journal #65

The CanadianQuaker History JournalNo. 65 2000

Timothy Rogers’Journal

Benjamin Lundy:Quaker Abolitionist

Memoir ofWilliam Allen

The Women ofYonge Street Meeting

Architectural Heritageof Sparta

The Canadian Quaker History JournalNo. 65 2000

Contents

Yonge Street Monthly Meeting

Timothy Rogers: The Story He wanted to TellChristopher Densmore 1

“A turbulent and contentious spirit”:Discipline among Women in the Yonge Street Community of FriendsRobynne Rogers Healey 6

Canadian Friends and Black History

Quaker Abolitionist Benjamin Lundy and His Visit to Canada Ronald Mattson 27

Memoirs of William AllenFred L. Ryon 37

Sparta

Sparta’s Quaker Heritageby Nick May 54

The Canadian Quaker History Journal is published annually by the Canadian FriendsHistorical Association (as part of the annual membership subscription to the Association).Applications for membership may be made to the address listed below. Membership fees for1998 are:

Libraries and Institutions $15.00General Membership $10.00Life Membership $200.00

Contents of the published articles are the responsibility of the authors.

Copyright © 1999 Canadian Friends Historical Association.

ISSN 1180-968X G.S.T. No. R118831593

Editors: Jane Zavitz-BondAlbert Schrauwers

Production: Albert SchrauwersJane Zavitz-BondSandra FullerRuth Jeffery-MacLean

Letters and submissions from readers are always welcome.

Subscriptions and Correspondence:

Canadian Friends Historical AssociationFriends House60 Lowther Ave.,Toronto, Ont.,M5R 1C7

WWW page: http://www.interhop.net/museum/

Canadian Quaker History Journal, No. 65, 20001

1800 -- two hundred years ago this year-- tolook over the land. He obviously liked whathe saw, for he agreed to settle forty farms oftwo hundred acres each in the district. In thewinter of 1800-1801, Rogers and his familymoved, by sleigh in the dead of winter, toYonge Street. This marks the beginning ofthe Yonge Street Friends Meeting. This wasa critical event for Canadian Quaker history.There was a Quaker community on theNiagara Peninsula dating from the late1780s, but only formally organized asPelham Monthly Meeting in 1799 as a fardistant outpost of Philadelphia YearlyMeeting. The second center of Quakerismin Upper Canada was in Prince EdwardCounty, were Adolphustown MonthlyMeeting, part of New York Yearly Meetingwas organized in 1799. The arrival ofRogers and other Quakers from Vermont tothe Newmarket area formed the basis ofYonge Street Monthly Meeting, the thirdimportant center of Quakerism in UpperCanada. Yonge Street, roughly midwaybetween Pelham and Adolphustown, ineffect linked the Canadian Quaker commu-nities, that then structurally joined togetherin Canada Half-Yearly Meeting in 1810,and ultimately in Canada Yearly Meeting.

Researchers, genealogists in particular,often state that Quakers were excellentrecord keepers. As a user of Quaker records-- and as the recorder of a monthly meeting--I can attest that Quaker records are not ascomprehensive or accurate as researchershope or believe. More significantly,Quakers have conventions about what is

Like Quakers of his era, TimothyRogers knew the Bible thoroughly, andquoted Scripture frequently in his journal. Itis therefore fitting that I begin this talk witha passage from the Bible, the Epistle of Paulto the Hebrews, Chapter 11, and verses 3-4:3. Through faith we understand that theworlds were framed by the word of God, sothat things which are seen were not made ofthings which do appear. 4. By faith Abeloffered onto God a more excellent sacrificethan Cain, by which he obtained witnessthat he was righteous, God testifing of hisgifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.(KJV)

"He being dead yet speaketh." TimothyRogers left us his journal, and so he contin-ues to speak directly to us. His journal is notsimply a record of things done, but a storythat he wanted to tell. His purpose is clearlylaid out in the opening page:

Whereas God almighty has in hisinfinite wisdom caused me to liveamong the sons of men and as I havewent through many things in mydays that may be instructing both tomy children and others I cannot feeleasy without giving a short accountof my pilgrimage in this life.

And who is this Timothy Rogers, thatwe should be interested in what he has tosay? He is an important name in CanadianQuaker history. Arthur G. Dorland in hisQuakers in Canada recounts how Rogerscame to Yonge Street from Vermont in

Timothy Rogers:The Story He Wanted to Tell

Christopher Densmore

[Talk to the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Friends Historical Association, Newmarket,Ontario, September 30, 2000.]


Hartley' metaphor of the "past being aforeign country" was used in 1985 by geog-rapher David Lowenthal as a title for bookon contemporary attitudes toward the past.Lowenthal's book has become very import-ant for those thinking seriously about whatis now called "heritage tourism." In readingover Timothy Rogers's journal we are "heri-tage tourists" traveling not to a place but toanother time.

So who is Timothy Rogers? Rogers wasborn in low circumstances in New London,Connecticut in 1756. He doesn't know isfather. At the age of six or seven, this smallchild travels with his uncle to DutchessCounty, New York. At the age of nine, he isput out to work. Being ill-treated, his unclerescues him from his first employer andplaces him with another who does better. Inthe hands of a Charles Dickens, this couldbe a story of poverty and neglect. TimothyRogers covers this period of his life in a fewsentences, seemingly to fill in the gaps andto explain his poor spelling-- as he only hada few weeks of school.

At the age of twenty-one, with a newbride, Timothy Rogers sets off for Vermont,which is then largely uncleared new lands.Over the next two decades, Rogers opens upnew farms in Danby, Vermont, then inSaratoga (now North Easton), New York)and then in Ferrisburg, Vermont. In thehands of another, we would have a story ofpioneer life-- lands cleared and adversitiesmastered. Rogers was proud of his skills inclearing new land, but does not providedetails. The fact that his early pioneeringdays in Danby and Saratoga were probablymade difficult by a virtual civil war betweenYankees and Yorkers in Vermont, and bythe Burgoyne Campaign, are not mentioned.

Historians are constantly frustrated withdiarists who stubbornly refuse to answer ourquestions. We have to remember that it isthe diarist who is telling the story, and that

recorded in the official minutes, whichsometimes obscures what is written. The"query" answered in each monthly meetingwhether "love and unity are maintained asbecomes brethren" is sometimes answeredpositively right up until the times themeeting divides over this or that issue.

There is also a tradition of Quaker jour-nals. When Timothy Rogers was becomingconvinced of Quaker principles at the begin-ning of the American Revolution, he readthe journals of George Fox and JohnWoolman. His own journal is a form of spir-itual autobiography-- or perhaps spiritualbookkeeping, because Rogers is careful totally his faults against his progress in theTruth. Timothy Rogers is clearly a part ofthis tradition, and his journal can be read inconjunction with those of his contempora-ries and near Joseph Hoag, Joshua Evansand Rufus Hall. Rogers accompanied bothHoag and Evans in their travels in the minis-try in the 1790s. Most Quaker journals ofthis era were published by Quakers and forQuakers, after being reviewed by YearlyMeeting committees to see that no unguard-ed comment remained to trouble Friends, orbe used against them by the world's people.Rogers' journal, having never been editedfor publication by pious editors, is probablya more accurate portrayal of the tensions aswell as the unity in Quaker communities.

Another reading-- this one from theprologue to a 1953 novel by L.P. Hartley,called The Go-Between:

The past is a foreign country: theydo things differently there. When Icame upon the diary, it was lying atthe bottom of a rather battered redcardboard collar-box. My firstimpression was that it was a presentsomeone had brought me fromabroad.


Writings of great importance. Isuppose I had about forty deeds forabout six thousand acres of land.note and bonds for about to thousanddollars and all the other proprietor'srecords of Ferrisburg.

What do we know about TimothyRogers so far. Born in low circumstances,put out to work as a child, ill treated, illeducated, can't spell, took off to the wilder-ness at the age of twenty-one. Now, we findhim camped out by near the shores of LittleOtter Creek in Vermont with his wife andfive children. And why is it Timothy Rogersthat has to explain what has happened to therecords? Because it is Timothy Rogers whois the Clerk for the Proprietors ofFerrisburg, a responsible position that invol-ves the buying and selling of thousands ofacres of land, overseeing the settlement ofthe Town of Ferrisburg and the City ofVergennes. He is also, at the same time, theClerk of the Proprietors of the Town ofHungerford and in two years the owner ofthe mills that will grind the corn for the newsettlers of Ferrisburg. He is, in fact, a highlysuccessful entrepreneur and one of theleading citizens of Ferrisburg. These are theskills that he will use fifteen years later tolead a migration of friends, neighbors andrelatives from Ferrisburg to Upper Canada.

I titled this paper "the story he wanted totell" because it is the Quaker story thatinterested Rogers. Rogers is traveling backand forth to Albany and New York, andnorthward to Montreal in the course of hisbusiness, but he is far more interested inrecording his travels on the business ofFriends. He talked not at all about going toMontreal to find a market for Vermontpotash, but much about going to NovaScotia as the companion to Quaker ministerJoshua Evans. He passes over establishing

we are only guests in this journey to the pastthat is another country.

Fortunately, we do sometimes havealternative sources of information. Theopening pages of the records of the Clerk ofFerrisburg, Vermont, contain a lengthyentry in the hands of Timothy Rogers datedthe 3rd Day of the 10th Month 1785,explaining what had happened to the earlierrecords. This account was later reproducedin a local history of Vermont, complete withRogers's very unique spelling.

[On] the second day of the tenthmonth I Timothy Rogers ofFerrisburg was moving from BotonBay in Ferrisburg to Little OtterCreek.. and as I went by water I didnot get up the bay till about mid-night and my wife and five childrenand one woman Peggy Smith byname and one child was all in anopen boat and it was a dark andrainy time. We landed about aquarter of a mile from the house.Some of the hands went up and gotfire. When they got down again thefire was so rained out that wekindled some fire by the side of atree to light barks that my familymight see a little to walk up to housefor my wife was sick I led her by thehand. This morning, being the thirdday of the tenth month 1785 aboutsun rise one of the men told me thatthe tree by which the fire waskindled was burn down and burnt upa large chest of drawers that waspacked as full as it could be ofclothes and writings of great impor-tance.

Weren't our pioneer ancestors quaint? Iwould be easy to miss the implications ofthe next few lines:


[to Nova Scotia in 1796]… my trailsand probations were so many, thattime would fail me to write of them.And as I believe they were for myown improvement… [But] the greatKing and Lord of all our blessings,spiritually and outwardly, hathvisited me by His spirit in an accept-able time, and when very muchneeded…You may now understand that I,having had many troubles for someyears, waited for the waters of afflic-tion to cease. And a prospect oropening in my mind was revived inmy mind with clearness or a removalto the westward… After opening theprospect to my wife and dearfriends, way opened for it and I trav-eled between four and five hundredmiles to a place called Yonge Street,about thirty miles from York, inUpper Canada…

This last is a remarkable passage. Thereis an element of discontent, of being unful-filled and trouble running through much ofthe journal. His release from his troubles, bythe visitation of God and His spirit, coin-cides with a clearness that it was right andproper to settle in Upper Canada. Rogers'spiritual and temporal journeys end togeth-er, in peace, and in Canada.

I alluded before to the current interest inheritage tourism. People are interested invisiting the past, both through text andthrough place. People seem to be moreinterested in hearing authentic voices andtrying to understand the experiences of indi-viduals. The generic pioneer cabin, with theman holding the gun and the woman spin-ning flax is no longer enough. And there is apolitical and cultural side to heritagetourism-- what is the story that we want totell by preserving the past, both in text and

mills on the Otter Creek in a few words, butspends pages on the establishment ofQuaker meetings at Danby and Ferrisburg.And the journal shows that the establishinga Quaker meeting at this time wasn't alwayseasy. Even in a period of the rapid numeri-cal and geographical

expansion of Quakerism, Quakers seemto have taken the Biblical injunction to "layhands suddenly on no man" (I Timothy5:22) very seriously. Meetings spentmonths, and sometimes years, decidingwhether an individual was ready to bereceived as a member, or whether a groupof Friends was ready to form a meeting.

This caution was a trouble to TimothyRogers. Friends could, when led by thespirit, rise and speak in meeting. Meetingscould, when they felt that an individual wasspeaking under the right guidance, and ifthat individual spoke frequently, acknowl-edge that person as a Friends minister. Not,of course, a minister in the sense used bymost churches, but a recognition that anindividual had the spiritual authority tospeak to and on behalf of the Society ofFriends. Probably many Friends of this timenever spoke publicly in meeting and mostothers only rarely. Those who spoke whodid not meet with the approval of the min-isters and elders would be advised thatperhaps it was better wait for better light.

Rogers' journal is a story of spiritualprogression. As a young man he becomesconvinced of Friends principles, andbecomes a Quaker. As an adult, his speak-ing in meeting is at times discouraged bythe elders, and he is disheartened. ButRogers' journey does not end with this dis-couragement. In a letter to a Friend in NovaScotia, written in 1809, and almost at theend of the journal, Rogers writes:

Now, dearest friends, I may informyou, that after I returned to my visit


tribulations until he reaches the PeaceableKingdom. That he tells us much along theway of the settlement and Vermont andUpper Canada, about the mechanics ofQuaker discipline, about his travels throughNova Scotia in the 1790s, adds to the inter-est (and to the historical value of thejournal). But it is the settling of his story,not the story itself.

in place.Timothy Rogers was a pioneer builder

of Upper Canada and a committed Quaker.His commitment to Quakerism in 1775 and1776 in Dutchess County was marked byhis refusal to take up arms for either side inthe Revolution. He would not have qualifiedas a United Empire Loyalist. In 1812,Rogers, now a British citizen again, passesbetween the lines of the British andAmerican armies as a neutral Quaker on hisway to New York Yearly Meeting. His storyis not that of the warrior-- he rejected thatway. It was not the story of the entrepre-neur. He was that, but that was not whatwas his story. His story is that of theQuaker, and I will close by quoting from theend of Rogers' journal:

Dear fellow-laborers and compan-ions in trials and sorrows, let us dieto all outward man's contrivanceabout the Gospel rule, which Ibelieve the natural part in us is tooapt to be meddling in. Oh, myfriends, how it wants to be calledwise, and looks for applause! Butsurely this disposition dies whensimple honesty arises in the heart, inthe love of the Father, Son and HolyGhost. Then all is concord, and thehonest Truth; the Lamb, becomes"the Lion of the tribe of Judah," spir-itually. This has been slain from thefoundation of the world, and hasarisen from this death, by slaying thespirit of the world. Thus all that iswrong in us being slain by grace, thewolf must die also...

Rogers is, of course, thinking about theverses in the book of Isaiah, about the lionlying down with the lamb. He is telling us astory, and that story had a plot, and that plotis the his spiritual travels through trials and


Hannah James


case. A trip from Yonge Street toPhiladelphia would have been both timeconsuming and costly. Yet, in August of1808, the monthly meeting of men recordedthat Amos Armitage, John Doan andReuben Burr were appointed “to attend theYearly meeting with the proceedings of thismeeting in [Kezia James’s] case.”5

Unfortunately, those who had been appoint-ed to attend the yearly meeting in the casecould not attend. David Willson was addedto the group and they were instructed toattend the following yearly meeting with theminutes regarding James’s case.6 The casedoes not appear again the minutes.7

However, it did not disappear. Kezia Jamespressed her case and was successful in even-tually having the decision of the monthlymeeting against her overturned.8

The particular case against Kezia James,evocative as it is in the minutes, with itsreference to her unbecoming behaviour andtroublesome spirit, illustrates a number ofissues related to discipline within theSociety in general and within the communi-ty at Yonge Street specifically. The meetingminutes provide the skeletal record of thecommunity.9 Although it cannot be deniedthat there are times when the minutes aremaddeningly silent in their cursory form, acareful examination of the meeting minutesin the context of the Discipline and othermeeting records can be much more reveal-ing than might originally be thought. Thepriorities set by the community and theissues of foremost importance to Friends onYonge Street can be determined by their

At the December 1806 business meetingof the Yonge Street Monthly Meeting, thewomen’s meeting sent a request across tothe men’s meeting soliciting their assistancein the difficult case of Kezia James. Thewomen complained that Kezia James “hasbeen guilty of unbecoming behaviour in ameeting for worship and through a turbulentand contentious spirit hath been endeavour-ing to defame the character of friends—notonly amongst members but to those not ofour society, whereby she hath wilfullyasserted things which appear to be false.”1

Unfortunately, given the nature of meetingminutes, the specifics of Kezia James’sassertions are unknown. However, the mendid agree to assist the women in the case. Agroup of men was appointed to join thewomen in a visit to the James household onYonge Street.2 In February of 1807, theappointed committee reported back to theMonthly Meeting that they “had an oppor-tunity with her and afterwards had her andher accusers face to face and they beingunitedly of the opinion that the chargeagainst her was justly supported and she notappearing to them to be in a suitable dispo-sition of mind at present to make satisfac-tion for her misconduct,” it was decided thatshe be disowned.3 Kezia James disagreedwith the committee’s decision and, follow-ing her rights laid out in the Discipline,promptly informed the monthly meetingthat she had decided to appeal to the YearlyMeeting.4 This was not a decision takenlightly as appeals required the attendance ofthe appellant at the appeal to defend their

‘a turbulent and contentious spirit’:Discipline among Women in the Yonge Street Community of Friends

Robynne Rogers Healey

Paper Presented to theCanadian Friends Historical Association Annual Meeting, September 30, 2000,


to adhere to the testimonies, determiningdepartures from the Discipline in areas relat-ing to contentiousness was not so easy.Transgressions of the Discipline were fairlyobvious if Friends married non-Friends orwore inappropriate garments. However,questions of what constituted a spirit ofdisunity were not readily answered. It is inthese cases that we find individual meetingsinterpreting the goals of the Disciplinewithin the context of their own community.These difficult cases also clarify the rolethat individual personalities played in deter-mining who or what was defined as obstre-perous. Although not a frequently recordedoffence, to be branded as one who encour-aged disunity was something to be takenseriously. Such a spirit was evidence thatthe individual in question was not being ledby the Inner Light. To be quarrelsome wasthe anathema of being a good Friend. Theminutes show that gender did not play a rolein how contentiousness was treated withinthe meeting. To be of a turbulent and con-tentious spirit was frowned upon equallyamong both men and women. However,even though the transgression was treatedequally, these cases provide some evidenceof the strong women who gave leadership toand molded the Yonge Street community.These cases demonstrate that the communi-ty of Friends on Yonge Street was notsimply defined unilaterally by the centralauthority of the Yearly Meeting and theDiscipline it espoused. It was activelyshaped by those who lived in the communi-ty and were responsible for interpreting andexecuting the Discipline within the contextof the meeting. Women were persistent par-ticipants in this process, influencing theircommunity at every level.

