RESPECTED FRIENDS,
I have been
visited on the part of your Monthly Meeting, by my worthy
Friends, Sampson
Lloyd, Samuel Baker, and Joseph Gibbins; whose candid and liberal conduct to
me, on this occasion, I acknowledge:---They left with my Father, a Copy of your
Minute, dated 8th of the 4th Month, 1795, and a Narrative of
Observations, that were made in the Yearly Meeting of 1795, on the subject of
the Business, in which I am engaged:---And, I understand, that a Process is
instituted, tending to the disownment of me, as a Member of your Society, in
consequence of a Minute made at the Yearly Meeting of 1790; a Copy of which
Minute, together with that of your Meeting, accompany this Address.
In this Process,
adopted, reluctantly, I believe, on your parts (but to which I presume you
conceive yourselves obliged, in compliance with the Minute of the Yearly
Meeting of 1790) this is perhaps the only stage, in which I can claim your
attention, to the following Statement of FACTS, and OBSERVATIONS;---or in
which, I shall have an opportunity of requesting you, to preserve this letter,
and to refer to it in that record, which you will have occasion to make in my
Case. I am very solicitous that you
should comply with this request, in order that my Children, or others, who may
feel an interest in the Event, may have an opportunity hereafter, of informing
themselves of the Circumstances, and of the Motives of my conduct; and because,
from the rules of your discipline, I am precluded from every other Mode of
Defence.
FACTS
1st. The
sole, and entire cause alledged for this process, is, that I am
engaged in a Manufactory of Arms, some of which are applicable to military
purposes.
2nd. My
Grandfather,---afterwards my Uncle;---then my Father and my Uncle,---and
lastly, my Father and myself, have been engaged in this Manufactory for a
period of 70 years, without having before received any Animadversions on the
part of the Society.
3rd. The
Trade devolved upon me, as if it were an Inheritance, and the whole,
or nearly the whole of the Fortune which I received from my Father,
was a Capital invested in the Manufactory; a part of which, consists in
appropriated Mills, Erections, and Apparatus, not easily assignable, or convertible,
to other purposes.
4th. I
have, at various times, during my carrying on the said business,
performed many Acts, with the Concurrence, and at the Instance of
the Society, which alone would have constituted me a Member.
5th. I
have been engaged in this business from the Year 1777, and it was not
until the Year 1790, that the Minute was made, on which this Process against me
is founded.
6th. My
Engagements in the Business were not a matter of choice, in the first
instance; and there has never been a time, when I would not have
withdrawn from it, could I have found a proper Opportunity of transferring the
Concern.
OBSERVATIONS
1st. I
am convinced by my Feelings, and my Reason,---(*)THAT THE
MANUFACTURE OF ARMS IMPLIES NO APPROBATON OF OFFENSIVE WAR---(||)THAT THE
DEGREE OF RESPONSIBILITY THAT HAS BEEN IMPUTED TO THAT MANUFACTURE DOES NOT
ATTACH---(§)AND THAT IN ITS OBJECT, OR ITS TENDENCIES, IT NEITHER PROMOTES WAR,
OR INCREASES ITS CALAMITIES.
(*) Will any person, for a moment
suppose, that as a Manufacturer, it is my object to encourage the Practice,
or the Principle of War, or that I propose to myself any other
end, than that which all commercial Persons propose, viz. the
acquisition of Property?---And although it be true (and I lament the fact) that
in too many Instances Fire Arms are employed in Offensive War, yet
it ought in candor to be considered that they are equally applicable to
the purposes of DEFENSIVE WAR, to the Support of the CIVIL POWER, to the
PREVENTION OF WAR, and to the PRESERVATION OF PEACE.
(||)If Arguments from Abuse, are
to be admitted against the Use, and the Existence of things, Objections
may be made against almost every Institution, is susceptible of
Abuse. Is the Farmer who sows
Barley,---the Brewer who makes it into Beverage,---the Merchant who imports Rum,
or the Distiller who makes Spirits;---are they responsible for the Intemperance,
the Disease, the Vice, and Misery, which may ensue from
their Abuse?---Upon this Principle, who would be innocent?
