a 
a4 
word found in their ears, and would pro- 
bably fhudder at the propofal of any inno- 
 wation as the direft of’crimes ! The 1ma- 
gination can fcarcely conceive that change 
which fhould render our books, our know- 
ledge, our opinions, familiar to thefe peo- 
ple. Nothing but entire conguelt would 
feem anywife adequate to this ‘eee 5 3; and 
what a Pandora’s box does that word 
eniguicfe comprifet Getter, furely, that the 
world fhould remain in its prefent mixed 
and imperfect fate, than that an unifor- 
mity of good thould be aimed at t by means 
which are themfelves the greatelt of evils! 
pp nits eRe eae a ae 
To the Editor of the [Monthly Magazine. 
RESPECTED FRIEND, 
N appretiating 1 the Beneca charaSter of 
any body of men, it is equally abfurd 
and unjutt to deferibe it by traits which do 
not exclufively apply, or which may be 
equally p pertinent to any other branch of 
the ee and no lefs fo to impute 
to it practices with which individuals only 
are chargeable. 
A writer in the Magazine, under the 
‘Signature of G. W. has not, I think, been 
faliciently ¢ guarded in thefe refpects in his 
remarks on the fociety called Quakers: 
for altho” he fays thefe remarks, ¢¢ mult not 
_ be accepted as ey applicable,”” he 
offers them as ‘ithe relult of long, atten- 
five, and commodious infpection,” and 
that ‘¢ in various parts cf this kingdom, 
and among very numerous focieties of the 
Friends,’’—thence inferring their appro- 
priate juftice and accuracy. 
The, limits ufually allowed to an Effay 
of this kind do not admit of a difcuffion of 
ali the fubjects involved in thofe remarks. 
4 therefore mean to confine myfelf to fuch 
as firuck me moft forcibly on the perufal. 
He fays, ‘¢ I fhall attempt to eftimate 
the public character of thefe people under 
the threefold divifion of peculiarities praife- 
worthy, dubious, and reprehenfible.”’ 
As tothe two firft claffes, it may be 
worthy of G. W’s cenfideration, whether, 
3f his opinion of them under the firft head, 
3s *‘ the refult of long, attentive, and com- 
modious infpection,’’ he fhould have hefi- 
tated in admitting their fingularity of 
drefs to be more than a prudent “ external 
diftinction,”’ and ¢*a prominent exhibition 
of principles and character to the ocular 
obfervations of their countrymen.”” After 
a more than forty years intimate acquain- 
gance with their principles and practices, 
I never knew that ‘the colour of cloth and 
the difpofal of buttons’? were matters of 
peculiar feruple or ferious regulation 
among them, excepting only fuch advices 
Reply to GW. refpeéting the Quakers. 
as have been from time to time iffued 
againit the ufe of mourning habits, and 
following vain and expenfive fafhions—as 
to black, it is almoft exclufively the livery 
of the clergy, and the glaring colours, 
as red, &c. that of the military orders : on 
which account the fociety may have de-. 
clined the ufe of them in favour of other 
colours. he avoi idance of parade, ex-_ 
penfiyenefs and finery, at once vain and 
vicious, is the fole objeét to which its re- 
ees on this head have refer- 
ence: and of courfe fuch parts of apparel 
as are ‘more adapted to ornament than ule, 
and to eratify that difpofition which in- 
duces the gay and inconfiderate to fubmit 
to the capricious empire of fafhion, mutt 
experience its difapprobation. fs to the 
drefl:s in which the generality of this 
people now appear, it is thought they are 
nearly the fame- which were commonly 
worn by others, at their firft appearance, 
ae fuch particulars wherein an im- 
provement in real convenience was their 
‘ 
inducement to alteration. If this be true, 
the peculiarity of their garb may be rather 
pei to the verfatility of their 
ountrymen than to them.* 
ne they have paid more <f attention 
to certain forms of language in perfonal 
addrefs, dates, and fuperfcriptions,” 1s 
admitted. But I cannot as readily con- 
cede that the period is arrived when the 
plain rules of grammar and Janguage are 
no longer facrificed to ‘* fuperftitious re- 
verence,” and the moft fulfome and un- 
meaning adulation. [ can hardly think 
that G. WwW. on more ferious coniideration, 
will think that the fubftitution of the fin- 
gular for the plural number in addrefling a 
{ingle perfon, or of the numerical names 
of the days and months in lieu of thofe de- 
rived from the heathen mythology, really 
merit the cenfure he has exprefled on that 
account. Or what proof is it of their 
difloyaity and‘want of good fenfe, that in 
their addreffes to the ‘king, whom they 
honour, they refrain from the common 
epithets of moft facred—moft excellent— 
moft high—moft mighty, &c. yet here 
G. W.’s cenfure would apply with pegual 
reafon. 

* The late Dr. Franklin, on being told by a 
perfon with whom in earlier life he had been 
in the habits of intimacy, that his old 
acquaintance were forry to obferve how often 
he had changed his political principles, replied, 
‘¢ Be affured, my dear Sir, they are miftaken 5 
I have kept on in the fame ftraight road ; and 
when they, in crofling it, have met me, * they 
have fuppoied it to be me and not themfelves, 
that was going zig zag. rm a 
28 : Tnew 
