18

to suit her own purpose. For those who do not wish to be satisfied with fair reasoning, there is no end to their cavilling and misrepresentation. As to what she relates as it regards the manner of our coming into the world in our infant state, it is my belief, that we come into the world in the same state of innocence, and endowed with the same propensities and desires that our first parents were, in their primeval state; and this Jesus Christ has established, and must be conclusive in the minds of all true believers. When he took a little child in his arms and blessed him, and said to them around him, that except they were converted, and became as that little child, they should in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. Of course, all the desires and propensities of that little child, and of our first parents in their primeval state, must have been good, as they were all the endowments of their Creator, and given to them for a special and useful purpose. But it is the improper and unlawful indulgence of them that is evil.

I readily acknowledge, I have not been able to see or understand, how the cruel persecution and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, by the wicked and hard-hearted Jews, should expiate my sins; and I never have known any thing to effect that for me, but the grace of God, that taught me, agreeably to the apostle's doctrine, to deny all ungodliness and the world's lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world; and as I have faithfully abode under its teachings, in full obedience thereto, I have been brought to believe that my sins were forgiven, and I permitted to sit under the Lord's teaching, as saith the prophet: "that the children of the Lord are all taught of the Lord, and in righteousness they are established, and great is the peace of his children." And so long as I feel this peace, there is nothing in this world that makes me afraid, as it respects my eternal condition. But if any of my friends have received any known benefit from any outward sacrifice, 1 do not envy them their privilege. But, surely, they would not be willing that I should acknowledge as a truth, that which I have no kind of knowledge of. Kam willing to admit, that Divine Mercy is no doubt watching over his rational creation for their good, and may secretly work at times for their preservation; but, if,

in his infinite wisdom and goodness, he sees meet to hide it from us, as most consistent with his wisdom and our good, let us have a care that we do not, in the pride of our hearts, undertake to pry into his secret counsels, lest we offend; but be content with what he is pleased to reveal to us, let it be more or less, and, especially, if he is pleased to speak peace to our minds. And when he graciously condescends to do this, we shall know it to be a peace that the world cannot give, with all its enjoyments, neither take away, with all its frowns.

I shall now draw to a close, and, with the salutation of gospel love, I subscribe myself thy affectionate and sympathizing friend and brother,

TO EDWIN A. ATLEE.

DEAR FRIEND,

ELIAS HICKS.

Letter of A. Shipley.

New York, 10 mo. 15, 1824.

It has been with feelings of extreme regret and astonishment that I have read two pamphlets published in your city, entitled "Misrepresentations of A. Braithwaite, &c."

It is not my desire to discuss or widen the controversy which unhappily exists respecting the sentiments of those who are thus placed before the public as the accusers of our dear friend Anna Braithwaite; but it has become in my mind a serious question whether I ought to permit the character of an absent friend, whose distance from her accusers prevents her from vindicating herself against the gross aspersions so illiberally cast upon her, without endeavouring to do all in my power to avert the arrows of calumny and persecution with which she has been so cruelly assailed, but which, as relates to her own innocency, and a consciousness of having faithfully discharged what she believed to be her religious duty, will, I trust, fall harmlessly at her feet.

After deliberately weighing the subject, and the very unpleasant and painful considerations associated with it, duty to my absent friend, respect to my own character, and above all, a regard for the cause of truth, obliges me to assure thee, and all A. Braithwaite's friends, that I was pre

sent during the conversations between her and Elias Hicks. The statement she left was correct. The subject of the forbidden fruit was mentioned, but I have not a perfect recollection of the terms made use of, and never have, at any time, given a different account respecting it, although the contrary has been reported.

I believe her visit to him was with sincere desires that she might be enabled to convince him of what she thought to be his errors, and from feelings of love and good will towards him.

I also believe when A. Braithwaite left that statement she had no desire to have it circulated in the manner it has been done, but with a view that should any erroneous representations take place respecting the conversations, that an accurate account of them might be produced to prevent trouble.

It may appear to some very extraordinary that I should thus express myself in direct contradiction to Elias Hicks; and my dear friend, thou mayest be assured that nothing but a sense of duty, the peculiarities of the case, and the entire conviction of mind of the correctness of A. Braithwaite's statement, would ever induce me to do so. ANN SHIPLEY.

Signed,

In order to shew that the statement of Anna Braithwaite can be fully and firmly supported; and that the sentiments which she attributes to Elias Hicks are by no means new to him, we subjoin the following documents, which are but a part of the testimony which might be adduced, all corroborating her account in the most plain and positive manner.

