|
Most of the information below is from a commerative booklet
published upon the occasion of the 150th Anniversary in 1938, of the
construction of the present meeting house in Plainfield, New Jersey.
There is some updating taken from a single sheet pamphlet published
for the 200th Anniversary in 1988 The name of the historian who
researched and prepared these booklets is not noted. though a
present member, Charles A. Varian remembers being involved in
typing the 1938 booklet. In order to preserve and disseminate this
history, it was been keyed into this form in 1996 by Alan Taplow, a former
attender of the Plainfield Meeting.
The Plainfield, New Jersey Meeting House
The Evolution of A Quaker Meeting
Historical Sketch
Before the Plainfield Meeting House was built in 1788, Quakers in
this section of New Jersey met in "Amboy," now called Perth Amboy.
Their first organization meeting was held on the 13th of 8th month
1686, when "Friends at Amboy agreed to have a Monthly Meeting" and
in a minute of their next meeting, held the 10th of 9th month 1686,
the members were directed to "bring minutes of the births and
burials since they first came into this place that they may be
recorded." Amboy at the time of the organization was the seat of
government in the Province of East Jersey. The Deputy Governor,
Gawen Laurie, a former London merchant, was a member of the
Society of Friends, as were several of his official associates. The first
marriage recorded in the minutes of the Meeting was that of Miles
Forster to the daughter of the Deputy Governor.
In 1704 the Meeting was transferred to Woodbridge where Friends
met in the home of Nathaniel Fitz Randolph until they constructed a
Meeting house there in 1713. At a Monthly Meeting held at
Woodbridge 9th month 16th, 1721, John Laing, one of the prominent
members, asked permission to hold a meeting at his home in the
Township of Piscataway, County of Middlesex, and not far from the
boundary line of the present City of Plainfield. This request was
granted and carried into effect. On land bequeathed to the society by
John Laing, Friends obtained permission in 1731 to build a Meeting
house not to exceed 24 feet square, which was called the "Plainfield
Meeting." This was the immediate predecessor of the present
Meeting House, although not on the same property.
For over 50 years the original "Plainfield Meeting House" met the
needs of the Friends, but by 1787 a change seemed essential and in
the Meeting held on the 15th of 11th month of that year the following
minute appears: "The Friends appointed to endeavor to find a
suitable place to build a Meeting House at Plainfield report that they
all agreed that a lot of land containing three acres near the house of
John Webster, the third, would be a suitable place for said house to
be built on, and they propose that the size of the house should be
about 34 x 48 feet." The Meeting agreed and the new house was first
used for the Monthly Meeting held the 20th of 8th month, 1788.
The final report on the construction of the new Meeting House was
made to the Meeting held on the 21st of 4th month, 1790, and stated
"that the expenses of the house is four hundred and seventy four
pounds, seven shillings and ten pence, exclusive of what stuff was got
from the old Meeting House." The cost of the land and fencing was
forty-seven pounds, fourteen shillings and three pence. The
committee that had charge of the construction of the house
consisted of William Shotwell, Edward F. Randolph, William Webster,
Edward Moore, David Vail and Ambrose Copland.
When the present building was first occupied for Meeting purposes
the Federal Constitution had been formulated in Convention only
eleven months and George Washington was not yet elected first
president of the United States. It may be interesting and not entirely
inappropriate to mention an incident which personally associates the
erection of this house with a memorable event in national history.
During the Revolutionary War, when the British forces held
possession of Perth Amboy and nearby country, General Washington
and Staff called at the farm residence of John Vail, great, great,
grandfather of Charles E. Vail, the oldest member of the Meeting at
the present time (1938), and requested to be guided to some
prominent spot in the Watchung mountains from which he could get
a good view of the plain below and the movements of the enemy.
There was a man at Friend Vail's house at the time who was
acquainted with the mountain paths and he at once volunteered his
services and led the Continental Commander to a high point which
is now called Washington Rock. That guide was Edward Fitz
Randolph, a member of the committee in charge of building this
Meeting House and who, as a carpenter, gave manual labor to its
construction.
While the storms of over 200 years have beaten upon this venerable
building, and yet, shingle-sided and wrought-nailed, with the
exception of a portion of one end damaged by fire and repaired in
1873, and the substitution of slate in place of the shingle roof in
1922, it stands outwardly the same as of old. Inside the massive
timbers have become richly browned by the mellowing hand of time
and clearly show the marks of implements used by the sturdy
forefathers of 1788. The benches, which were built by individual
families from a common template still are in use, though with the
addition of cushions which were not a part of the original plans.
