I will admit that the connexion of "master and servant,” “maiden and mistress," or rather the employer and the employed, is not, nor I believe ever will be abolished, or done away with. The reciprocal obligation, or relation of master and servant, I find in english law, and domestic economy, 66 is

teased by a fashionable young man, (a customer of my then employer, and who was no less profligate than fashionable,) by the words brother, and friend! after assuming I was a Quaker---a Friend, he always, in general, after addressed me with the appellation "brother;" "well brother," and sometimes tauntingly..." am I not your brother? 1 acceded and told him he was my brother, after the fleshly Adam, and of one common parent ..."God, the Father of all :" but it was some time after before I could tell him he was not my brother, after the second Adam ---spiritually. I turned to my books, I turned to my Bible, and the following remarks were the result; which, though some eight or nine years ago, I now lay before my reader.

I found the very learned and pious writer, the late Granville Sharp hath shewn, that "under the glorious dispensation of the gospel, we are absolutely bound to consider ourselves as citizens of the world; that every man whatever, without any partial distinction of nation, distance, or complexion, must necessarily be esteemed our neighbour, and our brother; and that we are absolutely bound in Christian duty to entertain a disposition towards all mankind as charitable and benevolent, at least, as that which was required of the jews, under the law, towards their national brethren." Vide "the Law of Retribution, or a serious Warning to Great Britain, &c." against tyrants, slaveholders, and oppressors, &c. &c.

Brethren was a common designation among the jews; and St. Paul calls them brethren to whom he preached-kinsmen after the flesh. And he, as well as our blessed Lord, speaks of the new spiritual, distinct from the brotherhood according to the flesh. Just so the epithet Friend will admit of a double meaning, the natural, used in common by princes, counsellors, generals, captains, honest men, and rogues; and the spiritual,

founded in convenience, whereby a man is directed to call in the assistance of others, where his own skill and labour will not be sufficient to answer the cares incumbent upon him." This is simply, if not exclusively, the intent and connexion of master and servant, according to law: the effects and conse

used by the faithful, bound together in the sacred tie of Chris tian love. But if the holy scriptures are to be our instructor, it appears that the Almighty had chosen a name (or epithet) to be used under the gospel dispensation. "In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, ye shall call every man his neighbour, under the vine and under the fig tree." Zech. iii. 10.

But with respect to the epithet Friend, (if I learn right,) it is not so honourable, if so endearing, as you, my friends, may apprehend; which I infer from our blessed Lord's common use of it, to jews and gentiles; even to the man who was at the king's feast, and had not on a wedding garment; and to Judas who betrayed him. (Mat. xxvi. 50.) I know nothing of the dead language, in the original tongue, I am informed (by a member of the New Jerusalem Church! John Clowes) "a term is applied which more properly signifies companion." And truly, every one knows the difference between a companion and a friend. The natural or common acceptation, and the spiritual, the faithful and beloved. (v. the parables, &c. explained, part 3. p 30.)

The expositors of the Christian Family Bible, observe that "the word Friends does not often occur in the New Testament, being swallowed up in that of brother." (John 'iii. 14.) The early christians, I find, loved each other like brethren, and called one another by that name. From hence, it appears to me, that the epithets friend or neighbour, ought to be the general address, in the intercourse with strangers; and brethren, "brother and sister," to those who are connected by that tender and endearing tye of christian faith, hope, and charity. But I find by (the latter) "brother," the society of Friends address the heathens---the unconverted Indians! (see an oration of the American Friends, on the cultivation and improvement of these people.)

quences depend on the services and circumstances. If, by way of contradistinction, nothing more is meant than, or implied by these epithets,

Master, S. (maister, old Teut. meister, Teut. meester, Bel. maitre, Fr. magister, Lat.) a ruler, a chief or head; a housekeeper or possessor; a teacher or instructor; or the commanders of trading vessels, &c. a person who has servants under him. -Mistress. ***

Servant, S. (Fr. servus, Lat.) one who is hired to do business for another; a word of civility, implying a ready willingness to do good, or to serve another service of love; favour.

1

a

If, I say, this is the import only and use of the above epithets, by way of clearness of expression; I do not much scruple to use them occasionally: but if master (and mistress, Mr. or Mrs.) implies a person subject to no controul; a title of dignity at the universities, and in the courts of law; or implies a young gentleman, and used as flattery or mere compliment; in this case my objections are already before the reader: and I shall only add in the words of Elihu-" I know not to give flattering titles; in so doing my Maker would soon take me away, (Job. xxxii.) or as your worthy predecessor, William Penn, hath it" lest God should strike me dead!" Truly, "nothing proves more the absence and disregard of the fear of God, than to speak and act with a mere view of approbation, and to flatter the persons around us.”

But unto you, my friends, I need not thus to write. It is pretty well known, that in no society is a man upon such an equality of rank and privileges, as in the society called Quakers; I mean, at the time when you were what is called "first a people." And certain it is, (as your worthy advocate Thomas Clarkson observes,) "there are particular traits in the character of a true Quaker, worthy of imitation: their independence of mind-no marks of servility about them-no flattery from their lips: his mind has never been made to bend, on the approach of what is called his superior rank. He sees nothing in his own society to lessen his own importance of dignity as a man. They all (poor as well as rich) can read and write; they have the Bible. and it may thus be said "the keys of knowledge" are put into their hands.

I will admit, with a certain "divine," that "so far as service imports duty and subjection, all created beings, whether men or angels, bear the necessary and essential relation of servants to God, and consequently to Christ, who is God blessed for ever."

"Forasmuch as having once made a creature, he cannot cause that creature should not owe a natural relation to his Maker, both of subjection and dependance." The Messiah, Christ himself, with respect to his human nature, was considered as a servant."Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high." (Isaiah lii. 13.) Yet, "he took upon himself the form of a servant, and became obedient unto death; even the death of the cross." But to be Christ's servants, (whose service is perfect freedom,) and to be servants

1

of men, (whose service is bondage,) are two different situations and occupations in life.

If through "the love of Christ to his faithful followers, he further advances them from servants to friends, from only living in his house to lying in his bosom!--this is an instance of favour above the rate of created goodness. Ought not the earthly or professing master to follow his heavenly master's example? That you, my friends, (the society at large,) do not stand clear in this important matter, but bear the name and have the honour of that you do not merit, but are rather reprehensible, I could easily prove but I must conclude this important subject with another short remark or two,

"Mr. and Mrs." (Master and Mistress) it is said, do not mean any thing about bondage or dominion, or import mastership; and that the epithet "friend," or "brother," is liable, on the same principle, (as commonly used,) to as many objections. But suppose

to a stranger it appears mere civility; and to an enemy it may approach nearly to insincerity; are the Friends, or a person purely religiously scrupulous, to be blamed in this matter? The like also of the plural verb, "you," to a single person, (as well as Mr. and Sir, &c.) is said to be used indiscriminately, to the very lowest of mankind—to negroes, felons, and toad-eaters." Its-is it "obvious that no psrson's vanity can possibly be puffed up by receiving of it?"*

* Vide "the Edinburgh Review, or Critical Journal;" review of T. Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism, &c. p. 93. (No. 1,