(Page 29 of 36) - Quaker Pennsylvania: Refuge from Priestcraft? authored by Calvert, Jane.

Calvert – 29

to Church, Presbyterian & Baptist Meetings;” he wrote, “and this day, being the first of the week,
I chanced to incline to go to Quaker-meetings” twice.

176

Also, they commented regularly on the

oddities of the Quaker laws and customs that pervaded the city, including their plain speech,
distinctive clothing, and lack of toasting and polite greetings.

The delegates were also favorably impressed when, as revolution became a greater

possibility, some Quakers began to form themselves into military units that set a fine example for
other units. Roger Sherman observed that the Quaker troops “make as good a Figure as the
best.”

And, wrote Eliphalet Dyer, they “were exceeded by none in dress or exactness of

discipline.”

177

The “fighting Quakers,” John Adams concurred, “look beautifully in their

Uniforms.”

178

With a showing like this, he concluded, “America will Soon be in a Condition to

defend itself by Land against all Mankind.”

179

But more than this, the delegates looked to the

behavior of the Quaker population as a barometer with which to gauge the patriotic sentiment of
the whole country. With Quakers known for their conservatism and desire to preserve peace, the
delegates felt they could be sure the colonists were united and ready for resistance when Quakers
joined the cause. Moreover, with this great show of support from Quakers indicating the level of
commitment of America as a whole to the cause, the delegates were encouraged that Great
Britain would have to acknowledge them as a formidable enemy. Roger Sherman wrote
confidently to Joseph Trumbull: “you may be sure we are in earnest, when [Quakers] handle a
Musquet.”

180

But after the Stamp-Act controversy, the Quakers began to take a more conservative

approach to the dispute with Britain. In the Townshend controversy, although John Dickinson
continued to rally the colonists to resist the Crown, Quaker merchants and the religious Society
in general began to worry that the resistance was going too far and would lead to two things they
opposed—war and independence. Accordingly, some Quakers began to voice opposition to the
movement. Friends had always urged peace and reconciliation with Britain, but by 1770, they
had begun to publicize their concerns much more broadly and forcefully than before. For
example, Philadelphia Yearly Meeting sent an epistle to New York Friends encouraging them to
maintain their peaceful principles, “since by doing so might influence others to follow a more
peaceful course.”

181

And they sent epistles and testimonies in the same vein to the other

colonies.

182

As the conflict heated up, Friends also stepped up their political efforts to promote

peace. In February of 1775, congressional delegate and speaker of the Pennsylvania Assembly
Edward Biddle wrote, “We are all in Confusion. The Quakers are moving Heaven & Earth to
defeat the Measures of the Congress & introduce a Submission to Parliamt.”

183

On the same day,

a message from Governor Penn was also being considered before the Pennsylvania Assembly on
the appropriate response to Britain. After a “Debate of considerable Length” between radical
(revolutionary) and conservative factions, the Quaker Assembly found itself for once in
agreement with the proprietor that war should be avoided and they supported his motion to

176

David Howell to Moses Brown, June 23, 1782. Letters, 18: 598.

177

Roger Sherman to Joseph Trumbull, Aug 24, 177, Letters, 1: 705, and Eliphalet Dyer to Joseph Trumbull, June 8,

1775, Letters, 1: 459.

178

Adams to James Warren, July 6, 1775, Letters, 1: 589.

179

Adams to James Warren, May 21, 1775, Letters, 1: 364.

180

Roger Sherman to Joseph Trumbull, August 24, 1775, Letters, 1: 705.

181

Mekeel, 47.

182

PYM Meeting for Sufferings, 1771-1780, FHL

183

Edward Biddle to Jonathan Pott, February 25, 1775, Letters, 1: 315.