Electric lights instead of the old oil lamps that swung from the
beams, a furnace in place of the wood-burning stoves so long used,
running water and modern plumbing are among the changes made
within the building. In 1955 the need for expansion was felt, this
time for more classroom and nursery space. A large portion of the
old carriage sheds, older than the Meeting House since many of the
timbers came for the earlier Meeting House on Woodland Avenue, was
converted into a one-story building which now contains a nursery, a
large subdivisible Sunday School room, a kitchen in place of cooking
facilities on the balcony of the Meeting House, and a library in place
of a closet containing books. In 1988, a covered breezeway
connecting the Meeting House to the School Wing was expanded to
include new lavatory facilities.
A burial ground had been established behind the old carriage sheds.
The earliest extant dated stone bears the inscription "1815/H.W.."
there are reports that Friends and "some Indians" were buried earlier
at the northern corner. The burial ground is still in use.
The surrounding environment has changed greatly in 150 years.
Originally, the only house of worship in a small community of about
150 people, it now represents one of over 40 places of worship in a
city with a population of over 40,000. In 1836 a committee was
appointed to confer with representatives of the railroad about the sale
of land for a right of way which eventually was granted, the Meeting
receiving $200 for the land. Trains operated between Elizabethport
and Plainfield in 1837 and eventually in 1852 as far as Philadelphia.
The railroad tracks were elevated in 1874 and for a period after the
Friends seriously considered moving the Meeting House to a location
that would be less disturbing. No action was ever taken, however,
and though the noise of chugging steam engines is now gone, the
problem is one that still causes concern to visiting speakers who
seek to talk above the noise of the trains.
The members of the Meeting have from time to time been active in
community affairs, and have always been ready to allow the use of the
Meeting House for deserving causes.
Friends took recognition of the 100th, 125th, 150th and 200th
anniversaries of the construction of the Meeting House by holding
suitable exercises. The history herein presented was written in 1938,
and is supplemented with materials from the 200th anniversary in
1988. There is always the hope that the present generation will not
lose the vision of the past, but rather that the members now living
may find in the use of their Meeting House these qualities so fittingly
set forth by Elizabeth Lloyd:
"Our Fathers gathered here long years ago
To hold communion with the power divine
That is within, and over, and around:
And as they were obedient to the Voice
That spoke into their inmost souls,
They found sweet peace and strength,
Leaving behind a priceless heritage
Of courage, patience, faithfulness and love.
This heritage is for us to enrich
And magnify, not merely to enjoy;
Oh, that we may be wise to know the right,
And strong to do the work that lies at hand
>From the unfailing source to which they turned
In prayer, we seek for wisdom, vision, power."
ACTIVITIES OF THE PLAINFIELD FRIENDS
IN THE CAUSE OF PEACE
(Early history through 1938)
That the peace testimony of Friends was recognized in the early days
is indicated by the minute recorded Fourth Month 21st, 1705,
reading:
"Any person presenting a certificate signed by 6 or more members of
a Monthly Meeting or Quarterly Meeting of the people called Quakers,
stating that said person was one of said people called Quakers, he
shall not be lyable to the penalties of the act of militia."
In 1756, complaint was made against John Kinsey for attempting to
transport provisions for the Army raised against the French colonies.
During the Revolutionary War, the Plainfield neighborhood was
crossed and recrossed by both loyalist and rebel forces and the
Friends must have been greatly stirred. While the scattered
references to the conflict in the minutes are inadequate to give a
complete historical picture, the record indicates that the Meeting
maintained its position of opposition to war.
In 1776, a member was disowned for having "signed a paper of
independency, and suffering his apprentice to go in the Army." The
same summer a committee of investigation reported that the
"soldiers in the Woodbridge meeting house took possession without
leave, they at times continue there yet, but don't much interrupt
Friends in time of Meeting." Representatives appointed to attend
Shrewsbury Quarterly Meeting in the winter of 1777 were unable to
do so "by an apprehension of great difficulty attending their passing
through the contending armies of soldiers."
Interesting reports were made by the "Committee for Suffering Cases"
for the years 1777-1782 which consist of long lists of those who
suffered fines and confiscation of property for refusing to bear arms,
and for the non-payment of taxes to support the "present
commotions." The property taken included live stock, farm
implements, household furniture and utensils and farm produce.
Among the various items listed are cows, heifers, yoke of oxen, desk,
pewter "basons" (basins), "pye" pans, mirrors, "cyder" spirits, Bibles
and "servant man for one month to serve in the militia." Those
requisitions totaled upwards of 200 pounds (specie value) in the war
years, or about five pounds per person assessed. The inflated war
time price level is indicated by the valuation of 10 bushels of corn at
2 pounds, 2 shillings and 6 pence. In 1777, all of the requisitions
were put down as fines, but later they were mostly taxes.