The Quaker meeting was the dominantforce in the expression of a Friend’s faith.The meeting was not only an apparatus thatoversaw discipline and enforced the unique

place in the minutes. In the case of theUpper Canadian meetings, the minutesshow the impact of the frontier on theimplementation of the Discipline with busi-ness occasionally taking considerablylonger to transact that it did in other meet-ings. Because women had separate businessmeetings, the minutes also provide awindow into the community of women, illu-minating those issues of importance toQuaker women. Through an examination ofboth the men’s and women’s businessmeeting minutes, we can determine theimpact of gender in realizing the testimoniesset out in the Discipline. Specifically ofinterest, the minutes show that, whilewomen and men faced similar cases of deal-ings within the context of the Discipline,women were more likely to appeal theirdisownments than men were. This attests tothe value women placed on their member-ship in the Society and the rights that theyfelt their membership gave them and theirown understanding of their position in theYonge Street community of Friends.

The socialization of women and girlswithin the business meetings of the Societyof Friends had a lasting impact on theirinteractions with those outside the Societyin the mid-nineteenth century when Friendsbegan to extend their organizationalinvolvements to mainstream movementssuch as the temperance or abolition move-ments. Through their socialization in themeeting girls and women put into practicethe precepts of Friends that they learnedthrough their formal and informal educa-tion. Through the business of the meeting,Quaker women came to a greater under-standing of how they could shape theircommunity. It was here that notions of spir-itual equality gained their clearest expres-sion. The community, however, had limita-tions. Although the Discipline itself wasclear on how to deal with those who failed


the labour which in gospel love hathbeen from time to time bestowed fortheir help and recovery.”10

The Discipline governed a Friend’s lifefrom birth to death. It stated that Friendswere required to register their children’sbirths with the meeting, it set stipulationsfor their religious and academic education,it set standards for the choice of an appro-priate spouse, and it ensured that burialoccurred in a decent and orderly fashion. Inbetween birth and death, the Disciplinecodified a Friend’s behaviour. TheDiscipline was a living document; it couldand did change as need determined. As timepassed, Friends became stricter in someareas; in others they became more tolerant.

The Discipline was formally implement-ed in a structure of hierarchical meetingswhich began at the Preparative Meeting.However, prior to an issue coming to theattention of the business meeting, it hadbeen extensively discussed informally at thecommunity level. The method of invokingthe Discipline was based on Christ’s instruc-tions to his disciples in Matthew 18: 15-17:

if thy brother shall trespass against thee,go and tell him his fault, between theeand him alone: if he shall hear thee, thouhast gained thy brother. But if he willnot hear thee, then take with thee one ortwo more, that in the mouth of two orthree witnesses, every work may beestablished. And if he shall neglect tohear them, tell it to the church; but if heneglect to hear the church, let him beunto thee as a heathen-man and a publi-can.11

Complaints against individuals who hadcommitted an infraction of the Disciplinewere ideally to be dealt with following thisinjunction. Friends would watch over each

testimonies of the Society of Friends. Itwas, above all, the body which provided‘care’ to the flock. In addition to implement-ing the Discipline and providing spiritualshepherding, the monthly meeting wasconcerned with supplying education tochildren and fostering parents in raisingtheir children consistently with the ideals ofQuakerism. The meeting provided schools,a library of Quaker books, and assistedparents in placing their children in appro-priate apprentice positions. For those inneed the meeting ensured that relief wasavailable and that needy children wereeducated to ‘fit them for business.’ Thoseexperiencing financial difficulties weregiven financial counsel to assist them inclearing themselves of debt. When differ-ences arose between members, the meetingprovided an arbitrator to expeditiously settlethe problems. Essentially, as the body thatimplemented the Discipline, the meetingwas set up to oversee all aspects of aFriend’s life.

The apparatus of hierarchical meetingsthat evolved had begun as a mechanism toensure a standard of behaviour among allmembers of the Society of Friends. Asmuch as it became an exercise in socialcontrol, the original concern that created theDiscipline and the meeting apparatus wasthe consideration that the Society wouldsuffer as a result of the errant behaviour ofsome of its members. The Discipline haddeveloped in order to ensure “the preserva-tion of all in unity of faith and practice.” Asa unifying and centralizing force in theSociety, it provided the framework:

for the government of Friends,overseers, and meeting, with a view thatin the exercise thereof, the unfaithful,the immoral, and the libertine professorsmay be seasonably reminded of theirdanger and of their duty; as well as of


business of the meeting.12 However, oncethe offender had been visited by the com-mittee, the transgressor could either ignorethe committee or choose to acknowledge theerror and submit an offering of acknowl-edgement to the monthly meeting, publiclycondemning their behaviour. These werepresented in writing to the Monthly Meetingand were usually quite straightforward. Forinstance, consider the acknowledgementproduced by Jane Hollinshead following hermarriage to a non-member:

Whereas I the subscriber (having hada right of membership amongstfriends) have so far deviated as toaccomplish my marriage contrary tothe good order used amongst them,which breach of order, I freelycondemn as an error in me, anddesire friends may pass it by, andcontinue me a member, hopeing myfuter conduct may render meworthy.13

Once the acknowledgement was entered atthe monthly meeting, those in attendancedecided whether or not to accept it.Acceptance or rejection of the acknowl-edgement depended greatly on the report ofthe visiting committee. There were occa-sions where acknowledgements were reject-ed because the committee did not feel thatthe offender had demonstrated a suitablyremorseful disposition. If the acknowledge-ment was accepted, the paper was ‘pu-blished’, or read in the meeting for worshipto which the individual belonged.Depending on the nature of the offence, theacknowledgement could also be posted onthe door of the meeting house or in thepublic marketplace. This was considered asuitable chastisement and warning to otherswho might be tempted to follow the wrongpath.

If the offender did not condemn their

other’s behaviour and bring to the attentionof their fellow believers what they believedwere infractions of the Discipline. In somecases incidents of behaviour could be dealtwith privately and might only include anadmonition to the individual in question.This might apply to areas such as keepingcompany with a non-member or failing touse plain language. However, cases whichwere in opposition to the testimonies of theDiscipline and stood to harm the Society inthe eyes of non-Friends, required further‘dealing’ or treatment. Complaints weregiven in writing to an overseer who wasresponsible for determining the nature andextent of the infraction, for visiting theoffender and ascertaining the disposition ofthe offender towards the transgression, and,if necessary, for presenting the complaint atthe preparative meeting. Once the complaintwas entered at the preparative meeting, theappropriate supporting evidence was alsocollected and representatives were selectedto take the business forward to the monthlymeeting. Therefore, once the complaint hadreached the monthly meeting, it was fairlywell established, in the minds of the over-seers at least, that the transgressor wasguilty.

The monthly meeting appointed acommittee to visit the miscreant to judgetheir disposition. Usually the committeetried to accomplish this before the nextmonthly meeting. However, there weretimes when the nature of the offence or theexigencies of the circumstances of distance,weather, or health could delay the case for anumber of months. This was often the casein the early years of the Yonge Streetmeeting, especially when business had to bedealt with through the monthly meeting atPelham. Even when Yonge Street had itsown monthly meeting, those who lived atUxbridge or Pickering in the years beforethe roads were well developed found thatdistance remained an issue in executing the


Denying that he is a member of oursociety when amongst other Peoplefor which Deviations we have endea-voured to treat with him which hadnot the Desired Effect, therefore weDisown him from being a member ofour Society untill he through truerepentance and amendment of lifecondems the same to the satisfactionof this meeting which that he may isour sincere Desire.15

The testimony was published in the sameway that acknowledgements were publi-cised. Thereafter, the transgressor was con-sidered disowned and no longer under thecare of the meeting.

For Quakers, disownment was not theequivalent of banishment, nor was it everconsidered final. Disownment did notsignify a fall from grace or damnation.Disowned Friends could continue to attendmeeting for worship; they were not,however, permitted to attend the meetingfor business. This effectively silenced anyformal voice they might have in theircommunity. At any time after being dis-owned, a Quaker could acknowledge his orher wrongdoing and come back under thecare of the meeting. There was no kind ofbehaviour or belief that Friends could notforgive, as long as the individual demon-strated suitable remorse and condemnedtheir transgressions to the satisfaction of themeeting. Disownment, as translated byQuakers from Christ’s injunction, was not ajudgement on the salvation of the offender;it existed to ensure the integrity of the repu-tation of the Society and its religious testi-monies. Historically Quakers had come torealise that they could not force theirmembers to behave in certain ways. Bydenying fellowship with those who refusedto follow the behavioural mandates estab-lished by the yearly meetings, however,Friends could ensure that their persecutors

transgression or if the acknowledgementwas not accepted, the miscreant was testi-fied against. Testimonies of disownmentclearly laid out three points: the violationsfor which the offender was being disowned,the fact that treatment had been attempted,and a statement indicating the desire of themeeting that the transgressor come to anawareness of their sin so that they might bereinstated into membership. This fulfilledthe instruction in the Discipline that dis-owned Friends “be made sensible that theythemselves [were] the sole cause of theirseparation from religious communion andfellowship.”14 Usually there was a singleoffence which resulted in the disownment.However, in serious cases where the infrac-tion or series of transgressions stood tobring serious harm to the Society, the testi-mony listed the catalogue of deviations aswell as comments about the individual’spoor spiritual state. This was the case in thetestimony against Joseph Leavens:

Whereas Joseph Leavens havinghad a birthright amongst friends butfor want of taking heed to theDictates of truth in his own breasthas for a long time neglected toattend our meetings for worship andDiscipline and has suffered hisunmortified will so to predominate asto beget in his mind a spirit of hard-ness toards his friends in whichDisposition he has made use of manyunsavory Disrespectful Expresionsrespecting friends who Resides in theneighbourhood friends who havevisited us from a Distance & ourmeetings, likewise as a spectatorattended military Exhibitions on theDays of General muster or trainingsand horserasing at which place helaid a wager and is in the practice ofuncovering his head, making use ofthe Compliments of the wourld and


the days and months by heathen names.”19

Therefore, the days of the week and monthsof the year were numbered, beginning withSunday as First Day and January as FirstMonth. Neither were feasts and festivalsobserved since, “the principle of Friends isfor continual fasting and refraining fromthose things which defile the soul and makeit unfit for becoming the temple of the HolyGhost.”20

In the context of frontier Upper Canadathis presented some difficulty to Friendswho participated in community events suchas shivarees and communal barn-raisings,which often included non-Friends. At times,these events got out of hand, especially ifliquor ran freely. A number of young menwere chastised for attending a shivaree.Festivals were also disapproved of.Nineteen-year-old John Rogers was dealtwith because he had “so far disregardedgood order as to join with a noisy companyshooting off guns at the time called NewYear.”21

Although an adult, Rogers may havebeen forgiven for his transgression becauseof his relatively young age. But Job Webbwas viewed in especially disparaging terms.Not only did he allow fiddling and dancingin his own house but at a barn raising heshowed another person how to dance.22

Webb’s departure from the Disciplinewas viewed so negatively for a number ofreasons. First, his behaviour encouragedothers to transgress. Moreover, thisbehaviour was displayed at a barn raisingwhich would have been attended bymembers of the community who were notFriends. To jeopardize the cause of Truthamong non-Quakers was especially abhor-rent to Friends. Finally, as a mature male,Webb was expected to act as a role modelfor younger Friends.

In addition to serving as an immediateidentification of those who followed theteachings of Friends, plainness in dress

had no fodder with which to slander theSociety. However, many Friends who wereno longer on membership lists continued toworship and identify themselves asQuakers.16

§

The frequency with which contraven-tions of the Discipline appear in the meetingminutes indicate that the community wasoften faced with challenges, however subtle,to the rules of testimonies under whichFriends lived. Those testimonies whichseemed to create the most discussion in theYonge Street meeting were similar to thosethat created difficulties in other meetings.Contraventions of the testimonies on plain-ness, marriage to non-members, sexual sins,oaths, and military activity were relativelycommon in the minutes. They were alsotreated in a relatively straightforwardmanner.17

Plainness was one of the most importanttestimonies for Friends. Not only was itregularly queried, but it appears consistentlyas a matter of concern in the meetingminutes.18 The object of the testimonyrequiring plainness in dress and address wasfirst and foremost to provide a distinctivemarker of identification which would sepa-rate Friends from society and identify themas ‘a peculiar people.’ Plain speech originat-ed in the language of George Fox’s daywhich applied ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ to the singu-lar usage and ‘you’ to the plural. ‘You’ wasalso used when addressing someone ofsuperior social standing. Since Quakersclaimed that everyone was equal in the sightof God, they eschewed use of the term ‘you’as well as any complimentary titles thatmight be attached to names. Friends alsorefused to use the names of the days of theweek or months of the year, claiming their“ancient testimony against the superstitiousobservance of days and times, and calling


garment or bonnet could immediately iden-tify those Friends with greater financialresources.24 Oatmeal or grey-coloured silkcould be fashioned into a simple dress; thismade a much finer garment, however, thanthe same dress fabricated with oatmeal orgrey-coloured poplin. More than any of theother testimonies, plainness in dress andaddress served as a boundary between theSociety of Friends and the world. It allowedfor a symbolic separation from the societyin which Friends lived and, as a result, stim-ulated their group consciousness as a pecu-liar people.

By the time that Friends arrived onYonge Street, notions of plainness hadbecome quite ritualized in the Discipline.However, unlike the marriage testimony,the meeting appeared to be far more flexiblein carrying out the rules on plainness. Thereare few specific references to departuresfrom plainness in the minutes. When it doesappear, it is usually accompanied by someother offence such as attending places ofdiversion, drinking to excess, or neglectingmeeting. General concerns about issues ofplainness were primarily directed towardthe youth of each generation whose appareland speech patterns seemed to be a sourceof concern for parents regardless of theperiod! In fact, the women of the PelhamMonthly Meeting were so concerned at onepoint about “the deviation of the youth inboth dress and address” that a committee ofsix women was appointed to visit the youthof the meeting to discuss their concern.25

The generation gap that surrounded the tes-timony on plainness may account for theflexibility in its implementation. Friendscould bemoan the passing of plainness indress and address; yet, they remained pow-erless to stop it. As Friends moved furtherand further into mainstream society, theirapparel became less important as a signatureof their membership in the Society ofFriends.26 Among the Orthodox especially,

functioned as a levelling influence amongQuakers. Initially, plainness in dressreferred only to simplicity in apparel.Quakers avoided frills, bright colours andfussy styles. Ideally, adherence to simplicityin one’s manner of dress and speech wereoutward signs of inward grace; they were avisible representation of a changed heartthat focussed on the Inner Light. In accor-dance with the tenets of Quakerism, thistestimony was in no way to become a ritual.However, over time the humanity of thefaithful began to show through. Plainnessbecame an end in itself. Counsel in theadvices in 1682 had cautioned that Friends“be not found in wearing Superfluity ofapparel.” This had quickly become muchmore specific. By 1695 Friends wereadmonished that:

none wear long lapped Sleeves, orCoats gathered at the Sides, or super-fluous Buttons, or broad Ribbonsabout their Hats or long curledPerukes; & that no women theirchildren or Servants dress theirHeads immodestly or wear theirGarments indecently, as is toocommon, nor wear long Scarfs andthat all be careful about makingbuying or wearing (as much as theycan) striped or flowered Stuffs orother useless and superfluousThings.23

No longer was simplicity enough; simplicitybecame uniformity. With uniformity camethe expectation of conformity. At times thatconformity to an outward uniform tookprecedence over spiritual growth. Moreover,as some Friends began to amass greatwealth, they found ways to signify theirwealth while adhering to the letter of theDiscipline. For instance, while the cut of aspecific item of apparel might be consideredsimple or plain, the fabric chosen for the


peace testimony was extended to includeany activity that might be related to war. By1810 it became a disownable offence “tobear arms, or actively comply with militaryrequisitions, be concerned in warlike prepa-rations, offensive or defensive, by sea orland, pay a fine, penalty, or tax, in lieu ofpersonal service, deal in prize goods, direct-ly or indirectly, or be concerned in promot-ing the publication of writings which tend toexcite the spirit of war.”29 This created sig-nificant problems for those Friends wholived on or near Yonge Street, a militaryartery that connected York to Lake Simcoe.During periods of military conflict Friendswere faced with threats to their person andproperty. In cases where Yonge StreetFriends found themselves directly in thecentre of military activity, one might thinkthat they would have been forgiven fordefending themselves or their property.However, the minutes indicate that themeeting was rigid in their interpretation ofthe Discipline on this issue. Anyone withthe slightest involvement in war activitieswas brought to task, no matter how justifi-able or minor their activity was. Some, likeNicholas Brown, presented an acknowl-edgement even before a complaint could beentered.30

While dealings in these areas of theDiscipline seemed to be more straightforward, the issue of contentiousness wastreated far more subjectively. DifficultFriends were dealt with under two sectionsof the Discipline: Charity and Unity andDefamation and Detraction.31 By 1810when Yonge Street switched to the 1810New York Discipline the issue of unity hadbeen integrated into the section onDefamation and Detraction, which stated:

When any are guilty of tattling, tale-bearing, reproaching, back-biting, orspeaking evil of others, or busilymeddling with their affairs, when not

it became increasingly difficult to distingu-ish Friends from non-Friends on the basis oftheir clothing and manner of speech.

