The Quaker
: :: ^ ?3rum

Amelia Mott Gum mere

mii3i&&mr

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

J

The Quaker and the Baubit.

"li is ihe Land which Ihe territorial party represents in Parliament. . . . Thai is the theory ol the Constitution:
Blackstone says so. But it is a thing which is not likely to be respited; much longer, and it must go. *v?n "¦
involving the destruction ot the Constitution."— Mr. BRIGHT.

From "Punch/' February, 1859.
Caricature of John Bright.

The Quaker in the Forum
j By
AMELIA MOTT GUMMERE
Author of
"The Quaker: A Study in Costume"
"Witchcraft and Quakerism," etc.

"The Virtues which can be rewarded and the Vices which
can be punished, are not as a rule the Virtues or the
Vices which make or mar the Soul." —
Hatch. The Bampton Lectures.

ILLUSTRATED

THE JOHN C. WINSTON CO.
PHILADELPHIA

KV/6 Gr<?53

f

Copyright, 1910, by
The John C. Winston Co.

INTRODUCTION
This little study of an aspect of Quakerism
which has hitherto received no attention, was
suggested by the question of a Professor of His
tory in a New England college, who asked when
the Quakers obtained the franchise in America?
His question led to an investigation, showing
three widely differing conditions in New Eng
land, Pennsylvania and the South, where the es
tablished churches were in the beginning respec
tively, Puritan, Quaker and the Church of Eng
land. The following pages are offered as a slight
contribution to an interesting aspect of history.
Quakerism has made an impression upon the
two great English speaking nations of the globe
in a way that is not yet fully appreciated, al
though the subject is beginning to receive more
careful attention at the hands of competent his
torians. It is not upon theology or philoso
phy that Quakerism has made its chief impress,
although no history of these two great depart
ments of knowledge can be complete, either in
England or America, without reckoning with the
Quaker. It is upon social history that his influ
ence has chiefly told. The unique feature of his
career has been that he largely succeeded in liv-
i

ii INTRODUCTION
ing out his unwritten creed in a philosophy that
made belief a conduct of life, and manifested to
the world its practicability as a working theory.
The Quaker as a citizen has done his duty as he
conceived it in the most modest and unobtrusive
manner possible. In commerce and in political
life, where, as in the colony of Pennsylvania,
Quakerism had a fair opportunity to show what
it could accomplish, the theories of William Penn
were sufficiently worked out to prove their prac
tical value.
The democratic spirit of Quakerism early
made itself felt in the political institutions of the
American colonies. Perhaps nowhere in history
is to be found a body of people who had been able
so suddenly to separate themselves from ancient
traditions, and in an old-world, aristocratic com
munity, to develop ideas of political and religious
freedom and equality. The Puritans of the sev
enteenth century came to Massachusetts, bring
ing with them the aristocratic institutions of
their forefathers. It was only as the exigencies
of colonial life demanded it, that the prevailing
ideas of New England gradually assumed a more
democratic character.
The Quaker becomes significant in American
history when his share in bringing about this
change is appreciated. By the time that he ap-

INTRODUCTION iii
peared in Boston, in 1656, the isolation of the
Puritans had had its inevitable, if unconscious,
effect. With the Quaker came religious free
dom, and he at once sympathized with the politi
cal, if not indeed, with most of the religious,
ideas, of Roger Williams and his community in
Rhode Island. England had furnished the Puri
tan and the Quaker from the same social class.
Wherever the Quaker settled, there the influence
of the clergy was lessened, and a system was pro
duced, more or less complete, of election and leg
islative power. The Quaker concerned himself
little about the law of the land. On the other
hand, he devoted himself, heart and soul, to the
administration of substantial justice. Little le
gal knowledge was possessed by any of the colo
nies, but the Dutch had certain legal procedures
somewhat resembling Quaker arbitration. Trial
by jury was early demanded by the Quakers, and
in Pennsylvania, where they were the adminis
trators of the law, the Jury of Inquest and Trial
was demanded in all common-law courts. North
Carolina, New Jersey and Rhode Island, where
Quakerism early came into power, showed less
concern for legal form, while the proprietary
governments of Maryland, South Carolina and
New York were more subject to the legal spirit
of England.

iv INTRODUCTION
Militarism was as weak in the Quaker settle
ments as their prosperity was conspicuous. The
proprietary provinces, with a people of varied
origin, had a corresponding variety of religious
faiths, while the uniform population of New
England made the uniformity also of religion a
marked feature of its colonial life. The absence
of checks on the individual has often been criti
cised by the opponents of Quakerism, but it is the
very freedom of the Quaker in these matters that
makes him strong. The abolition of the Test
and Corporation Acts opened a field of public and
municipal service before closed to the Quaker.
Prior to this, his attention was concentrated upon
the ministry, and the custom of much travel in
the preaching of the Gospel. Nothing could bet
ter have prepared the colonial Quaker for the
work he was destined to perform. Idealists
though they are, the Quakers have been a whole
some leaven in political and commercial history.
They have brought pure and strong minds to
their task.
" The riches of the Commonwealth
Are free strong minds, and hearts of health ;
And more to her than gold or grain
The cultured hand or cunning brain." A. M. G".
Haverford, Pa.

CONTENTS

CHAPTEB PAG El
I. The Oath  1
LT. A Wanton Gospeller  41
ILT. The Quaker Franchise  105
IY. The Quaker Citizen and the Law  189
V. The Quaker in International Politics .... 215
VI. The Quakers and Mirabeau  253
NTL Quaker Loyalty  281
Index  319

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

John Bright  Frontispiece
Caricature from "Punch," February, 1859.
George Fox Refusing the Oath at Holker Hall  10
After painting by J. Pettie, R. A.
Joseph Wanton. Governor of Rhode Island  97
After painting oy Smibert, R. I. Hist. Soe.
John Arehdale to the French Huguenots  168
Facsimile of original in Roberts Collection.
Cream Jug made in 1765  215
Presented by John Fothergill to Benjamin Franklin.
Dr. John Fothergill  218
Medallion by Wedgicood, after Flaxman.
Benjamin Franklin  224
Medallion by Wedgicood, after Nini.
David Barclay  236
William Rotch  254
After daguerreotype, from portrait in family.
Francis Rotch : Jean de Marsillac  261
From old silhouettes.
Honors Gabriel Riquetti, Comte de Mirabeau  267
After the engraving by Weber.
Quaker Discourtesy  287
Caricature, from Quaker "Pantheon" etc., 1706.
President Washington to Quakers of Philadelphia  307
Facsimile of original, Friends' Library, Phila.
Abraham Lincoln to Eliza P. Gurney  315
Facsimile of original, Penna. Hist. Soe.

THE OATH

THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
CHAPTER I
THE OATH
" See the ingenuity of Truth, who, when she gets
a free and willing hand, opens herself faster than the
pace of Method and Discourse can overtake her."
Milton ; Areopagitica.
A Scotch Earl is said once to have remarked to
a Quaker, "The Quakers' loyalty is a qualified
loyalty — it smells of rebellion." To which the
Quaker calmly replied, "We understand not loy
alty that is not qualified, qualified, that is, with
the fear of God rather than that of man." Bar
clay, in his letter to King Charles, prefixed to his
"Apology" for the Quakers, declares that no libel
upon the Government was ever traced to a
Quaker, nor was a Quaker ever involved in con
spiracy against the King. The society kept aloof
from the commotion over the Exclusion bill,1 and
protested against the Rye House Plot: they
avoided in private as well as in public, con-
1 Sewel, History of the Quakers, Book X.
I

2 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
versation upon political matters, to an extent at
one time carried to an absurd extreme. Even
Macaulay is obliged to acknowledge their up
rightness in these respects.
At the time of the execution of Charles I, when
Quakerism was beginning to gain some adher
ents, there were men concerned in the proceed
ings of Parliament whose sons were to become
prominent in the new sect, and with whom they
themselves sympathized. At the King's trial in
Westminster Hall (20-27 January, 1648-9),
of the sixty-seven who were the King's Judges,
nine or ten dropped off before sentence had
been pronounced. Among these was Isaac Pen
ington, Alderman of the City of London. He
had been present all the previous days, but could
not reconcile himself to the conclusion.1 His
name, therefore, is not signed to the death-war
rant, two days later. On January 6, 1660, King
Charles II issued a proclamation requiring all
surviving Judges not already in custody, forty in
number, to surrender themselves within fourteen
days to officers named in the proclamation. The
fifth of these to give himself up was Penington,
who owned that he acted in the beginning in ig
norance. He was committed to the Tower,
where he died December 17th, 166 1. His son of
iMasson, Life of Milton, III, 712.

THE OATH 3
the same name was one of the best-known Qua
kers of the seventeenth century.1
The Laird of Swintoune, better known as
John Swinton, who, among the Scots in Parlia
ment was almost as great a favorite with Crom
well as Lockhart, became a Quaker and was
taken prisoner in a Quaker's house in King St.,
Westminster, July 20th, 1660. The decree of
outlawry for encouraging Quakers was pub
lished against Colonel David Barclay, of Ury,
October ioth, and early in December of the same
year Swinton (minus his hat) was committed to
the Tolbooth. Another member of Parliament
in 1653 was Dennis Hollister, who, although not
a Quaker himself, gave the sect much encourage
ment. He was the grandfather of Hannah Cal-
lowhill, who became William Penn's second wife,
and owned in Bristol, where he lived, the great
orchard in which so many enormous outdoor
Quaker meetings were held.2 In the same year,
ijohn Brown of Weston-Turville (Buckinghamshire) in 1658
was imprisoned for refusing to be sworn on a jury — an early
instance. 2 The Baptists were shocked by the field preachers, John Camm,
Thomas Airy and John Audland, who visited Bristol in July
and September, 1654. Out of seventy-nine members of the
church, nineteen, according to Barclay, became Quakers. Den
nis Hollister was a member of this church, and upon the
second visit of Camm and Audland, he " received these persons
into his house, entertained them and closed in with their doc
trine." An interesting contemporary account may be found in

4 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Francis Rous was speaker of Cromwell's "Lit
tle," or "Barebones" Parliament. He was an
old man and related to that John Rous who mar
ried the daughter of Margaret Fell, afterward
the wife of George Fox. All these men were in
Parliament at the time of the rise of Quakerism.
Very soon the English laws against dissent be
gan to bear heavily upon the Quakers. The atti
tude of the latter in regard to the legal value of
the oath — the turning point in so many lives —
makes their refusal to take the oaths required of
them an important matter, involving the fran
chise of a large body of people in widely-sepa
rated territory, and under very different circum
stances. The most distinguishing characteristic of
Quakerism under all conditions and in all periods
of its history has been fidelity to the principle
against taking the oath. No other single
Quaker "testimony" has caused so much suffer
ing. The Quaker carried most of his contention
for justice before the Courts of England, where
the test oath of fidelity was always promptly of
fered him. Possibly no more embarrassing situ
ation can be imagined than that of a thoroughly
the Records of the Baptist church at Broadmead, Bristol, pp.
42-57. (R. Barclay, "Inner Life of the Religious Societies of
the Commonwealth.")

THE OATH 5
loyal subject — for this the Quakers were, to a
man — obliged to decline to assert his fidelity to
his sovereign because of the form in which he
was asked to declare it. The consequence of his
refusal — and he always did refuse — was the accu
sation of disloyalty to the Government. By the
time the Quakers had become well known
throughout England, most of the Justices before
whom they were arraigned were perfectly well
aware of their real loyalty to the sovereign, and
put the test oath to such a proverbially truth-
telling people merely to furnish an excuse for
persecution. It is not too much to say that in
England more Quakers were imprisoned for not
taking the oath than for any other cause.
The Quakers declared that Christ's command,
"Swear not at all," covered all cases, legal and
otherwise, that the oath implied a double stand
ard of truth-telling, and that the administration
of an oath is an appeal to superstition, in the up
raised hand, kissing the book, etc. One should
distinguish between mere profanity and swear
ing in courts of law, and also between these, and
what may be termed the conversational oath,
used by way of additional emphasis. With the
first and last of these, although there may be
much of antiquarian interest, we have here noth
ing to do. But it must be noted that the whole

6 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
subject was viewed in a different light at this pe
riod of English history. One's word might be
kept or broken according to convenience, in the
Middle Ages, unless one were a man of most un
usual uprightness. And yet, even the matter of
profanity — in which the ladies were as accom
plished as the men — was against the law in the
days before Quakerism arose. For a long time
in England, acts condemning it were read at
stated intervals in the churches.1 Penalties were
fines, pillory, or a short imprisonment. The ob
ligation to read the statute was not abolished un
til so late as 1823, but had fallen into disuse
before that time. In 1772 a vicar was fined for
neglecting it.2 Objection to war and to oaths in
the time of Edward VI gave occasion for two of
the Articles of the Church of England, the 37th
and 39th. The Anabaptists of the time of Eliz
abeth and James I anticipated the Quakers. The
Massachusetts Bay Colony laws, with their total
lack of the sense of humor, in 1650, under
"Pphane Swearinge" read, "Noe man to sweare
more oathes than one at a time before hee re
moue out of ye roome!" William Penn, 1701,
wrote James Logan, "Tell R. Janney the young
man can neither plow nor mow, but has been
a2l James, c. 20; 19 Geo. II, c. 21.
2 Annual Register, 1772, 115.

THE OATH 7
mostly used to driving; is ready and good-na
tured, but swears. The young woman we should
be glad to have, but think the young man not so
fit!" Occasionally it happened that an uneducated
Quaker did not understand the nature of the
oath, as when Timothy and David Johnson, Jan
uary 1 8th, 1794, in Virginia, acknowledged to
their meeting that they had "deviated from the
principles of Friends in Kissing the Book, etc.,
which we were inadvertently drawn into, not
knowing the difference between an Oath and an
Affirmation, which we are heartily sorry for,"
etc. (Minutes of South River, Va., Monthly
Mt'g.) At Dartmouth, Massachusetts, in 1705,
"G. M." was condemned for "holding up his hand
in giving evidence." "G. M." wrote an acknowl
edgment, but his wife burned the paper which he
was to have read (we wonder why?) and he read
another. The Memoir of John Roberts, by his son,
(1725), tells us that once asked by an official,
"Can you swear ?" he answered coolly, "Not that
I know of, I never tried!"
Charles Lamb pays a high tribute to the
Quaker point of view,1 distinguishing closely be
tween "clergy-truth," as he calls the speech of a
1 Essay " On Imperfect Sympathies.''

8 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
person upon his oath, and, "laic, or secondary
truth." Of the Quaker he says, "You can of
him no more than his word." It was a common
saying among those who knew George Fox, "If
George says 'Verily,' there is no altering him."
Charles Thomson, first Secretary of the Ameri
can Continental Congress, was known among the
Indians as the "Man of Truth."
In 1666 George Fox exhorted his followers to
observe the laws, and threw the weight of his
great influence upon the side of loyalty to the
Government, with marked effect. At this time
he wrote a little book, "Fear God and Honour the
King," which, he says, "did much affect soldiers
and most people." Other recommendations
speak the liberality of Fox's views : "Let all the
laws of England be brought into a known
tongue." Many of these, as well as Court pro
ceedings, were then in Latin. "Let no swearer
nor curser nor drunkard bear any office what
ever, nor be put in any place." Of himself, he
wrote, "I was never found in any plot, I never
took any engagement or oath, nor have I ever
learned war-postures." At Worcester Court, in
1773, being tendered the oaths of supremacy and
allegiance, Fox made a full and clear statement,
acknowledging the King, and accepting the spirit
of the oath of supremacy by declaring his abhor-

THE OATH 9
rence of the Pope. He was sent to London and
there brought before the Court of King's Bench,
when, he says, "I tendered them a paper in which
was contained what I could say instead of the
oaths of supremacy and allegiance as follow-
eth: —
This I do in the Truth and in the presence of God de
clare, That King Charles is the lawful king of this realm,
and of all other his dominions ; that he was brought in
and set up King over this realm by the power of God;
and I have nothing but love and goodwill to him and
all his subjects, and desire his prosperity and eternal
good. I do utterly abhor and deny the Pope's power
and supremacy, and all his superstitions and idolatrous
inventions; and do affirm, that he hath no power to ab
solve sin. I do abhor and detest his murdering of
princes, or other people by plots and contrivances. And
likewise I do deny all plots and contrivances, and plotters
and contrivers against the King and his subjects, know
ing them to be the works of darkness, the fruits of an
evil spirit, against the peace of the Kingdom, and not
from the Spirit of God, the fruit of which is love. I
dare not take an oath, because it is forbidden by Christ
and the Apostle, but if I break my Yea or Nay, let me
suffer the same penalty as those that break their oaths.
— G. Fox.
His conversation with the official Lord Mid
dleton is characteristic, and shows the Quaker's
quickness in a trying situation. He thus relates
the incident: "Then," said George Middleton,

10 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
"you deny God, the Church and the Faith." I
replied, "Nay, I own God and the true church
and the true faith. But what church dost thou
own?" said I (for I understood he was a Pa
pist). Then he turned again and said, "You are
a rebel and a traitor." I asked him to whom he
spoke, or whom did he call rebel? He was
so full of envy that for a while he could not speak,
but at last he said, "I spoke it to you." With
that I struck my hand upon the table and told
him, "I have suffered more than twenty such
as thou, more than any that is here, for I have
been cast into Derby dungeon for six months to
gether, and have suffered much because I would
not take up arms for this King before Worcester
fight. I was sent up a prisoner out of my own
country by Colonel Hacker to Oliver Cromwell
as a plotter to bring in King Charles, in the year
1654. I have nothing but love and goodwill to
the King, and desire the eternal good and welfare
of him and all his subjects." "Did you ever hear
the like?" said Middleton, "Nay," said I, "you
may hear it again if you will. For ye talk of the
King, a company of you, but where were ye in
Oliver's days, and what did ye do then for him?
But I have more love for the King and for his
eternal good and welfare than any of you have."
Margaret Fell, widow of Judge Fell, of

O a

¦u
o X

lire

3-su rt-
X
o

I

THE OATH II
Swarthmoor, was in the habit of holding Quaker
meetings in her house, and in order to force her
to give these up, she was informed by Colonel
Kirby that she would be tendered the oaths of
allegiance and supremacy. Threats were of no
avail ; she declined the oath, and was thrown into
Lancaster Jail, where she remained for some
months. The scene at her trial, near the close
of 1663, must have been impressive as well as
picturesque. She made her appearance at the
bar accompanied by her four daughters. The
judge ordered the jailer to bring "a cushioned
seat for Mistress Fell," and seeing the young la
dies, added, "Let not Mistress Fell's daughters
stand at the bar; let them come up hither, they
shall not stand at the bar." So the four sisters
were seated near the judge. When the mittimus
was read, Mistress Fell stood. She declared, in
response to the questions put her, "As to the oath,
the substance of which is allegiance to the King,
this I shall say for my allegiance, that I love, own
and honour the King and desire his peace and
welfare; and that we may live a peaceable, a
quiet, and a godly life under his government, ac
cording to the Scriptures. But as for the oath
itself, Christ Jesus, the King of Kings, hath com
manded me not to swear at all, neither by
Heaven, nor by earth, nor by any other oath."

12 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
She was then told, and the jury were instructed,
that the penalty of refusal was life imprisonment,
and the forfeiture of all her estate.1 The statute
under which she was held was the 35th of Eliza
beth, and she bravely replied to her judge, "If I
might gain the whole world by swearing an oath,
I could not, and whatever I have to lose this day
for not swearing, I am willing to offer up." She
protested, "You are to consider this statute, what
it was made for, and for whom. It was made to
manifest who were Papists, and the oath was
made to test allegiance to the King. Now let
your consciences judge if we be the people it was
made for, who for conscience' sake, cannot swear
at all." This was addressed to the jury, where
upon the impatient judge, declaring she had "an
everlasting tongue," for the last time demanded,
"Will you take the oath, or no, Mistress Fell?"
"If you should ask me ever so often," she re
turned, "I must answer to you that the reason
why I cannot take it is because Christ hath com
manded me not to swear at all." The clerk then
held out the book, bidding her pull off her glove
and lay her hand on the Bible. "I never laid my
hand on the Book to swear in all my life," was
the reply. "I was never at any assizes before
1 Maria Webb, " Fells of Swarthmoor Hall," pp. 180-213.

THE OATH 13
this, but I bless the Lord that I am here this day,
on this account, to bear witness to the Truth."
A final question, whether she would give security
to hold no more meetings, brought the reply,
"Nay, I can give no security. I have spoken
enough on that." Upon which the judge said to
the officers, "Take her away," and they led her
civilly out of the court room. Twice more she
appeared at the bar, and her lawyers pleaded in
vain. September 21st, 1664, she was sentenced
to be premunired — outlawed, her property con
fiscated to the Crown, and she herself imprisoned
for life. "I am not terrified," said this brave
woman. "Although I am out of the King's pro
tection, I am not out of the protection of the
Almighty God." That she was right, is indi
cated by the fact that after an imprisonment of
four years and a half, the constant efforts of her
many friends resulted in her release, in the sum
mer of 1668. A year later she became the wife
of George Fox.
The Oath of Supremacy was required to be
taken by the Commons in the fifth year of Eliza
beth, and the Oath of Allegiance in the seventh
of James I, but these oaths were taken before the
Lord Steward, sitting in the Court of Requests.
During the last year of Charles II they were pre-

14 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
scribed to be taken by both Houses of Parlia
ment.1 The struggle of the last of the Stuarts
to revive the early claim of the Crown to be in
dependent and to possess almost divine rights,
and the rapid growth of that democracy, not only
in matters political, but also religious, of which
Quakerism was the flower, form an impressive
spectacle for the student of English political, so
cial or religious institutions at this period. With
the quarrel of Church and King, the latter be
came no longer divine. "The Hanoverian dy
nasty was too obviously endowed with no divine
sanctity. George I was clearly not the represen
tative of God Almighty, and the disappearance
with Queen Anne of the quaint superstition of
"touching" for the Evil, marked the extinction
of the last fragments of belief in the special sanc
tity of Kings." 2 The modern Constitution is
the legal result of the Revolution, and, with its
codification of the limitations of Royal Preroga
tive, dates from William and Mary. The altered
conception of Royalty was emphasized by the
way in which the representatives of the estates of
1 Sir W. R. Anson, " Law and Custom of the Constitution,"
Part I, 59. The same author says, " Edward I gave to our Par
liamentary institutions the form which, with many changes in
spirit, and many more in detail, they still retain."
- Sir Leslie Stephen, " English Thought in the Eighteenth Cen
tury," II, 132.

THE OATH IS
the realm presented the crown to the joint sov
ereigns, a fact which has controlled the develop
ment of constitutional usage since 1688.
The loyal Quaker would not seek to avoid his
lawful contribution to the Royal Exchequer. In
1 7 19 the meeting of London declared against
those of its members who defrauded the King by
seeking to escape the customs, buying goods sus
pected to be "run" (i. e., smuggled), exporting
wool, or other goods prohibited by law, or other
wise injuring the fair trader. Fifty years
after they say — "We cannot consistently join
. . . in opposition to those providentially
placed, either in sovereign or subordinate
authority; nor can we unite with or encourage
such as revile and asperse them, for it is written,
"Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy
people." The Popish affiliations of James II frightened
Parliament into excluding the Roman Catholics,
which was accomplished by compelling every
member to take the oaths of Allegiance, Suprem
acy, and Abjuration ; after this no Roman Cath
olic sat in Parliament until the oaths themselves
were altered in 1828. But this also effectually
excluded the Quakers as well, whose opposition
came not at all from the substance of these oaths,
as with the Roman Catholics, but because of their

16 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
objection to all swearing. This is a very im
portant distinction to be made throughout the
period during which the Quakers bore their un
flinching public testimony against the oaths pre
scribed by the Government.
It was entirely due to political misunderstand
ing that the Londoner of the seventeenth century
confounded the Quaker with the Roman Catholic,
just as for commercial reasons he was likely to
confound him with the Jew. The latter had been
proscribed in London for three centuries, and his
readmittance to English commercial life was al
most coincidental with the appearance of the
Quaker in the City. Both were thrifty ; both well
understood the value of money; and the philoso
pher might find certain ground for eminent suc
cess in financial affairs, in the exclusion by both
of distracting interests. They both had, more
over, an early education in economy. The Qua
ker and the Jew together gave rise to the
commercial prosperity of England in the reign
of Queen Anne.
With the Roman Catholic it was quite differ
ent. "No Popery" was the cry of the multitude,
who sought with bitter hatred to locate and pun
ish any man or bodies of men who might seem to
favor either the Pope or his adherents, Royal or
other. Suspicion, therefore, soon fell upon the

THE OATH 17
silent Quaker who took no part in political life,
and who went about holding quiet little meet
ings, often in secret places, for the sake of that
silence and retirement then so little associated
with acts of worship. Many a Quaker preacher,
from Fox down, was accused of being a dis
guised Jesuit. One of the precautionary meas
ures employed by the Quakers against the accu
sations of this sort which continually threatened
them with imprisonment, is to be found on the
fly-leaf of the minute book of Kingston Meeting,
London, under date, 1667.
This is to be put in the front of Friends' wills to clear
us of that scandal that the Quakers live and die Papists.
My Body, Soul and Spirit I have given up to the Lord,
with which I have glorified God, which all are the Lord's,
and have been long given up to him. And now I do
commend my body, soul and spirit unto my Savior and
Creator's hand, for all is his, and I die in the Lord (in
whom I have lived and moved and had my being) a
true and real Protestant Christian, and a member of the
true Reformed Church in Christ Jesus, as was in the
Apostolic days before the Apostasy was, of which church
Jesus Christ was and is the holy head and husband,
Mediator and Redeemer and Savior, and no pope nor
false Christian, by whom I have been a great sufferer for
bearing a true testimony to the Lord's holy name, in
whom I rest. Spread this among Friends.
Archbishop Tillotson, in 1685, apropos of Wil-

18 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Ham Penn's being called a Jesuit, wrote him in
response to Penn's inquiry whether he would tell
him frankly if he himself had ever made such an
assertion.
I make it one of the governing principles of my life
never to abate anything of humanity and charity to any
man for his difference from me in opinion, and par
ticularly to those of your persuasion. I have been ready
on all occasions to do them all offices of kindness, and
though I thought them mistaken, yet in the main I be
lieve them to be very honest. I thank you for your
letter, and have a just esteem for the Christian temper
of it, and rest your faithful friend, Jo. Tillotson.1
There were other requirements, however, to
which the Quaker objected in themselves, be
sides those oaths named. The Corporation Act
of 1 66 1 forced every one who took office in any
town service to show that within twelve months
before entering upon office he had taken the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the
rites of the Church of England. The Test Act
also of 1673 provided that any one who held of
fice of any sort under the King, must within six
months take the Oaths and subscribe the Decla
ration against Transubstantiation, and must
also within six months take the same Sacrament
1 Clarkson, Life of Penn, vol. I, p. 445.

THE OATH 19
according to British ritual. These were among
the unjust laws which were altered with the
reformation of Parliamentary order and oaths in
1828-9. The only legal obstacle which prevented a Jew
from sitting and voting in Parliament before
1858, arose from the words, "upon the true faith
of a Christian." In the year 1850, Baron Na
than de Rothschild was elected to Parliament, but
was obliged to withdraw at the end of the oath
of Abjuration. The same thing happened the
next year to Alderman Salomons. In 1858 the
law was amended to omit the above words, and
July 25th, 1858, Baron Rothschild was sworn on
the Old Testament and took the modified oath.1
The Act of Toleration passed in 1689, under
William and Mary, contained a Confession of
Faith to which the Quakers took exception, its
concluding phrase declaring the Holy Scriptures
to be the "revealed will and word of God." This
Quakerism held to be Christ Himself, the Word.
George Whitehead, therefore, with one or two
others, secured an amendment to the proposed
confession, which passed the House with the
Declaration of Belief of the Friends, as follows —
"I, A. B., profess Faith in God the Father, and
1 Sir T. E. May, " A Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Pro
ceedings and Usage of Parliament," pp. 197-&

20 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
in Jesus Christ, His eternal Son, the true God,
and in the Holy Spirit, one God Blessed forever-
more, and do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures
of the Old and New Testaments to be given by
Divine Inspiration."
An effort of Whitehead's, fruitless at the time,
had, however, so long before as 1680, laid the
foundation for future relief for the Quakers as
to the form of the oaths of allegiance and su
premacy.1 In 1693, and again the following
year, they had applied to Parliament for aid.
To do the Government justice, the Parliamentary
Committee for 1693 which had the matter in
charge, reported, "Upon the whole, it is the opin
ion of this Committee that the Quakers might be
relieved according to the prayer of their peti
tion." The opposition of the Bishops, who pre
ferred persecution to piety as an argument,
blocked all advance. Next year the case was
presented by Theodore Eccleston ("London, De
cember 22d, 1694"), and while the Quakers seem
to have obtained a hearing and placed themselves
in a more favorable light, their request for per
mission to affirm was not then granted.
In 1695 George Whitehead appears to have led
the first successful effort in the direction of relief
from Parliament in this matter of the oath. His

1 Gough, " History of the Quakers," II, 510.

THE OATH 21
own account is clear and interesting.1 Many
Quakers were imprisoned for "Contempts," as
the term ran, i. e., for not swearing, for non-pay
ment of tithes, etc. These "Contempts" being in
the eye of the law against the person of the King,
the Quakers determined to apply for relief to the
King himself who had the power to pardon such
offenses. In February, 1695, a little delegation
of five, led by the venerable George Whitehead — ¦
"always willing and ready to help suffering
Friends (as I had been in two Kings' reigns
before)," he says — waited upon King William.
With him were his "ancient companion in solic
itation," Gilbert Latey; his brother-in-law, Doc
tor Thomas Lower; John Taylor, of York, and
Daniel Quare, the celebrated clock-maker to the
King, and the inventor of the repeating watch.
He made a clock for William III which, may still
be seen in the bedroom of that sovereign at
Hampton Court.2
Daniel Quare, the only one personally ac
quainted with the King, acted as usher, and
Whitehead was spokesman for the picturesque
delegation. He explained the character of the
Quaker or free ministry, as distinguished from
that for which the Anglican church paid tithes,

i-Ibid., Ill, 279.
2 Daniel Quare is one of a very interesting and distinguished

22 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
and also the objection of the Quakers against any
form of oath. "This, our Case of Conscience, in
refusing to swear (I told the King)," says G. W.,
"is the same with the Peoples called Menists in the
Low Countries, as it was a matter of Conscience
with them." x His reference was to the com
mand of William of Orange in 1577 (January
25th) to accept the Yea and Nay of the Men-
nonites, a privilege confirmed to them later by
Prince Maurice. Seven cases of precedent as to
Royal clemency toward Quakers were also
quoted. The "Case," as Whitehead always calls
it, was presented and left with the King, and soon
after, his pardon released forty Quakers impris
oned for not taking the oath, or for other "Con
tempt." George Whitehead, having accomplished thus
much, then proceeded to the larger attempt of
introducing a Bill into Parliament to relieve
Quakers from taking the oath. The " Case 2 re
lating to Oaths and Swearing" was drawn up as
follows : —

group of Quaker clock- and watch-makers, a man of affairs
and large influence. He was much interested in the settle
ment of Pennsylvania, knew Penn well, and was' one of the
ten owners of shares in the mills at Chester in that province,
managed and named for Caleb Pusey.
1 " Christian Progress of that Ancient Servant and Min
ister of Jesus Christ, George Whitehead," etc.
2 " Christian Progress," p. 651.

THE OATH 23
It is not unknown to this Nation that ever since we
were a People it hath been our Principle not to Swear,
make or take Oaths, which He who is the Searcher of
all Hearts knows, is no other than a Case of Pure Con
science in Tender obedience to the Mind of our
Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, as we are fully
persuaded (according to many Eminent Martyrs, and
Men of Wisdom and Renown were who testified against
Oaths and Swearing in the Gospel-Day), and not any
Obstinacy, Disaffection or Worldly Interest whatsoever
on our Parts; We being really Willing and desirous to
answer the Just and Good Ends of Law and Govern
ment, as a peaceable People, fearing God, and for this
Cause of not Swearing we have been exposed to great
Sufferings and Inconveniences in our Persons and Es
tates, by tedious Imprisonments, and disabled from re
ceiving Our Due Debts or defending our Just Titles and
Properties; not suffered to give Evidence in Courts of
Judicature, at Common or Civil Law, nor to answer in
Chancery, or Exchequer, prove Wills and Testaments, or
take Administrations or proceed in our Trades at
Custom-house or be admitted to our Lands, or trusted
in our Duties and Services in Courts Leet, and Courts
Baron, but great advantage is taken against us, because
we so fear an Oath, that we durst not Swear ; for which
Cause also, our Children and Young Men are not al
lowed their Freedoms in Cities or Corporations, when
they have faithfully served out their Apprenticeships.
Nor admitted to give our Voices in Elections of Magis
trates and Parliament Members in divers places, though
known to have right thereunto as Freeholders, etc.
Wherefore, our request is, that in all Cases where
oaths are imposed and Swearing required, our Word,

24 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
that is, our Solemn Affirmation, or Denial, as in the
Fear and Presence of God, may be accepted instead of
an Oath, for which we Humbly Offer and freely Sub
mit, that if any under the same Profession among us,
break their Word, or be found false in such their Af
firmation, or Denial, or Guilty of Falsehood in any Un
sworn Testimony, Evidence or Answers, That then such
Penalty be inflicted on the Person so offending as Law
and Justice require in Case of False Swearing, or Per-
jury." This " Case," with an application for permission to
present a Bill to the Houses of Parliament, was laid be
fore that body, signed by twenty Friends,1 after some
weeks spent in judicious lobbying, " that it might not be
moved too soon or abruptly, before many of the House
were well apprized and prepared ! " "I did particularly
pitch upon Edmund Waller, Esq.," writes Whitehead,
" and engaged him to help us therein, he having then
pretty great influence in the House, and being my par
ticular Acquaintance and Friend. And when I had fully
given him to understand our Case, and what we re
quested, he sincerely undertook to assist us what he
could, and was very helpful by Solicitation, and Motion
in the House, for our said Petition which, when moved,
was read the 7th, of the 12th month, 1695, and carried
by a large Majority."
The Bill was drawn up by experienced counsel,

1John Staploe, John Harwood, William Bingley, Walter
Benshall, Jo. Hall, George Whitehead, Thomas Lower, Gil
bert Latey, William Mead, Richard Thomas, Thomas Hud
son, Thomas Hart, Theodore Eccleston, Jo. Butcher, Michael
Russel, Samuel Johnson, John Harmon, Daniel Quare, John
Bull, George Oldner.

THE OATH 25
Sir Francis Wynington, who made clear to the
Friends that their simple Yea and Nay, in a
document of such importance and dignity, must
be accompanied by such terms or expressions as
would appear sacred or solemn, so that the
Affirmation or Negation might be made to de
clare that they understood themselves to be in the
presence of God. "Many others," says White
head, "were of the same mind. . . . Their
forms of Oaths and Swearing having been of
such long standing, and such Great Stress and
Obligation laid upon them, for many hundred
Years, that 'twas a very difficult Point and a
great thing, to gain any such Variation or Alter
ation from them, as conscientiously to declare or
affirm in the Presence of Almighty God, instead
of the imprecation Oath, So help me God, and
the ceremony of handling or fingering or kissing
the Bible." '
During the debate upon the Bill in the House
of Lords, the Bishops who were present insisted
that some further mention of God as witness of
the truth of any statement made, must be in
serted. The waiting committee of Quakers in
the lobby, being consulted by several of the "tem
poral Lords," as Whitehead says, who were their
friends, the latter agreed to a proposition that the
words "The witness of the Truth of what I say"

26 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
be added after the word God, which change prov
ing satisfactory to the Bishops, the Bill, May
14th, 1696, was passed, with the wording, "I, A.
B. do declare in the Presence of Almighty God
the Witness of the Truth of What I say," etc.
This Act continued in force seven years, when it
was renewed again for eleven years from No
vember 22d, 1702.1
Edmund Waller, the poet and "particular ac
quaintance and friend" of Whitehead, was born
at Coleshill, and lived at Beaconsfield, in a neigh
borhood in Buckinghamshire whence came to
America some distinguished Quakers, — John
Archdale, Samuel Jennings, Thomas Olive and
others. He was a cousin of John Hampden, and
as Clarendon says of him, "was nursed in Par
liaments," sitting first in the house as a boy of
sixteen! He was exiled for a time during the
Commonwealth disturbances, and began his sec
ond career in Parliament in 1661 — a career in
every way to his credit. He remained in the
House until his death in 1687, speaking against
military despotism, and especially defending the
Quakers and other Dissenters. His attitude dif
fered from that of the poet Dryden, who named
the Quaker as "the Quaking Hare," who
1 " Christian Progress," p. 655.

THE OATH 27
Professed neutrality, but would not Swear." 1
It had been debated by London Friends, as the
records of Devonshire House Meeting show,
whether they should not accept office as Magis
trates, after the passage of the Declaration of
Liberty of Conscience. In 1690, the House of
Commons decided that the refusal to take the
oath rendered the Quakers incapable of voting
for Knights of the Shire. Most of the Non-Con
formists were Protestants and Hanoverians. A
Dissenter could hold no army or navy position.
Under a law of Elizabeth, he could not go either
to Oxford or Cambridge; he could hold no mu
nicipal office, nor could he be Judge, Member of
Parliament or a Peer. Nothing but a career in
literature was open to him; and since that was
circumscribed to a degree by his own self-im
posed limitations, there is no difficulty in under
standing why nearly all the society entered upon
trade. The bar, however, against entering upon public
office, lay most often in the Quakers' refusal to
comply with the necessary conditions. An hon
est and worthy citizen, public-spirited and re
spected even by his political enemies, was more
than once elected to office, and failed to occupy
1 " Hind and Panther," Part I, line 37.

28 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the position only because his scruples as a
Quaker interfered with his taking the necessary
oath. The most notable instance of this is the
case of the great Quaker, John Archdale, a dis
tinguished Englishman who had been governor
of the Carolinas, and who, upon his return to
England in 1698, was elected to Parliament from
Chipping Wycombe. He has the honor of be
ing the first Quaker elected to that body. He
never occupied his seat, because of his refusal to
take the oath of fidelity. The story of his public
testimony is given 2 in the language of the
Journal of the House of Commons for January
third, 1698-9. This is perhaps the most im
portant testimony upon the subject of oaths that
has come down to us.
The House was, according to order, called over, and
the names of such members as made default taken down,
and their names being called over a second time, several
were excused upon account of their being sick ; and others
upon the road coming up, and others upon account of
extraordinary occasions in the country; and the name
of John Archdale, Esq., a Burgess for the Borough of
Chipping Wycombe, in the County of Bucks, being called
over a second time, Mr. Speaker acquainted the House
that Mr. Archdale had been with him this morning, and
delivered him a letter sealed, which Mr. Speaker pre-
1 Stephen B. Weeks, " The Southern Quakers and Slavery,"
p. 61.

THE OATH 29
sented to the House. And the same was opened and
read, and is as followeth, viz:
Londox, 3rd. of the nth mo., called January, 1698-9,
Sir ( ?) Upon the call of the House it will appear
that I am duly chosen and returned to serve in Parlia
ment for the Borough of Chipping Wycombe, in the
County of Bucks, and therefore I request thee to ac
quaint the Honourable House of Commons the reason
I have not yet appeared; which is, that the Burgesses
being voluntarily inclined to elect me, I did not oppose
their inclinations, believing that my declarations of
fidelity, etc., might in this case, as in others where the
law requires an oath, be accepted. I am therefore ready
to execute my trust if the House think fit to ad
mit of me thereupon, which I do humbly submit to their
wisdom and justice; and shall acquiesce with what they
may be pleased to determine therein. This being all at
present, I remain, Thy real and obliged Friend,
John Archdale. .
The case came up for settlement on the 6th
January, when Archdale was ordered to be pres
ent. "The house being informed that Mr.
Archdale attended according to order, this let
ter to Mr. Speaker was read again, and several
statutes qualifying persons to come into and sit
and vote in this House were read . . . and
then the said Mr. Archdale was called in and
he came to the middle of the House, almost to the
table, and Mr. Speaker, by direction of the

30 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
House, asked him if he had taken the oaths, or
would take the oaths appointed to qualify himself
to be a member of the House? To which he
answered back, in regard to a principle of re
ligion, he had not taken the oaths, nor could take
them, and then he withdrew." With this great
public testimony to the then startling principle
that a man's yea and nay are sufficient, and that
a superadded oath is un-Christian, John Arch
dale withdrew from the Parliament of England,
and his vacated seat was soon occupied by his
brother Thomas.
But the Quakers were peaceful and unambi
tious, and for a period of one hundred and thirty
years no Quaker served in Parliament. In the
interval the Government made provision for re
ligious scruples in various ways. We have seen
them relieved of some of the sufferings in which
their refusal to take the oath under William and
Mary had involved them. The law of 7-8, Wm.
and Mary, Cap. 34, sec. 3, was later made per
petual. The form of affirmation obtained by
Whitehead — "I, A. B., do declare in the presence
of Almighty God the witness of the truth of
what I say," etc. — was continued until the second
Act of Parliament on Affirmation was passed, in
January, 1721. The Quakers themselves had
long been divided in opinion as to whether

THE OATH 31
Whitehead's form really constituted an oath or
not. Some of the more scrupulous contended that
the form as given was practically an oath, and
Thomas Story went to prison for eighteen months
because he would not make use of the form.
London Yearly Meeting gave the following ad
vice — "That Friends be charitable one to another
about it; they that can take it, not to censure or
reproach them that cannot, and those that can
not, to use the like caution with regard to those
who can." This was repeated by the American
meetings to their constituencies.
Finally, 1722 (8 Geo. I, Cap. 6), the simpler
form was constituted, which ran,
" I, A. B., do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare
and affirm, etc." The preamble to the act declares that
the change was made because "the Quakers had not
abused the liberty and indulgence allowed to them by
law,. and that they had given testimony of their fidelity
and affection to His Majesty and the settlement of
the Crown in the Protestant line, and that it was rea
sonable to give them further ease and relief."1 The
iThis affirmation was declared good, "In All Courts of Jus
tice & Elsewhere." (Davis, "Digest of Parliamentary Enact
ments relating to the Quakers," 1820, Bristol, p. 32.) The
simple form was protested against by the Archbishop of York,
and Atterbury, the intriguing Bishop of Rochester, with several
others. The laws relating to the Quakers were printed in
London by Luke Hinde 1757, under the title, "A Collection of
Acts of Parliament relative to those Protestant Dissenters who

32 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
London Friends issued an " Epistle of Caution," in
a now very valuable paper, which calls attention to the
obligation under which a gracious government had placed
them by this preamble to its act. They say, " This
testimony of the Legislature concerning our Use of the
late Solemn Affirmation upon Twenty-five Years Expe
rience ought at least to stir up all Friends to great
Watchfulness and Care in the Use of this farther Ease
and Relief, that this Testimony may be continued, and
thereby confirm the Government in their favourable Senti
ments concerning us." They practically repeated these
sentiments in 1730, officially " discountenancing every
indecent mark of dissatisfaction in word or writing re
lating to the Government."
In 1773 the London meeting again issued a
broadside containing the forms of Affirmation
and Fidelity directed by the Parliament earlier
in the century, as quoted. It is dated "Meeting
for sufferings, the 26th day of the 2d Month,
^Z" The right of the Quakers to vote upon
declaring the effect of the Electors' Oath on their
Affirmation was recognized by Queen Anne.1
Under George II amendments or embodiments
of earlier provisions were made in their favor,
and under William IV the Moravians were in
cluded with them. Benjamin Franklin wrote in
1764, "Nor is there existing in any of the Ameri
can Colonies any test imposed by Great Britain
are usually called by the name of Quakers." These were taken
from Burke's "Digest."
1 10 Anne, Cap. 23, 88.

THE OATH 33
to exclude Dissenters from office." J It is inter
esting to find Lord Mansfield, on the bench, in a
case where the defendant, losing his case, moved
for a new trial on the ground that a Quaker
had been a witness on his affirmation, saying
with emphasis — "I wish, when the statute 7-8
William III was made, that the affirmation of a
Quaker had been put on the same footing as an
oath in all cases whatsoever." 2
It would be pleasant to leave the Quaker at
this point, with the principle for which he had
so long contended, established in Anglo-Saxon
countries for all time. This indeed he had
accomplished, not only for himself, but for others
as well. Now would seem to have been the op
portunity to use the liberties he had gained at
so dear a cost. But there came a period in
Quaker history, when quietism was carried to
such an extent that for several generations it was
almost an offense to mention political matters,
aside from those aspects in which selfish interests
were involved. It is this attitude, at the end of
the eighteenth century, which is described by
Clarkson,3 until recently our only commentator
1 " Cool Thoughts on the Present Situation of our Public
Affairs." 2 Yorkshireman, I, 117.
3 Thomas Garkson, " Portraiture of Quakerism," 2 vols.
1806, London.

34 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
upon the social history of the sect. London
meeting had advised "that Friends be circum
spect, and not make it their business to discourse
of the outward powers, but to discourage all such
things." One has but to reflect upon the state
of the "powers " in the times of early Quakerism,
to understand how necessary, from the quietist's
point of view, was such an admonition as this.
Yet upon the whole, the result was unfortunate.
Clarkson tells us that if the subject came up at
all in conversation, it was most cautiously dealt
with. This attitude came from several causes.
As the eighteenth century drew toward its close,
the Quakers, considering that they were not per
mitted to take part in affairs relating to the
Government, and, indeed, were as a rule con
scientiously debarred from such interests, thought
it folly to disquiet their minds with such "vain
and fruitless speculations." Political discus
sions, moreover, usually lead to warmth of tem
per and expression, and this is detrimental to
their quiet attitude in religious matters. And
after all, since life is a mere journey, brief enough,
from one state of being to another, why should
they not get through it as inoffensively and as
speedily as possible? "I have seen," says Clark
son, "aged Quakers gently reprove others of
tender years for having started the subject."

THE OATH 35
SucK was eighteenth century Quaker ex-
clusiveness, at a time when both England and
America needed every energy of the Society
thrown upon the side of enlightened and right
eous judgment. Clarkson's "Portraiture" was
written in 1806, and while he is very fair, he un
consciously brings out strongly an attitude in
sharp contrast to the public-spirited vigor and
alertness, mingled with caution, which marked
the seventeenth century Quaker. There were
prominent men on both sides of the Atlantic who
did not fully share this spirit of exclusiveness, and
who chafed at quiet submission to the "powers
that be." It proved a sharp test, this official
withdrawal, to many of the sect in the trying
times preceding and during the American
Revolution. Nevertheless, it was a typical senti
ment for most of the society at large, voicing the
spirit in which the Quaker of the olden time
certainly dwelt, endeavoring to live "peaceably
and inoffensively as we have always done under
the various revolutions of Government;" "being
a people clear in the sight of God from all evil
designs, plots and conspiracies whatever, we hope
we shall continue a people, always quiet in the
land, having but love and good will to all men."
When this sentence was read in the meeting
at London in 1843, John Bright, who was

36 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
present, sprang to his feet, and so ably defended
the Anti-Corn Law League and its friends, and
so forcibly pointed out the need for active partici
pation by the Quakers in lending aid and influence
to measures for alleviating the distress then ex
isting in England, that he carried the meeting
with him, although there does not seem to have
been any alteration of the epistle recommending
the Quakers to "keep quiet in the land." The
struggle for reformation of political evils, headed
by Cobden and Bright, stirred the Quaker poet of
America to extend them a sympathetic hand
across the sea, and to encourage them in his fa
mous lines :
" God bless ye, brothers ! in the fight
Ye're waging now, ye cannot fail ;
For better is your sense of right
Than king-craft's triple mail.
O ye who, with undoubting eyes,
Through present cloud and gathering storm,
Behold the span of freedom's skies,
And sunshine soft and warm;
Press bravely onward ! not in vain
Your generous trust in humankind ;
The good which bloodshed could not gain
Your peaceful zeal shall find.

