QUAKERS IN NEW ENGLAND
AN ESSAY,
BY
RICHARD P. HALLOWELL.
(PUBLISHED BY REQUEST.)
PHILADELPHIA:
ME RR I I E W & SON P R INTE l
243 Arch Street.
id t~9                   1870.








THE
QUAKERS IN NEW ENGLAND
AN ESSAY,
BY
1RIOCHARD P. H-IALLOWELL,
(PUBLISHED BY REQUEST.)
PHILADELPHIA:
MSERRIHEW & SON, PRINTERS,
243 Arch Street,
1870.








PREFACEE
This essay was printed in the July and September numbers of
"Old and New," a deservedly popular magazine published at Boston.
At the request of many friends I have consented to its publication in
pamphlet form, and have added an Appendix containing some of the
laws of the Puritans, and other matter not heretofore accessible to the
general reader.
West I'edford, Mass., Sept. 11th, 1870.








THE QUAKERS IN NEW ENGLAND.
Our popular historians agree substantially in their version of the
conflict between our Puritan legislators and the Quakers. A complete vindication of the conduct of the Puritans is nowhere attempted;
apology is substituted for defence, and palliation for acquittal, and
these are enforced by a vigorous denunciation of the Quakers.
This method of treatment is well illustrated in an exhaustive lecture
upon the subject, delivered last winter by Dr. Geo. E. Ellis, and subsequently published by the Massachusetts Historical Society.* Dr.
Ellis, with more knowledge and a greater show of fairness than other
writers, praises the Quakers almost extravagantly, when he deals
with them separately, or without regard to their special relations to
the founders of the colony.  He thinks " they were the advanced
pleaders for a liberty which is now our life;" that they were "not
only led, but really inspired," to come here, by a" " high and pure
motive;" and " without doubt much of their terrible abusiveness of
language was wholly free from malice and any ill intention, but was
prompted wholly from an honest and severely righteous sense of the
errors and superstitions which they assailed."  Here we have the
estimate of the historian; but, unfortunately, he deems it incumbent
upon him " to relieve the burden of wanton and ruthless cruelty cast
upon our legislators;" and straightway the Quaker pleader for liberty
becomes a "meddler with other people's consciences," and his high
and pure motive degenerates into an "aimless spirit of annoyance."
Dr. Ellis's lecture is an able exposition of the positions commonly
assumed by the champions of the Puritans; and I cannot do better
than to let him state for me such of them as I shall attempt to show
are at variance with the plain facts of history.  He says, "Our
fathers cared little, if at all, for the Quaker theology. They did not
get so far as that in dealing with them.  Our fathers dealt with them
* Massachusetts and its Early History, pp. 7'7-126.




on the score of their manners, their lawlessness, and their offensive
speech and behavior."
Now, it is true, that what is called the offensive speech and behavior
of the Quakers was a feature of the contest; but I believe I can
show that the Quaker theology is precisely that which the Government of New England most violently opposed; and that their fear of
it was the primary cause of the dreadful persecution which followed
the advent of the Quakers.
Before the first Quaker set foot upon Massachusetts soil, a Fast
Day had been appointed by the Court, "to seek the face of God in
behalf of our native country, in reference to the abounding of errors,
especially those of Ranters and Quakers."*
A few weeks later, a vessel arrived in Boston harbor, bringing Ann
Austin and Mary Fisher, the first Quakers who came to Massachusetts. They were at once conveyed from the vessel to the jail, where
they were detained in close confinement until they could be sent away.
Their books were confiscated and burned.  This event occurred in the
early part of the year 1656.
Hardly were th'ese women banished, before another vessel arrived
with eight Quakers on board.  Guiltless of crime or offence, these
people were arrested and thrown into jail; and, while they were
there, a law was enacted (Oct. 14, 1656) with a view of meeting their
case. This law was passed before the Quakers had an opportunity
to manifest their "lawlessness," and practically before a single one
of them appeared in the Puritan community.
The terms of this and every succeeding statute touching the subject
clearly indicate that they were inspired by a dread of the Quaker
heresies.  They speak of the " cursed heretics," their " blasphemous
opinions," their denial of "all established forms of worship," and
their withdrawal from " church assemblies, allowed and approved by
all Orthodox professors."t
A petition signed by some of the citizens of Boston, calling for
additional legislation against the Quakers, complains of " their denial
of the Trinity,...    of the person of Christ,
of the Scriptures as a rule of life."t
* Massachusetts Records, vol. iv, p. 270.
t See Appendix.
I Miscel. Papers in the State House, Boston.




At a later date, Cotton Mather, in his apology for these inhuman
laws, truthfully reveals their inspiration.  He enumerates the offences
of the Quakers, such as " denying the Scriptures,
denying the doctrine of the Trinity,...    disbelieving
in the second coming of Christ in person,...    rejecting ordinances, such as baptism, and bread and wine,
asserting that every day is the Lord's day, and advocating silent
prayer."  IHe says, " In Quakerism, the sink of all heresies, we see
the vomit cast out in the by-past ages by whole kennels of seducers,
licked up again for a new digestion.":
In 1658, John Norton was appointed by the Court to write a
treatise against the doctrines of Quakers, and received a grant of
land in remuneration.
The Court at Plymouth went so far as to authorize four men to
attend Quaker meetings, " to endeavor to reduce them from the error
of their ways."t  Public debates were arranged for the purpose; and
it is worthy of especial note, that some of the champions thus conmmissioned were not only out-argued, but, to the infinite horror of
their friends, were converted to Quakerism, and joined these persecuted people.S
Of all the popular notions regarding the Puritans, none are less
warranted by history than that which credits them  with a love or
regard for religious liberty.  Whatever their virtues in other directions, in matters of religion they were dogmatic, bigoted, and intolerant.  Their fanaticism was unbounded; and, in opposition to the
prevalent theory, that Puritan fanaticism, as manifested in the persecution of the Quakers, was developed by Quaker extravagances, I
think it can be shown that Quaker fanaticism  was largely due to
Puritan persecution. The laws already mentioned are evidence of
the correctness of this view; and an investigation into the causes of
the arrests and trials of the Quakers will confirm it.  If they were
arrested as "intrusive, pestering, indecent, and railing disturbers,"
to quote Dr. Ellis, the records will prove it.
What do they prove? 1 have already shown that they were imprisoned upon arrival, and that the first law against them was enacted
while they were illegally confined, and before they had committed
* Could the Quaker " abusiveness of language " exceed this?
t Baylie's Mem. Plym. Col., p. 40.
X Salvi's Hist. of America, vol. ii, p. 135.




any offence whatever. As soon as they arrived, they were maltreated,
and others followed only to receive still harsher treatment.  They
were goaded on to acts of defiance, and some of them were frenzied
by the horrible and inhuman torture inflicted upon them. Women
were tied to carts, and publicly whipped; the bodies of men were
mutilated; they were robbed of their possessions, their meetings were
dispersed, and they were hunted down as wild beasts. Hatred and
fear of Quakerism not only inspired the laws, but prompted these.
atrocious deeds of the Puritans.
In the Plymouth-Colony Records, we read that a certain Quaker
was " found to be a man of turbulent spirit, and forward to abuse,
men with his tongue." He was publicly whipped. Two women suf:fered the same punishment " for disturbances made by them in thepublic worship of God on the Lord's Day at Sandwich, by opposing:
and abusing the speaker amongst them." These cases are, however,
comparatively rare; and it is more common to find that men and
women were punished for attending Quaker meetings, for non-attendance at the Orthodox Church, for going from one place to another
contrary to law, for being guilty of " divers horrid errors," for harboring Quakers, for confessing themselves to be Quakers, for denouncing the popular theology, for refusing to take the oath, for returning,
to the colony after banishment.
At one sitting, the Court fined eight of them for refusing to takes
the oath, which, we must remember, was proposed to them for the:
purpose of imposing the fine. At this sitting, twenty-four were fined,
for attending a Quaker meeting. At another time, seven Quakers
were charged with " tumultuous carriage " at a meeting; and, beingacquitted, the Court fined them forty shillings apiece for not removing their hats.
While examining the unpublished manuscript on file at the State
House, I was attracted by some hieroglyphics indexed, "Minutes
of the Magistrates," and headed, "The-Exam. of Quakers at ye
Court of Assistant's in Boston."
These minutes refer almost exclusively to the religious or theological opinions entertained and expressed by the prisoners; and in no
single instance is it stated or implied that an arrest was made for
any other cause. I reproduce them as evidence of the charactei of the
charges brought against the Quakers, and of the offences for which.,
they were arrested and punished.