While the testimony on plainness did themost to visibly separate Friends from theworld, the testimonies on oaths and peacewere responsible for their detachment frommainstream society. Friends believed thatChrist’s teachings to “swear not at all”made them responsible to tell the truth at alltimes. Oaths were considered not onlyunnecessary but wrong. In the early stagesof Quakerism in England, followers hadbeen thrown into jail for their refusal toswear an oath. Later, Quakers were permit-ted to make a solemn affirmation in place ofan oath. However, since an oath was stillrequired for service on juries or service inany public office or government position,Friends were excluded from those positionsin Upper Canada.27 As the testimony onoaths excluded Friends from public office,the peace testimony prohibited Friends frominvolvement in military conflict. The peacetestimony originated in the belief that theInner Light was to guide and guard allaspects of life. Therefore, to follow theprecepts of the Inner Light meant that theseeds of war within an individual weredestroyed. The tenet of peace, which was tocharacterize dealings between Friends, wasnaturally extended to their dealings withthose outside the Society. Friends wereexhorted to “be vigilant in keeping up to thepeaceable Principles professed by us as aPeople,” and were forbidden from unitingwith those who “may be for makingWarlike Preparations, offensive or defen-sive.” Friends were also reminded to“demean themselves in a Christian & peace-able manner, thereby to demonstrate to theWorld, that our Practices, (when we are putto the Trial), correspond with ourPrinciples.”28 As a result of the wars whichseemed to be a constant fixture of coloniallife, especially in the eighteenth century, the


ish those who are guilty of unbecoming ordisorderly conduct.” Yet it was especiallythe work of the overseer who was “to treatwith [the offender] in the spirit of meeknessand restoring love, patiently endeavouringto instruct and advise them.”35 Great con-sideration went into the selection ofoverseers. Those selected as overseers wereto demonstrate sound judgement and have agreat depth of religious insight and experi-ence. The number of overseers selected wasdetermined by the size of the meeting. TheDiscipline indicated that the monthlymeeting appoint “two or more faithful andjudicious Friends” to this position in eachpreparative meeting.36 There were alwaysboth male and female overseers. The firstoverseers appointed at Yonge Street wereIsaac Phillips, Asa Rogers, Sarah Rogersand Edith Phillips. Isaac and Edith Phillipswere husband and wife and among the firstof the Pennsylvanians in the area. AsaRogers was Timothy Rogers’s son-in-lawand Sarah Rogers was Timothy’s wife.Interestingly, Timothy Rogers was neverappointed as an overseer. The choice of thefirst overseers was no doubt done very care-fully by those from the Pelham MonthlyMeeting. The appointments made allowedfor an equal representation among the menand women from the Vermont andPennsylvania settlers.

Complaints against individuals could bebrought to the overseers by members of theQuaker community or non-Friends. Theoverseers then determined whether therewere grounds for the complaint to beentered into the minutes of the preparativemeeting. The complaint could not be sent tothe monthly meeting without first goingthrough the preparative. Given their authori-ty and influence in exercising theDiscipline, overseers could wield a fairdegree of influence in the daily functioningof a Quaker community, especially when itcame time to qualify contentiousness.

concerned, tending to excite strifeand discord, or cause disesteemamongst brethren or neighbours, theyare to be suitably treated with, and ifthey do not make satisfactions there-for, they should be disowned.32

The subjective nature of the cases relatingto infractions of this testimony give us awindow through which we can glimpse themeeting hierarchies and politics that hadevolved in the Yonge Street community.What appears is a certain tension betweenthe weighty Friends who were in positionsof leadership and those who remainedoutside the Select group.

The weighty Friends comprised a sort ofmeeting oligarchy. Although the develop-ment of these oligarchies was not an inten-tional aspect of the meeting apparatus, oncein place they played a large role in deter-mining the direction that individual meet-ings would take.33 Belonging to the groupof weighty Friends were elders, ministers,clerks and overseers, although only theministers and elders met as part of theSelect Meeting of Ministers and Elders. Themeeting elders were the spiritual guardiansof the meeting. They wielded the mostinfluence in spiritual matters, having theauthority to censor even ministers. It wasthe elders and ministers who were primarilyresponsible for maintaining love and unityamong their flock.34 Because the clerk wasresponsible for interpreting the ‘sense of themeeting,’ they were influential in directingthe course of business meetings. In terms ofimplementing the letter of the Discipline atthe community level, however, theoverseers held extremely authoritative posi-tions.

Overseers were appointed to watch overthe membership to guide them in the princi-ples of Quakerism. The Discipline recog-nised that it was “the duty of every faithfulmember of our society to advise and admon-


then married Stephen Bowerman, a Friendfrom Adolphustown, and moved with himto the verge of the Adolphustown MonthlyMeeting. In response to the letter, AnnJames quickly launched her own complaintagainst Amy Bowerman for writing a letter,the tone of which was detractory. Thisrequired the involvement of the Adolphus-town meeting, to which Bowerman hadmoved. It also seemed to take the spotlightoff James. But it created problems forBowerman because Yonge Street MonthlyMeeting refused to forward a certificate onher behalf until the matter was settled.Without a certificate Bowerman held nomembership in the meeting in which shelived. As the daughter and wife of activeFriends, Bowerman’s inability to be formal-ly involved in her new meeting would, nodoubt, have been a source of aggravation toher. Both parties stood their ground. Withdistance complicating issues, the discussioncarried on for a period of two years. TheAdolphustown meeting finally requestedthat a certificate for Bowerman be forward-ed. The Adolphustown women explainedthat even though they disagreed with thetone of the letter that Bowerman had sent toJames, they felt the precautions thatBowerman had taken prior to forwardingher letter would have a great deal of weightin a superior meeting.40 The minutes do notstate what those precautions were.However, it is obvious that the subject ofappeal had arisen. Perhaps Bowermanfinally forced the issue by reminding theAdolphustown committee that any attemptto disown her would easily be over turned atsuperior meeting. Maybe those on thecommittee came to the conclusion them-selves. The origin of the ‘threat’ to appeal isnot as important as the centrality that theidea of appeal itself made in the final deci-sion of the committee. Yonge Street for-warded a certificate and the issue wasdropped with neither woman being dis-

From the minutes it is impossible todiscern whether certain individuals orfamilies were viewed as naturally difficultand were, therefore, more prone to becharged with creating disunity. To be fair tothe overseers and weighty Friends, it ispossible that certain individuals were moreobstreperous. However, it is intriguing thatthose who were viewed as troublesome andcontentious seemed to share family connec-tions. Consider the James family. KeziaJames was not the only James woman whowas chastised for her troublesome nature.Ann James, Kezia James’s daughter, wasalso known for her fiery spirit. In 1805 itwas reported to the Pelham MonthlyMeeting that Ann James had “got into aturbulent disposition rejecting all counseland advice of her Friends and [had] beenguilty of tatling and wilfully saying thingsthat appears to be false.”37 Although shewas not disowned for this offence, a numberof years later she entered the minutes againas a result of some unusual “communic-ations” with which she disturbed meetings.These were communications that thewomen felt did “not proceed from the rightauthority.” Even though women Friends hadapparently repeatedly offered Ann Jamescounsel and advice about the content of hercommunications, she had obviously notaccepted their admonitions.38 In the worldof Quakerism, Ann James would haveviewed her communications as part of herburgeoning ministry—an expression ofwhat she felt the Inner Light was leadingher to share with Friends. In the wake of theDavid Willson scandal only a year or twoearlier, the women were obviously exertingeven more care over those who spoke pub-licly in meeting. However, the debate aboutAnn James’s ‘ministry’ was not confined tothe meetings for worship and business. AmyHughes, the daughter of Eleanor and JobHughes wrote a rather caustic letter to AnnJames criticising her behaviour.39 Hughes


choice of a marriage partner.Ann James married quite late for a

woman Friend. In the spring of 1816, at theage of forty-one, Ann James married JohnLampton Hodgson, another member of theAdolphustown meeting. Hodgson himselfhad a colourful past with Friends. In June of1800 he had requested membership, on thebasis of convincement, among Friends atAdolphustown. Not long afterward he wasrecommended as an overseer in theKingston Preparative Meeting. He was notin this position long. Sometime prior to1802 he removed to Coeyman’s MonthlyMeeting in New York State. There he leftFriends to join the Shakers. Word travelledback to Friends in Adolphustown and theyrequested the assistance of the Coeyman

owned or acknowledging their transgressionfor causing disunity. The case of Ann Jamesand Amy Bowerman shows us two womenwho were well versed in the Discipline andin meeting politics. The references to appealdemonstrate that both women were familiarwith the Discipline and that theyconfidently acted within its parameters toshape their community. Neither hesitated inusing the avenues available to them tosupport their beliefs and actions. Nor didthey wilt under pressure from weightyFriends. Unlike Bowerman, Ann James didnot come from a weighty family. Herinsistence on pressing for her rights in theface of a detraction from a well-connectedFriend demonstrates the strength of her will.She showed the same strength of will in her

Five generations of the James family.


were well known for establishing schoolssoon after they settled in areas.42 However,there was a healthy dose of practicalitylaced with Ezekiel James’s comittment toeducation. By 1817 he and Ruth Lundy hadbeen married ten years. They had five child-ren, the oldest of which was nine. AlthoughRuth James would have been spending timeteaching the children to read and write athome and they would have been learning inmeeting, James and his wife were no doubtconcerned for their children’s formal educa-tion. Unless they were to board away fromhome, Yonge Street was too far away tosend young children. Possibly, Ezekiel andRuth James came to the conclusion that theonly way they were going to get a formalschool near home was to build it them-selves. In addition to the formal business ofthe women’s meeting, women becameinvolved informally in matters that relatedto the community. Often this activity neverentered the minutes. Women were eagerparticipants in cases, working alongsidemen, influencing overseers in determiningthe merit of complaints to be taken beforethe preparative meeting. The case in whichthis stands out most clearly is that of PhilipPhillips and William Lundy’s bull. PhilipPhillips was the brother of Isaac Phillipswho, along with Samuel Lundy in 1800, hadsecured land patents for PennsylvaniaFriends on the east side of Yonge Street inEast Gwillimbury and Whitchurch town-ships. Obviously Philip Phillips shared fewof his brother’s sterling religious qualities.43

Early in the meeting minutes, Phillipsacknowledged “partaking of spiritous liquorat a public gathering.”44 It was a few yearslater, however, that Phillips appears again inthe minutes charged with being:

so unguarded that instead of prudent-ly labouring for the support of goodwill and harmony he has made use ofsome expressions casting aspersions

Monthly Meeting in treating with him.Nineteen months later, the minutes finallyshow that Hodgson had been disowned,since he did not appear disposed to return toFriends. Obviously Hodgson was given tochanges of heart, for a year later heacknowledged the error of his ways in theCoeyman Monthly Meeting. News of hisacknowledgement and a request for a cer-tificate on his behalf reached Adolphustownin May 1805. Sometime later he returned toUpper Canada and became active in theAdolphustown Monthly Meeting; by 1812he was again appointed as an overseer.41

Hodgson would have been an overseer atthe same time that Bowerman and Jameswere involved in their dispute and couldhave met her as a result of dealings betweenthe meetings. After their marriage, Jamesand Bowerman were once again in the samemeeting, attending worship and businessmeetings at the same meeting house. Howthey got along in the Adolphustown meetingis unknown. Their earlier experiences andthe strength of will demonstrated by bothwomen would have provided for somecolourful meetings.

In the Yonge Street Monthly Meeting,the Jameses continued to be active. AnnJames’s brother Ezekiel James Jr. had estab-lished his family in Uxbridge where theyworked to shape their community. Theybuilt and opened a school on his land in1817, the same year that the UxbridgePreparative Meeting was established underthe authority of the Yonge Street MonthlyMeeting. Both the school and the Uxbridgemeeting house were built in close proximityto each other. The James School, built at theexpense of Ezekiel James, was non-sectari-an and was, therefore, open to the childrenof non-Friends as well as Friends in theUxbridge area. James’s continued commit-ment to the principles of education forchildren in the community was, no doubt,an extension of his family’s faith. Friends


John Lundy of “spreading an evil reportwhich is that Philip Phillips told him he hada pike poal or an Iron Pike in the End of apoal Provided in order to Fight or KillWilliam Lundy’s Bull.” In the same com-plaint Phillips was upset about the involve-ment of John Lundy’s wife, Elizabeth, who,“as she stood at the meeting house Doar,”47

overheard a conversation that Phillips andhis wife Rachel were having about the desti-nation of the load on their sleigh. Phillipsaccused Elizabeth Lundy of falsely report-ing the contents of the conversation he hadwith his wife. At the same time Phillipsreproached both Issac Webb and WatsonPlayter for “by falls [sic] and deceivingmeans indever[ing] to subvert the overseersfrom taking notis of a complaint [he] hadagainst Henry Widdifield.” Finally, hedenounced Henry Widdifield who:

in discourse with Lewis Powel toldthought [sic] he could prove me a liarand he appeared as tho he was pleasdin doing it: with the idea that it wouldinvalidate my word so that it wouldbe of no account in a case then undernotis between William Lundy andme, wherein I was criminaly chargedby sd Lundy. Henry Widdifeld at thattime, was one of the overseers thathad the case in chargd: …And Ihereby complain of the man, as moli-tious and intending privately to ingerme: also, Guilty of Detraction againstme and spreading it.48

Asa Rogers, the overseer to whom Phillipspresented this catalogue of complaints,refused to bring them before the meeting,and returned them to Phillips.49 In themeantime, the neighbours began takingsides; some even went so far as to send intheir own written declarations, certifyingthat they “heard John Lundy say that he hadheard Philip Phillips say that he had some

on some of his neighbours which hasbeen the cause of a considerableincrease of discord between him andthem.45

Phillips was hastily disowned, although helater claimed he did not receive a copy ofthe testimony against him. The story wouldend there if it were left for the minutesalone to tell. However, in an unsorted col-lection of small pieces of paper which wereread in the meeting, but not recorded in theminutes, small bits of the rest of the storyare told.

Philip Phillips and William Lundy wereneighbours. Lundy lived on lot 94 in thefourth concession of Whitchurch; Phillipslived just north on lot 96 in the fourth con-cession of East Gwillimbury. Sometime in1811 William Lundy’s bull died. Accordingto Lundy, the bull had been murdered andPhilip Phillips was criminally charged withthe act. A criminal charge was outside thepurview of the meeting and so it does notappear in the minutes. However, Phillipsclaimed he had not killed the bull and someyears later attempted to bring a complaint ofdefamation and detraction against WilliamLundy. Phillips gave the complaint “into thehands of the overseers hoping that a trueinquiry [would] take place that the justcause may be known.”46

The overseers at the time, HenryWiddifield and Henry Bonnel ignoredPhillips’s complaint against Lundy. Thisthrew the whole neighbourhood into a tails-pin and spawned a flurry of written com-plaints from Phillips against numerousFriends. These give us some idea of thepolitics of implementing the Discipline.Phillips first charged William Lundy asbeing “guilty of spreading an Evill Reportwhich is he believed that Philip Philips orsomeone about his plase did privately andmilitously kill his bull.” At the same timePhillips accused William Lundy’s brother


That summer Powell acknowledged hisactions. The document he presented to themeeting appears to be a sincere acknowl-edgement: “If I have contended to the less-oning the harmony of the meeting or to theincouragement [sic]of Philip Philips toDisturb our meetings it was more than Iintended at that time, or to hurt the tendermind in any, If I have by anything I havedone I am sinceraly [sic]sorry for it, andhope I shall bee enabled to be every cau-tious in these respects for the futer[sic]….”54

The acknowledgement was not acceptednor recorded in the meeting minutes. LewisPowell was disowned. Whether he andPhillips continued to be unwelcome guestsat business meetings is unknown. On thisthe minutes are silent. Powell did inform themeeting that he intended to appeal his dis-ownment but because he did not appear atthe Half-Years Meeting to pursue his case,it was put off to the next Half-Year’sMeeting.55

After this Powell disappears from theminutes until 1827 when he acknowledgedhis error and requested reinstatement inmembership.56

One wonders how many other intriguingstories lie beneath the perfunctoryminutes.57 In addition to illuminating someof the more convoluted aspects of meetingpolitics, the case of William Lundy’s bullshows us the informal power that womenhad in propelling decisions that technicallyhad nothing to do with them. In a communi-ty where discipline was implemented on thebasis of member complaints, gossip andinnuendo were a powerful mechanism forshaping the fellowship. Elizabeth andAgness Lundy were never formallyinvolved in launching the complaint againstPhillip Phillips. However, they were active-ly associated with the decision that wasmade against him. The fact that Phillipslaunched formal complaints against both of

clubs and a pike pole or a stick with an ironin it to fight Wm Londys bull.”50 WilliamLundy’s wife, Agness, also got involvedcausing Phillips to launch a complaintagainst her. The overseers still refused totake the complaints to the PreparativeMeeting and, in a last desperate measure,Phillips brought them forward to themonthly meeting himself. In June of 1817,Phillips presented a written complaintagainst the Whitchurch Preparative Meetingfor their refusal to bring forward complaintshe had given to the overseers againstAgness Lundy, William Lundy and JohnLundy. Phillips noted that “in justis [sic] tomyself, and friends also to releiv [sic] thecontrite minds” he was “under the necessityof handing [the complaint] to the meeting[himself].”51

At this point the Monthly Meeting musthave reminded Phillips that he was nolonger a member and had no place in thebusiness meeting. Phillips requested a copyof the testimony against him, which heclaimed he had never received.52 All formalavenues exhausted, Phillips appears to havegiven up his search for justice and settledfor disturbing business meetings, and theweighty Friends who presided over them,by his continued presence. In this he wassuccessful in soliciting Lewis Powell’sassistance. Powell was then dealt with fordisregarding harmony and good order bysupporting

a person who several years ago wasdealt with and disowned as anoffender, and has of late, for a con-siderable length of time been in thepractice of intruding in our meetingsfor discipline by keeping his seat inthe time of transacting the businessthereof and it evidently appears thatthe conduct of said Lewis Powell hashad a tendency greatly to strengthenand encourage him.53


up and held meetings contrary to theDiscipline, and in a finishing punch,“defame[ed] the character of some of [their]neighbours.”59 There was a great deal ofacrimony between Friends during thisperiod and accusations flew between thetwo groups. During the tumultuous summerof 1828 the Orthodox and Hicksite factionscarried out their battle within and withoutthe meeting house on Yonge Street. Oftenthe struggle focused around who would getpossession of the meetinghouse. When theMonthly Meeting met in August, both sidesinsisted on holding their own meetings andneither group would retreat. AmosArmitage, a Hicksite, commented that thecrowd that milled about the meetinghousethat night was “rude and noisy.” He specifi-cally noted that among the crowd “it may bestated were a few female members ofsociety.”60 From the tone, it is apparent thatwomen’s involvement in these activities didnot impress Armitage. However, the womenrefused to remain silent. They had investedas much in their meetinghouse as the menand no one was prepared to give it up easily.The whole schism dealt a great blow to theSociety of Friends. While the Hicksitewomen lost a group of active womenFriends, strong women elders like MarthaArmitage and Edith Phillips and ministersMargaret Brown and Margaret Bonnellsupported the Hicksite cause. Therefore,even though each group claimed someactive weighty women Friends, the strengthof the Society had been severely damaged.Never again would the community have thestrength it had in its early years. With theirnumbers depleted on both sides, Hicksiteand Orthodox women had to spend a periodof time regrouping. Within a few years, theminutes of the two groups reveal that theirinterests began to include an outward focusthe larger society of which they were a part.Women Friends became involved in move-ments associated with native education,

the Lundy women for their informalinvolvement demonstrates the extent of hisconcern over the potential impact of theirgossip. His fears were not unfounded.Whether Phillips was guilty or not, thesewomen obviously carried more weight withthe overseers than he did. His inability tohave his case heard at any level renderedhim powerless within the context of theQuaker community. Although the womeninvolved in this case were not the onlyreason that Phillips was disowned, theycertainly contributed to his disownment anddemonstrate the extent to which womenextended their influence in the communityof Friends.