(§)No reflecting Person will contend
that the Manufacture of Fire Arms has ever been the Cause, or Occasion
of any War; it is a consequence only, but not a
Cause:---Neither can it be admitted that the Calamities of War have been
increased thereby,---all History, both sacred and profane, prove the
reverse---Those horrid Contests, since the invention of Fire Arms, are
universally allowed to have been less sanguinary, and less ferocious.
2d. I know
2d. I know that
there are certain Texts in Scripture, from which some of our Society have drawn
literal inferences, against all kind of Resistance: but do we not know
that there are other Passages, and Texts of Scripture, which seem
to admit of a different Construction.
Some of these I shall take the liberty to mention, and refer the
Comment, and the Inference to yourselves.
Does not St. Paul say that the Magistrate
beareth not the Sword in vain? ROMANS xiii-4.
Does not Jesus Christ speak in high terms of Approbation of the
Centurion? (whose Profession was Arms).
MATT. viii-10. Cornelius, the devout
Christian, is not less distinguished.
ACTS x. Does not Christ tell
Pilate, that if his Kingdom were of this World, then would his Servants
fight? JOHN xviii-36. In a Parable, does he not state to his
Disciples, as an Example of Prudence, the case of a King going to War; whom he
supposes first to consider, whether with an Army of 10,000 Men, he can go
against his Opponent with 20,000? LUKE
xiv.-31. In another Parable, he speaks
of the Good Man of the house, watching for the Hour when the Thief would come,
in order to resist him. MATTHEW
xxiv.-43. Two of his Disciples wore Swords.
LUKE xxii. 38. ---and, in the same Chapter, Christ is represented as saying,
“He that hath no Sword, let him sell his Garment and buy
one.” The Apostle Peter is not
reprimanded for wearing a Sword, but for using it improperly.---He was
not told to cast away his Sword, but to put it up again into its
place. MATT. xxiv-52. I must, however, in Candor allow that in the
same Verse, it is said, “All they that take the Sword, shall perish
with the Sword.” I hope, in
stating these Quotations, not to be misunderstood, as attempting to wrest,
or even to explain the Sense of the Scriptures on this head; much
less to offer them as an Apology for Offensive War, for which I profess the
most decided Abhorrence.
With regard to the other Texts, from which
inferences have been deduced against all Kind of Resistance---without presuming
to define the Nature, and the Extent of the Obligation, which these Texts
impose, or deciding upon the Practicability of that Conduct (in the present
State of Society) which you imagine them to enjoin---Permit me to enquire if any
of you carry the literal interpretation into your own Practice.
When smote on one Cheek, would you actually turn the other also? If you are sued at Law for your Coat, do you
give your Cloak also? Do you uniformly
give to those who ask, and from those who would borrow of you, do you never
turn away? If an armed Assassin were
to aim a Stroke at my Parent, my Wife, or my Child, ought
I not to repel him with whatever Weapon were the most effectual? When your Houses are beset, and invaded by Thieves
and Murderers, do you not call on the Civil Magistrate, and is he not
obliged to use Arms against armed Ruffians; and to apply capital
Punishment, to capital Offences? Do
you hesitate to have recourse to the Coercion of the Laws to enforce
your Rights, or to its Punishments, to vindicate your Wrongs.
3d. Permit me to
refer to the PRACTICE, and the SENTIMENTS of our PREDECESSORS on this
Subject. My Grandfather who was the
first of my Family concerned in the Manufacture of Arms, and from whom the
Trade is at length derived to me, was a convinced Quaker.
George Robinson, a Friend of this Meeting, and Son of Thomas Robinson,
an approved Minister, long since deceased, was bound Apprentice to a Gun
Maker, without any Censure from the Society.