THE OATH 37
Press on ! and they who may not share
The toil or glory of your fight,
May ask, at least, in earnest prayer,
God's blessing on the right."
In Philadelphia, alas, disownment had followed
the neglect to observe the advice to "keep quiet."
The brilliant career of John Bright shows what
the right sort of political Quaker can do, and
caricature, one of the surest guides for the histo
rian, did not spare him when he exercised his
power, or declined worldly honors. With him a
conviction was a conviction, and his belief that it
was not right for a member of an administration
to have anything to do with the control of a polit
ical newspaper, is an instance of this.
In the year 1833 there was a general con
struction of the various statutes of Parliament.
Joseph Pease, in this year, claimed to take his
seat, after election, in the first reformed House.
The House of Commons admitted his claim, and
he took his seat after making affirmation; thus,
most unostentatiously he won a victory, "and the
Commons," says Spencer Walpole, in relating
the facts, "took a fresh step in advance."
There are now nine members of Parliament
who bear the name of Quaker ; one of them (J. E.
Ellis) has long been "temporary chairman," and
a member of the Privy Council. J. Allen Baker,

38 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
another member, did splendid work on the Lon
don County Council, as member and chairman
of the Highways Committee. The wife of the
Earl of Portsmouth, Under Secretary for War,
was born a Quaker. James B. Clark, who re
cently declined an invitation from King Edward
to sit in the Royal box at the Doncaster races,
on the ground that he could not "consistently
break through the rule of the Society of Friends
even for so great an honour," is Mayor of Don-
caster, and a devoted philanthropist. The tran
sitions of the English mind upon the subject of
Mr. Bradlaugh's admission to Parliament, re
fused him in 1881 upon the ground that he was
an unbeliever, are akin to those upon which the
admission of Quakers was declined. The Re
ligious Disabilities Removal Bill, passed Febru
ary 4th, 1 89 1, struck from the records the reso
lution of 1 88 1 that Mr. Bradlaugh should neither
affirm nor swear. Mr. Gladstone supported Mr.
Bradlaugh. The latter, in 1885, was again
elected from Northampton, and allowed to take
the oath, and it is interesting to find him in 1888
securing by his own efforts, the passage of the
Affirmation Bill. To-day, scarcely one person
in five takes the oath in the English Courts, those
oaths which are taken being of a judicial char
acter.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER

39

CHAPTER II

'wanton gospeller"

" New England, being a country so remarkably in-
wrapped in ecclesiastical circumstances, ministers ought
to concern themselves with politics."
Cotton Mather.
In England, the seventeenth century Quaker
quietly stepped aside from the political arena,
and, cut off from the privilege of attending the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge, settled
down to commerce and the art of growing rich.
In America, however, and especially in New
England, the question of the franchise faced the
incoming Quaker at once. The exigencies of the
wilderness, and still more, the rigor of the policy
pursued by the Puritan Fathers, made life a
burden to the sect. In this the Baptists shared,
and a glance at the laws as they affected the
Quakers and others, will help us in understanding
the legal position of the society in the colony of
Massachusetts Bay — the chief colony, with Vir
ginia, in which an established church, planted on
41

42 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
new soil, set about dealing out to others the ills
from which it had just escaped.
The religious qualification was the supreme
test of Puritan good citizenship. All must
"come in by the doore" of the church, as in
New Haven, not making "disorderly or unseemly
attempts to climbe uppe another way." Origi
nally a Puritan church enterprise, when the
Massachusetts Bay Colony's charter became its
only frame of government, how otherwise was
its integrity to be preserved, except by the ex
clusion of all non-Puritans? Governor Win
throp in 1637 said — "Whereas the way of God
hath alwayes been to Gather His churches out
of ye Worlde, now ye Worlde, or Civill State,
must be raised out of ye Churches." * These
idealists, even more than those who, under Penn,
came to Pennsylvania in 1682, had a clear theory
of government in their own minds. But they did
not foresee the economic complications sure to
ensue from the taking up of land by newcomers
who could not be excluded. Church government,
town politics and economic life, in the very nature
of things, could not long remain as one, and the
franchise which united them came to an end with
the colony's charter in 1691 when the property
qualification alone was adopted. Town life and
iWinsor's "Boston," I, 165.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 43
the common ownership of land had their origin
together, until individual ownership finally took
the place of the village community of interests.
In all the New England colonies, together with
the acceptance of Puritan doctrines, ownership
of land formed one of the voter's qualifications.
The mere taking of the oath of Fidelity did
not make a man a freeman. This was compul
sory upon all males over sixteen. The freeman
must have been regularly admitted into some
town within the commonwealth, where he had an
actual residence, owned land, and had a legal in
habitancy. After taking the oath, he must re
ceive his freemanship as a privilege conferred by
an order of the General Court. In almost all the
colonies, the path to the provincial suffrage lay
through the towns. Land was the cheapest
commodity possessed by the colonists, and its
ownership an inducement held out to the settlers.
The non-ownership of land was one of the of
fenses of the first Quakers in Massachusetts,
to whom the Vagrant Laws, by a stretch of
the facts, were the more easily made to apply.
When they did become owners of property, as in
Plymouth Colony at Sandwich, the religious test
was administered in the shape of the oath.
Accounts of the rise of Quakerism had pre
ceded its first exponents in New England, for

44 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
much discussion was going on in England and
the Barbadoes, whence they came. On the
other hand, the Quakers in England were no
doubt fully informed of the intolerance of Mas
sachusetts, for some of their own people, or those
in sympathy with them, who later came out to
New Jersey and Pennsylvania, were associated
with owners of shares in the colonies at Ply
mouth and the Bay. Righteous indignation at
the increasing intolerance of those who first came
out to Massachusetts with the meekness of mar
tyrs, no doubt led the pioneer women, Mary
Fisher and Anne Austen, to the Bay, but they
were permitted no opportunity to give offense,
and were at once forcibly returned to the place
whence they came. This indignity did not tend
to quiet the next comers, who proceeded to at
tack the government. It is probable that had
they gone about their self-imposed task with the
judgment and moderation which two centuries of
experience have since made Quaker characteris
tics, they might have appealed strongly to the
majority of the people, and carried public opinion
with them. But they met the Puritan govern
ment arrayed like a stone wall against them. It
was not an age for gentle speech or conciliatory
acts, and a few days sufficed to find the lamentable
persecutions begun in Boston.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 45
Let us, however, be sufficiently just to the
Fathers, to remember, as not all Quaker histo
rians have done, that the Quakers were punished
chiefly for contempt of Court. Had they, like
the Episcopalians, chosen more peaceably to bide
their time, they might have established them
selves as tenants of the soil, as they did in Rhode
Island, when the Government would have had far
more difficulty in adding capital punishment to
disfranchisement. As it was, the attacks in
Court forced upon Massachusetts the necessity
for preserving perfect its own body politic. No
Governor could permit himself, while presiding
in Court, to be called a liar, or a malicious man,
as Humphrey Norton to Governor Prence.
Contempt of Court has always been a high
offense. A punishment equally severe, if more
in accordance with modern ideas, would be meted
out to a similar offender to-day. The same
Court that put the use of the Book of Common
Prayer in the category of atrocious sins, defined
the Quakers as "grossly scandallouse," "lyars,"
"drunkards," "swearers," etc. This association
of Quakers in the minds of the Legislators helps
to prove that their "tumultuouse carriages"
were the offenses for which they were usually
punished, rather than the particular belief that
they held, although of course their behavior was

46 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
regarded as the result of their doctrines. Long
before the Quakers arrived, however, all "op
posers of the good and wholesome lawes" of the
colony had been excluded from Massachusetts.
The culmination fell upon the persecuted
Quakers and the acts of the more violent were
simply those of the insane. Many of the un
fortunate occurrences recoiled upon the Quakers
themselves, and the highest exponents of
Quakerism expressed reprobation for these acts.
During the seventeenth century the Quakers,
and in less degree, the Baptists — the two most
aggressive bodies of Dissenters — were outlawed
in all the colonies but Rhode Island and Pennsyl
vania, their sufferings varying with the progress
of ideas of toleration, or the political and eco
nomic conditions which governed their property
rights. Hard, however, as colonial laws became
against the Quakers, the injustice against both
Jews and Roman Catholics was greater. The
Jews were not given the franchise in the days of
early Quakerism in England. They could not
vote in New York so late as 1737, and the same
state of things existed in South Carolina. In
1647, an act was passed in Massachusetts as
severe as any enacted in England, to punish
Roman Catholic priests who might be found in
the colony. Their treatment is only an anticipa-

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 2tf
tion of what later befell the Quakers.1 They
were disfranchised in the colonies before the first
Quaker crossed the ocean, and Maryland pre
sents the extraordinary spectacle of many years
under a Roman Catholic administration, — during
part of which the Quakers enjoyed the franchise,
— only to suffer severe reaction with the establish
ment of the Church of England, and the dis
franchisement of the Roman Catholics them
selves. Social ostracism pursued the Roman
Catholics in most of the American colonies to
a much later period than it did the Quakers, who,
when persecution ceased, soon established for
themselves a secure position in society.
Some time before the coming of the Quakers,
there were stanch advocates of religious free
dom in Plymouth, and particularly in Sandwich,
the most tolerant community in Massachusetts.
Religious distractions were to be expected under
a government where the rights of petition and
private judgment were denied. Men like Vassal
of Scituate, and Maverick and Dr. Child in Mas
sachusetts, were objecting that "sober, righteous,
and godly" persons were debarred from Chris
tian and civil privileges, and prayed that civil
liberty and religious freedom might be granted,
in which case they "hoped to see the Gospel

1 Massachusetts Records, II, 193.

48 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
break forth as the sun, and Christian charity
wax warm." 1 The Oath of Fidelity demanded
in 1658 was refused by a number who were not
Quakers. Several arrests were made at Sand
wich at a meeting called by the authorities
"Quaker," when not a single Quaker was pres
ent.2 While Nicholas Davis was imprisoned in
Boston, the Court at Plymouth ordered the ap
pointment of a committee of four to visit the
Quaker meetings of Barnstable, and "endeavour
to reduce them from the error of their wayes,"
with the amusing result that one of the commit
tee became a Quaker himself, and was disfran
chised ! 3 The toleration proclamation of James
II had a marked effect in all the colonies. Be
fore this, history had pursued a differing course
in each. Virginia, whose representative assem
bly met for the first time in the church at James
town in 1619, took action first after Massachu
setts, i. e., in 1658. On the other hand a freeman
in Rhode Island between 1647 an<i 1663, had a
wider field in which to exercise the powers of
his suffrage than the voter of any other colony
at the same period. Ideas of toleration were
rapidly making progress, but that they had not
1 Freeman's " History of Cape Cod," II, 49.
2 Ibid., J, 228.
s Ibid., II, 265.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 49
very mightily prevailed is shown by the fact that
Defoe's satire, "The Shortest Way with Dis
senters," was at this time taken for a genuine
utterance of orthodoxy. It was too early in the
history of toleration to begin to be satirical, and
the pilloried and imprisoned satirist, taken in too
deadly earnest, most justly complained — "It is
hard that this should not be perceived by all the
town, that not one man can see it, neither Church
man nor Dissenter!"
By the end of the seventeenth century the
Quaker had established his right to freemanship
in all the colonies, and his unique figure might
be seen mingling with his neighbors in the pic
turesque gatherings of freemen, in the kitchens
of Newport, the Puritan Meeting-houses of
Massachusetts, or the Quaker Meeting-houses of
Rhode Island. "William Coddington, Governor.
General Assembly of Colony of Rhode Island and
Providence Plantations, held at Newport, at
Henry Palmer's house, 3d of May, 1675.
Voted, that this Assembly sitt in time of Elec
tion in the Kitchen of this house, and that Ar
thur Fenner and John Coggeshall see that the
votes come in legally and that the clerke of this
Assembly take the names of all the freemen that
vote for Governor." 1 So. Kingstown, R. I. 26

1R. I. Colonial Records, II, 541.

50 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Feb., 1739-40. Voted, "that Messrs. Peter
Bours, Nicholas Easton, Joseph Whipple and
Wm. Anthony be and they are hereby appointed
a Committee to procure some suitable place to
hold the next General Election, and that they re
quest of the people called Quakers in Newport,
the use of their meeting-house for that day, for
the purpose aforesaid, the colony making good
all damages that shall accrue to said house, by
meeting in it as aforesaid." 1 The Hingham
church — "old ship" — for over one hundred years
was used for town meetings and village gather
ings. Each man put his vote in a hat on the
table. This custom was discontinued by act of
August 1 8th, 1760, when every man was ordered
to hand in his proxy vote at a town meeting
on the third Wednesday of April, before the
election. The reason for this was, that their
presence in the town caused "a very great loss
of people's time at a season of the year when
their labor is abundantly necessary for prepar
ing the ground and planting the seed, on
which the produce of the whole summer must
depend." 2
The Quakers early saw the value of union, and
1 R. I. Col. Rees, IV, 569.
2 R. I. Col. Rees., IV, 569- A. E. McKinley, " Suffrage Fran
chise in the Thirteen English Colonies," p. 466,

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 51
as soon as their meetings were fairly organized,
communication was established between London
and the colonies, and the union was reinforced
by a frequent exchange of preachers. Their in
dependent position was also strengthened by a
knowledge of the fear lurking in the colonial
mind that differences abroad might cause dis
pleasure to the King and friends at home. Ap
peals to the home government, or, in fact, any
thing that might cause dissatisfaction in England
were to be avoided. The arbitrary acts of the
rulers of Massachusetts cost the lives of four
of the Quakers before public opinion and an act
of Parliament could check them. Many of the
proceedings of the authorities did not really rep
resent the true feeling of a majority of the
colonists, who frequently submitted to the rule
of an exclusive class in order to avoid a rupture
with the King, this being a disaster which, in the
mind of the newly-planted colony, was not for a
moment to be thought of. The voting class, ac
cording to recent figures,1 comprised one-tenth
only of the people in Massachusetts, and one-
ninth in New Haven, where, indeed, the dis
couragement to freemen, even up to the very date
of the Revolution, did not call out more than two

1 M. H. Greene, " Development of Religious Liberty in Con
necticut," 57.

52 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
per cent, of the population.1 While Rhode Island
was in the turmoil inevitable to the rapid growth
of the democratic idea, and was declaring for
, the separation of Church and State, Massachu
setts, holding the theory of the age, placed her
earthly interests in the hands of theocratic rulers,
and declared that the civil power should be
guided in its exercise by the ordinances of re
ligion. "Safety," said Governor Winthrop,
"lies in the councils of the best part, which is
always the least, and of the best part, the wiser
is always the lesser."
A meeting of the General Court of Boston,
held May 18th, 1631, passed several laws, "with
full consent of all the commons then present."
The following is one of their orders, to which,
presumably, all agreed:
"To the end the body of the commons may be
preserved of good and honest men, it was like
wise ordered and agreed that for time to come,
noe man shalbe admitted to the freedome of this
body polliticke, but such as are members of some
of the churches within the limits of the same." 2
The enormous influence of this test operated to
1A. E. McKinley, work quoted, pp. 41&-20. From 1639 to
1662 only one settler in thirteen was admitted as a freeman, and
three thousand came in. So late as 1723 the total population in
an election for magistrates was only 1618 freemen.
2 General Court Records Mass., vol. I, p. 86.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 53
deprive him who did not conform, of more civil
privileges than a Nonconformist was deprived
of by the test demanded in England.
The same Court, under date September 2d,
1635, ordered "that none but ffreemene shall have
any vote in any towne in any accon (action) of
auethoritie or necessity, or that which belongs
to them by virtue of their ffreedome, as re-
ceaving inhabitants, or laying out of lotts," etc.
On the 9th March following, ordered, "that noe
person shall hencefourth bee chosen to any office
in the Commonwealth but such as is a freeman." J
The text of the "Freeman's Oath" follows; the
broadside which contained it was the first piece
of printing in America.
I, A. B. being by God's Providence, an inhabitant and
ffreeman within the jurisdicon of this comon weale, doe
freely acknowledge myselfe to be subiect to the govern
ment thereof & therefore doe here sweare by the grate
& dreadful name of the euerlyveing God that I wilbe
true and faithful to the same & will accordyngly yielde
assistance & supporte thereunto with my pson & estate
as in equity I am bound & will also truly indeavr to
maintaine and preserve all the libertyes & privilidges
thereof, submitting myselfe to the wholesome lawes and
orders made and established by ye same; and furthr,
that I will not plott or practise any evill against itt, nor
consent to any that shall so doe, but will timely discover

1 General Court Records Mass., vol. I, p. 188.

54 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
& reveale the same toe lawful auethoritie nowe here es
tablished, for the speedy preventing thereof. More-
ouer, I doe solemnly bynde myselfe in the sight of God,
that when I shalbe called to give my voice touching any
such matter of this state, wherein ffreemen are to deale,
I will give my vote and sufrage as I shall iudge in myne
owne conscience may best conduce & tend to the publique
weale of the body, without respect of psons, or favr of
any man. Soe helpe mee God, in the Lord Jesus Christ.1
Among the whole company of the Corporation
of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, there was
not in the beginning a single professionally
trained lawyer. To them, their statute book was
the Bible, and like the Quakers in Pennsylvania
under Penn, they began their career in the same
hope that their system might prove simple and
peaceable. But their state really rested upon the
very groundwork of a legal structure, which soon
became their snare. Had the suffrage, as in
Pennsylvania, been extended to all citizens of
character and good repute, without the church
membership limitation, it is more than likely
that humane laws would have replaced those
which now deface the records of Massachusetts.
In 1 64 1 the Puritans of Massachusetts, at that
date taking under their jurisdiction the four
towns in New Hampshire of Exeter, Hampton,
Dover and Portsmouth, made so much of a con-
1 Massachusetts Records, vol. I, p. 17, 14 May, 1734.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 55
cession as to admit as freemen in those towns, not
only the church members who had in Massachu
setts been the only voters since 1633, but all other
substantial persons, and the four towns were al
lowed to go on governing themselves practically
as they had done before. It was long before a
similar freedom was allowed in Puritan Boston.
The oath of Fidelity was required of all
strangers within two months of their arrival in
the province; church members refusing to take
the Freemen's Oath, "ye Churche to deale with
ym." Many persons attempted to escape serving, as
is shown by an order that all persons refusing
to take their freedom be summarily dealt with.1
This was ineffectual, and four years later it was
enacted that all church members were liable for
public service, and to be fined for delinquency, as
though freemen.2 Non-church members, how
ever, did not have power to vote for general
officers. The first specific law enacted against the
Quakers in Massachusetts was at the meeting of
the General Court on the 14th of October, 1656.
According to its provisions, no captain of any
vessel should bring into the jurisdiction any of
lMass. Records, II, 138.
2 Ibid., II, 208.

56 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the "cursed sect of hereticks lately risen up in the
world, which are commonly called Quakers."
The entire text need not here be quoted at length,
but one finds it another illustration of the bald
ness of epithet possible in the seventeenth century.
It closes with the clause, "Lastly, it is hereby
ordered, that what person or persons soever shall
revile the office or person of magistrate or min
isters, as is usuall with the Quakers, such person
or persons shalbe severely whipt, or pay the
somme of five pounds. This order was pub
lished 21 : 8mo. [October], 1656, in severall places
of Boston, by beate of drumme." 1 The next year
found the Quakers meeting in the woods and in
their own dwelling houses. Samuel Gorton
wrote, in a tone of keen satire, to the imprisoned
Quakers whose presence had caused the passage
of the law, from Warwick, in Rhode Island — "I
marvel what manner of God your adversaries
trust in, who is so fearful of being infected with
error, or how they think they shall escape the
wiles of the Devil, when the arm of flesh fails
them, whereby they seek to defend themselves for
the present; sure they think their God will be
grown to more power and care over them, in and
after death, or else they will be lothe to pass
1 Ibid., IV, pp. 277, 278. Besse, " Sufferings of the Quakers,"
II, 197.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 57
through it!" The death penalty in Massachu
setts came in 1658. The authorities warned
their inhabitants against the Quakers' "dainger
ous and horrid tennetts," declaring "they do take
upon themselves to chainge and alter the received
customs of our nation in giving civill respect to
equalls or reuerence to superiors, whose actions
tend to undermine ye authority of ciuill Govern
ment." The Quakers were imprisoned without
"bayle," and a legal trial, so called, could be had
only before a "special jury," by the "Court of
Assistants." The publication of Quaker books
was punishable with imprisonment for one
month, and banishment, or giving bond for ap
pearance at the following Court. Obstinacy was
punishable with banishment upon pain of death.1
The penalties had been increased October 14th,
1657, and the death penalty was ordered October
19th, 1658, and again May 22d, 1661. This law
was passed by a majority of but one.
The Plymouth colonists in 1658 enacted a law
that "noe Quaker ranter or any such corrupt
person" should be permitted to become a free
man. They declared against "opposers of ye
true worship of God," or such as refused to do
the country service, and especially, "that all such
as refuse to take the oath of Fidelitie, as Qua-

1 Ibid., IV, pp. 231, 345-

58 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
kers, or such as are manifest encouragers of ym,
shal have noe voat in choice of publick offices
where they dwel, or shal bee imployed in any
place of trust while they continue such." In
spired, probably, by their neighbors of Boston,
the Plymouth colonists enacted the foregoing,
while the Boston Puritans already had in their
prison the four Quakers, who, a few months
later, suffered martyrdom for no offense. No
other Puritan colony but Massachusetts passed
a capital law against the Quakers. Great
Britain never executed a Quaker, although many
died of cruelty in her prisons. A Baptist was
burned near Lichfield, England, in 1612, and
the severe whipping of the Baptist minister, Rev.
Obadiah Holmes, at Boston, in 165 1, made him
the protomartyr of New England. In Con
necticut it was forbidden to lay upon the Quakers
a fine of more than ten pounds, or under any
circumstances, the death penalty. Mild laws
were soon found sufficient to restrain them. A
similar law to that of Massachusetts was passed
in Virginia at the same date. Plymouth seems
to have confined itself to whipping and other
bodily punishment, and to severe distraint for
fines unjustly imposed.
It is interesting, in passing, to find Governor
Edward Winslow of the Plymouth colony, asso-

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 59
ciated with the father of William Penn, the Ad
miral of the same name, the year before the
coming of the first Quakers to Massachusetts.
In 1652, Cromwell selected Winslow, then in
England, as Chairman of the English and
Dutch Commission on awards for the vessels
destroyed in neutral Denmark. In 1655, Wins
low headed the ill-fated expedition which was to
have made him Governor also of Hispaniola, had
not the jealousy of General Venables of the land
forces, and Admiral Penn of the fleet, caused
defeat. The expedition then sailed for what
proved the successful conquest of Jamaica, but
meantime Governor Winslow fell ill — it is said,
of chagrin — and died in mid-ocean, May nth,
1655, at the age of sixty-one. He was buried at
sea, Admiral Penn firing forty-two guns over the
spot as a salute of high rank.
Soon the individual churches took up the note
of warning, and the pioneer, the First Church of
Salem, in 1660, added to its confession of Faith
clauses relating to the Quakers and declaring
against that sect. The addition concludes thus —
"And doe judge, soe farre as wee understand itt
yt ye Quakers' doctrine is as bad or worse than
that of ye Pharisees ; therefore wee doe covenant,
by ye helpe of Jesus Christ, to take heede of ye
leaven of ye doctrine of ye Quakers !" On October

60 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
21st, 1653, tne General Court had ordered that
all persons absenting themselves from the public
worship "are hereby made uncapable of voting in
all civil assemblys during their obstinate per
sisting in such wicked wajes & courses, & untill
certificate bee giuen of theire reformation."
Soon afterward, the disapproval of the Royal
Commissioners, Maverick and Carr, fell upon the
Bostonians, whose severity many had begun to
condemn. These men sent back an unfavorable
report to the King, declaring that His Majesty's
desire to have all men "civil and of competent
estate" admitted as freemen, was eluded by an
act forcing a freeman, who must be twenty-four
years old, to be a "housekeeper" (married man),
and to bring with him certificates of his civil life,
his orthodoxy in religious belief, and of the pay
ment of ten shillings, besides head money, at a
single rate. He might then make his case
known, when the Court voted upon him. "Scarce
three in a hundred," say they, "pay ten shillings
at a single rate, yet if this were general, it would
be just. But he that is a church member, though
he be a servant, and pay not two pence, may be
a freeman. They will not admit any who is not
a member of their church to the Communion, nor
their children to baptism, yet they will marry

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 6l

their children to those whom they will not admit
to baptism, if they be rich." *
Finally, the General Court of Massachusetts
on the 1 6th August, 1664, ordered,
In ansr to that part of his Majtjes letter of June 28th,
1662, concerning admission of freemen, this Court doeth
declare that the lawe prohibiting all persons except mem
bers of churches & that also for allowance of them, in
any County Courts, are hereby repealed.12
The events leading up to the act above quoted
are connected with the matter of what has be
come known as "The King's Missive," from the
dramatic treatment which the final incident has
received at the hands of the Quaker poet, Whit-
tier. From the date of the Covenant Test for
franchise, quoted above, to that of the downfall
of the Provincial Charter, the number of male
citizens deprived for one cause or another of
their rights as freemen and voters increased
alarmingly. Dr. Ellis quotes the Court lists of
Massachusetts up to the year 1674 as containing
two thousand five hundred and twenty-seven
(2,527) names of men sworn to citizenship; this
was too small a proportion of the entire popula
tion; one estimate places the deprived citizens at

1F. B. Sanborn, Hist, of New Hampshire, p. 62.
2 Mass. Court Rees., vol. IV, Part II, p. 117.

62 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
a proportion of five to one ! The punishment in
cluded many who had nothing whatever in com
mon with the Quakers.
" Any one behaving himself toward the word preached
or carrying reproach on the service or ordinances," was
first to be rebuked by a migistrate at lecture, and bound to
good behaviour. " And if a second time they breake forth
into the like contemptuous carriages, either to pay five
pounds to the publicke treasury, or to stande two hours
openly upon a block 4 foote high on a lecture day, with
a paper fixed on his breast, with this; A Wanton Gos
peller written in Capitall letters.1
At Hartford, Connecticut, for some such of
fense, an inhabitant named John Williams in
1639, had been "Whipt at a Cart's Podex upon a
'Lection Day!" It is evident that the extreme
severity practiced against the Quakers ceased to
be a factor after 1664. In 1758, the Quakers
were exempted from tithes in support of the
Puritan clergy.
The General Court of Massachusetts meeting
December 19th, 1660, had voted an address to
Charles II on his restoration, which is spread
upon the Records. They apologize for, or rather
explain, their putting to death four of the
Quakers, and say, "The Quakers died, not be
cause of their other crimes, how capital soever,
1Dr. Ellis, "Puritan Age in Massachusetts," p. 216.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 63
but upon their superadded presumptions and in
corrigible contempt of authority, breaking in
upon us notwithstanding their sentence of ban
ishment made known to them." Certainly the
Quakers were never guilty of any violence, al
though, as Dr. Ellis x remarks, "there was good
cause for dreading their sharp tongues." The
new court law of May 22d, 1661,2 known as the
"Vagabond Law," provided for those who "wan
dered" from town to town; they were to be
"tyed to cart's tayle and whipped" from one vil
lage to the other, and this to be repeated for the
second and third offense. For the fourth, an
"R" was to be branded upon the left shoulder
before the victim was sent off with a warning not
to return under pain of death, and if he did re
turn after all these sufferings, and proved "in
corrigible," imprisonment and death followed.
This law, while apparently directed toward every
one coming under the head of "Vagabond," was
really intended to reach the Quakers, no others
in the country being such travelers from town
to town as they, on their preaching expeditions;
they were usually strangers from abroad. The
Quakers under imprisonment at the passing of
l"The Puritan Age in Massachusetts."
2 A law dated 14 October, 1657, was directed against vagrants,
Mass. Rees., Ill, Part I, 308.

64 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
this law were to be released and ordered to leave
the jurisdiction; if they did not do so, then the
law was to go into force at once. It was under
stood that the Quakers released were to go to
England. The cheapness of land, and the fact that agri
culture was almost the only occupation, may aid
us in understanding better the Vagrant Laws of
the seventeenth century. The possession of land
meant that the individual had a permanent and
definite employment.
The Vagrant Laws in force in England up to
1744 were severe, and in them it is not hard to
see the origin of the Vagabond Laws of New
England. The former enacted that any persons
found begging "were, by the appointment of the
head borough, or tithing-man, assisted by the ad
vice of the minister of the parish, to be openly
whipped until they were bloody, and then sent
from parish to parish, until they came to the par
ish in which they were born." No respect what
ever was shown to sex. The register of Croft,
Yorkshire, tells us, "Jane Buttery, of Darlington,
was sett in ye Stoxe of Crofte and was whipte
oute of ye Towne ye 3d. day of Jan. 1673."1 She
!Th. Thistleton-Dyer, "English Social Life as shown in the
Parish Registers," p. 97.

A " WANTON*- GOSPELLER " 65
was probably a relative of that Isabel Buttery
who first carried Quakerism into the city of Lon
don. Edward Burrough sent to the King a sharp
and able answer to the New England address and
obtained an audience with Charles, drawing from
the King a letter to the Magistrates of Massa
chusetts, sent to Governor Endicott by the hand
of Samuel Shattuck in a ship provided by the
English Quakers, and dated "ye ninth day of
Septembre, 1661." The letter of Samuel Shat
tuck in regard to his reception is still preserved,
in which he says, "The moderate sort rejoiced to
see me ; the truth had pretty much ground of ye
adversary." J
In Charter St. burial ground, Salem, his grave
may still be seen. It is two-thirds sunk in the
ground, but its long inscription is legible. "Here
lyeth buried the body of Samuel Shattuck, aged
69 years, who departed this life on ye sixth day
of June, 1689. He was present at ye Friends'
meeting when Christopher Holder attempted to
speak, and he endeavored to prevent their thrust
ing a handkerchief into Holder's mouth lest it
should have choked him, for which attack he

1 Samuel Shattuck's letter is preserved in the Aspinwall Papers,
Mass. Historical Society. See 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., IX, 160.

66 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
was carried to Boston and imprisoned until he
had given bond to answer at the next court, and
not to come to any Quaker meeting."
William Robinson and Marmaduke Stevenson
were hanged in 1659. Mary Dyer's reprieve at
the last moment saved her life at that time, but
she was hanged June 1st, 1660. William Leddra
was executed in 1661. All were buried in un
marked graves on Boston Common. Years af
terwards, permission to mark the spot was denied
by the Government, and all trace of it is now lost.
There seems little doubt that the Fathers were
rapidly reaching a point just at this time when
they were ready to acknowledge the impossibility
of any longer persecuting Quakers in the face of
the general disapproval which was beginning to
make itself felt. Dr. Palfrey says 1 "The reso
lution to abstain from further capital punishment
had been taken some months before, although the
magistrates, perhaps, were not indisposed to ap
peal to the King's injunction, rather than avow
a change of judgment on their part." There was
a general jail delivery, in 1661, of twenty-seven
Quakers, including one then under the death sen
tence, who agreed to go out of the territory of
Massachusetts. The second order of the Court
was dated November 27th, 1661, and is signed by
*Dr. Palfrey, "History of New England," vol. II, p. 519.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 67
Edward Rawson, Secretary.1 The Quakers then
liberated and the ship's company which had
brought over the King's Missive, met together
and publicly gave God thanks for their liberation,
well knowing, however, that it was no impulse of
mercy or of justice that had moved the sovereign,
and only too well prepared for his continued dis
favor. The correspondence between Dr. Ellis
and the poet Whittier upon this historic incident
has pretty clearly brought out the facts, and to it
the reader may be referred.2
" With its gentler mission of peace and goodwill
The thought of the Quaker is living still:
And the freedom of soul he prophesied
Is gospel and law where the martyrs died."
The "King's Missive" ran as follows :
Charles R.
Trusty and Well-Beloved, — We greet you well. Hav
ing been informed that several of our Subjects
among you called Quakers have been and are Imprisoned
by you, whereof some have been Executed and others
(as hath been represented to us), are in danger to un
dergo the like, We have thought fit to signifie Our
Pleasure in that behalf for the future ; and do hereby
require, That if there be any of those People called
'Dr. Ellis, "Puritan Age," etc., p. 480.
2 This is given in full in the Life and Letters of Whittier, by
S. T. Pickard, vol. II, Appendix, p. 775.

"68 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Quakers amongst you now already Condemned to suffer
Death or other Corporal Punishment, or that are im
prisoned or are Obnoxious to the like Condemnation, you
are to forebear to proceed any further therein but that
you forthwith send the said persons (whether Con
demned or Imprisoned) over into this our Kingdom of
England together with the respective Crimes or Of
fences laid to their Charge, to the end such Course may
be taken with them here as shall be agreeable to our
Laws and their Demerits; And for so doing, these our
Letters shall be your sufficient Warrant and Discharge.
Given at our Court at Whitehall, the ninth day of Sept.,
1661. By his Majesty's Command, William Morris.
A second royal letter began the open negotia
tions eventually ending with the withdrawal of
the Charter. In reply to the correspondence thus
begun, the Court declared the law of 1631 in
reference to church membership to be repealed,
and acknowledged the requirements of his Maj
esty's letter, rather than the old rule of "Full
communion with some church among us." It is
only as they affected the Quaker franchise that
these changes are here noticed. An alternative
qualification included a certificate signed by the
local minister that the would-be freeman was
"orthodox in religion and not vicious in life."
So few persons possessed these qualifications that

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 69
the practical effect of the new law was to leave
the Massachusetts voters where they were before.
Eventually, non-church members could vote, al
though required to pass through a long period
of probation.
The King's second letter declared that "all the
freeholders of competent estates, not vitious in
conversation and orthodoxe in religion (though
of different persuasions concerning church gov
ernment), may have their votes in the election
of all officers, both civill and military." It then
added, "Wee cannot be understood to direct or
wish that any indulgence shall be granted to
those persons, commonly called Quakers, whose
principles, being inconsistent with any kind of
Government, wee have found it necessary, by the
advice of Parliament here, to make a sharp law
against them, and are well contented that you
do the like there." The date of the King's sec
ond letter was June 28th, 1662; it was presented
by the returning agents, Bradstreet and Norton,
and Dr. Ellis calls attention to the fact that it was
not put upon record until the session of May,
1665, although acknowledged by the Court Oc
tober 8th, 1662. Upon the receipt of the first
letter, Massachusetts suspended action against
the Quakers, and made a pretense of extending

70 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the franchise generally. The arrival of the
second letter 1 caused a resumption of severity,
but public opinion had been aroused, and the
Fathers found it impossible to administer the laws
in their original spirit of exclusion. By various
quibbles, they endeavored to avoid the evident
purpose of the King to broaden the franchise in a
juster spirit of toleration. In 1678 the Quakers
printed "An answer to Severall New Laws &
Orders made by the Rulers of Boston in New
England." 2 (Dated 10th day of 8mo, 1677. )
Finally, the General Court of Massachusetts,
March 29th, 168 1-2, enacted the following:
"For admission of ffreemen, wee humbly con
ceive it is our liberty by Charter to chuse whom
wee will admitt into our owne company, wch
yet hath not bin restryned to Congregational
Menn, but others haue been admitted who were
also provided for according to his majtjes direc
tion by a law made Anno 1664. In answer to
his Majtjes letter of June 28th, 1662, the law
restryning ffreemen to church members only, is
repealed." 3
The thoroughly undemocratic conditions which
had prevailed in Massachusetts and New Haven
1 Records Mass., vol. IV, Part II, p. 165.
2 Goodwin's " Pilgrim Republic,'' 490.
s Ibid., vol. V, p. 385. The Quakers were not whipped after
1677.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 71
had at first been borne with New England's cus
tomary sturdiness until a partial church member
ship was adopted as a political measure. Puri
tan birthright membership took shape when at
Boston, October 8th, 1664, the Court confirmed
the decision of the Synod in 1657 — "That the
children of professing parents are, by means of
their parents covenanting, in covenant also, and
members of the church by divine institution."
This was receding from their former position of
regeneration for each member of the church. It
applied only to membership, and a sharp distinc
tion was drawn between an ordinary member
and one who held the franchise and became a
voter, through professing regeneration. Mitch-
el, a member of the Court which confirmed the
decision, explained — "We make account that if
we keep baptism within the non-excommunicable,
and the Lord's Supper within the compass of
Godliness, or grace in exercise, we shall be near
about the right middle way of church reforma
tion!" This has ever since been known as the
"Half-way Covenant."
This attempted compromise between institu
tional and individualistic theories of church gov
ernment was the beginning of a disintegration
which, as it affected the suffrage, affected also the
Quakers, who had patiently borne the results of

y2 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM"
a policy too exclusive from the beginning. Leg
islative action ended with the commendation by
the General Court of the action of the Synod
in affirming the compromise. Although certain
ecclesiastical historians say that the "half-way
covenant" had no effect upon the suffrage, the
inevitable result was to make the religious test
less objectionable, and to broaden the suffrage,
although there was at that time no actual change
of a statutory kind in the franchise itself. The
influence of the parish upon the church has al
ways tended toward increased liberality. Per
sons who made no formal profession and sub
scribed to no creed, were by this compromise
admitted to the suffrage.1
As a matter of course the King's interference
with the stern Puritan rule also involved the re
moval of the restriction of the franchise to church
members; this meant, further, its extension to
all good citizens properly qualified in other re
spects. But although the wily Puritans man
aged to retain under other forms most of the
earlier restrictions, and so evade the' spirit of the
English law, they could not long maintain their
position, and the spell was finally broken when
1 Backus, in his " History of the Baptists '' (I, 266) has a clear
setting-forth of this famous compromise measure of the Puri
tans. See also M. C. Cook, " Unitarianism in America."

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 73
the charter of 1628 was annulled and the province
became the colony. Under the Massachusetts
Charter of 1691 there was no rule limiting the
suffrage to church membership.
The claim of liberty of conscience came in
with the Reformation, but the recognition of that
claim was long delayed. The Episcopalians did
not secure their rights in Massachusetts until the
grevious penalties for Dissenters had been re
moved in England. Under Governor Andros,
worship by the ritual of the Established Church
was introduced in Boston, and a church built in
1688. New Hampshire, at the period which we
are considering, was geographically a part of
Massachusetts, not succeeding in severing her
self from the arbitrary dominion of the Bay Col
ony for many years. Like Rhode Island, her
constituency was much more liberal, and there
were those who declined to follow the rules laid
down at Boston. While practically all the free
men of New Hampshire were church members,
as in Massachusetts, the members of the Angli
can church in Portsmouth and Dover stipulated
as a condition of their obedience to the Bay Gov
ernment that no such ecclesiastical restriction
should be laid upon them. F. B. Sanborn J

1,1 American Commonwealth" series, History of New Hamp
shire, p. 22. New Hampshire seems to have excluded the Ro
man Catholics in 1680 for a space of two years.— [McKinley.]

74 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
thinks that this exemption gradually prevailed in
Exeter and Hampton. As might be imagined,
however, the interference of the Boston Puritans
soon disturbed the peace of the English church,
and forced the Portsmouth rector to return to
England, leaving an unsettled feeling in the lat
ter town which, for so long as thirty years, re
acted in turn upon the Puritan element itself, and
prevented the peaceful settlement of a church in
that place for anything but a missionary congre
gation. A full church covenant waited for
adoption for more than a quarter of a century.
A Court law of Massachusetts, in 1652, had de
fined as a misdemeanor the act of any one who
preached on the Sabbath day who was not a reg
ularly ordained preacher. It was aimed partic
ularly at Joseph Peasley and Thomas Macy, of
Salisbury, New Hampshire, who from the meet
ing-house in that place had been occasional ex-
horters of the people. Lieutenant Robert Pike,
the leading citizen of Salisbury, declared indig
nantly that the lawmakers had "violated their
oath as freemen;" he further declared that the
act was against both the civil and religious lib
erty of the country. He was in consequence dis
franchised, disabled from holding office, fined
thirty pounds and bound to good behavior. The
leading citizens of Hampton and Salisbury were

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 75
sufficiently enlightened and had enough respect
for their fellow-citizen, to send up a petition to
the Court of Massachusetts in his behalf, de
manding his release. This was accomplished by
the payment of the fine, and Pike's re-enfran
chisement in 1657, followed by his election the
following year as deputy to the General Court
which had disfranchised him! The petitioners
who had signed the offending document demand
ing his release, were, however, dealt with ; and all
made apology but two — Christopher Hussey and
John Sanborn.1 Such was the effect of this
incident upon the broader minds of these New
Hampshire men, that Macy and the children of
Christopher Hussey became Quakers, and John
Emery, one of the recusants, was some years
after, fined for "harboring Quakers." A more
important result was the purchase in 1659 of the
Island of Nantucket from Thomas Mayhew, by
Macy, Starbuck, Coffin and their companions and
their removal there in that year. Nantucket has
been so identified with the Quakers that writers

1 See F. B. Sanborn, Hist. N. H. Amer. Commonwealth Ser.,
pp. 44-52. Robert Pike was one of the kindly men who took no
part in legislating against the Quakers, although the first law
was passed almost as soon as he became a member of the Court.
At Dover he aided in relieving the Quaker women so merci
lessly treated in that town by the agent of the Bay Colony.
The law against preaching without proper ordination was also
repealed.

76 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
upon its unique history — which well deserves the
close attention of a competent historian — have
frequently asserted that it was settled by them.
The first Quaker meeting was not established
there for fifty years. Macy and his company
settled in the island a community, the most abso
lutely free of any in America, where every man
could vote who was a freeholder. This was the
case from the very beginning, and Nantucket
may well be called the "Pearl" of Puritan rule.
It is the only community in New England where
from the first, so complete was the separation of
Church and State, that the earliest mention of a
meeting-house occurs fifty years after settlement,
and then it is in the Quaker meeting records of
1709.1 This is largely explained by the fact that
to 1692, Nantucket belonged to New York.
Edward Randolph, agent for the Board of
Trade in the Colonies, reported from New
Hampshire, October 12th, 1676, "The clergy are
for the most part very civil, but held in subjec
tion by the ruling elders, who govern all affairs
of the church. The ecclesiastical government is
in the hands of lay members, but no church cen
sure shall degrade or depose any man from any
1 See an interesting and valuable paper by Henry B. Worth,
Esq., "The Colonial Church and Nantucket," in Proceedings of
the Nantucket Historical Association, for 1906.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" yj
civil dignity, office or authority." This was
more the case in Boston than anywhere else.
The authorities permitted no disrespect to mag
istrates. They were "ordained of God," and as
such were addressed as "worshipful." It was
quite otherwise with the ministers, who were
elected by their church members, and however
much they might know their "call" to be divine,
were, nevertheless, the servants of the people.
Puritanism's powerful state organization had
begun with the idea that the churches were to be
supported by voluntary contribution — an idea
that Boston carried down to modern times.
This, however, had not always worked, and the
Fathers soon resorted to taxation. When only
church members were permitted the franchise, it
is easy to see that the selection of the minister
would be in the hands of a conservative few.
The extension of the franchise would make all
tax-payers electors. Then came the question as
to the Quakers and other Dissenters, who de
clined to be taxed, although it was their universal
custom to aid in paying the poor rates and all
other town charges. Randolph once had the
"insolence" to "reprove and even threaten" the
Governor of Plymouth for exacting taxes from
Quakers for support of the ministry, and later
added a remonstrance to the authorities of Mas-

78 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
sachusetts — "Perhaps it will be as reasonable
to move that your colony be rated to pay our min
ister of the Church of England who now preaches
in Boston and you hear him not, as to make the
Quakers pay in your colony." Two men had
been dropped from the Board of Assistants
twenty-five years before, because of their opposi
tion in Plymouth to the severe proceedings
against the Quakers: they were Timothy Hath-
erly and James Cudworth.1 One cannot help ad
miring the attitude of Isaac Robinson, son of the
revered pastor of the Pilgrim church at Leyden,
who allowed himself to be dismissed from civil
employment, disfranchised and treated with a
certain amount of indignity, because of his lib
eral views. He removed to Sandwich to find a
freer atmosphere, and was later restored to the
freemanship. By degrees, in all the New England colonies,
the church rates were gradually lightened. Con
necticut complicated its church suffrage early in
the eighteenth century by allowing attenders of
the Episcopal and Quaker congregations exemp
tion from the tax in support of the established
church. In 1746, such Dissenters were very
properly excluded from any part in meetings for
1 Freeman's History of Cape Cod, II, 224.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 79
church affairs, as the selection of a minister, etc.1
In 1732 the town of Chatham sent to Barnstable
to inquire "whether those that call themselves
Quakers be free of ministerial taxes," while the
previous year the town meeting of Falmouth or
dered 170 pounds paid toward the minister's sal
ary "to clear the Quakers." The fines of the
Baptists on Cape Cod were remitted soon after.
Pocasset, on the Cape, in 1769 reported sixty
families of Quakers "whose rates are not avail
able for the support of the ministry." After
Sandwich town meeting had passed a similar vote
to the effect that "the interest on the town's
loan money be appropriated to pay the minis
terial tax laid on the people called Quakers, bal
ance to be paid out of the town treasury and thus
from year to year," it is surprising to find the
Quakers in that place in 1768 petitioning for
their share of the ministerial lands. The mild
spirit of the people at this later date is shown in
the appointment of a committee to confer with
the petitioners and examine "the foundation on
iA. E. McKinley, "Suffrage Franchise in Thirteen English
Colonies," 425. The Quakers always willingly paid the poor
rates. In 1712, two Sandwich Friends calculated the propor
tion between the priests' rates and the county charges and re
ported "The priests' rate, which Friends cannot pay, is near
about one-half, lacking half a third of the whole." [Sandwich
M. M. Records.]

80 THE' QUAKER IN" THE FORUM
which the town was settled, the manner and rea
son of grants to the ministry, and whether the
petitioners have any equitable right to the same,
and report." Unfortunately, we are not told
the result. The reference was probably to the
public lands long held in that town in common,
and to which all freemen had certain rights.
The town of Sandwich has upon its records a
very valuable account of a Quaker's legal experi
ence under Puritan rule. Sandwich was an off
shoot from the Pilgrim colony at Plymouth, and
was settled by its "undertakers" in April, 1637;
the picturesque narrative of the brief journey
afoot across the eighteen miles intervening reads
like a romance. In a sense, it took the best of
the milder Puritan element, and often gave the
Quakers protection when shelter was withheld by
all other towns in the colony. Sandwich was in
corporated in 1639 and its lines were run by that
doughty Puritan, Myles Standish. It was in
timately connected with the parent colony of Ply
mouth, to attend whose courts a pilgrimage
through interlying forest was made twice yearly.
Its municipal rights underwent alteration when
the Massachusetts Colonial Charter absorbed the
separate rights of Plymouth in 1692. The "Town
Neck" of Sandwich is to-day one of the last
relics of the lands held in common in New Eng-

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 81
land, in which Quaker ownership was often so
difficult, and so unjustly questioned.
Among the "undertakers" of Sandwich was a
widow named Deborah Wing, who, with her
four sons, took up land and built the homestead,
to whose site all of her descendants still make an
nual pilgrimage. These sons, upon the coming
of the Quakers to Cape Cod soon after their ar
rival in 1656, all threw in their fortunes with the
persecuted sect, except John. That he remained
a Puritan is known from the town records for
J657- "J°hn Winge tooke the Oathe of Fideli-
tie at Yarmouth." In 1640 Daniel bought land,
built a house and married Hannah Swift soon
after. Here he became an offender by "enter
taining Quakers," incurring thereby the penalty
of the law. The first record of the town relative
to the persecution of the Quakers, is dated March
2d, 1657-8, when Peter Gaunt, Daniel Winge,
Ralph Allen Jr., and William Allin, were sum
moned to appear at court for their "tumultuouse
carriage att meeting of ye Quakers." They
were cleared of the charge, but for "theire irrev
erent carrying themselves before the Court, com
ing in before ym with theire hatts on," they were
fined twenty shillings apiece. The brothers
Wing had been recognized as citizens in all the
transactions of the town from the beginning, and

82 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Stephen had been appointed to office by the Ply
mouth Court, yet in 1658 steps were taken by
Governor Thomas Prence and the magistrates,
at the petition of some of the inhabitants of Sand
wich, to deprive Daniel and Stephen Wing of
their rights as citizens, under the law of 1639.
The order went forth that they, and several other
Quakers, "shall henceforth have noe powere to
act in any town meeting till better evidence ap
pear of their legal admittance ; or to claim title or
interest in any towne priviledges as townsmen,"
etc. Daniel Wing was fined five pounds, which
he refused to pay, when the town distraint
amounted to twelve pounds and three of his cows
were sold to satisfy the claim.
Soon after this he was offered the oath of
fidelity, which he was fined five pounds for re
fusing because he could not take any oath. His
companion, George Webb, was banished. For a
number of years after, there were yearly fines of
five pounds for the same offense on record. The
continued obstinacy of the Sandwich Quakers on
the subject of the oath, finally caused the Ply
mouth authorities to despatch the infamous
Marshal, George Barlow, to reduce them to sub
mission. His favorite method was to call upon
the Quakers to assist him in levying upon the
property of their co-religionists, and upon their

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 83
refusal, to present them at Court, as when Wing
and two others, December 3d, 1658, were tried
"for refusing to aid the mar shall in the execution
of his office" and were each fined twenty shil
lings. Freeman x states that Daniel Wing died in
1659. But there seems no sort of doubt, as a re
cent writer has shown,2 that Daniel Wing's death
was only a legal one, for, threatened with finan
cial ruin by repeated prosecution, the shrewd
Quaker took advantage of a forgotten law, and
caused his estate to be administered in his
own lifetime. The Court minute of March 3d,
1658, can only thus be properly understood.
'Whereas, att this Court, John Winge testified
and cleared up unto the Court, that the estate of
Daniel Winge is made over unto his children, the
Court allows thereof, provided that the said John
Winge give in unto the Court a true inventory
of the Estate soe disposed, and engaged, and that
he likewise engage that the said estate shall be
employed for the use of the said children." John
Winge, then of Yarmouth, having remained a
Puritan, could administer the estate for his
brother. Since Daniel Wing's will, made thirty-
nine years later, left a second property to his
1 History of Cape Cod.
2 Henry N. Hoxie, in a paper, " The Wings as Quakers."

