QUAKERS IN PENNSYLVANIA

The Quakers were quick to perceive the vanity underlying most of the customs and habits prevalent in their day, hence their determined opposition. For titles and worldly honors generally, they always entertained special aversion. An instance is on record where William Penn was once accosted as Lord Penn in the colony of Pennsylvania. To evidence its great displeasure the assembly promptly ordered the practice to be discontinued, and a fine was imposed on the transgressor, presumably to stimulate his memory in the future. When addressing Charles II., Penn never referred to him as "His Majesty," but always as "Friend Charles;" and the king, either in his characteristic spirit of levity or mockery, styled the son of the admiral as "Friend William."

The Quakers even discarded the use of the ordinary master or sir in conversation and correspondence. They contended that the Bible nowhere contained any such expression as "My Lord Peter" or "My Lord Paul." They honored "all men in the Lord," but "not in the fashion of this world that passeth away." When William Penn became a convert to Quakerism, he positively refused to take off his hat to anyone. His courtly father, being exceedingly provoked at what he deemed such unreasonable conduct, tried to conciliate the youthful proselyte. He proposed a compromise, that his son should only uncover his head before three persons; to wit, the king, the duke of York, and last but by no means least, the admiral himself. Yet even this apparently innocent concession William positively declined to make. He declined to remove his hat even in the presence of his father, because, as Mr. Graham expresses it, "he refused to lay a single grain of incense on what he deemed an unhallowed altar of human arrogance and vanity." It is related that George III., when he granted an audience to the Quakers, took care to save his honor, and at the same time to spare his own royal feelings, by stationing at the door of his chamber an extra groom, whose sole duty it was to remove the hats of the visitors as they approached the monarch. Such, indeed, was the obstinacy of the Friends in retaining their head gear, that one writer, in evident exasperation, declared that "their virtue lies in their hats, as Sampson's did in his hair."

The Quakers rejected the custom of saying good night, good morning, good day, or passing the other ordinary compliments of the season. Penn

VOL. XXVIII.-No. 5.-23

excused such behavior by alleging that "they knew the night was good and the day was good without wishing of either." The members of the society always recommended silence by example as well as by precept. They rarely employed more words than were absolutely necessary to convey the intended meaning. Penn earnestly advised his brethren and sisters in the faith to "avoid company where it is not profitable or necessary; and on those occasions speak little; silence is wisdom, where speaking is folly." Attempts at ornamentation were viewed with grave suspicion, because they were deemed frivolous, and anything partaking of this nature, the Quaker believed to be injurious. The houses of the Friends were generally very plain, and almost entirely innocent of any sort of adornment or ostentation. Pictures for the decoration of their dwellings were used but sparingly. Wall paper was introduced, under protest, about the year 1790. Antecedent to this date, the reign of whitewash had been universal. Carpets were deemed an undesirable luxury, for fresh sand was considered more healthful. But in the march of progress carpets had to come, and the year 1750 is given in the books as that of their advent. Sewell mentions a case where one gentleman, in his desire for simplicity, even banished from his fireside the luxury of a pair of tongs, and substituted the primitive implement of a cloven stick.

Juridical procedure among the Quakers was both curious and instructive. When the members of the society disagreed they seldom scolded or went to law. All their disputes were adjusted by what we call, in the language of administration, boards of arbitration. These peace commissioners, so to speak, arranged all difficulties arising between the Europeans and the Indians, as well as settling altercations between the colonists themselves. Agesilaus, the famous king of Sparta, being asked on one occasion, "What ought children to learn?" quickly responded, "That which they ought to practice when they become men." With this opinion Penn's belief coincided exactly. At an early period in his administration of the Quaker colony he ordered that "all children within this province, of the age of twelve years, shall be taught some useful trade or skill to the end none may be idle, but the poor may work to live, and the rich if they become poor may not want." In his frame of government, Penn declared that a committee on manners, education, and art should be appointed, so that all "wicked and scandalous living may be prevented, and that youth may be trained up in virtue and useful arts and knowledge." As early as 1683, an educational institution was established for the instruction of the children of the colonists. In 1689 the Quakers opened another school for "all children and servants, male and female-the rich at reasonable rates;

the poor for nothing." George Keith was made principal of this foundation, and was assisted by a certain Thomas Makin, who, the records inform the reader, was "a good Latinist." The plan of instruction was similar to that of an ordinary modern grammar school, with the exception that its curriculum included "the learned languages." It was entirely supported by the Friends, but representatives of all denominations were magnanimously permitted to share its advantages.

'With trivial exceptions the Quakers anathematized music in general, and denounced it as invariably corrupting in its tendencies. As early as the year 1536 the English Puritans presented a formal protestation to their king, emphatically declaring "the playing at the organyes a foolish vanity." Fox unhesitatingly affirms-and the majority of the inhabitants of Pennsylvania coincided perfectly in the opinion-" I was moved to cry against all kinds of music, for it burdeneth the pure life." In the opinion of the Quakers the saints alone might sing praise to God (in their worship). Concerning the wicked and the unregenerate, the society had an abiding belief that it would be more appropriate for them to "howl for their sins."

