Keith's followers set up a new organization, called the "Christian Quakers and Friends," but the organization. did not last very long. Keith's connection with political matters must be passed over, as well as the general political matters of the colony. The colony was taken possession of by the crown, mainly on account of the refusal of the Assembly to vote any money for military purposes, though Penn's arrest for treason, and the Keith disorders had their influence in bringing it about. The colony was restored to Penn in 1694. It has been claimed that he did not at that time object to granting money or men for the defense of the frontier, but it appears that he simply said he would transmit to the Assembly "all orders that the crown might issue for the safety and security of the province."1

The Society continued to increase in numbers, so that in 1700 there were forty individual meetings or congregations. There were many Welsh settlers, who took up land to the north and west of Philadelphia, and a number of meetings were established among them.

Thus the seventeenth century closed with congregations of Friends established in all of the colonies under the English rule, while in Pennsylvania they were the controlling element, and in the Jerseys and Maryland they had much influence in modifying legislation.

Society of the People called Quakers, cleared, etc.," Sewel, pp. 619-626; "Christian Doctrine," etc., pp. 6 ff. (in part); Barclay, "Inner Life' (p. 375, note), says that Keith was disowned "for his unbearable temper and carriage." The London Epistle for 1695 speaks of "G. K." as continuing in the same spirit of discord and opposition." ("Epistles," vol. i., p. 82.) For the account of an eye witness in London; [John Whiting] "Persecution Expos'd," etc., London, Assigns of J. Sowle, 1715, p. 231. For a graphic account of a personal dispute with George Keith at Lynn, Mass.; Journal of John Richardson, Philadelphia, Joseph Crukshank, 1783, pp. 103-127.

1 Bowden, vol. ii., p. 134; Janney, chap. xxviii., p. 395; Proud, vol. i., chaps. xi.-xiii.

CHAPTER IV.

THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

IT will be impracticable to describe in detail the progress of the Society during the eighteenth century, nor is it needful, for there are no essential features of difference in any one part of the country. During the earlier years of the century, Friends, except where the privileges had been attained, were striving to obtain relief from the imposition of taxes for the support of a state church, from the requirement of taking judicial oaths, and from contributing directly to the support of the army. Their success in these respects in Massachusetts, Maryland, and North Carolina has been already referred to, and, with the exception of military service, most of the privileges sought were acquired. In Pennsylvania, owing to the increase of immigrants belonging to other denominations, to the colonial wars, and to the dissatisfaction of the English Government with the peace principles of the Quakers, the majority of Friends in the Assembly decreased, until in 1756 six Friends vacated their seats in the Assembly, and at the next election others declined to be candidates. And from this time Friends discouraged members of the Society from holding any office.1 The exact time when the

66

1 Colonial Records, vol. vii., pp. 82, 84, 86, 292; Archives, vols. v., vi. ; Hazard's Register," vol. v., p. 115; "The Friend" (Philadelphia), vols. xix., xx.; Thomas F. Gordon, "History of Pennsylvania," Philadelphia, Carey, Lea & Carey, 1829, pp. 281, 321 ff., 339 ff.; Bowden, vol. ii., pp. 278 ff.; A. C. Applegarth, in "Johns Hopkins University Studies," vol. x. pp. 427 ff.; Michener, pp. 274, 281; “Memoirs of Samuel Fothergill," pp.

political control of the Quakers ceased in Pennsylvania is hard to determine.

The troubles in 1754 and 1755 led to the establishment in 1756 of the first "Meeting for Sufferings" in America. Its object primarily was to extend relief and assistance to Friends on the frontiers who might suffer from the Indians or other enemies, to represent the Yearly Meeting, and to look out for the interests of the Society, etc., but not to "meddle with matters of faith or discipline."1

The Society of Friends continued to grow in the various colonies during the first half of the century, but it is difficult to arrive at a satisfactory estimate of the total number of members. In 1700 the members in England and Wales have been estimated at about 66,000.2 The estimates about 1760 of the number of Friends in Pennsylvania and New Jersey would make the number of Friends in America toward 50,000, perhaps more. But it is impossible to give accurate data. Bownas, who visited America in 1702, and again in 1726, notices the great increase in numbers during the intervening period, and speaks of several meetings of fifteen hundred people.1 With the cessation of persecution and the increase of the number of adherents had come laxity in regard to the good order of the Society, and a declension in spiritual life. This was true of England as well. The journals or lives of 240 ff.; Catharine Phillips, pp. 133, 141; Gough, vol. iv., pp. 458 ff. In Sandwich, Mass., Quarterly Meeting Records, "No members of Select Meeting [ministers and elders] to hold public office of honor, profit, or trust," nor members of " Meeting for Sufferings, "8th Mo. 1788." Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography," vol. x., p. 283.