84 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
younger children, born after the episode of 1659,
we may safely conclude that his older children en
joyed the fruits of his first acquired estate. The
first inventory of the estate was taken by Stephen
Wing and Stephen Skiff e, 5mo. 3d, 1659. By
this settlement, while his personal inconvenience
may have remained as great, Daniel Wing pro
vided for his family, and secured them from suf
fering. His death occurred in 1698, when the
second will was proved ; he left an estate in which
the personal property amounted to £268. 10s., the
right of his share in the land at Scorton, or the
"Town Neck," going to his son Samuel.
This is a remarkable instance of dove-like inno
cence and serpent-like wisdom; there may have
been other cases among the Quakers somewhat
similar, where a little legal knowledge was of
great value. Daniel Wing's persecution went
on, of course, just the same; but there are few in
stances where the circumstances of the case can
be so clearly followed throughout.
Rhode Island owes its being to the intolerance
of Massachusetts, illustrating how fully the char
acter of the civil institutions of the United States
has been influenced by the zeal of the Puritans
in persecuting other churches. Their attitude
quickened all the forces of independence, and has
tened the separation of Church and State. The

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 85
inhabitants of Rhode Island in 1657-8 declared,
"We shall strictly adhere to the foundation prin
ciple on which this colony was first settled, to
wit, that every man who submits peaceably to the
civil authority may worship according to the dic
tates of his own conscience, without molesta
tion." They felt that when Roger Williams and
his companions, on the banks of the Moohausic,
in 1639, drew up their famous compact, they rec
ognized no aristocracy of government, but began
their first written document, "We incorporate
ourselves!" They make no mention of God, and
in only one of their first three agreements do they
notice the existence of the English government.1
They say "We ... do promise to subject
ourselves in active or passive obedience to all such
orders or agreements as shall be made for public
good for the body, in an orderly way, by the
major assent of the present inhabitants, masters
of families, incorporated together into a town fel
lowship, and such others as they shall admit unto
them, only in civil things." In contrast to this,
the New Haven planters at the same time, in a
meeting in Mr. Newman's barn, "settled civil
things according to God," i. e., they limited polit
ical power to church members only. This was
widely different from the agreement of "Rhode
*A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, 433.

86 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Island and Providence Plantations," which de
clared that "the Government which this body pol
itic doth attend unto is a Democracy, or Popular
Government." It was furthermore ordered that
"none be accounted a delinquent for doctrine,
provided it be not directly repugnant to the Gov
ernment and Laws." This is practically a com
plete separation of Church and State.
William Coddington, John Coggeshall, Nich
olas Easton, William Brenton, John Clarke,
Jeremy Clarke, Henry Bull, Thomas Hazard and
William Dyer (Clerk) were the founders of
Newport. Their original idea was to travel to
the Delaware, other New England settlers having
praised the fertility of New Jersey; but Roger
Williams urged the proximity of Aquidneck, as
equally good. Like all Rhode Island towns but
Bristol, Newport, where they finally settled after
a year at Portsmouth (Pocasset), was founded in
dissent. It is said that the thick underbrush
about the new town was more than they could
clear, and in despair, they accepted the offer of
an Indian to clear the plantation, for the unique
reward of William Coddington's coat with brass
buttons. The Indian proceeded to simply burn
off the land, and by this obvious method, very
soon claimed the coat of its discomfited owner !
These Antinomians proclaimed toleration, a

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 87
long step in advance, but in Providence the prin
ciple of absolute liberty of conscience and the
complete divorcement of Church and State was
not only advanced as a theory, but for the first
time in history, was actually adopted as a prac
tical policy. Men of all creeds or none, were wel
come, so that by 1756, the Missionary of the
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in For
eign Parts, Dr. McSparran, sent word home —
"Here liberty of Conscience is carried to an irre
ligious degree!" The English agent as early as
1676 (Randolph) was complaining of the ram
pant democracy of Rhode Island, and that the
officers of the colony were largely "inconsiderable
mechanics." In a sense, they were mechanics,
as every man in those days was handy with all
crafts, and master, often, of more than one; "in
considerable," they could not have been, to leave
their great record on the page of history.
Naturally the Quakers sought and obtained
refuge in Rhode Island, where they at once pros
pered, and where they were, as in Pennsylvania,
for long years the law-givers. The Commis
sioners of the United Colonies, seeing the course
which things were taking, vainly attempted to
prevent the admission of the Quakers as freemen.
There is a delightful touch of irony in the commu
nication which Rhode Island sent to the General

88 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Court of Massachusetts, October 13th, 1657: —
And as concerning these quakers, (so-called) which are
now amongst us, we have no law whereby to punish any
for only declaring by words their minds and understand
ings concerning the things and ways of God as to salva
tion and an eternal condition. And we moreover finde,
that in those places where these people aforesaid in this
colony are most of all suffered to declare themselves
freely, there they least of all desire to come, and we are
informed that they begin to loath this place, for that they
are not opposed by the civil authority, but with all pa
tience and meekness are suffered to say over their pre
tended revelations and admonitions, nor are they like or
able to gain many here to their way, and surely we finde
that they delight to be persecuted by civill powers, and
when they are soe, they are like to gain more adherents
by the conseyte of their patient sufferings, than by con-
seyte of their pernicious sayings ! 1
That the effort was futile to dispose of the
Quakers may be shown from the report of the
King's Commissioners, who in 1665, found that
"all religions, even Quakers and Generalists, are
admitted to this colony." 2
The situation had been lightened for the
Quakers when in 1663, Rhode Island enacted the
statute which released them from the necessity of
taking the oath, declaring a "solemn profession
1 R. I. Colonial Rees., II, 374.
2 Ibid., II, 128.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 89
or testimony in a Court of Record, or before a
Judge of Record accounted throughout the whole
colony of as much full force as an oath." This
was done by an Assembly which recognized the
consciences of men "truly conscionable" who dif
fered from themselves, as having a right to tender
treatment by men professing to allow perfect free
dom of thought.
This law is sometimes incorrectly stated to
have excluded the Roman Catholics. Such ac
tion was proposed in the digest of Rhode Island
laws of 1 719, never accepted, however, by the
Legislature. A new digest in 1730 retained the
clause, and the few Roman Catholics then resi
dent in the colony were outlawed. In 1735, the
admission by Rhode Island of Stephen Decatur, a
Genoese and a Roman Catholic, as freeman,
would indicate that the law was ignored. After
1783 it was abrogated altogether, when the large
number of French, after their occupation of New
port, made it desirable to restore to them the fran
chise.1 The Jews had been in the colony since
1684 and somewhat later, erected a synagogue in
Newport.2 In 1762 two Jews, named Lopez and
Elizar, applied for naturalization under the stat
ute of George II, and party strife between the
*A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, p. 452.
2 Arnold, "History of Rhode Island," II, p. 247.

90 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Governor and the Chief- Justice caused them to
be denied by the Superior Court on two grounds
— "the colony was already so full of people that
many of His Majesty's good subjects, born within
the same, had removed and settled in Nova Sco
tia!" The act of 1663 was quoted as the second
reason, that "no person not professing the Chris
tian religion" could be admitted as a freeman. It
may be noted that the same thing, and for a sim
ilar course, had happened in New- York in 1738.
By the year 1672 the Quakers were so far in
power that Nicholas Easton, one of their number,
was Governor, elected under the Royal Charter of
1663. Of him, George Fox writes in his Journal
— "We went to Nicholas Easton's house, who was
at that time Governor of the Island, where we
rested, being very weary with travelling." Eas
ton's house was on the east side of Farewell
street, Newport, by which the present Friends'
meeting house is bounded on the west and a little
to the west of it. Nicholas Easton, together with
William Coddington, taught in Baptist congrega
tions before joining the Quakers. He had been
an elder among them. He was President under
the Patent, 1 650-1 651, and also in 1654, and was
Governor from May, 1672, to May, 1674, dying
the following year. His son, John Easton, was
Governor for the five years 1690-1695, dying in

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 91
1705, aged eighty-eight. In 1675 William Cod
dington was Governor and John Easton his dep
uty. The former, before he became Quaker, had
been the first "Judge" of "Rhode Island and
Providence Plantations," in 1638. He was serv
ing his second term as Governor at the time of his
death in 167S. He also had a son, William Cod
dington, Jr., who was Governor, 1683-1685, and
died in 1688. These old Spartans were accus
tomed to meet their Assembly at the truly heroic
hour of six in the morning.
We find these good Quakers giving out
commissions under their hands and seals to arm
vessels and garrisons against the Indians.1 In
1675, Connecticut passed a law releasing the
Quakers from fines for absence from public wor
ship, in order to gain the friendship of Rhode Is
land, where the authorities, hard-pressed by King
Philip's war, repealed the law exempting the
Quakers from militia service. Gough says that
the persecuting spirit revived against the Quak
ers in 1702. In Rhode Island, the law for militia
service was modified to suit the Quakers in 1730,
but had not been strictly enforced for years.2
Roger Williams wrote against the Quakers
1 See R I. Colonial Records for Commission of Cranston un
der Coddington's seal, dated April nth, 1676.
2 Greene, " History of Rhode Island," pp. 76, 152.

92 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
soon after Coddington's commission to Cranston,
and at the election of May 2d, 1676, the Qua
kers were for a time left out of office. George
Fox had been present at a wedding at Governor
Coddington's house during his travels in Rhode
Island, and after his departure, the Governor
wrote John Winthrop, under date June 29th, 1672.
— "George Fox being at my house (who saw thee
in England) spake to me to write to thee viz, that
Samuel Winthrop, thy brother, was with him at
Barbadoes, came hither to visit him, and G. F.
could wish that thou was like him, and that thou
would stave off persecution in thy day, in thy
Jurisdiction, that thou mayest not bee numbered
amongst persecutors and the wicked whose names
shall rote." x When William Coddington was
dismissed from Massachusetts for embracing
views in sympathy with those of Roger Williams,
the Puritans of that colony at the General Court
held October 6th, 1640, had excluded him by
name as "a man not to be capitulated withal by
us !" But the Quakers retained the franchise in
Rhode Island, a fact which it is important to em
phasize, for their prominence in colony and state
is another instance which disproves the frequent
statement that Quakerism has flourished chiefly
in those places where persecution has borne hard-
1Mass. Historical Soe. Collections, 4 Ser., VII, 288.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 93
est upon them. Pennsylvania and Rhode Island
alone would prove the contrary. When, in 172 1,
a petition from Massachusetts was addressed to
the Deputy Governor of Rhode Island and "fif
teen of the eminent men" of the town of Provi
dence, five of these who were most "eminent"
proved to be Quakers.1
Sympathy with the Protestant revolution in
England which resulted in the banishment of
James II was very great in the colonies, and no
where greater than in Rhode Island. News of
the invasion of England and the declaration of
the Prince of Orange reached Boston April 4th,
1689. The way had already been so well pre
pared in the people's minds that an attempt to
suppress the anticipated tidings was unsuccessful,
and Rhode Island at once responded. The Roy
alists had pretended that the "Quaker Grandees,"
as they called them, did not desire a restoration of
their old Charter. How greatly they were mis
taken was manifest when on their May Day elec
tion, the inhabitants and the freemen poured into
1 Backus, Hist, of Baptists, II, 7. The same excellent au
thority gives an interesting history of the Baptist franchise in
America. The act of 1667 injured them as much as it did the
Quakers. The first legislator to be slain in King Philip's war
was Anne Hutchinson's son, Edward Hutchinson, who entered
his protest at Boston in 1658 against the law of banishment for
Quakers on pain of death.

94 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Newport, the "democracie" giving thanks to God
for support through their difficulties of the past.
A vote which was unanimous restored the officers
whom Andros had displaced. Not all, however,
had the courage of their convictions, and the
Quaker Governor, Walter Clarke, wavered. For
nine months there was no chief magistrate, when
the Assembly elected Governor Almy. Again
hesitation; no one dared to take the responsibility
of the office. Finally "all eyes turned to one of
the old Antinomian exiles, the more than octo
genarian, Henry Bull; and the fearless Quaker,
true to the light within, employed the last glim
merings of life to restore the democratic Charter
of Rhode Island." x The Protestant sovereigns,
William and Mary were then proclaimed with re
joicings. For over a century the name of Wanton ap
pears in Rhode Island history, and five of the fam
ily have been its Governors and Deputy Govern
ors. During the period of the wars between
Great Britain and France, and those with Spain,
and also in the stirring days before the Declara
tion of Independence, a Wanton was at the helm
of the ship of State. Edward Wanton, founder
of the family, came from London and was in Bos
ton in 1658. He settled at Scituate, and at the
¦R. I. Col. Rees., II. See also Bancroft, U. S., II, 447.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 95
execution of the Quaker martyrs in Boston,
served as officer of the Guards. He was com
pletely won over by the gentle firmness with
which the sufferers met death, and returning to
his home, exclaimed, "Alas, Mother, we have been
murdering the Lord's anointed." Taking off his
sword, he put it by and never wore it again.1 He
is said to have built the first Quaker meeting
house in Massachusetts. He was a preacher, and
died in 171 6, at eighty-five. His eldest son, Jo
seph, who, with his wife, was also a preacher,
lived until 1754, and died at ninety.
Another son, William (born in 1670), married,
after a stormy courtship, Ruth, daughter of Dea
con Bryant of Scituate, in 1691. The Deacon
detested the Quakers, and it is related of the
youthful William that he said to his charmer,
"Friend Ruth, let us break with this unreasonable
bondage. Thou shalt leave thy religion and I
mine, and we will join the Church of England and
go to the Devil together!" Which they pro
ceeded to do, so far as joining the church went.
The coast of Rhode Island was at this time in
fested with pirates, and William Wanton and his
brother John, in more than one instance, did gal
lant service in which they acted independently of
the Government, helping to rid the seas of the

lJ. H. Bartlett, The Wanton Family, p. 9.

96 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
pests. They were rising merchants, already
wealthy, and their expeditions succeeded so well
that they were accused of piracy themselves.
Their venerable father, finding they were not to
be dissuaded from attacking a French privateer,
said "It would be a grief to my spirit to hear ye
had fallen in a military enterprise, but if you will
go, it will be a greater grief to hear that ye were
cowards !" x In 1702, so much aid had they ren
dered the Government, that they were summoned
to England to be received at Court, and Queen
Anne granted them an addition to their family
coat of arms, with her own Royal hands present
ing each of them with two pieces of plate — a sil
ver punch bowl and salver.2 Governor William
Wanton, on his deathbed, showed his attachment
to Quakerism by exclaiming, "My father's God is
my God, and I die in the faith of the Quakers."
His brother John was elected Deputy Governor,
and from 1729 to 1734 served continuously in that
office. Upon the death of his brother, Governor
William, John Wanton was made Governor in
the latter year, holding office until 1741, when he
died. He had become very serious in mind about
1712, and traveled much as a minister. When
the plainer Friends "dealt" with him on the sub-
1 Ibid., p. 49.
2 Ibid., p. 29.

After porhtiit hy Hmibert, in possession of Rhode Island Historical Sticietii.

Joseph Wanton,
Governor of Rhode Island.

A "WANTON GOSPELLER" 97
ject of his commissions issued as Governor, he
made them a suitable acknowledgment, but de
fended the course he had taken.
It was the custom in the administration of Gov
ernor John for the General Assembly of Rhode
Island to attend the Quakers' mid-week meeting
during the sessions. On a certain Friday morn
ing there was a marriage at meeting, and the As
sembly, amid a great throng of people, came in,
preceded by their sergeant-at-arms, and took
seats reserved for them. The Governor, in a
bright scarlet cloak lined with blue (a piece of
which is still carefully preserved by a descendant
in Newport), walked up and sat down in the
high seat in the minister's gallery. He presently
rose and preached an eloquent sermon from the
text, "There was a marriage in Cana of Galilee,
and the Mother of Jesus was there." He wound
up with an argument against the use of the ring
in the marriage ceremony.
Gideon Wanton (son of Joseph, and grandson
of Edward) was Governor in 1745 and again in
1747, and Joseph Wanton 2d, son of William,
was Governor from 1769 to November, 1775,
when, for remaining faithful to the interests of
Great Britain, he was impeached and all his prop
erty confiscated, but he was permitted to live and
die at Newport unmolested. His son Joseph had

98 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
been Deputy Governor also. Portraits of Wil
liam, John and Joseph may be seen in the Red
wood Library at Newport. The town at this pe
riod was the metropolis of the country, swarming
with officers of the British navy, travelers from
all parts of the world, mariners who had become
prosperous merchants — often in the slave trade,
and sometimes by privateering — Huguenot ref
ugees, and representatives of all faiths. The
Quakers came inevitably into contact with many
varieties and types of thought, and nowhere has
it ever been possible to find a more delightful cir
cle of highly-educated and intelligent Quakers
than at Newport before the Revolution. They
remained more actively engaged in politics, with
out so much censure from the officials of their
meetings, than was the case in Philadelphia.
There were conservatives to be found, of course,
but they seem to have been of less "weight."
Upon the election of Governor John Wanton,
in 1734, in order to set at rest any question as to
whether a Quaker, on being chosen to the highest
office in the colony, was obliged to take oath for
the faithful performance of his duty, the opinion
of the King's Attorney General was sought and
obtained by the colonial agent of Rhode Island
in London. He wrote the Governor that the

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " 99
opinion which he then forwarded, "is entirely
with us." It was to the effect that "a Quaker,
if Duly Elected Governour, may act as Such with
out being Obliged to take any Oath whatsoever."
It is of interest in passing to note an early
movement for independence initiated by the
Quakers at this time. In 1740, the agent just
named, Richard Partridge, acting for the colony,
strenuously opposed the taxation of the Ameri
can colonies by Great Britain. The Assembly
urged Governor John Wanton to "write to the
neighboring governments, inviting them to join
in the opposition." Nothing came of it, but it is
most interesting to find this on record, thirty-six
years before Independence was declared. Par
tridge served the colony faithfully for thirty-four
years, and on his deathbed in London, 1759,
wrote to recommend a brother Quaker to his
office. The recommendation was accepted, and
John Sherwood succeeded him, dying in 1773.1
The following contains the interesting text of
the opinion of the King's Attorney General :
1 Greene, Hist, of R I., pp. 158, 181. Partridge was born Dec.
9th, 1681, son of Hon. Wm. Partridge, Lieutenant Governor of
New Hampshire, and died March 6th, 1759. Ralph Partridge,
who died very old in 1658, was a learned Cambridge divine
whom Laud had evicted and banished. He heartily condemned
Massachusetts' treatment of the Quakers. [See Goodwin's " Pil
grim Republic"]

100 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
London. 6mo. the 27th. 1734.
Governour Wanton,
This serves to Inclose the King's Attorney General's
Opinion Upon the Case relating to a Govr. of your Col
ony that may be one of the People called Quakers
which Opinion I think is entirely with us.
I am thy assured Friend, Richard Partridge.
Opinion of the King's Attorney General in regard to
a Quaker Governor.1
Case: The Colony of Rhode Island by Virtue of their Char
ter granted them by King Charles Anno 1663 Annually
Elects their own Governr. & Inferior Officers both Civil
and Military.
Query :
Whether one of the People called Quakers upon being
chosen Gov. of the said Colony is Obliged to take a
Solemn Oath to the Acts of Trade considering our Char
ter and the Indulgence granted them by Act of Parlia
ment in Respect to Oaths And whether a Solemn En
gagement upon an Affirmation is not Sufficient in that
Case? I Have Perused and Considered that Clause in the
Charter which Relates to the Election of a Governor and
likewise that Clause which Directs that before his Entry
upon his Office he shall give a Solemn Engagement by
Oath or Otherwise for the due and faithful Performance
of his Duty.
I Have likewise read over the Opinion of Mr. Auch-
muty which was left along with this And am of the Opin-
1 Quoted hy Caroline Hazard, " Thomas Hazard, son of Rob
ert, called ' College Tom,' " Appendix, pp. 224 et seq.

A " WANTON GOSPELLER " ioi
ion that a Quaker if Duly Elected Governour may act
as Such zvithout being Obliged to take any Oath whatso
ever. The solemn Engagement which he is to (sic) obliged
to enter into by the Charter may be by Oath or otherwise.
And instead of the Abjuration Oath and the Oath of
Allegiance and Supremacy There are Certain forms of
Affirmation or Declaration prescribed by the Stat. 8 G. J.
to be taken by the Quakers in lieu thereof.
As to the Oath directed to be taken by the Governours
of English Plantations by the Stat. 7 and 8 W. & 8 & 9
W, for the Observance of the Several Acts relating to the
said Plantations I am of Opinion upon Consideration of
the several Acts made in Favour of Quakers That if a
Quaker Governour Solemnly Affirms in the form Pre
scribed by act of Parliament That he will Observe the
Several Acts relating to the English Plantations ; Such
Affirmation will be deemed a sufficient Complyance in
him to the said Two Acts 7&8W&8&9W And will
Exempt him from the Penalties of these Acts.
J. Willes. Augst. 26th, 1734.
A True Copy
Exam, per J. Lyndon, Cler.
Through much of this period, there had been
living in Rhode Island a man who again takes us
back to the time of Charles I. Two of the "Reg
icide" Judges escaped to America, one of them,
Theophilus Whalley, finding his way north from
Virginia about 1779-80. With a price upon his
head, and at the mercy of his protectors, he oc
cupied a little house or hut upon the farm of

102 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Colonel Francis' Willet. Public opinion, how
ever, seems to have been sufficient to save the
lives of him and his fellow sufferer Goffe, who
lived and died in Connecticut. Men came from
Boston who supplied Whalley with money and
books, and his ostensible employment was weav
ing. He died at the age of one hundred and one
in 1719.1 The Willet farm had descended to
Colonel Willet from his grandfather, Thomas
Willet, first Mayor of New York under the Eng
lish, whose son Andrew married Anne, daughter
of Governor Coddington. They were the par
ents of the Colonel. As one stands upon any
hill near the South Kingstown or Point Judith
country, and looks inland, almost every point that
strikes the eye teems for the imagination with the
life and color that a century ago entered so
largely into Quaker history. It is to-day a silent
and deserted land for miles in comparison with
the activity on the plantations of the wealthy
Quakers of that day.
1 Potter "Early History of Narragansett," 311. T. R. Hazard,
" Recollections of Old Times," 68.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE
IN PENNSYLVANIA AND
THE SOUTH

103

CHAPTER III
THE QUAKER FRANCHISE IN PENNSYLVANIA AND
THE SOUTH
" Freedom of different Consciences . . . was the
principal Ground of our Charter . . . which Free
dom we still prize as the greatest Hapines that man can
possess in this Worlde."
Rhode Island to Massachusetts. 1658.
When John Winthrop arrived in Boston in
1630, there were probably not more than three
hundred white persons in all New England. He
brought with him a thousand, and in the next
twenty years, in some three hundred ships, came
quite twenty thousand more. This was exceeded
by the immigration to Pennsylvania, fifty ships
succeeding the "Welcome" with William Penn in
one year, the first being the "John and Sarah,"
followed by the "Amity" and "Bristol Factor."
The settlers of New England were nearly all
Puritans, but twenty-five years' interval had so
altered the course of affairs, that the great ma
jority of all the emigrants to the colonies were
Quakers, who came to Pennsylvania.
105

106 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Puritanism became at once the state church of
New England, with the privilege of the franchise,
as we have seen, limited to the membership of
that establishment. Up to 1691 its persecution
of Dissenters — Episcopalians, Baptists, and
Quakers, with a few Roman Catholics — was lit
tle short of barbarous. Within close limitations
of membership, the privileged class possessed the
power to elect a Governor and general officers.
In Pennsylvania, however, Quakerism would
have been the state church, had not William
Penn, the idealist and republican, given in his
Charter, not toleration — which, when they finally
attained it, the New England colonies regarded as
to the last degree, liberal and unprejudiced — but
absolute freedom of conscience, as he once de
clared, "for Papists and Protestants, Jews and
Turks," with no state forms whatever, promising
for himself and his heirs for all time to come, that
the clauses as to Liberty of Conscience should re
main inviolate. The fifty years between the
coming of Winthrop and that of Penn had seen a
great advance in ideas of religious liberty.
Nothing could so thoroughly have proved this as
the fact that Penn's Charter secured the privilege
to any twenty members of the Church of England
on petitioning the Bishop of London for a
preacher, who was to pursue his ministrations

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 1107
within the province "without any Deniall or mo-
lestacon whatsoever."
There have been writers who declared that the
political and religious ideas of Penn were quite
independent of each other, and that his govern
ment was based upon the result of no religious
conviction. Such a view is inconsistent with the
facts, which lead one inevitably to the conclusion
that the superiority of his "Frame of Govern
ment" must be attributed to the peculiar and dem
ocratic influences of his religious associations.
The "Holy Experiment" lasted for seventy-five
years, watched and admired by the little group
in England who had seen its inception, and whose
republican idealism sometimes cost them so dear.
Charles II set his signature to the Charter of
Penn, February 24th, 1681. Algernon Sydney
went down a few weeks later to Worminghurst
to perfect the plan for the "Holy Experiment." 1
It is altogether likely that the presence there of
both George Fox and John Burnyeat in 1678,
may have stimulated Penn's interest in his Amer
ican possessions, for both were recently returned
from missionary journeys in the west. Sydney
only too soon paid the penalty for his liberality,
but Penn courageously declared, "I propose that
which is extraordinary, to leave myself and my

1 W. H. Dixon, Life of Penn, p. 193-

108 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
successors no power of doing mischief." Sir
Isaac Newton was an adviser of Penn, and the
worldly old statesman, Lord Peterborough, paid
his tribute to the wisdom of the Founder.1
William Penn's final Frame of Government
was concluded April 25th, 1682,2 but it was only
after many changes, variations from the original
draughts, and experiments. The spirit in which
the settlement of the new province was under
taken, and its resemblance to the Hebraic model
followed by Massachusetts, is expressed in one
of these draughts. "For a conclusion of all, we
declare that we hold it our glory that the law of
Jehovah shall be the supreme law of Pennsyl
vania. Ordained by William Penn so far as in
him lies, by and with the advice and approbation
of the proprietors and freeholders of the said
province, so far as in them lies, the  day
of  in A. D. 1 68 1." 3 Ten days after the
Frame of 1682 was concluded, modeled as it
was upon the "Fundamental Constitutions," the
"Laws Agreed upon in England" were formed as
1 Spence's " Anecdotes " p. 155. It is unnecessary to recall
Voltaire's tribute to Penn's Treaty as the only one made with
the natives of the new world "which was not ratified by an
oath, and the only one which has not been broken.''
2 Charter and Laws of Pa., pp. 94-98.
3 Penn Mss. Charters and Frames of Govt. (W. R. Shep
herd, " Proprietary Govt, in Pa.," p. 231).

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 109
Penn's famous series of agreements. These,
however, were all reckoned but "probationary,"
as Penn says.1
It seems that the "Frame" as adopted in
England, was not pleasing to one of Penn's
intimate associates. This was the Quaker,
Benjamin Furly, who had married a Dutch wife
and was a prosperous citizen of Rotterdam, the
promoter of the first German Emigration to
America. Furly was a scholar, an author of
some prominence, and a wise adviser. He de
sired a more democratic government than a
council composed of the largest landholders,
which was arranged for in the "Frame," pre
ferring Penn's original draught in the "Funda
mental Constitutions" as more in accordance with
Quaker ideals.2 In the following year, in fact,
on Pennsylvania soil, the original "Frame" had
to be modified, "and out of fifteen laws declared
at this session to be fundamental, nine had been
suggested by Furly." 3
William Penn was in a newly-established
country, governed by untried principles, with a
iPenn and Logan Correspondence, II, p. 17.
2 Penn Mss. Ford vs. Penn. B. F, "Abridgment out of Hol
land and Germany. Laws of Govt. Pense." (W. R. Shepherd,
Work quoted, 236-9.)
3 Ibid., 252. Charter & Laws of Pa., 154. Pa. Mag. Hist, and
Biog., Oct., 1895.

no THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
greater degree of liberty than any of its neigh
bors. His religious policy is the most valuable
legacy of Quakerism. Yet, while Penn imposed
no restriction on public or private worship, he
did lay a religious test upon office-holders; and
the Quaker province was never free from some
such restriction before the Revolution.
Penn's colony was more limited by the crown
than was the case in Massachusetts. He was
obliged to submit laws made in the province to
the English Parliament within a certain time
after their enactment. This was not the case
in Massachusetts until after the Royal Charter
of 1691. Penn's concession to the English
church, just quoted, was a measure which was
demanded by necessity. Moreover, Pennsyl
vania, unlike Massachusetts, was not intended
solely for the one sect which settled it. Penn
was the humanitarian, and although his scheme
of Government, in its earliest form, would seem
to show that he had in mind a Commonwealth
governed by Quakers, while not excluding men
of all faiths, yet his responsibility to the crown
held him to certain Royal prerogatives with
which he was entrusted. Like a kindly pa
triarch — and unfortunately for him, a patriarch
without that keen judgment of men which he
needed — William Penn led a colony of settlers

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE in
to the new country who were, in his own mind,
to be obedient children under the guidance of a
wise and benevolent father. The ingratitude of
those children, whom, with a surer knowledge of
men, and a truer sense of the difference between
justice and privilege, he might have ruled
securely, saddened the latter days of one of the
greatest philanthropists the world has ever seen.
That he fully appreciated his responsibility to
the crown is shown by the following letter,1
dated "6 7br. 1701."
To Lord Romney, from Pennsylvania regarding his
own deprivation of the Governourship :
" Had the land been cultivated, as in England, we had
fallen into immediate profits, for our money, but after
all our hazards in getting theither, as well as Charges, to
finde onely Creation, a rough Wilderness, yt would cost
us 3, 4, or 5 lb., an Acre to cleare for use, and then tell
us they will onely take the Govt, from us, -but leave us
our Property, might deserve a very bad name. It is to
strip us of our defense, both in our Civil & Religious
Capacity, & to introduce that powr and Spirit over us
we came heither to avoyde, as indeed all the people that
began Proprietary Govm'ts, did, those of Carolina ex
cepted. And that after the Governm't at home was glad
to be rid of us, at so cheape a rate as a little parchment,
to be practised in a Desart, 3000 Miles off ! . . . But
I never knew an ill thing to want a good pretense, & such

1 From an unpublished letter in the possession of Mrs. Charles
Roberts.

ill2 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
an one this has viz., the service of the Crown, which they
say, will not allow of such Independent Governm'ts, and
that they are for that reason, as well as foule Trade, to
be taken out of ye handes yt holde them & reunited (as
it is very improperly phrased) to ye Crown. But ye
Governm'ts yt by their Graunts are obliged to allow of
Appeals to the King and whose laws are to have his Ap
probation, and where those of Trade and Navigation are
to be observed, can properly bee made Independent, myn
must be such, Else the pretense is vain, as indeed it is,
to take away my limited one as Independent.
Besides, I can honestly say that no King's Governor
has more readily obey'd the King's directions or with
more intention apply'd himselfe to assure him of their
complyance with his Commands, and after having this
Testimony sent home by our old Accusers, to be Treated
alike as if a Transgressor, is to observe no measure to
merit Innocence, at least! Here I am come to rectify
things. I have at expensive and hazardous voyage done
it, and now I must be turn'd out, as a Delinquent, God
help us !
Penn may not have desired the powers of a
Captain General, or to send his Assembly's acts
to England; to maintain an agent at London,
or to permit the services of a clergyman of the
Church of England, upon the request of twenty
persons. But he was wise enough to perceive
that in order to gain greater things, he must
make these and certain other concessions. As a
British colony, Pennsylvania must not too greatly

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 113
differ from its neighbors, and a Quaker colony,
exclusively governed upon Quaker principles,
would not fall in with the general plan of colonial
administration. To the intimacy of Penn with
James II, however, must be ascribed the exemp
tion of Pennsylvania from the King's policy of
absolutism. Pennsylvania lay between Virginia
and New England, and its situation alone ex
plains much of its policy. As for many years
the Quakers and their sympathizers formed the
bulk of the more wealthy citizens of the colony,
their attitude, particularly on the subject of peace
and defensive war, explains also the causes of
the crisis which was reached only in 1756, when
the Quakers bodily left the Assembly upon that
issue. Logan openly believed in defensive war.1
Probably the more complete equipment of a pro
vincial constabulary or mode of defense of some
such sort, would in the end have prevented the
incursions of freebooters to which Pennsylvania
was subjected through the early years of Quaker
administration. Pirates and other notorious
characters used it as a refuge, little fearing im
prisonment and arguments compared with the
death-dealing punishments of the other colonies.
1 Penna. Mag. of History and Biography, VI, pp. 403-411.
For Penn's acts in regard to peace, the suppression of piracy,
levying money for defense, etc., see W. R. Shepherd, " Hist, of
Proprietary Government in Penna.," 504 et seq.

114 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Colonial records are full of accounts of free
booters on the coast and in the Delaware.
The laws of 1682 declared that every inhab
itant, artificer or other, resident, and paying
"scot and lot" to the Government, should vote.
The antiquarian will find in the Philadelphia
of the early day a good instance of the old
"Potwalloper Franchise — i. e., that of one who
did not own an entire house, but had a separate
fireplace, and boiled his own separate pot — in
other words, lived in a "flat !" The word seems
derived from the Anglo-Saxon weallan, to boil.
The Abjuration Act soon disfranchised the
Roman Catholics, and for a time, only Protes
tants and those having a religious creed, or who
believed in "one eternal and Almighty God, Crea
tor, Upholder and Ruler of the World," might
vote. Even this was less liberal than Penn had
intended, but the antipathy to the Roman Cath
olics which prevailed in England was shared in
Pennsylvania. The Episcopalians cherished
much bitterness against them, and the broader-
minded Quakers dared not show their sympathy.
The instructions of the Proprietor forbade the
Governor to allow them to settle in the province
or to purchase lands for chapels or dwelling
houses.1

1 W. R, Shepherd, Work quoted, p, 369,

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 115
Nevertheless, they were early in the Province,
and the first mention of them is a reference in a
letter from the Reverend John Talbot, a non-
juring Episcopal missionary, to the Secretary of
the "Society for the Propagation of the Gospel
in Foreign Parts," dated at New York, January
ioth, 1707-8, in which he exclaims, "Arise, O
Lord Jesus Christ ! help us and deliver us for thine
honor. Since Mr. Brooke, Mr. Moore, and Mr.
Evans went away, there's an Independency at
Elizabethtown (New Jersey), Anabaptism at
Burlington, and the Popish Mass at Philadelphia.
I thought that the Quakers would be the first to
let it in, particularly Mr. Penn ; for if he had any
religion, 'tis that ; but thus to tolerate all without
control is the way to have none at all !" 1
Mr. Talbot only voiced others' sentiments; to
the charges of Jesuitism, Penn wrote :
" If the asserting of an impartial liberty of conscience ;
if doing to others as we would be done by, and an open
avowing and steady practicing of these things at all times
and to all parties will justly lay a man under the reflec
tion of being a Jesuit or Papist of any rank, I must not
only submit to the character, but embrace it, too ! " Rumor
busied itself with tales of the " mass house," and in 1708
Penn wrote James Logan — " With these, is a complaint

*G. M. Hills, "History of the (Episcopal) Church in Burling
ton."

116 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
against your government, that you suffer public mass in
a scandalouse manner. Pray send the matter of fact,
for ill use is made of it against us here."
Three priests are on record as being in New
York between 1686 and 1689. Two of these, in
1688, were forced to leave when James II their
protector fled to France, welcomed by the Arch
bishop of Rheims as that "good soul who has
given up three Kingdoms for a Mass !" 1 One
of them followed the King to France. The
other traveled on foot to Maryland,2 and there
is reason to suppose that it was he, Father
Harvey, who died in Maryland, at the age of
eighty-four, and who at various times came to
Philadelphia to celebrate mass. A primitive
chapel may have been established in the city so
early as 1686, but no organization took place;
and as their practices were not openly "scandal
ouse," the Roman Catholics would appear never
to have suffered persecution under the Quakers
in Pennsylvania, although they had no political
rights in the colony. Their numbers quietly but
steadily increased, until in 1730, Father Greaton
was sent from Maryland to build a chapel and
establish an organized congregation. There was
1 Fontanelle, " Siecle de Louis XIV."
2 Henry Foley, S. J., "Records of the English Province of
Society of Jesus."

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 117
real danger when he came upon his earliest pros
pecting tours; but the Jesuit was fearless, and
it is said that he entered the City of Brotherly
Love clad in the garments of Quakerism ! Even
St. Joseph's, his little church, conformed so far as
possible to the Quaker architecture, and the
nearby Quaker almshouses were not put out of
countenance. Dr. James McSparren, of Rhode
Island, an earnest Episcopal clergyman, wrote
of Philadelphia, in 1752, to a friend in England:
"There is a public and open Mass-house in this
city, which I note, there being none allowed to
the northward of it in all the English Planta
tions." * St. Joseph's continued its ministrations
all through the colonial period, and survives
to-day, with several large congregations flourish
ing on the old root.
After the War of the Revolution, a Te Deum
was ordered sung there at the request of the
Marquis of Luzerne, and both Washington and
Lafayette are said to have been present. It was
the place of worship for the French officers who
fought for the colonies, and the Counts de Ro-
chambeau, de Grasse, and many others have knelt
within its walls. It is interesting to find Cardi
nal Gibbons, of Baltimore, himself not without
1 Dr. McSparran, " America Dissected, in Sundry Letters from
a Clergyman There," III, p. 394. Dublin, 1753.

Il8 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Quaker blood in his veins, in the name of the
American hierarchy of the Roman Catholic
church, writing to Cardinal Richard, of Paris,
August, 1906; "It is difficult for minds accus
tomed to the complete liberty which we enjoy in
this country, to understand how a civilized
government, can in the name of liberty, subject
an entire Christian people to the yoke of official
atheism !"
By his first "Frame of Government," as well
as by the Act of Settlement, Penn provided that
all elections should be by ballot. "To the end
that choice may be made fully and without fear
from any except God and to avoid contention and
confusion, all questions except in the Council and
Courts of Justice over the appointment of officers
by poll, should be by the balloting box as it is
used at Gresham College, or as the Governor and
Council shall direct." * This is an interesting
reference to the University Suffrage granted by
James I, who conferred the right of election of
members of Parliament on the Chancellor, Mas
ters and Scholars of each university.2 Only one
instance exists in America of the principle of
political representation in institutions of learning.
This is the college of William and Mary in
1 W. R. Shepherd, Work quoted, p. 230.
2 A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, p. 16.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 119
Virginia, where the President and six Masters
possessed the right to choose a member of the
House of Burgesses in the colony of Virginia.
"New England, with all her respect for learning,
never put political power within the control of
her colleges." 1
Rotation in office and the use of the ballot were
regarded by the seventeenth century idealists as
essentials in the "equal commonwealth" of which
they dreamed. The ballot had been in use in
New England, and the adoption of the Covenant
or Confession of Faith in 1629 by the "First
Church" of Salem, Massachusetts, seems to have
been the first instance in America. After those
at Jamestown, Virginia, 16 19, and at Plymouth,
1622, this famous "First Church" was the third
to be organized in the new world. Benjamin
Franklin says that 2 "an Act for Regulating the
Elections of Sheriffs and Coroners" passed in
4th of Queen Anne, gave Pennsylvania the right
of voting by ballot.
A debate of the provincial Council, April,
1689, shows the construction put upon the provi
sion in regard to a disputed election. A member
raised the objection that many persons came over
1 Ibid., 484.
2 " Cool Thoughts," etc., 1754- See also Smyth's ed. Life B. F,
IV, 329-

120 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
from the Jerseys and voted in Chester, thereby
causing great disorder. In the absence of the
"Poll and Ballot," the objecting member argued
that it could not be known whether these persons
were really residents or not. The sheriff's re
turn showed that the electors objected to voting
by ballot. A balloting box, some of the members
stated, was used only in one county, and unless
there was doubt upon the accuracy of the election,
the delegates should be chosen by "votes" —
{probably a viva voce election). A member
stated that the ballot was used at Upland, and in
all the lower counties by "black and white beans
put into a hatt, which is balloting in his sence,
and cannot be denied by the Charter when it is
demanded." 1
This debate, and the phrase "poll and ballot,"
show the system prevailing at elections under
the proprietary government. The bean ballot,
according to Mr. Bishop, may have come from
Massachusetts, and it is interesting to find the
votes put in a hat as they were in ancient Greece.
The officer in charge of the returns was probably
free to act as he thought best in matters of de
tail, and this debate in the Pennsylvania Council
may indicate that the ballot took the place of the
1 Cortlandt F. Bishop, " History of Elections in the American
Colonies" (Studies in History, Columbia Univ.), p. 167.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 121
poll in the English system of elections. The
ballot had been suggested for use in Parliament
by a political tract in the time of Charles II. It
was actually in use in the Scots Parliament in
1662, in proceeding on the "Billeting Act,"
Middleton's measure to secure the ostracism of
Lauderdale. The Billeting Act was repudiated
by the King, and the ballot rested until 1705. It
seems to be the conclusion that in Pennsylvania,
unless the ballot was demanded or the returning
officer was in doubt, elections were decided by
show of hands or acclamation.
The Quakers across the river in New Jersey
were of a different mind, and the "Concessions
and Agreements" of West Jersey, under date
3d day of March, 1676-7, say — "And the said
Elections shall be made and distinguished by
balloting trunks (boxes) to avoid confusion and
noise, and not by Voices, holding up of the Hands
or otherwise howsoever." 1
The "Charter of Privileges," 1701, put
through by the efforts of that importunate
Quaker, David Lloyd, took away rotation in
office, and the use of the ballot, later restored.
Writing to Logan in 1704, Penn says:2 "I
acquiesced, having first shown my dislike . . .
1 New Jersey Archives, I, 244.
2 Penn and Logan Corres., II, 18.

122 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
at throwing away the use of the ballot, which
their children, as I told them, will have cause
sufficient to regret of their folly therein." The
franchise of Penn was "twice as liberal as
Connecticut, the most democratic of all the col
onies, and with ten times the voting power of
Old England." *
The Toleration Act had not been passed at
home when Penn arrived in Pennsylvania in
1682, and the "Act for preventing mischiefs that
may arise by certain persons called Quakers re
fusing to take lawful oaths" 2 was still in force.
What course the Quakers would take when they
became the lawmakers was no doubt watched
with interest. One of two ways was open:
either they must falsify their cherished religious
principles by taking and administering the oath,
or endanger their government and jeopardize
their laws by enacting those in harmony with
their principles, risking the peril of repeal. The
latter course, as always, they chose. Therefore,
seven years before George Whitehead appeared
at Court and obtained the right to affirm, Penn's
first Assembly at Chester made the requirement
for giving testimony, the promise to tell "the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,"
1 President Isaac Sharpless, " Quakerism and Politics," p. 25.
2W. R. Shepherd, Work quoted, 353-4.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 123
without any oath, and that electors should be
"such as profess and declare they believe in
Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and Saviour
of the world." Their declaration of fidelity was
to Penn: "I, A. B., do hereby freely acknowl
edge and solemnly declare and promise fidelity
and lawful obedience to William Penn, son and
heir of Sir William Penn, deceased, and his
heirs and assigns, as lawful proprietary and
governor of the same, according to the King's
letters patent, and deeds of grant enfeoffment
from James, Duke of York and Albany, and that
I will never act or do, by word or deed, directly
or indirectly, anything, nor consent to, nor con
ceal, any person or thing whatsoever, to the
breach of this solemn engagement." The King's
name is conspicuous by its absence, but the next
year this little omission was rectified!
In the short interval during which William
Penn was denied the Governorship, and Governor
Fletcher succeeded him, trouble was caused from
the commission of the latter calling for the usual
oaths to qualify members to serve in the Assem
bly, despite the fact that the Act of 1689, known
as the Toleration Act, had then passed. This
was in 1693. Six of the members took the oaths.
The remaining fourteen refusing entirely, they
were "by the special grace and clemency of the

124 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Governor," permitted to take the declaration of
Fidelity just quoted, and the "profession of
Christian Faith" as given in the act of Parliament
referred to. This act was recognized by law
three years later.
The administration of Penn personally, 1699-
170 1, was under his promise to the King and
Queen that he would take the declaration of
Fidelity to them. Hence all officers and members
of Assembly "took a solemn attestation of alle
giance to King William III, and fidelity to
William Penn, . . . and subscribed the dec
laration appointed by Parliament." x
Winsor draws attention to the over emphasis
of affirmation in Pennsylvania,2 intimating that
the Quakers would have been glad to have their
scruple forced upon those not of their faith.
Since they were the first settlers of the Province,
it was perfectly natural for them to make affirma
tion instead of an oath, a matter of great impor
tance. A revision of the laws followed the
resumption of the government by Penn, when a
law concerning the manner of giving evidence,
passed in 1701, was repealed in 1705 by Queen
Anne, "not because the English government in
tended to deprive the Quakers of Pennsylvania of
1 13-14 Charles II, ch. I.
2 Justin Winsor, " Narrative and Critical History of America."

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 125
their cherished privilege, but because it punished
false affirming with more severity than the laws
of England, false swearing." The Quakers went
through much distress of mind at this period in
connection with the settlement of the question
of affirmation, which finally was arranged to
satisfy them. William Penn, in writing to his
Secretary upon the finances of the Province,
urged the Quakers to stand by their rights. He
wrote under date, "London, 4th, Xbr. 1703 —
New England's standard, take it for granted, will
be that of all the continent at least ; and had not
a law of theirs been confirmed by King William
unwarily, that can't be repealed without their
consent, the English standard had been the
measure of America at large. I say, the abjura
tion, etc., are beside your clue, and I admire at
your weakness in not keeping to law. Queens
never read, as well as Kings, what they sign ; they
are signed upon the credit of committees or
secretaries. "I desire you to pluck up that English and
Christian courage to not suffer yourselves to be
thus treated and put upon." *
Penn wrote Logan, when agitation in the
direction of repeal was going on in England,
under date "London, 8th, 2mo., 1704 — I am

1 Penn and Logan Correspondence, I, p. 247.

126 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
grieved to think that you ever gave way to any
other affirmation than that appointed by law in
the province; by which you have given away a
most tender point, and not easily recoverable.
My regard to this Queen is known almost to
partiality; but I shall never obey her letters
against laws into which she may be drawn by
interested persons or those that would make their
court at other men's cost, and go upon private
piques." 1 After the Act of 1706 had passed
Logan wrote to Penn in England — "I am humbly
of opinion that if thyself were now here, . . .
thou wouldst be pleased to think nothing that
is done in relation to it unadvisable. A less
security than that affirmation among so very
loose a people as in many places here shelter them
selves under the name of a profession, would be
very dangerous, and the compliment that is paid
to the order can injure nothing, but serve for oil
to make it go the more easy." Later, Penn, un
convinced by his secretary's arguments, wrote
him, "I do abhor the new affirmation . . .
I would rather Friends were never in power, so
our old affirmations were confirmed for Friends
and others scrupulous, and oaths for the rest;
unless a short way of bonds penalty for truth of
what is said were made practicable and accept-
1 Penn and Logan Corresp., I, 278.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 127
able, as I have often thought might be." x
Philadelphia Monthly Meeting Records of 7mo.,
16, 1706 mention a collection made to defray "the
charge that our Friends have been at in Old
England to get that law repealed made in Con
necticut colony against the Quakers."
London Yearly Meeting, when the permission
to affirm wras enacted, gave the advice quoted on
page 31. The Yearly Meeting of Philadelphia
in 1 710 records the same, in the exact words of
London, to the effect that "all be charitable to
each other" in such a complicated matter. None
of the Pennsylvania Friends were indifferent to
the situation. Haverford Monthly Meeting
1713, states — "It was signified by the Quarterly
Meeting that some Friends disbursed money on
account of getting the Affirmation Act confirmed
which are yet unpaid ; and the proportion thereof
befalling upon this meeting appears to be one
pound, fourteen shillings and one penny half
penny, and Thomas Jones is ordered to pay the
same according to the desire and order of the
Quarterly Meeting." This may refer to the
short-lived bill more in accordance with the
wishes of Penn, which was passed in 171 1 and
repealed in 1713. The law of William III, (7-8,
Ch. 34) as well as the Toleration Act preceding,
1 Ibid., II, 339-

128 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
while permitting affirmation to Quakers, had ex
pressly provided that they could not give evidence
in criminal cases, serve on juries, or hold office
under the Crown : this restriction was at once set
aside by Penn's laws on his arrival in the prov
ince. One reason for the repeal of the Pennsyl
vania law of 171 1 was the opinion of the Attor
ney-General in England, that the affirmation itself
differed materially from that in use in England
and that the other privileges had been unlawfully
accorded the Quakers.1 The name of God was
omitted in the provincial declaration, which was
not the case in England. Therefore in 171 5, was
passed the act which included in the Quaker
affirmation, the wording of the Toleration Act —
"I do solemnly declare in the presence of Al
mighty God, the witness of the truth of what I
say." Two years later in 1718, an act of the Assem
bly provided that the "affirmation of such per
sons as conscientiously refuse to take an oath
shall be accounted and deemed in law to have the
full effect of an oath in any case whatsoever."
This was not repealed; hence the repeal in 1719
of that of 1715, entitled "An Act for the ease of
such as conscientiously scruple to take the solemn
1 W. R. Shepherd, Work quoted, 362. The Statutes at Large
for Pa. give the form for 1710.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 129
affirmation formerly allowed in Great Britain,"
etc. caused no comment. The act of 1718, re
ferred to, readopted for the province many of the
English criminal laws. Up to this time, the only
death penalty in Pennsylvania was for murder
and treason. It was now inflicted for minor
offenses. The measure was a compromise, but
it is strange to find that the act was framed by
the Quaker lawyer, John Kinsey. (See p. 209.)
This act was "drawn up by a Quaker Lawyer,
passed by a Quaker Assembly, and satisfactory to
a Quaker community." 1 This was the period of
political dissension in Pennsylvania, and that just
preceding, due, the impartial observer must own,
not only to the opposition of members of the state
church in England, not here touched upon, but
also to the unworthy conduct of certain Quakers,
who were repudiated by their respective meet
ings. They almost literally broke the heart of
Penn, who so long before as 1696 had written,
"For the love of God, me and the poor country,
be not so governmentish, so noisy and open in
your dissatisfactions."
Finally, 1724 saw a peaceful conclusion to the
affirmation struggle, when Parliament acknowl
edged the affection and fidelity of the Quakers
1 President Isaac Sharpless, "A Quaker Experiment in Gov
ernment," 152.

