before Penn received the royal grant. Those worshipping at the Falls of the River and at Chester united in a Monthly Meeting at the latter place before his first arrival in the Province. A Monthly and a Quarterly Meeting at Philadelphia were established in 1682, and, under the latter, there were started in the following year Monthly Meetings at Radnor and Abington. Bucks Quarterly Meeting started with Falls and Middletown Monthly Meetings and in 1684 Darby and Concord Monthly Meetings were established under Chester Quarterly Meeting. The Quarterly Meetings within Pennsylvania associated with those in New Jersey and Maryland in a Yearly Meeting, which, first held in Burlington on 6, 31, 1681, was arranged in 1685 to alternate at Philadelphia and Burlington, and finally in 1760 was fixed at Philadelphia.

The earliest meeting-house erected within the limits of the capital city of the Province was on Delaware Front Street about 60 ft. N. of Arch, and was probably what was known as the "boarded meeting-house," from its material: a brick building, known as "Bank Meeting" or "Meeting on Delaware Side," was soon put on its site. A meeting-house at the Centre, presumably on the lot intended by Penn for it at Twelfth and High Streets, was commenced in 1685, completed in 1689, and torn down after 1700. The "great meeting house" of the period of this history was at the S. W. cor. Market and Delaware Second streets, begun in 12th month, 1695, and used from 6th month following, and pulled down in 1755, to give place to a larger structure (George Vaux's article on Early Friends MeetingHouses written for centennial of Fourth and Arch Meeting).

By the time of the English Revolution, the "Children of the Light,' as they first called themselves, or "Quakers," as they were nicknamed, or "Friends," as they themselves came to speak of those composing their

Society, had been gathering together for about forty years, and had had an organization for more than half that period. The distinguishing doctrine was as to the Inner Light, and led those confident of or seeking direction by that Light to shut themselves off from the distractions of the world, such as music, the fine arts, bright colors, the flattery paid to rank, luxury, etiquette, &ct., and to reject sacraments, priesthood, ritual, and even to some extent the Protestants' dependence upon the Bible. Rather as afterthoughts came the peculiarities most popularly known: the refusal to take an oath, the non-support of ministers, the avoidance of bloodshed, and the wearing of a certain garb. All these peculiarities seem to have been pretty generally adopted among the Quakers by the year 1688. The garb of course has been changed from time to time, the Quakers of that year, at least in America, probably wearing the dress of English tradespeople with an avoidance of ornament. Penn had soon found that wearing a sword, as was the fashion among men of his station in life, made him unpleasantly conspicuous at the meetings, and his wig is described as a small circle to cover the baldness resulting from imprisonment without a barber, and later as an inexpensive article to keep head and ears warm.

How far was carried the discouragement of music and painting is shown in two instances. The Philadelphia Monthly Meeting of 8th month, 1696, hearing that Walter Long had sold Jews-harps, sent to admonish him to take them back, refund the money, and return the Jews-harps whence they came. The Meeting sent also to speak to the widow Culcop to hand over those which she had bought from Long. Long agreed to sell no more, and take back those sold, and stand half the loss. About fifty years later, when, in boyhood, Benjamin West, who was born near the site of Swarthmore College was showing a talent for paint

ing, it was a serious question among the Quakers influential with his parents whether it would be right to permit the exercise of his skill. Fortunately the weightiest appreciated that the talent was God-given. Perhaps the world owes to the Quaker predilection for the matter of fact rather than the imaginative the revolution which West made in the portrayal of modern battles, when he refused to dress General Wolfe and the Indians as Roman soldiers.

Before the Keithian separation, to be narrated in a special chapter, there was no lasting congregation assembled in Pennsylvania outside of the Society of Friends and the Church of Sweden, except two little groups-hardly congregations-of Baptists, one being at Cold Spring, Bucks County, which was established under Rev. Thomas Dungan from Rhode Island about the year 1682, and the other on the Pemmapecka (or Pennypack) Creek in Philadelphia County, of which latter group Samuel Jones and some persons named Eaton had come about 1686 from the Baptist Congregation of Rev. Henry Gregory in Radnorshire followed by John Baker from the congregation at Kilkenny, Ireland, and Samuel Vaus from England. Elias Keach, son of the celebrated English Baptist, Rev. Benjamin Keach, was ordained by Dungan, baptized John Watts and several others, and became in Jany., 1687-8, minister at Pennypack, afterwards going to England, and taking charge of a congregation there. John Holmes, said to have been from Somersetshire, and some time in the West Indies, and to have arrived in Pennsylvania in 1686, who married the widow of Dr. Nicholas More, seems to have been the most conspicuous Baptist layman in the colony before 1700.

The cost of maintaining non-Quaker services was deterring. Quakerism had financial advantages independent of numerical strength. The Quakers felt no call to set apart a place for hallowed uses, and could

meet in private houses until those attending were too numerous to be so accommodated, and too numerous to feel the cost divided among them of buying and building and occasionally warming: and the Quakers paid no salaries to their ministers. When the Society of Friends had the only religious gatherings in a locality, in fact when Quaker meetings were the only gatherings of any sort, the Society was likely to gain accessions. Also we must notice the fact that Deists and Roman Catholics would find it less troublesome to masquerade as Quakers than as any other Protestants, being required only to sit still in meetings, where no sacraments were administered, and rarely, if ever, a chapter in the Bible was read. When the civil authorities relaxed the persecution of Quakers, or when public opinion was tolerant of them, as was not the case with either those who denied Christ, or those who acknowledged the supremacy of a foreign ecclesiastic, some infidels and Papists, no doubt, let themselves be supposed to be Quakers, there being no formality involving a profession of faith. The remark applies more particularly to the growth of Quakerism in other regions than Pennsylvania, and is not to be understood as impugning the sincerity of any of the ministers here or elsewhere.

From 1688 to 1692, the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings in Pennsylvania itself, although it was not so in Delaware, were practically the organization of the Province ecclesiastically as much as the Governor and freemen represented in Council and Assembly were the organization secularly. During those years, and for some time afterwards, the leaders in the former organization were leaders in the latter. It was natural that the spiritual relationship through which the emigrants had first known of one another should be so reflected in their civil government as to make it a theocracy. By popular choice, the Quaker ministers took a more

important part in the temporal business of the infant commonwealth than by custom or statute the bishops did in England. This union of capacities in the same individuals, whereby retributive justice was to be enforced by those who were to preach and exemplify meekness, long suffering, and forgiveness, was very awkward for them. Even when the ministers were seldom members of the Council or Assembly, but those bodies were largely, sometimes entirely, composed of those who had scruples against war, the reference of the question of participation in military measures to those bodies worked badly for the group of British colonies, and for the empire of which this community was a part.

The Society of Friends had been recruited from those social classes which were considerably above George Fox, its recognized Founder, a shoemaker, and considerably below Robert Barclay, its great Apologist, almost a noble, descended in the female line from the Gordons and the first King James of Scotland. It became the Pennsylvania Assembly's boast, as expressed on Dec. 18, 1706, that "this Province was not at first settled, as some others were, either at the charge of the Crown or of any private man; nor was it peopled with the purges of English prisons, but by men of sobriety and substance, who were induced chiefly by the Constitution which by contract with the Proprietary was to be established as that the purchasers and adventurers were to have greater privileges than they enjoyed in their native countries." Of course, there were persons brought over at other's expense and even without their own volition, as some of the servants and sailors, but a number who came as servants or sailors were very shortly afterwards to be described as property-holders or officers. When, in 1685, a large number -Penn says, about 1000-of Monmouth's rebels were to be transported, Penn, before Oct. 2, begged and ob