tioner! and actually served out 12 years in rough labour, until a seeming accident, in the year 1730, brought him to such acquaintance, as led, in the next year, to his return home. The case was this: Two Irishmen, John and William Broders, travelling the Lancaster road, in the year 1730, stopt at the house near the 40 milestone, where James was in service with an old German. These countrymen entering into conversation perceived they were severally from Dumaine, in the county of Wexford, and that James Annesley was the son of Arthur. The two Broders volunteered to go back to Ireland, and testify to the discovery they had made, and actually kept their word at the trial which afterwards occurred. James subsequently stated his case to Robert Ellis, Esq. of Philadelphia, who, compassionating his case, procured a passage for him to Admiral Vernon, then in the West Indies, by whom he was afterwards landed in England. But shortly after his arrival at London James unfortunately killed a man, for which he had to stand a trial; and then Lord Altham, the unnatural uncle, exerted himself to have him convicted, but he was nevertheless acquitted as innocent. An action was brought against the uncle, and went to trial in November, 1743, and the verdict was given in favour of James, our Redemptioner. The uncle appealed to the House of Lords; and while the case was pending James died, leaving the uncle in quiet possession of his ill-gotten estate, showing, however, while he lived, which was not long, the spectacle of a finished villain, even in an Irish nobleman, THE FRIENDS. "In stillness thus the little Zion rose." THE following constitute such special notices of the Friends as I occasionally met with in the course of my researches. In 1684, Thomas Lloyd in writing a letter to the Friends' Meeting at Dolaran, in North Wales, dated the 2d of 6 mo. says, that there were then 800 people at Friends' Meeting in the city. At that time, says another writer, all denominations assembled with the Friends in much harmony and good fellowship, until discord and confusion was introduced by George Keith's schism. In 1691 a scene of rare confusion was exhibited in Friends' Meeting. The facts in the case have been told by Thomas Wilson, a public Friend, who was present. George Keith who had just separated, sent T. Wilson and his companion, James Dickinson, a challenge to dispute. They readily agreed to meet, and many Friends of both parties assembled. George Keith railed much. He and his abettors requested another meeting, which was also granted. At another time George Keith went into Friends' Meeting while James Dickinson was there, and preached fawningly, as though he and James Dickinson were in unity; but James stood up and confuted him. Then Keith withdrew in much wrath, and the people of other denominations present, being numerous, cried aloud," Give way and let the devil come out, for the little black man from England (J. D.) has got the day!" In 1702-8th of 9 mo. Isaac Norris' letter says, "George Keith hath been twice here, but has not yet disturbed our Meeting as hath been his custom to the Eastward. He is now the talk and news of the town; but has little to boast of in all his progress hitherto. His own party here is like to fall with him. All his sermons is railings against the Friends. During the time of this schism there came out a printed pamphlet of 24 pages against orthodox Friends, which might be deemed a curiosity for its rare and gross scurrility. It is without imprint, but shows from its context that it was done at Philadelphia about the year 1701. Ample extracts of the whole have been preserved in my MS. Annals in the City Library, on pages 190 to 195. There indeed they deserve to be buried, were it not that their style of abuse is so unique as to show a characteristic of some minds of that day, which we could not conceive of in modern times; they besides contain some local references which may possibly serve on some needful occasion to illustrate some local incidents. The whole has the appearance of being set forth as the venom of Keith's adherents. It assails the characters, by name, of every leading. man in Friends' Society, making them severally immoral men (though sly) of the grossest kind. It is called "the Cage of Unclean Birds," because so George Fox called false professors. I have purposely suppressed all the names, and refer to the whole now rather as matter of amusement than of scandal. The Friends, then vilified, must have been endowed with much moderation, to have endured such a publication, or else the doctrine of libels was ill understood and without practice among them. Some of the facts are ludicrous enough. One, a minister too, is accused by name of packing his flour barrels with only good flour at the ends! and also of blowing in money scales to make his light money pass off as weight! It reproaches them of vainglory in building "a great Cathedral Meeting Place at Philadelphia"-corner of Second and High streets. I have seen the first record of marriages among Friends in Philadelphia for the first 32 years of the city. The first named is in 1682, of Thomas Smith with Priscilla Allen. These had before passed one Meeting in the Isle of Wight. The next marriage is that of David Breintnall with Jane Blanchard, in 1683. In 1684, eleven couples are married there. My own name-of Watson, is of very frequent occurrence among them. One singular name is, I presume, intended to commemorate a providence of God to the parents in their voyage, to wit:-Seamercy Adams, married to Mary Brett in 1686. I have in my possession the original parchment certificate