Some Friends did not voluntarily accept the new government as
shown in the following minutes for Twelfth Month 1778:
"Elijah Pound sent a paper to this meeting condemning his late
conduct, which is accepted and is as follows: Whereas I was bound
over to court by one of our late made Justices to affirm to the states
so-called, or give my reasons why Reasoning at it, a weakness
covered my mind, I gave way to their request and affirmed which I
now believe is wrong and am sorry I ever did it and hope the Lord may
forgive me and also hope Friends may be pleased to pass it by and
hope the Lord may be pleased to preserve me from ever falling into
the like again."
There are three other similar "papers," two of which mention being
taken to Morristown "gaol" before affirming allegiance to the new
government.
Near the close of the War, the Meeting expelled three members who
"removed to New York, Long Island and Staten Island, some of whom
have privately returned back and committed acts inconsistent with
our peaceful principles and thereby occasioned public scandal to the
society." The sanction of the Quarterly Meeting was obtained in this
case because it was impracticable to "treat with" the offending
members in person due to their absence. Whether the delayed
procedure may have been prompted by the youth of the members, or
because of reluctance to act against those who took the loyalist side,
we can only speculate.
From the Revolutionary War to the World War (WW I), this meeting
does not seem to have deviated much from the paths of peace. The
last recorded suffering payment on account of military requisitions
was for $5.75 in 1832, but in 1838 a member was "treated" with
paying such a demand. In this connection, a significant query
answer in 1865 reads "it is likely there has been some tax on account
of the support of war so unified with the general tax that it was
difficult to avoid it." The Queries also indicate that three Quakers
volunteered for service in the Civil War, and that one paid a military
fine.
For over two hundred years, it seems that the Quaker opposition to
war was expressed largely by negative non-participation rather than
in attempts to build up public sentiment throughout the nation for
peace. In 1895 a trend away from isolation was shown by the
appointment of a Committee of Aaron M. Powell and others to prepare
a protest to the State Legislature against the proposed introduction
of military drill into the New Jersey public schools. In 1898 the
meeting sent a letter to the Czar of Russia commending him for
proposing a disarmament conference.
With the outbreak of the World War, meeting members raised funds
and collected clothing for relief work, held peace meetings,
distributed peace literature, and undertook to mitigate the evil effects
of the War. The first Peace Committee was appointed in 1916. The
further happenings during and since the World War period being well
remembered need not be recounted here.
PLAINFIELD FRIENDS AND RACE RELATIONS
(Early history through 1938)
As we look back over our 150 years of life in our meeting house, and
more than 250 years as a religious society in this part of New Jersey,
it is natural that we survey the past and take stock of ourselves as to
our beliefs, traditions and aims. In the matter of race-relations we
have played various parts.
Our minutes, dating from 1686, give many instances of concern
against owning slaves. Such advice is noted in a minute in the year
1716 when Friends were requested not to buy any more slaves.
Thereafter Friends frequently expressed concern that their members
should not purchase or even own them. If, on joining the Society,
they owned slaves they were urged to take immediate steps to free
them. There are many minutes giving in full the manumission papers
of freedom for the slaves of some member. In 5th month 1776,
"Adams Miller manumitted and set free two negroe boys and one
negroe girl to take effect when the boys arrive at the age of 21 and the
girl at 18." Also in 9th month 1776 "Johathan Harned produced an
instrument of writing to this meeting wherein he manumits and sets
free his Negroe woman named Mary which is as follows:
"Whereas I Jonathan Harned am possessed of a Negroe woman
named Mary and not being easy to continue her in bondage being
persuaded she ought to be free and that it is her just due . . .
therefore I do by these presents manumit and set her, the said Mary,
free. . .
"Whereas she, the said Mary, is old and likely is or soon will be
incapable to support herself comfortably, therefore I promise to give
her . . such necessary supplies as will render her life comfortable in
meat, drink, apparel, washing and lodging. . ."
Friends interest did not cease at freeing their slaves. They continued
to feel a concern for their welfare and their education as well. If some
member refused to free his slaves he was "treated with" at length. If
such treatment failed to convince him and he still continued to hold
negroes in slavery he was disowned from his Meeting.