130 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
to the Crown, and established the forms of
affirmation for Pennsylvania, with no opposition
from the Attorney General. The Act was rati
fied by the King in Council, March 27th, 1725.1
When the sons of William Penn had some
thought of taking the Governorship, it was sup
posed that an oath to qualify would be necessary;
and a commission to Thomas Penn was made
out. But an act implying the abandonment of all
his father's testimonies, roused the entire sect of
the Quakers. The idea was, for various reasons,
notably the controversy with Lord Baltimore,
abandoned at that time. When John, nephew of
Thomas, finally came, their Quaker principles had
been given up, and the sons of William Penn no
longer stood in the position of their famous
father. The student of constitutional history
must observe that the Quakers, by mere non-re
sistance, obtained from legislatures and courts,
indulgence for scruples and recognition of the
validity of their customs.
William Penn was the first purchaser of lands
from the Six Nations and the Indians of New
Jersey and Pennsylvania, to put a bound upon
1 Shepherd, Work quoted, 368. For the benefit of Scotch
Presbyterians and others who objected to "Kissing the Book"
an act was passed in 1739 enabling them merely to repeat the
oath. In the next year, this was repealed, and they did not
revive recognition of this scruple until 1772,

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 131
the purchase. All other purchasers before Penn
had left out the element of a boundary, and a
shore line had no limit at the back. This is im
portant. A portion of land of their own was
essential, moreover, to the Indian in all treaty-
making in wliich his rights were concerned. A
very interesting relic of this directly inherited
from Penn still exists in Philadelphia.
In 1865-7, a Committee of citizens, headed by
William Welsh, secured the old "Slate Roof"
house of AVilliam Penn, on the east side of Second
Street, for the Corn Exchange, to erect which,
the priceless relic was sacrificed. When it was
proposed to purchase out to Walnut Street, the
discovery was made that a tiny piece of property,
twelve by sixteen feet, was not covered by orig
inal deeds or patents. This proved to belong to
the Six Nations, to whom it had been presented
by the sons of William Penn, when the Chiefs,
on a visit to Philadelphia, refused to negotiate a
Treaty or even talk about it, until they could
stand on their own ground, and build a council-
fire on their own land. One of the Committee
visited the Indian Reservation on the Allegheny
River, and was referred to "Colonel Parker,"
their Chief, in New York. He confirmed the
fact, but said that there was no record, a wampum
belt having been the confirmation. This belt has

132 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
since been deposited at Albany, with all the wam
pum belts of the Six Nations. Granville Penn
visited this plot of ground, and knew all about
it. The exact location is in the rear of 45 South
Second Street.
The precedent of the Swedes was followed by
the Quakers in Pennsylvania, when they per
mitted six out of the twelve men on a jury to be
Indians, in those cases dealing with the various
tribes.1 Much as Penn's admirable treatment of
the Indians has been praised, he was not the first
to be just to the red man. Lands had been
bought of aboriginal owners in New Jersey, and
half a century before the time of Penn, benevo
lent instructions had been given Endicott in 1627
to buy of the Indians certain territory.2 The
Pennsylvania law read, "All differences between
the Planters and the natives shall also be ended
by Twelve men, that is, by Six planters and Six
natives, that so we may live friendly together as
much as in us lieth, preventing all occasions of
Heart-burning and Mischief." On this subject
of juries Penn wrote his Secretary Logan from
Worminghurst, in 1703: — "It was not to be
1 In 1675, in the Plymouth colony, a jury of twelve citizens
and five " grave " Indians — a total of seventeen — convicted the
murderers of John Sassamon, the Indian preacher and Harvard
student. [Goodwin, "Pilgrim Republic," 5-37.]
2 Bancroft, History of U. S., I, 346.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 133
thought that a colony and constitution of govern
ment made by and for Quakers would leave
themselves and their lives and fortunes out of so
essential a part of the government as juries ; that
there and here differed much, as we had gone
thither with our lives and substance, to be so pre
carious in our security as not to be capable of
being a juryman. If the coming of others shall
overrule us that are the originals, and made it a
country, we are unhappy, that it is not to be
thought Ave intended no easier nor better terms
for ourselves, in going to America, than we left
behind us." 1 One cannot help a pang at being
obliged to place his associations with the scene
under the Treaty Tree, along with those repre
senting the prowess of William Tell, and label
them both on the same shelf, "unauthentic."
Perhaps Penn did not thus purchase his great
possessions, but that he often met the Indians for
friendly conferences under the famous elm, we
very well know from documentary proof. Let
us, therefore, claim West's great picture for
other than historic, or even artistic, reasons, and
quote Voltaire with all the enthusiasm that the
great philosopher deserves. They were both —
West and Voltaire — equally impressed with the

1 Penn-Logan Correspondence, Memoirs of the Pennsylvania
Historical Soe, I, 205.

134 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
friendly light of Justice as it first rose in the
western hemisphere — a beacon to draw the op
pressed from all the nations.
Despite their "testimony" as Quakers against
fighting, the Quaker governors of each of the
American colonies found themselves obliged to
accept the office of Captain-General in the prov
inces over which they ruled. Like Coddington
and Easton, Penn had to grant a Commission to
establish a fort at Newcastle, now Delaware.
James Logan, his secretary, was a frank believer
in defensive war, and while William Penn had to
accept command from the King in his Charter, he
successfully did the martial acts through deputies
who were not Quakers and who had no scruples.
29th of 5mo., 1702, Logan wrote Penn, then in
London: "The Governor . . . has issued
commissions for one company of militia, and in
tends to proceed all the Government over." This
was the first information of a militia in Pennsyl
vania.1 A note of Deborah Logan adds that this
company was raised by William Penn, Jr. In
1706 Logan wrote the latter, "the militia that
cost thee so much pains seems utterly knock'd o'
th' head !" — a short-lived existence.
The duties exacted by Governor Evans, con
trary to the Provincial Charter, for the main-
1 Penn-Logan Corn, ibid., I, 124. Also, II, 159.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 135
tenance of a fort at Newcastle, on the Delaware
(amounting to half a pound of gunpowder per
ton measurement, from all merchant vessels),
were successively resisted by three Quakers in
1706, the war between France and Spain being
then on. Isaac Norris and Samuel Preston led
by Richard Hill, of the Governor's Council, a
man bred to the sea, on the latter's vessel, the
"Philadelphia," accompanied the sailing master,
who had loaded and cleared, down the river. At
the fort Norris and Preston went ashore, and cer
tified as to the clearance of the vessel, requesting
permission to pass. This being refused, Richard
Hill took command, and standing to the helm un
der continuous fire, sailed his vessel past the fort
with only a shot through his mainsail. The
Commandant at the fort, John French, put off in
an armed boat, and came alongside. A rope was
thrown him, and he came aboard, when his boat
was at once cut adrift and he politely conducted
to the cabin. Having no mind for an impromptu
ocean voyage, he was set ashore at Salem, on the
Jersey side, and interviewed by Lord Cornbury,
Vice Admiral of the River, "who sufficiently rep
rimanded him." Promising another conduct, he
was dismissed, "not without marks of derision,"
from certain attendants. The fort duties were
soon discontinued.

136 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
While in some details, the Quakers both of
Rhode Island and Pennsylvania seem to have
compromised with their peace principles, a truer
view demands that we recognize their willingness
to submit to a constabulary. Such an idea will be
found at the bottom of their actions in all cases.
The perplexities of a time in which there was no
such idea as a principle of peace can hardly be im
agined by us, still far removed from a state of
mind in which "the nations shall not learn war
any more," yet accustomed to that development
of the arbitration idea which has at length
realized the proposal of Penn, made in 1693 for a
"Diet of Nations," in the establishment of the
Hague Tribunal. It is important also to note
that of the five Judges who tried the first inter
national case at the Hague — that of the "Pious
Fund" between the United States and Mexico,
decided in favor of the former in 1902 — one, Sir
Edward Fry, was a Quaker. In fact, we shall
have to approach a little nearer the millennium of
international arbitration, not to feel that the ends
of justice will ever be hard to attain under the
principles and ideals of a people who repudiate all
war, even that which is defensive.
Pennsylvania was made up, before the opening
of the eighteenth century, of quite as great a
variety of religious beliefs as distinguished her

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 137
smaller friendly rival, Rhode Island. The two
had no state religion, while Connecticut did not
make the formal separation of Church and State
until so late as 181 8. The Quaker belief that the
civil magistrate has no right to interfere with re
ligious matters, either to enforce doctrines or
hinder any from worshiping God in their own
way, may have led the Welsh Quakers who ar
rived in large numbers after Penn, to try to re
tain their own rights as Welsh citizens. The
sort of "barony" promised them by Penn has al
ways had nebulous legal and geographical boun
daries. Their exclusiveness even went so far at
first as to cause them to decline to sit upon juries,
or take any part in the Government, beyond elect
ing members to the Legislature. This state of
affairs could not long endure, and they became
identified eventually with the political issues of
the colony, and their dreams of a Welsh Quaker
church were also dissipated, great as their influ
ence long remained in Pennsylvania.
The year 1756 marks the withdrawal of the
Quakers from the Assembly of Pennsylvania.
They had had a large German backing, some
times misrepresented, as is shown by their epistle
of explanation from Philadelphia Quarterly Meet
ing to London in 1755 — "our former representa
tives were, at our last election, chosen throughout

138 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the Province by the greatest majority ever
known, without accounting the freemen who are
foreigners, on whose credulity and ignorance it
has been unjustly asserted that we have indus
triously and artfully posed. And this was done,
not only without the solicitation but in some in
stances, without the privity or approbation of
some that were chosen." 1 The crisis was ap
proaching, and Quakerism bodily refused to ac
cede to the demand for a compulsory militia law.
There was a suggestion, openly made, that unless
the Quakers acted a more "rational and dutiful
part," they be not permitted to remain in positions
of trust or office, and the Board of Trade was
even then considering a bill for Parliament, one
clause of which should forbid Quakers sitting in
the Pennsylvania Assembly.2
Apropos of this, Benjamin Franklin wrote
Peter Collinson, Philadelphia, August 7th, 1755
— "I know the Quakers now think it their duty,
when chosen, to consider themselves as Repre
sentatives of the Whole People, and not of their
own Sect, only; they consider the Public Money
as raised from and belonging to the Whole Pub-
lick, and not to their Sect only, and therefore, tho'
1 There were at this time, 221,000 inhabitants in Pennsylvania;
100,000 of these were foreign, chiefly German.
2 Penn Mss. Thos. Penn to Governor Morris, Feb. 14, 1756.
Quot. Shepherd, " Prop. Govt," 537.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 139
they can neither bear Arms themselves, nor com
pel others to do it, yet when our Frontier inhab
itants . . . thought themselves in danger
and the poor among them unable to provide Arms
petitioned the House, a sum was Voted for these
purposes. ... To me, it seems as if Qua
kerism (as to the Matter of Defense) be excluded
the House, there is no Necessity to exclude Qua
kers, who in other Respects make good and Use
ful Members."
The Assembly's reply to the Governor, in 1756,
was called by Samuel Fothergill, inconsistent
with Quaker profession. He wrote his brother
the Doctor, from Philadelphia under date, 2mo.,
29th, 1756 — "It is altogether imputed to B.
Franklin, their principal penman, who, I have
sometimes thought, intended to render the As
sembly contemptible, and subject our religious
Society to the imputation of want of respect to
authority, as a Factious sort of people, and I fear
he has gained his point." The English Quakers
suggested that Parliament dissolve the Assembly
then sitting, upon which they would request
Friends to withdraw from the Assembly until the
close of the war. The Proprietors, wisely con
cluding that London Yearly meeting might not
find its suggestions heeded, desired some qualifi
cation introduced to which the Quakers could not

140 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
comply. This, however, did not seem respectful
to the English Friends. If a law were passed for
the establishment of a colonial militia, there were
sure to be complications with the militia law in
England, by which Quakers were individually ex
empted from service. A similar act in Pennsyl
vania, with a certificate from the meeting to
designate those entitled to exemption, was liable
to abuse, and undue efforts at proselyting. The
exemption by name was deemed wiser, and the
suggestion of London Yearly meeting that
Friends desist, had so great an effect that 1757
saw the force of Quaker influence broken in the
Assembly of Pennsylvania for all time.
The obstinacy of Quakers in Pennsylvania has
had some excuse, however, for in the epistle to
London, just quoted, they said, "Were a sufficient
number of men of understanding, probity and
moderate principles proposed for our representa
tives, in whose resolution we could confide, to pre
serve our liberties inviolate, we should be well sat
isfied to have the members of our society relieved
from the disagreeable contests and controversies
to which we are now subjected. But while arbi
trary and oppressive measures are publicly
avowed by those desiring to rule over us, . . .
we must be faithful to our trust." Then came
their retirement, and when the Committee of

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 141
Safety superseded Governor John Penn, the feel
ing of the forces then forming preparatory to the
Revolution was so strong, that the soldiers re
fused to sign certain regulations if the Quakers
were to be exempted. After much discussion a
rate of £3 10 sh. was prescribed, for non-pay
ment 1 of which Quakerism suffered much. The
statement of the meeting for Sufferings in Phil
adelphia, 1769, makes clear their attitude —
They said : " We seriously exhort all carefully to
guard against being drawn into measures which may ad
minister occasion to any to represent us as a people de
parting from the principles we profess ; " they emphasized
" the deep obligation we are, and have been, under to the
King and his royal ancestors for their indulgence and
lenity granted to our predecessors, and continued to us ! "
They then proceed:
" Should any manifest a disposition to contend for
liberty by any methods or agreements against the peace
able spirit and temper of the Gospel, which ever breathes
peace on earth and good will to all men, we must declare
that we cannot join with such, and that we firmly believe
a steady, uniform conduct under the influence of that
spirit will most effectually tend to our relief under every
kind of oppression." These, then, were the last official
words of what Franklin called " that wealthy and pow
erful body of people who have, ever since the war, gov-

1 Nantucket had a similar law — partly because of the diffi
culties of an impressment of the inhabitants, and partly because
most of them were Quakers.

142 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
erned our elections and occupied almost every seat in the
Assembly." 1
The Quaker magistrates of Pennsylvania,
through all their trials, have so thoroughly lived
up to their principles, that it is fitting that one or
two typical instances should be noted. The mat
ter of the removal of the hat received attention in
the Court of Chancery in 1725. The traditions
of Penn's proprietaryship had been so well pre
served, that in the year named the forcible uncov
ering of John Kinsey, a prominent Quaker law
yer, afterward Chief-Justice, by order of Sir
William Keith, President of the Court of Equity,
was greatly resented by the entire body of Qua
kers in Pennsylvania, as an invasion of their orig
inal Charter. The Quarterly Meeting of Phila
delphia addressed the Governor upon the subject,
the address was filed and their privilege of ap
pearing and officiating with their heads covered,
restored. There is no doubt that the Quakers
were in the whole matter actuated by the most
conscientious motives.
In 1740, again, a considerable number of
bought and indented servants were taken
from the employ of their masters and en
listed for the army. John Wright, a Quaker
1 Franklin, "The Plain Dealer," 1747.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 143
preacher, member of the Pennsylvania As
sembly, and Magistrate of Lancaster County,
of which he was a pioneer, opposed this abuse
and was left out of the new Commission of
Peace for the County.1 The address in which the
aged and worthy magistrate gave his final charge
to the jury at the Lancaster Quarter Sessions in
May, 1 741, is an admirably dignified and impres
sive effort. "I have," said he, "for upwards of
twenty years, borne a Commission of the Peace in
Chester and Lancaster Counties, under the re
spective Governors of this Province, and have
lived in familiar friendship and good understand
ing with all of them until of late. . . . The of
fice of Civil Magistrate, or Justice of the Peace, is
an office of high trust, and ought to be exercised
with great care, circumspection, and good con
science. Magistrates may be looked upon as
Ministers under God, invested with some
branches of power for the public benefit ; viz, to be
a terror and scourge to evil doers, and a praise to
them that do well. ... I was always a friend
to power, well knowing that good and wholesome
laws, duly executed, are so far from being a re
straint upon true liberty that they are only as reg
ulating springs to the passion and production of
1 Proud's History of Pennsylvania, II, 221. John Wright died
1751, aged 83.

144 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
it. . . . For the cause of English liberty, for
standing in the Civil defense of right and prop
erty, are we dismissed, and I rejoice and am
heartily glad that I have been one of those who
are thought worthy of displeasure. And now, to
conclude, I take my leave in the words of a Judge
in Israel: "Here I am; witness against me.
Whom have I defrauded? Whom have I op
posed? or of whose hands have I received any
bribe, to blind my eyes therewith? And I will
restore it." May the Prince of Peace, who is the
King of Kings, protect the people of this Prov
ince from domestic foes and foreign enemies, is
my hearty desire, and so I bid you all farewell."
In the next generation of Quaker Justices is
Warner Mifflin, Magistrate in 1770, Justice of
Peace, 1771-1774; Court of Quarter Sessions,
and of Common Pleas, 1774. He was, according
to Clarkson, the first man in America to eman
cipate his slaves unconditionally, and his anti-
slavery work was almost equal in extent and im
portance to that of either Clarkson or Woolman.
He died of yellow fever in Philadelphia in the
dreadful year of 1793, while ministering to the
victims about him.1

1 See St. John de Crevecceur's " Letters of an American Far
mer," and Kotzebue's play, "The Quaker," for Mifflin's inter
view with General Howe, to represent the Quaker's ideas of

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 145
The "Concessions and Agreements" of New
Jersey, 1665, guaranteed liberty of conscience to
all comers, but required the oaths of fidelity to
King and Lords. The Concessions of 1677 say,
"No man nor Number of Men upon Earth hath
power or Authority to rule over Men's Con
sciences in Religious Matters." Some emigrants
from the eastern colonies, under the leadership of
the Reverend Abraham Pierson, shortly before
Governor Carteret's arrival, settled at Newark
about 1666, and, adopting the ideas of New
Haven whence they came, permitted only church
members to vote. The unsettled years between
this and the coming of the large emigration of
Quakers to West Jersey in 1677, saw many strug
gles, but the Constitution prepared for the colony
at that time by Penn emphatically reasserted the
doctrine of religious freedom, and guaranteed
the right of trial by jury. The protest of the
Quakers against their arbitrary taxation by the
Duke of York, in 1680, includes most of the argu
ments used by the Americans in 1776 against
"taxation without representation," and is an early
Quaker movement in favor of independence,
nearly a century in advance of the event.1 We
peace at the time of the Revolution. Also, " The Life of
Warner Mifflin," by Miss Hilda Justice.
1 Smith's History of New Jersey, 117, et seq.

146 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
find for years the Puritans in East Jersey and the
Quakers of West Jersey, managing their affairs
through their town organizations in an orderly
way. In 1702 the province of New Jersey, where the
franchise had been as free as across the river in
Pennsylvania, and under more democratic condi
tions, came under the Royal Governors. A prop
erty qualification was then required, and the suf
frage limited to freeholders. Religious liberty
was conceded to all "except Papists," and al
though the Church of England was favored, and
there were prescribed regulations for its main
tenance, these were rendered inoperative by the
refusal of the Assembly, consisting mainly of
Quakers, to make the necessary grants for the
purpose. Governor Hunter supported the Dis
senters, in opposition to the English law, requir
ing an oath of officers, jurymen, and witnesses in
capital cases. Before this time there had been
practically no Anglicans in the Jerseys, and the
first Episcopal clergyman in East Jersey came to
Perth Amboy in 1698. In 1680, it is said that
Bishop Compton could find but four clergy of the
Church of England in North America.1 In 171 3
1 Whitehead's "Contributions to East Jersey History," 209.
Daniel Leed's New Jersey " Almanac " for 1687 amusingly antici
pates criticism by saying, "Them that has good eyes mayst see

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 147
the General Assembly passed an Act "That the
solemn affirmation and Declaration of the People
called Quakers shall be accepted and taken in
stead of an oath in the usual form, and for qual
ifying and enabling the said people to act as Ju
rors, and to execute any office of trust and profit
in this Province."
How completely the Quakers had the reins of
government in their own hands, is shown soon
after when they had occasion to speak on the
question of the militia tax. Lord Loudoun wrote
William Pitt, then Chancellor of the Exchequer,
from New York, April 25th, 1757, complaining of
the Quakers' unwillingness to furnish the neces
sary money and men for the French and Indian
campaign. He says, —
In the Jerseys, I have failed in getting the Number
of Men I proposed for the Service in this Campaign.
. . . The pretence they used was want of money.
. . . The real State of the refusal of the Jerseys, tho'
they avoid mentioning it to me, is, They have very little
Trade, but are supplied with goods from hence and from
Philadelphia, and are almost wholly engaged in Culture,
where each Man lives in great Affluence on his own
Lands, and saves considerably every Year, by which they
are all Rich, and for that Reason, as they are in General

that I oft change my method, and I may well, too, for Govern
ment is greater and yet it hath changed oftener here in West
Jersey than I have altered the fashion of my Almanac ! "

148 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
much on a Footing, they will not agree to our Impress
out of their own Militia, which occasions their giving
so large a Bounty. . . . The Jerseys . . . have
not met with any part of the harassment which War in
evitably occasions in the Country where the seat of it lies,
nor are they likely to meet with any this Year. . . .
The majority of the Jersey Assembly are Quakers,
. . . who support that Independence on Government
which is so deep-rooted everywhere in this Country, but
particularly so among that set of People ; for altho' I have
always been a great Favourer of the Quakers, I am
thoroughly convinced since I came to this Country that
they are very Unfit to bee Employed in any Public Em
ployment. And in this Country they are Judges, Justices
of the Peace, and indeed employed in every Office, as well
as being Members of the Assembly ! 1
The final separation of New Jersey from New
York was effected in 1738, James II having
united the two, the Jerseys making no open resist
ance. The Revolution of 1688, had left the prov
inces practically under the care of county and
town officers, with the Proprietors abstaining
from a resumption of authority in the Jerseys.
They later took it up in a nominal way, but the
Royal Governors in 1702 ended the anarchy re
sulting. Since 1685 New York had had a Royal
1 Letter in "American and West Indies Papers," London Pub
lic Record Office, Vol. 85. Quoted by Gertrude Selwyn Kim
ball, in the "Correspondence of William Pitt," edited for the
National Society of the Colonial Dames of America, vol. I, p. 40.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 149
Governor, succeeding the popular Assembly
which had administered the Duke of York's laws.
The first proclamation against the Quakers in
New York — or New Amsterdam, as it then was
— was made by the Dutch in 1657, modeled on
that of Massachusetts. Forcible measures were
taken against them for some years without the
approval of the West India Company, by the Es
tablished Church of Holland, led by Governor
Stuyvesant, an intolerant Calvinist. The Qua
kers were fined, whipped, imprisoned and ban
ished, until 1663, when the West India Company
condemned such "rigorous proceedings" against
sectarians. The Hempstead Assembly of 1665
was the first representative body under the Eng
lish in New York. The "Duke's Laws" were
adopted by them. The aristocratic methods of
the Netherlands were not at once superseded, al
though the outlying towns were really often New
England offshoots, and not pure Dutch. Reg
ular popular suffrage, however, was not much
practiced. The old New York records show us what hap
pened to non-swearing Quakers who were not
permitted to affirm.1
Whereas, the Late Chosen Magistrates of Shrousburj
(Shrewsbury) are found to be persons whose Religion
1 O'Callaghan, " Documentary History of New York,'' 1673.

150 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Will Not suffer them to take any Oath or administer the
Same to others, wherefore they Cann Nott be fitt Per
sons for that office, I haue therefore thought fitt to order
that bij ye sd Inhabitants off ye sd Towne a New Nomi
nation shall bee made off four Persons of the True Pro
testant Religion, outt of which I shal elect two.
Dated att Fortt Willem Hendrick, this 29th, 7ber, 1673.
(Signed) A. Colve.
So early as 1682 Roman Catholics had been
excluded from elections in New York, but the fol
lowing year Thomas Dongan, himself an Irish
Catholic, was made Governor. The "Charter of
Liberties" which included a guaranty of freedom
of conscience to those who "Profess faith in God
by Jesus Christ," was not signed by the Duke of
York until 1684. The Revolution of 1688 was
succeeded in New York by the minor revolution
of Leisler, and his fall and the coming of Gov
ernor Sloughter under William and Mary saw
the restoration substantially of the Bill of Rights
of 1683, with the exception that the right of the
Roman Catholics to worship after their own
forms was denied. In 1701 and 1702 they were
disfranchised, and the church of England fa
vored, where it was supported for a time by state
money, although the Treaty of Breda protected
Dutch forms of worship. The law which or
dained that a "popish priest," if he came into the
province of his own accord, should be hanged,

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 151
was still unrepealed upon the arrival of Lord
Cornbury, who vainly pretended that English
acts of uniformity were still in force in the
province.1 A description of New York from the pen of
Governor Andros in 1678, mentions Quakers and
"some Jews" as there resident at that date.
Eight years later Governor Dongan said, "Here
bee not many of ye Church of England, few Ro
man Catholics; abundance of Quaker preachers,
men and Women especially; Singing Quakers;
Ranting Quakers; Sabbatarians; some Anabap
tists ; some Independents ; some Jews ; in short of
all sorts of opinions there are some, and the most
part, of none at all !" 2 The charter of 1684 must
have disfranchised the Jews. This was done
again in 1737, by a resolution of the Assembly.
There is on record in Queen's County, New
York, a petition of the Quakers to the Governor
demanding to know whether they are legally
barred from voting. The petition is dated Octo
ber 3d, 1 701, "To the Honorable John Nanfan,
Governor of New York:
The Humble Petition of Samuel Hoight, John
Way, and Robert Field, and the rest of the Ff ree-
holders of Queen's County of the persuasion and
^G. P. Fisher, "Colonial Era," 247.
2 N. Y. Colonial Documents, III, 262.

152 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
profession of the People called Quakers. Hav
ing been deprived of their right and privilege of
Voting by Justices of said County, or some of
them, and others appointed witnesses to the
Elecon upon Pretence and Colour of not having
taken the oathes, notwithstanding their having
signed the declaracon appointed the People of
that persuasion by Act of Parliament," the Qua
kers ask for a legal opinion as to their rights.
Unfortunately, the opinion is not recorded.1
An incident of the election of Chief- Justice
Lewis Morris to the New York Assembly in 1733
shows the later position of the Quakers in that
colony to have had embarrassments. Upon the
death of Governor John Montgomerie in July,
1 73 1, Rip van Dam, senior member of the Coun
cil of New York, succeeded in office according to
custom until the arrival of his successor. Van
Dam, by the way, was the last native Dutchman
of New York to preside in Council under English
rule. He lived from 1662 until 1749, and was
Governor for thirteen months. William Cosby,
successor to Montgomerie, arrived in New York
on the first of August, 1732. He was a hot-tem
pered, arbitrary Irishman, bitterly opposed to
Morris, who was not only Chief- Justice of the
Supreme Court of New York, since 171 5, but had
1 0'Callaghan, "Doc. Hist. N. Y." Ill, 609.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 153
been a member of the Assembly since 171 1 — a
position which he held for twenty-seven years.
In the attempt to accomplish his defeat at the
Westchester election, October 1733, Cosby gave
orders that all Quaker votes should be challenged
upon the ground that the voters were not free
holders, although all were men of estate and good
standing. The sheriff tendered them the usual
oath to qualify, which they of course refusing,
offered instead to affirm, as was their right under
the statute. This they were not permitted to do,
and thirty-eight were disfranchised without
cause. Justice Morris' opponent was the Clerk
of Common Pleas, William Foster, who was said
to have paid the Governor one hundred pistoles
for the appointment. A contemporary account of
this fraudulent election, which, in spite of the
elimination of the Quakers, resulted in a triumph
for the Chief- Justice, may be read in Zenger's
"New York Weekly Journal" for Monday, No
vember 5, 1733.1
During the early years of the nineteenth cen
tury, the Quakers were to the fore in political af-
!The opinion of the Attorney-General of the Province upon
this case declares that Acts of Parliament do not extend to the
provinces; that the Act of New York, 3 Wm. and Mary, only
related to the Courts and not to Elections; and that in the
present instance, the Sheriff refused no unchallenged votes. 28
January, 1734. R. Bradley, Attorney-General. [O'Callaghan,
Doc. Hist. N. Y., 612.]

154 THE QUAKER IN TFIE FORUM
fairs. Walter Bowne, a wealthy Friend, was at
one time Mayor of New York; Walter Underhill
was elected to Congress from the same place, and
Quakerism, particularly in commercial directions,
made itself felt in many ways.
The Church of England was from the begin
ning established in Virginia. The first Lord
Baltimore in 1629, on his way from New Eng
land, would have settled in Virginia, had not his
repugnance to the terms of the oath of Suprem
acy led him, as a Roman Catholic, to return to
England. The first legislation in the south
which was directed against the Quakers person
ally was in Virginia, by the passage of an act
dated in March, 1658-9. This law was one of
the first in America against them, and attention
has been drawn to the fact that its text so nearly
resembles that of Massachusetts the year before
that it is in all probability a copy.1 That of New
York of the same date may also be a copy. In
1663 the oath was made the test of orthodoxy,
when a burgess of Virginia was dismissed from
the Assembly for sympathy with the Quakers,
and refusing to take the oaths of Supremacy and
Allegiance. The act of 1684 first formally lim
ited the suffrage to landholders. This lasted to
1 For the text of this Act, see Hening, " Statutes at Large
of Virginia," I, 532.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 155
1830, and as nine per cent, of the white population
voted, the showing compared favorably with New
England. In Virginia, in 1699, the Toleration Act of
AVilliam and Mary (passed May 24th, 1689) re
ceived late statutory recognition. The interval
was a period of political apathy. Brock 1 says
that the Quakers had their rights recognized un
der this act in 1692. The Virginia Act of 1699,
says McKinley,2 excluded "Recusant Convicts,"
i. e., Roman Catholics, from voting or serving as
witnesses, and continued until the Revolution of
1776. The struggle of the Quakers went on,
varying in character; not until the American
Revolution was it ended for them, and indeed, not
entirely then. Sometimes it was the question of
tithes, and sometimes permission to affirm, for
which the Quakers contended, but it was always,
apparently in personal inconvenience and dis
traint of goods that punishment came, and never,
as in Massachusetts, for capital offense.
Recent interest in the tercentenary of the set
tlement of America by the English at Jamestown
in 1607 has brought the little group of Virginia
heroes more clearly before the public mind. Not
1 R. A. Brock, Collections of Southern and Virginia Historical
Soe. 2 A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, p. 35.

156 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
all of importance in the settlement's history, how
ever, is contained in the inaccuracies published
about the love affair of Captain Smith and Poca
hontas ! The little colony — if a military outpost,
with no private ownership of land and no separate
homes, with wife or child, can be called a colony
— struggled along until its life was literally and
figuratively saved by the provision ships of the
newcomers under Lord Delaware in 1610. From
this date colonial life in Virginia really begins.
The orders of the Commissioners sent in 1654
from England by the Council of State to reduce
the threatening Stuart loyalty of the plantations
on Chesapeake Bay, first formally excluded the
Roman Catholics from the franchise. Here was
felt the hard hand of the Commonwealth. After
the Restoration came the Test oath, as we have
seen. Roman Catholic Maryland, in the beginning,
allowed large liberty to all comers, and the Qua
kers were permitted to worship unmolested when
they first came. So early as 1658, the Quakers
in Maryland could subscribe instead of taking the
oath of fidelity. A severe order against them in
the next year was due to their refusal to bear
arms, to take the jurors' oath, or give testimony
in Court, but it was never to any extent enforced.1
1 H. L. Osgood, " American Colonies in 17th Cent.," II, 322.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 157
Lord Baltimore, as Sir George Calvert, had been
converted to the Romish faith in 1625. The
charter of his son, who settled the country, recog
nized the Church of England as the established
form of worship, while at the same time permit
ting full toleration toward all Christian bodies.
The Government at home, as well as most of the
settlers, in a steadily increasing number, were
Protestant, and to limit the franchise would have
been fatal to the prosperity of the new settlement.
Moreover, it is but just to the breadth of mind of
the first Lords Baltimore to give them credit for
liberal views and wide sympathies. There was,
however, no very clear statement in Maryland
laws as to toleration. That was taken for
granted. In 1643, and later, during the strug
gle between King and Parliament, Maryland hos
pitably entertained those Puritan and Non-Con
formist exiles who fled from Virginia, Baltimore,
indeed, even inviting Massachusetts Puritans at
the earlier date, to come to his colony.1 1648 saw
a Protestant Governor, William Stone, appointed,
from whom the Proprietary exacted an oath of
toleration toward all beliefs that were Christian,
and particularly the Roman Catholics. With a
majority of the colony now Protestant, this was
regarded necessary, and it was under these cir-
1 George P. Fisher, "Colonial Era," p. 69.

158 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
cumstances that the celebrated Act of Religious
Freedom was passed in April, 1649, the first ex
plicit guarantee of religious freedom in Mary
land. The Assembly of 1654, after struggles
which cannot here be enumerated, repealed the
Act of 1649, declaring the Roman Catholics with
out legal protection. The reinstatement of Balti
more after a short interval in which his Govern
orship was withdrawn, restored the protection of
law to the original creed, and Maryland had a
period of respite until the Revolution of 1688.
The overthrow of Proprietary Government in
Maryland which then succeeded, eventually led to
the exclusion of Roman Catholics from political
life thereafter. The first Assembly under the
Royal government, which met in 1692, restricted
the Roman Catholics, and for a quarter of a cen
tury, Maryland became a Royal province. The
oaths required would prevent them from holding
office.1 It is curious to find James, the Roman
Catholic, favoring Penn the Quaker in his plans
for the settlement of Pennsylvania, while one of
his own faith, Lord Baltimore, received no favors
from the royal hand. This fact did not save the
Maryland Proprietary when he was threatened
with the confiscation of his province. In 17 14,
before succeeding to the title, the fourth Lord
*A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, pp. 57, 58, 71.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 159
Baltimore, as Benedict Calvert, formally re
nounced Catholicism.1 After the Jacobite rising
of 1 71 5, Maryland, like the other colonies, revised
her laws, but two years later, a special act dis
franchised the Roman Catholics. A section of
this act, as in Commonwealth days, was still most
unjustifiably unrepealed in 1776, and marks the
effect of Episcopalian intolerance through a long
period of years, culminating in the attitude of the
province of Maryland in the American Revolu
tion. Thus members of that church which orig
inally settled Maryland were themselves disfran
chised by successive acts under the Common
wealth, and William and Mary, and finally in
1718. A clause in the last act lightened the load for
the Quakers, but the establishment of the Church
of England in 1692 had taken away from them
their former permission to affirm as to all oaths
taken by others, and the privilege of not being
debarred for not swearing.2 As history shows,
they and the Roman Catholics suffered together.
It is interesting to record that to-day the impreca
tory features of the oath have been successfully
abolished in the Courts and customs of Mary-

1 Ibid., p. 74.
2 Cortlandt F. Bishop, " History of Elections in the American
Colonies." Note, p. SO.

160 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
land, and a form has been adopted which is almost
identical with that in use in Pennsylvania under
Quaker rule in colonial days.
The parallel must be drawn between Lord
Baltimore's policy and that of William Penn,
who, equally zealous for the interests of their
respective religious beliefs, sought with equal
earnestness to build up a remunerative province;
Baltimore even resisted the efforts of certain
provincial Jesuits when these ran counter to his
policy. Both Governors recognized that pros
perity depended upon their offer of an asylum to
all denominations where liberty should be the
keynote. In this respect, Baltimore and Penn
were singularly alike. Penn, too, was better ac
quainted with the methods of the Catholic Fathers
than his biographers have often realized. Under
Moise Amyrault, at Saumur, he had learned a
certain subtlety in argument which may have
aided in attaching to him the epithet of "Jesuit."
At all events, when the early Quakers in Mary
land were disturbed in mind as to the taking of
oaths, which long prevented John Edmondston
from taking his seat in the Assembly for Talbot
County, although often elected, Penn wrote them
a letter of advice as to how to deal with a Catholic
colony. He referred to many Church Fathers,

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 161
and arrayed against persons in authority, all the
writers of the church.
It must again be emphasized that the Quakers
of Maryland were not persecuted for their re
ligious belief. The only people made liable to
disfranchisement in that province at any period,
were infidels, Jews, and Roman Catholics. The
Quakers declined to obey laws relating to per
sonal service in defense of the Government, and
the requirement of an oath of allegiance and
fidelity to the Proprietor — laws which applied
alike to all persons, without discrimination.
Their sole interest was self-preservation. There
was in those laws, no religious motive, nor any
purpose to suppress heresy, as was the case both
in the neighboring colony of Virginia, under the
Church of England, and still more conspicuously,
under the uncompromising Puritans of Mas
sachusetts Bay. The persecution of Quakers in
Maryland, therefore, differs greatly from that of
Massachusetts, and must be put upon other than
religious grounds ; although, as has been pointed
out before in these pages, even there the offenses
which they committed were more political than
religious. The order of 1659 complained of the
"disturbance of the civil and military part of the
government by the Quakers," and their banish-

•I 62 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ment was for these reasons. At least one
official favorable to the Quakers, and afterward,
one himself, was a member of the Assembly
which passed this law, and later, its Speaker;
but he was probably in England at this session.
This was Richard Preston, until his death, Bur
gess of Calvert County. By 1688, so great is the
change of feeling, that Thomas Thurston, ex
pelled from the province under this law, takes
his seat in the lower house of Assembly, and being
a Quaker, is excused from taking the usual oath
of fidelity!
Dryden's "Prologue to the King and Queen"
on the opening of the Joint Theatre, 1682, has
the following lines : —
" Since faction ebbs and rogues grow out of fashion,
The Penny-scribes take care to inform the nation
How well men thrive in this or that plantation ; —
How Pennsylvania's air agrees with Quakers,
And Carolina's with Associators."
The period of Quaker political influence was
strongest in the American colonies in the seven
teenth, and early part of the eighteenth centuries,
and the prominence of Penn in the affairs of his
Government and the greater wealth and impor
tance of the men with whom he surrounded him
self, have led to a want of appreciation of a Gov
ernor in one of the southern colonies who was as

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 163
enlightened as any man of his day. This was
John Archdale, Governor of South Carolina, who,
as we have seen, declined to take the oath in the
House of Commons soon after his return from
America, and in the absence of any alternative,
left Parliament. He was at the time a propri
etary in both the Carolinas, at first united as one.
Daniel Akehurst and Francis Toms, also Qua
kers, held high office under him before 1700.
The former was Deputy Governor, and the latter,
Councillor and Justice of the Peace. Francis
Toms accompanied Thomas Story and Roger
Gill, when the former arrived in Carolina with
letters to the Governor, (1 mo. 1698-9), and they
were guests at the house of Daniel Akehurst.1
Archdale was appointed Governor of South
Carolina in August, 1695, and had previously
been Acting Governor of North Carolina. Lie
was born in 1642, and died in the same year as
Penn, i. e., 1718. Under Archdale, Quakers held
office in both the Carolinas, and drew some of the
churchmen to their cause, while their influence,
as in Pennsylvania, made itself felt in the Courts,
Council and Assembly.
The philosopher, John Locke, at the request of
Lord Shaftesbury, had drawn up a form of Gov
ernment for Carolina, when the two colonies were

i"Life of Thomas Story," 245.

1 64 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
comprised in one territory. "It happened,"
says Clarkson, in writing of the incident,1 "that
he and William Penn and Mr. (afterward Sir)
Isaac Newton and others were in company, and
that the conversation turned upon the compara
tive excellence of the new American governments,
but particularly those of Carolina and Pennsyl
vania. The matter was argued at length in the
presence of the two legislators, when Locke
generously yielded the palm to Penn." Locke's
system for Carolina was never fully carried out.
His object, "to avoyde a numerous democracie,"
was not a Quaker sentiment. The original pro
prietors of the Carolinas, except Shaftesbury,
were all Anglicans. Blake, a Dissenter, and
Archdale, the Quaker, were later appointments.
North Carolina was early a Quaker stronghold,
having an organization there soon after the visit
of George Fox and William Edmundson, who
came in 1672. There is no evidence, we are told,
that the Quakers took part in political affairs,
until the coming of John Archdale, and his in
troduction of them into the Assembly.2 There
are said to have been enough Quakers by 1700 to
organize three monthly meetings in the Caro-
1 Thomas Clarkson, " Life of William Penn, II, 409.
2 See Letter of Rev. W. Gordon, North Carolina Records, I,
708.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 165
linas. This is the date of North Carolina Yearly
Meeting. There had been a meeting however,
so early as 1676. In 1700, the Quakers were the
only strong religious body in the colony. The
preponderance of Dissent in the colonies is con
spicuous, and in West Jersey, Pennsylvania, and
North Carolina, and to a certain extent, Rhode
Island, the Quakers were of these the predomi
nant body.
In 1704, one of the first Parliamentary Acts
under Queen Anne imposed a new oath of Alle
giance. The Quakers, as in Pennsylvania, de
clined to take the oath, although a province law
made it requisite to do so in order to hold office.
The church question was stirring the Dissenters
profoundly, but the prominent subject was that
of oaths. John Archdale, who had been suc
ceeded by Sir Nathaniel Johnson, exerted him
self to aid in the removal, first of Colonel Robert
Daniel, the persecuting Deputy Governor of
North Carolina, and later of Sir Nathaniel John
son himself. In the disturbed years that fol
lowed, the Quakers seem to have made some form
of declaration.1
It was under the following form that John
Archdale was inducted into office when made

XH. L. Osgood, "American Colonies in the 17th Century,"
II, 248.

1 66 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Governor of South Carolina in 1695. The form
is taken from the original certified copy of the
Deputy Secretary, and is endorsed in Archdale's
own hand, "My declaration upon ye Entrance
into ye Governm't, by way of Affirmation instead
of ye Oathes, ye 17 Aug.st- 1695:" it is a very
valuable original.1 There is no known por
trait of Archdale, and autographs and original
letters or documents of his are rare.
Att a Council Held att CharlesTowne the 17th day of
August Anno Domi. 1695. And psent the Rt. Hono.ble
John Archdale, Esqr. Governor.

Depty.s

Paul Grimball
Stephen Bull
Richard Conant
William Smith
William Hawett

Esqr.

This day the Rt. Honoble John Archdale, Esqr. Gover
nor, in open Councill Tooke the following Oathes or dec
larations according to the forme of his profession.
You being Governor doe solemnly promise and Ingage
that you Will Govern according to the Lords Proprs.
Instructions and Rules of Government and as ye Lawes
direct: you will Distribute equall Justice without delay
to the Rich and Poore, the Secretts of the Councill you
will keep. In all things you shall Endeavour to dis-
1From the original, in the possession of Mrs. Charles Rob
erts.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 167
charge the Trust reposed in you on behalfe of the Lords
for the good of ye People according to your power and
the best of your Understanding. This you declare ac
cording to ye forme of your profession.
You shall well and truely, to the best of yor Skill use
your utmost Endeavour to cause ye severall Clauses con
tained in the Acts of Parliament Called an Act for ye
Encouraging & Increasing of Shipping & Navigation
passed or made in ye twelfth yeare of the Reigne of our
late Soveraigne Lord, King Charles the Second; and
the Act of Parliament Called an Act for the Encourage
ment of Trade, passed or made in the fifteenth yeare of
our said Late Soveraigne Lord King Charles the Second,
To bee well and truely observed within the Limitts of
your Government. This you declare according to the
forme of your profession.
I doe solemnly promise to beare faith and true alle
giance to King William.
A True Coppy taken from the Records and Examined
this 17th, day of August, 1695.
sp. Jno. Hamilton, Dep.ty Secr.ty

Some idea of the clear head and wisdom of
John Archdale may be gained from the advice
he gave the French Huguenots a few weeks after
assuming the Governorship of Carolina. He
told them that his best endeavors should be used
to lighten their position, but that in the mean
time, they would gain more by quiet submission
than by too open remonstrance, and the following

1 68 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
letter was written apropos of that advice, in Oc
tober, after his arrival in the province.1
To ffriends:
Having further Considered of ye answer you gave mee
on behalfe of the rest of you, I have thought good yt
there might bee a right understanding of my advice to
you to give you some Explication of ye same. In ye
first place, I doe not conjecture yt if you att this juncture
of time should forbeare Voting, yt thereby you or any of
you deprive yr selves for ye future of any just or Legall
privileges of Voteing: for an Illegal Custome in these
like Cases begetts no right; neither doth a Voluntary
Cessation lose any.
Secondly, if, upon an answer from England the Pro
prietary shall not represent you duly qualified att this
time; butt, notwithstanding be willing to Joyne with ye
People there for a full Qualification of you : then by yor
now acting against ye present humor of ye People you
will thereby Alienate yr selves from their affections, &
thereby prevent ye Peoples conjunction with ye Proprie-
tarys to Naturalize you for this Country : for ye Humor
of our People will not bee drove, butt are to bee ledd, even
so that wch is their owne Interest to doe and this wee
have had ye experience of in what relates to ye Consti
tutions. And therefore my Advice to you was Candid out of a
real Respect to you, for I have a real Sympathy wth you
in yor condition having once bin in my Native Country
in a very likely Way upon ye Account of Religion to
1 From the original autograph, Archdale Papers, in possession
of Mrs. Charles Roberts.

»—j r^ &: ap /i, u ¦

Facsimile of Original

John Archdale to

^«m.

A, Am -> &~~ « -^ <? ^ • ^7 yL

iu l/ 2?Z1/

'?p-l toy

the French Huguenots.

ItnhrilH Collrrlion, Ham-ford College.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 169
have binn a very great Sufferer, yea, even to have binn
Banished out of my Native Soile for ye Lawe of ye
Lande, then amounted to that Severity.
Butt if what I have writ prevaile not upon yr reason,
I request no submission to my Advice. So I leave ye
Issue to ye Direction of ye Divine Power, and Remaine
Yor Reall & Assured f friend,
John Archdale.
From my Brother Berisford's, ye 19th October, 1695
If you should Thinke convenient to forbeare at this
tyme, then lett those yt bee Naturalized & Denizized for
beare allsoe, least an ill Construction bee made of ye
Others forbearing.
The disturbances in Pennsylvania just before
this had led William Penn to write David Lloyd,
that the ill-fame his province had gathered by its
bickerings had lost it fifteen thousand immi
grants, who went to the Carolinas instead.1
The following is John Archdale's speech
setting forth his reasons for accepting the
Governorship of the Carolinas. He called to
gether the Assembly and thus addressed them —
f friends and Representatives of ye People —
The Occasion of my coming hither and ye reason of
my calling you at this time I thinke good to acquaint you
withall, that soe ye may ye better iudge of ye Proprie-
1 Westcott, History of Phila., I, 121.