9
Joseph Nicholson sayth ye law agSt Quakers is a wicked law, & not
of God.
His wife denyes ye law as not of God.
W. Christophson sayth as a witness for God & his law he stands
agst yoi & yor law, & yt ye law agst ye quakers is agSt ye law of God
and is a corrupt law neither pure nor holy, seeking for bloud; &
Christ fulfilled ye law well appoint murderers to be put to death.
Sayth he saw ye law before he came at M, & he came for a testimony ag"t this cruelty; & the God of order y6 know not. In ye name
& feare of God I am come.
J. N. sayth ye God yt made Heavern & Earth is not yor God.
W. C. sayth the true God yt made heaven & earth we know & owne.
Math. Stanly sayth sthe bears witnes agst ye law, for Xt came not
to kill but to save.
Win. King sayth he is warned of God not to goe, & yt he will stay,
tho banished.
W. Christoph. sayth that he owned ye scripture to be a true declaraccon, but not ye mind of God, & sayth that we know not ye word of
God, & yt not one man here can prove ye scripture to be ye word of
God.  Sayth they are ye words of God, but not ye word; he sayth w'
he sayth is truth according to Scripture, & yt he stands here a witnes
for God.
Margarett Smith sayth she denies ye law, & stands as a witnes agst
ye same.
Benj. Bulflower sayeth he hath fulfilled ye law of God, & done all
yt it requires.
Nich. JnO Endecutt. I stand as an evidence agst ye thou knowest
not ye powr of God, & yt wwel thou callest heresie in me shall stand
for ev. higher than thee, although as high as ye Pope.
The exam. of Quakers at ye C6ourt of Assistants in Boston.
Joseph Nicholson, Jane his wife, and WainslockeChristophersonne.
Christopher sayth he owns ye Scripture to be a true declaracon of
Xt & be true words; he saith ye.mind of God man must know as they
did weh gave forth ye Scriptures; Xt is ye rule for evrie one to
walk by.
Xt is ye word.




the letter kills; ye Spirit giveth life.
I have not put ye Scripture in ye roome of Xt.
Nichols to ye Govr: thou errest, not knowing ye Scripture nor ye
powr of God, thou art not come to yt well gave forth ye Scriptures.
God heareth us, all th. is but jangling.
Christ.  Xt sayth sweare not at all, love yr enemies,. he yt swears
is out of ye Doctrine of Xt.
Nicholson.  you er from ye Scripture in keeping ye 1st day instead
of ye Sabbath.  Wee owne ministers of ye word, but not of ye letter.
they yt take titles were nevr sent of God.
that Xt in whom I believe is a Spirit. a savior to ye Mii~or Denis:
thou nev heardest by voice.  hlearlen to ye voyce of Xt w"lin.:yt will shew the thy sins.
Christoph.  he hath a body.  one body, & one spiritt.  & no other
but wt is meant in yt place Preaching. reading. singing. done by yt
Spirit of ye Lord we owne.  All other is an abominacon.
Christoph. in obedience to ye Lord we come hither.
Nicholson.  Wee owne quakering to be of God, and wee owne
quakers whom you so call to be children of God & to be of ym they
call quakers.
Christopher & Jane also answered Each of yf for thems. that they
were of them they called Quakers.
The Jury was called over to y'n all, & libty given to yi' all to chal.
lenge any of y'n off ye Bench.
Major Hawthorne at Dinnr wtl ye Govr & maiestrates at a court of
assistants, said that at Salem yr was a woman  called Consader
Southleck, yt said shee was greater y"l Moses, for Moses had seen God
but twice & his backe parts, & shee had seen him 3 times face to face,
instancing the place (i. e.) her old House one time, & by such a
swamp another time.
Also he said a woman of Lin being at yt meeting w Wim Robinson
was yr who pressed much ye seeking for ye powr wthin.  shee asked
him  How shee should come to feele ye powr wtlin.  Hle told her yt
shee must cast of all attendance to ordinances, as publike p"ching,
prayr, reading ye Scripture, & attending to times of Gods worP, and
then wayte for the communicaccon of ye powr wthn.
and He added yt Hee yt will do so, it will not be long, but ye Devill
will appeare, either more explicitely, or at least implicitely to comuneca t c his —




Chambline. sayth yt he find not ye opinion of ye Quakers to be
cursed, but yt wch shall stand when all yor' shall fall.
Wm King sayth he own ye Scripture to be a true declaraccon of ye
word of God.
Mary Trask. & Smith & Martha Stanly. in a contemptuous & seditions mann. began & continued to speak. to ye disturbance of
Court. so yt ye Court was forced to charge ye Jailor to eary y" out of
ye Court.
Wnm King sayth I am sure God doth & will plead ow' cause.
fronm Redding.
Benj. Bulflower came into Court wth his hat cockt: remaineing on
his head. & refusing to pull it of w comanded. & said he could justifie
his accon by ye Scripture.  Alleading for his prooffe yt Scripture. yt
God threatned his people yt for yr sin he would bring a nation aget
ym yt would not Honr ye person of ye old man.
being examined in Court,
Asserted. yt after ye Dissoluccon of ye Body & soule. ye body
should nev be united to ye soule more. yt ye first day of ye weeke was
not ye sabboath but ye last day of ye weeke. ye 7th day.
Martha Stanly. late of tenterdon in Kent. & a single woman.
Saith she had a message from ye Lord. to vissitt her freinds in
prison at Boston.  her message was to turn people from darknes to
light to ye virtues wthlin: in her measure she hath spoaken ye same. &
shall go on to ye laying down her life.
Saith wee meet wth many yt tell us we must sin whiles we live.
as any keep to ye light made manifest in conscience they sin not.
Sayth I acknowledge my selfs to be one of yim whom ye world in
scorne call quakers.
Jn~ Chambline of Boston came into Court wt'h his ]att on.
from Salem.
Wm King wtl his Hatt on & Mary Trask & Mary Smith came into
Court.
owned yt they were at a meeting at Whartons on ye Sabboath day. &
yt they were such as ye world called Quakers.  this all of ym pticularly
owned.
WimI King sayth Wharton was not at home w they werb there-and
I am sure We have obeyed ye voyce of God in wt we have done & God
sayth wo. be to ym pastors yt destroy ye flock of Xt.




12
After persecution of the Quakers for their religion ceased, we
search the records in vain for instances of arrest or imprisonment.
When they were treated as human beings, when their rights were
recognized, they were esteemed good citizens, and were respected for
their piety and integrity.
The fanaticism of New England Quakers has been so long taken
for granted, that a mere reference to these people is suggestive of
violence, indecency, and rant; but that it is over-estimated and exaggerated is evident from all the reliable information we have upon
the subject.  The custom is to judge the entire body of Quakers by
the action of a few exceptional cases; and we are gravely asked to
believe that Mary Dyer was hung in Boston because Lydia Wardwell
appeared in the town of Newburv without her garments. The fact
that this event occurred after the execution of Mary Dyer is of trifling importance to the zealous defenders of the Founders.
In the jail, at the whipping-post, aud on the scaffold, these heroic
people displayed a fortitude worthy the cause for which they suffered,
-the cause of religious liberty.  Their lives were pure and spotless:
no one has yet been able to stain their memory with dishonesty, or
immorality of any kind. Strong in the faith that they were doing
God service in struggling for their rights, they would have been less
than human had they not uttered their righteous indignation, and denounced their persecutors.
To us the act of Lydia Wardwell is evidence of insanity.  She was
a modest woman, and, strange as it appears, performed the act complained of under a sense of religious duty.  She meant it for a " sign"
unto those who had stripped women to whip them.  The authorities
had caused women to be driven through the streets, bared to their
waists, and to be flogged as they dragged themselves along. They
had ordered Ann Austin andl Mary Fisher to be stripped naked, and
examined for witch-marks.  Lydia Wardwell's act was one of highlywrought, shocking fanaticism. Was the act of the Founders mere
" comedy,"* as it has been called? or was it a deed of wretched fanaticism, more to be censured than its counterpart, because cruel and
diabolical?
In extravagance of language the Puritans at least rivalled their
victims: in fanaticism of action the difference is more apparent; for,
* Ellis.




while the intensity of feeling may have been equal, in the one case it
was signalized by acts of cruelty, and in the other by lofty indifference and a sublime heroism.
During her imprisonment, Mary Dyer addressed a letter to the
"General Court at Boston," of which the following is an extract.  I
offer it as a fitting illustration of the temper and spirit in which the
Quakers confronted their persecutors:" And have you no other weapons to fight with against spiritual wickedness,
as you call it? Search with the light of Christ in you, and it will show you of
whom you take counsel.              It is not my own life I seek, but the
life of the seed which,,,know the Lord hath blessed. And I know this: that,
if you confirm your law, the Lord will overthrow both your law and you, by his
righteous judgments and plagues poured justly upon you. In love, and in the
spirit of meekness, I again beseech you, for I have no enmity to the persons of
any; but you shall know that God will not be mocked."
In studying the history of a people or a sect, if we aim at an impartial estimate of their character and their value to posterity, we
must regard them from their own point of view, test them in the light
of their own generation, and judge them by the requirements of our
present civilization.
The sincerity of both the Founders and the Quakers I think has
never been seriously questioned. The Founders scouted the possibility of Divine revelation beyond the limits of the Bible.  Their
Christianity was Judaism full blown. Believing implicitly in a theocracy, they attempted to administer a civil government by statutes
derived mainly from the Old Testament. The Quakers, with courageous fidelity, asserted that the soul of man is still accessible to God,
and claimed religious liberty to be the natural right of all men. A
conflict between these radically different ideas was inevitable. The
Puritans invited the conflict. They were the aggressors. As early
as 1654 they challenged the Quakers by enacting a law forbidding
the importation of their books. Again, in 1656, they threw down
the gauntlet by prohibiting the intrusion of a Quaker upon their soil.
I shall not stop to examine the value of their claim to absolute
jurisdiction, and, as a consequence to the right to enact this prohibitory law.  We are examining the case from  the respective standpoints of the contending parties; and it is sufficient to know that they
sincerely claimed such right. It is sufficient, also, to know that the
Quakers as sincerely denied it.  They had "' heard that New England
had made a law to put the servants of the living God to death;" and,