Statement of Joseph Whitall.

Having attended the last yearly meeting at New York, I heard Elias Hicks declare, in public testimony, in a large meeting, at the North House, "The same power that made Christ a Christian must make us Christians, and the same power that saved him must save us." Being very uneasy with the doctrine, I took a private opportunity to state to him my uneasiness. I informed him, that, for several years, reports had been in circulation unfavourable towards him, and that on these occasions I had vindicated his character from a belief that he must have been misunderstood, until last fall I met with a piece in writing,

said to be from his pen, in which he called Christ the Jewish Messiah; that he was alone the Saviour of the Jews ; and that he was not the Son of God until after the baptism of John, and the descent of the Holy Ghost. To this I offered my objections as unscriptural, but he justified them. He also declared that he considered it a matter of the greatest encouragement to believe that Christ was no more than a man, for if he were any thing more it would destroy the effect of his example to him. He admitted that he had not, till of latter time, held up the doctrine that Christ was liable to fall like other men. When I quoted the testimony of John, that the Word was made or took of flesh, he said it was impossible. I offered my sentiments, that, if he persisted in preaching these doctrines, so contrary to the Scriptures, and the testimonies of our ancient Friends, it would produce one of the greatest schisms that had ever happened. He allowed it would produce a schism, but that it would soon be over, for he believed his doctrines must and would prevail. Seeing that we differed so widely in sentiment on these points, I proposed to him to have a few solid friends, ministers and elders, convened, that a discussion might be had; but he would not consent thereto, saying, that he was so confirmed in his sentiments that he would persevere therein let the consequences be what they might.

12 mo. 12th, 1822.

JOSEPH WHITALL.

E. Hicks, in a letter dated 12 mo. 21st, 1822, speaking of this statement, says, "As these charges are not literally true, being founded on his (J. W's,) own forced and improper construction of my words, I deny them," &c Here it is important to observe that the language used by E. H. is similar to that in which he denies some few points in the statement of A. Braithwaite, though in the case of J. W. he goes no further than to say that they are not literally true; an assertion which does not in the smallest degree affect their substantial truth. If Elias Hicks really believes that he has cause to complain of a feigned, or forced, or improper construction being put upon his words, why does he not come out and tell what he did say, and leave the world to judge how far his meaning has been perverted by a feigned, or forced, or improper construction of his language? The fact is, there is neither construction or comment, feigned or unfeigned, forced or easy, but a simple statement of his own words; and although he thus speaks of the statement of Joseph Whitall, yet he did fully admit it to be substantiatly true, in a conference which J. W. afterwards had with

him on the subject, as is expressed in a letter dated 2d mo. 18th, 1823, viz. "I thought it proper when he (E. H.) was in our neighbourhood, to call upon him for an explanation, which he was free to give, and which fully confirmed every sentiment which had entertained concerning his new doctrines. He did not hesitate to admit every thing which I had stated as his doctrine, with one small exception scarcely worth naming." This exception was simply this; E. Hicks said that instead of stating to J. W. that Christ was no more than a man, he said he was no more than an Israelite.

We shall now lay before our readers the following letter, written by Elias Hicks to a respectable physician of this city, which will be found to corroborate, under Elias' own hands, the sentiments which he has avowed in the hearing of these Friends. Letter from Elias Hicks, to Dr. N. Shoemaker, of Philadelphia.

DEAR FRIEND,

Jericho, 3d mo. 31st., 1823.

Thy acceptable letter of the 1st month last, came duly to hand, but my religious engagements, and other necessary concerns, have prevented my giving it that attention that its contents seem to demand. Thou queries after my views of the suffering of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and what was the object of the shedding of his blood on the cross, and what benefits resulted to mankind by the shedding of this blood, &c. I shall answer in a very simple way, as I consider the whole subject to be a very simple one, as all truth is simple when we free ourselves from the improper bias of tradition and education, which rests as a burthensome stone on the minds of most of the children of men, and which very much mars the unity and harmony of society.

1st. By what means did Jesus suffer? The answer is plain, by the hands of wicked men, and because his works were righteous and theirs were wicked. Query. Did God send him into the world purposely to suffer death by the hands of wicked men? By no means; but to live a righteous and godly life, (which was the design and end of God's creating man in the beginning,) and thereby be a perfect example to such of mankind as should come to the knowledge of him and his perfect life. For, if it was the purpose and will of God that he should die by the hands of wicked men, then the Jews, by crucifying of him, would