This step, hard and difficult as it may appear to those who are thriving in the world, is, notwithstanding, not a novel one, if we may judge either by the example of many of the pure minded Christians of other denominations, or by that of many estimable persons in this society.  John Woolman, among many others, was uneasy on account of his business “growing cumbersome,” for so he expresses it, lest it should hurt the purity of his mind.  And he contracted it, leaving himself only enough of it, and this by the labour of his own hands, for a decent support.  And here I might mention other individuals of this society, if I had no objection to offend the living by praise, who, following his example, have retired upon only a moderate competency, though in the way of great accumulations, for no other reason than because they were afraid, lest such accumulations should interfere with their duty, or injure their character, as Christians.

But if this measure should not be approved of under an idea that men ought to have employments for their time, or that in these days of increasing taxes and of progressively expensive living, they cannot specify the sum that may be sufficient for their future wants, I have another to propose, in consequence of which they may still follow their commercial pursuits, and avoid the imputation in question.  I mean that the Quakers ought to make it a rule, after the annual expences of living have been settled, to lay by but small savings.  They ought never to accustom their eyes to behold an undue accumulation of money, but liberally to deal it out in charity to the poor and afflicted in proportion to their gains, thus making their occupations a blessing to mankind.  No other measure will be effectual but this, if the former be not resolved upon, while they continue in trade.  Their ordinary charity, it is clear, will not do.  Large as it may have been, it has not been found large enough to prove a corrective of this spirit in the opinion of the world.  Indeed, it matters not how large a charitable donation may seem, if we view it either as a check upon this spirit, or as an act of merit, but how large it is, when compared with the bulk of the savings that are left.  A hundred pounds, given away annually in benevolence, may appear something, and may sound handsomely in the ears of the public.  But if this sum be taken from the savings of two thousand, it will be little less than a reproach to the donor as a Christian.  In short, no other way than the estimation of the gift by the surplus-saving will do in the case in question.  But this would certainly be effectual to the end proposed.  It would entirely keep down the money-getting spirit.  It would also do away the imputation of it in the public mind.  For it is impossible in this case, that the word Quakerism should not become synonimous with charity, as it ought to be, if Quakerism be a more than ordinary profession of the Christian religion.

Now these methods are not chimerical, but practicable.  There can be no reasonable objection against them, because they allow of the acquisition of a decent and moderate competency.  The only one that can be started will be, that Quakers may injure the temporal interests of their children, or that they cannot, upon this plan, leave them independent at their deaths ...