14
braving the perils of the sea, they sought out this land, where religious
liberty was crucified, where the " servants of the Lord " were forbidden to serve him.  It was a divine mission that brought them  here.
We are told " they had no rights or business here; and a simple prohibition ought to have been sufficient even to release their consciences
from all obligation to meddle with other people's consciences."*  A
simple prohibition, a significant hint from the pews, may satisfy the
consciences of a " hireling ministry," of men who deal in the gospel
as a profession, receiving as their reward the money-value of their
speech; but for "'the servants of the living God" prohibitions,
threats, and persecution had no terrors; their alswer was the answer
ever given by ministers ordained of Heaven:  "Whether it be right
in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge
ye."  It is asserted, too, that they courted persecution.  Yes, as
their Master Jesus Christ before them; as the thousands and tens of
thousands of victims to religious despotism who preceded them; as, in
our own day, Elijah P. Lovejoy, Garrison, Wendell Philips, and that
grand old Puritan John Brown,-as these soldiers in the army of the
Lord courted persecution, so did the New-England Quakers.  Under
the law of England, as English subjects, they claimed the right to
come here; and under that Higher Law which bade them  call the
world their country, and all mankind their countrymen, they claimed
the right to live in old England or in New England, as they saw fit.
Their business here was " to meddle with other people's consciences."
They took up the gauntlet of the Puritan, and accepted his challenge.
Equal to their enemy in sincerity, in integrity of purpose, in devotion to their idea, they possessed the advantage of being in the right.
They resolved to establish- in Massachusetts the right of every man
to worship God, not according to old John Norton's conscience, but
each according to the dictates of his own conscience.
Without organization, without any especial co-operation, rejecting
the use of carnal weapons, and " relying solely upon those which are
spiritual and mighty through God, to the pulling down of strongholds," they attacked the Puritan Bastile. There could be but one
issue to such a contest. The Quakers triumphed, and despotism was
vanquished.
The methods of the two people were in as marked contrast as their
* Ellis.




15
opinions. An illustration will suffice to indicate the difference. The
Puritans attempted to civilize and to convert the Indians. As one
measure to this end, they provided by law, that " if any woman shall
wear her hair cut like a man's, or hanging loose, she shall pay five
shillings. All men who wear long locks shall be fined the same
sum."* For a considerable length of time after he became a Quaker,
William Penn continued to wear his sword. Experiencing a feeling
of unea -/ness about it, he consulted George Fox. Fox said, " Friend
William, wear it as long as thou canst."  Subsequently they met
again; and Fox, perceiving that Penn had no sword, said to him,
"William, where is thy sword?"-" Oh!" said he, " I have taken
thy advice.  I wore it as long as I could."  The Puritan's was the
method of coercion, the Quaker's the method of conviction.
A: I have before observed, the New-England Quakers and the
Founders were justified in their relations to and treatment of each
other from their respective stand-points; for they were faithful to
their highest idea: but, judged by the light of their generation, it is
not so easy to justify the Fcunders.  The theory that the public
sentiment of their day was undivided is hardly sustained by history.
The contest over the law banishing Quakers under pain of death
was sharp and severe.  The law was passed by a majority of one vote
only.  On one occasion, public indignation at the barbarous treatment of William  Brend was so great, that, to prevent a tumult, the
authorities caused a report to be circulated that the jailer should be
dealt with at the next court.  It is worthy of note, that John Norton,
thechamupion of the Puritan religion, voluntarily defended this inhuman jailer. When William Robinson and Marmaduke Stevenson
were executed, they were guarded by Capt. Oliver with a company
of soldiers "completely armed."  Thirty-six soldiers were posted as
sentinels about the town, 1" to preserve the peace."  The selectmen
of Boston were " required and empowered to presse ten or twelve able
and faithfullpersons every night during the sitting of this Court, to
watch with great care the toune, especially the prison." Mr. Ellis,
commenting upon this event, says they were " well aware that a protesting and indignant spirit, widely working among the citizens, was
ready to manifest itself in a threatening way." To pacify the people,
two declarations were drawn up and published, defending the acts of
*  Wynne's History of America, p. 76.




16
the judges against the " clamorous accusation of severity," and arguing the justice of their extreme proceedings.*
As early as 1635, Roger Williams, then an elder of the church at
Salem, was driven out of the colony, because he "broached and divulged divers new and dangerous opinions against the authority of
the magistrates," and " writ letters of defamation both of the magistrates and churches."  He was warmly endorsed by a large number
of adherents.  For putting him into office in violation of tt'lecree
of the magistrates, the Salem Church was denied a grant of lair from
that town.
The Antinomian controversy, led by Mrs. Ann Hutchinson, followed
the exile of Williams, developing a strong diversity of sentiment. At
one period, the Founders were fearful of losing their charter by the
interference of the Privy Council Commission.t
In 1646, some of the people, by a " Remonstrance and Petitic "
to the " General Court, protested against being " compelled by  ne
to support and attend religious ministrations."
About the year 1653, Sir Richard Saltonstall, who came here with
Winthrop, but subsequently returned to England, addressed to his
old associates a letter of " sharp rebuke," deprecating their " tyranny
and persecution," and imploring them "not to practice those courses
in a wilderness which you went so far to prevent."I
In 1657. the Commissioners of the United Colonies of New England (Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven) addressed the governor of Rhode Island, remonstrating against the
permission granted to Quakers to remain in that colony. The -'avernor laid the communication before the " Court of Trials;" and,liat
body, "acting in unison with the law of their colony," that "none
be accounted a delinquent for doctrine," resolved that no settler or
stranger within the limits of their jurisdiction " should be persecuted
for whatever opinions in religion he might either hold or teach."
This evidence that the intolerance and persecution of the Founders
were widely condemned by the public sentiment of their day is decisive. They were behind their own age; they refused to read the
signs of the times; and they set their faces like flint against the progressive spirit which everywhere inspired the people. Judged by the
light of their own generation, they are condemned: and strange indeed would it be if it were otherwise; for, living in the seventeenth
* See Appendix. t Ellis. i Hutchinson Papers, pp. 401-407.




17
century of the Christian era, they attempted to set up Moses as their
lawgiver.  Their creed was sternly Calvinistic and theologically
Christian; but in their hearts they held themselves answerable to the
old Hebrew law.
Judged by the same standard, the Quakers are not justified, only
because they were in advance of their age.  They represented the
best developed form of the Christian religion known to that century.
We I:i,,e low to apply the third test: How, in the light of our
preset'civilization, do the Founders of Massachusetts and their
Quaker victims stand?  Our historians and essayists apologize for
the Founders, but no one justifies them.  Unfortunately, most writers
have been inspired by the one desire to " relieve the burden of wanton
and ruthless cruelty cast upon them," rather than to reveal the truth
of 1 story. Their crafts invariably go to pieces on Plymouth Rock.
"N' must get ourselves as far away as possible from the atmosphere
of t~ is liberal Boston," say Mr. Ellis and the rest, when we judge
our Puritan Fathers; but we look in vain for this demand when the
Quakers are called to judgment.
Two hundred years have passed away, and yet not one prominent
descendant of the Puritans, Mr. Longfellow, perhaps, excepted, has
had the courage to try his ancestors and their victims by the same
law. Mr. Bancroft intended well; but either his courage failed, or
his pride of ancestry was too strong for him.
In spite of the determination to whitewash the Founders, and to
perpetuate their follies by abusing the Quakers, these writers are
foreo''o record the fact, that their forefathers failed and the Quakers
succeeded. Puritan despotism, at least in its grosser forms, is a
thing of the past.  Quaker freedom, liberty of conscience, the
Quakerism of Massachusetts in 1660, is the accepted gospel of the
old Bay State to-day. The theocracy of the Puritans-where is it?
The democracy of the Quakers-where is it not?  The stone which
the Founders rejected has become the head of the corner.
We may boast of the honesty and devotion of the forefathers, and,
glossing over their intolerance and fanaticism, point with just pride
to their stern morality; but the idea for which they lived, and by
which they asked to stand or fall, is repudiated by their children.
We may call the Quakers meddlers and intruders; we may give
prominence to the acts of Lydia Wardwell and Deborah Wilson; we
may laugh at the broken bottles of Thomas Newhouse, and sneer at




the sackcloth of Mary Brewster; preferring to judge the little army
of Quakers by these exceptional cases, and forgetting the purity of
their lives, the sublime heroism of their devotion, we may curse them
for a set of fanatics and madmen, but the truth remains, and will
prevail: the Quakers were the pioneers of religious liberty; their
thought, the idea for which they lived and suffered and died, is the
inspiration of our present civilization.
In making this attempt to indicate the true position of the Quakers
in the early history of Massachusetts, I have anticipated the course
of events.  They came here in 1656, several years after the rise of
Quakerism in England.  To understand their character, it is quite
necessary to revert to the founder of the society, George Fox.  He
was born in the year 1624, and died in 1690. Very early in life he
discovered a serious disposition, amounting almost to moroseness: he
was one of those unfortunate men who were never young. His boyhood was valuable to him only so far as it fitted him for manhood;
his manhood, only so far as it prepared him for another life. At the
age of nineteen, and for three continuous years, he experienced a
mental and spiritual conflict, which, from the intensity of its nature,
would have driven a weaker man to insanity. The wickedness and
folly of that age shocked and confounded him. To him, the pleasures
of life, whether in or out of harmony with human nature, were so
many vanities. Asceticism was his creed: he would be in the world,
but not of it. Educated in the Orthodox school of theology, he accepted the doctrine of total depravity in all its hideousness, and with
it the irresistible logic which demands a total repudiation of human
nature.  He separated himself from men; walking through lonely
fields, and creeping into hollow trees, he there sought to learn the
divine will.  At such times he made himself familiar with the Bible
accepting it as the only revealed word. He was a devout believer in
the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures.
Resorting to men for advice and consolation, he was thrown into
deeper gloom and despair.  He visited the pastors of many churches,
but found them all " miserable comforters."  One who was reputed
to be spiritually minded, was to him "like an empty, hollow cask."
Resuming his life of solitude and meditation, he began to see that the
paramount object of existence here is to get into a proper spiritual
relation with the Creator; and he saw that this is to be accomplished
only by the subjugation of all but our spiritual faculties.  He learned




