reasonable motives, would lead, if not watched and checked, to other still greater changes; and because an uninterrupted succession of such changes would bring the minds of their youth under the most imperious of all despotisms, the despotism of fashion;—in consequence of which they would cleave to the morality of the world instead of the morality of the Gospel.

And fourthly, because, in proportion as young persons deviate from the plainness and simplicity of the apparel as worn by the Society, they approach in appearance to the world, they mix with it, they imbibe its spirit, and admit its customs, and come into a situation which subjects them to be disowned; and this is so generally true, that of those persons, whom the Society has been obliged to disown, the commencement of a long progress in irregularity may often be traced to a deviation from the simplicity of their dress. And here it may be observed, that an effect has been produced by this care concerning dress, so beneficial to the moral interests of the Society, that they have found in it a new reason for new vigilance on this subject. The effect produced is a general similarity of outward appearance in all the members, though there is a difference both in the form and colour of their clothing: and this general appearance is such, as to make them still known to the world. The dress, therefore, of the Quakers, by distinguishing the members of the Society, and making them known as such to the world, makes the world overseers, as it were, of their moral conduct. And that it operates in this

way, or that it becomes a partial check in favour of morality, there can be no question. For a Quaker could not be seen either at public races, or at cockfightings, or at assemblies, or in public-houses, but the fact would be noticed as singular, and probably soon known among his friends. His clothes would betray him. Neither could he, if at a greater distance from home, and if quite out of the eye and observation of persons of the same religious persuasion, do what many others do. For a Quaker knows that many of the customs of the Society are known to the world at large, and that a certain conduct is expected from a person in his habit. The fear, therefore, of being detected, and at any rate of bringing infamy on his cloth, if I may use the expression, would operate so as to keep him out of many of the vicious customs of the world.

From hence it will be obvious, that there cannot be any solid foundation for the charge which has been made against the Quakers on the subject of dress. They are found in their present dress, not on the principle of an attachment to any particular form, or because any one form is more sacred than another, but on the principle that an unreasonable deviation from any simple and useful clothing is both censurable and hurtful, if made in conformity with the fashions of the world. These two principles, though they may produce, if acted upon, a similar outward appearance in persons, are yet widely distinct, as to their foundation, from one another. The former is the principle of dolatry. The latter is that of religion. If, there

fore, there be persons in the Society, who adopt the former, they will come within the reach of the charge described: but the latter only can be adopted by true Quakers.

VOL. I.

CHAPTER II.

Quakers are in the use of plain furniture—this usage founded on principles similar to those on dressthis usage general-Quakers have seldom paintings, prints, or portraits, in their houses, as articles of furniture-reasons for their disuse of such

articles.

As the members of this Society are found in the use of garments differing from those of others in their shape and fashion, and in the graveness of their colour and in the general plainness of their appearance, so they are found in the use of plain and frugal furniture in their houses.

The custom of using plain furniture has not arisen from the circumstance, that any particular persons in the Society, estimable for their lives and characters, have set the example in their own families, but from the principles of the Quaker-constitution itself. It has arisen from principles similar to those, which dictated the continuance of the ancient Quaker-dress. The choice of furniture, like the choice of clothes, is left to be adjudged by the rules of decency and usefulness, but never by the suggestions of show. The adoption of taste instead of utility, in this case, would be considered as a conscious conformity with the fashions of the world. Splendid furniture, also, would be considered as pernicious as splendid clothes. It would be classed with external ornaments, and would be

reckoned equally productive of pride with these. The custom, therefore, of plainness in the articles of domestic use is pressed upon all members: and that the subject may not be forgotten, it is incorporated into their religious discipline; in consequence of which it is held forth to their notice, in a public manner in all the monthly and quarterly meetings of the kingdom, and in all the preparative meetings at least once in a year.

It may be admitted as a truth, that the Society practises, with few exceptions, what is considered to be the proper usage on such occasions. The poor, we know, cannot use any but homely furniture. The middle classes are universally in such habits. As to the rich, there is a difference in the practice of these. Some, and indeed many of them, use as plain and frugal furniture as those in moderate circumstances. Others, again, step beyond. the practice of the middle classes, and buy what is more costly, not with a view of show, so much as to accommodate their furniture to the size and, goodness of their houses. In the houses of others, again, who have more than ordinary intercourse with the world, we now and then see what is elegant, but seldom what would be considered to be extravagant furniture. We see no chairs with satin bottoms and gilded frames, no magnificent pierglasses, no superb chandeliers, no curtains with extravagant trimmings: at least in all my intercourse with the Quakers I have never observed such things. If there are persons in the Society, who use them, they must be few in number: and these must be conscious that, by the introduction of such