Women in the Yonge Street MonthlyMeeting were as eager as men to embraceissues of discipline relating to doctrine. Asseen in the schism which led to the creationof the Children of Peace, women Friends atYonge Street brooked no hesitation invoicing their opinion on matters of doctrine.Similarly, they were as actively involved inthe unpleasantries that surrounded theHicksite-Orthodox split as men were. Infact, the first evidence of trouble at YongeStreet emerges in the minutes of thewomen’s meeting. In answering the queriesin 1827, the women had to admit that “Loveand Unity [were] not so fully maintained asdesired.”58 After the separation occurred,the minutes of both sides reveal the depth ofanimosity that had erupted in the communi-ty. Both sides viewed themselves as theoriginal group of Friends. Each groupquickly disowned those who did not staywith them. Among the first Orthodoxwomen disowned by the Hicksites were:Anna Rogers, Mary Pearson, Esther Doan,Elizabeth North, Olive Rogers and EuniceHuff. All were active Friends. According tothe Hicksite women’s minutes these Friendswere not satisfied simply with separatingthemselves from Friends. They “manifestedfixed disunity” with the Society, actively set


went to the Governor requesting permissionto visit her husband. The request was deniedand the Governor told Lount that herhusband “looked well.” According to Lount,this was not the case. When she finallyobtained a pass from a Captain Fuller whichallowed her to visit her husband, she saysshe found him “a shadow, pale and debili-tated.” When Lount discovered that ChiefJustice John Beverly Robinson had sen-tenced Samuel Lount and Peter Matthews toexecution by hanging, Elizabeth Lount andanother woman from York went again tovisit the Governor. The women pleadedwith the Governor to extend mercy to themen, presenting a petition signed by thirty-five thousand Upper Canadians supportingthe request for clemency. Lount claimed shealso knelt before Governor Arthur andbegged for her husband’s life for the sake ofhis wife and children. The Governor refusedto capitulate and Elizabeth Lount concludedthat “neither prayer nor petitions couldsubdue the hard heart of the Governor.”After the execution the Governor refused toturn the bodies of Samuel Lount and PeterMatthews over to their families afraid,Lount surmised, that “the generous sympa-thies of a noble people, who have been toolong ruled by threats, might rise, and inretributive justice fall with tenfold forceupon himself and those who were his chiefadvisers.” After her husband’s death,Elizabeth Lount felt compelled to leaveUpper Canada with her seven children. Shereturned to the United States. Even from theUnited States, however, Lount used a finalact of recourse and wrote a stinging openletter to John Beverly Robinson, the manwho had condemned her husband to hang.The letter, published in the Pontiac,Michigan Herald would have certainlymade its way back to Upper Canada forresidents of that province to read.62 In fact,this was Lount’s objective. The letter wouldalso have encouraged active discussion

abolition, women’s rights, temperance,peace, and other social concerns.

Through their involvement in themeeting structure and the business of themeeting, women Friends were well versedin the process of assessing communityissues and conveying their opinions onthose issues they considered important.They also expected that they could appealdecisions they considered unjust. BecauseFriends were “a peculiar people,” a groupthat held itself apart from the larger societyin which they lived, there was not a directtranslation of these processes into the main-stream. However, as Friends becameinvolved in mainstream organisations, theywere quick to learn and use the processesspecific to their needs. Friends began tochallenge the government on issues theyviewed as unfair. High on their list was thequestion of the clergy reserves. Because theDiscipline made it clear that Friends couldnot support a hireling ministry, they werenot permitted to rent clergy reserve land,since the funds from that land supported theChurch of England. Reform sentimentaround Yonge Street ran high as is evi-denced by Friends’ increased involvementin politics and their role in the Rebellion of1837.

Women, whose husbands and sons werearrested for their involvement in the upris-ing, used various avenues of appeal to assisttheir loved ones. Most notable for the publicattention she drew was Elizabeth Lountwhose husband, Samuel Lount, was execut-ed in April 1838. Samuel Lount, who hailedfrom Holland Landing had been a Memberof Parliament. He was hanged in York afterbeing convicted of treason for his part in theRebellion of 1837. After Lount was arrest-ed, Elizabeth Lount attempted to access allavenues of appeal to free him. According toher memory of events, Lount followed herhusband to York subsequent to his arrest.61

After arriving in York, Elizabeth Lount


grasp of tyrants?63

Lount’s stinging appraisal of Robinson andhis cronies who were in control of UpperCanadian politics probably had little impacton them. However, it no doubt went a longway to heighten reform sentiments withinthe Yonge Street Friends’ community wherethe Lount families were well-respected.Although there is no evidence that the letterwas circulated among Friends, it was cer-tainly Lount’s objective for it to circulatenot only among Friends but throughoutmainstream society as well. We do notknow how the community or the meetingfelt about Samuel Lount’s involvement inthe Rebellion. Strict Friends continued tomaintain a dogmatic line on the peace testi-mony and many Friends were dealt with inthe Monthly Meeting for their involvementin the uprising. From Robinson’s point ofview, Lount would most certainly have beenviewed as being possessed of turbulent andcontentious spirit.” Whether she was viewedthat way by her community is unknown,although the support her husband receivedwould indicate she, too, was supported.

Elizabeth’s Lount’s effort to shapethe community and country in which shehad lived was built on a long legacy ofQuaker women’s activities which hadgained expression in their separate businessmeetings. Not only were women accus-tomed to having a voice in the way theircommunity developed, they expected tohave their views considered. The assump-tion that women should be active particip-ants in the shaping of their community wasbased in a faith that granted spiritual equali-ty to women and men. It developed throughan intricate process of daily communitydiscipline and was exercised in meetings forworship and business. Much of the specificsof that process is lost to us because of theway that meetings were recorded and thepolitics that developed within the communi-

about the politics of Upper Canada. Lountwas not at all cautions, calling GovernorArthur a “coward and a tyrant” for refusing“a defenceless woman the corpse of hermurdered husband.” About Robinson, Lountwas equally scathing. She called upon hersignificant rhetorical skills in her assess-ment of the state of Upper Canadian polit-ics:

But, sir, all is not over yet. No gov-ernment whose only acts are those ofviolence and cruelty, whose statutebook is stained with the book ofinnocent sufferers, and whose land iswatered by the tears of widows andorphans, can long stand contiguousto a nation abounding in free institu-tions. O Canada, my own country,from which I am now exiled by aparty whose mercy is worse thandeath—I love thee still. ... I do notwrite to excite your sympathy, forthat I neither respect or covet. I writethat Canada may know her childrenwill not silently submit to the mostegregious outrages upon privateproperty, and even life itself. _ Sir,the officers of the government ofCanada, civil and military, are placedover the people without theirconsent. They form a combinationtoo powerful for the prayers of anhumble citizen to move. Be their actshowever corrupt, the law is by them-selves administered, and consequent-ly they are beyond its reach; while ifthe private citizen offend he isneither safe in his property or person.If these things are so, I ask you, sir,how long will the people of Canadatamely submit? Will they not soonrise in their strength, as one man, andburst asunder the chains that bindthem to the earth and revolutionizeand disenthrall Canada from the


from being under the care of the Philadelphia YearlyMeeting to the New York Yearly Meeting. In thetransfer of business from one yearly meeting toanother, it would have been easy for long-standingcases like this one to slip through the cracks.8) Personal correspondence with Sandra Fuller,descendant of Kezia James. September 2000.9) The meeting minutes of the Society of Friendsfunction much like the ‘case file’ records that haveincreasingly been used by historians seeking to shedsome light on the lives of those in the past who haveleft no personal records. For a discussion of themerits and pitfalls of using these types of records seeFranca Iacovetta and Wendy Mitchinson, eds. On theCase: Explorations in Social History (Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1998).10) Discipline of the Yearly Meeting of Friends,Held in New York, For the State of New York, andParts Adjacent: As revised and adopted, in the sixthmonth, 1810 (New York: Collins and Perkins, 1810),5-6. CYM Archives.11) All scriptural passages are taken from the KingJames Bible, which was the translation used by theSociety of Friends during the period covered by thiswork.12) For instance, one travelling minister, frustrated atthe length of his journey in Upper Canada, comment-ed on the difficulties Upper Canadian Friendsendured in their business and daily lives:I feel often very thoughtful at being delayed so longin this province but don’t see how I could haveavoided it, friends being scattered over such anextensive country & the roads so exceeding bad—Iconsider it a favour to have escaped thus far withoutbodily injury, except from the bites of mosquitos, theeffects of which have been rather taxing & occasionme to some almost sleepless nights_. The first set-tlers in the different parts of this woody country,many of whom are friends, have had & some of themstill have many hardships to endure. The cuttingdown of the Trees and the burning of them is exceed-ingly Labourious, but they are exceedingly hardy &seem contented with their allotment.13) CYM Archives, Box 23, “Yonge Street,”unmarked file. Dated 16-02-1815. All spelling as inoriginal..14) New York Yearly Meeting Discipline, 1810, 5.15) CYM Archives, Box 21 “Pelham,” unmarkedfile. Dated 01-12-1802. All spelling as in original.

ty. Nevertheless, even the glimpses of tur-bulent and contentious Friends provided tous from the minutes show us that womenFriends came to accept and expect that theywould be involved in shaping their world.Not only was it their right; they felt it wastheir responsibility. It was a responsibilitythey took seriously as they engaged thesociety around them.

Footnotes:

1) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting, 1806-1818, MS303, Reel 27, B-2-83, 18-12-1806.2) Appointed in this case were Samuel Lundy,Francis Wasly and Abraham Webster.3) Yonge Street Montly Meeting, 12-02-1807. IsraelLundy and David Willson were appointed to assit thewomen in preparing a testimony against KeziaJames. The depth of contentiousness in this case isseen in the fact that the women did not deliver theprepared testimony themselves, as would normallyhave been the case. Rather, two of the meetings mostelite members, Asa Rogers and Timothy Rogers,were appointed to deliver it to Kezia James and toinform her of her right to appeal.4) Normally appeals from monthly meetings went upto quarterly meetings. However, the Yonge StreetMonthly Meeting reported directly to thePhiladelphia Yearly Meeting until the three UpperCanadian meetings were unified in 1809 under theCanada Half-Years Meeting which had the authorityof a quarterly meeting. That meeting was subordinateto the New York Yearly Meeting.5) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting of Men Friends,MS 303, Reel 59, C397A, 10-08-1808.6) Ibid., 16-02-1809. One of the probable reasons forthe appointees inability to attend the Yearly Meetingwas no doubt the first epidemic which was claimingthe lives of Friends on Yonge Street at an alarmingrate. In fact, Ezekiel James Senior, the husband ofKezia James, died in this epidemic. This in itselfwould have hindered James’s own pursuit of theappeal.7) The reason that the case disappeared from theminutes for a period of time was no doubt due to thefact that the Yonge Street Monthly Meeting changed


Adolphustown had been elected to the firstParliament of Upper Canada as the member forAdolphustown and Prince Edward. Dorland travelledthe two hundred miles from Adolphustown toNiagara to serve in the first Parliament which met inSeptember 1792. As each member prepared to takehis seat, he was required to swear an oath of alle-giance to the King. As a Quaker, Dorland refused.Since there was no provision in Upper Canada for anaffirmation, Dorland was disqualified and a newelection was called for his seat.28) Advices of the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, 305.This advice was entered in 1739.29) New York Yearly Meeting Discipline, 1810, 45.30) Brown appeared and “voluntarilyacknowledged” that he had complied with militaryrequisitions because, when his team was impressed,he drove the horses rather than letting them go withthose who had impressed them. Yonge StreetMonthly Meeting, 1806-1818, Reel 27, B-2-83, 13-01-1814.31) The Discipline of the Philadelphia YearlyMeeting for 1806 included both of these sections; the1810 Discipline of the New York Yearly Meetingonly included a section on Defamation andDetraction. Essentially both sections related to thesecond query which asked, “Are love and unitymaintained as becomes brethren; if differences arise,is due care taken speedily to end them; and doFriends avoid and discourage tale-bearing and dis-traction?” Discipline of the Yearly Meeting ofFriends, Held in New York, For the State of NewYork, and Parts Adjacent: As revised and adopted, inthe sixth month 1810. (New York: Collins andPerkins, 1810), 35.32) Ibid., 55.33) The meeting oligarchy in the Yonge StreetMonthly Meeting is discussed elsewhere in my dis-sertation. Albert Schrauwers has also explored thisoligarchy in his work. See especially Awaiting theMillenium: The Children of Peace and the Village ofHope, 1812-1889 (Toronto: University of TorontoPress, 1993), chapter one. The fact that ‘marginal’Friends were continually challenging this oligarchyhelps us to understand their willingness to challengethe larger political oligarchies that developed inUpper Canada.34) The Queries for Ministers and Elders sets themaintenance of love and unity as one of the key roles

16) The 1851 census records over 7, 000 Friends inOntario. Yet, the Monthly Meeting records for thesame year only record 1,000 members. Therefore,people were identifying themselves as Friends,without having membership in the Society. Figuresfrom Albert Schrauwers, “The Spirit of Capitalismand the Collapse of Community: The Children ofPeace in the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” TheCanadian Quaker History Journal, 63(1998):64.17) By far, transgression of the marriage testimonyaccounts for the most disownments, especially in thepost-1755 reformation period. This is dealt with inmore detail in the chapter on kinship and will not bediscussed here.18) The third query, which followed questions aboutattendance at meeting for worship and the main-tenance of love and unity asked, “Are Friends carefulto bring up those under their direction in plainness ofspeech, behviour, and apparel _.” PhiladelphiaYearly Meeting Discipline, 1765.19) New York Yearly Meeting Discipline, 1810, 69.20) Philadelphia Yearly Meeting Discipline, 1806,28.21) Yonge Street Preparative Meeting of Friends,1804-1862, Reel 26, B-2-76, 11-05-1815.22) Ibid., 06-06-1833.23) A Collection of Christian and Brotherly AdvicesGiven Forth from time to time by the Yearly Meetingof Friends for Pennsylvania and New Jersey held atBurlington & Philadelphia alphabetically digestedunder proper heads, 211. CYM Archives. Hereafterreferred to as Advices of the Philadelphia YearlyMeeting.24) The issue of fabrics also arose in the lateeighteenth century among Friends who were staunchsupporters of anti-slavery. These individuals refusedto use any cotton fabrics, since the labour that pro-duced cotton was enslaved. At the same time theyderided their fellow Quakers for their consumptionof the products of slave labour.25) Pelham Monthly Meeting of Women Friends,1810-1842, C-3-52, 06-06-1816.26) This is seen especially in the multigenerationalphoto of women that comes from the Armitage file atthe CYM Archives. Although all were Friends, theapparel of the women is less and less plain, witheach succeeding generation.27) This problem presented itself early in UpperCanada. Philip Dorland, a Quaker from


51) Ibid., 12-06-1817.52) Ibid.53) Whitchurch Preparative Meeting of Friends,1816-1841, Reel 26, B-2-73, 15-04-1818.54) Miscellaneous papers relating to Yonge Street,13-08-1818.55) Ibid., Extracts from the Canada Half-YearsMeeting held at West Lake, 03-04-1819.56) 26:4857) For instance, in 1826 Timothy Rogers’s son,Stephen Rogers, was charged with being “guilty oftarring and carrying a woman on a rail.” His accom-plices, James and Isaac Eves were likewise charged.Yet, there is no context or further explanation givenfor this act. Nor are we told the name of the womanupon whom this act was perpetrated. She must havebeen a Friend since Rogers would most certainlyhave been charged with wounding the reputation ofthe Society if she had not been. All we know is thatthe Eves brothers were continued as members butRogers was disowned, even though he offered anacknowledgement. The committee in his case were“of the united judgement that [he was] not in a suit-able state of mind to make this meeting satisfaction,his outward conduct not corresponding with thispaper of condemnation.” Yonge Street MonthlyMeeting of Friends, 1818-1828, Reel 27, B-2-84, 13-07-1826.58) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting of WomenFriends, 1818-1832, Reel 49, C-3-111, 18-10-1827.59) Miscellaneous Papers relating to Yonge Street,12-03-1829 and 14-05-1829; Yonge Street MonthlyMeeting of Women Friends, 1818-1832, Reel 49, C-3-111, 13-11-1828 and 18-12-1828.