1v
that the law of God is written upon the hearts of men; and that only
by listening to the voice of God in his own soul could he interpret
that law.  His mission was now revealed to him.  "I was commissioned," he says, " to turn people to that Inward Light, —even that
Divine Spirit which would lead men to all truth." Thus Quakerism
was born.
Jesus had in substance taught the same lesson. His followers,
down to Fox, had made the fatal mistake of going to him-practically
to him and the apostles alone-for spiritual guidance. Fox attempted
to restore primitive Christianity by calling upon men, not to forsake
Jesus, but to worship God.
This doctrine-of the Inward Light was the corner-stone of Quakerism. It inflicted a mortal wound on priestcraft. If God dwells in
the soul of man, he is a usurper who dares assume to be man's spiritual guide.  A mere scholastic education cannot qualify men for the
true ministry. As religion is from God, only such as are inspired by
him can teach religion. Church tithes, an ordained and paid ministry, were abominations in the sight of Fox. He found the kingdom
of heaven within him; and it was heathenish idolatry to worship
bricks and mortar by calling a church, or steeple-house as he termed
it, the house of God.
As the Bible was written by inspiration it can be understood only
by the aid of inspiration.  The revealed word is in itself nothing; it
is a sealed book until we know it by revelation.  " The letter killeth,
but the spirit giveth life." As Jesus was the Son of God, he could
only be known and taught by men who felt the spirit of Christ illuminatihg their souls and sanctifying their lives. Every word and
deed of Jesus and the apostles must be spiritualised. Baptism, bread
and wine, crucifixion, atonement, resurrection, were with Fox as signs
only, and of themselves were neither necessary nor valuable; they
were meaningless, except as applied to the spirit, or soul of man.
He declared all days, every hour, every moment of time, to be sacred,
as all came from the same divine hand; and, therefore, he denied the
peculiar sanctity of the sabbath ascribed to it by the people.
Under God, Jesus was his friend and teacher; and he had said,
"Swear not at all:" therefore, Fox would go to the stake rather
than take an oath. He rejected the use of carnal weapons, and denounced war as anti-Christ; he advocated the utmost simplicity in
dress and speech; music and the fine arts were vanities. He dis



20
couraged all amusements, as calculated to distract the mind, and lead
it from the contemplation of our spiritual condition. The Inward
Light vouchsafed to all men is a levelling doctrine; it places all upon
an equality. The Quakers, therefore, refused all titles; nor would
they remove the hat or bend the knee to any man, in token of respect.
King, priest, arid peasant were estimated at their value as men, and
not by the position to which, by birth or accident, they were assigned.
Thus briefly I have named the cardinal principles and the more important features of early Quakerism.  Fox appeared as a preacher in
1647. The age was ripe for his acceptance; the public mind, indeed,
was eager to grasp at every suggestion appertaining to religion.
Nevertheiess, Fox was no fair-weather reformer.  In calling upon
men "'to re-assume the ill-deputed care of their religion into their
own hands again," he arrayed against himself, not only Court and
Parliament, but Papist, Episcopalian, and Independent.
The people sought and followed him, and many hungry souls were
satisfied. The Quakers increased rapidly in numbers and influence.
With the zeal, and often with the fanaticism, so characteristic of the
time, they plied their spiritual weapons against the prevailing dogmas
and ceremonials; they denounced the licentiousness of the Court, and
the extravagances of the Puritans. Other people were non-conformists; the Quakers were both non-conformists and revolutionists.
For a full obedience to the inward light, absolute religious liberty
was essential, —and to this idea they were faithful to the end. In
the history of the world, the progress of freedom is tracked by the
blood of martyrs. The Quakers suffered their full share of martyrdom; they encountered persecution in England, almost as severe and
cruel as in Massachusetts. Several thousand of them were confined
in the jails at one time. Fox especially suffered harsh treatment.
A recital of their sufferings, however, is not necessary here. In contrast with the enlightened views entertained by the Quakers on most
subjects, their superstition is most striking.  It was, perhaps, no
more characteristic of them than of others.  Amongst the so-called
evangelical societies of the present day, it is very prevalent, and is
manifested in much the same form. Emancipated, as they were, from
the dumb forms of the Church, they were not able to escape the
blasting influence of a dark theology. They believed firmly in an
avenging God; and, in violation of the law of love so prominent in




21
their lives, they ascribed to him such deeds as would earn the title of
monster for any human being. The books of the Quakers are full of
detailed accounts of disasters which befel their persecutors.  Many
of them would prophesy some great calamity, some visitation of the
Lord, upon their enemies; and any misfortune that afterwards overtook these doomed persons was sure to be construed and recorded as
a fulfilment of the Quaker prophecy. George Fox was reputed a
great prophet, of the Cassandraic order; and the New England
Quakers were singularly gifted. In his history of the Quakers, Mr.
Janney, their historian of this generation, owing perhaps to his
idolatry of the Fathers, perpetuates these accounts without a dissenting word, and almost with approval.
The organization of the society was commenced by Fox in 1667;
not till twenty years after he began to preach.  The name Quaker
was applied to it in derision: Fox and his companions, assuming a
name indicative of their character and mission, called themselves
" Friends." The original object of the organization was, not to
build up a sect, or to propagate a creed, but mainly to ameliorate the
condition of the poor, and to aid those who were in prison.  Beyond
this, and the "promotion of purity and virtue," nothing was contemplated. No test of membership was required, except the habitual
attendance at religious meetings.  In the meetings for business, if a
stranger appeared, and wished to participate, he was asked to propuce a certificate of character from Friends in his own town. This,
says Fox, "'was to prevent any bad spirit, that may scandalize
honest men, from bringing reproach upon them."
Their influence upon civilization must not be lightly estimated. By
their sturdy opposition to ecclesiastical oppression they aided largely
in lifting the dead weight of the Church from the necks of the people.
They taught men to subordinate theological opinions, church government, and church ordinances, and to give heed to that higher law, by
obedience to which we can alone hope to establish a true and permanmnt religion.  Men began to understand that rights, not privileges,
must be demanded, in order to secure religious and civil liberty.
Legislation in England, from that day to this, has been steadily
modified to correspond with Quaker views, suggestions, and demands.
They, indeed, so largely anticipated our present civilization, that it
is frequently urged that the decline of the society is due to the all
but universal acceptance and adoption of their theories and principles.




England learned her first lesson in democracy under the tuition of
the Quakers.
The early settlement of Pennsylvania is without a parallel in the
history of nations. In that State, Quakerism performed its work,
unimpeded by persecution; and, in a few years from the meeting of
its first legislature, or colonial parliament, it had outstripped all other
American colonies in natural prosperity and growth. In Massachusetts, the Quakers had to contend with the intelligence, the culture,
the piety, of the Founders.  Four of them were hung; all of them
were persecuted, and denounced as children of Satan.
In Pennsylvania they met the North American Indians, men we
are accustomed to call savages; and by these they were recognized
as children of the Great Spirit.  William  Penn with his Quakerism
overcame the tomahawk and scalping-knife of the red man, and, in
the forests of the New World, not only laid the foundation, but established a republic. The history of his "' Holy Experiment" is known
to every school-boy; and, to vindicate the claim for Quakerism as a
great civilizing force, we have only to refer to it.
I have alluded to the decline of Quakerism, and to the reason
therefor so frequently given by the Friends themselves.  It is very
true that the principles of the early Quakers are now a part of our
civilization; but it is a curious logic which leads to the conclusion
that this is any justification of the stand-still, do-nothing policy of
the modern Friends.  Quite recently, a spirit of progress has been
developed, which promises prolonged life to the society; but, until
within a very few years, stagnation was the notable characteristic.
The Quaker garb and directness of speech, once grand protests
against extravagance in dress and the flattery bestowed upon wealth
and rank, lost their original significance; and the broad-brimmed hat,
the peculiar bonnet, the thou and thee, became the sectarian badge,
and too often indicated the bigotry of the children in their worship of
the fathers. In many Quaker schools and colleges, the students were.
compelled to adopt the distinctive dress, and the ancient testimonies
against literary and esthetic culture were rigidly enforced.  During
the three years spent at an Orthodox Quaker college, we were not
allowed to see a volume of Shakspeare, and while there I read
"Uncle Tom's Cabin" by stealth.  Music was strictly prohibited,
and the fine arts were absolutely ignored. A regular attendant at
Friends' meetings must have heard many sermons, within the last
twenty years, against the vanity of much learning.




