their request was not only refused, but condemned as disorderly.
Affairs were certainly in a very singular position.
Both branches of the Society of Friends were entirely inert on the subject of slavery.
Both expressed pity for the slave, but both agreed that ‘the way did not open’ for them to do
If individual members were thus driven to unite in action with other sects upon a subject which seemed to them very important, they were called disorganizers.
When they tried to conciliate by forming an association composed of Quakers only, they were told that ‘as the Society of Friends saw no way to move forward in this concern, such associations appeared to reflect upon them;
’ implying that they failed in discharging their duty as a religious body.
What could an earnest, direct character, like Isaac T. Hopper
, do in the midst of a sect thus situated?
He proceeded as he always did. He walked straight forward in what seemed to him the path of duty, and snapped all the lilliputian cords with which they tried to bind him.
Being unable to obtain any apology from their offending members, the Society proceeded to administer its discipline.
A complaint was laid before the Monthly Meeting
, in which Isaac T. Hopper
, James S. Gibbons
, and Charles Marriott
, were accused of ‘being concerned in the publication and support of a paper calculated to excite discord ’