Quakers by name, before they could become Quakers in spirit.  Robert Barclay therefore, and William Penn, kept alive the subject of dress, which George Fox had been the first to notice in the society.  They followed him on his scriptural ground.  They repeated the arguments, that extravagant dress manifested an earthly spirit, and that it was productive of vanity and pride.  But they strengthened the case by adding arguments of their own.  Among these I may notice, that they considered what were the objects of dress.  They reduced these to two, to decency, and comfort, in which latter idea was included protection from the varied inclemencies of the weather.  Every thing therefore beyond these they considered as superfluous.  Of course all ornaments would become censurable, and all unreasonable changes indefensible, upon such a system.

These discussions, however, on this subject never occasioned the more ancient Quakers to make any alteration in their dress, for they continued as when they had come into the society, to be a plain people.  But they occasioned parents to be more vigilant over their children in this respect, and they taught the society to look upon dress, as a subject connected with the christian religion, in any case, where it could become injurious to the morality of the mind.  In process of time therefore as the fashions continued to spread, and the youth of the society began to come under their dominion, the Quakers incorporated dress among other subjects of their discipline.  Hence no member, after this period, could dress himself preposterously, or follow the fleeting fashions of the world, without coming under the authority of friendly and wholesome admonition.  Hence an annual inquiry began to be made, if parents brought up their children to dress consistently with their christian profession.  The society, however, recommended only simplicity and plainness to be attended to on this occasion.  They prescribed no standard, no form, no colour, for the apparel of their members.  They acknowledged the two great objects of decency and comfort, and left their members to clothe themselves consistently with these, as it was agreeable to their convenience or their disposition.

A new aera commenced from this period.  Persons already in the society, continued of course in their ancient dresses:  if others had come into it by convincement, who had led gay lives, they laid aside their gaudy garments, and took those that were more plain.  And the children of both, from this time, began to be habited from their youth as their parents were.

But though the Quakers had thus brought apparel under the disciplinary cognizance of the society, yet the dress of individuals was not always alike, nor did it continue always one and the same even with the primitive Quakers.  Nor has it continued one and the same with their descendants.  For decency and comfort having been declared to be the true and only objects of dress, such a latitude was given, as