23
The failure to progress necessarily involves retrogression; and the
degeneracy of the society was strikingly illustrated by its treatment
of the abolitionists, during the long years of moral warfare which preceded the downfall of the Southern oligarchy. When the contest
began, the society found itself in advance of most, if not all, religious
sects in its traditionary testimony against slavery.  By the "rules of
discipline," members could not hold slaves, nor could they employ
slave-labor. The system had always found its most active antagonist
in the Quaker Church. By birthright, the modern Quaker was an
abolitionist, and hence the responsibility of the society was greater
than that of other religious bodies.  History will reveal to posterity
the sad fact, that the Friends of this country were false to their
traditions, false to the spirit of their discipline, and altogether unworthy their inheritance.
I do not forget the exceptional men and women who labored in the
good cause; and I know, that, by their efforts, the society was, in a
measure, rescued from the utter demoralization which overwhelmed
the Christian churches of America. In some localities, these Friends
were occasionally able to secure from their respective meetings a
renewal of the ancient testimony, in the form of a memorial to Congress or to some State legislature.  I remember, too, that the ranks
of the abolitionists were largely recruited, in some places, from the
younger members of the society; but they were, comparatively speaking, without influence in the organization, and not a few of them left
their meetings, disheartened by the course of the more " weighty" and
influential members. As a rule, the moral weight of both branches of
the society —0rthodox and Hicksite-was against the abolitionists
and the anti-slavery movement.  The subject was studiously avoided
in the "meetings for worship," being classed with those questions
which are regarded as beyond the pale of religion. The abolitionists
were regarded and treated as disturbers of the peace. In some instances, they were pursued with bitter hostility, and even with malignity.  The venerable Lucretia Mott, who led the forlorn-hope of
the society, was persistently persecuted and tabooed.  One Quaker
physician actually refused to prescribe for her when she was ill, he
was so incensed by her abolition heresy.  More fortunate than some
of her coadjutors, she escaped disownment; but the fact that she
" ESCAPED" is mournfully significant.  Isaac T. Hopper was " dealt"
with for his connection with "The Anti- Slavery Standard."  His case




24
was duly considered by his own meeting, and he was expelled. He
appealed successively to the meetings higher in authority, and each
one of them sustained the action of the other.  The various branches
of the New York Hicksite meeting, assembled as one body in their
corporate capacity, confirmed his expulsion.  The rise of the branch
of the society known as Progressive Friends was the result of the
hostile attitude of the Hicksite Quakers towards the anti-slavery
movement.
The language of a prominent New England Orthodox Quaker, fitly
represents the position of that portion of the society. She said to me,
" The Lord will settle this question of slavery in his own good time,
and we must not interfere with it."*  Quakerism was a grand protest
against' slavery; but modern Quakers preferred peace to purity,
organization to justice.  Sectarianism had done its work; and, practically repudiating its principles, the society floated with the popular
current.
But I gladly forego further consideration of the short-comings of
the society, to pay a tribute to its solid worth. If the Friends idolize
their ancestors, so do the descendants of the Puritans; if they are
superstitious, they are no more so than a majority of sects; if they
were pro-slavery, they were less so than most religious denominations.
The Quaker coat, it is presumed, covers a multitude of virtues.  It is
primdfacie evidence of the honesty of the man who wears it.  Our
poor-houses, our criminal courts, our rum-shops, our gambling hells,
whether in North Street or State Street, would find their occupation
gone, if they relied upon Friends to furnish them with inmates or
criminals or victims.  The private virtues, the simplicity and purity,
the uprightness and integrity, of the modern Quakers, command the
honor and respect of every community in which they live, and
challenge the admiration of society.
The failure of Quakerism, so far as it is a failure, is due, no doubt,
in a degree, to the development of sectarianism; but we must go behind this to seek for the main cause.  It must, it seems to me, be
attributed to the non-aggressive character of the society; and this, in
turn, is probably due to the limited interpretation of the Inward
Light, insisted upon by Friends.  They must be "moved by the
The Orthodox Quakers of New York were more faithful to their' anti-slavery
testimonies than Friends of other meetings included in this branch of the
Society.




25
Spirit" to speak or to act.  At a given moment, they receive a
direct and complete revelation from God, touching'some definite subject; and this revelation is independent of all human faculties,-it is
supernatural.  The modern spiritist receives a communication from
the spirit of Washington; in like manner, the Quaker receives a
message or command from the Spirit of God. Depending upon this
supernatural instruction for guidance, it is essential to banish all
"worldly thoughts;" to concentrate the mind, or, more accurately
speaking, the soul, upon God, in order to get into spirit relations with
him,-to get en rapport with him, and thus to invite communion.
The parallel to this theory of religion is frequently found in the
history of heathen nations.  The Hindu priests, by constant contemplation of their deities, sought to become divine.  Asceticism is the
inevitable result of such a practice.  In the case of Friends, it has
made them exclusive, indifferent to education, indifferent to the world
about them: unity and harmony must be maintained, and the introduction of the great questions involved in the development of society
must be discouraged, as tending to distract the soul, and to lead it
away from the contemplation of the Creator.  I shall not now dispute
the reality of special or supernatural revelation; though I am compelled to say, that the sermons usually heard at a Quaker meeting,
and claimed to be the expression of the Holy Spirit, the reflex of the
" light within," are not calculated to overcome the incredulity of the
sceptic.
A firm belief in spiritual communion, however, is of inestimable
value to our spiritual nature; for, through it, the aspirations of the
soul are satisfied. But we are human as well as spiritual beings; and
our humanity protests against a religion which subdues and slights
our human faculties, which refuses to recognize Mind or Reason, as
a part of that kingdom of heaven we find within us. A broader and
more intelligent interpretation, it appears to me, will divest the theory
of the Inward Light of all supernaturalism, and will bring into harmony all the faculties of our dual nature. It will recognize the divine
character of humanity, and teach us to revere every faculty God has
given us, as a part of that light by which we must be guided. His
law is written, not only on our hearts, but in every fibre of our being,
and our lives are a perpetual revelation of it.
The spirit of progress recently developed-within the Society is full
of promise.  The invaluable testimonies in favor of moderation in




26
living, and simplicity in dress and address, imply less singularity than
heretofore, but still have their work to do, in checking the spirit of
recklessness and extravagance which marks and mars the age.  The
protest against amusements has been materially modified, and the
value of music and the fine arts is better appreciated.  The liberal
management of Swarthmore College, even more than the two or three
hundred thousand dollars invested in it, attests the increasing importance attached to education. The desertion of the slave is being atoned
for, so far as possible, by devotion to the freedman; and the nation
already owes a debt of gratitude to Friends for their attempt to solve
the Indian question.
The development of rationalism, as opposed to spiritism and superstition, is another encouraging evidence of vitality and progress..
Quakerism, developed to its legitimate conclusion, leaves to its earlier
professors the confusion of Calvinistic theology with the simpler faith
in God as he is manifested in the individual soul. The logic of Quakerism establishes the Church universal, and demands a religion which
embraces Jew, Pagan, and Christian, and which cannot be limited by
the dogmas of one or the other.




APPENDIX.
Some of the laws of the Puritans and a Scriptural argument to justify them
are given in the following pages: They can be found in vol. iv, Mass. Records.
Att a Generall Court held at Boston October 14th 1656.
Whereas there is a cursed sect of hlereticks lately risen vp in the
world, whl are comonly called Quakers, who take vppon them to be
imediately sent of God and infallibly asisted by the spirit to speake
& write blasphemouth opinions, despising gouernment & the order of
God in church & comonwealth, speaking evill of dignitjes, reproaching
and revjling magistrates and ministers, seeking to turne the people
from the faith, & gajne proseljtes to theire pernicious wajes, this court,
taking into serious consideration the pmises, and to prevent the like
mischiefe as by theire meanes is wrought in our native land, doth
hereby order, and by the authoritje of this court be it ordered and
enacted, that what master or comander of any ship, barke, pinnace,
catch, or any other vessell that shall henceforth bring into any harbor,
creeke, or coue wtllin this jurisdiccon any knoune Quaker or Quakers,
or any other blasphemous haereticks, as aforesnad, shall pay, or cause
to be pajd, the fine of one hundred pounds to the tresurer of the
countrje, except it appeare that he wanted true'knowledg or information of theire being such; and in that case he hath libertje to cleare
himself by his oath when sufficijent proofe to the contrary is wanting,
and for default of payment, or good securitje for it, shall be comitted
to prison, & there to contjneu till the sajd some be sattisfied to the
tresurer as aforesajd; and the comander of any such ship or vessell




that shall bring them (being legally convicted) shall giue in sufficijent
securitje to the Gouunor, or any one or more of the magistrates who
haue power to determine the same, to carry them  backe to the place
whence he brought them; and, on his refusall so to doe, the Gouernor,
or one or more of the magistrates, are hereby impowered to issue out
his or theire warrants to comitt such master or comander to prison,
there to contineu till he shall give in sufficijent securitje to the content of the Gouernor or any of the magistrates as aforesajd.  And it
is hereby further ordered & enacted, that what Quaker soeuer shall
arive in this countrje from  forraigne parts, or come into this jurisdiccon from any parts adjacent, shall be forthwith comitted to the
house of correction, and at theire entrance to be seuerely whipt, and
by the master thereof to be kept constantly to worke, & none suffered
to counerse or speak wth them during the tjme of theire imprisonment, wch shall be no longer than necessitje requireth.  And further,
it is ordered, if any pson shall knowingly import into any harbor-of
this jurisdiccon any Quakers' bookes or writings concerning theire
diuilish opinions, shall pay for euery such booke or writting, being
legally prooued against him or them, the some of five pounds; and
whosoeuer shall disperse or conceale any such book or writing, and it
be found wth him or her, or in his or her howse, and shall not imediately deliuer in the same to the next magistrate, shall forfeite and
pay five pounds for the dispersing or concealeing of euery such booke
or writing.
And it is hereby further enacted, that if any person wthin this
colonje shall take vppon them to defend the haoretticall opinions of
the sajd Quakers, or any of theire bookes or papers as aforesajd, ex
annimo, if legally prooved, shall be fined for the first tjme forty shillings; if they shall persist in the same and shall so againe defend it,
the second tjme fower pounds; if still, notwthstanding, they shall
againe so defend & maintajne the sajd Quakers hberetticall opinions,
they shall be comitted to the howse of correction till there be convenjent passage for them to be sent out of the land, being sentenced by
the Court of Asistants to banishment.  Lastly it is heereby ordered,
that what pson or persons soeuer shall revile the office or pson of
magistrates or ministers, as is usuall with the Quakers, such person
or psons shall be seuerely whipt, or pay the some of five pounds.
This order was publised 21: 8 m~, 56, in seuerall places of Boston,
by beate of drumme.




