Friends here should not act in the 
 A. S. cause as they do there. At which they were silent. 
 
 " One of the committee expressed that he thought the 
 term 'Anti-Slavery, 5 attached to our name, very objection- 
 able ; for, he said, the principles of the Society of Friends 
 are, and have been Anti-Slavery, for the last century. 
 And they advanced the sentiment, that an investigation 
 of the causes of the difficulty would be attended with 
 deleterious effects, and would result in widening the 
 breach. And they severallv insisted that thev had no 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 343 
 
 intention of placing any degree of censure on us for our 
 course, or of justifying our opposers in theirs, and that 
 their Yearly Meeting has always avoided doing so; and 
 they again earnestly urged the consideration and adop- 
 tion of the Advice from their Yearly Meeting. But they 
 were again told that their course inevitably had that ten- 
 dency, and they could not prevent that consequence 
 while they continued therein. 
 
 " The committee, when questioned at different times, 
 with regard to the course it would be necessary for us to 
 pursue, to obtain the privilege of religious fellowship and 
 unity with those they require us to return to, have never 
 proposed any other plan than merely our attending their 
 meetings for worship, without any privileges more than 
 those have, who never possessed a right of membership 
 in the Society. 
 
 " In conclusion, we would here state, that we have not 
 undertaken to give the precise language that was used 
 in the different interviews here narrated ; but we have 
 endeavored to give the sense and purport of what was said. 
 
 " Signed by direction of a meeting, and on behalf of the 
 members of Salem Monthly meeting of A. S. Friends, Iowa. 
 
 u Anna Johnson, William Lewelling, Elvy Lewelling, 
 Cyrena Lewelling, Aaron Street, Jr.. Rachel Joy, Shan- 
 nah Hiatt, Marmaduke Jay, James Comer, Jane Lewel- 
 ling, Eli Jessop, Nathan Hammer, John Lewelling, Hen- 
 derson Lewelling, Sarah Marine, Elizabeth Lewelling. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 Proceedings of the English Committee at ISTettle Creek. 
 
 As the committee passed along from place to place, 
 they were very careful not to eat or lodge with the ob- 
 jects of their solicitude, when it could be avoided. And 
 in calling Friends together, they studiously avoided using 
 the term Anti-Slavery Friends, professing to be restricted 
 by conscience from so doing. 
 
844 HISTORY OP THE SEPARATION IK 
 
 Neither would they in their language, acknowledge we 
 had any meetings, but would speak of the " little com- 
 pany," in this, that, or the other place. Every move- 
 ment on their part, showed that their ardent desire was 
 to break up the organization of A. S. Friends. 
 
 When they chanced to come across one that could be 
 diverted with the relation of some incident foreign to the 
 object of their mission, or pleased with soft and oily 
 words, they had sagacity enough soon to discover it ; and 
 then it was they were indeed communicative and soci- 
 able ; but let any one put a few questions, as was fre- 
 quently done, respecting the manner in which Friends in 
 England acted touching the Anti-Slavery cause; or how 
 they could persuade Anti-Slavery Friends to submit to 
 a body which prohibited its members from doing as their 
 own Yearly Meeting recommended to do, etc., etc., and 
 they were at once dumb. Sometimes, however, they 
 would converse a little together in a low tone, or whisper, 
 and then inform the "little company;" they did not 
 think proper to answer such questions. 
 
 It will not be necessary to narrate the proceedings 
 with all the " little companies ;" an account of one or 
 two other of their conferences may suffice. 
 
