power from the Governor and Council, and seemed to justify Logan's complaint that they were intoxicated with the liberty to which they were unused. To crown all William Penn was thrown into prison on the charge of Jacobinism, his government taken from him, and Governor Fletcher of New York appointed to manage the disordered but not turbulent Province.

*

*

Thomas Lloyd and many other Friends refused positions under him, acting on Penn's advice "to insist on their patent with wisdom and moderation." The old laws were, however, declared invalid. "These laws and that model of government is dissolved and at an end. * The King's power and Mr. Penn's must not come in the scales together." This dispute was long in settling. The Assembly adhered tenaciously to their old privileges, and the nineteen months of Fletcher's rule saw very little done, but nothing lost to the cause of liberty.

Upon the restoration of Penn to liberty and power in 1694, he appointed Markham as his Deputy, and this arrangement lasted until his return to the colony in 1699. Markham held to what he could, but was not able to resist the growing desires of the Assemblymen under the able leadership of David Lloyd. They secured

་་

the charter of 1696, giving them the power of originating, as well as vetoing bills, thus reducing the Council to a co-ordinate rather than a superior body, a reduction still further continued in 1701, when it was shorn of all part in law-making. The need of money by the Governor was a perfect boon to the Assembly, which, English-like, coupled its grant with conditions requiring unwelcome concessions from the proprietary deputy.

An unfortunate ecclesiastical schism was not without its political effects. George Keith had been a doughty defender of Quakerism. He was perhaps the best scholar of his Society, had been associated with Barclay in the preparation of the Apology, and with Fox and Penn in their travels in Holland and Germany. He had proven the sincerity of his convictions by his sufferings, and when, in 1689, he came to Philadelphia as the first Headmaster of the School which is now the William Penn Charter School, it was with the highest reputation for Quaker orthodoxy, as well as linguistic, scientific and philosophical attainments. A change came over his views very soon after this. It is unnecessary to accept any of the reasons given by Quaker historians for this change; all cannot be correct. The times

were strenuous, and strong language was used on both sides. Political controversy raged fiercely, and some of the tenets advocated were crude and trifling. Keith's charges against his former brethren were the exaltation of the Inward Light at the expense of the historic Christ and the Bible, too great use of outward resistance by magistrates, and the practice of capital punishment. He had many sympathizers, but the Yearly Meeting decided against him, and a separate meeting was the result. The Foxian and the Keithian Quakers became convenient terms of distinction in the writings of the day, and opposed each other in church and state.

Keith appealed to England with similar results. His learning and his preaching made him friends, but the decision, carefully made, was adverse to his claims. After a vain attempt to divide Friends, he joined the Episcopal Church, and spent the rest of his life in refuting the doctrines he had done so much to establish. He never denied his inconsistency. He paid a sccond visit to America, as the first missionary of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, and between 1700 and 1704 traveled from Massachusetts to Carolina, setting up churches. He claims to have induced about five hundred peo

ple in Pennsylvania, mostly Friends, to join the Episcopal Church, and large numbers of Presbyterians in other colonies. His "Christian Quakers" had disappeared as an organized body by 1700, some returning to the fold, more joining the Baptists and Episcopalians.

Politically, they associated themselves sometimes with David Lloyd and the democrats, sometimes with Quarry and the Churchmen; and by the rancor they received and returned, added greatly to the disunion of the time.

Notwithstanding these continuous dissensions among the rulers, petty and great, the country as a whole was peaceful and prosperous. The farmers tilled and cleared their lands, and built up their homes undisturbed; they went to their semi-weekly meetings, and managed their church affairs generally in a sweet spirit of brotherly love. Merchants and traders carried on increasing business, and laid the foundations of considerable fortunes. Immigrants flocked in at a great rate, and found homes and occupations in pleasing contrast to their state in Europe. When Penn landed, in 1699, he found a government somewhat in confusion, from an experiment of tyros not altogether "holy," but a people in the main contented and satisfied, and con