virtuous power thereof, were restored to soundness; and indeed not many were lost. And though most of those who thus returned, were such, as with myself, had before renounced the error and forsaken the practice; yet did we sensibly find, that forsaking without confessing (in case of public scandal), was not sufficient; but that an open acknowledgment (of open offences) as well as forsaking them, was necessary to the obtaining complete remission."

In the latter part of the seventeenth century, Friends in Pennsylvania were much troubled by the course pursued by George Keith. He was a man of considerable abilities and learning, and in his native country, Scotland, had preached, written and suffered imprisonment and hardships for the principles of Friends. He removed to Pennsylvania in 1689, and was appointed teacher to a school set up by Friends.

With a high opinion of his own intellect and attainments, he became dissatisfied if his own ideas were not received by his brethren, and soon began to manifest a contentious spirit. Friends appear to have exercised much patient forbearance, but George became more and more violent and abusive until finally the Monthly Meeting of Philadelphia proceeded to disown him, and George Keith set up a separate meeting.

Thomas Wilson, in 1692, visited Pennsylvania and had several meetings with George Keith and his party. He told them that they were gone from the Lord in an airy flourish, and the wit of man, and had set up a separate meeting, but in a little time the sun of righteousness would shine among them, and drive away the misty doctrines of men, and that they would dwindle and die away, and come to nothing, except such as were most honest, who should return to Truth and Friends.

In 1694 George Keith went over to England to argue his case before Friends there. He attended London Yearly Meeting, which spent ten days in listening to the statements laid before it, and in endeavoring to restore unity, and at last

came to the judgment that George Keith was responsible for the separation, and that he had done ill in printing and publishing those differences as he had done. His rude and passionate behavior prevented his gaining many adherents. He refused to take the advice of the Yearly Meeting, but continued printing unsavory statements. In 1695, his case was again considered and the Yearly Meeting adopted a testimony against him, in which they say that he had "Separated himself from the holy fellowship of the church of Christ," and "ought not to be owned and received as one of us."

He set up a separate meeting, which continued for a few years. But confusion soon began to prevail among his followers. Some of them in Pennsylvania became reconciled to Friends, others joined in membership with other societies. In the Epistle from Philadelphia to London Yearly Meeting in 1697, they say: "Our exercises with the separatists is much over here." Keith himself became an Episcopalian, and was sent over to America by his bishop about the year 1702, in the hope that he might win over to that sect, some of his former associates. He appears to have spent his time principally in New England, where he met with John Richardson, then on a religious visit to Friends in America. John had gone to Lynn to attend the Monthly Meeting there, and the evening before it was held, George Keith came to the house where he was staying, and began railing against Friends, and said they pretended to be against all persecution, but they were not clear, for the Quakers in Pennsylvania and New Jersey had persecuted him, and would have hanged him, but there was some alteration in the government. John replied:

"George this is not true." I then demanded of him, What way our Friends proceeded against him, and what measures they took, as he would insinuate, to bring him to the gallows. But fear began to surprise the hypocrite, and he would not

meddle in the least with the particulars. I then showed the people the falsity of his charge, and the wickedness of his spirit, and the peaceableness of Friends' behavior towards him.

At meeting the next day, George stood up to tell us that he was come in the queen's name, to gather Quakers from Quakerism to the good old mother church, the church of England, as he called it, and that he could prove out of our own books, that we held errors, heresies, damnable doctrines and blasphemies. I stood up and signified to the people what manner of man George Keith was, that he had been publicly disowned and testified against by us. After a time it pleased the Lord to open my mouth, beginning with the words: "In that way you call heresy, do we worship the God of our fathers, believing all things that are written concerning Jesus Christ, both as to his Godhead and manhood, etc. The people appeared very attentive, for the Lord's heavenly, baptizing power was amongst us that day." After John Richardson had ended, George began to exhibit his charges against Friends, and said he could prove them out of our Friends' books. He was now crowded up into the gallery between me and the rail, with a paper in his hand; and I standing over and being taller, could see his quotations and his paraphrases upon them, on which I told him loudly, that all the meeting might hear, That he offered violence to that sense and understanding which God had given him, and that he knew in his conscience we were not that people, neither were our Friends' writings either damnable or blasphemous, as he through envy endeavored to make the world believe, and that he would not have peace in so doing, but trouble from the Lord in his conscience. I spoke in the Lord's dreadful power, and George trembled so much as I seldom ever saw any man do. I pitied him in my heart, yet as Moses said once concerning Israel, I felt the wrath of the Lord go forth against him. George said, Do not judge me. I replied, the Lord judges, and all who are truly one in spirit with the Lord, cannot but judge thee. So he gave over, and it appearing a suitable time to break up the meeting, Friends parted in great love, tenderness and brokenness of heart.

George Keith remained in America about a year, but not

meeting with much success he returned to England, when he obtained a benefice in Sussex. Here he got into dispute with his parishioners, being very exacting in the collection of tithes. There is some reason to hope that he was re-visited by the long-suffering grace of God, for about the year 1714, as he lay on his death-bed, he said to one who visited him, that "He did believe if God had taken him out the world when he went among the Quakers and in that profession, it had been well with him."

We have spoken elsewhere of the small secessions from the Society of Friends which arose out of the military excitement which prevailed in this country at the time of the Revolutionary war. About the commencement of the present century a few members in Ireland left the Society; the ground of this separation was doctrinal. Hannah Barnard of New York, being then in Great Britain on a religious visit appears to have joined in feeling with these unsettled people. Henry Hull, who had travelled with her in America, says that she evinced much love and zeal for the cause of religion, but afterwards imbibed and promulgated "Principles inconsistent with what she had once so zealously propagated, denying the literal accuracy of some parts of the Holy Scriptures, and rejecting the doctrines of the Divinity and atonement of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for which she was disowned from Society."

Some years after this fresh troubles arose in America springing from the preaching of similar doctrines by Elias Hicks and others, which led to the withdrawal, about the year 1827, from communion with their former brethren, of many thousands of persons in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Maryland and other States, and occasioned great distress to many who were concerned to uphold our original principles. This breach has

never been healed, but the two bodies, each claiming the name of Friends, have continued to exist side by side.

CHAPTER XVII.

PRAYER, MEETINGS, ETC.

The late John Barclay says the essence of true prayer is a reverential breathing unto the Lord, and a longing of the soul after those things that we need; and he thus relates his own experience:

I remember that after I refrained from repeating those forms of prayer, which were taught me in my childhood, I was much in the habit of kneeling down and repeating extempore prayers, by dint of my natural abilities; this I did for some little time with great fervor of youth and eloquence, even sometimes aloud, both morning and evening, until the Lord opened my eyes in this respect, and gave me clearly to see that these attempts, in my own will, way and time, were but sparks kindled about me, and which availed nothing with Him whose own sacrifices (of his own preparing and kindling) were alone acceptable. Thus in obedience I was made willing to be silent and to seek the Lord, who is nigh at hand, and dwells in the hearts of his people, and is not far from any one of us, if we look for and unto Him. This silence of all the creaturely reasoning powers was very hard to something in me, which would be judging and questioning very unmeaning did it appear; yet durst I not forbear to meet with my Lord and Master, or to strive to meet with him, day by day, and oftener than the day; and frequently crying, in the depth and sincerity of my heart, unto Him, that He would be pleased to show me the way to call upon Him aright, and what to pray for. I was often in tears, and lay down my head in grief upon my pillow, fearing I should never be made sensible of true prayer, and partake of the privilege of "praying always." The Lord did not long leave me with