 " At Nettle Creek, after they had taken their seats a few 
 minutes, George Stacey stated that the object in calling them 
 together, was to read an expostulatory Address from London 
 Yearly Meeting, to those who had believed it right to with- 
 draw from Indiana Yearly Meeting, and set up separate 
 meetings to themselves. It was then stated, on the part of 
 A. S. Friends, that from the course they, the committee, 
 had pursued hitherto, it was understood that their sole 
 object was, to lay waste the religious Society of A. S. 
 Friends. To this they made no reply. They were 
 plainly told that A. S. Friends felt called upon to watch 
 upon the walls of their Zion, and to guard against the 
 encroachments of the enemy ; and they were requested to 
 allow them the same privilege that Paul had, that is, to 
 answer for themselves, 
 
 "To this the committee partially consented. 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 345 
 
 "The Address was then read. After which the com- 
 mittee made some remarks, censuring A. S. Friends, and 
 justifying their opposers. 
 
 "They were repeatedly asked, if they had investigated 
 the difficulty between us and those we had left. To 
 which they gave no answer. But when they w T ere told 
 how one-sided they were in giving judgment before 
 hearing both parties ; they said they knew nothing of the 
 cause of separation, and they had no privilege from their 
 Yearly Meeting to investigate the difference between us ; 
 and they did not come here to discuss the matter, but 
 were messengers to expostulate with us. 
 
 "They were then replied to in regard to their great 
 mission, as being messengers of the Lord ; and told of 
 their inconsistency, by alluding to their standing in re- 
 gard to the Anti-Slavery cause in England, and the 
 different course they took in America ; how they had 
 advised us, heretofore, to join with our fellow-countrymen 
 in this great work, and how they now advised us to 
 return to that body which had rejected that advice and 
 proscribed us for following it. One of the committee 
 then said he wished to give some explanation in regard 
 to the allusion that had been made to their being messen- 
 gers of the Lord. He said they did not say, nor had they 
 said, they were messengers of the Lord ; they w T ere only 
 messengers qf London Yearly Meeting (in this he said 
 truly), and came here to carry the message from that 
 meeting. 
 
 "They contended that the different Yearly Meetings in 
 America bore a faithful and consistent testimony against 
 Slavery. They were then asked, if they believed the 
 Society of Friends in America, faithfully and consistently 
 bore a testimony in favor of the Anti-Slavery cause in this 
 country. To which George Stacey replied, that he was 
 not fully acquainted with the character of the Anti-Slavery 
 enterprise in this country ; it might be possible that it 
 consisted of those icho were infidels ; and if so, they in 
 England w r ould advise against joining with such associa- 
 tions. He was then asked, if he knew whether the Anti- 
 
346 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION Itf 
 
 • Slavery associations in England, were clear of all those 
 who hold unsound principles ? To which he made no 
 reply. They were then told, that Hi might be possible* 
 there were some, both in Europe and America, engaged 
 in the Anti-Slavery cause, who were not sound in prin- 
 ciple ; and that it was quite as possible, there were some 
 in the Society of Friends, who were not sound in principle. 
 To all of which they made no reply. 
 
 "Various questions were put to them, and among others, 
 whether it was consistent with our testimony against Sla- 
 very, for Friends to vote for slaveholders ? Which they 
 refused to answer, though they were solicited to do so. 
 They were then referred to the example of George Fox ; 
 how he answered all civil questions, investigated things, 
 and never gave judgment without hearing both sides, etc. 
 
 " Toward the conclusion, a friend proposed asking 
 them a few more questions. One of them rose and said, 
 they should decline answering them. The questions, 
 however, were put as follows : 
 
 "1st. Do you know whether there is any difference 
 between the Body Friends, and Anti-Slavery Friends ? 
 
 "2d. Do you know whether the charges made by the 
 old Yearly Meeting against A. S. Friends, are true or not? 
 
 "3d. Do you know whether the charges made by A. S. 
 Friends against the old Yearly Meeting, are true or not ? 
 
 "4th. Is it the duty of a Christian, when there are two 
 parties, to ask one of them to submit to the other, without 
 an investigation, to see which is in the wrong ? 
 
 "5th. Would it be right to ask others to do anything, 
 without giving all explanations, and answering all ques- 
 tions, so far as is in their power to give or answer, 
 relating thereto %V- 
 
 But they were as good as their word, they made no 
 reply to the questions. 
 
