many, from the quarterly together.  And here the Quakers from all parts of the kingdom have an opportunity of seeing and conversing with one another.  I may add too, that many individuals in the interim, who travel, whether on business or on pleasure, or on religious errands, enlarge this friendly intercourse; for few Quakers pass through the towns where Quakers live, without calling upon these, so that there are many sources within the customs and constitution of the society, that are productive of cheerful hours.[43]

[Footnote 43:  It may be mentioned here, that the Quakers acknowledge their relations to a much farther degree of consanguinity, than other people.  This relationship, where it can be distinctly traced, is commemorated by the appellation of cousin.  This custom therefore is a cause of endearment when they meet, and of course of additional pleasure.]

But here it will probably be said, that these sources of happiness, which have been hitherto described, are common to many others.  I grant they are to individuals, but not to communities at large.  No society has probably so many of the comforts of life in its power, number for number, and rank for rank, as that of the Quakers.  None probably so wholly domestic.  None, where the members of it have such frequent intercourse with each other, or where they are so connected in the bonds of brotherly love, and none, as far as I know men, who have such constant employment for their time.

Having explained some of those, which may be considered as positive sources of happiness to the Quakers, I shall now shew what may be causes of unhappiness to others, and that the Quakers seldom partake of these.  Such an exposition, however strange it may appear at the first sight, will be materially to the point.  For though an exemption from the causes of the uneasiness of others can never be admitted as a proof of the existence of positive enjoyment among the Quakers, yet if the latter have solid sources of happiness of their own, and these are not in any material degree diminished by the causes of the uneasiness of the former, there will be left to them, because there will be no drawback, a certain portion of happiness with less alloy.  And here it is obvious at the first sight, that the Quakers have not the same, nor so many wants as others, with respect to their pleasures, and that they do not admit the same things to be component parts of them.  Hence they have not the same causes of uneasiness from the chance of interruption.  Hence also their happiness is more in their own power.  What individual can annihilate the comforts which arise from their own industry, or their domestic enjoyments, or their friendly intercourse with each other, or their employments, which arise from their discipline, and from their trade and callings?  But how easily are many of the reputed enjoyments of the world to be broken?  Some people place their happiness in a routine of constituted pleasures.  In proportion