the grave and sober garments of antient times.

It may now be observed, that from these religious persons, habited in this manner in opposition to the fashions of the world, the primitive Quakers generally sprung. George Fox himself wore the plain gray coat that has been noticed, with alchymy buttons, and a plain leathern girdle about his waist. When the Quakers, therefore, first met in religious union, they met in these simple clothes. They made no alteration in their dress on account of their new religion. They prescribed no form or colour as distinguish- ing marks of their sect; but they carried with them the plain habits of their ancestors into their new Society, as the habits of the grave and sober people of their own times.

SECTION

SECTION II.

But though George Fox introduced no new dress into the Society, he was not indifferent on the subject he recommended simplicity and plainness-and declaimed against the fashions of the times-supported by Barclay and Penn-these explained the objects of dress-The influence of these explanations-Dress, at length, incorporated into the discipline-but no standard fixed either of shape or colour-the objects of dress only recognised, and simplicity recommendedA new ara-great variety allowable by the discipline-Quakers have deviated less from the dress of their ancestors than other people. THOUGH George Fox never introduced any new or particular garments, when he formed the Society, as models worthy of the imitation of those who joined him, yet, as a religious man, he was not indifferent on the subject of dress. Nor could he, as a reformer, see those extravagant fashions, which I have shown to have existed in his time, without publicly noticing them. We find him accordingly recommending to his followers simplicity and plainness of apparel,

and

and bearing his testimony against the preposterous and fluctuating apparel of the world.

He

In the various papers, which he wrote or gave forth upon this subject, he laid it down as a position, that all ornaments, superfluities, and unreasonable changes in dress, manifested an earthly or worldly spirit. laid it down, again, that such things, being adopted principally for the lust of the eye, were productive of vanity and pride; and that, in proportion as men paid attention to these outward decorations and changes, they suffered some loss in the value and dignity of their minds. He considered, also, all such decorations and changes as contrary both to the letter and the spirit of the Scriptures. Isaiah, one of the greatest prophets under the Law, had severely reproved the daughters of Israel on account of their tinkling ornaments, cauls, round tires, chains, bracelets, rings, and ear-rings. St. Paul,

also, and St. Peter, had both of them cautioned the women of their own times to adorn themselves in modest apparel, and not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array. And the former had spoken

to

to both sexes indiscriminately not to conform to the world; in which latter expression he evidently included all those customs of the world, of whatsoever nature, that were in any manner injurious to the morality of the minds of those, who followed them.

By the publication of these sentiments George Fox showed to the world, that it was his opinion that religion, though it prescribed no particular form of apparel, was not indifferent as to the general subject of dress. These sentiments became the sentiments of his followers: but the Society was coming fast into a new situation. When the members of it first met in union, they consisted of grown-up persons; of such as had had their minds spiritually exercised, and their judgments convinced in religious matters; of such, in fact, as had been Quakers in spirit before they had become Quakers by name. All admonitions, therefore, on the subject of dress were unnecessary for such persons. But many of those, who had joined the Society, brought with them children into it, and, from the marriages of others, children were daily springing up.

Το

To the latter, in a profligate age, where the fashions were still raging from without, and making an inroad upon the minds and morals of individuals, some cautions were necessary for the preservation of their innocence in such a storm. For these were the reverse of their parents. Young in point of age, they were Quakers by name before they could become Quakers in spirit. Robert Barclay, therefore, and William Penn, kept alive the subject of dress, which George Fox had been the first to notice in the Society. They followed him on his scriptural ground. They repeated the arguments, that extravagant dress manifested an earthly spirit, and that it was productive of vanity and pride. But they strengthened the case by adding arguments of their own. Among these I may notice, that they considered what were the objects of dress. They reduced these to two, to decency and comfort,-in which latter idea was included protection from the varied inclemencies of the weather. Every thing, therefore, beyond these they considered as superfluous: of course, all ornaments would become censurable, and