INDIANA YEAELY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 347 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 English Committee at Newport — A Response to the Address carried 
 round by that Committee. 
 
 To read the Address and urge submission to its advice, 
 seemed to be the sole business of the committee, and it 
 was hard work to divert them in the least from it. 
 
 At Newport, however, they were induced to enter into 
 some little discussion, and make some admissions relative 
 to their connection with the British and Foreign Anti- 
 Slavery Society, and Anti- Slavery Friends pretty fully 
 exposed their position and their course. 
 
 At the conclusion of the conference, the committee 
 were asked, if they would carry back to their Yearly 
 Meeting a response to the Address they had been carry- 
 ing round to Anti-Slavery Friends ? to which, they 
 replied, they could see no propriety in sending such a 
 communication, and refused to take one. 
 
 The following, however, was issued by the Meeting 
 for Sufferings, and sent in another way : 
 
 " To the Yearly Meeting of London; to the Quarterly 
 and Monthly Meetings constituting the same, and to 
 the members thereof individually. 
 
 " Dear Friends: — 
 
 " In the fear of the Lord, and under a solemn sense 
 of the obligation resting upon us, to stand for the defense 
 of the Truth, at the same time being sensible of our own 
 weakness and insufficiency as men and creatures, but in 
 humble reliance on the unfailing arm of the Shepherd of 
 Israel, we believe it right at this time to address you, 
 although you have heretofore refused to give our com- 
 munications a hearing in your Yearly Meeting. Our ob- 
 ject is not now to solicit the customary correspondence 
 between Yearly Meetings, for this your previous course, 
 both in the capacity of a Yearly Meeting and Meeting 
 for Sufferings forbids us to expect ; and indeed, unless 
 
348 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 we could see in the action of those meetings, relative to 
 the unhappy difficulty among Friends in this country, 
 arising from the opposition of the ? body,' to the A. S. 
 action of some of its members, more regard for consist- 
 ency and truth, than for the forms of order — more con- 
 cern for the promotion of the great cause of justice and 
 mercy, than for the preservation of the external bonds of 
 union, such a correspondence is, perhaps, as undesirable 
 to us as it is to you. Still, as your Yearly Meeting has 
 thought fit to issue an Address to us — though still refus- 
 ing to recognize us as brethren — advising us to discon- 
 tinue our meetings for worship, and to attend those of 
 the ' body,' and has sent over a deputation to present the 
 Address, and to urge a compliance with the advice ; we 
 believe ourselves called upon, even by a regard for com- 
 mon courtesy, and a decent respect for civility, as well 
 as justice to ourselves, to the Truth which we advocate, 
 and for the information of all concerned, to make a brief 
 reply to the Address, in a respectful manner, and with 
 feelings of due regard, declining to comply with the Ad- 
 vice. And while we believe ourselves thus bound to 
 submit to your consideration some of the reasons which 
 impel us to this course, we think we have a just claim to 
 a patient and impartial hearing before that body from 
 which the Advice issued. 
 
 " We do not desire now to rehearse the particulars of 
 the difficulty which resulted in the establishment of our 
 Yearly Meeting. The most important facts have been 
 presented to your Yearly Meeting, which it has refused 
 to hear, choosing to make up a judgment in our case 
 merely from the statements of our opposers, and from the 
 simple fact, that we had set up separate and independent 
 meetings. Thus, by refusing to inquire into, or even 
 hear our reasons for the measure, and at the same time 
 virtually passing sentence of condemnation upon us, by 
 refusing to correspond with us, and advising us to dis- 
 continue our meetings ; your Yearly Meeting has practi- 
 cally recognized (however you may discard it in theory), 
 the doctrine of the infallibility of the Church, or else 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS. 349 
 