In Sewell’s History, 2d Edition, published in
the Year 1725, by the Assigns of J. Sowle, George Yard, Lombard Street. London,
p. 235 & 236, it is related that R. Grassingham, a Quaker, of
Harwich, who suffered Imprisonment with G. Fox, when he was about to be removed
to London, by Warrant from the House of Commons, urges as a Plea with the
Sheriff, that having received Orders from the Commissioners of the Admiralty,
and Navy, to repair a King’s Frigate, he ought not to be taken from such
Service;---this was about 1660.
Samuel Spavald, lately deceased, a Minister of high
Esteem in Society, worked many Years in the King’sYard, at Chatham.
Isaac Pennington, whose Writings having the Imprimatur of the Society,
must be considered as speaking the genuine and approved Doctrines
of the Quakers, in a small Folio Edition of his Works, in 2 parts, printed by
Benjamin Clark, George Yard, Lombard Lane, London, in 1681, p.323, in a Tract,
intitled, “somewhat spoken to a Weighty Question,” says,---“I speak not this
against any Magistrate, or People, defending themselves against foreign
Invasions, or making use of the Sword to suppress the Violent, and Evil
Doers, in their Borders; for this, the present state of things may, and doth
require; and a great blessing will attend the Sword, when it is
borne uprightly, to that end, and its Use will be honourable; and
while there is need of a Sword, the Lord will not suffer that the
Government, or those Governors, to want fitting Instruments under them, for the
managing thereof, who wait on him in his fear, to have the Edge of it
rightly directed. ”
4th. It is alledged that the
Manufacturer of Arms, contributes to the carrying on War. But do you, not all in many ways contribute
to the War, by supplying Government directly, or indirectly, with Money,
which is so necessary, that it is called proverbially the Sinews of
War? Do not such of you as are concerned
in East India Stock, who subscribe to the Loan, who purchase Stock,
Lottery Tickets, Navy Victualling, or Exchequer Bills, as directly,
and as voluntarily furnish the means of War, as myself? Do not all those who voluntarily, and
without being distrained upon, pay the Land Tax, and the Malt
Tax, which are voted, and levied from Year to Year, expressly for
the payment of the Army---or who pay any other Taxes levied
for the purpose, or applied to the purposes of War, as
directly violate the Principle you would enforce.
With
With respect to the Taxes, it may be objected
that the Contribution is merely a Compliance with the Law, not spontaneous. But can any of you, my Friends, with Consistency,
adduce this Plea, whilst you not only REFUSE A COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW IN THE
CASE OF TITHES, BUT ENJOIN THAT DISOBEDIENCE TO OTHERS, unless indeed you
suppose the Mode of the moral, and religious Instruction of the Clergy, to be
more criminal than War;---but even upon that Supposition and voluntary
Payment of these Taxes, would be to sanction by your practice that
violation of Principle, which the Law of the Society makes the Ground of
spiritual Interdiction against me.
The Censure, and the Laws of the Society,
against Slavery, and Oppression, are as strict and as decisive,
as against War---Now, those who use the produce of the labor of Slaves,
as Tobacco, Rum, Sugar, Rice, Indigo, and Cotton, are more intimately,
and directly the Promoters of the Slave Trade, than the Vender
of Arms is the Promoter of War;---because the Consumption of
these Articles, is the very Ground and Cause of Slavery;---but
the Manufacture of Arms is not the Cause, but only a consequence
of War. Such of you as do not concede
these Luxuries of Life to your Principles---Can you,
consistently, require a Sacrifice from me, of a Concern in which my Property
is so involved, and by which my Family would be so extensively
injured?
If you carry your speculative Principles into strict,
and rigid Practice, you will abstain not only from the Consumption of West
India Commodities, but from all Commodities which are taxed,
especially from Malt, and Wheat, and all the Produce of the
Land; for, you may be well assured, that every Cup of Beer you drink, and
every Morsel of Bread you eat, has furnished Resources for carrying on this
War, which you so justly censure.
If you should be so conscientious as to
abstain from all these enjoyments, I shall have no reason to complain of
any partiality, in applying the same strict construction of principle against
me. I shall greatly admire the efficacy
of your opinions, whilst I lament that the Practice of your principles,
is not compatible with the situation in which Providence has placed us.
