ART. I.-A Chronological Summary of events and circumstances connected with the origin and progress of the doctrine and practices of the Quakers.

A. D.

(Continued from p. 356, Vol. IV.)

Hannah Barnard, a Minister, certified by the Monthly Meeting 1800-1. of Hudson (New York) and its superior Meetings in North America is silenced, by the Monthly Meeting of Devonshire House and the Quarterly Meeting of London and Middlesex, for preaching unsound doctrine.

This Friend was at the Yearly Meeting in London (of 1800) when, in the Meeting of Ministers and Elders, her companion in travel Eliz. Coggeshall requested the Certificate of concurrence of the latter Meeting, to visit some parts of the Continent of Europe: which was granted. Hannah Barnard then offered herself, to accompany her friend, asking for similar credentials. This gave occasion to David Sands a Minister, and Jos. Williams an Elder to object to the ministry of Hannah Barnard; as differing in some points of belief and doctrine from that of Friends. It appeared that these Friends had had occasion to learn her sentiments, while she travelled in the Ministry in Ireland. Thus appealed to, the Meeting declined granting the Certificate, and requested some of its members to visit and confer with Hannah Barnard.

Having received the report of these Friends, the select Yearly Meeting referred the case to the Morning Meeting' held in London; which body, after some fruitless endeavours to convince the judgment of Hannah Bar

VOL. V.

C

nard, reported her case to Devonshire House Meeting, within which she was considered resident.

That Meeting having waited the return of the Friend to London, (who had it seems gone to Brighton for her health,) and she having signified her desire that the case should be proceeded in, John Lloyd, Sparks Moline, and Samuel Barnard were appointed to visit her, and make report. The result of several conferences with her on their part, and of the deliberation which followed was, that the Meeting advised her to desist from preaching, and return home.

At the Quarterly Meeting, held in London the 30th of Twelfth Mo. 1800, an Appeal was announced on the part of an individual, against Devonshire House Monthly Meeting, and the Meeting was informed that the said body had made an appointment of Friends to answer it. The Meeting proceeded, as usual, to the choice of a Committee to hear the appeal: and it being well known from whom it came, there was considerable anxiety to prevent an unfair nomination; as the Friend had already, in Ireland and in this country, a party in her favour. The members of the Morning Meeting,' and those Friends not members of the Monthly Meeting who, being present there, had spoken on her case, (according to the courtesy in use among us,) either excused themselves, or were excepted against by others. The choice fell on the sixteen Friends (being two out of each Monthly Meeting of the quarter, except the one appealed against) named in the following minute:

QUARTERLY MEETING OF LONDON, &c. 12th Mo. 30, 1800. “An Appeal was brought in against Devonshire House Monthly Meeting, which is referred to the following Friends to consider and make Report :-Ino. Lister, Joseph Smith, Edw. Janson, Ino. Withers, Ino. Allen, Sam. Harris, Ino. Smith, Jacob Hagen, Ino. Ingham, Wm. Binns, Jno. Hull, Simeon W. Hagen, Luke Howard, Jas. Sheppard, Wm. Dillwyn, Wm. Forster, to meet at the close of this meeting.

*

This Committee met forthwith; the Meeting adjourning to the 9th of First Mo. 1801 the appeal was opened and notice sent to the parties to attend on the following morning. At this sitting, after a considerable time of silence, and some previous remarks by members of the Committee, as to the conduct to be observed by us all in the case, the appeal was read a first time, and the parties, i. e. the Appellant and Respondent, called in. After the Appeal had been again read, John Lloyd, a respondent, read the Minutes made in the Monthly Meeting, which they had brought with them, as its written defence; and the appellant was informed she might now speak for herself. Some time having been first spent in ascertaining how far we were to go back into the proceedings, and in personal explanations between the parties, Hannah Barnard read from her notes an account of the conferences held with the Friends of the Monthly Meeting; in which, if the three together offered no more to the appellant than was there by her put down, I do not see how their duty of dealing' can be said to have been fulfilled. What was offered by herself, to the purpose, would natu

* See the Appeal forward.

rally be more easily remembered by her. The Respondents had no notes. of these proceedings; and were content to refer us to the minutes of the Monthly Meeting.