 that equally absurd and dangerous position, that, no 
 matter how corrupt and oppressive the Church may be- 
 come, those members who desire to have it otherwise, 
 are bound to submit to the corrupt and anti-christian 
 measures of the dominant party, to preserve the external 
 forms of order and the appearance of harmony, We 
 believe there is no possibility of escape from this dilem- 
 ma, for a departure from the usual order in the establish- 
 ment of meetings, instead of the merits of the contro- 
 versy, is made the grounds of the judgment of your 
 Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " This doctrine of implicit, unconditional, and unqua- 
 lified submission to the powers that be, in religious So- 
 ciety, which is so prevalent among Friends, both in this 
 country and in England, is a most conclusive evidence 
 of a lamentable defection from first principles. All ec- 
 clesiastical history testifies to the fact, that in proportion 
 to the corruptions of the Church, have been its claims to 
 infallibility, and to a blind submission to the decrees of 
 its dignitaries. 
 
 " To assume that the references which your Yearly 
 Meeting have made to passages of Scripture, to enforce 
 the duty of submission to one another, are applicable in 
 the present case, is to take for granted the very thing in 
 controversy, that is, that the requirements of Indiana 
 Yearly Meeting were in accordance with truth, and 
 which London Yearly Meeting has refused to investigate. 
 That it is our duty to submit ourselves one to another in 
 love, in the truth, and in the fear of God, we freely ad- 
 mit; but not in error and in the fear of man; for the 
 fear of man bringeth a snare. 
 
 " The exhortation, to submit ourselves one to another 
 in love, no more requires a surrender of our own con- 
 sciences into the keeping of the rulers of the church, 
 than the requirement to be subject to the powers that be, 
 puts us under an obligation to surrender them to the 
 wicked rulers of the State. It is all a perversion, and so 
 far as the doctrine in question has obtained a hold among 
 those with whom we were formerly associated, we feel 
 
 16 
 
3S0 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN 
 
 bound to say to our London Friends, that they are mis- 
 taken in supposing, that on fundamental doctrine there 
 is no essential difference between us. We regard the 
 doctrine of individual responsibility and accountability 
 to be one of vital importance, and that the difference be- 
 tween us and those who contend for implicit obedience 
 to the mandates of the Church, however contrary they 
 may be to our conscientious convictions of duty, is essen- 
 tial ; and we can have no fellowship with the sentiment 
 repeatedly put forth by members of the London deputa- 
 tion, that no conceivable circumstances can justify a 
 separation from the £ body.' 
 
 " But independently of the foregoing considerations, 
 there are other circumstances which dictate to us the pro- 
 priety of declining a compliance with the advice. We 
 would briefly state that in pursuing the course which 
 brought upon us the displeasure of our fellow-members, 
 and placed us under the necessity of occupying our pres- 
 ent position, we were greatly encouraged by the example 
 of our English brethren, and by the advice of your 
 Yearly Meeting, in 1830, to unite with our fellow-coun- 
 trymen in the promotion of this and other benevolent en- 
 terprises. This advice we were very ready to comply 
 with, not because of your word, but because we heard and 
 felt for ourselves that it was in accordance with the dic- 
 tates of Truth. And now, we can not see the propriety 
 of giving up our own views of required duty, in conse- 
 quence of your recent advice ; neither can we see the 
 justice of your course in virtually censuring us for imita- 
 ting your example, and following your advice, while you 
 cling to and effectually justify those who have rejected 
 that advice, and presented a most formidable opposition 
 to the advancement of the Anti-Slavery enterprise, No 
 religious society, in this country, we confidently believe, 
 has exerted a greater influence adverse to its advance- 
 ment than the Society of Friends. Its former Anti-Sla- 
 very character, and the fact of its being clear of slave- 
 holding, gave it the power of exerting a greater influence 
 for or against the cause, than any other society of equal 
 