5th. In making these observations,
I hope I shall not be considered as suggesting the Propriety of extending
the Penal Code. I HAVE TOO SINCERE A RESPECT FOR THE RIGHT, AND DUTY, OF
PRIVATE JUDGEMENT, AND TOO STRONG A DOUBT OF THE COMPATIBILITY OF
ECCLESIASTICAL CENSURE, AND PUNISHMENT, WITH THE GENUINE SPIRIT, AND OBJECT OF
CHRISTIAN DISCIPLINE, NOT TO EXPRESS A MOST DECIDED DISAPPROBATION OF SUCH A
MEASURE.
I am induced to make this remark, not from any
personal considerations, but as I have reason to believe that in some
instances, the Society have it in contemplation, to excommunicate those who pay
Tithes (as you pay Taxes) in obedience to the Laws, and without feeling
any conscientious Conviction of Impropriety of the Practice---I wish respectfully
but most seriously, to avail myself of this, perhaps the only
Opportunity in my power, to suggest to the solemn Consideration of the
Society, whether Excommunication, (which is considered as a species of religious
Persecution,) be consistent with that Discipline, which Christ proposed
to introduce into his Church, whether it be really bearing a christian
Testimony against paying Tithes---and if it be not a Violation of that Precept,
meant to be inculcated by this Text---“Who art thou that judgest another Man’s
Servant, to his own Master he standeth or falleth?” ROMANS xiv.-4
6th. I
have no view in this address, to embarrass your proceedings, with regard to
myself. An equitable attention to
my own Case, seemed to require a fair statement of Facts, and a candid
examination of Principles---My intention is to point out the injustice of the Law,---but
not to appeal from it.---To prove that it is too strict for the Practice
of the Society---too partial for its Principles.
I acknowledge a decided Preference, to this,
before any other religious Sect. This
Preference, I do not imagine will be influenced by the measures, which you may
conscientiously conceive it to be your duty to pursue, or which you may think
it incumbent upon you to adopt, in consequence of the direction of the Yearly
Meeting. I do not perhaps entertain the
same Opinions, as are entertained by many, on the subject of Excommunication,
which I would rather suffer than inflict.
I mean to give no Pledge, or Expectation,
to the Society, with respect to the abandoning my Business; but to reserve
to myself, a perfect Independence on that head, to act as
Circumstances may suggest---So that whenever I may have an Opportunity of
withdrawing myself from these Engagements consistently with my Judgement, I
shall have the satisfaction to feel that I act from spontaneous Sentiment
only, and not from unworthy Influence.
Circumstanced as I am, standing in no new
Relation to the Society, by any Act of my own,---I cannot with
Propriety withdraw myself. I state the
Sentiments, and Practice of our Predecessors; and if I should be disowned---I
shall not think that I have abandoned the Society, but that the
Society have withdrawn themselves from their antient, tolerant Spirit, and
Practice. I have no doubt but that I
shall equally retain the esteem of the more liberal, and enlightened
amongst you, and I shall not cease to wish for the Happiness of the whole
Society.
Saml
Galton
Copy of a Minute
of the Yearly Meeting of 1790:---
Copy of a Minute
of the Monthly Meeting of Birmingham, held in Tamworth:---
“Monthly
Meeting, Tamworth, 8th of the 4th Month, 1795.
Mention having been made at this, and some former
Sittings, respecting the Case of Samuel Galton and Samuel Galton, jnr. Members of this Meeting, who are in the practice of fabricating, and
selling Instruments of War, concerning which divers Opportunities have been had
with the Parties, by several Friends, under the Nomination of Overseers, and
others, to some Satisfaction; but thinking it proper that they should be
further labored with, respecting the Inconsistency thereof, with our religious
principles: We appoint the following
Friends to visit them, on behalf of this Meeting, who are desired to make a
Report thereof, at a future Monthly Meeting, viz. Sampson Lloyd, Joseph Gibbins, and James Baker, together
with any other Friends who are inclined to join them in the Service.”
The above is
copied from the Monthly Meeting Book.
Joseph Gibbins.