There are certain constant factors in almost every community-namely, marriage and giving in marriage. Cupid exhibited as much activity in the Quaker colony as he did in other portions of the terrestrial globe. At the time, however, of which we write, bashfulness and modesty in youth were regarded as ornaments, nay even as great virtues. "Young lovers," says Watson," then listened and took sidelong glances when before their parents or elders." Marriage among the Friends was a very important institution, and weddings in the early times were always the occasions of great festivity. The matches appear to have arisen solely from inclination. "Never marry but for love," was William Penn's advice to all, "but see that thou lovest what is lovely." The Quakers, moreover, gave considerable publicity to the celebration of marriage. Before the union could be consummated, the intentions of the persons concerned were promulgated by affixing a declaration to that effect on the courthouse or meeting-house door; and when the act was finally solemnized at least twelve subscribing witnesses had to be present. In regard to the ceremony, it was a simple form of marriage in the meeting of their own society. The priest and the ring were discarded as being utterly heathenish. The Friends, in the language of George Fox, declared, "We marry none, but are witnesses of it; marriage being God's joining, not man's." Penn said the Quakers believed "that marriage is an ordinance of God, and that God only can rightly join men and women in marriage." The paper that the engaged lovers submitted to the society was about as follows:

"We, the subscribers, A. B., son of C. and D. B.; and F. G., daughter of H. and I. G., purpose taking each other in marriage, which we hereby offer for the approbation of Friends." Then followed the signatures of the contracting individuals. If no sufficient reasons were discovered for preventing the union, the hymeneal ceremony was performed at the appointed time. The company usually assembled early in the morning, remained to dinner, possibly even to supper. For two entire days it was customary to deal out refreshments with a lavish hand to all who honored the family with their presence. The gentlemen congratulated the groom on the first floor of the dwelling, and then ascended to the second story, where they wished future felicity to the blushing bride, and she was compelled by the unwritten law of the time to undergo the ordeal of being kissed by all the male visitors.

It is somewhat astonishing when we reflect that the Quakers, strenuously opposed, as they unquestionably were, to all sorts of frivolity and ceremony, ever submitted to such veritable nuisances as these weddings. soon turned out to be. The annalist, Watson, relates on credible authority, that it was nothing uncommon for families in affluent circumstances to have "one hundred and twenty persons to dine, the same who had signed their certificate of marriage at the monthly meeting. These," he adds, "also partook of tea and supper." At first these elaborate ceremonies were accepted, if not without question, certainly without expressed opposition. Finally, however, the good Friends revolted from all this worldly excitement and round of festivity. Such frivolities were relegated to the limbo of exploded vanities, and matrimonial alliances were attended with no other ceremony than that of the parties taking each other by the hand in public meeting and avowing their willingness to enter the connubial state, and the marriage certificate was registered in the record book.

No mourning was ever worn for departed friends. Crape was accounted as especially heathenish, and not in accordance with biblical precepts. Even the casket was denied its usual black covering. No vaults were used. Tombstones were also rejected. They were considered an

especial abomination.

In some respects the Philadelphia of that period reminds the historical student of Geneva at the time of Calvin. After nine o'clock at night, the officers at first all private citizens serving in succession-inspected the town, and no inhabitant thereof was permitted to remain at any ordinary (the ancient word for inn or hotel) after that hour without good and sufficient reason. Originally the Quakers prescribed no particular style of

dress; for, in their judgment, it was "no vanity to use what the country naturally produced," and they reproved nothing but that extravagance in raiment which "all sober men of all sorts readily grant to be evil." Wigs were at that period à la mode, and even the inhabitants of Pennsylvania succumbed to the seductive influences of that worldly custom. In the year 1719, a prominent Quaker, in ordering his wearing apparel, writes, "I want for myself and my three sons, each a wig-light, gud bobs." Even Franklin, disdainful as he was of display and artificiality, wore a tremendous horse-hair wig. And Penn's private expense book reveals the startling fact that even the proprietory of the province indulged in these vanities to the extent of four wigs per annum.

In early times, too, the Quaker women wore their colored silk aprons as did the aristocratic ladies of other denominations. And the wealthy arrayed themselves in white satin petticoats embroidered with flowers, and pearl satin gowns with peach-colored cloaks of the same material. Their white and shapely necks were ornamented with delicate lawn or lace, and also with charms. In course of time white aprons were discarded by the élite, and then the Friends abandoned colors and adopted white. The Quaker ladies also wore immense beaver hats, which had scarcely any crown, and were fastened to the head by silken cords tied in a bewitching bow under the chin. This was the so-called skimming dish hat. The Quaker dress, however, gradually assumed a more subdued form.

In the year 1771, the first umbrellas made their appearance in Philadelphia, and were scouted by the more conservative as ridiculous affectation. Afterwards, when the important character of their services was more fully understood and appreciated, their reception was decidedly more cordial.-Extracts from the monograph by Albert C. Applegarth, Ph.D., Quakers in Pennsylvania, Johns Hopkins University Studies.