of the select Friends.35) New York Yearly Meeting Discipline, 1810, 31.36) Ibid.37) Pelham Monthly Meeting of Friends, 1799-1806,C-3-44, 07-08-1805.38) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting, 1806-1818, 18-08-1814.39) It is entirely possible that Ann James had criti-cized Hughes mother Eleanor Hughes or her sisterRachel Lundy. After a nasty schism, Eleanor Hugheshad left Friends to join Willson. Rachel Lundy, whoalso separated from Friends, had been accused ofhaving an affair with David Willson. It can safely bestated that Ann James’s circle of close personalfriends were theologically opposed to Willson andthose who followed him. An examination of James’swedding certificate from 1816 lists families wholater fell firmly into the Orthodox camp. In additionto James’s immediate family, present at the weddingwere the Linvills, Winns, Rogerses, and William andEsther Doan. Therefore, conflict between groupswithin the community was obviously brewing longbefore the formal schism occurred in 1828. Ofcourse, in 1814 Yonge Street Monthly Meeting wasstill reeling from the effects of the Davidite schism.40) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting, Women, 1806-1817, C-2-110, 16-02-1815.41) Adolphustown Monthly Meeting, 1798-1813, B-2-1, 26-06-1800, 15-04-1802, 17-11-1803, 16-05-1805, and 19-03-1812.42) For instance, the school on Yonge Street origi-nally opened in 1806, about the same time that themonthly meeting was established.43) Isaac was very active in the Yonge Streetmeeting and, in addition to serving on numerouscommittees, was one of the first overseers of theYonge Street Preparative Meeting. He was alsoappointed an elder in the Monthly Meeting.44) Yonge Street Monthly Meeting of Friends, Reel59, C397A, 12-11-1807.45) Yonge Street Preparative Meeting of Friends,1804-1862, Reel 26, B-2-76, 11-07-1811.46) Miscellaneous papers relating to Yonge Street,1807-1876, Reel 54, 22-10-1816.47) Ibid., no date.49) On the outside of the letter is written “AsaRogers overseer returnd to Philip Phillips.”50) Joseph Pearson and George Vernon sent insimilar declarations. Both were dated 03-04-1817.


being effected by oily words [of slaveowners] flowing in honied [sic] accents...shielded with the breastplate of power, andelated with the idea of self-sufficiency, theylaugh to scorn everything like mildness andpersuasion, and must be addressed in suchlanguage as will ready their adamantinehearts..."2 To address adamantine heartsbecame his life's mission.

§

Benjamin Lundy, son of Joseph andElizabeth Shotwell Lundy, was, as Quakerswould say, "... born 4th day of 1st month,1789, in Sussex County [New Jersey, and]... was brought up in the religious faith ofthe Society of Friends, ... was trained totheir plain way of living; and in their faithand way ho lived and died."3 His earlyschooling, learning to read and write, wasvery limited and was interrupted by thedeath of his mother and handicapped by apartial loss of hearing. Finally, one winterquarter's attendance when he was 16, study-ing arithmetic, completed his formal educa-tion.4

In 1808, when he was 20, "he left hisfather's home, not in rebellion -for the tiesbetween Lundy and his family alwaysremained close - but to travel,"5 seeking tolearn a trade and to discover his life'scalling.

Both of those goals, learning a trade andfinding his life's calling, happened after hereached Wheeling, Virginia [now WestVirginia]. He becomes an apprentice to

Benjamin Lundy, gentle Quaker,inspired visionary, steadfast abolitionist,and an 1832 visitor to the WilberforceCommunity in Canada, is a little-knownfigure in North American history. Yet hewas a leading abolitionist in the 1820s and1830s and was known as a ceaseless workeragainst slavery and for universal emancipa-tion. As William Lloyd Garrison was towrite, after Lundy's death:

"To Benjamin Lundy, more than toany other human being, am I indebt-ed for having my attention called tothe wretched condition of the slavesin this liberty-loving, slavery-idolizing country. He it was whofirst informed, quickened, inflamedmy mind on the subject of Americanslavery, and by whom I was inducedto consecrate my life to the over-throw of that dreadful system ofiniquity... Thousands stand ready totestify how much they are indebtedto him, under God, for their conver-sion to the side of emancipation,from a state of total apathy to itssuccess."1

Beginning with a circular promulgatedon his 27th birthday (4 January 1816) andfollowed by an organizational meeting ofthe "Union Humane Society" at Mt.Pleasant, Ohio, three months later,Benjamin Lundy was to spend his life fight-ing for the freedom of his Negro brothersand sisters. "I have no idea of a reformation

Quaker Abolitionist Benjamin Lundyand His Visit to Canada

Ronald MattsonStoney Friends Meeting


Benjamin Lundy


Quaker youth from nearby Mt. Pleasant,Ohio, the spiritual center of Ohio's Quakersand the site of a soon to be created YearlyMeeting Meeting House. In 1811, Lundygoes to work at Mt. Pleasant for JesseThomas, a brother-in-law of his Wheelingroommate and a dedicated opponent toslavery. "He was then between twenty-twoand twenty-three years old, of a slightframe, small stature, warm temperament,social and genial manners, and possessed ofan unbounded generosity."7 After a success-ful period as a journeyman, he travels backEast to see his family, but by 1815 returnsto Mt. Pleasant to marry Esther Lewis.Together they move to nearby St.Clairsville.

The next year, on his 27th birthday, heissues a circular calling for an organizationof the Union Humane Society in Ohio,intending " to form a national society toembrace all existing antislavery organiza-tions and thereby create a grand concert ofanti-slavery sentiment and activity. Nothing... would halt the new momentum of theslave system."8 The Union Humane Societytools for its guidance the Golden Rule andthe Declaration of Independence, andvowed to use every means to seek gradualemancipation. What followed was agrowing commitment to direct all his ener-gies toward the task of removing the institu-tion of slavery from the United States.

Late in 1819, Lundy travels down-riverto Missouri to set up a saddle and harnessshop. The depression of 1819 had caused ageneral business panic and his businessfails. While he had found no market forgoods, he becomes deeply involved in thepolitical ferment that was taking place.Missouri, in 1820, prepares for a stateConstitutional Convention. In establishingthe state, the United States Congress had notrequired Missouri to permit slavery, so ananti-slavery clause in the pending

learn the task of making saddles andworking with leather, but Wheelingbecomes much more important in Lundy'sstory for it is here that he receives his life'scall, his moment of Truth.

Comparable to George Fox's Pendle Hillexperience - where he saw a new people tobe gathered - or John Wesley's Aldersgatetransformation -where his heart was strange-ly warmed - Benjamin Lundy became achanged person when he saw chained slavesbeing transported to the waiting steamshipsfor travel down the Ohio River. As he wasto write about himself 23 years later (andthe same year he came to Canada):

“That was the place where his youth-ful eye first caught a view of the'cursed whip' and the 'hellishmanacle,' where he first saw theslaves in chains forced along likebrutes to the Southern markets forhuman flesh and blood! Then did hisyoung heart bound within his bosom,and his heated blood boil in hisveins, so seeing droves of a dozen ortwenty ragged men, chained togetherand driven through the streets, bare-headed and bare-footed, in mud andsnow, by the remorseless 'SOULSELLERS,' with horse-whips andbludgeons in their hands!!! It wasthe frequent repetition of such scenesas these, in the town of Wheeling,Virginia, that made those durableimpressions on his mind relative tothe horrors of the slave systemwhich induced him to devote himselfto the cause of UniversalEmancipation."6

"A solemn vow to God" was one that wasnot to be broken during his lifetime.

While in Wheeling his roommate wasBenjamin Stanton, another plain-speaking


produce a better paper if he moved to alocation on the East Coast. His mind madeup, he walks to Baltimore in the spring of1824 to begin publishing the Genius in thisnew location and to find a home so that hiswife and family, by now three children,could join him.

His days in the City of Baltimore,sometimes called the "the 19th CenturyBlack Capital of America,"12 were extreme-ly busy. He was able to set up a print shopwith the financial help of John Needles, alocal Quaker, and he quickly becameinvolved in the local anti-slavery communi-ty. While many were interested in earlyabolition of this evil, there were others whoalso were involved with the AmericanColonization Society, ten active in manyareas of the country. "On the one hand theywere confronted with doubts about theNegro's capacity to live in America as a freeman, on the other by surmises that whiteAmericans would never accept him as anequal." Lundy, along with John Needles andElisha Tyson, another Baltimore Quaker,were clear in their views that colonizationshould only be a voluntary process; theyknew the bitterness of racial intolerance andbelieved that some Blacks would rather livein a more favorable clime.13

One such territory that seemed a possi-ble site for colonization was the Republic ofHaiti, a country created and governed byfree Negroes. The President of the countryhad promised land grants and tools toanyone emigrating to this island nation, andhad also promised to bear part of the cost oftransportation. He had even sent a specialagent to the United States, "Citizen" JohnGranville. Granville was so convincing that600 Negroes emigrated from New York,Baltimore and Philadelphia during the laterpart of 1824.14 The early immigrants wroteletters to the United States, telling of theirfavorable treatment but on June 25, 1825,

Constitution would be possible. Lundy andothers work hard to elect an anti-slaverydelegation to the Constitutional Convention.The vote is taken and the antislavery pro-ponents loose. Lundy was to write: "Hell isabout to enlarge her borders; and tyrants herdomain...."9

Returning penniless to Ohio, Lundymoves his wife and children back to Mt.Pleasant. And it was here, in 1821, thatBenjamin Lundy begins publication of TheGenius of Universal Emancipation. Hispromise was to make the Genius " .an activeinstrument in the aftempt to abolish thatcruel and disgraceful system in theAmerican Republic."10 Lundy frequentlyborrowed a press to print his monthly paperand in 1822 is invited to Tennessee to takeover the press of a suspended newspaper ofthe Tennessee Manumission Society, theEmancipator, as the editor had died. It wasin East Tennessee, at Greenville, that Lundynow published the Genius. And it was fromhere that he traveled via horseback and footto Philadelphia for the 1823 fall Meeting ofthe American Convention for the Abolitionof Slavery. This group, many of them cos-mopolitan Friends, was not known for itsradical views, although the delegation fromPennsylvania presented a graphic report."Instead of witnessing the gradual advance-ment of emancipation to reduce the numberof slaves in the United States, we have hadwith sorrow to observe their numbers pro-gressively increase: - like cattle for themarket, they are driven from one State toanother, and sold to the highest bidder."11

While Benjamin Lundy was recognizedand the Genius recommended to itsmembers, the Philadelphia trip was moreimportant to Lundy in making him realizethat he was too isolated in Tennessee fromwhat was happening both in the UnitedStates and around the world. He came to seethat he would be more effective and able to


even greater challenges lay ahead. Hewould convince William Lloyd Garrison ofthe moral necessity of abolishing slaveryand together, for a brief time, they wouldwork together on the Genius. He wouldconfront notorious slave traders and bebeaten and hauled into court. He wouldcontinue to write and to address members ofCongress. Finally, he would spend much ofhis remaining efforts on searching for placesof safety for those Negroes who desired toemigrate. Places such as Canada, and thenthe Republic of Texas.

§

On a cold winter's day in January,1832,18 Benjamin Lundy crossed fromLewiston, New York, to Queenstown,Upper Canada. This crossing began aneleven day journey (across what is nowWestern Ontario) that would take him viasled, stage, ferry and on foot to Hamilton,Ancaster, Berntford, and ultimately Detroit,Michigan, but only after a 2 1/2 day visit tothe Wilberforce community some 12 to 14miles northwest of London. That communi-ty, designed as a haven for free Negroesfrom the United States, primarily fromCincinnati, Ohio, had come into being onlysome two years earlier. These former Ohioresidents, now struggling to create a safeand free community at the Wilberforce set-tlement, had fled to Canada to escape theharsh and repressive laws of Ohio.

The Wilberforce community was ofparticular interest to abolitionist BenjaminLundy for while he was committed to multi-ple methods of seeking to eliminate slaveryin the United States, he was also interestedin promoting safe emigration for Negroeswho desired to move from their presentinhospitable - and often dangerous - livingconditions. He felt however, that he neededto personally inspect any areas that he

the Secretary General of Haiti declared thatthere would be no more aid given to thenew settlers. Dismayed at this news, Lundyimmediately made plans to travel to Haiti toget the government to reverse its decision.Before he could leave, however, he had tofind an acting editor for the Genius andmake arrangements for the care of his wife,Esther, who was once again pregnant and asemi-invalid. An editor was found and hiswife urged him to go, as he would only begone for eight weeks.15

He found the Haitian governmentunwilling to reverse their decision and thenegotiations with the Haitian PhilanthropicSociety, to assist future immigrants withtransportation assistance, taking much toolong. "Just as he made ready to sail forhome, a vessel arrived from Baltimorebearing news that on April 4 his wife haddied in childbirth."16 The twins were namedEsther and Benjamin, and they, with theirthree siblings, were cared for by Quakerrelatives and Friends.

As Merton Dillon would write:

"The death of his wife intensifiedLundy's attachment to the anti-slavery cause. His life, long dedicat-ed to the crusade for freedom, nowbecame indistinguishable from it.Few distractions remained to impedehis single-minded pursuit of thatcause. Released, however tragically,from the responsibilities that hadtended to bind him to place and tofamily, he now found himself evenfreer than before to devote himselfto the very limit of endurance wher-ever the need seemed greatest andwherever his presence might accom-plish the most for the antislaverycause."17

The one part of his life was closing, but


The Wilberforce Tract (just north of London, Ontario)


details as to weather, soil conditions, timergrowth and general conditions of interest toprospective settlers. His description of theWilberforce community, once he arrived, isbest described in his own words:

"It will be recollected that theWilberforce Settlement was com-menced by a few colored personsfrom Cincinnati, Ohio, who wereinduced to seek asylum there fromthe storm of persecution thatappeared to be gathering in thatsection of country and directing itsforce towards them... The businesswas badly managed at first. Thepersons who acted as agents con-tracted for more land than they couldpay for according to agreement. Anew bargain was then made, andanother failure to comply with theterms succeeded. Confidence in theirability to prosecute the businesssuccessfully was impaired. Atlength, a smaller quantity of land hasbeen secured to the company andindividuals have made purchases ontheir own account. A number of veryrespectable and intelligent men havetaken up their residence there. Someof these are in good easy circum-stances - a few even wealthy - and itis believed that everything will goon well hereafter.

"The members of the Settlementhave entered into an Association formutual assistance, etc. They haveappointed a Board of Managers, ofwhich Austin Steward, ... formerlyof Rochester, New York, is thePresident. The Rev. Benjamin Paul,late of New York City, is their treas-urer.... Full confidence may beplaced in those at present selected tomanage the public concerns of the

would recommend.Canada had passed their first anti-

slavery law in 1793, legally forbiddenimportation of slaves in 1808 and hadexhibited a very enlightened position if anoft-told account is to be accepted. James C.Brown and Stephen Dutton of Cincinnati,Ohio, free Negroes, in the winter of 1829-1830, had registered the community's namewith the purchase of lands from the CanadaCompany, a land speculation venture. Theydesired to establish an intentional colony inthe Huron Tract in Upper Canada Brownand Dutton had interviewed the Britishgovernmental officials at York (nowToronto) to find out if they would beaccepted in Canada and eligible to receiveasylum from the Canadian government. Thereported response Brown received to hisinquiry when he raised the question with theLieutenant-Governor, Sir John Colborne,was: "Tell the Republicans on your side ofthe line that we Royalists do not know menby their color. Should you come to us youwill be entitled to all the privileges of therest of His Majesty's subjects."19 Land waspurchased and a settlement was started inthis inaccessible area.

When Lundy arrived at theWilberforce settlement on January 17, 1832,two years after the fateful interview, therewere approximately 150 free and perhapsonce-fugitive Negroes in the community.Later accounts would suggest that while itwas a new settlement it was also a gatewayfor a "rendezvous of 2,000 refugees whohad soon passed on seeking homes in otherparts [of Canada]."20 His trip to Wilberforcewas no accident. It was a continuation andan integral part of his life-long dedication toa conscious effort to abolish slavery in theUnited States and to secure equal treatmentfor his Negro brothers and sisters.

His diary, kept conscientiously ashe traveled across Canada, recorded myriad


ened and standing, as it is customarywith many in new settlements; butcut all off, though the labor is great.They have about 100 head of cattleand swine, and a few horses. Oxenare mostly used with them forhauling, ploughing [sic], etc. Theyhave a substantial sawmill erectedon a branch of the Au Sable [river],within the precincts of their settle-ment and, of course, they will hencehave no difficulty in procuringlumber for building. (Their dwell-ings are as yet constructed of logs -some of them hewed and a few havewell-shingled roofs.) There are [sic]one grist mill and two other sawmills within eight or nine miles ofthe settlement and one grist mill ispartly built within five or six milesof them. Several small stores arelocated also near by; and a tailor,shoemaker and blacksmith resideamong them. They have two goodschools for the education of theirchildren, one of which is under thecharge of Thomas J. Paul, son of theRev. B. Paul, a youth of finepromise. Such are the excellent regu-lations, and so high is the reputationof this school that a number ofrespectable white people send theirchildren to it in preference to othersthat are conducted by white teachers.In the summer season a daughter ofthe same gentleman, a quite accom-plished and amiable young woman,also teaches a school for girls. ASabbath School is likewise kept upin the warm season, under the direc-tion of Austin Steward. Two regularmeetings for religious worship areestablished among them, for theBaptist and. Methodist denomina-tions. A Temperance Society has

settlement; and the true friends ofthe oppressed could scarcely rendera more acceptable service to thecause of philanthropy than by assist-ing, with pecuniary and othermeans, the persecuted colored manin obtaining a residence there.Under the liberal provisions of thegovernment regulations, as nowinterpreted and administered, all arefree and equal. Every citizen,without distinction of color or caste,is entitled to all the privileges andimmunities that the most favoured[sic] individual can claim....