of one of those early marriages. It is chiefly curious as showing several signatures of the primitive leading Friends, and the verbal form of the instrument too, is somewhat different from the present. In early days the bride, among Friends, wore a black silk hood over the head, with the long ends hanging down the front of the shoulder. It was neat and graceful. By this token she was uni versally known in the street as one "adorned as a bride." She always went on foot publicly to Meeting in a kind of procession of eight or ten couples. She was preceded by the father and mother of the groom, then by her own parents,-next "the happy pair"— then their special friends. The wedding entertainments in olden times were very expensive and harrassing to the wedded. The house of the parent would be filled with company to dine. The same company would stay to tea and supper both. For two days punch was dealt out in profusion. The gentlemen visited the groom on the first floor, and then ascended to the second floor to see the bride in the presence of her maids, &c. Then every gentlemen, even to 150 in a day, sey erally took his kiss-even the plain Friends submitted to these do ings. I have heard of rich families among them which had 120 persons to dine-the same who had signed their certificate of marriage at the Monthly Meeting-these also partook of tea and supper. As they formerly passed the Meeting twice, the same entertainment was also repeated. Two days the male friends would call and take punch, and all would kiss the bride. Besides this, the married pair for two entire weeks saw large tea parties at their home; having in attendance every night the groomsman and bridemaids. To avoid expense and trouble, Friends have since made it sufficient to pass but one Mecting. When these marriage entertainments were made, it was expected also, that punch, cakes, and meats, should be sent out generally in the neighbourhood-even to those who were not visiters in the family. Some of the aged, now alive, can remember such weddings. When the walking on the side-walks in Philadelphia streets was impeded with heavy snows, as in days of yore, the Friends were notable for their early care to provide good paths to Meeting. When Richard Hill (a distinguished man) married Miss Stanley, in 1727, they swept the snow from the corner of Norris' alley and Front street, up to the Meeting-house at the corner of Second and High streets-thus making a snow-path of three squares in length. An old doggerel used to say, "The rain rains, and the winds blow : Another expressed the fact in these words, to wit: "The Quakers will to Meetings go, And if their streets be full of snow, When the Hectors and Hotspurs of the day were fierce for warineasures on the Indians, finding they could not get the sanction of the Friends to their intended embroiling measures, they fell upon expedients, such as satires and caricatures could enforce. Thus an ancient pamphlet printed at Ephrata,* contains a tirade called the "Cloven Foot Discovered," some of which reads thus, viz. "Pray, worthy friends, observe the text: To bark and bite, but skins and furs," &c. In another place it reads thus: "In many things, change but the name, * Supposed by Priest Barton, of Lancaster. I don't say all, for there are such, And sell their very souls for gain!" &c. When in the year 1756, the Governor had proclaimed a day of fasting and prayer on account of the calamity of the Indian war, the Friends did not join in it as a ceremony. Some squibs appeared against them; one reads thus, to wit: "Perverseness is a breach in the spirit: The passions and the writers who gave point and effect to such trifles in their day, are all dead. I presume I need scarcely add, I give no revival to any of them but in shear good nature, treating them rather as the comic of history, than as of any power to revive harm in our day! The state of the Friends as a part of the civil community down to the year 1739, has been thus noticed in a MS. account by William Fishbourne, of that Society, saying, "As the chief part of the inhabitants were Quakers, they with others were and are concerned in acts of government; but as the province increased and prospered in every respect, many of other persuasions came and settled here with worldly views, who have formerly attempted to wrest the civil power out of the Quakers' hands, as it is very probable they may and will again; as they publicly begin to think and observe the country in its increased wealth and commerce "cannot be safe” under the conduct of men who from their principles (of religion) would continue it in a defenceless state and leave it an easy prey to any enemy. Thus not regarding (the fact) the peaceable introduction, and continuing from the first settlement both in time of peace and war." In the year 1748 there was great efforts made in Philadelphia for the defence of the city, by erecting and furnishing two batteries at the Southwark end, and raising about 1000 volunteers. On this occasion some of the Friends, then in public employ, admitted the right of defensive measures, among whom were James Logan, whose letters to Benjamin Franklin on the occasion, I have seen. Kalm, the Swedish traveller, who was then here, remarks, "When the redoubt was erected at Swedes' church to prevent the French and Spanish privateers from landing, there was much opposition and debate, for the Quakers opposed the measure. Papers were printed and circulated pro and con; but when the danger became imminent at the close of the war, many of the Quakers withdrew their opposition, and helped the measure with their money." This |