Att a Gennerall Court, held at Boston, 14 of October, 1657.
As an addition to ye late order in reference to the coming or bringing in any of the cursed sect of the Quakers into this jurisdiction, it
is ordered that whosoeuer shall from henceforth bring or cawse to be
brought, directly or indirectly, any knoune Quaker or Quakers, or
other blasphemous haereticks, into this jurisdiccon, euery such person
shall forfeite the some of one hundred pounds to ye countrje, and shall
by warrant from any magistrate be comitted to prison there to remajne
till the pcenalty be sattisfjed and pajd; and if any person or persons
wthin this jurisdiccon shall henceforth entertajne and conceale any
such Quaker or Quakers or other blasphemous hbereticks, (knowing
them so to be) euery such person shall forfeite to the countrye forty
shillings for euery howers entertajnment and concealement of any
Quaker or Quakers as aforesajd, and shall be comitted to prison, as
aforesajd, till the forfeitures be fully sattisfied and pajd.
And it is further ordered, that if any Quaker or Quakers shall presume, after they haue once suffered what the lawe requireth, to come
into this jurisdiccon, euery such male Quaker shall for the first offence
haue one of his eares cutt off, and be kept at worke in the howse of
correction till he cann be sent away at his oune charge, and for the
second oflenc shall haue his other eare cutt of, &c. and kept at the
howse of correction, as aforesaid; and euery woman Quaker that hath
suffered the lawe heere that shall presume to come into this jurisdiccon
sha 1 be severely whipt, and kept at the howse of correction at worke
till she be sent away at hir oune charge, and so also for hir
coming againe she shall be alike vsed as aforesaid; and for euery
Quaker, he or she, that shall a third tjme heerein againe offend, they
shall haue theire toungues bored through wth a hot iron, & kept at the
howse of correction, close to worke, till they be sent away at theire
oune charge. And it is further ordered, that all & euery Quaker
arising from amongst ourselves shall be dealt wt'l & suffer the like
punishment as the lawe provides against forreigne Quakers.
At a Gennerall Courte held at Boston, the 19th of May 1658.
That Quakers and such accursed hzereticques arising amongst ourselves may be dealt withall according to theire deserts, and that theire
pestilent errors and practices may speedily be prevented, itt is heereby
ordered, as an addition to the former lawe against Quakers, that




euery such person or persons professing any of their pernitious wajes,
by speaking, writting, or by meetings on the Lords day, or any other
tjme, to strengthen themselves or seduce others to theire djabolljcall'doctrine, shall, after due meanes of conviction incurre the poenalty
ensuing; that is, euery personi so meeting shall pay to the countrje
for euery tjme tenn shillings, and euery one speaking in such meetings shall pay five pounds a peece, and in case any such person hath
binn punished by scourging or whipping the first tjme, according to
the former lawes, shall be still kept at worke in the house of correction till they put in securitje wt'l two sufficjent men that they shall not
any more vent theire hatefull errors, nor vse theire sinfull practices,
or els shall depart this jurisdiction at theire oune charges; and if any
of them returne againe, then each such person shall incurre the
poenalty of the lawes formerly made for straingers.
Att the second Sessions of the Generall Court, held at Boston, the
19th of October 1658.
Whereas there is a pernitious sect, comonly called Quakers, lately
risen, who, by word & writing, haue published & maintayned many
dajngerous & horrid tennetts, and doe take vpon them to chainge
and alter the received laudable customes of our nation in giving ciuill
respect to oequalls or reuerence to superiors, whose actions tend to
vndermine the authority of civill gouernment, as also to destroy the
order of the churches, by denying all established formes of worship, and
by wIhdrawing from  the orderly church assembljes allowed & approoved, by all orthodox proffessors of the truth, and insteed thereof,
and in opposition thereunto, frequenting private meetings of theire
oune, insinuating themselves into the minds of the simpler, or such as
-are lesse affected to the order & gouernment in church and comonwealth,
whereby dieuerse of our inhabitants haue binn infected & seduced,
and notwthstanding all former lawes made (vpon experience of theire
arrogant, bold obtrusions to disseminate theire principles amongst vs)
prohibbitting theire coming into this jurisdiction, they haue not binn
deterred from theire impetuous attempts to vndermine our peace and
haOten our ruine.
For prevention whereof, this Court doth order and enact, that euery
person or persons of the cursed sect of the Quakers, who is not an
inhabitant off but found wthin this jurisdiction, shall be apphended,




31
(without warrant,) where no magistrate is at hand, by any connstable,
comissioner, or selectman, and conveyed from connstable to connstable, vntill they come before the next magistrate, who shall comitt
the sajd person or persons to close prison, there to remajne with out
bayle vntill the next Court of'Asistants, where they shall haue a
legall trjall by a speciall jury, & being convicted to be of the
sect of the Quakers shall be sentenced to banneshment, vpon
pajne of death; and that euery inhabitant of this jurisdiction being
convicted to be of the aforesajd sect, either by taking vp, publishing,
& defending the horrid opinions of the Quakers, or by stirring vp
mutiny, sedition, or rebelljon against the government, or by taking
vp theire absurd and destructiue practises, vizt, denying civil respect
& reuerence to oequalls & superiors, wt'hdrawing from our church assembljes, & insteed thereof frequenting private meetings of their oune
in opposition to church order, or by adhering to or approoving of any
knoune Quaker, or the tenetts & practises of the Quakers, that are
opposite to the orthodoxe received opinions & practises of the godly,
and endeavoring to disaffect others to ciuill gouernment, & church
order, and condemning the practise & proceedings of this court against
the Quakers, manifesting thereby theire compljance wth those whose
designe it is to ouerthrow the order established in church and comonwealth, euery such person, vpon examination & legall conviction
before the Court of Asistants, in manner as aboue sajd, shall be
comitted to close prison for one moneth, and then, vnless they choose
voluntarily to depart the jurisdiction, shall giue bond for theire good
abbearance & appearance at the next Court of Asistants, where continuing obstinate and refusing to retract & reforme the aforesajd
opinions and practises, shall be sentenced to bannishment upon pajne
of death; and in case of the aforesajd voluntary departure, not to
remajne or againe retourne into this jurisdiction wthout the alowance
of the major part of the councill first had & published on poenalty of
being banished' vpon pajne of death; and any one magistrate, vpon
information giuen him of any such person, shall cause them to be
apphended, and if, vpon examination of the case, he shall, according to his best discretion, finde just ground for such complainte, he
shall comitt such person to prison vntill he come to his trjall, as is
aboue expressed.




32
Att a Generall Court of Election, held at Boston, 11th of May, 1659.
county Treasurer authorized to sell Quakers.
Whereas Daniell and Provided Southwicke sonne & daughter to
Lawrence Southwicke, haue binn fyned by the County Courts at Salem
& Ipswich, ptending they haue no estates, resolving not to worke,
and others likewise haue binn fyned, & more like to be fyned, for
siding wth the Quakers & absenting themselves from the publicke ordinances-in ansr to a qucestion, what course shall be taken for the
sattisfaction of the fines, the' Court, on pervsall of the lawe, title
Arrests, resolve, that the Tresurers of the seuerall countjes are and
shall hereby be impowred to sell the sajd persons to any of the English nation at Virginia or Barbadoes.
Att a aenerall Court of -Election, held at Boston, 22d May 1661.
This Court, being desirous to try all meanes, wtl' as much lenity as
may consist wth our safety, to prevent the intrusions of the Quakers,
who, besides theire absurd & blasphemous doctrine, doe, like rouges
& vagabonds, come in vpon vs, & haue not been restreined by the
lawes already provided, haue ordered, that euery such vagabond
Quaker found wthin any part of this jurisdiction shall be apphended
by any person or persons, or by the connstable of the toune wherein
he or she is taken, & by the connstable, or, in his absence, by any
other person or persons, conveyed before the next magistrate of that
sheire wherein they are taken, or comissioner invested wth magistratticall power, & being by the sajd magistrate or magistrates, comissioner or comissioners, adjudged to be a wandering Quaker, vizt, one
that hath not any dwelling or orderly allowance as an inhabitant of
this jurisdiction, & not giving ciuil respect by the vsuall gestures
thereof, or by any other way or meanes manifesting himself to be a Quaker, shall, by warrant vnder the hand of the sajd magistrate or magistrates, comissioner or comissioners, directed to the connstable of the
toune wherein he or she is taken, or in absence of the connstable, or any
othere meete person, be stripped naked from the midle vpwards, and
tjed to a carts tayle, & whipped throh the toune, & from thence imediately
conveyed to the connstable of the next toune, towards the borders
of our jurisdiction, as theire warrant shall direct & so from connstable
to connstable till they be conveyed throh' any the outward most tounes