"There are, at this time, aboutthirty-two families residing in thesettlement which averages about fiveindividuals to eachi (It is stated bythe settlers that upwards of 2,000persons have visited and intend toestablish themselves at that place,most of whom were necessitated togo to other parts of the provincewhere they could clear the land,plant, etc.). Four or five of thefamilies now there arrived abouttwenty months since - the rest atlater periods, and some few of themquite recently. Twenty-five familieshave purchased land and most ofthem have erected tolerably corn-fortable homes and cleared a fewacres of ground. They have pur-chased nearly 2,000 acres in thewhole, 200 of which are cleared andabout 60 sown with wheat. The set-tlers have cut a wide road throughseven miles and a quarter of verythickly and heavily timbered landfor the Canada Company - the pricefor which was placed to their creditin the purchase of their several lots.It should also be remarked that inclearing they leave no trees dead-


early settlers, it did remain a beacon of hopeas the situation grew considerably worse inthe United States. His departure from thecommunity was a time of sadness, on bothsides.

§

The seven years remaining in BenjaminLundy's life were equally full of writing andtraveling. He continued to publish TheGenius of Universal Emancipation, and hetraveled on two major trips to the Republicof Texas, similar to the one made toCanada.

Toward the end of the decade of the1830s, after his announced retirement, adisastrous fire at Pennsylvania Hall inPhiladelphia saw his lifetime collection ofpapers and correspondence destroyed. Hemoved, almost penniless, to PutnamCounty, Illinois, to be near his children. Hecontinued his work on abolitionist causesand even began plans for publishing anothernewspaper. But in early August, 1839, hecontracts a fever that was prevalent in thestate and on August 22nd, late in theevening, one of America's great workers forthe cause of abolition, died. He was buriedtwo days later in the Friends Burial Ground,next to the Meeting House, in McNabb,Illinois.

As Lundy's biographer would write:"Although his unceasing labor moved theantislavery crusade nearer its goals, theglory of his life did not lie in success, for henever achieved that. Final, unchallengedsuccess in the cause to which he dedicatedhis life always eluded him as it eludes allmen. But success postponed is neitherfailure nor tragedy. The record of histriumph remains vivid for all to read - a lifelived selflessly in devotion to the cause ofhuman equality and freedom"22

also been organized, the members ofwhich have pledged themselves toexert their influence in discouragingboth the vending and use of all kindsof ardent spirits. The settlers gener-ally are sober, industrious andthrifty. In their houses things mostlyappear clean, neat andcomfortable."...

"But the settlement atWilberforce [as opposed to othersettlements of Negroes in Canada]will be, by far, the most important,as there are men of known intel-ligence and public spirit there whowill give it a consequence that prob-ably will not, at least very soon, beattached to the others. It will indeed,be viewed by the colored people as anucleus for an extensive emigrationfrom the northern and middle partsof the union especially fromVirginia and several contiguousstates. Many will go there and obtaininformation there that will inducethem to settle in other places whenthe price of land shall rise and morenew settlements be opened. Theywill thus scatter over the province,some one way and some another; butmany will stop here, as at a centralpoint, which first shall have attractedtheir attention, and where they willfind intelligent friends andbrethren."21

Even though Lundy was in the settle-ment for only slightly more than two days,he had reached his objective: he had seenfor himself that it was possible for a liberty-seeking group of people to establish acommunity away from the evils of slavery,where all men and women were treated asequals. While the Settlement would nevergrow to the proportions envisioned by the


13) Dillon, Benjamin tandy, p.87.

14) Ibid., p. 92. While Lundy considered the coloni-

zation schemes a temporary matter " - the great

mass of Americans must forever remain of the

soil of their birth, and there be restored to their

rights." Ibid., p. 190.

15) Ibid., pp. 99-100.

16) Ibid., p. 102.

17) Ibid., p. 102.

18) See David M. Ludlum. Early American Wnters

II: 1821-1879 (Boston:

American Meteorological Society, 1968), p.16.

He argues that December, 1831, and January,

1832, were one of the coldest periods in record-

ed meteorological history in the Northeastern

states.

19) See Benjamin Drew, A Northside View of

Slavery (Boston, 1856), pp.244-245. Quoted in

Fred Landon, "A Pioneer Abolitionist in Upper

Canada," Ontario History Vol. LII (1960),

No.2., p.77.

20) See Fred Landon, editor, "The Diary of

Benjamin Lundy Written During His Journey

Through Upper Canada, January, 1832"

(Toronto: Ontario Historical Society's "Papers

and Records"), Vol.19. This is the standard

account of Lundy's Wilberforce visit.

21) Ibid., Diary of Benjamin Lundy, pp. 4-6. (This

Diary first appeared in three successive issues

of The Genius of Universal Emancipation,

March, April and May, 1832.)

22) Dillon, Benjamin Lundy, p. 262.

Footnotes:

1) William Lloyd Garrison, The Liberator,

September 20, 1839, as quote in Friends

Intelligencer and Journal, XLVI, No.19

(Philadelphia), 11 Fifth Month 1889, p.308.

2) Dillon, Merton L. Benjamin Lundy and the

Struggle for Negro Freedom (Urbana, Illinois:

University of Illinois Press, 1966), p.54. He is

quoting Lundy, The Genius of Universal

Emancipation, I, (June, 1827), pp. 101 and 102.

3) Armstrong, William Clinton. The Lundy Familyand their Descendants of Whatsoever Surnamewith a Biographical Sketch of Benjamin Lundy

(New Brunswick, New Jersey: Privately

printed, 1902), p.350.

4) Ibid., p. 351.

5) Dillon, Benjamin Lundy p.3.

6) Quoted in "Benjamin Lundy," Friends

Intelligencer and Journal, 18 Fifth Month

1889, p.308. A footnote to this biographical

statement acknowledges that it was taken from

an article in The Cosmopolitan, (New York,

n.d. given), written by Frank B. Sanborn, also

the author of A Lift of John Brown.

7) Thomas, Nathan Macy. Nathan M. Tihomas,Birthright Member of the Sodety of Friends,Pioneer Physician, Early and Ernest Advocateof the Abolition of Slavery, Friend and Helperof the Fugitive Slave; An Account of His Lift

Written by Himself (Cassopolis, Michigan,

1925), p. 16.

8) Dillon, Benjamin Lundy p. 18.

9) Emancipator. (Jonesboro, Tennessee),

September 30, 1820, p. 89.

10) Philanthropist, VT (Mt. Pleasant, Ohio), 2 June

1821, pp. 72-73.

11) Dillon, Benjamin tandy, p. 81. He is quoting

from Minutes of the Eighteenth Session of theAmerican Convention for Promoting theAbolition of Slavery, and Improving the

Condition of the African Race ... (Philadelphia,

1824).

12) See Leroy Graham Baltimore: The Nineteenth

Century Black Capital (Washington, D.C.:

University Press of America, 1982).


large sum of money had his “Master” sochosen to dispose of him. That Williamnever was put on the block for sale isevident from the fact that his father, in hislast will and testament, bequeathed to himhis personal freedom, upon entering histwenty-first birthday. Thus it would appearthat his father was not utterly void of con-science. He would not allow his own fleshand blood, regardless of colour, to beenslaved and trafficked in as a soullessbeast of the field. And thus it was that witha somewhat purged conscience, he passedon to meet the Judge of all the earth whomwe know is a wise, a just and a mercifulGod. William always testified that he waswell treated as a slave. Only in the face ofdeath, however, did fatherhood assert itself.

Of his mother William was evidentlyallowed to know but little. He saw herplaced on the block and sold down the river.It is quite understandable that her separationshould be desirable to the father. The sale ofa chattel would be simple and the removalof the accuser of his conscience wouldprove a relief.

Other slaves were less fortunate.William told of the cruelties practiced onother slaves by less kindly disposed owners.Women slave owners he said were morecruel than men. On one occasion the slavesfrom several neighbouring estates werehauling dirt to form a dam across a stream,driving out into the deep water and dumpingtheir load. One slave, owned by a woman,when in the middle of the stream, dove tothe bottom and caught firm hold of the

William Allen, a negro minister andevangelist of the Society of Friends -commonly called Quakers - was well knownand highly appreciated by the members ofIndiana, Ohio, New York and CanadaYearly Meetings.1

His type of Christian work was princip-ally evangelistic, though I recollect hearingit said of him by ministers of Ohio YearlyMeeting, that William Allen was a naturalborn sermonizer.

No financial arrangements were everentered into between the meeting he was toserve and himself, although, as I haveknown him for a goodly number of years,he has never suffered lack of food, raiment,shelter or loving Christian care. It is there-fore apparent that he worked for God; thathe looked to God for his remuneration andthat his God amply provided for his everyneed.

William Allen was born in the state ofTennessee. He was born of a full bloodNegro slave mother. His father was a whiteman of Irish extraction, a Southern planterand a slave owner. Allen was therefore aslave to his own father; a chattel rather thana son. To his father he may have owedmuch of his fluency of language and naturalwit.

William Allen was a man of great physi-cal power. His weight as I knew him was aminimum of two hundred fifty pounds,while in height he measured a full six feetwhen in his eighties. For this reason alone,he would have been an exceedingly valu-able slave and could have been sold for a

Memoirs of William Allen

Fred L. RyonMinisterial Companion to William Allen and later

Friends MinisterPelham Monthly Meeting


Fred and Olive Ryon


William Allen, Friends Minister and Evangelist


taking in which the Quakers were promi-nently associated.

The location chosen by William Allen inthe state of Indiana was in the vicinity ofwhat is now known as Blue River Meeting.He was not however, among Friends, butamong that anti-slavery body of Christiansknown as Wesleyan Methodists. Theyproved to be not only theoretical, but practi-cal anti-slavists. Soon the naturally religiousmind of William had opened wide for theChrist to enter in. He was soon received intothe church in full membership. His deepdevotion, his remarkable gift of languageand natural oratory as well as his clarity ofthought soon found recognition and he wasordained a minister in that denomination.

In the meantime he had become interest-ed in the accumulation of earthly posses-sions. In this too he was proving an inherentability. He had rented fields, purchased avery valuable team of horses; and plantedhis crops. His field of wheat showedpromise of abundant harvest as the time ofreaping drew near.

There is no question of his ability toacquire wealth. Yet his God had evidentlydiscovered in him a greater and moreimportant gift - the gift of winning souls.William had evidently felt the call of God topreach the Word. The growing signs ofworldly prosperity was alluring. He wouldfirst secure enough of this worlds goods toprovide for his declining years. It was not arefusal to preach the gospel but a waitingfor that “more convenient time - procrasti-nation that thief of time.”

But evidently those rich gifts, lyingdormant and which God had given for aspecific purpose were needed then andthere.

“The fields were white unto theharvest.”

About this time adverse winds of cir-cumstances began to appear on the horizon

spokes of the wheel and held on until dead.His owner was summoned and when shearrived, looked at the dead body unaffected-ly, saying “I don’t care about the loss of thenigger if I could only have him alive to givehim one more good thrashing.” Sometimes,William said, the poor slaves were faced upto a post, their arms around it and theirhands bound. Their backs were bared andthen they were flogged until their backswere lacerated and bleeding, then treatedwith a solution of salt and water.

While many slaves were well cared forand properly nourished, others, less fortu-nate, were under fed. He told me that theslaves had a report going around amongstthem, that “In Indiana pigs already roastedand with knives sticking in their backs wererunning wild through the woodlands,squealing a crying ‘Eat me, eat me’.” Whilethis seems ridiculous to a more enlightenedpeople, it may easily have been a hungryslaves dream, to whom it had seemed areality and who had thus reported it to hisfellow slaves, spreading the good news ofthis Promised Land throughout the adjoin-ing plantations.

Ridiculous as this may seem to you andme, it was evidently not without its appealto the long enslaved Negro mind, for uponreceiving his freedom, William Allenpromptly sough asylum in that “PromisedLand” of abundance, Indiana.

A booklet published by Jesse M. Waltonof Ontario, Canada, on the life of WilliamAllen, states that “Attempts were made byhis father’s white heirs to retain William inbondage by legal sharp practice.” Of thisfact I have no knowledge, although itappeals to me as altogether probable. Fromthe same source I also learn that for a timeWilliam was engaged as a teamster runningescaped slaves at night by the“Underground Railway” from the land oftheir bondage to Canada, a hazardous under-


“Placing his cup to his brother’s lips.”So heavily weighted this matter upon his

mind that he took the concern to his presid-ing official. After listening to the statementof William, his Elder said: “You are aQuaker.” This to William was pure Greek.“What are Quakers?” he asked. The he waskindly told that they were a religious sectthat did not practice the outward ordinancesbut considered them instead as real thoughspiritual christian experiences - not symbo-lic but the spiritual reality.

He was directed to the Quaker meetingnot so far distant, possibly the meetingknown as Blue River. This seems to havemet his approval for he was received amember, recorded a minister according tothe custom of Friends.

During his years of slavery, William hadnot been allowed to learn to read or write. Ifhe was caught trying to learn he was dulypunished. He was determined however, tolean and watched the school children asthey passed to and fro from school, withtheir text books under their arms, wonderingwhat those books contained. On one ofthese occasions a child chanced to loose aleaf from her reader. The wind whisped itaway in the direction where Williamchanced to be standing, watching. he notedthe place of its landing and when the child-ren were passed and out of sight, looking allabout him, to assure himself that no onecould see him, he picked up the fallen leafand secreted it about his person.

This lone leaf became his text book andin fact his library. Stranger than fictionthough it may seem, from this solitary leafof a school child’s reader, he learned to readhis Bible.

As he met a child on the way fromschool he would produce his treasured leafand inquire, “What does this mark mean?”Thus, laboriously, one by one he learned theletters of the alphabet. Then he learned that

of his life. They came thick and fast. Hisvaluable team of horses had died. His wheatfield which had given such promise provedto be blasted and worthless save for thestraw, which he gave to a neighbour for thecutting. All this, while his neighbour’s fieldof wheat, just over the fence, was filled outperfectly.

Moreover, to add to his calamity, hissweetheart to whom he was engaged to bemarried at no far distant day had sickenedand died. How greta was his love for hercan only be measured by his long life ofdevotion to her memory. None other wasever met who could fill her place in hisaffections. He remained single to the end oflife. His promise to her was not “Unto deathdo us part” but rather “Till death do usunite.”

I cannot think it altogether too visionaryto believe that she ever lived enshrined inhis heart. To the end of his life he continuedfaithful to his one and only love. What anexample of fidelity and devotion.

Nor did all this misfortune turn himaway from his God. On the contrary it gavehim to understand that his God was speak-ing and calling him to a service far greaterand more important, the salvation of immor-tal souls. It was then that William Allenmade full surrender of his life to God, topreach his everlasting gospel.

As heretofore stated he had beenordained a minister of the WesleyanMethodist church, with all the rights andprivileges and authority accorded theirministers generally. Thus it came to passthat he was called upon to serve in thepassing of the elements in the so called“Lord’s Supper.” He said that often therewere those who had been addicts to thedrink habit who would cling to the cup as heheld it to their lips, loath to release it untilthey had drained the last dregs. This trou-bled William. To him it seemed like


the Christian Worker. Among the highlightsof that Yearly Meeting was a Minister’sMeeting held in a tent on the meeting housegrounds and conducted by John HenryDouglas. I was not among the elect at thatgathering, though I was on the grounds andfelt the impact of the meeting. Strong menwere weeping; conservatives were shouting.It was a pentecostal outpouring. Above allcould be heard the sonorous voice ofWilliam Allen, calling upon “All that waswithin him to praise and magnify the Lord.”William’s spacious body seemed all toosmall for the fullness of the blessing of Godwhich came to him that day.

Not only was William Allen exalted byhis position but he glorified his position. Noword or act of his ever brought reproach orembarrassment to his church. Though hiswork was necessarily among the whites, henever “high hatted” those of his own colour.

At a certain Yearly Meeting anotherNegro was present who was asked to preachat a Negro Church on a First Day. Thisminister responded that he “did not preachto niggers.” Needless to say William wasgiven the appointment to which he respond-ed graciously. It was one of the oft repeatedsayings of William that “I think a white manis just as good as a Negro, if he behaveshimself as well.”

While we are wont to think of theremarkable qualities of his voice, it shouldbe equally well remembered that he had avocabulary and a voice that could, whenoccasion demanded, cut like a two edgedsword. In a certain meeting which he washolding in New York Yearly Meeting,William was invited to attend aConservative Friends meeting a few milesdistant for a First Day morning meeting.This he gladly did. At the close of theservice the lone elder of the meeting, nowadvanced in years, invited him to remainand hold a series of meetings there. I

through a combination of these characterswords were formed which were connectedto express though. It was thus he learned toread and write. Rising above so great ahandicap to so great a height makes him, tome, not only a self-made man, but a God-made man.

William was a student of the Bible. Thewell worn Bible left at his decease evi-denced it. It was full of markings which healone could have understood. He studied itnot so much historically and theologicallyas spiritually and experimentally. It wasnever too easy for him to read but he wasable to get his scripture first hand andbecause of his early handicap, the HolySpirit seemed to bestow upon him especialinsight and understanding of the scriptures.I heard him preach many, many sermons,yet I cannot recall any unsoundness in anystatement he ever made, or any misquota-tion of the scriptures. He used no notes inspeaking, yet was concise and without repe-tition. His sermons were orderly, logical andI could say, climacteric though apparentlyunstudied. One could but feel that his wordsand sermons were inspired of God.

