Andrew Fuller, Kettering, to S. J. Button, 24 Paternoster Row, London, 1 May 1804.

Ketter.g May 1. [1]804

Dear Sir,

         I am much obliged to Mr Bevan for the labour he has bestowed on the Articles Behmanists, Mystics, Quietists, & Friends, all wh I have duly rec.d The first is gone to press, and I believe with out any alterations. The Second & Third I have not had time to examine. The last which came yesterday I have read to day. It is long, but I w.d not object to it on that acc.t: And as I approve of the principle of every denomination being allowed to speak for themselves, I see nothing to object to on any other, except the last note which he is not anxious to have inserted, and the first two pages, respecting their history. These I think have rather too much asperity and reflection for a simple statement. If it were a vindication it might be less objectionable. I also conceive that part sh.d be given by the Editor; and that it w.d be more to their honour to have it so. As it is, it would be manifest to every discerning reader that it was done by one of themselves, and that rather as an advocate than a simple narrator. That the account of their principles sh.d be thought to be drawn up by one of themselves is highly proper; and it w.d add weight & worth to it. In that part therefore I shall intimate as much. I submit the following to Mr B.s remarks instead of those two first pages, wh if he approve, he need not trouble himself to write: if not, I will thank him for a few lines. All the rest I approve.  

         Friends or Quakers, a religious society wch began to be distinguished about the middle of the 17.th Century. The doctrines peculiar to this society were first promulgated by George Fox in Eng.d about the year 1647, for wch he as imprisoned at Nott.m in 1649, and in ye year following at Derby. The appellation of Quakers was given them by way of contempt: some say on acc.t of the tremblings and quakings, under an impression of divine things, whch appeared in their publick assemblies; but they themselves say, it was given them by one of the Justices, who imprisoned Fox on acc.t of his bidding him, and those about him tremble at the word of the Lord. Whatever was the origin of the name, it has remained their usual denomination, but they themselves adopted the appellation of Friends.

         From their first appearance they suffered much persecution. In New England they were treated with peculiar severity. To what has been alleged ag.t them they do not justify every thing done by individuals—that the extravagances and blaphemies of James Nayler, and his associates were disapproved at the time, and parties disowned; nor was he restored till he had given signs of sincere repentance, and publicly condemned his error—and that many of those who suffered were persons of unimpeachable character. The treatment which they as a body received, they consider, and so we apprehend must every true friend to liberty of conscience, as anti-christian and cruel.

         During the persecutions which they met with in New England, they applied to King Charles the Second for relief, who granted a Mandamus, dated September 9. 1661 to put a stop to them. Neither were the good offices of this Prince in their favour confined to the colonies; for in 1671 he released under the great seal 400 of these suffering people, who were imprisoned in Great Britain. 

         In 1681 the same king granted to Will.m Penn the province of Pennsylvania. Penn’s treaty with the Indians, and the liberty of Conscience which he granted to all denominations, even those, which had persecuted his own, do honour to his memory.

         In the reign of James the II.nd, the Friends, in common with other English dissenters, were relieved by the suspension of the penal laws. But it was not till the reign of W.m & Mary that they obtained any thing like a proper legal protection. In 1696 an Act was made which, with a few exceptions, allowed to their affirmation the legal force of an oath, and provided a less oppressive mode of receiving tythes under a certain amount; which provisions in the reign of Geo. the first were made perpetual. For refusing to pay tythes, &c, however, they are still liable to suffer in the exchequer and ecclesiastical court, both in Great Britain and Ireland.

         The doctrines of the Society of Friends have been variously represented: we shall give the reader an account of them as drawn up by one of themselves, and nearly in the words of their principal writers.

                           Kind respects to your own & fathers family & am affec.y y.rs    

                                                               A. Fuller

P.S. Mr Bevan & you must have patience—My hands are so full of other matters, & my Journies so many & long, that I shall not be able to get on very fast. I suppose I shall not be able to sit down to it another day till the latter end of July.

Text: MAM. PLP. 42.47.2, JRULM. Samuel Button, son of William Button, Baptist minister at Dean Street, Southwark, assisted his father and brother William for a time in their printing house in London. However, during the same year as the above letter he would form his own business as a music publisher in the firm of Purday and Button. Upon Purday's retirement in 1808, Button was joined by the musician John Whitaker (1776-1847) at 75 St. Paul's Churchyard, next door to Rowland Hunter, a bookseller who was the father-in-law of Leigh Hunt. Whitaker remained with Button until the latter's retirement in 1820, after which the firm became Whitaker and Co. Whitaker appears on several occasions in the correspondence of Eliza Fenwick (1764-1840) and Mary Hays (1759-1843). See Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians (Philadelphia: Thomas Presser, 1922), 5.89; Kenneth Neill Cameron, ed., Shelley and his Circle 1773-1822 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1961), 2.695; and Jeff Straub, "William Button 1754-1821," in The British Particular Baptists, vol. 4, ed. Michael A. G. Haykin and Terry Wolever (Springfield, MO: Particular Baptist Press, 2019), 314-16; Timothy Whelan, Mary Hays: Life, Writings, and Correspondence, at www.maryhayslifewritingscorresondence.com.

Joseph Gurney Bevan (1753-1814), a leading Quaker writer. James Naylor (1617?-1660) was an English Quaker from Yorkshire who was tried and convicted of blasphemy in 1651 by Parliament, for which he two years of imprisonment. His collected Writings were published posthumously in 1716. The work under discussion and to which Fuller contributed, with assistance from Bevan, was a new edition of Hannah Adams’s An Alphabetical Compendium of the Various Sects which have Appeared in the World from the Beginning of the Christian Aera to the Present Day. With an Appendix Containing a Brief Account of the Different Schemes of Religion now Embraced Among Mankind, etc. (Boston, 1800 and 1801) which first appeared in England in 1805, printed by J. W. Morris of Dunstable for William Button and Son, and for Thomas Williams (another edition appeared in 1814). Added to the 1805 edition was a preface by Fuller entitled “An Essay on Truth” (pp. 5-30). The article on “Behmanists” appeared on pp. 90-93; “Mystics” on pp. 229-32; “Quietists” on pp. 272-73; and “Friends” on pp. 138-58. At the end of the article on “Friends,” the following editorial note was added: “In apology for the length of the foregoing article, in which the reader is referred to the authorities cited at the foot of the page, it is proper to say, it was inserted at the request of an intelligent Friend, and in consequence of complaints of misrepresentations in other publications. The contrary opinions on several points will be found under the articles Calvinist, Baptist, Episcopalians, &c.” (p. 158). Obviously, that “Friend” was Bevan, though no acknowledgment concerning any of the authors of the articles in the book is given. Paragraphs 2-7 appeared in the 1805 edition (pp. 138-39) largely as written by Fuller, with some deletions and additions.