In the course of the reading of this pretty long document, the Appellant named one of the Friends appointed by Devonshire House Meeting to treat with her, who (she said) had openly acknowledged his agreement with her on more than one of the points in dispute! He was now present as a Respondent, and was allowed to say what he inclined to say in his own defence. On the Appellant being inquired of, if she had done, she said, if the Committee would take its departure,' in deliberation, from the proceedings of the Monthly Meeting, she was content: otherwise she had written accounts to lay before us, of the conferences held with members of the Morning Meeting,' with her observations thereon.

The Respondents having also ended the defence, the parties withdrew, while the Committee took into consideration what had been now proposed by the Appellant: an adjournment took place, while this was pending. On Seventh-day morning, the papers before the Committee being reviewed, it was found that the proceedings, had with the deputation from the Morning Meeting, formed an essential part of the case, and could not be passed over. The discussions on this point occupied the whole sitting, and the Committee adjourned to the following Second-day; giving the proper notice to the parties of what would then come on.

At this fourth sitting, one of the Committee of Respondents of the Monthly Meeting was excused further attendance, on the plea of urgent business elsewhere. Hannah Barnard proceeded to give an account, from her notes, of what had passed with the members of the Morning Meeting: the MS. took two hours to read, and was listened to with patient attention. Here, as before, we found a great deficiency, as to what had been said by the Friends appointed to treat with her: so that, if no more was offered than was set down, they must have visited her to little other purpose than the putting a few ill-chosen questions, and receiving replies to them by which they got nothing! Undoubtedly, if those Friends had made notes for themselves, their proceedings would have cut a better figure: but the replies and observations of the accused tended, principally, to recriminate upon the members of that body, by which she stood charged, and to exhibit their proceedings in an unfavourable light; as having taken up her case without sufficient ground or authority, and treated it throughout in a manner less consistent with Christian gravity, moderation and charity, than might have been expected from persons of their standing in the Society. But, here also, there does not appear to have been much anxiety felt on the part of the dealing' Friends, to have with them matter of personal justification for our perusal. Against this body of alleged facts, the Committee of Appeals had to weigh the proceedings and conclusion of the Morning Meeting,' as stated by that body to the Monthly Meeting; together with their own previous knowledge of the temper and conduct of the Friends so reflected on :-and (last not least) Hannah Barnard's own statement of her belief. This paper she gave to the Committee in her defence, along with a quotation of several pages from Richard Morris's pamphlet on the Scriptures as the Rule of

6

of Faith, &c. lately published under the authority which now impeached her soundness, the Morning Meeting! There was also in her defence a parallel attempted, between her own case and that of John Woolman; who, it was alleged, had been tolerated in his singularity of opinion (against slaveholding) to the ultimate great benefit of the Society.

The Appellant having presented this paper (which I annex) with an appeal to our candour as her judges, submitted farther the consideration of the propriety of our hearing her notes of sentiments expressed by various private Friends in her case. She was told, that if she apprehended these to have influenced the decision of the Monthly Meeting, she was at liberty to produce them. In reply, remarking that she had 'no direct evidence of this,' and that 'jealousy is cruel as the grave,' she preferred to withdraw the paper. Being then asked if she considered herself to have been fully heard, she replied, with an expression of entire satisfaction, in the affirmative. The same question being put to the two Friends who remained as Respondents, one of them desired to have a copy of the appeal before he could answer it ; his colleague at the same time observing that next day was their Monthly Meeting. This suggested the idea of a design of taking further instructions for the defence; and the Committee, after considering the matter in the absence of both parties, concluded not to grant a copy of the appeal. The use of the original in the Committee's presence the Respondents were not content with: so the Committee adjourned to the following morning; giving them that further time, to consider of any thing they might wish to add to their reply.