He had been endowed by his creatorwith a most remarkable voice. When hespoke in a lighter vein his voice seemed toradiate laughter. When he spoke sorrowfullyhis voice was deluged with tears. I haveseen the congregation at one moment con-vulsed with laughter and at the next momentin tears.

Yes, William Allen was evidently God-called; God endowed and God used. Amighty ambassador for his King.

My Christian relationship with WilliamAllen began at Ohio Yearly Meeting ofFriends held at Damascus, Ohio, in Augustof 1882. Among the notables of the timeswere John Henry Douglas; Robert Douglas;Nathan and Esther Frame; Seth and HuldaReese and Calvin Pritchard, then editor of


(Ec. 7:9)None of the infidels finished putting on

their overshoes, all remained until the closeof the meeting. Afraid that they wouldbecome objects of ridicule, they had beencaught in their own snare. The meetingclosed regularly and in perfect order.

Young in Christian life and experience,I had never seen the like and indeed wasfrightened for the results. I had yet much tolearn of the marvelous leadings of the Spiritof God, and His mighty spiritual forces, andthat He makes no mistakes.

The results of the meeting justified themeasures taken. In the services that fol-lowed there were satisfactory results, amongwhich was the professed conversion of aRomanist who was the son-in-law of adevout Methodist. Needless to say, thefather-in-law was lifted to the hallelujahheights.

Although the infidels did not reappear inthe meetings, they had learned that a negrocould be nobler and wiser than a white man.The victory had been twofold. William nowfelt that his work at this place was accom-plished and made his plans to move on.Those who had sought to break up his meet-ings were on hand to greet him a friendlyadieu. I have often wished I might know thefinal effect of that meeting upon thoseorganized and self-styled infidels.

William Allen had a great fondness forchildren. They in turn seemed instinctivelydrawn to him. In his kindly Christian pres-ence both youth and age forgot all about thedifference in colour; intuitively one seemedinspired with a sense of his kindly, lovingand pure regenerate nature that lay beneaththat dusky exterior. In many homes wherehe had been so kindly entertained, thepeople told me that though at first they hadfelt a hesitancy about receiving him intotheir homes, once within the home they hadforgotten all about race and colour and

remember the elder saying, “We are dyingout anyway and if it don’t do any good, itcan’t do any harm.” William, as was hiscustom, talked the matter over with hisyoung companion. It was decided that hewould stay and hold the meetings providedhe was allowed his customary freedom inthe conduct of the meetings. To this theelder gave his full consent. As usual, themeeting house was filled each evening.However, among the congregation was acompany of men who claimed to be infidels.By day they gathered in the village storeand conspired against the meetings. Theyboasted that they would “break up thatNigger’s meetings.”

They came to the meeting in a body andsat near each other in the rear part of theroom. They seemed to create an atmospherethat was impervious to the truth of thegospel, no matter how hard it was pouredout. No word of appeal seemed to gobeyond the lips of the speaker. Williamseemed to sense the condition and imme-diately his keen spirit rose to the conditionand became “Master of the situation.”

As in a flash his tactics changed andthere was poured forth such a deluge oforatorical denunciation of infidelity as I hadnever heard before. The very foundation ofthe house seemed to tremble neath the treadof his indignant feet. The large part of thecongregation was spellbound. Of course theso-called infidels were angered beyondmeasure. They simultaneously began slip-ping into their overshoes preparatory toleaving the house. Some of them had oneshoe off and one shoe on, when just assuddenly as the tumult had begun, it ceased.In a manner and in a voice as calm andserene as a summer sky, William said,“Now if any one gets mad, I have a scriptur-al text for him - ‘Anger rests in the bosomof fools.’ Remember this is not where Iplace you, but where the Bible places you.”


companion. It is true neither of the twainwas ever burdened with his receipts thoughWilliam himself was heard to say that henever knew how much his wallet contained,but there was always enough. While theFriend of yesterday have been sometimesaccused of parsimoniousness towards theirministers, be it known that outside thenominal salary, Friends meetings have, as arule, been exceedingly generous towardthose workers who were giving their entiretime to Christian service. For instance, thewriter knows of one Friend who purchasedthe material and paid the tailor to make afull English worsted suit for William. Notthat his old suit was in any sense disreputa-ble, but because he felt that William shouldhave a second suit. No entry was ever madeof this on the church records and in all prob-ability was never whispered outside thefamily concerned until now.

William was not large alone in phy-sique; he was great in his childlike faith.This was evidenced in his life in more waysthan one. Many years ago when on one ofhis evangelistic excursions to Canada, hewas just getting into a wagon to leave themeeting house, when the team of horsessuddenly started, throwing him to theground, where he was struck on the back ofhis head and neck.

This serious accident occurred atBloomfield meeting house. As the result ofthis injury there developed a cancerousgrowth, the size of a man’s hand. In spite ofthe pain, he covered the sore and continuedto carry on.

Somewhere near the year 1880, thisaffliction reached its climax. At the time,William with his companion, CharlesSweet, were holding a series of meetings atwhat was then known as the South StreetMeeting, in contrast to the North StreetMeeting a few miles distant.

From the lips of Charles Sweet, I

really enjoyed and benefitted by his pres-ence.

Cleanliness, both of body and of mindwere notably among his characteristics. Hewas always particular that his kinky hairwas kept closely cropped and his full beardtrimmed. He always had a young man oftheological bent to travel with him as com-panion. These young men were pushedforward in the early part of the service.Then William followed, and no matter howgreat the young man’s embarrassment andconfusion, William had the faculty ofsmoothing out and clarifying, until theyouth was made to feel perfectly at ease orto feel that he had really spoken to edifica-tion. It is said that he started no less thanthirty-seven young men in the ministry. Agoodly number of these young men becameministers and pastors and prominent churchworkers whose lives have been spent inChristian work.

These young men companions werealways white and were trained to do person-al work. To them William committed thework that might be required with seekers atthe altar. It may be added also, that he wasstrict regarding the deportment of theseyoung men, both in and out of the services.One of the young men however, fell in lovewith a beautiful young lady, school teacherin Vermont, where they were holding evan-gelistic meetings. He had to cover his devo-tion deep out of sight however until theirmission had been completed and he hadreached his home in Ohio; then he took upthe matter by mail. The young lady a littlelater gave up school teaching and becamethe wife of a much loved pastor ofDesmoines, Iowa Friends Meeting. Thewriter has had personal acquaintanceshipwith six of the companions of WilliamAllen, all of whom became ministers.Whatever he received in the way of financ-es, he religiously shared, 50-50, with his


ural. I had seen the sore at its worst. I hadseen the same when it was in the process ofhealing. New and healthy flesh wereforming around the edges of the wound. Thenew flesh was lighter in colour and easilydistinguished from the old. I also saw it at alater date when the healing had becomecomplete. The scar remained. That scarWilliam carried with him to the grave.

He said sometimes people asked himwhy, if God had effected a healing of thesore, he had allowed so great a scar toremain? To this William was wont to reply,“He left the scar to convince just suchpeople as you.”

My personal acquaintance with WilliamAllen began in the year 1882 at Ohio YearlyMeeting of Friends, which I attended thatyear for my first time.

Later in the year William visited AdrianQuarterly Meeting, Michigan. He held serv-ices at Hanover, my home meeting; atRollin, the home meeting of ElizabethComstock, the silver tongued orator of apast generation; also at Tecumseth. At thethree meetings mentioned he had the com-panionship of two of his young men. FromTecumseh he went to Sandusky, Ohio,where he was joined by a third young manwhich made William’s measure of joy fulland running over. The weather was stillwarm and one day between services,William expressed a wish to sit under anorange tree and pick and eat oranges.Whereupon, the young theological studentswent out and cut a sapling and brought it upin the parlor of the home. They then went tothe nearby store and bought oranges, fasten-ing them on the tree. Then placing a chairunder the would-be orange tree, they escort-ed William to the seat and invited him to“go to.” For once William seemed at a lossfor words. However, he appreciated thekindly gesture and all enjoyed the innocentpleasantry.

learned the following facts. While stillconducting meetings, William was sufferingintense pain from the malicious sore.Especially was this true of nights. All nightlong, Charles would wring cloths out ofalmost boiling water and apply them to thesore to relieve, temporarily, the pain.Charles said the condition was fast becom-ing unendurable to him, and as opportunityoffered he would steal quietly out of theroom and pray to God for relief. WhenWilliam noticed the frequent retirement ofhis companion, he inquired the reason.When Charles told him that he went out topray for his relief, he said, “Why not uniteour prayers?” Then there came to them areminder of the scripture as found in theEpistle of James 5: 14.2 Thereupon theydecided upon a plan to try the fleece, wet ordry, as is related in Judges 6: 37. Their planwas, if able, to attend the meeting on FirstDay at eleven o’clock. And if they wereinvited to the home of Isaac McKeel and ifJames and Mary Chase and Samuel andAnn Simpkin were also invited, they wouldtake it as evidence that it was God’s will forthem to ask the prayers of the company asinstructed in the Epistle of James.

As “truth is often stranger than fiction”so all the conditions they sought were fullymet. After the dinner hour, the matter ofWilliam’s healing was broached. Gatheredin one place were the ministers and elders ofthe church. As to the matter of prayer forhealing, they were of one accord and thus ofone mind which must have indexed themind of God as results must prove.

William told me that all present offereda prayer; that he was the last one in orderand when he arose from his knees all painwas gone. He could move his head any waywithout pain, though the sore seemed as yet,unchanged. In fact it never gave him painfrom that time to the end of his life.

God’s process of healing was not unnat-


down hill, in the back fields with the boysof the family. Our reception in the meetingwas truly splendid and results seemed tofollow our departure. This meeting housewas later moved to Perry City, where ayounger generation is now successfullycarrying on.

Other meetings belonging to ScipioQuarterly Meeting visited by William onthis trip were Union Springs (the then homeof Oakwood Friends Seminary) andSkaneatlas meeting, where Chauncey B.Thorne was the able minister as also clerkof the Quarterly Meeting.

Leaving Skaneatlas, William spent afew days with Friends in Rochester, thenwent on to Palmyra, N.Y., where we weremet by Alexander Purdy and taken to hislovely home on his nursery farm not farfrom the city where we were royally enter-tained during our sojourn in this meeting.Services were held each night in the Friendsmeeting house in the city with a mid-weekmeeting on Wednesday and morning andevening services on Sunday. A stage pro-vided by Alexander Purdy conveyed theemployees of the farm to all the services.No deduction of time was made for theirattendance of the mid-week meeting.

While we were being entertained at thePurdy home, it came to pass that Ellison R.Purdy and Edward Mott of Glens Falls werepreaching their maiden sermons in a nearbyschool house. Both of whom attained highhonours, later, in the work of the ministry ofthe Word.

To his credit William Allen (the farreaching nature of his ministry demonstrat-ing) it seems altogether proper to state here,that one of the men, John Weaver, thenemployed on the farm, later removed toClintondale, Ulster Co., N.Y. Through thisman, Fred L. Ryon was invited by themeeting to become its pastor, which he did,being with them perhaps through one of the

When unquestionably beyond his allot-ted four score and ten years, William wasstill carrying on his ministry. Not unlikeMoses, the great lawgiver, “His eyes werenot dimmed or his natural force abated.”

To me this sketch of his life wouldindeed be incomplete without a record of anevangelistic itinerary in which I accompa-nied him throughout New York YearlyMeeting of Friends.

This itinerary began in the winter of1883. His first series of meetings was atwhat was then known as the North Streetmeeting, in Scipio Quarter, N.Y. We weremet at the station in Aurora by JamesOstrander, who took us to his home fordinner and later took us to the home ofHiram Lyons where we remained perma-nently during the meetings there. I remem-ber the daughter, Genevieve, remarkingjocosely one day that it was a “den ofLyons.” Samuel Simkin was the minister atthe North Street meeting. We visited theSouth Street meeting of which James Chasewas the minister, and who for several yearswas the beloved pastor of the Brooklyn,N.Y. Friends meeting. South Street meetinghouse wa located at what was then knownas Wheelers Corners. Later the two meet-ings were united in one congregation whichis now known as Poplar Ridge Friendsmeeting.

While we were yet at South Streetmeeting we attended a tri-township SundaySchool Convention, held at Ledyard, in theM.E. Church. William addressed the con-vention while I was given the tenor part inthe choir. Dinner was served in the church.It was a memorable occasion and a fittingclose to our work in those meetings.

Our next series of meetings was held atwhat was then the Hector Friends meeting.Here we made our home with caleb Wixomand family. Here every courtesy was givenus and I have happy memories of coasting


His mission accomplished in this part ofNew York Yearly meeting, William nowturned his face toward the Friends meetingsin Vermont state. Friends took us toWatertown where we entrained for NorthFerrisburg. We were routed northwardthrough New York state and around thenorth end of Lake Champlain. It was nightwhen we arrived at N. Ferrisburg. In themeantime the conductor had informed usthat our train did not stop at that station.However, after much argument and prayerhe consented to slow down the train suffi-ciently for us to land safely on the stationplatform. Planting our feet securely on thelower step of the coach, we awaited thesignal when with alacrity we let ourselvesdown to the station platform. We landedstanding upright but in total darkness savefor the feeble flare of a kerosene lantern thatwas burning nearby. Happily this lanternproved to be the property of Peter Dakin,who with his farmhand, had ventured outover the hazardous roads of a Vermontwinter breakup to meet us and covey ussafely to his home, which was to be ourhome during the period of our stay in thatmeeting. In the home the traditional friendlywelcome was awaiting us. After a few pre-liminaries we were invited into the diningroom where a bountiful supper had beenprepared and kept steaming hot for us. Alittle later and we were ensconced betweensnowy white sheets, on a downey bed ofgoose feathers sleeping the sleep of the just;trusting God for the morrow.

Awaking with the morning light, welooked out of our bedroom window to viewfor the first time, mountains. Westwardacross Lake Champlain, silhouetted againstthe horizon, majestic, immobile and serenewere the Arirondacks. In their quiet mannerof speech, they seemed to be saying: “Asthe mountains are round about Jerusalem, sothe Lord is round about them that fear him.”

most critical periods of their existence.This would be but one instance out of

thirty-seven showing the far reaching resultsof the ministry of William Allen.

At the close of the series of meetings atPalmyra, William Allen returned toSkaneatlas to attend Scipio QuarterlyMeeting. From here we made our waythrough the mightiest fields of snow that Ihad ever seen, from Syracuse to Watertown,N.Y. As a matter of fact, the snow was sobanked up against the railroad track that inmany places one could not see beyond thecar window. At Watertown we hired alivery to take us out several miles to thehome of Hiram Wilber. We found the houseliterally submerged in drifted snow.Cheerful lights were shining through thefront windows but access through the frontdoor was utterly impossible. The livery manwith difficulty turned his team around andwaited for us to gain entrance to the house.This we accomplished by wading snow,surmounting drifts and finally reaching thewood house door at the rear of the home;we passed through into a cheerful, welllighted and comfortable living room wherethe usual friendly welcome awaited us.

In spite of the unfavourable weatherconditions a very satisfactory series of meet-ings was held. As I remember it, thismeeting was known as Evans Mills. A sonin this family, Wm. Wilber, attendedOakwood at Union Springs, and laterbecame a minister of the gospel.

Following this series of meetings,William was invited by the elder of a nearbyConservative Friends Meeting to comeconduct a similar meeting at LeRayville inhis meeting house. William was assured thatthere would be no restrictions placed uponhis methods of work. Harmony prevailedand the work was carried to a successfulend. Incidents of this meeting have beenrecorded elsewhere in these pages.


filled at the meeting hour, to capacity. Asidefrom the meetings which were our primaryobjective, there were other things that wereof special interest to me; the massive barnbuilt in the side of the mountain so thatloads of hay and grain were driven from theyard directly into the roof and unloaded intothe great mows beneath and on either sideof the drive way. We visited the herd ofsheep grazing among the rocks on themountain side. Inquiring as to how thesheep could get food enough from amongthe rocks to satisfy their hunger, some onejocosely answered, “Oh, w file the sheep’snoses, so they can get between the rocks.”We were reminded also that, “The cattle ona thousand hills are mine.” Peace, the peaceof God and satisfaction of all life seemed tofulfill the words of the Psalmist (Ps. 145:16). “Thou openest thine hand, and satis-fieth the desire of every living thing.”

We were told of a cave located on a farside of their farm. One day a member of thehome took us to see this cave. It so aptlyillustrates a certain portion of scripture that ithink it worthy of description here.

We found it half way up the mountainside. Almost indiscernible among the rocks,it was pointed out to us not much largerthan a man’s body. Inside the opening wecould discern nothing save the blackness ofnight. Our guide had brought with him somepine faggots. With these in his arms he slidfeet first down an incline into the darkness.Then lighting the faggots he invited us toenter one by one in like manner as we hadseen him go. Once inside we discovered bythe flickering light, a large quadrangularspace. The floor and the ceiling of this roomwas comparatively smooth, as also were theside walls, as though some mighty of theearth had pressed the sides apart leaving thewalls intact. One could but think of thesafety of such a refuge in the time of troubleand pursuit of an overwhelming enemy.

The summer of 1884 and the winter of1884-1885 were spent within the limits ofFerrisburg Quarterly Meeting, Vermont.

Meetings were held at N. Ferrisburg;Ferrisburg; Moncton Ridge; So. Starksboro;and Bristol where we were entertained byGeorge Meader. Here we did not get to seethe sun rise because of the mountains lyingto the eastward. The valley tot he west wasa fertile plain through ran a clear mountainstream. Someone told us that there was onlyone fault to be found with this land and thatwas - there was not enough of it.

While at Bristol we held meetings in aschoolhouse not so far distant. It was in thismeeting that I noticed for the first time thedominant enthusiastic characteristic of theNegro race in William Allen. In the congre-gation, on the front seat, near the platform,three men had taken their places. They allhad excellent voices; were good singers andenthusiastic worshippers. They beat timewith their feet, patted with their hands andwere generous with their loud amens. Iremembered William comparing somechurches to a pump that had to be primed.He said you had to stand and pour, andpour, and pour before you could even get anamen. After the meeting William said tome, “Wasn’t that a good meeting?” Even ifthe trio were “Holy Rollers” and I did notenthuse greatly over their methods, i wasglad for the cheer and uplift it gave him, forI am sure he must have missed in the calmQuaker worship much of the demonstrativeso natural to him.