170 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
tors & my Intentions in this Undertaking & yt ye may
alsoe thereby somewhat ye better regulate yr proceedings
att this time.
There came Lttrs from Carolina dated before ye death
of Sr Peter Colleton, butt they arrived not in England
untill after his death, signifying ye distracted Condition
the Country was then in so yt the heates among you was
intimated as irreconcilable, & yt there was noe hopes left
butt by a Considerable Supply of new Inhabitants & a
remouevall of a great pt of ye olde ones, or otherwise
except a Proprietor himselfe would be Pleased to come
ouer, & in a more especiall Manner particularizing ye
Lorde Ashley. Upon this the Proprietors entered into
a serious Consideration of ye Matter, & upon ye Lord
Ashley's satisfying you that att this time his Circum
stances would not Admitt of his Absence from England
though his heart & affections were entirely inclined
thither, especially in so goode a work as this offer'd
itself e toe bee; they therefore were pleased to moove ye
thinge to mee; Wch after mature deliberation & by ye
further encouragement of Seuerall Carolinians yn in Lon
don my coming was concluded on, & therefore I did un
dertake ye Matter, & Accepted of their Commission & I
must acquaint you that they looked upon mee as a person
yt would bee impartiall in Examining into ye Causes of
ye Differences & thereby bee ye more Capable of Giuing
Equal iudgmt. therein, & to that end they haue Endued
mee with a Considerable Power of Trust. And truly,
Friends, I should bee very Sorry if I did not to ye best
of my Ability & Understanding faithfully & Impartially
answer their Expectations.
And I hope I may appeal to that of God in all ye Con
sciences if I have not to ye best of my Power & iudgm't

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 171
Endeavoured to heale all differences, & have already
caused ye distinguishing Name for your Heates & Ani
mosities bee gott to cease amongst you, & united you as
Freeborn Englishmen, into one bond, where I hope you
will firmly Continue & heartily ioyne to promote yt
farther & more supreme Interest, wch is of making yor
now United Power & yt of yt Proprietors, butt one toe
carry on ye Publick good, by ye Enacting such Whole
some & Beneficial Lawes as may really tend to ye honor
of God & ye good Settlement of this Hopefull Collony.
And by soe doing I may without a H'yperbole of
Speech say yt all yr Succeeding Posterity will have Cause
to blesse God for soe Happy a Consummation, & ye Pro
prietors will not repent of their undertaking nor myselfe
repine att ye many Hazards & hardships I have gone
through to my Arrival hither.
Butt ye reason of my calling you together att this time
was principally ye Consideration of my own Mortality
& of others ; as allso I was forwarded to ye Same by ye
Earnest Supplication of many of ye Inhabitants of this
Place. And now you have heard wt ye Proprietors' Intentions
were in sending mee. I doubt not butt ye People's Inten
tions were of ye same Nature in chusing of you at this
time. I advise you therefore to proceed soberly & mildly
in wht yr iudgm't leads you into, and I question nott butt
wee shall answer you in all things yt bee reasonable iust
& honorable for U5 to doe.
You have now had a peaceable choice & election by ye
freemen of Carolina wch was ye Auntient method till ye
8th Henry ye 6th wherein itt was limited to freeholders
of 40 pound. I expect not for many years ye same rea
son of yt limitation ; wch was, ye multitude of people yt

172 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
made ye elections troublesome & hazardous to ye peace of
ye Country as ye sd Stat, expresses etc.
Lett mee once more remind you yt yor interest, & ye
interest of ye Proprietors ought to bee Really & essen
tially so linked together (& I hope there is now a good
opportunity) yt noe sinister or private end ought to be
countenanced yt would hinder its true Union."
This paper, one of Archdale's rare manuscripts, is in
dorsed, " My Speech to ye Commons." 1
There were many disturbances which Arch
dale had to quell, standing between the extremes
and caring for Quaker interests, as when, like the
Quaker Captains-General of Rhode Island and
Pennsylvania, he was called upon to administer
military law: he secured a special act, passed
March 16, 1695-6, exempting the Quakers from
its provisions. In 1697 an act to naturalize
aliens and grant liberty of conscience passed.
This act cared for the Huguenot refugees, and
further provided "that all Christians which now
are or hereafter may be in this province (Papists
only excepted) shall enjoy the full liberty of
their consciences."
Up to this time, the Carolinas had been free
and untrammelled, enjoying wide liberty in re
ligious matters. The struggle began with the
dawn of the eighteenth century, and the organ-
1 From the original, in possession of Mrs. Charles Roberts.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 173
ization of the "Society for the Propagation of the
Gospel in Foreign Parts," and the "Society for
the Promotion of Christian Knowledge," the
advent of which in the colonies, bringing with
it a strong missionary spirit, was the signal
for a struggle between the Church of England,
of which they were an offshoot, and the Dissen
ters, chief among whom were the Quakers, who,
in 1682, had been permitted to affirm in South
Carolina. The act of 1704, reproducing the
essential principles of the old "Test Act," with
provisions practically disfranchising the Qua
kers, was remonstrated against by them and other
Dissenters in an appeal to the House of Lords,
which declared that South Carolina's law for the
establishment of a State Church was not legal,
and it was repealed by Royal Proclamation, June
ioth, 1706. This was a notable attempt to limit
suffrage by a religious test. Job Howes,1 Speak
er of the Assembly, heartily opposed the remon
strance, and in an unpublished autograph letter,
defended the church party, and expressed his
strong sentiments as to the intentions of the
Dissenters, chief among whom were the Quakers,
to John Archdale, then in England, as follows :2
1 Howes was also Surveyor-General.
2 See H. L. Osgood, "American Colonies in 17th Century,"
II, 246. From an autograph letter in the possession of Mrs.
Charles Roberts. Another in the same collection is from Gov-

174 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
South Carolina, January 15, 1705-6.
I am surprised to see you so much concerned yt those
which will not occasionally communicate with ye church
of England are made incapable to sitt in ye House of
Commons and to believe yt yt will prejudice our settle
ment, I can say ye Act was well considered before it
past, and Judged ye onely means to quell all factions
which so much disturbed ye peace of ye Government, and
permitted settlers coming to us ; and if ye Dissenters were
not so bouy'd up with hopes of a Repeal, wee should soon
see ye good effects thereof; and I know no reason they
have to Quarrell att it for they have ye same liberty as
their Brethren in England, tho' they deserved it not from
us by endeavouring to Wrest the Governm't. into their
own Hands. . . . For them to come again with their
whole force into ye Gov't. I shall endeavour to prevent,
Job Howes.;
In North Carolina the same attempt had been
made in 1701, but the Quakers were strong
enough to elect a majority of their members into
ernor Archdale to an unknown correspondent, dated i2mo., 1705,
as to the Roman Catholics ; he says : " Itt hath a considerable
time binn my opinion, yea I may say, my Established Judgment
yt. ye Popish Rodd will be England's Scourge.'' The attempt
of the High Churchmen in South Carolina at this time to im
pose a religious test on the suffrage, could only have been
paralleled in New England. Yet, so closely were church and
state united by the period of the Revolution, that when the
vestrymen of St. Michael's church in Charleston desired to take
from that city for safe keeping, the priceless old church plate,
the permission of the Governor was first deemed necessary.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 175
the Assembly, and the law would have been re
pealed the next year, had not the Proprietors
saved them the trouble. During these years,
when the line separating churchmen and dissent
ers was growing stronger and stronger, Arch
dale consistently opposed the aggression of the
church. His refusal to sanction the acts that
were passed received the thanks of the Dissent
ers. He wrote Sir Nathaniel Johnson, gov
ernor of the Carolinas, in 1705, to remind him
that he too was a Proprietor, whose vote was of
value: — "I earnestly desire thee to be a reconcil
ing element of peace ; else," he adds, prophetically,
"Saxons will goe for Pensilvania if you continue
obstinate toward ym; being a free people, they
expect in a wilderness an enlargement, not a
lessening of their privileges" (M. S.), which
is exactly what Penn had written to his Secretary
Logan. Again, in his "Description of Carolina,"
he makes an unanswerable plea for his liberality
and religious freedom. — "It is stupendous to
consider how passionate and preposterous Zeal
not only vails but stupefies, ofttimes, the rational
powers! For cannot Dissenters kill wolves and
bears, etc., as well as Churchmen, as also fell trees
and clear ground for plantations, and be as
capable of defending the same, generally, as well

176 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
as the other? Surely Pennsylvania can bear
witness of what I write." 1
A prominent clergyman of the Society for the
Propagation of the Gospel, Dr. McSparren, set
tled in Rhode Island, in 1753, published in Dub
lin a series of letters, entitled, "America Dis
sected in sundry letters from a Clergyman there
— as a Caution to Unsteady People who may
be tempted to leave their Native Country." — In
his letters to the Hon. Henry Cary, he says of
North Carolina, "Two clergymen, who are the
Society's itinerant Missionaries here, are all the
advantages they are yet under respecting relig
ion; and tho' their Travel and Labours are ex
cessive, it can't be supposed but the greater part
of the People are necessarily rude and illiterate,
irreligious and prophane. There are a very
small number of Presbyterians with some Qua
kers : and wherever these latter are — at least pre
dominate, — you shall never fail to find Immorali
ties and Disorders prevail. Believe me, Sir,
wherever Distinction of Persons is decried, as
among that People, Confusions will follow; for
Levellism is inconsistent with Order and a Cer
tain Inlet to Anarchy: as when there was no
King in Israel, every one did what was right in
his own eyes! From Narragansett in the
1 Weeks, " Southern Quakers and Slavery," p. 58.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 177
Colony of New England, August 20th, 1752."
After the establishment of the Church of Eng
land in North Carolina, parish elections took
place on Easter Monday, once every three years.
The infrequency of the election made a thorough
notice necessary, and the Sheriff posted notices
on every church and chapel forty days in ad
vance, and publicly read the election law at the
door of the Court House between twelve and one
on the second day of Court preceding election.
The attendance of all but Quakers was required,
and a fine of twenty shillings for nonattendance
was imposed.1 The successful effort of 1706 re
lieved this situation, but by 1747 the North Caro
lina Assembly had so thrown off Quaker influ
ence, as to refuse to permit William Borden to
take his seat for Carteret county, as he offered
his affirmation instead of an oath.2
The settlement of Georgia took place in 1732.
It was especially provided that Quakers be al
lowed to affirm. The Trustees of Georgia were
very much in accord with the Society for the
iCortlandt F. Bishop, "Hist, of Elections in the American
Colonies." The English Government supported the Royal Gov
ernors after the Proprietary rule ended in 1728 and no colony
so felt the heavy hand of England.
2 So late as 1759, the change of one word in the laws of South
Carolina gave to " Protestants " the franchise formerly bestowed
upon "Christians," thus excluding Roman Catholics. The pre
vious wording had already excluded Jews in 1719.

178 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Propagation of the Gospel, and on March 17th,
1758, an act was passed which established the
Church of England in the province. But the
idea of religious toleration had progressed by
that date. Episcopal inducements had been held
out to the Quakers, who were regarded as most
desirable settlers, and we are told that there are
no instances of Quaker persecution in Georgia.
The Act remained in force, however, up to the
time of the Revolution, long before which Quaker
influence had ceased to be a factor in the Ameri
can colonies. In passing from the subject of the
southern colonies, it is interesting to find the
change which had come in 1809, when the emi
nent Quaker preacher, Stephen Grellet, records
that he preached in the Episcopal Church in Pe
tersburg, Virginia, after the rector had insisted
that he do so ! Just before this, Henry Hull held
a similar meeting in the Episcopal Church at
Winchester, Va. William Edmundson, the
Quaker missionary to Ireland, relates in his jour
nal the account of the conversion to the principles
of Quakerism, of Major-General Bennett (the
first governor sent to Virginia by Cromwell), in
1672. Virginia's Bill of Rights, in 1776, sepa
rated her church and state formally. Bancroft
emphasizes this as the first time this step had

TFIE QUAKER FRANCHISE 179
been taken in the history of the world,1 but
Rhode Island and Pennsylvania had sufficiently
imbibed the sentiments of the Anabaptists of
Germany, practically to adopt, and instill by
hard-fought struggles, their sixteenth-century
idea of liberty in worship, waiting for a necessity
which did not come, to make the terms of separa
tion formal.
The various colonies, as will be evident from
the foregoing sketch, show a great variety in
their voting methods. Some of them followed
those of the Virginia Company (161 9) and of
the New Jersey Proprietors (1676), both of
them in London, who used respectively "balloting
boxes," and "balloting trunks," probably the
same thing.2 The English universities pos
sessed the suffrage granted by James I, and they
furnish the only instance of the ballot in Parlia
mentary elections in Great Britain before the
nineteenth century. This custom in Massachu
setts became the "corn and bean" ballot, or vot
ing by means of black and white Indian beans.
Massachusetts thus elected her governor in
1634.3 The viva voce vote, or show of hands,
1 Bancroft, U. S., I, 348.
2 A. E. McKinley, " Suffrage Franchise in the Thirteen Eng
lish Colonies,'' pp. 22, 245.
sIbid., 310.

180 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
was preferred after the middle of the seventeenth
century. Crude ballot boxes, and the deposit of
votes in a hat obtained in Quaker Rhode Island.
The broad suffrage of aristocratic South Caro
lina began with the show of hands which finally
gave place to the more democratic ballot. North
Carolina, with the freest franchise in the begin
ning of her history, for a time curiously enough,
compelled her qualified freeholders who were
Dissenters to a vote in parish elections. Later,
in 1764, she declined to allow them to vote for
vestrymen, excluding the Quakers by name.1
William Penn permitted the Indians, in transac
tions involving their own interests, to serve on
juries, and a similar sense of justice led the Pil
grims of Plymouth, in 1665, to confer citizenship
upon "Sam, the Indian that keeps the cows." 2
In Massachusetts and New Haven, where par
tisanship ran high, and burning questions of
church polity were given the utmost attention,
the rank of freeman was much sought after. In
the more democratic colonies, work and respon
sibility came with the freemanship, and social
distinction was less connected with churchly ex-
clusiveness. There were, therefore, those not
averse to escaping the burden of citizenship, and
1Ibid., 119.
2 Goodwin, " Pilgrim Republic," 514.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 181
all the colonists at some period seem to have been
obliged to legislate in order to force their inhab
itants to assume their duties. The union of the
four colonies of Massachusetts, Plymouth, Con
necticut and New Haven (1643-1684) tended to
make Plymouth, heretofore the most liberal (ex
cept Rhode Island), much less so for a time.
One can call up in fancy the picturesque scene
in the kitchen of Henry Palmer's house in New
port as the Rhode Island Assembly, at the heroic
hour of six in the morning,1 gathers to deposit the
ballots in the Quaker beaver, placed upon the table
to receive them. Sobriety marks their demeanor,
and more than one man present recalls the Eng
lish kitchen in which he first heard Quakerism
preached, and of which his present situation re
minds him.
The grim Puritan in Massachusetts betakes
himself to the meeting-house, and there puts his
beans in the box, or perhaps expresses his polit
ical preferences by his raised hand, or the viva
voce vote. The Quaker meeting-houses of Penn-
*At a General Meeting at Portsmouth (R. I.), 27th, 4 mo.,
1638, "Ordered, that if any of the Freemen of this Body shall
not repaire to the Publicke Meetings to treate upon the pub
licke affairs of the Body, upon Publick warning (whether by
heate of ye Drumme or otherwise), if they fayle one quarter of
an houre after ye Second Sound, they shall forfeit twelve pence,
or if they depart without leave, they are to forfeitt the same
summe of twelve pence." R. I. Col. Rees., I, 57.

i82 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
sylvania,1 New Jersey and Rhode Island saw
many an Assembly election in their early days,
and New Jersey was at first so punctilious as to
prescribe in what dress the members should ap
pear. William Penn and the stately Quakers of
the middle colonies who surrounded him, wore a
dress very nearly that directed, in their velvet
clothes, wigs and cocked hats.2 Associated with
all these men of culture, the democratic spirit of
the new world already showed itself in the pres
ence at all the Assemblies of farmers, mechanics
and laborers. The Maryland Assembly of 1637-8
is perhaps the most typical. Besides Governor
Calvert, the ninety members present represent the
sheriff, three priests, gentlemen and planters,
taking their places beside mariners, carpenters,
the cooper, and the brick-mason.3 Pure democ
racy of the New England type existed in Mary
land for its first twenty years.
XA Council Minute in Pennsylvania of n mo., 3d, 1705, men
tions the petition of Thomas Makin, the school-master in Phila
delphia, complaining of damage accruing to him by the loss of
several of his scholars by reason of the Assembly's using the
school-house so long. " Ordered that he be allowed the sum
of three pounds over and above the sum of twenty shillings this
house formerly allowed him for the same consideration."
2 A man marched before Penn to the state meetings, and the
gate of his house was guarded by a servitor with a silver-
headed pole or mall, ten feet long. He traveled in his official
capacity with twenty horsemen and servants.
3 A. E. McKinley, Work quoted, pp. 40, 50.

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 183
Although for a time, in the greater part of
New England, the town meeting and the congre
gation were almost identical, yet the authority of
law was exercised by the lay township, and
not the ecclesiastical parish. In Pennsylvania,
again, the meeting of Quakers took the part of
civil administration, and in Philadelphia it fre
quently appointed committees, for instance, to
lay out roads.1 The surveillance of the Monthly
Meeting over the individual life — "the daily
walk" — was very similar to that in the early Pu
ritan church in New England. In both there
was active political interest and participation,
for connection with the Crown compelled men to
keep the run of English politics in order to know
when and how they were within the laws of the
realm, and sometimes, by resistance, to evade or
oppose, acts of tyranny on the part of the home
government. Yet political discussions, as such,
were quite unknown in the business of the Qua
kers' meetings, despite the unauthorized assertion
that in Pennsylvania "The Quakers even went so
far as to make up their party ticket at their
yearly meetings." 2
During the earlier years of the society the
Quakers, as will have been seen, held offices of
1 Amer. Hist. Assoc, II, 23.
2 Shippen Papers, p. 64.

184 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
trust and honor in the gift of the Government
and the people. There have been some early
instances of refusal by them to accept office, as
that of Thomas Story, then an Alderman in
Philadelphia, who in October, 1706, was elected
to the office of Mayor of that city. The City
Council Minutes say, "Alderman Story, refusing
to accept the office of Mayor, therefore he is
fined by this Common Council the sum of twenty
pounds." Two hundred years later his action
would have been less difficult to understand.
Pennsylvania Quakers held it a sacred duty to
serve their government as best they could in the
early days, and down to the middle of the eight
eenth century. The departure of Quaker in
fluence from the political arena of the Province
dates from 1756, and two years later we read in
the Yearly Meeting records — "1758. As the
maintaining inviolate the liberty of conscience,
which is an essential to our union and well-being
as a religious society, evidently appears to be an
indispensable duty, this meeting doth . . .
caution, exhort and advise Friends to beware
of accepting or continuing in office, or station
in civil society or government, by which they
may be in any respect engaged in, or think them
selves subjected to, the necessity of enjoining
or enforcing the compliance of their brethren or

THE QUAKER FRANCHISE 185
others with any act which they conscientiously
scruple to perform." Failure to obey this in
junction was punished by excommunication
from the society. Every one who took an active
part in the duties of a citizen, by the period of
the Revolution, or soon after, was "dealt with,"
and there was an actual trial of one Quaker who
became a Justice of the Peace in North Carolina.
In 1809, it was proposed by the Yearly Meeting
of the same state, that any one who "became
member of the Federal or State Legislature"1 or
justice of the peace, sheriff, clerk of court, coro
ner or constable, should be disowned. It was
much the same throughout all parts of America,
and this abnormal condition of mind lasted for
over a century, and is only now breaking up.
Far different was it from the days of pastoral
simplicity, but conscientious desire to do a citi
zen's duty, when the Quaker members of Penn
sylvania's first Assemblies used to trudge in to
'A traveler in 1818 says, of a Philadelphia court room:
" Symptoms of republican simplicity are visible in all members
of the community. . . . For example, Mr. Mayor is a re
spectable-looking, plainly-dressed gentleman, and apparently a
penetrating and efficient police magistrate. On a late occasion
the Court was crowded and the weather hot. He desired a per
son in attendance to bring cold water. It was brought in a
brown jug, not accompanied with a glass. A person within the
railing (probably a lawyer or clerk, more thirsty than his
Honor) intercepted the vessel, drank, and then handed it to the
Judge!" (Flint's Travels, p. 63.)

186 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the city from their lodgings out of town, bring
ing their dinners with them, and holding their
conclaves in a room hired for the purpose, de
fraying the expense from their own pockets.
John Hart's cooper shop, standing until 1842,
at Chester, was long pointed out as the spot
where the first Assembly of the Province met.
Many a Court and Council have been held in the
Quaker meeting-houses of the American colo
nies.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND
THE LAW

187

CHAPTER IV
THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND THE LAW
" Is there a variance ? Enter but his door — ¦
Balk'd are the Courts, and contest is no more."
Pope " Man of Ross."
Citizenship, in the early days, involved duties
of a nature more close and intimate than can be
comprehended to-day. The simple demands of
even the largest towns of a century or two ago,
when the word "neighbor" had not been like to
lose its significance altogether, produced a type
of citizen full of the Quaker feeling of individual
responsibility even among those farthest removed
from Quaker influence. Take, for instance,
street cleaning. A few of the largest cities had
certain officers, euphoniously called "scaven
gers," whose duty it was to see that the streets
were kept reasonably clean, although we will not
inquire into the standard of London at this
period. The old Quaker historian, William
Crouch, was officially chosen "scavenger" by his
fellow citizens in 1661. Every citizen was re
quired to sweep twice a week before his. own
189

190 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
door, and thus cooperate with the rest in produc
ing the desired result. Crouch writes:
In the year 1661, I was chosen a Scavenger by the
Neighbour-hood in Broad-street-Ward, and being Sum-
mon'd to Guild-Hall amongst other Ward Officers, an
Oath was tender'd me, and I refusing to Swear, was com
mitted to the Poultry-Compter, where I remained a Pris
oner about Eight Days : And for refusing to Pay Prison
Fees, and Garnish Money, as the Prisoners called it, I
was shut up in the Hole amongst the Common Poor Pris
oners, where I had no Lodging ; nor but very little Room
to walk, when the Prisoners were Lock'd up in the Night
Season who lay many of them on the Floor, with a piece
of Timber under their Heads for their Pillow: After
which upon Application to the then Mayor, by Name
John Frederick, I was set at Liberty: And then had a
Roll delivered to me, to Collect the Money Rated upon
Housekeepers, in order to keep the Streets Clean, and
Carry the Soil away, and was perswaded to give my
Bond to Collect the same. (Which was an Imposition,
it not being Customary) and to Pay the Raker, who
Carried away the Soil.
But to my great Surprize, I was about Three Months
after Arrested at the Suit of the Parish called Saint Ben
net Fink, (who had without President, (precedent) I
think, obtained my Bond to Collect the Scavengers Roll)
as I was told, for Tythes, or Hire for their Priest, named
Samuel Clark, and was then a Second time made Priso
ner in the Poultry-Compter, under which Confinement
I continued about one year and Three Quarters: But
through Favour of the Gaoler, I had some Liberty to be

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 191
at Home to look after my Business, after Two Months,
or thereabouts, from my First Commitment, Paying only
my Chamber-Rent, which was Three Pence a Night
(1661). After he had been a prisoner thus on proba
tion for two years, he was chosen constable, as
a further compliment to his character as a citizen
who was treated unjustly. The parish officials
accepted a moderate fine which he paid, and dis
charged him from the office and the imprison
ment.1 The Quaker has always permitted and encour
aged the idea of a constabulary. Corporal pun
ishment might be inflicted upon those of their
members whom the magistrates declared to have
transgressed the law. Fox's letter to the Qua
kers at Nevis, (1675) contains the following:
"Now as for Watching in itself. Don't you
watch your Plantations against Thieves in the
Night? And are not common Watches set to
Discover Thieves in the Towns, or House
breakers, or such as might wickedly set Fire to
Houses ? Such Civil Things we were subject to,
and do submit ourselves, for Conscience' sake,
unto every such Ordinance of Man, which are
for the Punishment of Evil Doers, and for the
Praise of them that do well. For this cause we

1 William Crouch, "Posthuma Christiana," pp. 26, 74.

192 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
pay Tribute to (Magistrates) and give Caesar
his due, that we may live a Godly and Peaceable
Life under them. . . . for the Law was not
made for the Righteous, but for the Sinner, and
Disobedient, which is good in its Place." The
Quakers were far more practical than the philan
thropist, Tolstoi, who has always expressed his
admiration for them. Ambassador White, in an
interview with the great Russian, was discussing
this point, when Tolstoi declared that he abjured
all idea of police protection, and that the only
exception he made to his admiration of the
Quakers was in their belief of the separate hold
ing of property, protected by such means ! 1
Moral suasion — leaving the culprit to the
work of what Fox called "that of God" within
him — was the Quaker way of reaching the offen
der. Sometimes it worked — occasionally it did
not. Ebenezer Wing at Sandwich, Massachu
setts, was one night roused from sleep by a noise
in an adjoining room. He sprang from his bed,
only to have the door closed and held by some
one on the other side. Slipping into the adjoin
ing front room, he watched through the glass
1 Andrew D. White, "Walks and Talks with Tolstoi," Mc-
Clure's Magazine for April, 1901. Nicholas Moore, the Attor
ney of William Penn, had a gaol or lock-up, at his own home,
granted him as a special privilege.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 193
over the door, two men possess themselves of his
hard-earned money, from his old desk in the
kitchen. He made no attempt to confront them,
but in the town next day he told the facts, with
holding the culprits' names. Within two days
the money was returned.1
The society of Friends was the first organized
body that approved and advocated the equality
of all men in the civil life of the people; and as
it stood for the equality of men and women in
religious services and rights, so, in legal ques
tions involving distribution of estates, education
or the control of property, Quakerism demanded
an equality of rights in the eyes of the law, and
eventually had its position adopted. Sons and
daughters shared impartially in inheritance, and
in no community has the position of woman been
so nearly on a footing with men. When Wil
liam Penn and William Mead were indicted be
fore the Michaelmas term of Court at West
minster, in 1 68 1, William Mead astounded their
Judges by assuring them that George Fox, his
father-in-law "had engaged himself never to
meddle with his wife's estate!" The Judges re
mained incredulous until shown the papers under
Fox's hand and seal, "at which they wondered."

1 Related by Mary Russell Wood, in a paper read at Sand
wich, June, 1903.

194 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Occasionally, however, women had had a cer
tain amount of recognition officially. One
Digma Peters, in the year 1558, was burgess of
the town of Dordrecht, in Germany. We are
told that she became an Anabaptist, and for her
punishment, was disfranchised, put into a sack
at Puttox Tower and drowned.1 In the English
boroughs, where right of suffrage depended on
holding certain lands (called "burgage bor
oughs"), women who held land thus could trans
fer such right to vote to a male relative. In
freeman boroughs, freemanship was conferred
by marriage with the daughter of a freeman,
and we infer that such daughters were much in
demand.2 Ownership of land has always neces
sitated some sort of legal recognition of women ;
when this occurs before the eighteenth century,
it is usually the result of an inherited right to
the suffrage, through certain land-ownership,
together with strong personal character and the
quality of leadership in high degree, with insist
ence upon those rights. This was probably the
case with the Widow Vesey, who, according to
a MS. note in the Bible of the Vesey family,
recently sold in Derby, held the offices in turn of
1 E. C. Pike, " Story of the Anabaptists," p. 88.
2 A. E. McKinley, " Suffrage Franchise in the Thirteen English
Colonies," p. 3.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 195
Churchwarden, 1673; Constable, 1677-8; Over
seer of Highways, 1679, and Collector of the
3d Boro', in 1680.
In Rhode Island's early settlement, among the
isolated inhabitants, so strong was the feeling of
democracy that prevailed, that the widows of
proprietors sometimes took part in civil affairs
in such a way, that, although it was not exactly
exercising the franchise, yet it manifested an im
portant share in the political rights of land
holders.1 In Gravesend, New York, in the year''
1655, when the town, with Dutch indifference,
neglected to make its usual nomination of officers
to the director, Stuyvesant wrote to Lady
Moody, oldest patentee of the town, with others,
directing them to perform their duty as required
by patent. A month later the names of selected
nominees were sent to the director in a docu
ment 2 signed by Deborah Moody, and John Til
ton, "as Clerk in behalf of the Rest." The New
York law of 1701 made a "freeholder" any one
who held land for his life or his wife's life.
When John Richardson, from England, first
visited Nantucket in 1706, he found Mary Star-
1Ibid., 434. See also, R. I. Col. Records, 3, 21, 23.
2 New York Colonial Documents, XIV, 527-9. Lady Moody
had been prosecuted before the court at Salem, Massachusetts,
for disapproving infant baptism. She persisted in her belief,
removed to New Netherland, and founded Gravesend.

196 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
buck, the Quaker preacher, a sort of Deborah,
or leader and "Judge," as he calls her, among
the people. The first woman to ask for a vote in
America was Mistress Margaret Brent of Mary
land, a kinswoman of Lord Baltimore, in 1647,
more than a century before the French Revolu
tion. The next was Abigail Adams of Massa
chusetts, who in 1776, wrote a lively and ironical
letter to her husband, John Adams : "I long to
hear that you have declared Independency.
And in the new code of laws which I suppose it
will be necessary for you to make, I desire that
you would remember the ladies, and be more
generous and favorable to them than your an
cestors. We will not hold ourselves bound by
any laws in which we have no voice or repre
sentation !"
The advice of Fox to "keep out of the powers
of the earth," led to the Quaker position of con
demning all participation in Law Courts as un
christian. The Roman Catholic Church stands
somewhat in sympathy with this sentiment, and
emphasizes the settlement of disputes within its
own borders, where possible, avoiding the appeal
to law. Its attitude toward divorce, like that of
the Quakers also, is very positive. There is but
one lawyer (St. Ives) in the hagiology of the
Romish Church. It was the demand of the Qua-

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW, 197
ker to be brought before the Court of Conscience,
where he felt sure his position would be ac
knowledged, and when his lot was to stand be
fore the Royal Court, his contention, as a rule
was eventually sustained, even if after years of
weary imprisonment. There would be little to
say about the Quakers and the law, were it only
with their relation to the Common Law that we
had to deal. Many of the positions taken by
them would be found sound and legal, and in a
number of cases, adopted in both countries. It
was the Ecclesiastical Courts which dealt so se
verely with the Quakers, the charges being con
tempt, non-attendance, non-payment of tithes,
oblations, church claims, &c. Old legislation
was revived upon the accession of Charles II,
and to the already existing laws were added spe
cial acts against Quakers, the Act of Uniform
ity, the Conventicle Act, &C.1
There is a valuable little pamphlet still in ex
istence printed in 1670, giving an account of the
famous trial which established a new era for civil
liberty. It is entitled, "The People's Ancient
and Just Liberties Asserted, in the Tryal of Wm.
Penn & Wm. Mead. At the Sessions held at

1 13, 14, Car. II, c. 1. Act of Uniformity, 13, 14 Car. II, c. 4,
Conventicle Act (1670), 22 Car. II, c. 1. All this was anti-
Quaker.

198 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the Old-Bailey in London, the first, third, fourth
and fifth of Sept., '70, against the most Arbi
trary procedure of that Court." Penn and
Mead were tried for "tumultuously assembling
with force of arms," when they preached in
"Gracious" (Gracechurch) street to five or six
hundred persons. The trial took place at the
Old Bailey, the Court before which they were
arraigned consisting of the Mayor and Recorder
of London, five Aldermen, and three Sheriffs.
The indictment was of course utterly false, and
the jurymen, with rare courage, refused to give
a verdict against them. For this offense, the
jury were condemned to be "locked up without
meat, drink, fire or tobacco" for two nights, and
were each fined forty marks for non-compliance
with the repeated demands of the Court that they
convict Penn and Mead against the evidence.
The case of the faithful twelve, who remained
in prison for non-payment of their fines, was
brought by William Penn, at the time only
twenty-five years of age, on a writ of habeas cor
pus before Chief- Justice Vaughan, who deliv
ered the opinion of the Court, establishing,
wherever the common law of England is the law
of the land, the right of juries to give their ver
dict in accordance with their convictions.1 The
!The names of the jurymen should go down to posterity on

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 199
details of these proceedings are well worth read
ing as an example of the knowledge of the law
possessed by these two Quakers. And in this
they are far from single instances. Gilbert Latey
is conspicuous for his handling of several cases,
not to mention Fox himself. Richard Farns
worth, in 1664, published "The Liberty of the
subject by Magna Charta; or, Several Weighty
Things to be considered of by the Jurors and
Judges seeing the Law of England is said to be
a Law of Mercy and doth take care that Jurors
be of the next Neighborhood, etc." The liability
to arrest at a moment's notice led them to fa
miliarize themselves with the technicalities of the
law so far as their own needs were likely to re
quire, and many cases are on record where the
intelligent prisoner at the bar has refuted the
charge against him with the utmost skill, con
trasting very forcibly with the brutal ignorance
of the judge upon the bench. In many instances,
a mural tablet or some suitable monument, on the site of their
brave deed. They were Edward Bushel, Thomas Veere, Wil
liam Lever, Charles Milson, William Plumstead, John Bright-
man, Henry Michel, Gregary Walklet, James Damask, Henry
Henley, John Hammond, John Baily. Penn's own interesting
account of the trial may be read in the first volume of his
Works. A fine paper on the subject, by Attorney-General Hamp
ton L. Carson, of Pennsylvania, — "William Penn as a Law-
Giver," — was recently read before the Pennsylvania Historical
Society, and has since been published in that Society's Maga
zine.

200 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
however, the skill was of no avail. A little book
entitled "A Collection of Authentick Useful Pre
cedents in All Cases Which do properly Concern
or are relating to, the Office of a Justice of the
Peace," was published in London in 1706. It
would seem to have been a sort of little Quaker
handbook of law, and served as a guide to certain
Justices in both England and America as to the
course to pursue with Quakers.
In this connection may be noted the so-called
evasive replies given so often to the Judge by the
Quaker witness on the stand, and frequently un
favorably criticized by those ignorant of the rea
son. If we take the trouble to examine the text
of the Acts against the Quakers,1 we shall find
that such an admission as the Judge usually
sought to elicit from the person arraigned would
have placed him out of court as to any trial by
jury. The Judge would then have it in his
power at once to pronounce sentence. The
Quakers made no concealment of their Quaker
ism and their assemblies. They had a Briton's
right of trial by their peers — a right of which
these acts really deprived them. They sought
to have that right recognized, and the trial of
Penn and Mead established that right fully, not
1 These Acts are given in full in Besse's "Sufferings of the
Quakers."

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW. 201
only for the Quakers, but also for all other Eng
lishmen, for all time.
George Fox seems everywhere to have been
wonderfully interested in the local justices of
the peace, and to have appreciated the powerful
influence they possessed as leaders of the people.
He at once perceived, with his extraordinary in
sight, that it was these officers who largely held
the fate of Quakerism in their hands. Always,
where possible, he made friends with the local
justices when he arrived in a new place. He
came in close contact with them in England, and
in America found them as a rule more friendly.
Justice Jireh Bull of Rhode Island, son of Henry
Bull, the famous settler, was his host in 1672,
and of a great meeting at the Justice's house he
wrote in his Journal, "We had a meeting at a
Justice's house where Friends had never had any
before. It was very large, for the country gen
erally came in; and people came also from Con
necticut and other parts round about, amongst
whom were four justices of the peace. Most
of the people had never heard Friends before;
but they were mightily affected with the meeting,
and a great desire there is after the truth
amongst them ; so that our meeting was of very
good service. Blessed be the Lord for ever!
The Justice at whose house the meeting was, and

202 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
another Justice of that county, invited me to come
again, but I was then clear of those parts and
going towards Shelter Island." Three years
later, this house of Justice Bull, known as the
"Garrison House," on the Pequot Trail on the
ridge in what is now South Kingstown, was de
stroyed, and only two of the inmates succeeded
in escaping from the Indians, who were then en
gaged in King Philip's war.
Most respectable people in the seventeenth
century indulged at one time or another in the
luxury of a law-suit. The injunction of Fox to
"keep out of the powers of the earth," did not lay
any final obstacle in the way of Quakers who had
a clear case taking it into court. It was urged
that if the case was first put into the hands of
arbitrators, the likelihood was very great that
an adjustment might be reached, and this fre
quently proved the case. London Friends in
1676 advised their members — "As this meeting
doth not enjoin or advise any Friends . . .
to take a course at law for remedy, neither can
we impose upon them not to use law in any case ;
. . . freedom being left upon urgent occasions
to take such a course for relief and ease . . .
as may not be prejudicial to the testimony of
truth. . . . Any Friend ... is ad
vised to consult about his case with his monthly

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 203
or quarterly meeting or, at least, with some ju
dicious Friends, relating thereto, before he
makes any procedure at law." Friends in
America might go to law with one who had been
disowned, or of another religious denomination,
but to take another Friend to court required the
consent of the meeting. There was a distinc
tion between consultation on technicalities that
were legal, and disputes, or quarrels. George
Fox consulted a lawyer on more than one occa
sion, and his London counsel, Thomas Corbet in
1674 carried to a successful issue, Fox's claim for
release from Worcester gaol, so that after the
trial, a Judge said to Corbet, "You have got a
great deal of honour for so pleading George
Fox's cause in Court."1 Fox mentions frequent
cases where he himself was called to act as arbi
trator and "compose Differences." The arbi
tration case of the original owners of New Jer
sey, Byllinge and Fenwick, in which William
Penn successfully settled the dispute, was an
early and important one.
The Quakers as a body were very jealous of
the credit of their members and dealt with them
for non-payment of their debts. Imprisonment
for debt was largely abolished in England
through their efforts. All members were straitly
1 Fox's Journal, 1674.

204 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
enjoined to make their wills. "Making such
wills in due time can shorten no man's days, but
the omission or delay thereof has proved very
injurious to many." "It is desired," say the
Quakers in 1701 in their meeting at Philadel
phia, "that no debtors may shelter themselves
under such of our rules as are designed to guard
us against an unkind treatment of each other
unjustly, hoping thereby to be put out of the
reach of the civil authority."
We are told of parental advice given by the
authorities in the newly-settled colonies, and
have visions of primitive law courts in the pages
of the earliest historians. Thomas Olive,
Quaker and preacher, Justice of the Peace and
Judge in New Jersey, settled more than one dis
pute with the stump of a tree for his judicial
bench, apparently to the entire satisfaction of his
clients.1 Thomas Lloyd, Deputy Governor of
Pennsylvania, sometimes, before he went to bed,
took a turn among the public houses of Phila
delphia, and ordered the loafers he found there
to their own homes, until, says the narrator, "he
was instrumental to promote better order, and
did, in large measure, suppress vice and immo
rality in the city." 2
1 Samuel Smith, " History of New Jersey."
2 Thomas Chalkley, Journal, 182.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 205
In 1 68 1, before the coming of Penn, at one of
the earliest gatherings in the colony, when the
Monthly Meeting at Burlington, New Jersey, in
cluded all the middle colonies, there is the fol
lowing record: "At a Monthly Meeting held at
Upland in the house of Robert Wade, the 15th
of the seventh month, 1681 — It is generally
agreed and ordered that if anything fall out by
way of controversy betwixt Friend and Friend,
that if they cannot end the matter between them
selves, then to refer it to two Friends, or more,
to see if they can end it ; then, if not, to bring it
to the Monthly Meeting, there to be ended."
Again — under same year, "It is ordered that if
any differences arise betwixt any two persons
that profess Truth, that they do not go to law
before they first lay it before the particular
Monthly Meeting that they do belong unto."
There is a simple naivete in one of Penn's
Council minutes which anticipates the later ad
vice of the meeting (in 1710) against "brother
going to law with brother." The Minute is
dated "13th day of the third month, 1684."
William Penn and his associates listened to the
discussion of a difference between an English
man and a Swede, after which, the Governor and
Council advised them to shake hands and forgive
each other, ordering that they enter into bonds

206 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
for fifty pounds apiece for their good observance,
which they did. It was further ordered "that
the records of the Court concerning the business
should be burnt!" This, be it observed, was a
Court order, and not the action of a Quaker
meeting. Several instances are recorded in Rhode
Island by the Quakers where a suit is carried
into Court with the evident consent of the meet
ing. South Kingstown, for instance, records
the lawsuit of "Tommy Hazard, the Black
smith," and Nicholas Easton.1 If, on the con
trary, a Quaker made the appeal to law before
bringing the case to the meeting, he was severely
dealt with. A man sues his son-in-law. "The
Meeting requests him to Desist such Disorderly
proceedings" (with a big D!) "and desires him
to attend our next Mo. Mt'g to make Fr'ds sat
isfaction !" 2 It is interesting to find in this com
munity the English primogeniture laws holding
to the middle of the eighteenth century. Quaker
eldest sons, like others in Rhode Island, when
arriving of age, were made freemen of the col
ony without the property qualification necessary
for younger sons. Thomas Hazard was admit-
1 Pres. Caroline Hazard, " Life of Thos. Hazard, called ' Col
lege Tom.'"
'Ibid.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 207
ted under such condition in 1742. There is no
American precedent for this outside of Rhode
Island, but a somewhat similar feature was
adopted for a time in Pennsylvania in 1776, when
the eldest son of a freeman might vote.1
Some affairs in Dartmouth, Massachusetts,
are characteristic of early Quakerism. Eben
ezer A — had been under dealings from his
Monthly and Quarterly meetings for a disagree
ment about property with a Friend. Finally, in
1705, a committee was appointed to "speak with
Ebenezer A — concerning his going to law with
a brother before unbelievers." Ebenezer re
plied, "that he doth Justify himself in going to
law with Nathaniel H — for he said that he had
gone as far with him as the law of God did re
quire, if he did understand what that law is."
He was "condemned." Later (1706) "if he will
condemn his outgoings to the satisfaction of
Friends, then the condemnation of this meeting
is not to be read in public; but if he refuseth,
then the judgment to be openly read the next
first day come two weeks, in the latter end of our
public meeting of worship." Ebenezer refused,
and the paper of condemnation was read. An
other case is that of Peleg S., who "did invest an

1 Poore, " Charters and Constitutions of Pennsylvania," p. 1542.
The Rhode Island law was that of 1724.

208 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
arbitrary power in J. T. and others." He re
fused to stand by the verdict and took the case
to the town meeting, "over the heads of the arbi
trators, and without the consent of this meeting,
which is esteemed disorder!" Patience Scott,
aged fifteen, of Boston, gave evidence, which is
recorded in full by the meeting. The same meet
ing in 1 71 2, is charged to see that "  's son
doth not sell the inheritance shee is to have her
living out of without good provision for her
Livelihood during her life." Philadelphia Meet
ing in 1709 (29th of 5mo.), records, "David
Lloyd is blamable for acting contrary to the or
der and practice of Friends professing Truth in
going to Law with a brother." The same meet
ing notes in 1 71 3 that certain Friends "enter into
bonds to submit to the arbitration of certain
Fr'ds of the meeting," &c.
Lawyers were generally in bad repute in the
seventeenth century, particularly in America.
Gabriel Thomas, who wrote his quaint little his
tory of Pennsylvania in 1698, says of that prov
ince, "Of Lawyers and Physicians I shall say
nothing, because this country is very peaceable
and Healthy; long may it soe continue, and
never have occasion for the Tongue of the one or
the Pen of the other, both equally destructive of
men's estates and lives!" Few Quakers were

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 209
lawyers ; the profession contained too many com
plications for their consciences at that day, and
most of them, like Thomas Story, gave up regu
lar practice at court, confining themselves to con
veyancing, and clerical work. Quaker lawyers,
however, may be found, and the digest of Par
liamentary laws relating to the Quakers (before
referred to), for the year 1739, shows that a
Quaker could be a solicitor or serve a clerkship
with an attorney or solicitor, upon his affirma
tion instead of an oath. William Penn was cau
tious about admitting too many lawyers, al
though Judge Guest was an honored one. He
wrote Logan from London, in 1703, "I have
granted (Judge Mompesson) a commission for
Chief- Justice in case the people will lay hold of
such an opportunity as no Government in Amer
ica ever had before, of an English lawyer, and
encourage him by a proper salary of at least
fioo if not £150 per annum!" 1 He came to a
province where a Judge was fined forty pounds
if he "judged contrary to law!" Poor Pennsyl
vania !
The most famous of Pennsylvania's colonial
Judges was John Kinsey (1693-1750), who, for
seven years previous to his death was Chief- Jus
tice. He was at the same time Speaker of the

- Penn-Logan Correspondence, I, 213.

210 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Assembly, and for twenty years was Clerk of
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting. He wrote the
Yearly Meeting's Epistles, and with great skill,
avoided political matters in drawing them up.
Yet never has there been a community in which
religious and political relations were closer.
The echo of the Yearly Meeting is often heard
in the Assembly of the early days in the province,
but never is the sound of political strife suffered
to enter the walls of the meeting-house. In one
instance, the text of a minute of the Yearly
Meeting became the text of the preamble to a
statute a few years later. President Sharpless 2
has called the Yearly Meeting that met not long
before the elections, the "Quaker Primary," but
it was in a social and unofficial sense that politi
cal sentiment was encouraged. Later on, even
conversation upon political matters practically
ceased. The Quakers left the Pennsylvania As
sembly in a body, in 1756. Quakerism gave to
Pennsylvania eight Provincial Councillors, three
acting Governors, one proprietary Secretary,
two Receivers General, one Register General,
1 No one has treated the important subject of the Quakers in
Pennsylvania so accurately as President Isaac Sharpless, in " A
Quaker Experiment in Government" and "The Quakers in the
Revolution." To write the state's history without insight into
Quaker methods, and reference to Quaker meeting records, is
impossible.

THE QUAKER CITIZEN AND LAW 211
one provincial Treasurer, one Chief-Justice,
three Judges, one Master of Chancery, two
Keepers of the Seal, twenty-two Justices of the
Peace, eighteen Assemblymen, two Sheriffs, one
County Treasurer, and three Mayors of Phila
delphia. Nicholas Wain, who was born at Fairhill,
Pennsylvania, in 1742, and died in 1813, is a re
markable example of a well-known lawyer, who,
upon convincement of Quaker principles, relin
quished a lucrative practice for conscientious
scruples. He had studied law under Galloway
in Philadelphia, and afterward continued his
studies in London, remaining there some time.
He appeared one day at meeting soon after hav
ing pleaded at court, and, sitting through most
of the meeting, moved into the minister's gallery,
and shortly after made an agitated prayer.
Friends did not at first understand his inten
tions, but he immediately gave up his practice,
which an eyewitness x of the first of his public
appearances, declared to amount to between fif
teen hundred and two thousand pounds per an
num, and devoted his life to philanthropic ends.
The case of Doctor John Dalton, the eminent
Quaker scientist, and his brother, is perhaps typ-
1 See Journal of John Oxley, Friends' Library, vol. I, p. 474,
and Friends' Miscellany, V, 180, for sketches of N. Wain.

212 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ical as an instance of administration of Quaker
justice, and obedience to the verdict. Their
father's will caused John to become complainant
against his brother Jonathan. The will of Jo
seph Dalton, who died in 1787, leaving a widow,
an only daughter and two sons, so disposed of
his property as to leave that portion of it which
he had received from his brother Jonathan, and
which he seemed to regard as an entail from
their father, to his own oldest son, also a Jona
than. Dr. John Dalton, however, felt sure that
his father intended no distinction between him
self and his brother. In a court of law, indeed,
John might have been non-suited, but with true
Quaker spirit he took his grievance to his
Monthly Meeting. Denominational justice was
done, and both parties were satisfied, although
we are not told the details of the arrangement as
we should like, probably for this very reason.1
*Dr. Lansdale, "The Life of John Dalton" in "Worthies of
Cumberland," p. 76.

THE QUAKER IN INTERNA
TIONAL POLITICS

213

In possession of ihe Author.

Cream Jug Made in 1765. Presented by Dr. John
Fothergill to Benjamin Franklin.

CHAPTER V
THE QUAKER IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS.1
There was recently to be seen at Philadelphia,
among relics once belonging to Benjamin Frank
lin, gathered there to celebrate the bicentennial
of his birth, a silver creampot of delicate work
manship, which is the memento of an interna
tional episode wherein Quakerism has played a
part of great historical interest, and in which its
important share has never been appreciated. The
cup was made in the year 1765 by Smith and
Sharp of London, well-known makers, who were
still in business when the century closed.2 It is
in the form of an egg, standing upon three claw
1 This chapter, in rather different form, was originally pub
lished in the first "Bulletin" of the "Friends' Historical So
ciety of Philadelphia" for October, 1906. A number of un
published letters have since been added, together with illustra
tions. 2 The makers' initials, D. S., R. S., are in a framed or shaped
escutcheon. The hall-marks are the Leopard's head with the
lion accompanying, mark of the Goldsmith's Hall; and an old
English or black-letter K, the sign for the year, 1765. One other
registered piece by Smith and Sharp, bearing the date 1771, is a
silver bason or christening bowl, owned by Mrs. Apthorp, of
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
215

216 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
feet, and truncated slightly above the center to
form the lid, which has an extension over the
lip; these together form the spout. A delicate
knob on top lifts the lid. A very graceful han
dle is richly ornamented, and in front of the
handle, partly upon the lid, and partly upon the
body of the cup, is engraved the chain of Friend
ship with the motto, "Keep bright the Chain."
This relic, now in the possession of the writer,
was presented by Dr. John Fothergill, scientist,
philanthropist and Court physician, to Dr. Ben
jamin Franklin, upon the departure of the latter
for America, in 1775, after fruitless efforts upon
the part of both to avert the American Revolu
tion. John Fothergill was the son of a Yorkshire
Quaker of the same name, who was well-to-do,
and gave his son a good education. He was
born in 171 1, five years later than Franklin, and
took his Doctor's degree in medicine in Edin
burgh, studying also in Paris and Leyden. Dis
tinguished for his ability, he came up to London
in 1740, and almost at once became a leader in
his profession, writing much upon medical and
scientific subjects for some years. About fifty
works and pamphlets testify to his industry ; they
cover philosophical, scientific and philanthropic
interests, as well as medicine. His essay on

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 217
"Ulcerated Sore Throat," in 1748, first sug
gested the proper treatment of that scourge,
diphtheria; it went into eight English editions,
and was published in every European language.
The pamphlet on "Weather and Diseases"
(1751) obtained also much attention. Dr.
Fothergill was a noted philanthropist, the friend
of John Howard, and consulted by the wise and
great of his day. Social questions engaged his
attention and he was much interested in public
baths, schools and the establishment of ceme
teries instead of city graveyards — an idea then
quite in advance of the time. He was made
Court Physician, and died in 1780, the year in
which appeared anonymously the "English Free
holder's Address to his Countrymen."
The personal appearance of Dr. Fothergill
must have been unique and interesting. We are
to imagine a spare, rather attenuated man, of
medium height, sensitively organized, alert and
quick in his movements, with a tendency to lean
forward in walking. His eye was brilliant and
expressive, and his face singularly mobile.
While delicate in appearance, he was seldom ill.
Fothergill wore the distinctive dress of the phy
sician of his day, including a carefully curled and
powdered wig, with cocked hat and cane, and
clothing very light in color, approaching a grey-

218 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ish white. Having once adopted this costume,
he wore it to his dying day, "thinking it un
worthy a man of sense," said his contemporary,
Dr. Elliott, "and inconsistent with his character,
to suffer himself to be led by the whim of fashion
and become the slave of its caprices !" The good
Doctor might have been seen any day driving
about London in a great green coach, with
horses sleek and fat, and with tails docked short,
driven by a highly respectable coachman weigh
ing no less than sixteen stone! It is said that a
Quaker apothecary once meeting the Doctor said
to him, "Friend Fothergill, I intend dining with
thee to-day." "I shall be glad to see thee," said
the Doctor, "but hast thou not some joke?"
"No joke at all," rejoined the apothecary, "but a
very serious matter. Thou hast attended Friend
Ephraim these three days, and hast ordered him
no medicine. I cannot at this rate live in my
own home, but must come to thine !" The Doc
tor took the hint, and prescribed handsomely for
both! He died the day after Christmas, 1780,
aged sixty-eight, and more than seventy coaches
and post-chaises attended his funeral at Winch-
more Hill.
Doctor FothergiU's scientific mind seems to
have been one of the first to appreciate the con
tributions to science made by Benjamin Franklin.