On Third-day morning, the members of the Committee of Appeal being all present, and neither party having come forward to be heard further in the presence of the other, (which is the invariable rule and practice,) proceedings were resumed in order to a Report. Most of the members gave their sentiments fully: two remained silent; and being called upon to speak, gave reasons for suspending their judgment; yet not as having an opinion opposed to that of the rest. After a considerable time spent in endeavours to procure the concurrence of these two, the Committee signed (with their exception) a Report, confirming the judgment of the Monthly Meeting.

Quarterly Meeting, &c. 1st Mo. 9th, 1801. “The Committee appointed to consider of the Appeal against Devonsire House Monthly Meeting brought in the following Report:

'Back Chamber, Gracechurch Street, 6th of 1st Mo.-Present all of the Committee.

To the Quarterly Meeting of London and Middlesex. We your Committee to whom was referred the Appeal against Devonshire House Monthly Meeting having fully heard the Appellant, Hannah Barnard, and also the Friends appointed by Devonshire House Monthly Meeting thereon, and having deliberately considered the same, are of the judgment, that the proceedings of the said Monthly Meeting were regular, and that their advice was proper: John Hull, S. W. Hagen, Luke Howard, Jas. Sheppard, Wm. Dillwyn, Wm. Forster, Ino. Lister, Jos. Smith, Edw. Janson, Ino. Withers, Sam. Harris, Ino. Smith, Jacob Hagen, Wm. Binns :—which was twice read, and is agreed to.""

"The said Appeal is as follows: To the Quarterly Meeting for London and Middlesex, to be held at Devonshire House, 30th of 12th Mo. 1800, The Appeal of Hannah Barnard sheweth: That having been laid under censure and restraint by the Monthly Meeting of Devonshire House, without sufficient cause in my apprehension to warrant them in such a measure, and they not having in their Minute of the 4th ult. even alleged any unsoundness, or inconsistency in my professed principles or conduct, as a justification of such proceedings, I feel myself injured by such treatment; as a stranger, whose inducement for coming amongst you was, I trust, gospel good-will and an apprehension of religious duty; at the same time duly authorized and recommended, agreeable to the rules of the Society, by certificates from the Monthly, Quarterly and Select Yearly Meetings of which I am a member; I therefore enter my complaint by way of appeal to you, requesting you to examine the subject; and either discharge me from the bonds and censure thus laid upon me, or clearly specify, and furnish me with reasons for approving and continuing the same.

"The clerk is desired to send copies of the Report, and of the foregoing Minute, to the Appellant: and copies of the same, with the Appeal, to Devonshire House Monthly Meeting.

“Hannah Barnard having requested to have a copy of the Minute, appointing the Committee to consider the Appeal, the clerk is at liberty to grant her one."

This being presented to the Quarterly Meeting at the time already indicated, some Friends showed a considerable desire to have the Appeal opened, and canvassed in the Meeting at large. The sense of the Meeting, however, appeared in favour of the judgment of its Committee, and the decision of the Monthly Meeting against Hannah Barnard was confirmed. [The Confession of Faith of Hannah Barnard: 1800.]

66

Apprehending it my duty, when called upon, to give an answer of the substance of my faith as a Christian, I believe it proper to commit the same to writing, and submit it to the investigation of any who may wish information respecting it.

“And in the first place, professing my firm belief in one God over all, who is above all, and through all, and in all, and in his ordinary and extraordinary manifestations, I also acknowledge that, although I believe in Adam's fall, I believe it consisted in a fall from innocence, and not from angelic perfection, as Wm. Law and some others have imagined, and asserted; but, my settled belief has long been, that the Almighty saw meet, and consistent with his power, wisdom, justice, and mercy, to create him a probationer endowed with free agency, and a measure of his own divine light, grace or intelligence; and so I fully believe are all his offspring, with good and evil set before them, as it was before him; and when we become capable of the knowledge or discernment of the different nature and effects of them, and then voluntarily choose what the divine intelligence, in our own minds, witnesses and warns us against, we fall, depart from, and forfeit innocence, and feel condemnation; from which we are favoured with the gracious opportunity of being again delivered, or restored, through repentance and turning from evil; into which [repentance] the divine principle within us