"

1 Michener, pp. 31 ff.; Bowden, vol. ii., p. 283. The New England Meeting appears to have been established 1775. Book of Discipline," Providence, John Carter, 1785, p. 77; Baltimore, in 1778, "Discipline," p. 46. 2 J. S. Rowntree, p. 73; Barclay, "Inner Life,"

p. 633.

3 Sparks's "Franklin," vol. iv., p. 165 (53,000), but this is much exaggerated; Hazard's Register," vol. v., p. 339 (25,000); Bowden, vol. ii., PP. 245, 376.

4 " Journal," p. 139.

4

Bownas,1 S. Fothergill,2 Catharine (Payton) Phillips,3 William Reckitt, Mary (Peisley) Neale,5 John Griffith, and others are full of testimony to this fact in America, and the manuscript records of the various meetings also bear ample evidence to the same effect. The tendency was, as Bownas remarks, to run to form rather than “to abide in the power and life." There was a great increase in the amount of secular business transacted in the meetings for discipline; the dress and manner of life seemed to attract as much if not more attention than the spiritual condition. of the church. In 1755, in New England especially, a great awakening took place. All who could not show their right of membership were set aside and were required to make new applications for admission. Queries relative to the state of the church were directed by the Yearly Meetings to be answered, and the replies sent to the Yearly Meeting, and there was a general overhauling of the church-membership. The comparatively informal rules of order soon became a Discipline. This movement extended throughout the Society, and marks the beginning of the rigid rules of order which so long characterized it. As has been well said: "The increased attention to the Discipline, valuable and important as it was, was too often associated with too rigid an adherence to forms, and a tendency to multiply rules, and to make the exact carrying of them out, in a degree at least, a substitute for that

1 "Life," p. 139.

2" Memoirs of Samuel Fothergill," Liverpool, 1843, pp. 159, 166, 168, 187, 214, 280 (a long account of the meetings in America in 1756).

3" Memoir of Catharine Phillips," Philadelphia, 1798, pp. 107, 118, 138.

4

Life," London, 1776, pp. 138, 151.

5

Life of Samuel and Mary Neale," London, 1845, pp. 335, 342, 353, 356. 644 Journal," 1779, pp. 371, 375, 381, 394.

Savory

7 Sandwich Monthly Meeting, MS. Records, "8th Mo. 1751 Clifton, an aged minister, under dealing for asking an hired minister to pray for Butler Wing's sick family." "1722, 2nd Mo.": "Friends should not wear periwigs." "1761, 4th Mo.": "Gravestones requested to be removed.”

patient and discriminating wisdom, tempered with love, which should ever characterize Christian discipline."1

Now began the general expulsion of members for marrying non-members, the severe rules in regard to dress and language, and many of those customs and outward practices which a later generation has supposed were peculiar to Friends from their foundation.

There had been various Rules of Discipline observed in England, but no Book of Discipline, as such, had been adopted by the Yearly Meetings until 1738, when a manuscript Book of Rules was sent down from the Yearly Meeting in London to the quarterly meetings. This consisted of quotations from the minutes of the Yearly Meeting and from "Advices" given forth at various times.3 In America the "Canons and Institutions" (p. 200) or a modification of them were in general use, and though there were rules of "good order of truth" adopted by the Virginia Yearly Meeting in 1702, and seventeen "Queries" adopted in 1722, these were not a formal Book of Discipline. Nor is it likely that the references in the Philadelphia Records in 1707 and 1711 refer to anything more. The regular Books of Discipline appear to have been generally adopted about 1759, but they were all in manuscript. With the

6

1 J. B. Braithwaite, "Memoirs of J. J. Gurney," vol. ii., p. 13. 2 See "Treatise Concerning Christian Discipline, Compiled with the Advice of National Meeting of the People called Quakers held in Dublin, in the Year 1746," by John Rutty, M.D. Printed in the year 1752.

3 Barclay, "Inner Life," p. 527. It was not until 1783 that this collection was printed. (London, James Phillips, 1783.) It has been the basis of all subsequent editions and “ Disciplines" issued by the English Friends. 4 Virginia MS. Records, 21st to 23d of 7th mo. [Sept.] 1722." 5 Michener, pp. 250 ff.

6 The Virginia Yearly Meeting adopted a comparatively full Discipline in 1758, which was referred to as a 'Book of Discipline" in an Epistle to "the Yearly Meeting for Pennsylvania and New Jersey," dated the 13th of the 5th mo. to the 15th of the same inclusive, 1758.' Baltimore Yearly Meeting adopted a Book of Discipline in 1759 (no Queries); New England either in 1759 or 1760. (Sandwich Monthly Meeting Records, 8th mo. 1760.)

7 New England Friends revised their Discipline in 1785, compared it with