ites to make mention even of the names of other gods, they thought it inconsistent in Christians to continue to use the names of Heathen idols for the common divisions of their time, so that these names must be almost always in their mouths. They thought, too, that they were paying a homage, in continuing the use of them, that bordered on idolatry. They considered, also, as neither Monday, nor Tuesday, nor any other of these days, were days in which these sacrifices were now offered, they were using words, which conveyed false notions of things. Hence they determined upon the disuse of these words, and to put other names in their stead. The numerical way of naming the days seemed to them to be the most rational, and the most innocent. They called, therefore, Sunday, the First day; Monday, the Second; Tuesday, the Third; and so on to Saturday, which was of course the Seventh. They used no other names but these, either in their conversation or in their letters.

Upon the same principles they altered the names of the months also. Those, such as March and June, which had been so named by the ancient Romans, because they were sacred to Mars and Juno, were exploded, because they seemed, in the use of them, to be expressive of a kind of idolatrous homage. Others, again, were exploded, because they were not the representatives of the truth. September, for example, means the Seventh month from the storms. It took this seventh station in the calendar of Romulus, and it designated there its own

*Septem ab imbribus.

station, as well as the reason of its name. But when it lost its place in the calendar by the alteration of the Style in England, it lost its meaning*, It became no representative of its station, nor any representative of the truth. For it still continues to signify the Seventh month, whereas it is made to represent, or to stand in the place of, the Ninth. The Quakers, therefore, banished from their language the ancient names of the months; and as they thought they could not do better than they had done in the case of the days, they placed numerical in their stead. They called January the First month; February the Second; March the Third; and so on to December, which they called the twelfth. Thus the Quaker-calendar was made up by numerical distinctions, which have continued to the present day.

Another alteration, which took place very generally in the language of the Quakers, was the rejection of the word Saint, when they spoke either of the apostles or of the primitive fathers. The papal authority had canonized these. This they considered to be an act of idolatry, and they thought they should be giving a sanction to superstition, if they continued the use of such a title either in their speech or writings. After this, various other alte

*This was in the year 1752. Prior to this time the year began on the 25th of March, and therefore September stood in the English as in the Roman calendar. The early Quakers, however, as we find by a minute in 1697, had made these alterations; but when the New Style was introduced, they published their reasons for having done so.

rations took place, according as individuals among them thought it right to expunge old expressions and to substitute new; and these alterations were adopted by the rest, as they had an opinion of those, who used them, or as they felt the propriety of doing it. Hence new phrases came into use different from those which were used by the world on the same occasions: and these were gradually spread, till they became incorporated into the language of the Society. Of these, the following examples may suffice.

It is not common with the members of this Society to use the words Lucky, or Fortunate, in the way in which many others do. If a Quaker had been out on a journey, and had experienced a number of fine days, he would never say that he had been lucky in his weather. In the same manner, if he had recovered from an indisposition, he would never say, in speaking of the circumstance, that he had Fortunately recovered; but he would say that he had recovered, and that it was a Favour. Luck, Chance, or Fortune, are not allowed by the Qua kers to have any power in the settlement of human affairs.

It is not usual with them to beg ten thousand Pardons, as some of the world do, for any little mistake. A Quaker generally, on such an occasion, ask the person to excuse him.

They never make use of the expression "Christian name." This name is called Christian by the world, because it is the name given to children in baptism, or, in other words, when they are christened, or when they are initiated as Christians. But the

Quakers are never baptized. They have no belief that water-baptism can make a Christian, or that it is any true mark of membership with the Christian church. Hence, a man's Christian name is called by them his First name, because it is the first of the two, or of any other number of names, that may belong to him.

In meeting a person, they never say "Good morrow," because all days are equally good. Nor, in parting with a person at night, do they say "Good evening," for a similar reason; but they make use, in the latter case, of the expression "Farewell."

I might proceed, till I made a little vocabulary of Quaker-expressions; but this is not necessary, and it is not at all consistent with my design. I shall therefore only observe, that it is expected of Quakers that they should use the language of the Society; that they should substitute Thou for You; that they should discard all flattering titles and expressions;—and that they should adopt the numerical instead of the Heathen names of the days and months. George Fox gave the example himself in all these instances. Those of the Society, who depart from this usage, are said by the Quakers to depart from "the plain language."

Great objections by the world against the preceding alterations by the Quakers-first, against the use of Thou for You-You, said to be no longer a mark of flattery-the use of it said to be connected with false grammar-custom said to give it; like a noun of number, a singular as well as plural meaning Consideration of these objections.

THERE will be no difficulty in imagining, if the Quakers have found fault with the words and expressions adopted by others, and these the great majority of the world, that the world would scrutinize and find fault with those of the Quakers, in return. This, in fact, has turned out to be the case; and I know of no subject, except that of dress, where the world has been more lavish of its censures than in that before us.

When the Quakers first appeared, as a religious community, many objections were thrown out against the peculiarities of their language. These were noticed by Robert Barclay and William Penn. And since that time other objections have been started. But as these have not been published, (for they remain, where they have usually been, in the mouths of living persons,) Quaker-writers have not felt themselves called upon to attempt to answer them. These objections, however, of both descriptions, I shall notice in the present place.