Incidentally, one of the men told me thathe had not been out to earlier meetings forthe want of footwear. He said the localstores did not carry sizes larger thantwelve's, so he had to send away and havehis shoes made to order.

At the Ferrisburg meeting we wereentertained in the home of the Deans. Aswas usually the case, the meeting house was


appears to me that those young people havefound a Hee-hee’s nest containing a Haw-haw’s egg.” His methods of control in meet-ings were always effective, leaving thespeaker on a little higher spiritual plane.Those who came to scoff, went away topraise.

While still at the Dean home inFerrisburg we were taken on a picnic to theshore of Lake Champlain. Here we learnedthe lesson of the mobility of the earth itself,for we were told that the lake at that pointhad receded nearly a quarter of a mile in thelifetime of the oldest settlers. Literally, “Themountains had been carried into the midstof the sea.”

It was also in this home that on a previ-ous evangelistic mission, a former youngman companion had fallen in love with theschool-teacher daughter. Because ofWilliam’s strict rulings in regard to thedeportment of his young companions, theyouth had been compelled to forego alldemonstrations until his return to his homein Ohio. However, he promptly took thematter up by U.S. Mail, and we wereinformed of the engagement of the couple.The young man later became one of thepopular pastors of Iowa Yearly Meeting ofFriends.

Leaving this meeting, William visitedthe home meeting of the Joseph Hoagfamed for his vision of the war between thestates. The attendance was not so large as atFerrisburg. One of the interesting featuresbeing the dismissal of the district school toattend the mid-week service in a body. Weviewed with interest the well preservedhome of the former minister and prophet.

This was the more interesting to mefrom the fact that my father’s uncle hadmarried Joseph Hoag’s daughter. Theirhome had been established near Vandalia,Michigan, and was ever during their naturallifetime an “open house” to traveling

Also what a reminder to the Bible student ofthe scripture: “He shall dwell on high; hisplace of defense shall be the munitions ofrocks; bread shall be given him; his watersshall be sure.” (Isaiah 33: 16).

It was from the observation of suchthings as this that William drew his illustra-tions. He told of the old bell bow on theplantation that would persist in getting inthe gateway and neither go in herself or letother cattle go in, to illustrate the way somepeople hindered others from becomingChristians.

The condition of “the almost Christianman” William illustrated by a person on theoutside of the house on a cold winters night,about to perish with the cold, while justinside the window was warmth and comfortand happiness. Only the thickness of thepane of glass, he said, might mean the dif-ference between life and death.

To those who thought they could notbelieve what they could not understand, heinvited a trip with him to the barn-yardwhere were the horses, the cows, the pigsand the poultry. The horses had manes, thecattle had hair, the pigs had bristles, whilethe hens had feathers, yet they all fed on thesame grain doled out to them by the farmer.Why this was so no one could understandyet everyone believed it. One does not haveto understand to believe. Thus it might bewritten that faith is the evidence of thereality of things incomprehensible.

William was a stickler for good orderand reverence in the Lord’s house.Moreover, he had wisdom and tact in thesecuring and preserving of the same. It istold that in a meeting in Canada oneevening the young people became some-what hilarious. Something had greatlyamused them and much giggling was goingon among them. Suddenly, as was his wontin an emergency, his manner changed andspeaking with rapier like stroke, he said, “It


such other Christian service “as way mightopen”. Following the Quarterly Meeting itseemed right to hold evangelistic meetingsat a place a few miles distant where acommunity church had been built. Thesemeetings proved very successful and as theresult some twenty-five accessions werereceived into the Pelham meeting. AlbionGinson though a young man, was quite baldover his forehead, which gave him theappearance of much greater years than hehad really experienced. At the close of onemeeting, a little girl said to her mother, “Ilike the young man [meaning WilliamAllen] but the old man’s face runs so farback over his head that he can’t see littlechildren.” Jesse M. Walton, in his sketch ofthe work of William Allen in Canada,speaks particularly of his fondness for littlechildren and his generous attitude towardyoung people, and his ability to encourageand inspire them to high and noble aims,feeling keenly as he did, the denial offamily ties, for he was neither white norblack. Always he had a kindly word for thechildren he met, and the majority of thechildren were attracted to and loved him.

This proved to be my last meeting withthis remarkable man of God. I was also thelast of American boys to serve as compan-ion.

It would seem that this trip to Canadaended in his change of residence, from Ohioto Ontario, Canada. In his pamphlet entitled“The Life of William Allen”, Jesse M.Walton of Aurora, Ont., says “His travelsbrought him to Canada, the land of freedomto which he had assisted many fearful fugi-tives.” He spent some time at MariposaMeeting, then went to Gowrie and in theearly ‘90s arrived at Yonge Street andNewmarket meetings. When visiting othermeetings he was usually accompanied byone or two young men who followed him astheir friend and teacher. This, from the start,

Friends.The work in the Green Mountain state

now being completed, I learned thatWilliam, from the very incipiency of thisitinerary had planned to close it by attend-ing New York Yearly Meeting at GlensFalls, N.Y.. His natural executive abilitywas thus demonstrated in the fact that theentire schedule was carried out without asingle break. Without solicitation of anykind, we had been kindly and well cared for,our needs supplied, financial provisionmade for our expenses to the YearlyMeeting and the journey from there to ourrespective homes.

On our way to Glens Falls we passedthrough Castleton, Vt., the birth place of mygrandfather, Paul Spink, who later moved toWhite Hall, N.Y., where my mother wasborn.

The Yearly Meeting was held in thespring of 1885. Luke Woodard was thenpastor. To me the meeting was of muchinterest. It was my second Yearly Meetingattended. Some of the names of personspresent and active in the meeting are JamesWood, Hannah Leggett, Jonathan DeVoll,Emily U. Burgess, Dr. Stephen Birdsall,David Taber, and Alexander M. Purdy.

William Allen was appointed to attendthe South Glens Falls Meeting on First Day.William Penn Angell was the minister.

With the closing of this meeting, ourcompanionship was, for the time ended, andI returned to my home at Hanover,Michigan. It was not until about the year1890 that we again met. At that time I hadbeen called to the pastorate of the Pelham,Canada Friends Meeting. Rufus Garratt, aformer companion to William Allen hadbeen supplying and had given the meetingmy name.

With a young man named AlbionGibson, William came from Ohio to attendPelham Quarterly Meeting and perform


was filled to overflowing. Those who hadcome the first night to laugh and scoff nowremained to weep and pray.

Uxbridge, Pickering, Wellington,Bloomfield and Wooler were visited in turn.At Newmarket, through his special effort,forty young people came into the meeting.About this time, Harry Parry and WalterArmitage joined with him in meetings atMoscow, Plymouth and Colbrook. The fol-lowing winter he conducted special meet-ings in Toronto. In 1897, after attending theQuarterly Meeting at Wooler, he with hiscompanion, Walter Armitage, conducted asix weeks meeting at Bloomfield, with thebuilding packed to the doors. Then goingfurther east during the summer they heldmeetings in a large tent purchased by theYearly Meeting. Later they went toSunbury, where - it was said - William waspreaching at his best.

His work in Canada was of an evangel-istic nature that reflected the generations ofuntutored poetry and childlike faith. Hispurposeful life was overshadowed by thetragedy of the slavery of his race. Often hispowerful voice could be heard far beyondthe building in which he was speaking.Though most of those who were privilegedto sit under his ministry have been called toa "better land", memories and stories stillsurvive of this tall, powerful negro, as heappeared wearing the straight black coatbuttoned almost to the neck, his kinky blackhair and beard touched with the frost of"fulness of years" while his broad ebonyfeatures were aglow from the joy of hisheart. Bible in his hand, speaking withoutnotes, his silvery eloquence thrilling andinspiring his attentive audience.

One of his favorite words used in begin-ning an exhortation was the quaint "pera-dventure". Also one recalls him fearlesslydenouncing falseness and hypocrisy, statingthat he had never heard the Gospel being

made him an outstanding leader. He had thegift of appeal to young men as few havepossessed. When he saw a young man ofpromise and ability, he would mark him forthe ministry. His judgment in this respectwas seldom ever wrong.

His powerful intellect combined withhis deeply religious nature made him anoutstanding minister, and a speaker of greatacceptance among the Quakers. His elo-quence and sincerity left a lasting impres-sion upon the large audiences whichgathered wherever it became known that hewould hold service.

As the years passed, his ministry, broad-ened by diligent and continuous study, wonfor him the distinction of being known asthe “traveling theological seminary of theSociety of Friends.”

In the winter of 1894, he with his youngcompanion Walter J. Armitage, began aseries of meetings at Uxbridge, Ontario. Aswas his custom, William asked the youngman to read and explain a certain portion ofscripture. The house was filled with youngpeople from the village. When the youngman arose to make his first public address,he was seized with stage fright. The youngpeople, sensing his plight, began theirlevity. Almost instantly, William graspedthe situation and walking to the rear of theroom began addressing some pointedremarks to the amused audience. Then withimpressive solemnity he opened his Bibleand in a low well modulated voice, began topreach. As the intensity of his fervorincreased, the windows of the old MeetingHouse vibrated with the volume of histones. The audience became hushed in deepsilence as before the presence of the deityitself. Many were white-faced and anxiousas he closed his address, inviting them all toreturn the following night. Then he shookhands with each one present as they left thehouse. The next evening the Meeting House


Sacred to the memory ofWilliam Allen,

A Friends Minister.

As I stood, my mind reverted to thebeginnings of his eventful career and Icould but wish that the inscription hadincluded the fact that he was "A NegroFriends' Minister" for the glory of theheights to which he had risen is greatlyenhanced by the knowledge of the depthfrom which he emerged.

If God can use such lowly livesTo demonstrate the Light of Heaven;What might not man accomplish here,To whom the Lord much more has given.

As we stood with bowed heads in thelight of undying memories and the hope ofimmortality, we had no tears to shed for this"Child of the King." He was to us one of thehonoured guests of God, dwelling in a Godprepared mansion, in the Land of theUnending Day.

With hearts bowed in meekness andoverflowing devotion to Almighty God,who only is able to create such virtue andgreatness out of deepest obscurity; andcause a life born under so adverse anddeplorable conditions to become one ofsupreme victory and undying glory, webreathed our silent prayers, bade our GoodNight here, and went forth to await ourGood Morning, up there.

It seems opportune and desirable toincorporate here a tribute to William Allensent to Jesse M. Walton by Rev. A.C.Hoffman of the Bay of Quinte Conferenceof Ontario. He says:

One of the most vivid and cher-ished memories of my earlymanhood is that of William Allen,Negro, Quaker Evangelist, who

handed out with kid gloves.The work of Jesse M. Walton states that

"Among traveling Friends and visitors whocame to Quaker Meetings in Canada duringall the years of the Friends' activities, noneare more vividly or more fondly remem-bered than this remarkable Servant of God,William Allen, who being dead yet livesand still bears witness to the wondrousgrace of God."

The last days of the earthly life ofWilliam Allen were spent in the home of hislong-time and faithful friend, JamesColquhoun, the father of Albert A.Colquhoun, minister of the Friends meetingat Hibbert, near Mitchell, Perth County,Ont.

It was from this home where he was sokindly cared for by loving hands and heartsthat William Allen's life's turbulent voyageended, passed on to his heavenly home, tobe forever with his Lord whom he had solong and faith fully served.

His death occurred May 21, 1898.Internment was in the Friends cemeteryadjacent to the Hibbert Meeting House. Thelast rites were conducted by AlbertColquhoun. Of this passing, our friend JesseM. Walton quotes, author unknown:

And he has gone - His pure and noble spirit,Hath plumed its pinions for a world on high,Where his freed soul will evermore inheritBlessings supreme that never die.

Some years subsequent to his passing,while I was serving a second pastorate at thePelham meeting, I was called to officiate ata Colquhoun family wedding. Olive Ryonaccompanied me and together we visited thegrave of William Allen. We found that theColquhoun family had placed a modestmarble stone to mark the last resting placeof this faithful servant of God. Deeply chi-seled upon the stone were the words:


Whilst mem'ry lives or loves endure.

How gracious beam those far flung rays,Their light undimmed by lapse of years;Their glitt'ring sheen lighting life's ways,Begetting hope, allaying fears.

No end is there to such a life:Stars brighter shine as sets the sun.The Godly life with light is rife,Nor dims, nor dies when day is done.

Footnotes:1. All Orthodox Quaker yearly meetings.2. “Is any sick among you? let him call forthe elders of the church; and let them prayover him, anointing him with oil in thename of the Lord.”

conducted a revival in the Friends'Meeting House at Moscow, in myboyhood home in the County ofLennox-Addington.

It was the largest and mostpowerful revival ever held in thecommunity, and was conducted bythe ex-slave.

I recall the stalwart figure, thepowerful preaching. He commandedthe deepest respect of the young andold. He stood behind the simplerailing with a Bible in his hand, hisrich, musical, resounding voice pro-claiming the Gospel, the power ofwhich was evident in his own per-sonality. Though of limited educa-tion and handicapped by his racialbackground, his appeal was impel-ling.

William Allen was a welcomeguest in the homes of the communityof all denominations. His referenceto slavery days was full of pathos,and his graphic word-picture of hismother and his parting with her,burned into the memory of his audi-ence.

I esteem it a great honour to paymy humble tribute to the memory ofWilliam Allen, one of the influencesthat gave direction to my young life.

And now as a fitting conclusion to thisaltogether incomplete record of the life ofWilliam Allen, Negro Friends' Minister andevangelist, I would lovingly dedicate thefollowing lines:

Immortality

Years are like the stars in Victors crown,Of Godlike life, noble and pure;Whose light shall glow, shining adown,Whilst mem'ry lives or loves endure.


heritage of Quakers from their first settle-ment in Canada.

The process of meticulously cataloguingthe architectural attributes and knownhistory of each building and assessing itsvalue in terms of heritage was greatly facili-tated by the generous support of the CentralElgin Local Architectural AdvisoryCommittee (LACAC) in the form of timeand advice and by the equal degree ofenthusiasm displayed by residents and homeowners eager to share their knowledge ofthe area’s rich history. This warm receptionmade the task extremely rewarding, and willno doubt ensure that the inventory whencompleted will serve as a valuable reference

This past summer saw a boost in theongoing effort to preserve the architecturalheritage of Sparta, a village in ElginCounty, Ontario, first settled by Quakers inthe years following the War of 1812. TheSparta and District Historical Associationreceived a grant from the Ministry ofHuman Resources which allowed them tohire a student to begin compiling an inven-tory of buildings of historical and/or archi-tectural significance in the village andimmediate vicinity. Given the well-knownbut poorly documented Quaker contributionto the early development of this area, thecompletion of this inventory will contributeto the larger preservation of the pioneer

Sparta’s Quaker Heritage

by Nick May

The Sparta (Yarmouth Friends) MeetinghouseBuilt 1865, just north of the village.


John Moore House, just north of the Meetinghouse.Built 1822-24.


to this community on matters of histori-cal and architectural heritage.

The built heritage of the Quakerswho settled this area accounts for muchof the uniqueness of Sparta and—despiteits slow attrition when unrecognizedover the years in the form of newwindows or aluminum siding—has comedown to us with a remarkable degree ofintegrity. Besides the Friends’ MeetingHouse built amidst a grove on the northedge of the village in 1865, a number ofhomes attest to the Quaker ideals of theirbuilders and to the prosperity of this richagricultural region as these values soonflourished in new soil.

The Moore House, with its use ofhandmade strawberry bricks and natural-ly abundant fieldstone to create a five-bay Georgian home is the earliest surviv-ing Quaker home in the area, completedin 1824. Equally valuable as an exampleof early Quaker architecture in Upper The Haight-Zavitz House, west of Sparta.

Built 1837

The Kipp-Sandrson House, built in the 1840’s.


Canada is the Haight-Zavitz House, aclapboard frame house built in 1837 in theGreek Revival style popular among manyof the area’s early Friends. The OilleHouse, a frame structure built around thesame time, exudes the philosophy of itsbuilders in its graceful simplicity. TheKipp-Sanderson House is reputed to havebeen the site of Quaker meetings in thesettlement’s early days, though its GreekRevival accents have been strengthenedsince the time of its builder and originalinhabitant, the Quaker John Kipp. Northof the village, several homes reflect theincreasing prosperity of subsequent gener-ations of Friends, including the ChaseHouse, an impressive Victorian structurebuilt by Abner Chase in 1874 with similar-sized cobblestones laid in a herringbonepattern periodically broken by designs,and the elegant red brick Minard Housebuilt by John Minard across from his fur-

Abner Chase House, built 1874.

Sparta Store & Post Office(Oilles family)


John Minard House, on John Wise Line, 2 miles north of Sparta.

niture factory. Onlyhalf of the Schooley-Haight House remainstoday, its spaciousoriginal size—whichincluded nine bed-rooms to accom-modate Quaker gather-ings—later found to betoo large for themodern family.

Approximatelyseventy buildings wereplaced on the inven-tory in this initialeffort to catalogueSparta, and manymore remain to beincluded. The distinc-tively Quaker inherit-ance that has shaped

Upright sawmill on Beaver Creek built by Christian Zavitz.(First sawmill in the vicinity)


Adobe House, built 1829. Main Street, Sparta

Sparta Tea Room, built by the Mills family, 1840s.


so much of the history ofSparta includes the architec-tural ideals its first settlersbrought to the task of forginga new community. Anyefforts to document and pre-serve this Quaker heritagemust therefore not overlookone of its most tangibleexpressions.

Top: Adobe Blacksmith Shop,built 1829. Now the Forge andAnvil Museum.

Middle: Katrina Zavitz House,on North St., built c. 1853.

Bottom: Temperance House,Sparta.

journal #65

Documents