INDIANA YEARLY MEETING OF FKIENDS. 351 
 
 numbers; and that influence, as is well known, Las been 
 exerted, either by manifesting an apathy of feeling toward 
 it, or by active opposition to it and to those who are la- 
 boring therein. But we forbear to enlarge upon this 
 topic ; and dismiss it with the observation, that the con- 
 duct of London Yearly Meeting and of its deputation is 
 calculated to uphold the Friends in this country in their 
 opposition to the labors of the Abolitionists, in adhering 
 to a Pro-Slavery political party, and in voting for slave- 
 holders. We cannot consent to act in accordance with 
 the advice contained in the Address and urged by the 
 committee, because it would be a surrender of our just 
 rights ; and it would be to deprive ourselves of the ines- 
 timable privileges which we now enjoy of religious fel- 
 lowship with one another in the bonds of gospel unity. 
 
 " We cannot comply with the advice, because it would 
 be a virtual acknowledgment that our Anti-Slavery prin- 
 ciples and views were all wrong, and must lead to an 
 abandonment of them ; which would, as we conceive, 
 work infinite damage to the blessed cause, by operating 
 as a discouragement to our fellow-laborers. 
 
 u And, finally, we cannot comply with the advice, be- 
 cause we believe it would bring disgrace upon the Chris- 
 tian name, by giving an additional evidence that the 
 4 American Churches are the bulwarks of American 
 Slavery. 5 
 
 " We wish to say, before we conclude, that we fully 
 believe there are many members of London Yearly Meet- 
 ing, who deeply sympathize with us, who have no unity 
 with the attempt to destroy our religious society, and who 
 did not fully understand the course of labor prescribed for 
 the committee by the Yearly Meeting, as they themselves 
 explain it. This opinion is confirmed by the frequent ex- 
 pression by some of our truly sympathizing Friends of a 
 hope that a proper reconciliation would be effected by the 
 labors of the deputation. This hope they could not have 
 entertained had they understood that no other attempt 
 was to be made than to annihilate our religious society, 
 and to justify the proceedings of our opposers. 
 
352 HISTORY OF THE SEPARATION IN INDIANA. 
 
 " To those of your Friends, who have some just con- 
 ceptions of the true state of the case, we beg leave to say, 
 the responsibility that rests upon you is great, and we j 
 pray that you may be enabled faithfully to discharge 
 your duty in the sight of God. 
 
 " Unless we shall become convinced that Slavery is not ] 
 that great evil which we have long believed it to be, we 
 should consider ourselves traitors to the cause of Truth, 
 which we believe ourselves called to advocate, were we 
 to accede to the advice of your Yearly Meeting and its 
 committee. And should the labors of that committee 
 prove effectual in the accomplishment of their designs, 
 we have no doubt but the damage done to the Anti-Sla- 
 very cause would be incalculable. But, thanks be to 
 Him, who controls the elements, we believe their course 
 has had a powerful tendency to strengthen the minds of 
 Anti-Slavery Friends generally, in the confidence of the 
 rectitude of our position. 
 
 "And now, in coming to a conclusion, permit us to 
 state, that with our present convictions of duty, we can 
 not look towards a re-union with those whom we have 
 left, upon any other terms than a total recantation of all 
 their proscriptive measures, and an unconditional restora- 
 tion to all the rights and privileges which we formerly 
 enjoyed in the Society, with unrestrained liberty to pur- 
 sue our Anti-Slavery labors according to the dictates of 
 our own consciences ; being responsible to the Church 
 only for violations of the Discipline. We shall rejoice 
 to hail such a proposition, made in good faith, and upon 
 a thorough conviction of its propriety, by our Friends of 
 Indiana Yearly Meeting. 
 
 " Signed by direction and on behalf of the Meeting for 
 Sufferings of Indiana Yearly Meeting of Anti-Slavery 
 Friends, held Second month 28th, 1846. 
 
 "Benjamin Stanton, Clerk" 
 
 the end, 
 
Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
 Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 Treatment Date: April 2006 
 
 PreservationTechnologies 
 
 A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVA1 
 
 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
 Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
 (724) 779-21 1 1