do not make sacrifices of their consciences to others; that in political affairs they reason upon principle; that they are punctual to their words and engagements; and that they have independence of mind, and courage.  Their character, as it is defective, has been explained also.  It has been probed, and tried by a proper touchstone.  Appearances have been separated from realities.  The result has been, that a deficiency in literature and science, and that superstition, and that an undue eagerness after money, has been fixed upon a portion of them.  The two former, however, it is to be recollected, are only intellectually defective traits, and maybe remedied by knowledge.  The latter, it is to be presumed, belongs rather to individuals than to the society at large.  But whatever drawbacks may be made from the perfect by the imperfect qualities that have been stated, there is a great preponderancy on the side of virtue.  And where, when we consider the evil propensities of our nature, and the difficulty of keeping these in due order, are we to took for a fairer character?  That men, as individuals, may be more perfect, both in and out of the society, is not to be denied.  But where shall we find them purer as a body? and where shall we find a faulty character, where the remedy is more easily at hand?

The next advantage will be in seeing the manner of the operation of these customs and principles, or how they act.  To go over the whole character of the Quakers with this view would be both tedious and unnecessary.  I shall therefore only select one or two parts of it for my purpose.  And first, how do these customs and principles produce benevolence?  I reply thus:  The Quakers, in consequence of their prohibitions against all public amusements, have never seen man in the capacity of a hired buffoon or mimic, or as a purchasable plaything.  Hence they have never viewed him in a low and degrading light.  In consequence of their tenet on war, they have never viewed him as an enemy.  In consequence of their disciplinary principles, they have viewed him as an equal.  Hence it appears, that they have no prejudices against him from causes which often weigh with others, either on account of rank, or station, or many of the customs of the world.  Now I conceive, that the dereliction of prejudice against man is as necessary, as a first measure, to the production of benevolence towards him, as the dereliction of vice towards the production of virtue.  We see then their minds free from bias on this subject.  But what is there on the other side to operate actively towards the promotion of this trait?  They view man, in the first place, as the temple in which the Divinity may reside.  This procures him respect.  Secondly, as a being for whose spiritual welfare they ought to be solicitous.  This produces a concern for him.  And thirdly, as a brother.  This produces relationship.  We see then the ground cleared.  We see all noxious weeds extirpated.  We see good seed sown in their places; that is, we see prejudices removed from the heart, and we see the ideas of respect, concern, and relationship implanted in it.  Now it is impossible that these ideas, under these circumstances, should not as naturally and immediately produce a general benevolence to man, as common seeds, when all obstructive weeds are removed, should produce their corresponding saplings or flowers.