and is obliged by the law to find a sufficient force to compel compliance. Criminals are put to death and riots suppressed by persons legally vested with power to use necessary force in each case. And for this latter end the sheriff has the right to summon all per sons in his district to aid him; and if need be, freely to use fire-arms, nor be held ac countable for lives lost, and to be punishable if they refuse to assist the sheriff.
"From whence it is evident, there is no Difference, in the last Resort, between Civil and Military Government. . . . And from these Premises it certainly follows, that whoever can . . . join in Assembly in making Laws, as particularly for hold ing Courts, is so far concerned in Self-Defence; and makes himself ... as obnoxious to Censure as those who directly vote for it. [Notice how tightly James Logan's logic is winding the Quakers up; for the Legislature was full of them, though their principles did not allow them to spend money for soldiers or forts.] ... It is further alledged, by our Friends, that no other was expected than that this should be a Colony of Quakers; . . . that they are willing themselves to rely on the sole Protection of divine Providence, and others who would not do the same should have kept out, for nobody called or invited them. [Then Logan refutes this allegation by recalling the terms of the original charter, and also Penn's general invitation to all of any country or Profession, " provided they own'd a God." Now he tightens his noose a trifle further.] . . . Although they alledge they cannot for Conscience sake bear Arms, as being contrary to the peaceable Doctrine of Jesus . . . yet, without Regard to others of Christ's Precepts, full as express, against laying up Treasures in this World, and not caring for to-morrow, they are as intent as any others whatever in amassing Riches, the great Bait ... to our Enemies to come and plunder the Place."
Then follows a warning of the defenceless condition of Philadelphia, and the ease with which Indians and French could raid it. It is pointed out that if the Quakers decline to help defend it, England will divest them of their privileges. And thus Logan loads to the natural conclusion that those Quakers whose consciences compelled them to vote against paying money for defence had better be consistent and decline standing as candidates "at the ensuing election for Representatives." Then follows a hint that perhaps parsimony and not conscience may have had something to do with this high moral tone; and the letter concludes with a recommendation to the Friends to consider what has been said from the "sincerest Zeal for the Public Good . . . and the most solid Interest of Friends as a People."
This was in 1741 . The following extract from a letter to John Penn, from a Friend, reveals how James Logan's letter pleased the Quakers : —
"The Yearly Meeting being held the week be fore the general Election, M' Logan . . . sent them a Letter. . . . Robert Jordan [and others] were appointed to inspect the Epistle. . . . They reported it was by no means proper to be read to the general Meeting. . . . Robert Strethil . . . was apprehensive should this Letter be refused a reading . . . such a procedure would . . . disgust . . . the Body of Friends in England . . . as it might . . . contain several Things . . . intended for the Good of the Society. . . . But John Bringhouse pluck'd him by the Coat and told him with a sharp Tone of Voce, Sit Thee down Robert, thou art single in that opinion."
So the " Epistle " was not read aloud in Meeting. But it raised a considerable dust; and its author would have probably been turned out of the Society for his unpalatable observations, had he not been a little too big a man for Quaker spite to tackle. Besides the excellent analysis of Government presented by this letter of Logan's, it is to be noticed that he was wise enough not to rest his argument upon abstract principle alone, which is a motive that has proved at times vacant of persuasion. He also appealed to the commercial prudence of the canny Quaker merchants whose nature he knew; and the following entertaining extract from Franklin's autobiography tends to show that such latter argument at length had its practical result upon their conduct : —