33
of our jurisdiction.  And if such vagabond Quaker shall returne
againe, then to be in like manner app'hended & conveyed as often as
they shall be found wthin the limitts of our jurisdiction, provided
euery such wandering Quaker, hauing beene thrice convicted & sent
away as abouesajd, & returning again into this jurisdiction, shall be
app'hended & comitted by any magistrate or comissioner as abouesajd vnto the house of correction wthin that county wherein he or shee
is found untill the next Court of that County, where, if the Court
judge not meete to release them, they shall be branded with the letter
R on theire left shoulder, & be severely whipt & sent away in manner
as before; and if after this he or shee shall retourne againe, then to
be proceeded against as incorrigible rogues & ennemys to the comon
peace and shall imediately be app'hended & comitted to the comon jayle
of the country, and at the next Court of Asistants shall be brought
to theire tryall, & proceeded agt according to the lawe made anno
1658, page 36, for theire bannishment on payne of death. And for
such Quakers as shall arise from amongst ourselves, they shall be proceeded agt as the former lawe of anno 1658, page 36, doth provide,
vntill they haue beene convicted by a Court of Asistants; & being so
convicted, he or shee shall then be bannished this jurisdiction; & if
after that they shall be found in any part of this jurisdiction, then he
or shee so sentenced to banishment shall be proceeded against as
those that are straingers & vagabond Quakers in manner as is aboue
expressed.. And it is further ordered, that whatsoeuer charge shall
arize about app'hending, whipping, conveying, or otherwise, about the
Quakers, to be layd out by the connstables of such tounes where it is
expended, & to be repajd by the Tresurer out of the next country
levy; and further, that the connstables of the seuerall tounes are
hereby empowred from tjme to tjme, as necessity shall require, to impresse cart, oxen, & other asistance for the execution of this order.
The following Scriptural argument, " To vindicate the justice of
this Courts proceedings in refference to the Quakers," was circulated
throughout the Mass. Colony, by order of the'" Generall Court" Oct.
18th 1659:
Many of that sect of people which are comonly called Quakers
hauing, from forreine parts & from other colonjes, come at soundry
times and in seuerall companjes & noumbers into this jurisdiction of
the Massachusetts, & those lesser punishments of the house of correc



34
tions & imprisonment for a tjme hauing beene inflicted on some of
them, but not sufficing to deterr & keepe them away, but that still
they haue presumed to come hither, vpon no other ground or occasion (for ought that could appeare) but to scatter theire corrupt opinions, & to drawe others to theire way, & so to make disturbance, and
the honnored Generall Court having herevpon made an order & lawe,
that such persons should be bannished & remooved hence, on pajne of
death, to be inflicted on such of them, as after theire bannishment
should presume to returne & come hither againe, the making & execution of the aforesajd lawe may be cleered to be warrantable & just
vpon such grounds & considerations as these, viz.:
1. The doctrine of this sect of people is destructive to fundamentall trueths of religion, as the sacred Trinitje, the person of Christ &
the holy Scriptures, as a perfect rule of faith & life, as Mr Norton
hath shewed in his tractate against the Quakers; yea, that one opinion of theires, of being perfectly pure and wthout sinne, tends to
ouerthrow the whole gospell & the very vitalls of Christianitje, for
they that haue no sinne, haue no neede of Christ, or of his sattisfaction, or his blood to cleanse them from theire sinne; no need of faith
to beleive in Christ, for imputed righteousnes to justify them, as being
perfectly just in themselves; no neede of repentance, as being righteous & wthout sinne, for repentance is only for such as have sinne;
no neede of growing in grace, nor of the word and ordinances of God,
that they may grow thereby, for what neede they to grow better who
are already perfect? no neede of Christian watchfulnes against sinne
who haue no such ennemy as sinne dwelling in them, as Paul had, but
are free from the presence and being of sinne, & therefore Christ
needs not to say to them, as sometjmes to his disciples,' Watch &
pray, that yee enter not into temptation; the spirit is willing but the
flesh is weake'; for hauing no such flesh or weakenesse in them, they
haue no such neede of watchfulnesse; they haue no neede to purify
themselves dayly, as all Christians should, for they are perfectly pure
already; no neede to put off the old man and put on the new, like the
Christians to whom Paul wrote his Epistles, for what neede they
to doe this when they are already wtllout sinne, and so wthout all
remainders of the old man? Such fundamentalls of Christianitje are
ouerthroune by this one opinion of theires, & how much more by all
theire other doctrines! Now, the comandment of God is plajne, that
he that presumes to speake lyes in the name of the Lord & turne




people out of the way which the Lord hath comanded to walk in, such
an one must not liue, but be put to death, Zach. 13: 3; Deut. 13: 6;
& 18: 20; & if the doctrine of the Quakers be not such, let the wise
judge. It is the comandment of the blessed God, that Christians
should obey magistrates, Tit. 3: 1; & that euery soule should be subject to the higher powers, Rom. 13: 1; yea, be subject to euery ordinance of man for the Lords sake, 1 Peet. 2: 13; & yeeld honnor &
reuerence or feare to such as are in authoritje, Prou. 24: 21; 1 Pet.
2: 17; & forbeare all cursing and reviling & evill speeches touching
such persons, Exod. 22: 28; Eclesiast. 10: 20; Tit. 3: 2; Acts 23:
5; & accordingly good men haue beene wont to behaue themselves wth
gestures and speeches of reuerence and honnor towards superiors in
place and power, as Abraham bowed downe himself to the Hittites,
Gene. 23: 7, 12; Jacob & his wives & children unto Esau, Gene. 33:
3, 6, 7; Josephs brethren vnto Joseph, being governor in ]Egipt,
Genes. 42: 6; & 43: 26 & 28; Joseph to his father Jacob, Gene. 48:
12; Moses to his father in lawe Jethro, Exod. 18: 7; Ruth to Boaz,
Ruth 2: 10; Dauid to Saul, 1 Sam. 24: 6; 1 Kings 1: 16, 23, 31;
wth others that might be added. And for reviling or contemptuous
speeches, they haue binn so farre therefrom that they haue spoken to
and of theire superiors wt termes & expressions of much honor & reuerence, as father, 1 Sam. 19: 3; 1 Kings 19: 20; & 2: 2, 12; master,
2 Kings 6: 15; 1 Sam. 24: 6; lord, Gen. 33: 13, 14; 1 Pet. 3: 6;
my lord, 1 Sam. 24: 8; Gen. 44: 18, 19, 20; 1 Sam. 1: 15, 26; most
noble Festus, Acts 26: 25; most excellent Theophilus, Luke 1: 3; and
the like; that servant of Abraham's, Gen. 24, doth call Abraham by
the terme & title of master, a matter of twenty times or not much
lesse, in that one chapter; and on the contrary, it is noted as a brand
& reproach of false teachers, that they despise dominion and are not
afrajd to speake evill of dignitjes, 2 Pet. 2: 10; Jude 8; though the
very aingells would not doe so vnto the divill, 2 Peet. 2: 11; Jude 9.
Now, it is well knoune that the practize of the Quakers is but too like
these false teachers whom the apostles speake of, & that they are farre
from giving that honnor & reuerence to magistrates which the Lord
requireth, & good men haue giuen to thdm, but on the contrary show
contempt against them in theire very outward gestures & behavior, &
(some of them at least) spare not to belch out rajling & cursing
speeches. wittnes that odjous, cursing letter of Humphrey Norton; and if so, if Abishaj may be judge, they are worthy to die; for




36
so he thought of Shimej for his contemptuous carriage and cursing
speeches against Dauid, 2 Sam. 16: 9; & 19: 21; and though Dauid
at that tjme did forbeare to put him to death, yet he giues charge to
Solomon, that this Shimej hauing cursed him wth such a greivous curse,
he should not hold him guiltlesse, but bring doune his hoarje head to
the graue Wth blood, 1 Kings 2: 8, 9; according to which direction
King Solomon caused him to be put to death, Vers. 44, 46.
Also, in this story of Solomon & Shimej, 1 Kings 2; it is recorded
how Solomon confined Shimei to Jerusalem, chardging him vpon pajne
of death, not to goe out thence, & telling him that if he did he should
dye for it, which confinement when Shimej had broken, though it
were three years after & vpon an occasion that might seeme to haue
some weight in it, viz., to fetch againe his servants that were runne
away from him, yett for all this, the confinement being broken, Solomon would not spare him, but putts him to death, and if execution of
death be lawfull for breach of confinement, may not the same be sajd
for breach of bannishment? Confinement, of the two, may seeme to
be much sleighter, because in this a man is ljmited to one place & debarred from all others, whereas in bannishment a man is debarred from
no place but one, all others being left to his liberty; the one debarres
him from all places, saue that it giues liberty to one; the other giues
liberty to all places, saue that it restraines from one; and therefore
if death may be justly inflicted vpon breach of confinement, much
more for returne vpon bannishment, which is these Quakers case.
There is no man that is possessed of house or land, wherein he hath
just title & propriety as his oune, but he would count it vnreasonably
injurious that another who had no authoritje thereto should intrude &
enter into his house wthout his, the ounors consent; yea, and when the
ounor doth expressly prohibitt & forbidd the same.  Wee say,
when the man that so presumes to enter hath no authoritje thereto;
for if it were a connstable or other officer legally authorized, such ain
one might indeed enter, notwthstanding the householders. dissent or
charge to the contrary; but for them that haue no authoritje the case
is otherwise. And if such one should presume to enter into another
man's house & habitation, he might justly be impleaded as a theife or
an vsurper; & if in case of such violent assault, the ownor should, se
defendendo, slay the assaylant & intruder, his blood would be vpon
his oune head. And if private person may in case shed the blood of
such intruders, may not the like be graunted to them that are the pub