Courtesy of the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia,
Medallion by Wedgwood, after Portrait by Nini.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 219
The first suggestion of Franklin's philosophical
investigations had come to him at Boston in
1746, through Dr. Spence, a Scotchman, who
showed him some imperfect electrical experi
ments. Soon after, upon Franklin's return to
Philadelphia, his "Library Company" received
from Peter Collinson, F. R. S., an eminent Eng
lish scientist, a present of a "glass tube, with an
account of its proper use in experiments."
These Franklin eagerly undertook, adding those
he had seen in Boston, and a number of his own.
He was later assisted by Ebenezer Kinnersley,
"an ingenious neighbor," who at one time taught
at the new school established by Franklin, now
the University of Pennsylvania, and who per
fected the apparatus under the sage's direction.
Franklin sent back an account of these experi
ments to Peter Collinson, by whom the paper was
read at a meeting of the Royal Society, where it
was received with ridicule. A similar fate
awaited his second paper upon the identity of
lightning and electricity. When these produc
tions, however, were shown to Dr. Fothergill,
"he thought them," says Franklin, "of too much
value to be stifled, and advised the printing of
them." Peter Collinson then gave them to Mr.
Cave, editor of the Gentlemen's Magazine, for
use in that periodical. He printed them, how-

220 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ever, in a separate pamphlet, and Dr. Fothergill
wrote the preface, which states :
The experiments which our author relates are most
of them peculiar to himself; they are conducted with
judgment, and the inferences from them plain and con
clusive; though sometimes proposed under the terms of
suppositions and conjectures. And indeed, the scene he
opens strikes us with a pleasing astonishment, whilst he
conducts us by a train of facts and judicious reflections,
to a probable cause of those phenomena, which are at
once the most awful, and, hitherto, accounted for with
the least verisimilitude.
. . . From the similar effects of lightning and elec
tricity our author has been led to make some probable
conjectures on the cause of the former; and at the same
time, to propose some rational experiments, in order to
secure ourselves, and those things on which its force is
often directed, from its pernicious effects ; a circumstance
of no small importance to the publick, and therefore
worthy of the utmost attention.
These papers obtained notice in France be
fore they became popular in England, the great
French savant, Buffon, being the means of their
translation and wide circulation. "Philadelphia
Experiments" at once became the rage in
Paris, which later was to adore as states
man him whom she was first to welcome as phi
losopher. The Fothergills had long been public-spirited
Quakers. In 1734 John Fothergill, Senior, the

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 221
preacher, took an active part in a contested elec
tion in Yorkshire, signing a circular letter to
the Quakers to recommend two of the candidates.
Doctor Fothergill and his brother Samuel, the
latter of whom had visited America and had an
intimate acquaintance with political affairs in
the colonies,1 were eagerly watching the strug
gles of the Quakers in Pennsylvania to maintain
the balance of power. Samuel Fothergill was
an eloquent and well-known Quaker preacher.
He had visited America in 1754, remaining until
June of the following year. This was a very
critical period in the history of the country and
of the Quakers as well. The latter were just
then determining, as a body, to set free their own
slaves, which the entire country was not ready
to do until another century had passed. Fother
gill had an excellent opportunity to test the po
litical pulse of America, and seems to have been
greatly moved by the stir which he found going
on in the colonies. Ten years before coming
over, he had met Josiah Quincy, Jr., of Boston,
who, in 1745, went to London on a patriotic mis
sion for his country. Doctor John Fothergill
then attended him in a dangerous illness, and
because of his interest in the American cause,
declined all tenders of payment for his services.

1 Memoirs and Letters of S. Fothergill, p. 171, 2d edit.

222 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Quincy never returned home, but died at sea in
the entrance to Massachusetts Bay, seven days
after the battle of Lexington, in ignorance of
that momentous event.
The fame of the eloquent Englishman appears
to have preceded Samuel Fothergill to Boston in
1755, when their common interest in the cause of
the abolition of slavery drew him and Samuel
Adams together. An impressive meeting was
held by Fothergill in the famous Old South
Church, on the very spot where, not eighty years
before, the daft Quakeress, Margaret Brewster,
with dishevelled locks and fantastic garb, had en
tered to call down the judgment of God upon
the Puritan persecutors.
" She came and stood in the Old South Church
A wonder and a sign ;
With a look the old time Sibyls wore
Half crazed, and half divine."
"When he prayed," said Adams, of the
preacher, "it seemed as if Heaven and earth were
brought together." The little meeting-house in
Quaker Lane proving too small for the great
crowds that came to hear him, Samuel Fothergill
was offered various churches in Boston, but he
wisely preferred the Town Hall. Here, then, on
the evening of the first of August, 1755, Fanueil

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 223
Hall was filled with a congregation of two thou
sand people to hear the Quaker. Only one fa
miliar with the history of Puritan Massachusetts
can fully appreciate the dramatic character of
the situation, in the town where once the magis
trates called forth all the power of the law to sup
press the Quaker's preaching, and to hang the
martyrs on Boston Common. S. Fothergill says
himself of this meeting: "I dropped my pen yes
terday under a weighty concern to appoint an
evening meeting in this place, and upon its being
mentioned to the magistrates (they did not seek
magistrates in the olden time; the seeking was
the other way) they cheerfully offered either one
of their own places of worship, or the Town
Hall, saying that our own house was too small
to accommodate the people who inclined to come
in. I found more freedom to accept their offer
of the hall, and had a very large meeting in the
evening, at which were present about two thou
sand people, and amongst them nearly all the
magistracy of the place, several of their minis
ters, and principal people ; it was a time, I believe,
never to be forgotten ; the power and wisdom of
truth was as a canopy over the meeting, and I
believe the truth itself gained great ground.
Let every part of the gain, glory and profit be
ascribed to that excellent Name, in and from

224 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
which all wisdom and strength proceed. One of
their ancient professors said pretty loudly, at the
close of the meeting, T thank God that I have
once heard the gospel of life and peace preached
in its purity, as it hath been this day.' "
John Fothergill, father of the brothers, Sam
uel and John Jr. (the Doctor), paid three visits
to America, and the Fothergills as a family pur
sued the course of history in the colonies with
unfailing interest.
The Doctor corresponded with most of the sci
entific men of his time, among them the brothers
Pemberton, of Philadelphia, who were leaders in
the Pennsylvania Quaker Assembly, and of
course, with Benjamin Franklin, who was al
ways grateful for his prompt advocacy and sup
port. The mysticism which paralyzed active
Quakerism with its quietistic breath in the mid
dle of the eighteenth century, was rendering the
Pennsylvania Quakers too timid to continue
their work in political fields, while the vast figure
of Franklin at the same time rose into promi
nence. His "honesty is the best policy" was a
true Quaker sentiment, and the political opinions
of the great apostle of common sense were as
much their own, in the main, as their ethical
views were beyond his sympathy or comprehen
sion. The Quakers were still a majority in the

Courtesy of the late Samuel R. Shiptci).
Medallion by Wedgwood, after Portrait in wax by
John Flaxman, R. A.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 225
Assembly, where they were to remain but an
other year, when Doctor Fothergill wrote the
following letter to Israel Pemberton, of Phila
delphia, from London, dated 8th of 71110., 1755.1
. . . I thought the latter part of thy letter, respect
ing the misinformation given to General Braddock, of so
much consequence, that I put it in the hands of a Friend
who will mention the purport of it to Lord Grenville,
Lord President of the Council, in a few days, and this,
with some circumstances of the like nature, will, I hope,
dispose him to take such a part in the affair as may tend
to the benefit of the colony, which must count in reconcil
ing, if possible, the Proprietary s and Assembly. Should
this prove impracticable, would it be amiss for the As
sembly to depute one or two of their members to come
over next winter, and join with their Agents and Friends
here in such a manner as might be thought most agree
able and likely to be attended with success?
It is quite possible that this may have been
the first suggestion for an American Agent to
negotiate a peace for Pennsylvania. At all
events, two years later, Franklin made his first
visit to England as Agent of the Pennsylvania
Assembly, to remonstrate with the Proprietors
against the exemption of their estates from equal
taxation with the rest of the colony. He arrived
in London July 27th, 1757. "As soon as I was
settled in a lodging Mr. Charles had provided
1 From the original in the Historical Soe. of Penna.

226 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
me," he writes, "I went to visit Dr. Fothergill,
to whom I was strongly recommended, and
whose counsel respecting my proceedings I was
strongly advis'd to obtain. He was against an
immediate complaint to Government, and
thought the Proprietaries should first be applied
to personally, who might possibly be induced by
the interposition and persuasion of some private
friends, to accommodate matters amicably."
But before anything could be undertaken, Dr.
Franklin fell ill of an intermittent fever, and
wrote his wife in Philadelphia that he was under
Dr. Fothergill's care.
As soon as possible, Dr. Fothergill arranged
for a meeting between Dr. Franklin and the Pro
prietaries at the house of Thomas Penn in
Spring Gardens. The general conversation upon
both sides seemed at first conciliatory, but more
particular complaints soon appeared, offer
ing little hope of agreement. The statement
which was drawn up by Franklin, and which he
declined to discuss with any intermediary, lay
for an entire year unanswered, when the Proprie
taries sent a communication to the Pennsylvania
Assembly, ignoring even the existence of Frank
lin, and requesting "some person of candour" to
treat with them! Meantime, however, the As
sembly had prevailed with Governor Denny to

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 227
pass an act taxing the proprietary estates in com
mon with those of the people, which was the
ground of the dispute, and consequently that
body omitted answering the message. When
the text of that act arrived, however, the Pro
prietaries, taking counsel, determined to oppose
its receiving the Royal assent, on the ground that
the lowest taxable rate was not applicable to it.
The entire controversy with the Proprietaries
lasted for a period of three years, and was not
finally settled to the satisfaction of Franklin's
constituents until June, 1760. He remained in
England, occupied with the question even then
of the annexation of Canada, the cultivation of
proper sentiments toward America in Great
Britain through the medium of the press, and
with his scientific interests — loath we infer, to
leave an atmosphere so congenial to his tastes.
Finally, however, he writes Lord Karnes from
Portsmouth, "I am now waiting here only for a
wind to waft me to America." After an absence
of five years, Franklin reached Philadelphia, No
vember ist, 1762.
The next year Governor John Penn's first act
was to recommend a militia tax, refused by the
Assembly, followed by a land tax in which an
ambiguity in the agreement obtained by Frank
lin when in England caused the Governor to in-

228 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
sist that Proprietary lands, good or bad, were
to be taxed at lowest rates. When the Assem
bly, at its wits' end with Indian frontier disturb
ances, passed this domineering act, for the sake
of peace, no one suspected that the rebellion it
was to engender would ultimately lead to the in
dependence of the colonies. The Assembly re
solved that peace and happiness, in view of so
many arbitrary representatives of the Proprie
taries, could come only by lodging the govern
ment of the province in the crown, and so ex
pressed itself upon adjournment. To these sen
timents, only seven weeks later, several thousand
citizens gave enthusiastic endorsement, and
when the Assembly met again, a petition to the
King to that effect was drawn up by Franklin,
who was made Speaker. Rumors were even
then rife of obtaining revenue from stamp duties
in the colonies, and a remonstrance against the
scheme, and instructions to the Agent, in Lon
don, were signed by Franklin, as his last act
while Speaker. Immediately upon convening, the
Assembly of 1764 resolved to pursue the meas
ures of its predecessor, at once appointing Frank
lin a special agent to England to petition for a
change of government, and look after the inter
ests of the province in the crisis abroad. The
merchants of Pennsylvania subscribed f 11,000 in

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 229
a few hours, upon the assurance that an appro
priation should be made for the purpose in the
next budget; and twelve days after (November
7th, 1764) he was on his way to England for the
second time, escorted to Chester by three hun
dred of his fellow citizens.1
This time when Franklin went abroad, he took
with him some silk of Pennsylvania manufac
ture, and on arriving after a tempestuous voyage
of thirty days, he sent for Doctor Fothergill to
join him in seeing the consignment opened and
arranging for its disposal. They discovered
that the valuers, after having opened the parcels
to ascertain the bounty, had lost the directions
and marks, so that "we could not find," says
Franklin, "which was intended for the Queen
and which for the Proprietary family. Then,
being no judges ourselves, we concluded to get
Mr. Patterson, or some other skilful person, to
come and pick out six pounds of the best for Her
Majesty, and four pounds for each of the other
ladies." . . . "Dr. Fothergill and myself
1 So long before this as 1758, Franklin had written the Quaker,
Isaac Norris, then Speaker of the Pa. Assembly: "I should
be glad to know your sentiments on the Point of getting rid
of the Proprietary Government, & whether you think it would
be generally acceptable to the people?" A. H. Smyth, Works
of B. Franklin, III, 455. His Ms. "Memorial of the State of
the British Plantations" shows that as early as 1731, he had
considered the possibility of a separation from England.

230 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
are to write a joint letter to the committee.
. . . I am charmed at the sight of such a
quantity the second year, and have great hopes
the produce will now be established. . . .
Dr. Fothergill has a number of Chinese draw
ings, which represent the process of raising silk
from beginning to end. I am to call at his house
and assist in looking them over, he intending to
send them as a present to the silk company." *
The old intimacy with Dr. Fothergill was re
newed, and Franklin threw himself ardently into
the attempt to solve the American difficulties.
In 1766, followed his famous examination before
the House of Commons relative to the repeal of
the Stamp Act, then become a law. As a sop
to America, Mr. Grenville invited the colonial
agents in London to name such persons in the
respective colonies as would be proper to act as
stamp distributors. Even the wary Dr. Frank
lin fell into the trap, naming his friend, John
Hughes, for Pennsylvania. His enemies at
once proclaimed him as encouraging the offensive
legislation, and a caricature of the period repre
sents the Devil whispering in his ear, "Ben, you
shall be my agent throughout my provinces!"
There was a great uproar at home, and Fother
gill came bravely to the defense of Franklin. An
" 1 Sparks' Franklin, VIII, p. 3.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 23 1
unpublished letter to James Pemberton of Phil
adelphia, dated London, 21110,, 17th, 1766, de
clares that from his personal knowledge, the ac
cusations in the letter of Christopher Krebbs,
and his allies, are false, and that Franklin did all
in his power to prevent the passage of the Stamp
Act, adding, "I can further aver likewise, upon
my own knowledge, that he diligently, steadily
and judiciously pursued the business recom
mended to him when he came over as agent, and
if he does not succeed in it, it will be more owing
to the present unfavorable circumstances of the
times than the want of either application or ad
dress. He has been an able, useful advocate for
America in General and the Province of Penn
sylvania in particular." 1
The bill for the repeal of the Stamp Act re
ceived royal assent March 18th, 1766. Al
though it was followed by a Declaratory Act of
fensive in principle as the first, affirming the
right of Parliament to bind the colonies "in all
cases whatsoever," nevertheless, the colonies
were frantic with joy for a brief period, and
Franklin was hailed at home and abroad with
boundless enthusiasm. A month earlier, Dr.
Fothergill had written James Pemberton, only a
few days after the letter just quoted . . .
iFrom original in Etting Collection, Pa. Hist. Soe.

232 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
"It is very probable that in the space of a week
or ten days, the bill for repealing the stamp act
will be pass'd in the House of Commons. I
make no doubt but this intelligence from all your
correspondents will diffuse universal satisfaction
thro' the continent, but I must intreat thee &
every person within the reach of thy influence
to determine with the utmost steadiness to re
press every mark of intemperate joy on this oc
casion !" 1 Here spoke the true Quaker.
Time passed, and Franklin still remained in
London, the agent of the increasingly restless
colonies; sometimes entertaining a table full of
Lords and Ladies with a brilliantly imagined
fable, like that of The Eagle and the Cat, and
sometimes telling a noble Lord "how to reduce
a great empire to a small one;" presenting some
American nuts to Lord Bathurst, and apples to
Lady Bathurst, "which he prays they will accept
as a tribute from his country, small indeed, but
voluntary!" "It has often happened to me," he
writes later, "that while I have been thought
here too much of an American, I have in Amer
ica been deemed too much of an Englishman!"
The intimacy between Franklin and Fothergill
became close, and there is no doubt that their
common interest in scientific matters drew them

1 From original in Pemberton Collection, Hist. Soe. Penna.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 233
much together. Finally, when the crisis was ap
proaching, Fothergill again wrote James Pem
berton in an autograph letter hitherto unpub
lished 1 which shows that there can be no reason
able doubt that the proposal for the effort finally
made, came from him. It is dated
" Near Middlewich, Chester. 23-8 1774.
. . . I have often asked myself (what I should do
were I in your situation). My first wish would- be to
choose out of so large a Congress a few sensible, sedate
persons from each colony to come over to this country
immediately, and in the mean time to recommend on your
side the most perfect submission to authority. No in
flammatory publications. No non-importation schemes.
Nothing that your enemies or the ignorant, misguided
people here would have (sic) made use of to your disad
vantage. You suffer more by the passionate resolves
of your ignorant assemblies — I do not mean Provincial
Assemblies — than the people of America can easily con
ceive. The business of this committee should be to apply
to the members of both Houses individually, at least such
as can easily be come at, and by a little moderate conver
sation, give them full information of your situation, as
sure them of the state of the dispute between you, and
with great moderation, yet with proper firmness, urge
their attention to the mutual reciprocal interest of a great
Empire. ... If something of this nature is not at
tempted, both you and we are, I am afraid, on the brink
of a fatal precipice. ... I partly wished that Dr.
ilbid.

234 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Franklin would stay here till your demonstrations are
made known to him. Should you think that conciliatory
measures ought to be attempted, tho' he may not perhaps
be heard impartially by a few, yet he retains considerable
influence with individuals, and might render a commis
sion like this proposed very considerable success.
Soon after these words were written, Franklin
prepared to return to Philadelphia, after eleven
years in London as agent of the colonies; and
while still in his house in Craven street, one last
attempt was undertaken by several eminent per
sons to effect a reconciliation between the mother
country and the colonies. For this purpose, a
little diplomacy was employed upon the diplomat
himself, and the principal actors were Quakers.
These were the "good Dr. Fothergill," as Frank
lin loved to call him, and his friend, David Bar
clay, representing the London merchants who
petitioned Parliament in the matter. The father
of David Barclay (i 682-1 769) second son of the
Apologist, settled in London, and had an exten
sive mercantile house in Cheapside, nearly oppo
site Bow Church. He entertained there three
successive Kings when they visited the City on
their accession, and from the windows George
III and his Queen and members of the Royal
household viewed the Lord Mayor's procession
in 1 761. David Barclay, last surviving grand-

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 235
son of Robert, was born in 1728. Succeeding to
the head of the Cheapside house, which was
largely engaged in the American trade, he wound
up the business at the outbreak of the Revolu
tion, and retired in affluence, devoting himself to
philanthropy. Afterward in 1780, the Barclays
purchased Thrale's great brewery in Southwark,
together with Perkins, its superintendent. The
famous brewery stood upon the site of the first
Independent church, in England, which was
opened in 1616 by the Puritan convert of John
Robinson, Jacob, who in Leyden had joined the
Separatists and with them became an Independ
ent.1 Dr. Johnson was executor for Mrs.
Thrale, and was on intimate terms with David
Barclay. Boswell speaks of him as "remarkable
for maintaining the principles of his venerable
progenitor with as much of elegance and modern
manners as is consistent with primitive simplic
ity." The Barclays, no doubt, in making the
purchase, had faith in Dr. Johnson's remark, "we
are not here to sell a parcel of vats and boilers,
but the potentiality of growing rich beyond the
dreams of avarice." His client had literary
tastes, and the Doctor said, "A mere man is a dull
man ; a man who is solely a man of business is a
1 Goodwin, " The Pilgrim Republic," 440. Jacob' was exiled
by Laud.

236 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
selfish man; but when literature and commerce
are united, they make a respectable man."
There was much friendship between them, and
when David Barclay saw the Doctor in his last
illness, Johnson said, "Have you any objection to
receive an old man's blessing?" His visitor
knelt, and the dying sage pronounced it over him
with great fervor.1
The inheritance of an estate in Jamaica de
termined Barclay at the cost of £10,000 to liber
ate his slaves, which he did with his usual sa
gacity. He sent out an agent to Jamaica with
instructions to charter a vessel, in which all were
transported to America, and not abandoned by
their caretaker until they were established in
good trades, thereby winning their lasting grati
tude. He lived to the age of eighty-one, dying
in 1809. His handsome figure and fine presence
aided a superior understanding to impress itself
upon all who came in contact with him. Like
Franklin, he was examined at the bar of the
House of Commons, and his advice, although not
taken, was so clear and convincing, that Lord
North made a public acknowledgment of his serv
ices.2

1 Biographical Catalogue, London Friends' Institute, p. 47.
2 Chambers' Edinburgh Journal for October 6th, 1849, con
tains a good account of D. Barclay.

^*-?v^

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 237
Through their common friend, Mr. Raper, the
conspirators contrived that Franklin should be
taken to call upon the sister of Lord Howe, who
challenged him to a game of chess. The attrac
tions of an elegant and accomplished lady, over
his favorite game, in one of the aristocratic
houses of London, were too much for Franklin,
always ready to follow the advice of his own
"Poor Richard," and make friends in powerful
quarters ; and the chess party came off with great
eclat, in November, 1774. "I had not," said the
Doctor afterward, "the least apprehension that
any political business could have any connection
with this new acquaintance !" A day or two be
fore this, David Barclay had visited Franklin
upon Parliamentary matters, and mentioned the
"great merit" any one would have "who could
contrive some means of preventing so terrible a
calamity, and bring about a reconciliation."
"He was pleased to add," says Franklin, "that
no man had it so in his power as myself. Mr.
Barclay apprehended I judged too harshly of the
ministers," and would call again. Two days
after, Franklin received a letter from him, en
closed in a note from Dr. Fothergill, who deeply
lamented the unhappy contest, and had in 1765
printed anonymously a now rare pamphlet on
"Considerations relative to the North American

238 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Colonies." 1 The letter alluded to ran as follows :
" Youngsbury, near Ware, 3d, 12th Month, 1774.
Esteemed Friend,
" After we parted on Thursday last, I accidentally met
our mutual friend, Dr. Fothergill, in my way home, and
intimated to him the subject of our discourse, in conse
quence of which I have received from him an invitation
to a further conference on this momentous affair, and I
intend to be in town to-morrow accordingly, to meet at
his house between four and five o'clock; and we unite
in the request of thy company. We are neither of us
insensible, that the affair is of that magnitude; as should
almost deter private persons from meddling with it; at
the same time we are respectively such well-wishers to
the cause, that nothing in our power ought to be left un
done, though the utmost of our efforts may be unavaila
ble. I am thy respectful friend, David Barclay.
To Dr. Franklin, Craven St.
This was enclosed in an invitation:
Dr. Fothergill presents his respects to Dr. Franklin,
and hopes for the favor of his company in Harpur Street
to-morrow evening, to meet their mutual friend, David
Barclay, to confer on American affairs. As near five
o'clock as may be convenient.
Harpur St., 3d. Inst.
A paragraph from the Autobiography brings

1 " Considerations relative to the North American Colonies,"
London 8 vo., 1765. Henry Kent, printer, Finch Lane.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 239
it vividly before us: "The time thus appointed
was the evening of the day on which I was to
have my second chess party with the agreeable
Mrs. Howe, whom I met accordingly. After
playing as long as we liked, we fell into a little
chat, partly on a mathematical problem" (Mrs.
Howe's accomplishments were unusual for the
day) "and partly about the new Parliament, then
just met, when she said, 'And what is to be done
with this dispute between Great Britain and the
colonies? I hope we are not to have a civil
war?' 'They should kiss and be friends,' said
I; 'what can they do better?' ... 'I have
often said,' replied she, 'that I wished govern
ment would employ you to settle the dispute for
them ; I am sure nobody could do it so well. Do
you not think the thing is practicable?' 'Un
doubtedly, Madam, if the parties are disposed to
reconciliation; for the two countries have really
no clashing interests to differ about. It is rather
a matter of punctilio, which two or three reason
able people might settle in half an hour. I thank
you for the good opinion you are pleased to ex
press of me, but the ministers will never think of
employing me in that good work; they choose
rather to abuse me.' 'Ay,' said she; 'they have
behaved shamefully to you. And indeed some
of them are now ashamed of it themselves.' I

240 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
looked upon this as an accidental conversation,
and went in the evening to the appointed meet
ing at Dr. Fothergill's, where I found Mr. Bar
clay with him."
It turned out that the object of the meeting
was the endeavor on the part of the two Quakers
to induce Franklin to draw up some plan agree
able to the colonies, which they believed certain
powerful friends at court might be induced to
consider with favor, and urge upon the ministry,
several of whom they knew to be more favorable
than the rest. The evident need for haste, and
their philanthropic purpose prevailed upon the
diplomat to overlook any impropriety that might
be involved by taking action while awaiting the
result of the Congress then meeting, and he prom
ised to join them again in a day or two, with
something tangible to present. This took the
form of "Hints for Conversation upon the Sub
ject of Terms that might probably produce a Du
rable Union between Britain and the Colonies,"
embodied under seventeen heads, and covering
all the points in dispute. Copies were sent to
both gentlemen present, and one was retained by
Franklin, Lord Hyde and Lord Dartmouth being
the persons to whom they desired to present
them, with the agreement that for the time, the
matter should remain sub rosa. "For my own

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 241
part," says the Doctor, "I kept this whole proceed
ing a profound secret ; but I soon after discovered
that it had taken air by some means or other."
Meantime the proceedings of Congress and the
petition of that body to the King had reached
Franklin's hands ; and the Secretary of State, af
ter asserting that Congress was an illegal body,
and hence had no right to be heard, agreed to
deliver the petition, which was destined to come
to naught.
On Christmas evening, Franklin was again
at Mrs. Howe's, and she asked his permission
to present her brother, Lord Howe. Franklin,
of course, "would be proud of the honour!"
His Lordship after some preamble intimated that
although Franklin might not desire to have any
direct communication with the ministry, or to
have it known that he had any that was even
indirect, yet, being himself upon no ill terms with
them, he might convey Franklin's sentiments to
them, and theirs to him, and that he might rely
on his Lordship's keeping perfectly secret every
thing that he might wish to remain so.
Mrs. Howe, although discreetly offering to
withdraw, was a party to all this, for, said Frank
lin, "I had never conceived a higher opinion of
the discretion and excellent understanding of any
woman on so short acquaintance." As it was

242 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
known that they played chess together at her
house, it was agreed that another secret meet
ing should take place soon after. Meantime,
Franklin had interviews with Governor Pownall,
with Lord Chatham, (who received him "with an
affectionate kind of respect, that from so great a
man was very engaging") and, at Chiselhurst,
with Lord Camden, and was back in town, in time
to keep his appointment at Mrs. Howe's, who
expressed her wish that Lord Howe were going
on a peaceful mission to America, rather than
that his brother, General Howe, should go out to
command the army. "I think, Madam," said
Franklin, "they ought to provide for General
Howe some more honourable employment!"
Here Lord Howe produced the "Hints" which
Franklin had drawn up, to whose authorship he
owned, and asked him to modify them, which
Franklin reluctantly agreed to attempt, and to
allow the copy to be in the handwriting of Mrs.
Howe, although Franklin disregarded the neces
sity for secrecy. The new terms were tran
scribed, and on the 3d. January, 1775, Franklin
received the following:
Mrs. Howe's compliments to Dr. Franklin; she en
closes him a letter she received last night, and returns
him many thanks for his obliging present (his Philo
sophical Works), which has already given her great

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 243
entertainment. If the Doctor has any spare time for
chess, she will be exceedingly glad to see him any morn
ing this week, and as often as will be agreeable to him,
and rejoices in having so good an excuse for asking
the favour of his company.
The note inclosed expressed Lord Howe's re
gret at the unlikelihood of the success of his ef
forts toward a peaceable ending of the dispute.
Later on when Lord Howe returned to town, he
lamented that Franklin's terms were not such as
could be accepted. Franklin remarked that as
his own propositions were not acceptable, he very
much desired to hear from the ministers, what
would do; and although his Lordship promised
when he learned their sentiments himself, to in
form Franklin, it was some weeks before any
thing further was heard from Lord Howe.
Meantime, Mr. Barclay and Dr. Franklin were
hard at it preparing the merchants' petition, and
Dr. Fothergill reported having interviewed Lord
Dartmouth and the Speaker of the House, Sir
Fletcher Norton, both of whom called the terms
presented in Franklin's "Hints" too humiliating.
The wise old Doctor replied that Britain had been
unjust, and that the bitter pill, if swallowed,
would be salutary; but only good wishes were the
outcome. On the 19th of January, Franklin was
gratified to be introduced into Parliament per-

244 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
sonally by Lord Chatham, then very feeble. His
Lordship made the famous motion to withdraw
the troops from Boston, as a first step toward
an accommodation. The motion was rejected;
but Franklin wrote a grateful note to America's
best friend.
After this, meetings with Dr. Fothergill and
Mr. Barclay took place on the fourth and the
sixteenth of February, and next day Lord Howe
proposed to Franklin, in case he himself should
be sent as commissioner of peace to the colonies,
that Franklin should cooperate with him, and in
timated financial advantages therefrom, — an idea
rejected by Franklin both for the mercenary point
of view, and because it was possible only if he
were fully in command of, and in sympathy with,
the propositions to be laid before the colonies.
This, of course, came to nothing, and hints of the
nature of a bribe were hastily and emphatically
rejected. All the time, Barclay and Fothergill
were at work, the former still having some idea
that money might appeal to Franklin, to lend him
self to a proposition to compromise. But the
stanch old Doctor was firm, and sat through the
final session of Parliament in wrath and indigna
tion at hearing his countrymen called cowards
and knaves for not submitting quietly to imposi
tion. Meetings in the daytime and meetings at

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 245
midnight, all unofficial, and all in the midst of his
preparations for sailing, were submitted to by the
Doctor, and all without result. On the 7th of
March, Franklin and Howe met for the last time
upon the good cause set going by Dr. Fother
gill. Lord Howe said that Franklin had been
a better prophet than himself, and hoped he
would pardon the trouble he had given him, for
his intentions had been of the best toward the
public and himself. They parted cordially. So
late as March 31st, David Barclay wrote to Phila
delphia :
Esteemed Friend,1
. . . I have only to add to what I have already
offer'd — That as much has been said by those in Power
and those out of it in favour of some person or persons
being sent here, as deputed from the Congress, notwith
standing Ministers would not treat with them as such, — ¦
Dr. Fothergill and myself are of opinion that if a proper
Person or Persons were to come here with Powers from
the Congress it might have a good effect, at least silence
those, who think that meeting (of Congress) shows no
disposition towards Conciliation. I am thy assured Friend,
David Barclay.
(To James Pemberton.)
A few days before Franklin left London, he
met David Barclay and Dr. Fothergill when, he
1 Original in Penna. Historical Society.

246 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
says "they desired me to assure their friends [in
America] from them, that it was now their fixed
opinion, that nothing could secure the privileges
of America but a firm, sober adherence to the
terms of the association made at the Congress,
and that the salvation of English liberty depended
now on the perseverance and virtue of America."
The evening before Dr. Franklin left London,
he received the following note from Dr. Fother
gill: "It would be well to get two or more friends
(in Philadelphia) together, and inform them that
whatever specious pretences are offered, they are
all hollow ; and that to get a larger field on which
to fatten a herd of worthless parasites is all that
is regarded. They will stun, at least, if not con
vince the most worthy, that nothing very favor
able is intended if more unfavorable articles can
not be obtained." Franklin notes that Fother
gill's large practice, taking him among all classes
of people, gave him an excellent opportunity to
read the public mind.1
Doctor Fothergill was associated in philan
thropic effort with Lady Huntingdon, and they
seem to have asked the intervention of the diplo-
1 For Franklin's own account of these negotiations, see Sparks'
" Works of Franklin," vol. 8. Also " Monthly Review " for Jan
uary, 1775.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 247
mat, for a letter from Franklin to Fothergill not
long before the latter's death, is dated Passy,
19th, June, 1780, in which he says:
"My dear old friend Dr. Fothergill may as
sure Lady Huntingdon of my respects, and of
any service in my power to render her or her af
fairs in America. I believe matters cannot much
longer continue in their present situation, but
will return to that state in which they were when
her property and that of our common friend, G.
W. (George Whitefield) received the protection
she acknowledges. ... Be pleased to re
member me respectfully to your good sister, and
to our worthy friend, David Barclay, who, I
make no doubt, laments with you and me that
the true pains we took together to prevent all this
horrible mischief proved ineffectual. I am ever
yours, most affectionately, B. Franklin.
Lady Huntingdon had been a generous con
tributor toward the establishment of Whitefield's
Orphan House in Georgia.1
!It is not generally known how large a share Dr. Fothergill
had in financing the affairs of the famous old Pennsylvania Hos
pital, in Philadelphia. It is the oldest institution of the kind in
America. In 1772, he and David Barclay sent over "between
6 and 7,000 pounds;" and before the war broke out, transferred
all the foreign invested funds to the American side of the At
lantic. While credit must always be given Franklin for aiding

248 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Franklin and Fothergill parted with mutual
regard, of which the gift of the cream-pot to
Franklin is a token. He sailed for home May
5th, 1775, and arriving in Philadelphia one even
ing, was the next morning unanimously chosen
delegate to the Continental Congress which met
on the ioth of June, and which accepted the re
sponsibility of resistance to English tyranny.
Immediately upon hearing of this, David Barclay
wrote to James Pemberton, in Philadelphia :
YOUNGSBURY, HERTS, 2IST, 7mO., I77S-1
. . . We cannot but painfully reflect on the affect
ing situation of our many friends on the other side the
Atlantic, and are anxiously waiting to hear the Resolu
tions of the Congress, the success of the Proclamation,
and the operations of the military in the Massachusetts.
One day we have been informed they have been victori
ous, and the next, that they have been vanquished. That
to found the hospital, yet his marvelous power of assimilating
the ideas of others, and turning to practical demonstration what
otherwise might have died of inanition, leaves us to ask whether
it was not likely that his idea for Philadelphia was taken
from London, and that the already famous Dr. Fothergill —
founder himself of hospitals and schools — made the original
suggestion? "He was," wrote Franklin many years later,
"among the best men I have known, and a great promoter of
useful projects." In any case, Franklin returned the compli
ment, for in 1760 he proposed to Fothergill a street-cleaning
method for the city of London. The Pemberton Letters in the
Historical Society of Pennsylvania show the important part taken
by Fothergill in starting the Hospital.
1 Original owned by Penna. Hist. Soe.

IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS 249
these gloomy prospects may speedily come to an end and
by Divine permission, a state of Peace and Tranquillity
be again restored in this mighty Empire, is the fervent
wish of Thy assured Friend,
David Barclay.
It was during Franklin's later residence in
France (1 776-1 785) as American Minister, that
we have a fleeting glimpse of him playing chess
in another society — the Cafe de la Regence,
which still flourishes, and where players from the
four quarters of the globe still gather. The wid
ening of Paris streets has removed it a few feet
from its old site, and Munich beer and English
afternoon tea are served in place of the wine and
coffee of Franklin's time. This was the adored
statesman who went to Court in brown cloth coat
and knee breeches, white stockings, hair brushed
flat and without powder, and bi-focal spectacles
of his own invention perched in enormous frames
upon his nose. It was during this period that
word came to him of Dr. Fothergill's death. He
wrote David Barclay — Passy, 12th, February, 1781.
Dear Sir: I condole with you most sincerely in the
loss of our dear friend Dr. Fothergill. I hope that
some one that knew him well will do justice to him by
an account of his life and character. He was a great
doer of good. How much might have been done, and

250 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
how much mischief prevented, if his, your and my joint
endeavours in a certain melancholy affair, had been at
tended to.
With great respect and esteem, I am, &c,
B. Franklin.
He wrote in 1783 to Dr. Lettson, who was
preparing the life of the Doctor which is to-day
the best account, although incomplete, which we
have — "If we may estimate the goodness of a
man by his disposition to do good, and his con
stant endeavours and success in doing it, I can
hardly conceive that a better man ever existed."
When the will of Franklin came to be written,
the year before his death, (it is dated June 23d,
1789) he inserted the following: "I request
. . . that my good friend Mr. Hill 1 may also
accept my silver cream-pot, given to me by the
good Dr. Fothergill, with the motto, "Keep
bright the Chain."
1 This was Henry Hill of Philadelphia, one of Franklin's four
executors.

THE QUAKERS AND
MIRABEAU

251

CHAPTER VI
THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU
The Quaker's testimony against bloodshed was practi
cal, as such a testimony can still be when men will;
their principle of equality, as well as their practice of it,
was their legacy to our people, and it now remains all
that differences us from other nations. It was not
Thomas Jefferson who imagined the first of the self-
evident truths of the Declaration, but George Fox — W.
D. Howells ; " London Films."
The name of Rotch in New 'England stands
for all that is loyal and righteous in the colonies.
Joseph Rotch, the father of three well-known
sons, was born in Salisbury, England, in 1704,
and early in life came to Nantucket, where the
family were practically the founders of the whale
fisheries, which had been on a small scale be
fore. The island became famous for the indus
try which these far-sighted men developed. Jo
seph Rotch died in New Bedford, Massachusetts,
November 24, 1784.
His three sons were William, Joseph Jr., and
Francis. Joseph Rotch died in England. Fran
cis Rotch at the age of twenty-three, was the
253

254 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
owner of the tea ship, "Dartmouth," from which
the tea was thrown into Boston Harbor on the
night of December 16th, 1773. She was said to
have been the first ship built in New Bedford.
The youthful owner was in a terrible dilemma
when Samuel Adams, who wanted him to return
the ships to England upon their arrival, exacted
a promise from him to that effect. On the nth,
December he was summoned before the Commit
tee of Safety, and asked why he had not sent
back his ship to London. His pass had been re
fused by Governor Hutchinson, and Samuel Ad
ams said, "the ship must go; the people of Boston
and neighborhood absolutely require and expect
it." His temperament would have yielded under
pressure, but he consulted counsel, and with
strong backing, withdrew his promise. The tea
was thrown, as all the world knows, into Bos
ton Harbor, and the East India Company paid
the freight charges. Francis Rotch married his
cousin, Nancy Rotch, who died April 24th, 1867,
at the advanced age of ninety-two. He him
self was born September 30th, 1750, and died
at New Bedford, in May, 1822.
The whaling business in which the New Eng
land Quakers had been engaged was ruined upon
the outbreak of the Revolution. William Rotch,
who had become the most prominent owner of

William Rotch, of Nantucket and New Bedford.

THE. QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 255
whalers in Nantucket, the chief seat of the indus
try, determined to follow the market for oil,
which, through heavy "alien" duties, had fallen
in price from thirty pounds per barrel, to seven
teen, costing twenty-five to produce. He there
fore sailed for England in his own ship, the
"Maria," Captain Moers, July 4th, 1785, and af
ter visiting coast ports for a favorable location,
determined to settle at Falmouth. It is stated
by his descendant, Captain T. R. Rodman, that
the "Maria" was built in 1782 for a privateer,
and in 1 86 1 was still at sea, whaling.
But the Quakers had reckoned without their
host. William Pitt, Chancellor of the Excheq
uer, at the time but twenty-seven years of age,
delayed for four months permission to pursue
this profitable industry, and at the end of that
time declined altogether.
The disappointed traders, therefore, betook
themselves to Dunkirk, France, where the French
government granted all the privileges desired
and others besides. The Dunkirk partnership
consisted of William Rotch, his son Benjamin
(who never returned to America) and his son-
in-law, Samuel Rodman. The business was car
ried on for some years, eventually dying out from
the lack of whales in accessible seas. William
Rotch came home in 1787, visiting France again

256 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
for four years in 1790. In 1794 he returned
permanently to America, and finally died in New
Bedford in 1828. His ship the "Bedford," Cap
tain Moers, who had sailed with the owner, in
the "Maria," is said to have flown the first Amer
ican flag in the Downs, England, after the peace,
on February 3d, 1783. She was reported at the
Custom House on the 6th and Barnard says 1
"She was not allowed regular entry until some
consultation had taken place between the Com
missioners of the Customs and the Lords of
Council, on account of the many acts of Parlia
ment against the rebels of America. She was
loaded with four hundred and eighty-seven butts
of whale oil, was American built, manned
wholly by American seamen, and belonged to the
Island of Nantucket, in Massachusetts. This is
the first vessel which has displayed the thirteen
rebellious stripes in any British port."
A like honor is claimed for a Philadelphia ship,
the "William Penn," Captain Josiah, upon what
seems the first-hand authority of the Captain's
wife, who told the historian, Watson, who
records it.2
William Rotch at the time of the Revolution,
says of the Quakers on Nantucket:
1 " Cyclopoedia of United States History," vol. I, 493.
2 Watson's "Annals of Philadelphia," etc., 333.

THE QUAKERS AND. MIRABEAU 257
From the year 1775 to the end of the war we were in
continual embarrassments. Our vessels were captured
by the English, and our small vessels and boats sent to
the continent for provisions, denied and sent back empty,
under pretense that we supplied the British, which was
without the least foundation. Prohibitory laws were
often made in consequence of these reports, unfounded
as they were. By this inhuman conduct we were some
times in danger of being starved.
At one time, W. Rotch took a lot of muskets
for debt, with the bayonets attached. He readily
sold the muskets to the whalers for killing wild
fowl, always, however, reserving the bayonets.
These were entirely forgotten, until an applica
tion was made from the mainland for them, for
use in the war. "The time," says William Rotch,
in relating the incident, "had now come to sup
port our testimony against war or forever aban
don it. As this very instrument was a severe
test, I would not hesitate, and therefore promptly
denied the applicant. My reasons for not fur
nishing the bayonets were demanded, and I an
swered, 'As this instrument is purposely made
and used for the destruction of mankind, and I
cannot put into one man's hand to destroy an
other that which I cannot use myself in the same
way, I refuse to comply with thy demand.' The
person left me, much dissatisfied. Others came,
and received the same denial. It made a great

258 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
noise in the country, and my life was threatened.
I would gladly have beaten them into pruning
hooks. As it was, I took an early opportunity
of throwing them into the sea." The Commit
tee of the General Court soon took him to Water-
town for an investigation. He says, "I gave a
full account of my proceedings, and closed it by
saying : T sank them into the bottom of the sea.
I did it from principle. I have ever been glad
that I had done it. If I have done wrong, I am
to be pitied.' The chairman of the committee,
one Major Hawley (a worthy character), then
addressed the committee and said: 'I believe
Mr. Rotch has given us a candid account of the
affair, and every man has a right to act con
sistently with his religious principles. But I
am sorry we cannot have the bayonets, for we
want them very much.' The Major was de
sirous of knowing more of our Friends' prin
ciples, on which I informed him as far as he
inquired. One of the committee (Judge Paine),
in a pert manner, observed, 'Then, your prin
ciples are passive obedience and non-resistance.'
I replied, 'No, my friend; our principles are
active obedience or passive suffering.' I passed
through no small trial on account of my bay
onets." This may be matched with a more recent in-

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 259
stance of Quaker principle of the old type, strong
and inflexible in a question of duty. It is that
of J. E. Rhoads & Sons, of Philadelphia,
manufacturers of leather belting, who not long
since declined to submit bids for a contract to
supply belting to the Navy and War Depart
ments. The head of the firm, Jonathan E.
Rhoads, is a brother of the late Dr. James E.
Rhoads, for some years President of Bryn Mawr
College. The separation in 18 12 of the town of
Fairhaven from William Rotch's town of New
Bedford, across the Acushnet River, was caused
by differences, on the points of peace and war,
between the Quaker community and Fairhaven.
The "Free Ships and Sailors' Rights" of the lat
ter proved irreconcilable with Quaker ideas of
submission. There were at this time among the Camisards
in France, certain people who disapproved of war,
and in other respects resembled the Quakers.
These were chiefly in the Cevennes, notably at
Congenies. During the war between France and
England consequent upon the American Revolu
tion, a Quaker named Fox was part owner of two
luggers, which, despite his resistance, were pri
vateers and took two prizes. The Quaker, find
ing himself helpless, took his own share, amount
ing to £1500, and invested it. When the war

260 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ceased, he advertized in the Gazette de France for
the owners of the captured vessels. This account
came to the body of Camisards, descendants of
the original Huguenots, who held similar views
upon war, and were greatly impressed by the
action of Friend Fox. Through this incident,
the whole French Community of Camisards at
Congenies became Quakers.1
Not long after this there arose several civil and
religious questions involving both the Friends at
Congenies, and those in the settlement of William
Rotch at Dunkirk. These concerned the regis
tration of births, deaths and marriages, oaths,
religious liberty, and military service. Both bod
ies of people united in a petition to the French As
sembly for recognition of their rights. "The
Respectful Petition of the Christian Society of
Friends called Quakers" was prepared by Wil
liam Rotch, and translated and presented to the
august body in the Chamber of Deputies, by Jean
de Marsillac, one of the Quakers from Congen-
1 See the " London Friend," III, p. 78, for an interesting ac
count of these people. Paul Cadognan, in 1769, seems first to
have heard of the English Friends when in Holland and England.
The son of the Dr. Fox who went to Paris for his father, then
in feeble health, to adjust the payments referred to, received
from the French Camisards a letter of fraternal greeting, ad
dressed : " The Quakers of Congenies-Calviston to the virtuous
Fox," Nismes, 3d April, 1785. Anthony Benezet, the famous
philanthropist, was of this community.

d >
Hi

o s

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 261
ies, later to become well known in Philadelphia.
He had been the bearer of the salutation from
the Camisards to Fox in Paris, in 1785, which
was signed by forty Frenchmen. He was also the
author of a little Life of William Penn, published
in French in 1791, the year of the present peti
tion. He came to America in 1795 when, in 91210.
of that year, a Friend records in his diary, — "I
went to Philadelphia and attended the Meeting
for Sufferings, at which was John Marsillac, a
Frenchman, who seems conscientiously concerned
for the support of Truth upon its right foun
dation." x '
William Rotch himself thus describes the scene
before the Assembly, at the time of the presenta
tion ; —
' Early in 1791 [Second month ioth] I was called
upon, with my son, to attend the National Assembly at
Paris. We were joined by John Marsillac in presenting
the petition to that body for some privileges and ex
emptions connected with our religious principles. The
petition was dravm up by John Marsillac before we
reached Paris, and notice given that it must be presented
next day. On perusing it we found some material al
terations necessary, and, in some instances, it was dif
ficult to express in French the alterations we had made
in English without losing their force. My not under-
1 Journal of William Blakey, Friends' Miscellany, IV, p. 123.
2 From the Journal of William Rotch.

262 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
standing the French language, it was impossible to have
such expressions, as I thought necessary, inserted; and
the time was so short that we were obliged to let it pass
with much fewer amendments than I wished.
The hour was come for presenting it, and the previous
notice given of the " Quaker petition," I suppose, drew
every member in town to his seat. The galleries for
spectators were filled, and many could not be accom
modated; nor did we wonder at the curiosity, consider
ing the novelty of the subject.
We had been with Brissot de Warville, Clavier and
some others, looking over the petition until the latest
moment, and must now proceed to the Assembly. They,
with several others, had come to accompany us, and just
as we were moving some one observed, " You have no
cockades; you must put them on." We told them we
could not. It was a distinguishing badge we could not
make use of. " But," said they, " it is required by law
to prevent distinctions, that people may not be abused,
for their lives are in danger without them." There was
always a large body of the lower classes about the As
sembly that we had to pass through. We replied that
we could not do it, whatever might be the consequences ;
that we were willing to go as far as we could, and if
stopped we must submit to it. We saw that our friends
were full of fear for our safety. We set out with no
small apprehension, but we trusted in that Power which
can turn the hearts of men as a watercourse is turned.
We passed through the great concourse without inter
ruption, and reached the waiting room of the Assembly.
A messenger informed the President of our arrival, and
we were immediately called to the bar.
John Marsillac read the petition, with Brissot at his

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 263
elbow to correct him in his emphasis, which he frequently
did, unperceived, I believe, by all except ourselves. At
the close of every subject there was a general clapping
of hands, and the officers endeavoring to hush them.
The hushing I thought was hissing, from my ignorance
of the language, and I apprehended all was going wrong,
until better informed. After the reading was concluded,
the President Mirabeau read his answer. The clapping
was repeated at the end of every subject. At the close
the President said : " The Assembly invites you to stay
its sitting." As we were passing to the seats assigned to
us, a person touched Benjamin and said, " I am rejoiced
to see something of your principles brought before the
Assembly." He did not know who he was. After we
were seated, several members came to us for conversa
tion on our principles. We remained till the Assembly
rose.
The Respectful Petition of the Christian Society
of Friends called Quakers, delivered before
The National Assembly, Thursday, ioth. Feb
ruary, 1 79 1.1
Respectable Legislators,
The French nation having appointed you her legis
lators, and your hearts having been disposed to enact
wise laws, our minds have been deeply engaged to solicit
the extension of your justice and benevolence to the
Society of peaceable Christians to which we belong.
You know that in several states of Europe and North

1 Prepared by John de Marsillac, under the direction of Wil
liam Rotch.

264 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
America, there are a great number of Christians known
by the name of Quakers, who profess to serve God ac
cording to the ancient simplicity of the primitive Chris
tian church. Several towns and villages of Languedoc
contain a number of families attached to this primitive
Christianity. Many other families, which came from
America, have settled at Dunkirk, under the auspices of
the late government, in consequence of the invitation
given to the inhabitants of Nantucket, for the purpose of
extending the French Fisheries.
These Islanders have proved themselves worthy of
your kindness by their success ; and the same motive will
induce them to continue to deserve it. Concerns, how
ever, of far greater moment, have this day brought us
before you.
In an age signal for the increase of knowledge, you
have been struck with this truth, that conscience, the
immediate relation of man with his Creator, cannot be
subject to the power of man ; and this principle of jus
tice hath induced you to decree a general liberty for all
forms of worship. This is one of the noblest decrees of
the French legislature. You have set a great example
to nations which continue to persecute for religion,
and sooner or later, we hope, they will follow it.
We are come to implore this spirit of justice, that we
may be suffered, without molestation, to conform to
some principles, and to use some forms, to which the
great family of Friends called Quakers, have been in
violably attached ever since their rise.
Great persecutions have been inflicted on us, on ac
count of one of these principles, but to no purpose.
Providence hath enabled us to surmount them, without
using violence. We mean the principle which forbids

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 265
us to take arms, and kill men on any pretence; a prin
ciple consistent with the holy Scriptures : " Render
not," said Christ, " evil for evil, but do good to your
enemies." Would to heaven this principle were universally
adopted! All mankind becoming one family, would be
brethren united by acts of kindness. Generous French
men, you are convinced of its truth; you have already
begun to reduce it to practice ; you have decreed never
to defile your hands with blood in pursuit of conquest.
This measure brings you — it brings the whole world — a
step towards universal peace. You cannot, therefore,
behold with an unfriendly eye, men who accelerate it by
their example. They have proved in Pennsylvania, that
vast establishments may be formed, raised, and sup
ported without military preparations, and without shed
ding human blood.
We submit to your laws, and only desire the privilege
of being here, as in other countries, the brethren of all
men — never to take up arms against any. England,
and the United States of America, where our brethren
are far more numerous than in France, allow us peace
ably to follow this great principle of our religion, nor do
they esteem us useless members of the community.
We have another request to make, which we hope you
will not refuse us, because it flows from those prin
ciples of justice to which you do homage.
In our registers of births, marriages, and burials, we
have preserved the simplicity of the primitive church.
Our maxims forbid useless forms, and limit us to those
which are necessary for ascertaining the terms of human
life, consistently with the good order of society. We
request that our simple registers may be deemed suffi-

266 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
cient to legalize our marriages and births, and authenti
cate our deaths, by causing a declaration thereof to be
made before a magistrate.
Finally, we request that we may be exempted from all
oaths, Christ having expressly forbidden them in these
words, " You have heard that it hath been said by them
of old time, thou shalt perform thine oaths; but I say
unto you, swear not at all ; but let your yea be yea, and
your nay, nay."
Wise legislators, you are persuaded as well as we,
that an oath is no assurance of sincerity ; that it can give
no additional force to the declaration of an honest man,
and doth not deter a perjurer. You admit that an oath
is but a peculiar way of making a declaration — as it
were a peculiar mode of speech. We hope, therefore,
you will not refuse to hear us in ours. It is that of our
common Master — that of Christ.
We trust that we shall not be suspected of a wish to
evade the great purpose of the civic oath. We are earn
est to declare in this place, that we will continue true
to the constitution which you have formed; we cherish
and respect it, and it is our full purpose to follow its
laws in all their purity ; on the other hand, if our words,
if our evidences are found to be false, we willingly sub
mit to the penalties on false witnesses and perjurers.
Can you, respectable legislators, hesitate to grant our
request? Cast your eyes on the history of our Society,
in the countries in which we are established. More than
a century hath elapsed, and we have never been found in
any conspiracy against the government. Our temperate
rule of life forbids ambition and luxury, and the pur
pose of our watchful discipline is to preserve us in the

After the engraving l>y Weber.
Honore-Gabriel Riquetti, Comte de Mirabeau.

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 267
practice of those manners to which we were led by the
exhortations and example of our Founder.
We esteem employment a duty enjoined on all ; and this
persuasion renders us active and industrious. In this
respect therefore our society may prove useful to France.
By favouring us you encourage industry. Industry now
seeks those countries where the honest industrious man
will be under no apprehensions of seeing the produce of
a century of labour snatched away, in an instant, by the
hand of persecution.
Now that France is becoming the asylum of liberty,
of equal law and of brotherly kindness, and adds to these
sources of prosperity, perfect liberty for every individual
to obey the dictates of his conscience, in relation to the
Almighty — what prospects of advantage will arise, to
induce our brethren who inhabit less happy climes, to
settle in France, a country favoured by nature, as soon
as they learn that you have granted them the same civil
and religious liberty which they enjoy in England and
the United States of America !
Such is the respectful petition we have found our
hearts disposed to present to you, for the relief of our
brethren in France, and for the good of a country which
we love. We hope among your important engagements
in reforming this great empire, and multiplying the
sources of its happiness, you will extend your justice
and regard to us and our children: it will bring upon
you the reward of the Almighty, and the love of virtuous
men. At the close of January, 1791, Mirabeau, by an
act of tardy justice, had been elected forty-fourth

268 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
President of the Assembly. In this position he
had occasion to make several remarkable re
sponses to addresses and deputations. On the
tenth of February, he replied to this deputation of
Quakers who asked permission to practice their
religion in France, and to establish for themselves
their own civil government, after forms tolerated
in England and America. Mirabeau's reply was
as follows : —
Quakers who have fled from persecutors and tyrants,
cannot fail to feel confidence in addressing legislators
who have been the first in France to reduce to legal
form the rights of man; and France regenerated — ¦
France, resting on the bosom of that peace which she
reveres with an inviolable respect, and which she de
sires for all other nations, — may herself become a happy
Pennsylvania! As a philanthropic system, your princi
ples win our admiration. They remind us that the first
cradle of every society was a family, united by its cus
toms (mceurs), its affections and its needs. Assuredly,
the greatest institutions should be those which would
create anew the human race and approach most closely to
this primitive, virtuous original.
The examination of your principles, considered as reli
gious opinions, does not concern us. This we make
clear. There is a kind of property that no man should
be obliged to share in common with any other — the
aspiration of his soul, the freedom of his thought. This
sacred domain places man in a hierarchy more elevated
than any social state. As citizen, he adopts a form of
government ; as a thinking being, he has no country but

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 269
the universe. As religious principles, your doctrines
will not be the subject of our deliberations. The rela
tion of each man to the Almighty is independent of all
political institutions. Between God and the heart of
man, what Government dare interpose? It is as social
laws (maxims) that your claims shall be submitted to
the discussion of the legislative body. It will examine
whether the forms you observe in order to establish
the facts of birth and marriage, give sufficient authen
ticity to this relation of the human race which the dis
tinction of property renders indispensable, independent
of good morals; it will discuss whether a declaration
whose falsity is submitted to the same punishments
established against false witnessing and perjury, does not
in itself constitute a veritable oath.
Estimable citizens ! you deceive yourselves. You have
already taken that civic oath which every man worthy to
be free regards as a privilege rather than a duty. You
have not called upon God as your witness, but you have
appealed to your own conscience, and a pure conscience
is as a sky without a cloud. Is not this part of man a
ray of the divine? You say, moreover, that an article of
your religion forbids you to take up arms or to kill,
under any pretext whatever — doubtless a more beauti
ful philosophical principle than those which give in some
sort, this cult to humanity. But take care lest self-
defence and its like be not also a religious duty. Would
you have succumbed to tyrants? Since we have ob
tained liberty for you and for ourselves, why refuse to
preserve it? Would your brothers in Pennsylvania, had
they been less distant from the savages, have permitted
the destruction of their wives, their children and their
old men, before resorting to arms ? And stupid tyrants,

270 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
ferocious conquerors — are they not also savages?
The Assembly will, in its wisdom, discuss all your de
mands. But if I ever again meet a Quaker, I shall
say to him — " My brother, if thou hast the right to be
free, thou hast also the right to prevent any from mak
ing thee a slave. Since thou lovest thy kind, do not
permit them to be overcome by tyranny; this would be
to kill them thyself. Thou desirest peace. Well! It
is feebleness which makes its appeal to war. A general
resistance would result in universal Peace ! *
The death of Mirabeau occurred less than two
months after this striking reply to the Quakers,
and the terrible catastrophe of the reign of terror
followed almost at once. William Rotch escaped
to England only two days before the execution of
Louis XVI. He spent a year with his family in
London, and returned as we have seen to Amer
ica, in 1794. "After the fall of Robespierre the
family set up a successful whaling business at
New Bedford, Massachusetts.

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 271
FRENCH TEXT OF THE PETITION.
(See page 263)
1 Petition respectueuse des Amis de la Societe
Chretienne, Appeles Quakers, Prononcee a
FAssemblee Nationale, le Jeudi 10 Fevrier
1791.2
Respectables Legislateurs,
La Nation Francpise vous ayant nommes ses Legis
lateurs, & vos ames ayant ete disposers a lui donner des
loix sages, nos cceurs ont ete vivement excites a solliciter
votre justice & votre bienfaisance, pour la Societe de
Chretiens paisibles a laquelle nous appartenons.
Vous savez qu'il existe dans plusieurs etats de l'Eu-
rope & de l'Amerique Septentrionale un grand nombre
de Chretiens, connus sous le nom de Quakers, qui font
profession de servir Dieu suivant I'antique simplicite de
la primitive figlise Chretienne. Plusieurs Villes & Vil
lages du Languedoc renferment nombre de families at-
tachees a ce Christianisme primitif. Plusieurs autres
families parties de l'Amerique sont venues s'etablir a
Dunkerque, sous les auspices de 1'a.ncien Gouvernement ;
elles y sont venues sur les invitations adressees aux
habitans de I'isle de Nantucket, dans le but d'etendre
les Pecheries Francoises.
Ces insulaires ont prouve qu'ils meritoient vos bien-
1 " Mirabeau : Sa Vie, Ses Opinions, Ses Discours," ed. A. Ver-
morel, 1898. Bibliotheque Nationale. Both the petition and the
reply were printed by Bowdoin, printer to the Assembly.
2 London. Printed by James Phillips, George- Yard, Lombard
St

272 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
faits par leurs succes, & le meme zele les portera a les
meriter encore; mais d'autres interets bien plus grands
nous amenent aujourd'hui devant vous.
Dans le siecle ou les lumieres ont fait de rapides
progres, vous avez senti que la conscience, ce rapport
immediat de l'homme a son Createur, ne pouvoit pas
etre assujettie a la puissance des Hommes. Ce senti
ment de justice vous a portes a decreter la liberte gen
erate de tous les cultes. C'est un des plus beaux Decrets
de la Legislation Frangoise; vous avez donne un grand
exemple aux nations qui persecutent encore les opinions
religieuses, & nous esperons qu'elles le suivront tot ou
tard. C'est cet esprit de justice que nous venons invoquer
ici, pour qu'on nous laisse suivre en paix quelques prin-
cipes & quelque formes, auxquelles la grande famille
des Amis, appeles Quakers, est restee inviolablement at
tached depuis son origine.
Un de ces principes nous a vainement attire de vives
persecutions; la Providence nous a donne la force de les
surmonter sans user de violence: c'est celui qui nous
defend de prendre les armes & de tuer les hommes sous
aucun pretexte ; principe qui s'accorde avec les ecritures
saintes ; Christ ayant dit : " Ne rendez pas le mal pour le
mal, mais faites de bien a vos ennemis."
Eh! plut au Ciel que ce principe fut universellement
adopte ! Tous les hommes ne faisant plus qu'une famille,
ne seroient plus que des freres unis par la bienfaisance.
Vous en etes convaincus, vous, genereux Francois ; vous
avez deja commence a le mettre en pratique ; vous avez
decrete de ne jamais souiller vos mains dans Ie sang pour
des conquetes. Ce pas vous conduit — il conduit le

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 273
monde entier vers la paix universelle. Vous ne verrez
done pas avec des yeux ennemis les hommes qui l'ac-
celerent par leur exemple : ils ont prouve dans la Penn-
sylvanie qu'on peut former, elever & soutenir de vastes
etablissements sans appareil militaire, & sans verser le
sang des humains.
Soumis a vos loix, nous ne vous demandons que de
pouvoir etre ici, commes ailleurs, les freres de tous les
hommes, & de ne jamais armer nos mains contre aucuns.
LAngleterre & les Etats Unis de l'Amerique, ou nos
freres sont beaucoup plus nombreux qu'en France, nous
laissent suivre paisiblement ce grand principe de notre
religion, sans nous regarder comme des membres inutiles
a la societe.
II est encore une demande ; & nous esperons que vous
ne nous la refuserez pas, parcequ'elle decoule des prin-
cipes de justice auxquels vous rendez hommage.
Nous avons conserve dans nos enregistremens de nais-
sances, de mariages & de sepultures, la simplicite de la
primitive eglise : nos maximes nous def endent les formes
qui sont inutiles; elles nous font une loi de nous borner
a celles qui sont indispensables pour constater ces epo-
ques de la vie, dans leur rapport avec l'ordre social.
Nous demandons que nos simples enregistremens suffi-
sent pour legitimer nos mariages et naissances, & con
stater nos deces, en faisant faire une declaration devant
les Magistrats.
Nous demandons enfin a etre dispenses de toute for-
mule de serment. Christ nous les a expressement de-
fendus en ces termes : " Vous avez appris qu'il a ete dit
aux Anciens, vous acquitterez vos sermens; & moi, je
vous dis, ne jurez en aucune maniere, mais que votre
oui, soit oui; que votre non, soit non."

274 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Sages Legislateurs, vous etes persuades, comme nous,
que la formule du serment n'ajoute rien a la bonne foi,
qu'elle n' ajoute rien a la declaration de l'honnete homme,
& qu'elle n'effraye pas les parjures. Vous convenez que
le serment n'est qu'une maniere particuliere d'exprimer
une declaration, que ce n'est qu'une langue particuliere.
Nous esperons que vous ne refuserez pas de nous en
tendre dans la notre ; c'est celle de notre commun Maitre,
c'est celle de Christ.
Nous esperons qu'on ne nous accusera pas de vouloir
nous soustraire au grand but du serment civique: nous
nous empressons de declarer ici que nous resterons fideles
a la Constitution que vous avez etablie: nous la cheris-
sons, nous la respectons, & notre intention est d'en suivre
les loix dans toute leur purete; d'un autre cote, si nos
paroles, si nos depositions judiciaires ne sont pas trouvees
con formes a la verite, nous nous soumettons a la peine
due aux faux temoins & aux parjures.
Balanceriez-vous, respectables Legislateurs, a accueiller
notre petition? Jettez les yeux sur l'histoire de notre
Societe. Dans les pays ou elle est Etablie, plus d'un
siecle s'est ecoule sans qu'on nous ait jamais trouves
compris dans aucune conspiration contre les Gouvern-
ements dans lesquels nous etions etablis. Notre severe
morale nous defend l'ambition & le luxe ; une surveillance
rigide & domestique les uns envers les autres, a pour but
de nous maintenir dans la pratique & les moeurs que notre
Fondateur nous a prechees par ses discours & son ex-
emple. Le travail est a nos yeux un devoir indispensable,
ordonne a tous les hommes. Ce precepte nous a rendus
actifs & industrieux. Ainsi, notre Societe convient a la
France sous ce rapport. En nous accueillant, vous ap-

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 275
pellerez l'industrie. Elle cherche maintenant les con-
trees ou l'honnete homme laborieux ne craint pas de voir
la persecution enlever, en un quart-d'heure, les fruits
de cent ans de travaux.
Maintenant que la France va devenir l'asyle de la
liberte, de l'egalite des droits, & de l'heureuse fraternite;
qu'elle joint a ces sources de prosperite, la liberte pour
chaque individu, de suivre sa conscience dans ses rapports
avec l'Etre Supreme ; enfin un pays favorise par la Nature ;
que d'avantages n'appelleront pas en France ceux de nos
freres qui existent dans des climats moins favorises, des
qu'ils sauront que vous leur accordez la meme liberte
civile & religieuse dont ils jouissent en Angleterre, & dans
les Etats Unis d'Amerique!
Telle est la petition respectueuse que nos coeurs ont
ete excites a vous faire pour la paix de nos freres de
France, & pour la prosperite d'une Patrie qui nous est
chere. Nous esperons qu' au milieu de vos grands
travaux pour regenerer cet Empire & multiplier les
sources de son bonheur, vous etendrez sur nous & nos
enfans votre justice & votre bienfaisance ; elles vous
meriteront les recompenses du Createur & l'affection des
hommes vertueux.
French Text of Mirabeau's Reply.
(See page 268.)
" Les Quakers, qui ont fui les persecuteurs et les ty-
rans, ne pouvoient que s'adresser avec confiance aux legis
lateurs qui, les premiers en France, ont reduit en loix les
droits de I'homme ; et la France regeneree, la France au
sein de la paix dont elle se commandera tou jours l'in-
violable respect, et qu'elle desire a toutes les autres na-

2y6 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
tions, peut devenir aussi une heureuse Pennsylvanie.
Comme systeme philanthropique, vos principes obtien-
nent notre admiration; ils nous rapellent que le premier
berceau de chaque societe fut une famille reunie par ses
mceurs, par ses affections et par ses besoins ; et sans doute,
les plus sublimes institutions seroient celles qui, creant
une seconde fois l'espece humaine, la rapprocheroient de
cette premiere et vertueuse origine. L'examen de vos
principes consideres comme des opinions, ne nous regarde
plus. Nous avons prononce. II est un propriete qu'au-
cun homme ne voudroit mettre en commun: les mouve-
mens de son ame et l'elan de sa pensee. Ce domaine sacre
place I'homme dans une hierarchie plus relevee que l'etat
social. Citoyen, il adopte une forme de gouvernement ;
etre pensant, il n'a de patrie que l'univers. Comme
principes religieux, votre doctrine ne sera point Fobjet
de nos deliberations. Les rapports de chaque homme
avec l'Etre d' en haut sont independans de toute institu
tion politique. Entre Dieu et le coeur de chaque homme,
quel gouvernement oseroit etre fintermediaire ? Comme
maximes sociales, vos reclamations doivent etre soumises
a la discussion du corps legislatif. II examinera si la
forme que vous observez pour constater les naissances et
les mariages, donne assez d'authenticite a. cette filiation
de l'espece humaine, que la distinction des proprietes rend
indispensable, independamment des bonnes mceurs. II
discutera si une declaration dont la faussete seroit sou-
mise aux peines etablies contre les faux temoins et les
parjures, ne seroit pas un veritable faux serment.
Estimables citoyens, vous l'avez deja prete ce serment
civique, que tout homme digne d'etre libre, a regarde
plutot comme une jouissance que comme un devoir;

THE QUAKERS AND MIRABEAU 277
vous n'avez pas pris Dieu a temoin, mais vous, avez
atteste votre conscience ; et une conscience pure, n'est elle
pas aussi un ciel sans nuages ? Cette partie de I'homme
n'est elle pas un rayon de la divinite ? Vous dites encore,
qu'un article de votre religion vous defend de prendre
les armes, et de tuer, sous quelque pretexte que ce soit.
C'est sans doute un beau principe philosphique que celui
qui donne en quelque sorte un culte a l'humanite; mais
prenez garde que la defense de soi-meme et de ses
semblables, ne soit aussi un devoir religieux. Vous
auriez done succombe sous les tyrans ! Puisque nous
avons conquis la liberte pour vous et pour nous, pourquoi
refuseriez-vous de la conserver? Vos freres de Pennsyl-
vanie, s' ils avoient ete moins eloignes des sauvages, aur-
oient-ils laisse egorger leurs femmes, leurs enfans et
leurs viellards, plutot que de repousser la violence? Et
les stupides tyrans, les conquerans feroces, ne sont ils pas
aussi des sauvages ?
L'assemblee discutera toutes vos demandes dans sa
sagesse; et si jamais je rencontre un Quaker, je lui dirai:
"Mon frere, si tu as le droit d'etre libre, tu as le droit
d'empecher qu'on te fasse esclave. Puisque tu aimes ton
semblable, ne le laisse pas egorger par la tyrannie: ce
seroit le tuer toi-meme. Tu veux la paix! Eh bien!
c'est la foibles se qui appelle la guerre: une resistance
generate seroit la paix universelle.
L'assemblee vous invite a assister a sa seance."

QUAKER LOYALTY

279

CHAPTER VII
QUAKER LOYALTY
" Thou shalt not speak evil of the Ruler of thy peo
ple." The foregoing glance at Quakerism in its rela
tion to the civil government, its view of the law,
and its duty toward God and man — the latter
both singly and collectively — will better enable us
for a moment to return to Quaker loyalty before
passing altogether from the subject. The per
sonal service of Richard Carver, the Quaker, to
Charles II on his escape from the battle of Wor
cester, although seldom heard of, is quite typical
of the attitude of Quakerism toward its King. It
is worth while to emphasize this loyalty, for much
has been written of the Quakers' indifferent posi
tion. Conservatism is sure to express itself thus,
and it is difficult to understand why so many
readers have assumed that the Quakers were reb
els during the period of the civil wars in England,
while the same people have been among the first
to reproach them for being Tories during the
American Revolution. Submission to authority
281

282 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
is the very key-note of Quakerism in things polit
ical — a point as strongly emphasized as is the
denial of any authority except the spirit of God
himself in matters dealing with the realm of the
soul. Modern life is changing this now, and
Quakers take another and freer attitude toward
political life; but we are dealing here with
past history, and facts only, and the above dis
tinction, while it may seem a curious one to be
drawn by the same sect in two important spheres
of activity, was drawn by them, nevertheless.
The King, after Worcester, in 1651, escaped
to Boscobel House, where he remained for a time
in hiding, some forty days being spent in moving
about under various disguises. His friends fi
nally engaged a smack to take him to France from
Brighton, then an inconsiderable fishing village.
The account printed in the "Boscobel Tracts,"
written by Charles' own hand, does not mention
Carver by name, but other first-hand narratives
tell us that the King fully acknowledged his in
debtedness to the Quaker. They carried the mas
ter of the ship behind one of the King's escort on
horseback; when they arrived, the tide was out,
and the vessel of sixty tons was dry. Lord Wil
mot and the King got into her with the help of a
ladder, and lay down in the little cabin until the
tide came up and they sailed for the coast of

QUAKER LOYALTY 283
France. This they reached next day, finding
themselves before the harbor of Feschamp. "Just
as the ebb of the tide was made," says the King,
"we espied a vessel to leeward of us, which, by
her nimble working, I suspected to be an Ostend
privateer. Upon which I went to my Lord Wil
mot, telling him my opinion of that ship, and pro
posing to him our going ashore in the cockboat."
This was done, and Carver, who was the mate,
carried the King ashore on his shoulders. John
Grove was the master of the vessel.
The Quaker does not appear to have made him
self known to the King for some years, until he
obtained an audience in order to plead for the re
lease of certain of his sect who were suffering im
prisonment. The original letter of Ellis Hookes,
Clerk of London Yearly Meeting, is still pre
served, dated nth month, 16th, 1669, which de
scribes the interview with the King.1 "The
King," writes Hookes, "knew him again, and was
very friendly to him, and told him he remembered
him, and of several things that were done in the
ship at the same time." Carver told the King
that he had not come forward before because he
had "peace and satisfaction in himself; that he did
*In Devonshire House, London. The letter is given in full
in "The Fells of Swarthmoor Hall," by Maria Webb, p. 232.
See also " Select Miscellanies," V, 251-2.

284 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
what he did to relieve a man in distress." He
then told the King that he had with him a list of
one hundred and ten Quakers who had been pre-
munired and had lain in prison already six years,
and he desired nothing but their liberty. But this
appeal, strong as it was, resulted in the release of
but six. Once more Richard Carver appeared be
fore the King in his prosperity, in the effort under
George Whitehead in 1672 to obtain the release of
prisoners who were Quakers. When Royal clem
ency had been obtained, sufferers of other sects
appealed to the Quakers, and were assisted to the
utmost in their power by the insertion of their
prisoners' names. With great labor the cum
brous document was passed all over the country,
and the Quakers obtained the release of four hun
dred and seventy-one of their own number, be
sides many Baptists and Independents, among
the latter of whom was John Bunyan.
Of course one calls to mind the real friendship
which existed between James II and William
Penn. While this friendship was regarded with
hostility by many, from widely differing points of
view, the intimacy with such a broad-minded
Christian philanthropist was greatly to the credit
of the King. We know that he and the Queen did
not lack for friends at St. Germain, however
much their hearts longed for the lost kingdom.

QUAKER LOYALTY 285
Whole families followed James II to his exiled
court. Even the Queen's coachman, who had
once served Cromwell in that capacity, drove her
state coach at St. Germain until he died of old
age. English ladies of the bedchamber, like Lady
Isabella Wentworth and Mrs. Dawson, continued
true to her when it became the fashion to revile
her. Among these loyal friends we find Gulielma
Penn, the first wife of the Founder of Pennsyl
vania, who, we are told, paid a yearly visit to
France, carrying with her a collection of all the
little presents which the friends of the King and
Queen could muster. Mrs. Penn was cordially
received by them, although she always main
tained that the Revolution had been inevitable.
The attentions she showed the Royal family in
their exile she wished them to understand came
from her personal regard for them.1
It was perfectly natural for Thomas Story,
upon his return to his native land after a pro
longed absence in America, where he served as
Keeper of the Rolls for Pennsylvania, to appear at
a London meeting and pray for the King. The
war of coalition was just over, and so word went
about that Story was no Jacobite, although he dis
tinctly denied any especial interest in the "thrones
!Mrs. Strickland, "Queens of England:" Mary Beatrice of
Modena.

286 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
and dignities of the world," as he put it. It is in
teresting also to find John Wesley's mother
stoutly refusing to say amen to her husband's
prayer for King William, and to discover her liv
ing apart from him for twelve months rather than
be disloyal to King James II, although she did not
admire him.
Stephen Crisp, the Quaker preacher, urged
Friends to avoid the terms "Jemmite" and T'Bill-
ite," current when James was exiled and William
came to the throne. There was at this time a
strong diversity of political opinion among the
Quakers themselves, known sometimes as "Mead-
ites" and Pennites;" the general sense of the
body went with William Mead in recognizing
William III, and the principles of the Revolution
of 1688. A few followed William Penn in his
sympathies with James II. It is a proof of the so
lidity of Quaker belief that there was not at this
time any open division in that body, although
there was much disturbance from this cause.
Few Quaker historians have sufficiently recog
nized political conditions at this period, which is
that of Penn's retirement and the "Fruits of Soli
tude." Crisp, it may be added, went to Germany
in 1667, where, in deference to him as a man
highly respected by the authorities, he was instru
mental in obtaining from the Palsgrave the re-

-vN> ttnr; W€rp pfcpmii fit attorn adcf?,
'-Ar c5iv|y JLctim rjf.&y ifjrwtt mchV (o rfui>
w{? iefortttv- $qjS4.*Wp& if)m jcmc <*1ir< ft iii- -

/¦"Yum '¦Anabaptislkum et Enthusiasticum Pantheon," etc. Hamburg, 1706.
Discourtesy of Quakers and Freethinkers toward
King Charles II, of England.

QUAKER LOYALTY 287
mission of the tax of four Rix-dollars, imposed
upon each Quaker family. Caricature did not
spare the Quakers in the matter of respect to sov
ereigns. It is unnecessary to report here the fa
miliar anecdotes as to "hat-honor"; two unusual
prints from a rare folio will suffice.1
The original draft from which the Sheriff read
the Proclamation of King James II in Philadel
phia is still preserved. Notice was given by the
order of the Clerk of Council, R. Angelo, nth,
3d Mo., 1685, that: "Our present Sovereign
King James the Second will be published in the
Front Street upon the Delaware River, Over
against the Governour's Gate to Morrow Morn
ing at the Ninth hour, upon the Wringing of the
Bell." The President and most of the Provincial
Council, who signed the Proclamation, were
Quakers.2 Philadelphia, the 12th of the 3mo., 1685.
Pennsylvania. We the president & the provincial Counsell accom
panied wth the representatives of the freemen in As
sembly & divers magistrates officers & other persons of
note do in duty & concurrence wth our neighbouring
provinces sollemly publish and declare that James duke
of york & albany by the decease of our late soveraigne
1 From the " Quaker Pantheon," etc., 1706. Published in Ger
many in derision of the Dissenting Sects.
2 Penna. Magazine of History and Biography, April, 1904 (242).

288 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Charles the 2nd is now become our lawfull leige lord &
king James 2nd of England Scotland franc & Ireland
& amongst other of his dominions in America of the
Provinc of Pennsylvania & its Territory king to whome
we acknowledg faithfull & constant obedienc hartily
wishing him a happy raigne in health peace & prosperity
And so god save the king
Tho Loyd president
Tho. Holmes Peter Aldricks
Christo Taylor Willm Darvall
Phinehas Pemberton Luke Watson
Willm Frampton Jon. Roades
Willm Southerbe Ed. Green
Jon. Simpcock
Jon. Cann
Willm Wood
Tho. Janney
Jon. Barnes Richd Ingelo
Clark Counsell
A formal assertion of loyalty was not always,
it seems, scrupulously attended to by the Quakers
in power, although in practice none could be
more devoted than they. This was instanced
when, in October, 1689, arrived at Philadelphia
one Samuel Gillham, master of the ketch
"Crane," of Dartmouth, England, with a packet
signed "Shrewsbury." — "For His Ma'ties espe
ciall Service," &c. The Governor inquired if
there were instructions for proclaiming their Ma-

QUAKER LOYALTY 289
jesties, and ordered the royal message, calling
upon the people to prepare for war against the
French, to be publicly read. A lively discussion
took place at the Council meeting at the Gov
ernor's lodgings next morning, between Griffith
Jones, Quaker, and two others, as to the necessity
for proclaiming the new Sovereigns, in the ab
sence of orders. The Governor's proposal was
finally adopted, i.e. to appoint a Committee to
draw up a Declaration in the name of the Gov
ernor and Council, that, "all processes, warrants,
orders, &c, that usually pass in the King's name,
may hereafter be issued in their Ma'ties." The
Committee adjourned "until tomorrow at Seaven
of the Clock," at which unearthly hour they
brought forward a loyal declaration "to strictly
charge and command all the people and inhab
itants within this Government, to yield all due
and lawfull Obedience unto William and Mary,
King and Queen of England &c, as their lawful
King and Queen." x The agent of the Proprie
tors in Maryland at this time also took no steps
to proclaim William and Mary, and the delay
gave strength to the various rumors of Roman
Catholic plots and Indian conspiracies. The
Protestant revolution had disturbed the peace of
all the colonies.

1 Council Minute, 9 mo. 2d, 1689, Col. Records, Pa., I, 305.

290 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
For some time the formal proclamation seems
to have been overlooked, for in February, 1 700-1,
Edward Randolph, Surveyor General of Customs
in the Colonies, informed the Ministers in Eng
land "that Neither former Governours nor Penn
since his arrival here (Pennsylvania) have pro
claimed King William." The laws in accordance
with the order given above, had been adminis
tered for several years in the joint names of their
Majesties, but the Quakers were enemies to pomp,
and the allusion is to a formal declaration. The
Board of Trade for Pennsylvania in reporting to
Queen Anne, September, 1709, on the laws lately
passed in that province remark — "That in none
of the Acts of this province is there any clause for
renouncing the Pretender, or declaring their al
legiance to your Majesty; and therefore we hum
bly offer that your Majesty be pleased to signify
your pleasure to Mr. Penn, that he endeavor to
get a law passed for that purpose." William and
Mary were proclaimed by order of Governor
Blackwell.1 In the Dutch settlements in New York, letters
may be found from Leisler of New Amsterdam to
Bishop Burnet, representing the Quakers loyal
to James II.2 William Bromfield, Quaker, wrote
1 Pa. Col. Rees., I, 303-5.
2 New York Hist. Soe. Coll., vol. I, p. 38-9 (1858).

QUAKER LOYALTY 291
from Ostend, February, 1710-11 to Lord Dart
mouth, then Secretary of State, that for "con
science' sake toward God and without any self-in
terest, he had served the late King James II in his
exile during his life, and would have returned to
England upon the accession of Queen Anne, but
had been imprisoned by means of the represen
tations of Lord Middleton, then Secretary of the
late King, though Queen Mary had nothing to ob
ject against him." He offered if he were released,
to show the Queen how to obtain her ends at much
less expense of blood and treasure. That this
man was acquainted with secrets was probably the
cause of his misfortune, and Lord Middleton was
too well informed, says Macpherson, "not to
know that the Quakers were then deemed excel
lent negotiators!" 1
In the English war of 1744, the Quakers sup
plied woolen waistcoats to the soldiers in the
north. They waited on Sir William Yonge, Gen
eral Ligonier and other officers, with the offer
thus to equip the soldiers in His Majesty's service
at their own expense.2 The loyalty of Darlington
1 Macpherson, "Secret History of England," vol. I, 603. He
states the Quakers to have been "universally the frfends of
James II."
2 Langstaffe's Hist, of Darlington. Also, Souvenir Addreaae*
to King Edward VII, 1901, p. 75.

292 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Quakers was said to have been remarkable during
the rebellion, and at the time of the Duke of Cum
berland's march, the men from that place were
furnished with sixteen thousand woolen waist
coats in three or four days. They were made to
double over the breast, under the soldier's own
clothing. Some Quakers entertained them on the
march at their own houses. There is an old
rhyme commemorating the waistcoat incident. It
is hardly likely that the Quakers would thus have
aided the Pretender's troops.
It is to this same period that Dr. Johnson re
ferred when he reminded his friend Mr. Boyd
that they once dined together in 1745 at the house
of their friend, "Tom Cumming, the Quaker,"
who told the Doctor that "he would not fight, but
he would drive an ammunition cart!" Smollett
declares that the conquest of Senegal was entirely
due to this "honest Quaker" who conceived the
project, and was the principal promoter of the ex
pedition. If it was the first military plan of any
Quaker, it was the first expedition of this war
which had succeeded. It was the first, also, car
ried on without bloodshed. This, however, must
have been by good luck, for a "regular engage
ment was warmly maintained on both sides," adds
the historian. It was a Quaker, it seems, who

QUAKER LOYALTY 293
made possible the first of the long line of con
quests which made Chatham's name so famous.1
The fact that Quakerism is essentially demo
cratic, and holds closely to its belief in the broth
erhood of man, results logically in sympathy with
the side opposed to blind obedience to despotism,
or an equally blind rebellion where peaceable
measures might succeed. For this reason, the
Quakers were more in sympathy with the King
than with Cromwell in the great Civil War of
the Commonwealth. For the same reason, they
were found most in sympathy with the colonists
at the period of the American Revolution, be
cause in the latter case it was a question of
rights, and the appeal was made to their sense
of justice and the elevation of their fellow-man.
But because their doctrine of non-resistance
made them differ with the authorities as to the
proper method to be employed to effect the de
sired end, and because Quaker policy has always
been one of delay, rather than haste ; of conserv
atism and submission, rather than of radicalism,
and the introduction of new measures, their neu
tral attitude in those critical times was often
misconstrued, with the expected result of plac
ing many a good and loyal patriot clad in drab
1 Smollett, Hist, of England, vol. II, 382. Mrs. Piozzi also
refers to Cumming.

294 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
under the hated name of Tory. That there were
many Quaker Tories, particularly in New Jersey
and Pennsylvania, no one familiar with private
letters of the time can deny. There were, how
ever, few disownments for joining the British
army, compared with the many for joining the
patriots, the Quaker Tories in the two colonies
being largely gathered from the governing class,
who, with their children and sympathizers, would
most naturally defend the crown, and maintain
their traditional conservative attitude. This as
pect of the case needs to be more clearly set
forth than has been done heretofore.
There were, however, in the great majority
of Quaker homes, many men and women who
were ready to suffer in their own chosen fash-
'ion of submission, to any extent, in the patriot
cause. Many a Lydia Darrach, (the Quakeress
whose warning saved Washington from the in
tended attack of the British at Whitemarsh, in
1777) without her opportunities, went about her
household tasks silently praying for the cause
of freedom, her heart throbbing under her Quaker
handkerchief with pride in colonial successes.1
The three colonies of Rhode Island, Pennsylva-
*Dr. George Smith, in his History of Delaware County, Pa.,
P- 339> says there were but two Quakers from that county who
joined the British.

QUAKER LOYALTY 295
nia and South Carolina, with three Quaker gov
ernors, are remarkable examples of prosperity,
showing the benign results of a rule of peace and
good order. The large German element of
Pennsylvania was in sympathy with the Qua-
, kers, voted for them, and kept them in political
life until they all left it together, with the star
of Benjamin Franklin rising in their place.
And when the Revolution was ripe, the Qua
kers had a quiet little tea-party of their own on
the banks of the Delaware, which is only less
famous in history than that in the north, because
its participants acted quietly and were clothed in
drab, although it antedated that more theatri
cal performance at Boston, when the actors were
disguised as Indians, and accompanied their deed
with noise and furious war-whoops.
The Ship "Polly," consigned to the Quaker
firm of James and Drinker, Captain Ayres, sailed
from London for Philadelphia, September 27th,
1773. A threatening handbill, the result of a
great mass-meeting in the State house, October
1 8th, warned the Delaware pilots that if the
"Polly" came up the river, a coat of tar and
feathers awaited her crew. She ventured up,
however; the consignees patriotically decided to
sacrifice their profits on the altar of patriotism,
and the "Polly," hastily provisioned, set sail for

296 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
England again immediately, December 27th,
without breaking bulk.
A curious letter originally published in the
Gentleman's Magazine in 1775, was addressed
in the interests of peace to King George III by
a Quakeress signing herself F. D. (Frances
Dodshon), before the commencement oi hostili
ties in connection with the American war. The
writer was somewhat known as a friend of prom
inent literary people; she besought the King to
prevent the "effusion of blood, the rending of a
potent empire," and by lenient measures, to win
again the obedience, loyalty and affection of his
erring subjects.1
An incident of the Revolution, however, should
be noted which, in the perspective lent by a cen
tury and a quarter, demands attention. The
Quakers of Philadelphia, by their "Meeting for
Sufferings" — a committee which had been re
cently created and given power to act, in the in
tervals of the meetings, as the representatives
of the entire body — put forth a "Testimony"
dated 20th, i2mo., 1776, and signed by John
1 See also, Souvenir Address of the Quakers to King Edward
VII, 1901. The address presented on the occasion of his acces
sion is given with those to most of his predecessors which have
been offered by the Quakers. They form interesting studies of
the Quaker attitude toward the Sovereign, especially from an
American point of view.

QUAKER LOYALTY 297
Pemberton. Its full title was, "The Ancient
Testimony and Principles of the People; called
Quakers, renewed, with respect to the King and
Government, and touching the Commotions now
prevailing in these and other parts of America,
addressed to the People in General." It seems
to-day to be much after the pattern of other
characteristic conciliatory documents published
at various periods by the same body; but com
ing at the critical moment that it did, it had all
the appearance of intermeddling in politics by
the very body which had just withdrawn in
righteous indignation from the public arena,
warning all its constituents to beware of political
life hereafter. "It hath been our judgment and
principle," they said, "since we were called to
profess the light of Christ, manifested in our
consciences to this day, that the setting up and
putting down of Kings and Governments is God's
prerogative. . . . (We) pray for the King
and safety of our nation, and good of all men,
that we may live a quiet and peaceful life in all
godliness and honesty, under the Government
which God is pleased to set over tis." It was a
perilous time to urge the people "firmly to unite
in the abhorrence of all such writings and meas
ures as evince a desire and design to break off
the happy connexion we have hitherto enjoyed

298 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
with the Kingdom of Great Britain, and our just
and necessary subordination to the King, and
those who are lawfully placed in authority under
him!" Not long before this, an anonymous writer in
Philadelphia, signing himself "Common Sense"
had begun to publish his remarkable political
pamphlets, upon which alone the reputation of
Thomas Paine should have rested. A brilliant
reply to the Quakers by "Common Sense" ap
peared in "The Crisis" January 13, 1777, as se
vere as the original was ill-timed. Possibly
nothing did so much to bestow the epithet of
Tory unfairly upon some of the Quakers of the
middle states, as this wide-spread remonstrance
to the Quaker's "testimony."
And yet, the Quakers were no more timid or
conservative than any of the Americans. New
Jersey, under its allegiance to the British gov
ernment, had had no constitution or charter. As
the Revolution appeared inevitable, the inhabit
ants of that colony thought well to have one,
and while the Declaration of Independence was
being discussed in Congress at Philadelphia, the
Representatives at Trenton, only two days be
fore the Declaration was made, inserted the fol
lowing remarkable condition in the Constitution
of New Jersey, dated July 2d, 1 776 :

QUAKER LOYALTY 299
. . . Provided always that it is the true intent and
meaning of this Congress, that if a reconciliation between
Great Britain and these Colonies should take place, and
the latter be again taken under the government and pro
tection of Great Britain, this Charter shall be null and
void, otherwise to remain firm and inviolable.1
Not only in these states, however, which were
largely Quaker, did the Tory element abound:
We learn that in Sandwich and Barnstable
Counties, Massachusetts, in 1769, the inhabitants
had been invited to send delegates to a political
convention, and so many were Tories, that the
town of Sandwich voted thirty-three to forty-
two not to send!2 Charles Wilson Peale, the
painter, in his autobiographical notes, mentions
incidents which occurred while he was "Commis
sioner to seize the personal effects of Traitors."
This unpleasant appointment occurred October
2 ist, 1777. He tells us of going to the house
1 Henry Gilpin, "Exiles to Virginia," p. 50.
2 Oration by Rev. N. H. Chamberlain, on the Quarter Millen
nial Celebration of Sandwich, Mass., 1889. Yarmouth, Mass., in
a town meeting in 1765, had decided to do nothing concerning
the Stamp Act. In 1780, a committee of townsmen was ap
pointed in Sandwich to apply to " such of the meeting of Friends
as are thought to have money to spare, for a loan in case fines
are imposed and that, in case they refuse, they shall be liable
to be dropped." Friends had been exempt and had saved money,
and the vote, from the townsmen's point of view, was not un
just.

300 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
of Mrs. Joseph Galloway, in Philadelphia, to take
away her husband's effects. Elias Boudinot had
been retained as Mrs. Galloway's counsel. She
did not incline to leave, although her friends were
ready to receive her. "Mr. Peale went to Gen
eral Arnold and borrowed his carriage, and when
it came to the door he took Mrs. Galloway by
the hand and conducted her to the Charriott."
They had a rather easier time at Mr. Shoemak
er's. Elizabeth Drinker's Journal says, "1778,
July 23d. They have taken an account yester
day or ye day before, of Joseph Galloway and
Sammy Shoemaker's property, with design to
confiscate," and under "August 20th — Grace
Galloway turned out of her house this forenoon,
and a Spanish officer put in." Those were hard
times for both Quakers and Tories !
At the moment when Mrs. Drinker thus wrote
in her diary, her husband was among the little
group of twenty Friends, who, consistently faith
ful to their interpretation of duty, declined to
take any active part on either side in the strug
gle going on about them. They were therefore
seized by the orders of the American authorities
at Harrisburg, and exiled to Virginia, where
they spent a severe and long-remembered winter,
and where two aged men of their number,
Thomas Gilpin and John Hunt, laid down their

QUAKER LOYALTY 301
lives. They were arrested, September 3d, 1778,
and, through the interposition of the women of
their families, the indignation of those who dif
fered from them politically, but respected them
as the pillars of the social fabric of Philadelphia,
and still more, the silent argument of death from
their sufferings and hardships, they were released,
and returned to their homes in April, 1 779. They
are known as the "Exiles in Virginia." 1
Certain of the Quakers who withdrew from
the society, or failing to do so, were expelled be
cause they took part in active service under
Washington, largely recruited from Philadelphia,
were known as "Fighting" or "Free" Quakers.
Led by Samuel Wetherill, Jr., they formed a sep
arate organization, and met in a building of their
own, which is still standing at the corner of Fifth
and Arch streets, in the gable of which may be
read "Of the Empire 8th, 1783," the new "Em
pire" being then regarded as eight years old.
The building was long used as the Apprentices'
1 The names of the prisoners sent to Virginia were as fol
lows : James Pemberton, Miers Fisher, John Pemberton, Sam
uel Pleasants, Thomas Gilpin (died, 3 mo., 2d, 1778), Samuel
Fisher (son of Joshua), Owen Jones, Jr., Edward Penington,
Wm. Drewet Smith, Charles Eddy, Israel Pemberton, John Hunt
(died 3d mo., 31st, 1778), Thomas Pike, Thomas Fisher, Henry
Drinker, Elijah Brown, William Smith, Thomas Wharton,
Charles Jervis, Thomas Afflick. (From T. Gilpin, " Exiles in
Virginia," 148.)

302 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Library. The "Society of Free Quakers" died a
natural death with that of its last member in
1836, and met with no revival at the time of the
Civil War. Their broadside after the Revolu
tion, issued in explanation of their position, and
as an appeal to the people to join them, still ex
ists. "You know," it runs, "that many have
been disowned by that people (Quakers) for no
other cause than a faithful discharge of those
duties which we owe to our country," &c. It
is a curious relic of the day, and is dated "Phila
delphia, 24th, of 4th month, 178 1. Signed in
and on behalf of the Meeting, by
Samuel Wetherill, Jr., Clerk."
The British, of course, preferred to interpret
the behavior of the Quakers as sympathetic with
themselves. An officer of that army wrote in
October, 1777 — "I cannot say much for the town
of Philadelphia, which has no view but the
straightness and uniformity of the streets. Till
we arrived, I believe it was a very populous city,
but at present it is very thinly inhabited, and that
only by the canaille and the Quakers, whose
peaceable disposition has prevented their taking
up arms and consequently has engaged them in
our interests, by drawing upon them the displeas
ure of their countrymen." 1
1 Sargent, Life of Major Andre.