licke keepers and guardians of the comonwealth?  Haue not they as
much power to take away the liues of such, as contrary to prohibition,
shall jnvade & intrude into theire publicke possessions or territorjes
as private and particcular persons to deale so wth them that, wthout authorije, shall presume to enter into theire private & particcular habitations? which seemes clearly to be the present case; for who cann beleiue that Quakers are connstables ouer this colonje, to intrude themselves, invade, & enter, whither the colonje will or no, yea, & notwthstanding theire expresse prohibition to the contrary? If in such violent and bold attempt they loose theire liues, they may thank themselves as the blameable cause & authors of theire oune death.
Who cann make question but that a man that hath children &
family both justly may, & in duty ought to, preserve them of his
chardge (as farre as he is able) from the daingerous company of persons infected with the plague of pestilence or other contagious, noysome,
and mortall diseases?  and if such persons shall offer to intrude into
the mans house amongst his children & servants, notwthstanding his
prohibition and warning to the contrary, & thereby shall jndainger
the healthe & liues of them of the familje, cann any man doubt but
that in such case the father of the familje, in defence of himself &
his, may wthstand the intrusion of such infected & daingerous persons
& if otherwise he cann not keepe them out, may kill them? Now,
in Scripture, corruption in minde & judgment is counted a great infection & defilement, yea, & one of the greatest; for the apostle, saying
of some men that to them  there is nothing pure, glues this as the
reason of it, because euen theire minde & conscience is defiled, Tit. 1:
15; as if defilement of the minde did argue the defilement of all, &
that in such case there is nothing pure; euen as when leprosie was in
the head, the preist must pronounce such a man vtterly vncleane,
sith the plague was in his head, Levitt 13: 44. And it is the Lords
comand that such corrupt persons be not receaved into house, 2 John
10, which plainly enough impljes that the householder hath power to
keepe them out, & yt it was not in theire power to come in if they
pleased, whither the householder would or no. And if the father of
a particcular family may thus defend his children & household, may
not magistrates doe the like for theire subjects, they being nursing
fathers and nursing mothers by the account of God in Holy Scripture? Isaj. 49: 23d. Is it not cleare, yt if the father in the family
must keepe them out off his house, the father in the comonwealth must




keepe them out of his jurisdiction? And if sheepe & lambes cannot
be preserved from the dainger of woolves, but the woolves will breake
in amongst them, it is easy to see what the shephard or keeper of
the sheepe may lawfully doe in such a case.
Itt was the comandment of the Lord Jesus Christ vnto his disciples,
that when they were persecuted in one citty, they should flee into
another, Math. 10: 23; & accordingly it was his oune practise so to
doe many a tjme, both when he was a child, Math. 13: 14; & afterwards, 12: 15; Job 7: 1 & 8; last, 10: 39; and so was also the
practise of the saints.
wittnes what is written of Jacob, Gen. 27: 42, 43 & 28: 5; of
Moses, Exod. 2: 14, 15; of El]jas, 1 King 19: 3; of Paul, Acts 9:
24, 25, 29, 30, & 17: 13, 14; & of the apostle, Acts 14: 4, 5, &
others, who when they haue beene persecuted, haue fled away for theire
oune safety; and reason requires that when men haue liberty vnto it,
they should not refuse so to doe, because otherwise they will be guilty
of tempting God, & of incurring theire oune hurt, as having a faire
way open for the avoyding thereof, but they needelessly expose themselves thereto. If therefore, that which is donne against Quakers in
this jurisdiction were indeed persecution, as they account of it, (though
in trueth it is not so, but the due ministration of justice; but suppose
it were as they thinke it to be) what spirit may they be thought to be
acted & led by, who are in theire actings so contrary to the comandment & example of Christ & of his saints in the case of persecusion,
which these men suppose to be theire case? Plaine enough it is, that
if theire case were the same, theire actings are not the same, but quite
contrary, so that Christ and his saints were led by one spirit, and those
people by another; for rather then they would not show theire contempt of authoritje, and make disturbance amongst his' people, they
choose to goe contrary to the express directions of Jesus Christ, &
the aprooved examples of his saints, although it be to the hazard &
perrill of theire oune liues.
THE END.
















OLD AND NEW.
THE PEOPLE'S MACAZINE.
EDITED BY EDWARD E. HALE
VOLUMJ[ E S3ECOND.
TERMS (payable in advance), $4.00 per annum; $2.00 for Six Months;
Single numbers, 35 cents (mailed postpaid).
" OLD  AND NEW" was established with the promise that it should be a Maoazine acceptable in every family among old and young; that it should be popular
and instructive; and that it should not be afraid to discuss social and philanthropic
reform, religion, and theology.
The publishers ask attention to the articles which have already appeared in it,
as an indication of their success in fulfilling these promises..  They have published,
among many others,STORIES 
JOHN WHOPPER THE NEWSBOY; a Story for Boys.       A TARTAR FAIRY TALE. Translated by Prof.
THE Iwo PRINCES. By E. E. HALE. A Story             LESLEY.
lor all Children.                               Now. A True Story of New-England Life.
TuE SURPRISE; a New-England Story. By             A CROWNED SONGSTRESS. By ELISE POLKO.
Miss LUNT.                                     SHE WRITES. An admirable Serial Novel, by
PAUL TRACEY, ARTIST. By Mrs. JULIA C. R.            the same author.
DORR.'L'EN TIMES ONE IS TEN. The Possible ReforLA, CRECHE. From the German.                        mation. A Serial Story. I1y Col. F. INGHAM.
CL.AUDE BLOUET'S SUFFERIN'S. ByA.'HE:URIET.      PINK AND WHITE TYRANNY. A Sketch of
LIFTING UP. By Miss LUNT.                           Modern Social Life. By Mrs. H. B. STOWE.
FELICIE MORDAUNT'S WORLD. By Miss L. P.             Now in progress.
HAIE.
The followinrg articles of a graver character have excited general attention.  In
the number for
JANUARY, 1870. —The k'cumeaical Council.          MY. —Christ the Lfe. By C. C. EvtEIT.
By J. B. ToRRICEELLI.                           Tie Woman thol,rm. By C. H. BIISGHAM.
Eternity,' Timn.. By ROBERT COLLYER.             ln/thorlty in Alatters oJ Religionl.  By 0.
Thre Perfection of Jesius. By J. F. CLARIE.         DSWEY.
JUNE. —Graty on the.Znfallibility of the Pope,
FEBRUS\RY. —SiX Fingers aed Toes. By B.               By J. P. TnosisoN.
G. WILDER.'Light and 1 song. By P. W. CHANDLER.
Nabtlcre cand.the Great J.RailTrcad. B-3y W. T.   G'eorge D. Prentice ancd Kesntucly. By J. F.
BRIGHAM.                                          CLARKE.
T'1he Scri.ptc'es sand their Inspiration. By H.
W. BELLOWS.                                    JULY. —The Qlakers in Nlew Englhtld. By R.
P. HAlLOWELL.
MARCH.- l-hat a Yolng Mian Aeedls in (Vol-          Life andsLfe-Force. By )r.G.M. KELL(GG.
lege. By Pres. G. M. STI:ILE.                   Hqasrisburg,   ltnd how to fisld it. By JULIA
The. Algonk.lin name Maniitol. By J. H.             WARD HowE.
gland's rew LL.                                AUGUST. —Alorthern Pacific Railroad. By
The Schoolmen tand their -Bureasu. By SIDNr         Gy. M. STEELE.
ANDREW SC71.01)1)1dt iieX (t.BNeari.  BY SIDNEI;  Amszerican P'olitical Literatlure.  By E. A.
POLLARD.
17. and     l the  The enian ampain. By C. H. TUTTLE.
AP RI L.-,/s 2~ew Enlzgqland Oitt in the Cold I
The Universulist Centellary. By i. M. AT-       SEPTEMBER. —The Later-lDay Saisots. By
WOOD.  W. T. BfIonHA M.
T'he PFur-Seal Fishery in Alaska. By O.           Our Oldest Fortress.
1H01WES, Jr.                                     The Adirondaceks in Anugust. By A. D. 3MAYO.
"THE  EXAMINER" is the critical department of the Journal, and  devotes
three hundred and sixty pages a year to reviews of the more important new books.
With the large page and condensed type of " OLD AND NEW," this department alone
is nearly as large as the whole of the old 1" EXAMIINER" Review.
"THE RECORD OF PROGRESS,'' another special department, is devoted to accounts of
the successful experiments in social order.
This Record has publistled accounts which have been widely copied, of
TIE PEOPLE'S CLUB HOUSE IN PROVIDENCE, R.I.
TEE RIVERSIDE IMPROY3IENT NEAR CHICAGO.
THE RICHM(OND FREE SCHOOLS.
TEIE MIETIIODS OF C)RNELL IJN1VERPITY.
LONDON WORK AMONG T E POOR.
And forty or fifty similar themes
The titles above are enough to show that " OLD AND NEW" is a National Magazine, appealing
to no single section, and receiving contributions from writers in all parts of the country.
ROBERTS BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS,
143 Washington Street, Boston,