QUAKER LOYALTY 303
Pennsylvania has upon her records the names
of two Quaker martyrs in the cause of freedom.
In 1778, Abraham Carlisle and John Roberts,
neither of whom had been guilty of offenses that
justified the death penalty, were hanged in re
sponse to the demand of the mob for vengeance,
although the execution was under the form of
law. Carlisle was a Quaker carpenter whose
acceptance of a commission to superintend passes
through the British lines gave the Americans
their excuse for his conviction of high treason
before Chief- Justice McKean. His companion,
John Roberts, was a miller, the ruins of whose
mill are still standing on "Mill Creek," Mont
gomery County. At the age of sixty, fearing
molestation because of British sympathies, he
took refuge within the British lines. How much
active aid he rendered the British is uncertain,
but the fact that more than one thousand persons
petitioned against the execution, would show
that his offenses were not great. The petitions
were of no avail. With their coffins before them
and ropes about their necks, the Quakers were
carried to their execution.
That close observer, Brissot de Warville, who
traveled in America immediately after the close
of the Revolution, and who came into intimate
relations with the Quakers,, showed for them

304 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
that remarkable comprehension which has al
ways been a French trait.1 He notes the vio
lent address against them written by Paine, and
praises the reply made to it by his friend, Miers
Fisher. "No person," said he "has spoken to
me with more partiality respecting the Quakers
than Washington, that celebrated man, whose
spirit of justice is remarkable in everything."
Washington had entertained an ill opinion of the
society in the beginning of the war, from want of
acquaintance with them, and had attributed to
their political sentiments the effect of their reli
gious principles. He told Brissot that since learn
ing to know them better — the purity of their mor
als, their exemplary economy, and their attach
ment to the constitution — he regarded them as
one of the best supports of the new government,
"which," said Washington, "requires great mod
eration, and a total banishment of luxury."
Washington felt the need for tolerant treat
ment of Dissenters, and wrote "If I could have en
tertained the slightest apprehension that the con
stitution framed in the Convention when I had
the honor to preside might possibly endanger the
religious rights of any ecclesiastical society, cer
tainly I would never have placed my signature
to it." It was Massachusetts that did not adopt
1 Brissot de Warville, Travels, 415,

QUAKER LOYALTY 305
the sentiment of September 23d, 1789 — "Con
gress shall make no law establishing articles of
faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the
free exercise of religion or abridging the freedom
of speech or of the press, or the right of the peo
ple peaceably to assemble, and to petition to the
Government for a redress of grievances."
As soon as the War of Independence was over,
the Friends accepted the results. The oath of
allegiance was an oath, however, whether taken
to a Federal or a State Government, or to a King,
and the provisions for Quaker scruple did not
always find acceptance. Bearing arms was
equally against Quaker principle, and they were
temporarily deprived of electoral privileges, were
not allowed to hold office, sue for debt, serve as
jurors, or purchase land. Pennsylvania went a
step farther than the other colonies, and would
not permit a Quaker to teach school who declined
the tests applied! An injustice this, to which
a remonstrance came from the "Meeting for Suf
ferings" dated 1779.
Yet Quakerism had furnished some of the
greatest of the American Generals, like Mifflin
and Morris in Pennsylvania, and Greene of
Rhode Island. The latter wrote the Quakers —
"I shall be happy if your ministry shall contrib
ute to the establishment of morality and brotherly

306 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
kindness among the people, than which no coun
try wants it more." x Mary Mott, of Newport,
was the second wife of Nathanael Greene, of East
Greenwich, R. I., and the mother of the famous
General of the same name. After failing to per
suade her son to give up the army, it is said of
her that she submitted, with the advice to him,
"Well, Nathanael, if thou must engage in this car
nal warfare, never let me hear of thy being
wounded or killed with thy back to the enemy !" 2
Perhaps the remonstrance of the North Caro
lina Quakers was the most true and dignified
protest to the demands made upon their patience
and Christian example that any of their members
made at this trying period of their history. They
said:

1 S. M. Janney, History of Society of Friends, III, p. 166.
2 Another of the family met a British attack in a characteristic
Quaker way. Some American " rebels " had annoyed the Brit
ish vessels from the east shore of Conanicut by discharging fire
arms. Captain Wallace sent an officer with a squad of men to
burn the culprits' houses. The husband of Abby Greene, who
lived in the old Joseph Greene house (recently standing north
of East Ferry) was a sympathizer, and his house also was
marked for destruction. Mrs. Abigail Greene persuaded her
excitable husband to keep in the background, and from the door
way, addressed the officer : " I hope you have not come to do
us any harm? Come in, and I will get you something to eat."
A moment's pause, and the officer said: "Dear old Mother,
we won't hurt a hair of your head." Stamping out the brand
he held in his hand, he came in with all his men and had a cup
of tea! (T. R. Hazard, "Recollections of Old Times," 117.)

, %£. ^A-,"-'^-?- ^"- 7viJt~~ •?•• .'" - - '

. / .-"-~.

'¦-^

%^£>

•£&£ tlaa^ *&£&<%

-t^S.

'ocirt.

,mA.U

i-.a^ict<s, 4}*'?*. /Zct. ¦¦ ..;..--*- i-^ts ••"'-

&£¦*. '

q^y?-

<? /,

&m iK^a-, /u-A> J"e .-.-.- is , sO&£*. hja

uz. . a.

a-P

^V/^-

~jbi-ji X a. i At a7?0Z* • "»' <^- -*-2 "¦ ^

-iy^.

4S?S S> J
^A-2 ZJZa. ^ d ns*''- &? -T-sZGl. f7l£«Q £-'ts- . .¦
" */ ' ¦ , J> f/? S
< GhT/Lt.«?S-- ^j-CZ- &*Xj/6 Xe/f -fcs-/AJi-jss<-^
/i-sL^yj-. _
<^.lsv-?-a'<fJ$± ire A-c A?m--± J e. #-££-, fls *-*f&> T* *2 &y A^ &fc
&~J-X- t£-&s7LS&£/ *~sC2 s6i2<2~c4-<z^s<~/ &^s^6£<^>A^ -Asij% /£e_,
s-£~y^-c/£,?>^^' &JZJ7-& &-3&6L ?s<*-i^sis /Xx^^^ J^z -sL-a-Xyt?yP.
Ss j T -S- ¦* J^Q S-
tr?- , :^s^a *--s , #~et2 c-7^..^> s-o az-&i*r£aLc4C '%-?-' ?>-^ c :*/7^2-ja^e.t2^e^/
_ X-e. ty^izsCzX- &s\^oyts.£t <^v ysUiSigssy-cn- r'
a, y/ , s, - ,- ' , - ..• -

¦ /-- .V

4L

Facsimile of Original

George Washington to the Quakers

¦ /"_ ' . sf
'7/it. •-¦ ««£= m^i ,' *-: Z . ¦ •-. tf-V.'Vua • •¦' • '¦• ¦' ¦<¦¦ ¦¦

€&&*£&1fc,£ ltd tk& ,- tSL A^ *>ytP .<<S ^C'"X^ -t 2_i2- <5?^l9 7-*3 -e^C- >

J*-*-<—

in Friends' Library, Philadelphia.
of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting.

QUAKER LOYALTY 307
We hope that you will consider our principles much
stronger security to any state than any test that can be
required of us ; as we now are and shall be innocent and
peaceable in our several stations and conditions under
this present state; and for conscience' sake, are sub
missive to the laws, in whatever they may be inflicted
upon us, in matters for which we cannot be active for
conscience' sake.1
After the inauguration of President Washing
ton in 1789, the Quakers of the Middle States
(Philadelphia Yearly Meeting) addressed him
with an expression of their loyalty and support,
through a deputation from their society. Sin
cerity and loyalty are the dominant notes of the
address, which was well received, and replied to
in a written address by Washington. The broad
side containing both addresses is rare.
The attitude of the Quakers toward the Con
stitution adopted by the new republic was one of
loyalty from the very beginning. Madison wrote
Jefferson from New York, October 20th, 1787,
"Pennsylvania will be divided. The city of Phil
adelphia, the Republican party, the Quakers, and
most of the Germans espouse the Constitution."
The "Independent Gazetteer" of January 15th,
1788, in an address with one of the fashionably-
1 Weeks: "Southern Quakers and Slavery," p. 192.

308 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
comprehensive and ambitious titles characteristic
of the time — "To the People of America" — re
futes statements that the Quakers were opposed
to the Federal Constitution, and states the follow
ing facts; that there were seven members of the
late House who were Quakers, all of whom at
tended and voted for the call of a convention,
against some opposition ; that they took no part in
the obstruction methods adopted by certain other
members in order to defeat the measure; that
eight Quakers took their seats as members of the
state convention, and together voted against post
ponement of the adoption of the Constitution,
and that all voted for its adoption, and for the
relegation to Congress of the jurisdiction of ten
miles square within the commonwealth for the
seat of the Federal Government. This was
signed, "Undeniable Facts." Other publications
of the time can be quoted to prove that their po
sition was that of perfect loyalty from the be
ginning. Henry Drinker wrote James Thornton, then
in York, England, from Philadelphia, under date,
7mo., 25th, 1788 — "Since thy departure there has
been a great stir among the people respecting the
new Federal Constitution. It has spread far and
near, produc'g much agitation and an abundance

QUAKER LOYALTY 309
of parade and nonsense. When will this People
learn Wisdom? How opposite is such Vanity
and Folly to true Christian Sobriety!"
During the Civil War in the United States the
American Quakers lived through a period of test
ing of their principles almost as great as that
which had been the experience of their English
ancestors in Cromwell's time. Only one incident
of that period, however, can be related here.
The visit of Eliza P. Gurney to President Lincoln
is characteristic of the attitude of the Quakers
toward those in positions of civic trust. Many
an English or American Quaker minister had felt
called to visit crowned heads in England or on
the Continent, and had carried out his mission
with satisfaction to his own mind, and courteous
acknowledgment of his kindly intention in prof
fering the visit under a deep sense of his religious
duty. The pathetic association of the martyred
President with the good offices of a noble woman,
of the type of her sister-in-law, Elizabeth Fry,
warrants mention as an instance of such a "con
cern," as she herself would have described the
feeling under which she acted.
In October, 1862, when the hostilities which
everyone had hoped would soon end, promised
to continue for a much longer period, and anx
iety lay heavily on all hearts, Eliza P. Gurney of

310 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
Burlington, New Jersey, the widow of Joseph
John Gurney, of Norwich, England, one of a fam
ily of Quaker leaders, accompanied by her friends,
Hannah B. Mott, also of Burlington, John M.
Whitall, of Philadelphia, and James Carey, of
Baltimore, went to Washington and after two
days' delay, obtained a private audience with
President Lincoln. He received them most cor
dially, fully understanding that they had come
purely upon an errand of sympathy and love;
and the intense anxiety on his face stirred their
hearts. Hannah B. Mott took copious notes, and
at once wrote down the remarks made by the
President during the interview. The main part
of her letter, written to her son and his wife
within an hour after returning to her hotel,
graphically describes the experience of the little
party. It is dated —
"Willard's," Washington, iomo. 26th, 1862.
You may well wonder, my dear children, at this date ;
but here we are, just arrived from Baltimore, and our
two attendants, John M. Whitall and James Carey have
gone to the White House to negotiate an interview with
the President, which presses heavily upon E. P. Gurney's
mind as a religious duty, and which excites sympathy
with her in us all. She has written a note to him her
self which they have taken to deliver to him in person,
if possible. . . .
Our friends have come in; no admittance yet; the

QUAKER LOYALTY 311
President is in Council with his cabinet, and cannot
possibly be disturbed, but the gentleman was polite and
friendly, and took the note, promising to deliver it.
First Day morning, 27th. We went yesterday to the
President's house, having been directed to do so, and
his Private Secretary came to us and was very polite
&c, but the President was engaged with Secretary
Seward ; still, we had better wait. Poor Eliza was much
tried, yet we waited a very long time in the anteroom,
until we found he had walked out with a roll of papers
in his hand over to the War Office ! So E. P. G. wrote
a note to him, pressing it as a religious duty; and then
she was willing to leave it. It is now near ten, and we
are waiting to hear his final determination. There is
a meeting appointed for half past three this afternoon
which is announced in the papers to-day, so I hope some
way will open for her to relieve her mind, for we all
feel much for her. While we were at the White House,
we visited the famous East Room, and a splendid apart
ment it is, and the grounds are elegant. The beautiful
Potomac is seen from its windows, with many vessels
upon its waters, and Virginia shores may be traced at
a distance; Alexandria is distinctly seen. When I
thought of the thousands ranged on each side of that
splendid river, waiting for the moment to strike each
other to the heart, there seemed no fitting expression to
describe the horrors of war.
We have every comfort here we need, and a quiet
parlour where we sit together as if we were at home.
There are, I believe, five hundred guests in the house —
a great many officers ; but we only see them at meals.
About one o'clock. —
We have just returned from an interview with the

312 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
President, which has been wonderfully brought about
by no less nor greater an instrument than our old ac
quaintance, Isaac Newton, formerly in Chestnut St.
(Philadelphia), who formerly kept an ice cream saloon!
It seems that he is now Commissioner in the Agricultural
Bureau, and is most confidentially intimate with the
President. He had but just returned from Philadelphia,
and hearing of our desire, came at once here and said
it should be done. Finding what time would suit Eliza,
he went to the President at once and told him about it.
The President said that Sunday was the only time he
had to himself, and that if the Friends would come now,
he would be glad to see them. Isaac came here with
the message. So we put on our bonnets and shawls
(no time to fix on the other dress), and once more re
paired to his mansion, where we were at once taken
up into his office or private parlour. His tall command
ing figure and cordial grasp of each of our hands as we
were presented made us feel as if we were indeed in the
presence of a great man. He pointed us to seats, and
asked Eliza something about England, and made a re
mark about the rain, when Eliza commenced, with a
great deal of feeling, to address him. She assured him
of the deep interest and approval of his course by
many thousands on both sides of the Atlantic, espe
cially in regard to his act of letting the oppressed go free,
encouraging him, under his great responsibility, to look
for his light and his strength to his God. Altogether,
I think I never heard her more favoured or more weighty
in her ministry. She spoke at some length, and soon
after her communication, knelt in solemn prayer for
"our chief magistrate." I cannot pretend to do it jus
tice. It was a touching scene, and never, I think, to be

QUAKER LOYALTY 313
forgotten. The President listen'd in the deepest at
tention ; there was no one in the room except Isaac
Newton, and a young man named Grinnell, but we
found afterward that during the time, Stanton, the Sec
retary of War, opened the door, but seeing that some
thing was going on, retreated, leaving the door partly
open, when the Private Secretary came in, and after the
President spoke to him, promptly retired.
Eliza Gurney soon after rose, when the Presi
dent also stood, and taking her hand, responded
in the following words : 1
I am glad of this interview. In the very responsible
situation in which I am placed, as an humble instrument
in the hands of our Heavenly Father, I have desired
that all my words and actions may be in accordance with
His will, but if, after endeavoring to do my best with
the light which He affords me, I find my efforts fail, then
I must believe that, for some purpose unknown to me,
He wills it otherwise. If I had had my way, this war
would never have been, but nevertheless, it came. If
I had had my way, the war would have ended before
this, but we find that it still continues, and must con
clude that He permits it for some wise purpose, although
we may not be able to comprehend it, for we cannot but
believe that He who made the world, still governs it. I
repeat that I am glad to have had this interview with
you. After leaving the President, Isaac Newton took us to

1 The writer of the letter enclosed these remarks on a separate
sheet, in which the whole party had combined to reproduce the
President's exact words.

314 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
the Red Room and the Blue Room; and seeing what
was interesting there, we returned to our hotel, poor
Eliza feeling quite relieved of a very heavy burthen ;
yet we all felt more than ever the weight that is oppress
ing President Lincoln. It has rained nearly all day,
and seems increasing; but we went to the meeting as
appointed this afternoon, — a pretty good congregation
considering the rain, and a very attentive and quiet
company, who seemed to feel deeply what Eliza had to
say. A number came afterward to speak to her ; among
them in the chapel was young Grinnell, who told Eliza
how much he had been gratified and interested, both in
the meeting and during the interview with the Presi
dent: he should write to his mother an account of this
deeply impressive day. He said the President had been
much impressed, and he observ'd, was so much affected
that he could scarcely speak for some time. We are
to call this evening on Senator Bates, Attorney-General,
and to-morrow take the train for Baltimore.
Nearly a year later, Eliza Gurney received a
request through the Commissioner of Agricul
ture, Isaac Newton, that she would write to the
President again ; and having already had it on her
mind, she did so under date, "Eighth Month
1 8th, 1863," expressing her continued sympathy
and prayers for the President in his time of trial,
and fully endorsing the words of his recent proc
lamation for a day of thanksgiving and of prayer,
that "the angry feeling that has so long sustained
this needless and cruel rebellion may be subdued,

vl'.vrcuti i

lf*VUlft

'¦l\\ ,ui si on.

•<£< ,?.,..,_. J;i,v. /:,,,<- 'iy£ ... ¦' i

f^yl^t^O (r* — '

£*«*« ~^ ^ Jt0T 4U& h<w te*Mj e*#rjtu»a.
VU^ oJf^j ^ y*f" %^CuJ g^e^ £U*^ V,

/^r^ AA^ fi&tl fi-*^ ^tr^V /t^rt^f g^^C

fi-f fU?~t/fc*~Z* fl^K^t,

c , , /.

<

t\

L u

"

V

A^O,

V\' '**¦

r ,
•y,
r
ir.Jt,.
,„.„:..,. ^
i- X- ,,: *„
/v . . ¦ y*^v
¦''-;?¦ * 'v"7 |"
{ r1-<J (-.-•-- <^,-.,v .t^A - - >.,-w, £&-, t^w *
yt^*
o»~^ t^^<.^ ,>. -, i-^cBj ic- a£i, e^^t
yiW^r^r
Facsimile of Original in Pcnnsulvania Historical Society, PhiladelpMa.
Abraham Lincoln to Eliza P. Gurney.
QUAKER LOYALTY 315
the hearts of the insurgents changed, and the
whole nation be led through paths of repentance
and submission to the Divine Will back to the
enjoyment of union and fraternal peace." The
next year, President Lincoln sent to Eliza Gur
ney, the following acknowledgment of her visit
and letter: Executive Mansion,
Washington, September 4th, 1864.
Eliza P. Gurney :
My Esteemed Friend, — I have not forgotten, proba
bly never shall forget, the very impressive occasion when
yourself and friends visited me on a Sabbath forenoon
two years ago. Nor has your kind letter, written nearly
a year later, ever been forgotten. In all, it has been
your purpose to strengthen my reliance on God. I am
much indebted to the good Christian people of the country
for their constant prayers and consolations, and to none
of them more than yourself. The purposes of the Al
mighty are perfect, and will prevail, though we erring
mortals may fail to accurately perceive them in advance.
We hoped for a happy termination of this terrible war
long before this ; but God knows best, and has ruled other
wise. We shall yet acknowledge His Wisdom and our
own error therein. Meanwhile, we must work earnestly in
the best light He gives us, trusting that so working still
conduces to the great ends He ordains. Surely He intends
some great good to follow this mighty convulsion, which
no mortal could make, and no mortal could stay. Your
people, the Friends, have had, and are having, a very
great trial. On principle and faith opposed to both war

316 THE QUAKER IN THE FORUM
and oppression, they can only practically oppose oppres
sion by war. In this hard dilemma, some have chosen
one horn and some the other. For those appealing to
me on conscientious grounds, I have done and shall do,
the best I could and can, in my own conscience, under my
oath to the law. That you believe this I doubt not, and,
believing it, I shall still receive for our country and
myself, your earnest prayers to our Father in Heaven.
Your sincere friend,
A. Lincoln.
The original of this touching letter is pre
served in the rooms of the Historical Society of
Pennsylvania. Eliza Gurney wrote once more to
the President, under date "Ninth Month, Eighth,
1864;" and after the close of the War, in 1865,
followed in a few days by the assassination of the
President, Eliza Gurney's first letter was discov
ered in his breast pocket, where, much worn and
read, it had been constantly carried, even to the
moment when the fatal shot was fired.
The impression made by the Society of Friends
upon the world was made, as every candid mind
must admit, from no motives of self-seeking.
The very "testimonies," so closely held by them,
were the means of keeping them from the offices,
legislatures, and the political appointments where
they could best enforce their views. Policy never
governed them, compromise was impossible to
their stern idea of duty, and popularity was not

QUAKER LOYALTY 317
desired by them. They simply stood for the
right as they saw it, ably defending their own lib
erties when it became necessary, and when they
were unsuccessful, submitting without any effort
in the use of force. Possibly no better setting-
forth of the Quaker attitude can be found than
the words of W. E. Gladstone in his great speech
in Parliament upon the Bradlaugh agitation,
April 26th, 1883. He said, "Truth is the ex
pression of the Divine mind, and however little
our feeble vision may be able to discern the means
by which God may provide for its preservation,
we may leave the matter in His hands, and we
may be sure that a firm and courageous applica
tion of every principle of equity and of justice is
the best method we can adopt for the preserva
tion of Truth."
The Quaker point of view upon the whole sub
ject of the duty of the citizen in the political
arena, may be found in the sentiments of the
Quakers of Baltimore, Md., in their Yearly Meet
ing of 1903:
Those members who have the right of franchise are
urged to be careful to exercise that privilege in a careful
and conscientious spirit, ever mindful that the elective
franchise is a sacred trust, and that it should be used as
in the sight of the Lord, and for the advancement of
righteousness.

INDEX

Abjuration, Oath of, 15, 114
Acushnet River, Mass., 259
Adams, Abigail, 196
Adams, John, 196
Adams, Samuel, 222, 254
Affirmation, 30, 32, 38, 101, 127f,
166
Afflick, Thomas, 301
Airy, Thomas, 3
Akehurst, Daniel, 163
Aldricks, Peter, 288
Allegiance, Oath of, 13, 15, 154,
305
Allin, Ralph, Jr., 81
Allin, William, 81
Almy, Governor, 94
" Amity," Ship, 105
Amyrault, Moise, 160
Anabaptists, 6, 15, 151, 179, 194
Andros, Governor Edmund, 73,
94, I5i
Anne, Queen, 14, 96, 124, 165,
290
Anson, Sir W. R., 14
Anthony, William, 50
Anti-Corn Law League, 36
Antinomians, 86, 94
Aquidneck, R. I., 86
Archbishop of York, 31
Archdale, John, 26, 281, i63ff
Archdale, Thomas, 30
Arbids, Church of England, 6
Atterbury, Bishop, 31
Audland, John, 3
Austen, Anne, 44
Ayres, Captain, 295 3

B
Backus, Isaac, 72, 93
Baily, John, 199
Baker, J. Allen, 37
Baltimore, Lord, 154, 157
Baltimore, City of, 317
Bancroft, George, 132, 178
Baptists, 3, 41, 46, 79
Barbadoes, 44
Barclay, Colonel David, 3
Barclay, David, 234ff, 243ff,
248ff
" Barebones,'' Parliament, 4
Barlow, George, 82
Barnes, Jon, 288
Barnstable, Mass., 48, 79
Bartlett, J. H., 95
Bates, Attorney General, 314
Bathurst, Lord and Lady, 232
Beaconsfield, 26
Bennett, Governor, 178
Bensshall, Walter, 24
Besse, Joseph, 56
Bill of Rights, Virginia, 178
Bingley, William, 24
Bishop, Cortlandt R, 120, 159,
177
Blackwell, Governor, 290
Blake, 164
Blakey, William, 261
Borden, William, 177
Boston, 44, 52, 7off, 94f, 105,
222, 254
Boudinot, Elias, 300
Bours, Peter, 50
Boscobel House, 282
Boscobel Tracts, 282
19

320

INDEX

Bowne, Walter, 154
Boyd, Mr., 292
Bradlaugh, 38, 317
Bradstreet, Simon, 69
Breda, Treaty of, 150
Brent, Margaret, 196
Brenton, William, 86
Brewster, Margaret, 222
Bright, John, 35ft
Brightman, John, 199
Brissot de Warville, 262, 304
Bristol, R. I., 86
" Bristol Factor," ship, 105
Brock, R. A., 155
Bromfield, William, 290
Brooke, "Mr.," 115
Brown, Elijah, 301
Brown, John, 3
Bryant, Deacon, 95
Bryant, Ruth, 95
Buffon, George L. L., Comte
de, 220
Bull, Henry, 86, 94, 201
Bull, Jireh, 201
Bull, John, 24
Bull, Stephen, 166
Bunyan, John, 284
Burke's " Digest," 32
Burlington, N. J., 115, 205, 310
Burnet, Bishop, 290
Burnyeat, John, 107
Burrough, Edward, 65
Bushel, Edward, 199
Butcher, Jo., 24
Buttery, Jane, 64
Byllinge, Edward, 203

Callowhill, Hannah, 3
Calvert, Benedict, 159
Calvert, Governor, 182
Camden, Lord, 242
Camisards, The, 259, 261
Camm, John, 3
Carey, James, 310
Carlisle, Abraham, 303
Carolinas, The, 162ft", 180
Carr, Commissioner, 60

Carson, Attorney Gen. Hamp
ton L., 199
Carteret, Governor, 143
Carver, Richard, 281 ff
Cary, Hon. Henry, 176
" Case of Conscience," 22ft
Cave, E., 219
Cevennes, 259
Chalkley, Thomas, 204
Chamberlain, Rev. N. H., 299
Charles I, 1, 2, 101
Charles II, 2, 10, 13, 62, 67, 121,
281 ff
Charleston, S. C, 174
Charter, Provincial, 61, 73
Charter, Colonial, 1691, 73
Charter, William Penn's, 107
Charter of Liberties, N. Y., 150
Chatham, Lord, 242, 244, 293
Chatham, Mass., 79
Chester, Pennsylvania, 186, 229
Child, Dr., 47
Chipping Wycombe, 28
Chiselhurst, 242
Clarendon, 26
Clark, James B., 38
Clarke, John, 86
Clarke, Jeremy, 86
Clarke, Walter, 94
Clarkson, Thomas, 18, 33ff, 144,
164
Clavier, 262
Cobden, Richard, 36
Coddington, Anne, 102
Coddington, William, 49, 86,
90ft", 102, 134
Coddington, William, Jr., 91
Coggeshall, John, 86
Coleshill, England, 26
Collinson, Peter, 138, 219
Colve, Governor A., 150
Compton, Bishop, 146
Conant, Richard, 166
" Concessions and Agreements,"
N. J., 14S
Congenies, 259, 260
Connecticut, 91, 127, 181
Constitution of N. J., 298
Conventicle Act, 197

INDEX

321

Cook, M. G, 72
Corbet, Thomas, 203
Cornbury, Lord, 135
Corporation Act, 18
Cosby, Governor William, I52f
" Crane," Ship, 288
Cranston, John, 92
Crevecoeur, J. H., St. John de,
144
" Crisis," The, 298
Crisp, Stephen, 286
Croft, Yorkshire, 64
Crouch, William, i8gff
Cromwell, Oliver, 10, 59, 285
Cudworth, James, 78
Cumberland, Duke of, 292
Cumming, Thomas, 292

Dalton, John, 211
Dalton, Jonathan, 212
Dam, Rip van, 152
Damask, James, 199
Daniel, Col. Robert, 165
Darlington, Eng., 64, 291
Dartmouth, Lord, 240, 291
Dartmouth, England, 288
Dartmouth, Mass., 7, 207
" Dartmouth," Ship, 254
Darrach, Lydia, 294
Darvall, William, 288
Davis, "Digest," etc., 31
Davis, Nicholas, 48
Dawson, Mrs., 285
Decatur, Stephen, 89
Defoe, Daniel, 49
Delaware, River, 86
Delaware, Lord, 156
Denmark, 59
Denny, Governor, 226
Dissenters, 27, 46, 106, 165, 173f,
180, 304
Dixon, William H., 107
Dodshon, Frances, 296
Doucaster, 38
Dougan, Governor Thomas,
150, 151
Dover, N. H., 54, 73

Drinker, Elizabeth, 300
Drinker, Henry, 301, 308
Drinker, James and, 295
Dunkirk, France, 255
Dyer, Mary, 66
Dyer, William, 86

Easton, John, 90, 91
Easton, Nicholas, 30, 86, 90,
134. 206
Eccleston, Theodore, 20, 24
Eddy, Charles, 301
Edmonston, John, 160
Edmundson, William, 164, 178
Edward I, 14
Edward VI, 6
Elizabeth, Queen, 6, I2f
Elizabethtown, N. J., 115
Ellis, Dr. George R, 61, 63, 69
Ellis, J. E, 37
Elliott, Dr., 218
Emery, John, 75
Endicott, Governor, 65, 132
England, Church of, 154, 159,
173
Episcopalians, 45, 106, 114, 178
Evans, Governor, 134
Exclusion Bill, 1
Exeter, N. H., 54, 74

Falmouth, England, 255
Farnsworth, Richard, 199
Fell, Margaret, 4, ioff
Fenner, Arthur, 49
Fenwick, John, 203
Fidelity, Oath of, 43ft, ssff
Fidelity, Declaration of, 124
Field, Robert, 151
Fisher, George P., 157
Fisher, Mary, 44
Fisher, Miers, 301, 304
Fisher, Samuel, 301
Fisher, Thomas, 301
Fletcher, Governor, 123
Foley, Henry, S. J., 116
Fontanelle, 116
Foster, William, 153

322

INDEX

Fothergill, John, 2i6ff
Fothergill, Samuel, 139, 221
Fox, Dr. Edward, 259?
Fox, George, 4, 8, 13, 90, 92,
107, 164, 193, 201, 203
France, 116
Franchise, 41 ff
" Frame of Government," Pa.,
io7ff, 118
Frampton, William, 288
Franklin, Benjamin, 32, 118,
138, 142, 2isff, 295
Freeman, Hist. Cape Cod, 78, 83
Freeman's Oath, 53, 55
French, The, 89
French, John, 135
Fry, Sir Edward, 136
Fry, Elizabeth, 309
Fundamental Constitutions, io8f
Furly, Benjamin, 109

Galloway, Joseph, 211, 300
Gaunt, Peter, 81
George I, 14
George II, 32, 89
George III, 296
Georgia, I77ff
Gibbons, Cardinal, 117
Gill, Roger, 163
Gillham, Samuel, 288
Gilpin, Henry, 299
Gilpin, Thomas, 300, 301
Gladstone, W. E., 38, 317
Goffe, 102
Goodwin's " Pilgrim Republic,"
70, 99, 132, 180, 235
Gordon, Rev. William, 164
Gorton, Samuel, 56
Gough's History, 20, 91
Grasse, Count de, 117
Gravesend, N. Y., 195
Greaton, Father, 116
Green, Edward, 288
Greene, Mrs. Abigail, 306
Greene, M. H., 51, 91, 99
Greene, Gen. Nathanael, 305f
Grellet, Stephen, 178

Grenville, Lord, 230
Gresham College, 118
Grimball, Paul, 166
Grove, John, 283
Guest, Judge, 209
Gurney, Eliza P., 3098
Gurney, Joseph John, 310
H
Hacker, Colonel, 10
Hague, The, 136
Hall, John, 24
Hamilton, John, 167
Hammond, John, 199
Hampden, John, 26
Hampton, N. H., 54, 74
Harmon, John, 24
Harrisburg, 300
Hart, John, 186
Hart, Thomas, 24
Hartford, Conn., 62
Harvey, Father, 116
Harwood, John, 24
Hatherly, Timothy, 78
Hawett, William, 166
Hazard, Caroline, 100, 206
Hazard, Thomas, 86, 206
Hazard, T. R., 102, 306
Hempstead, L. I., 149
Hening's " Statutes at Large,"
etc., 154
Henley, Henry, 199
Hill, Henry, 250
Hill, Richard, 135
Hills, Rev. G. M., 115
Hispaniola, 59
Hoight, Samuel, 151
Holder, Christopher, 65
Hollister, Dennis, 3
Holmes, Thomas, 288
Holmes, Rev. Obadiah, 58
Hookes, Ellis, 283
Howard, John, 217
Howe, Lord, 24iff
Howe, Mrs., 237, 239
Howes, Job, i73f
Hoxie, H. N., 83
Hudson, Thomas, 24

INDEX

323

Hughes, John, 230
Huguenots, 167, 172
Hull, Henry, 178
Hunt, John, 30of
Hunter, Governor, 146
Huntingdon, Lady, 246, 247
Hussey, Christopher, 75
Hutchinson, Governor, 254
Hutchinson, Ann, 93
Hutchinson, Edward, 93
Hyde, Lord, 240

Independency, 115
Independents, 151, 235
Ingelo, Richard, 288

Jacob, 235
Jamaica, 59, 236
James and Drinker, 295
James I, 118, 179
James II, 15, 18, 93, 113, 116,
158, 284ft, 291
Jamestown, Va., 48, 119, 155
Janney, R, 6
Janney, S. M., 306
Janney, Thomas, 288
Jefferson, Thomas, 307
Jennings, Samuel, 26
Jervis, Charles, 301
Jesuits, 17, 160, 161
Jews, 16, 19, 46, 89, 151, 161
"John and Sarah," Ship, 105
Johnson, David, 7
Johnson, Sir Nathaniel, 165,
175
Johnson, Samuel, 24
Johnson, Samuel, Dr., 235, 236
Johnson, Timothy, 7
Jones, Griffith, 289
Jones, Owen, Jr., 301
Judith, Point, 102
Justice, Miss Hilda, 145
K
Keith, Sir William, 142
Kimball, Gertrude S., 148

" King's Missive," 61, 67
Kingstown, South, 49, 206
Kingston Meeting, London, 17
Kinnersley, Ebenezer, 219
Kinsey, John, 129, 142, 209
Kirby, Colonel, 11
Kotzebue, 144

Lafayette, Marquis de, 117
Lamb, Charles, 7
Lancaster, Jail, n
Langstaffe, 291
Lansdale, Dr., 212
Latey, Gilbert, 21, 24, 199
Lauderdale, 121
Leddra, William, 66
Leisler, Jacob, 290
Lettsom, Doctor, 250
Lever, William, 199
Lexington, 222
Lichfield, England, 58
Lincoln, Abraham, 309ff
Lloyd, David, 121, 169, 208
Lloyd, Thomas, 204, 288
Locke, John, 163
Logan, Deborah, 134
Logan, James, 6, 113, 125, 132
London, City of, 2, 9, 94, 98
Loudoun, Lord, 147
Lower, Thomas, 21, 24
Luzerne, 117 M
Macy, Thomas, 74
Madison, James, 307
Magistrates, Quaker, 27
Mansfield, Lord, 33
Maryland, is6ff
Massachusetts, 6, 41 ff, 253, 256
Maurice, Prince, 22
Maverick, Samuel, 40, 60
McKinley, A. E., 50, 52, 79. 85,
118, 155, 158, 179. 194
McKean, Chief Justice Thom
as, 303
McPherson, Hist. Eng., 291

324

INDEX

McSparran, Rev. Dr., 87, 117,
176
Mead, William, 24, 193, 197, 266
Menists, Mennonites, 22
Michel, Henry, 199
Middleton, Lord, 91, 121
Mifflin, General, 305
Mifnin, Warner, I44f
Milson, Charles, 199
Mirabeau, 263, 267ff
Mirabeau, French text of reply
of, 275
Mirabeau, Translation of reply
of, 268
Mitchel, of Mass. General
Court. 71
Mompesson, Judge, 209
Montgomerie, Gov. John, 152
Moody, Lady Deborah, 195
Moohausic, River, 85
Moore, "Mr.," 115
Moore, Nicholas, 192
Morris, General, 305
Moravians, 32
Morris, Lewis, 152
Morris, Secretary William, 68
Mott, Hannah B., 310
Mott, Mary, 306 N
Nanfan, Gov. John, 151
Nantucket, Mass., 75, 195, 253ff
Netherlands, 149
New Bedford, Mass., 254, 256,
270
Newcastle, Del., 134!
New Hampshire, 73
New Haven, Conn., 42, 51, 85,
181
New Jersey, 86, 132, I45ff
Newman, Mr., 85
Newport, R. I., 49f, 86, 90, 94,
99, 181
Newton, Isaac, 3i2f
Newton, Sir Isaac, 108
New York, 46, 90, i49ff, 290
Norris, Isaac, 135, 229
Norton, Humphrey, 45

Norton, John, 69
Nova Scotia, 90

Oath, The, 4ff, loof
O'Callaghan, 149, i52f
Oldner, George, 24
Olive, Thomas, 26, 204
Orange, William of, 22, 93
Osgood, H. L., 156, 165, 173
Oxley, John, 211

Paine, Judge, 258
Paine, Thomas, 298
Palfrey, Dr., 66
Palmer, Henry, 49, 181
Papists, 12
Parker, Colonel, 131
Partridge, Ralph, 99
Partridge, Richard, ggi
Partridge, Hon. William, 99
Peale, Charles Wilson, 299
Pease, Joseph, 37
Peasley, Joseph, 74
Pembertons, The, 224
Pemberton, Israel, 225, 301
Pemberton, James, 231, 233,
245, 301
Pemberton, John, 297, 301
Pemberton,. Phineas, 288
Penn, Granville, 132
Penn, Gulielma, 285
Penn, John, 130, 141, 227
Penn, Admiral Sir W., 59
Penn, Thomas, 130, 226
Penn, William, 3, 5, 6, 18, 22,
42, iosff, 182, i97ff
Penington, Edward, 301
Penington, Isaac, 2
Pennsylvania, 46, 54, iosff, 2041,
208ff, 224ff
Pennsylvania Hospital, 247
Perth Amboy, 146
Peterborough, Lord, 108
Peters, Digma, 194
Petersburg, Va., 178

INDEX

325

Petition to French Assembly,
263
Petition, French text of, 271
Philadelphia, 115, 127, 131,
i37ff, 185
" Philadelphia," Ship, 135
Pierson, Rev. Abraham, 145
Pike, E. C, 194
Pike, Thomas, 301
Pine, Lieutenant Robert, 74
Pilgrims, 80, 180
Piozzi, Mrs., 293
Pitt, William, 147, 255
Pleasants, Samuel, 301
Plumstead, William, 199
Plymouth, Mass., 43, 47f, 80,
119, 181
Pocasset [Portsmouth, R I.],
79, 86, 181
" Polly," Ship, 295
Poore's " Charters," etc., 207
" Popish Mass," The, 115
Portsmouth, N. H., 54, 73
Potter, 102
" Potwalloper Franchise," 114
Pownall, Governor, 242
Prence, Governor Thomas, 45,
82
Preston, Richard, 162
Preston, Samuel, 135
Protestants, 114
Proud, Robert, 143
Providence, R. I., 87, 93
Puritans, 4iff, 54ff, io6f
Pusey, Caleb, 22 Q
Quare, Daniel, 21, 24
Quincy, Josiah, Jr., 221

Randolph, Edward, 761, 87, 290
Rawson, Edward, 67
" Religious Freedom," Act of,
158
Rheims, Archbishop of, 116
Rhoads, J. E., 259

Rhode Island, 451, 48f, 52, 58,
73, 84ff
Richardson, John, 195
Richards, Cardinal, 118
Roades, Jon., 288
Roberts, John, 7
Roberts, John, 303
Robespierre, 270
Robinson, William, 66
Rodman, Capt. Thomas R.,255
Rodman, Samuel, 255
Rochambeau, Comte de, 117
Roman Catholics, i5f, 46, 89,
106, 114, isof, I54ff, 161, 174,
196, 289
Romney, Lord, in
Rotch, Benjamin, 255, 263
Rotch, Francis, 253
Rotch, Joseph, 253
Rotch, Joseph, Jr., 253
Rotch, Nancy, 254
Rotch, William, 253ff, 261, 270
Rothschild, Baron, 19
Rotterdam, 109
Rous, Francis, 4
Russel, Michael, 24
Rye House Plot, 1

Sabbatarians, 151
Salem, Mass., 59, 65
Salem, N. J., 135
Salisbury, Eng., 253
Salisbury, N. H., 74
Salomons, Alderman, 19
Sanborn, F. B., 61, 73
Sanborn, John, 75
Sandwich, Mass., 43, 8off, 299
Sargent, Winthrop, 302
Saumur [France], 160
" Settlement, Act of," 118
Seward, Sec'y W. H., 311
Sewel's History, 1
Scituate, Mass., gdi
Shaftesbury, Lord, i63f
Sharpless, Pres. Isaac, 122, 129,
210

325

INDEX

Shattuck, Samuel, 65
Shepherd, W. R, 108, 109, 113,
118, 122, 128, 130, 138
Sherwood, John, 99
Shoemaker, Samuel, 300
Shrewsbury, N. J., 149
Simpcock, Jon., 288
Skiffe, Stephen, 84
Sloughter, Governor, 150
Smith, Dr. George, 294
Smith, Samuel, 145, 204
Smith, William, 166, 301
Smith, William Drewet, 301
Smith and Sharp, 215
Smollett, Tobias, 293
Smyth, A. H., 119
South Carolina, 46, i63ff
Southerbe, William, 288
Sparks, Jared, 230
Spence, 108, 219
Standish, Myles, 80
Stanton, Sec'y Edward, 313
Starbuck, 195
Stephen, Sir Leslie, 14
Stevenson, Marmaduke, 66
St. Germain, 285
St. Joseph's, 117
Story, Thomas, 31, 163, 184,
209, 285
Stone, Gov. William, 157
Strickland, Agnes, 285
Stuyvesant, Governor, 149, 195
Supremacy, Oath of, 13, 15, 154
Swift, Hannah, 81
Swinton, John, 3
Sydney, Algernon, 107

Talbot, Rev. John, 115
Taylor, Christopher, 288
Taylor, John, 21
Test Act, 18, 173
Thistleton-Dyer, Th., 64
Thomas, Gabriel, 208
Thomas, Richard, 24
Thomson, Charles, 8
Thornton, James, 308
Thrale, Mrs., 235

Tilton, John, 195
Tillotson, Bishop, 17
Toleration Act, 19, 123, I27f
Tolstoi, Count, 192
Toms, Francis, 163
Tory, Tories, 281, 294, 298f
Transubstantiation, 18
Treaty Elm, 133 U
Underhill, Walter, 154
Uniformity, Act of, 197
University — Suffrage, 118, 179
Upland, Penna, 205

Vagabond Laws, 63f
Vagrant Laws, 43, 64
Vassal, of Scituate, 47
Vaughan, Chief Justice, 198
Veere, Thomas, 199
Venables, General, 59
Vesey, " The Widow," 194
Virginia, 41, 48, 58, 101, 113,
I54f
Voltaire, 133 W
Wallace, Captain, 306
Waller, Edmund, 24, 26
Walklet, Gregary, 199
Wain, Nicholas, 211
Walpole, Spencer, 37
Warwick, R. I., 56
Wanton, Edward, 94
Wanton, Gideon, 97
Wanton, John, 95ff, 99
Wanton, Joseph, 97
Wanton, Joseph, 2d, 97
Wanton, Joseph, 3d, g7
Wanton, William, 95, 97
Washington, D. C., 310
Washington, George, 117, 301,
304, 307
Watertown, Mass., 2S8
Watson, John, 256

INDEX

327

Watson, Luke, 288
Way, John, 151
Webb, George, S2
Webb, Maria, 12. 2S3
Weeks, S. B., 28, 176, 307
" Welcome," Ship, 105
Welsh Quakers in Penna., 137
Welsh, William, 131
Wentworth, Lady Isabella, 285
Wesley, Susanna, 286
West, Benjamin, 133
Westchester Co., N. Y., 153
Westcott, Thomas, 169
West India Co., 149
Westminster, 3, 193
Westminster Hall, 2
Wetherill, Samuel, Jr., 30lf
Whalley, Theophilus, ioif
Wharton, Thomas, 301
Whipple, Joseph, 50
Whitall, John M., 310
White, Andrew D., 192
Whitefield, George, 247
Whitehead's " Contributions,"
146
Whitehead, George, I9f, 30, 122
Whitemarsh, 294
Whittier, John G., 61, 67
Willet, Andrew, 102
Willet, Colonel Francis, 102
Willet, Thomas, 102
William IV, 32

William and Mary, 14, 19, 21,
30, 33, 94, n8, 123, 127, 150,
286, 289f
Williams, John, 62
Williams, Roger, 851, git
Wilmot, Lord, 282
Wing, Daniel, 81 f
Wing, Deborah, 81
Wing, Ebenezer, 192
Wing, John, 81 f
Wing, Stephen, 82f
Winthrop, Governor John, 42,
52,92
Winthrop, Samuel, 92
Winchester, Virginia, 178
Winchmore Hill, 218
Winslow, Edward, s8f
Winsor, Justin, 42, 124
Wood, Mary R., 193
Wood, William, 288
Woolman, John, 144
Worcester, 8, 203, 28if
Worminghurst, 132
Worth, H. B., 76
Wynington, Sir Francis, 25

Yarmouth, Mass., 83, 299
Yonge, Sir William, 291
York, Duke of, 150

THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF
ALLEN JAY
THE LIFE OF A WELL KNOWN FRIEND
Allen Jay is one of the best known mem
bers of the Society of Friends, and his long
life of seventy-eight years has been almost
entirely devoted to religious and benevolent
work. The author's life is so intimately connected
with the modern history of Friends, both in
America and other countries, that this volume
will be of the greatest interest, not only to
Friends, but to others, from a historical
standpoint. In telling the story of his career,
Allen Jay touches on many subjects, such as
the following:
Randolph Meeting at Dayton, Ohio; the
Millerites and Spiritualists; West Branch
Quarterly Meeting; the Friends in Indiana,
and Greenfield Monthly Meeting. Allen Jay's
beginnings in the Ministry; the Civil War;
the Draft and the Anti-Slavery Separation
in Indiana Yearly Meeting; Allen Jay's
Activity Among Friends in Maryland, North
Carolina, and Tennessee; Conditions in Car
olina at the Close of the Civil War ; the Balti
more Association; Work of Francis T. King,
John Scott and other Friends ; Allen Jay's
Visits and Work in Great Britain and Nor
way; at Friends' Boarding School in Provi
dence, Rhode Island; Earlham College and
its History; the Five Years' Meeting; Cali
fornia Yearly Meeting; Guilford, Earlham
and Whittier Colleges; Work in Oregon,
Washington, North Carolina and Nebraska.
This hook is fully illustrated and handsomely
hound in cloth. Price $1.50 Net.
THE JOHN C. WINSTON CO.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

JESUS OF
NAZARETH IN THE
LIGHT OF TO-DAY
By ELBERT RUSSELL
Professor in Earlham College
Author of " The Parables of Jesus"
AN INTERESTING MODERN VIEW-POINT
In this book Professor Russell makes "an
effort to show Jesus in His saving truth and
power to those who may be alienated from
the Christ of past generations." The result
is clear and impressive.
The author considers the character of the
Saviour reverently yet without passion. As
suming the standpoint of the intelligent man
of to-day, — "who thinks in terms of the
evolutionary philosophy and who presup
poses the commonly accepted results of
Biblical criticism" — he makes a fresh inter
pretation, simple and popular in method and
positive and religiously helpful in its result,
of the historical character and spiritual
significance of Jesus of Nazareth.
12mo. 5i by 7f inches. 112 pages. Silk Cloth
Price 60 Cents Net
Postage 6 Cents
THE JOHN C. WINSTON CO.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

A History OF
The Society of Friends
in America Br
ALLEN C. THOMAS, A.M.
HAVERFORD COLLEGE
AND
RICHARD H. THOMAS, M.D.
BALTIMORE, MD.

NEW AND REVISED EDITION, 1905
Brought down to date and including valu
able statistics and information in regard to
the Society of Friends in America.

" A work on 'The History of the Society
of Friends in America,' which is likely for
many days to be a standard text-book on the
subject." — The London Friend.
" We have read it with interest. It gives
evidence of much research and of a disposi
tion to observe the impartiality of faithful
historians." — The Friend, Philadelphia.

I2mo. Cloth. Price, $1.00 Net
(Postage, 15 Cents)

THE JOHN C. WINSTON CO.
PHILADELPHIA

SOCIAL LAW IN THE
SPIRITUAL WORLD

Studies in Human and Divine Inter-Relationship
BY
Rufus M. Jones, A.M. , Litt. D.
Professor of Philosophy in Haverford College, Pa.
This is a fresh interpretation of the deep
est problems of life. It discusses the most
interesting phases of recent psychological in
vestigation into spiritual subjects.
<; Prof essor Jones offers here a series of studies
on the nature and meaning of Personality.
He is at home in modern psychology and tells
it effectively for his purpose in freedom from
technicalities." — The Outlook.
"The author has written the twelve chapters
of this book dealing with such subjects as The
Meaning of Personality, The Realization of
Persons, The Sub-Conscious Life, The Inner
Light, etc., etc., with an aim to show through
Psychology, as Drummond showed through
Biology, that life can be unified from top to
bottom." — Christian Work and the Evan
gelist. " The author bears a unique equipment for
the task, having studied Philosophy at Harvard
under Royce and Palmer, and acquired the art
of presenting it to untrained thinkers in his
capacity of Professor of Philosophy at Haver
ford College." — British Friend.
12mo. 272 pages. Extra Vellum Cloth,
Gilt Top, Uncut Edges. Price$1.2S
Net {Postage 10 Cents).
THE JOHN C. WINSTON COMPANY
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Practical Christianity

By Rufus M. Jones, A.M., Litt.D.
Professor of Philosophy at
Haverford College
NEW AND REVISED EDITION
This is a collection of short, prac
tical articles on important religious sub
jects. It deals with questions which
every thinking man must meet in a
practical way, and it contains a positive
message for the times.
In the sixty -six essays many of the
most important phases of the spirituallife
receive consideration, and the notes of
hope and victory, and faith in the over
coming life, are everywhere manifest.
It is a book which should appeal to all
classes of Christians. The book also
contains a suggestive chapter on ' ' The
Message of Quakerism."
This Second Edition contains thir
teen additional chapters on timely sub
jects. 12mo. 208 Pages. Oxford laid paper.
Bound in cloth. Price $1.00 postpaid.

THE JOHN C. WINSTON COMPANY
PHILADELPHIA, PA.

The United States a
Christian Nation
BY
HON. DAVID J. BREWER,
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court United States.
Haverford College Library Lectures, 1905.

In this book the distinguished Christian Jurist has
discussed three important topics:
First. "THE UNITED STATES A
CHRISTIAN NATION," in which he shows
why our Republic should be so classified, basing
his argument upon the Decisions of the Supreme
Court, Colonial Charters, Constitution of the
United States, and National and State Legislation.
Second. "OUR DUTY AS CITIZENS."
A strong plea for Business Honesty and Integrity,
for Liberty and the Rights of Man, for Education,
for Peace and Temperance.
Third. "THE PROMISE AND POSSI
BILITIES OF THE FUTURE." An earnest
and eloquent exhortation to the young men of
America to temper their devotion to country with
fidelity to the teachings of the Gospel.
Issued October 1, 190S.
12mo. 100 pp. Price, postpaid, $ 1 .00.

THE JOHN C. WINSTON COMPANY
PHILADELPHIA