Intellectually, friends admitted the enormity of owning or trading in
slaves, as is evidenced by the minute from 5th month 1836: "The
deeply interesting subject of slavery has been again spread before us,
and greatly have we desired that we may be enabled to discover what
there is for us to do while this great evil exists. May we be willing to
go into an individual examination in the light of truth what would be
our feelings and how we should move, were the ties of endeared
relatives and friends broken and they separated from us and doomed
to perpetual toil and bondage. Let us examine ourselves whether the
peace of our minds would not be promoted by abstaining from the
use of products of slave labor."
But emotionally they were not wholly free from race prejudice.
Instances are noted where there were rear benches for colored
attenders at a Meeting. "They usually sat in a special place against
the wall, under the stairs or in the gallery." (Henry J. Cadbury "Negro
Membership in the Society of Friends.")
It was difficult for Negroes to become members. There are rare cases
of such colored members, but it took long periods of consideration
and many referrings to superior meetings before such colored
membership was consummated. One such case appears in our own
meeting, as noted in the report of the monthly meeting held the 20th
of 4th month 1796, which reads, "They," referring to women Friends,
"inform that Cynthia Miers, a mulatto woman had also requested to
be joined in membership with Friends, but this being a case of a
singular nature amongst us the meeting thinks it best to proceed
very cautiously herein and therefore appoints to take the subject into
their serious consideration and report at the next meeting, John
Haydock and others."
It took about a year to turn this request into actual membership
since the Monthly Meeting referred the matter to Quarterly Meeting
which in turn referred it to Yearly Meeting. The committee appointed
by Yearly Meeting to consider this matter brought in the following
report which was accepted. "We are united in believing our
Discipline already established relative to receiving persons into
membership is not limited with respect to Nation or Colour" and it
recommended that applicants for membership should be investigated
as to their views and practices and when satisfied, Monthly Meetings
"may in their freedom receive such with propriety without respect of
persons or colour." (Henry J. Cadbury, "Negro Membership in the
Society of Friends.")
Many of these conferences with superior Meetings developed the
statements that there could no where be found any place in the
Discipline against receiving a person into membership on account of
his color. So, intellectually, Friends have consistently testified to the
propriety of such membership.
Later on in pre-civil war days when the abolition movement was at its
height, disagreement among Friends as to their activity in this
movement was very evident. While in Revolutionary days members
were disowned for refusing to free their slaves, in Civil War days they
were disowned for their abolition activities. One of our former
members, Aaron M. Powell in his "Reminiscences," dwells on this
incongruity. In speaking of the difficulty of finding suitable places in
which to hold anti-slavery meetings he says: "I early had the
cooperation of Joseph and Mary W. Post and their family. In their
hospitable home . . . I was welcome with a cordiality which in a period
of general social ostracism for abolitionists, made it seem an oasis in
a desert. . .. They also opened their house for my meetings at a time
when the Friends Meeting House, strange to say, was closed against
them."
Now in these present days of 1938 we are still a divided Society on
our stand on Race Relations, but on the whole it seems as if fair
dealing and right treatment were beginning to be the real concern of
the Society. The Race Relations Committees of the New York and
Philadelphia Yearly Meetings are evidences of an awakening
conscience and interest in justice and fair dealing to all races. The
younger members are accepting people at their true value, and where
worth exists, honor it, whatever the color.
PLAINFIELD MEETING AND THE CAUSE OF TEMPERANCE
(Early history through 1938)
The members of the monthly meeting were advised of the evils of
intemperance as early as 1688 when they received through their
Quarterly Meeting from the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting, held the "7th
of ye 7th month, 1687" advising that "ye practice of selling rum and
other strong liquors to the Indians directly or indirectly or changing
rum or other strong liquors for any goods or merchandise to them,
considering the abuse they make of it, is a thing contrary to ye mind
of ye Lord." The Yearly Meeting requested that "this, our testimony,
be entered in every Monthly Meeting book and every Friend belonging
to their Monthly Meeting to subscribe the same." That the concern
of Friends regarding the use of strong liquors was carried over into
their own membership, is evidenced by the following minute of the
Monthly Meeting held at Woodbridge the "16th of the 2nd month,
1741." "Whereas, Samuel . . . being frequently very much in liquor
. . . for which he has been tenderly delt with and frequently
admonished, . . . but not withstanding he still persists in the same .
. . we disown him to be of our Christian Society." Disownments for
the excessive use of strong liquors are found in the minutes for over
100 years, continuing until the Monthly Meeting apparently was clear
of any members so inclined.
The associating of members with the liquor traffic was giving concern
as early as 1810 when a committee was appointed to "labour with
such of our members as are in the practice of distilling or trading in
liquors or encouraging distillation by processing their fruit and
cider." (Monthly Meeting at Rahway, 24th of 5th month 1810.) Three
years later a committee report on the subject stated that "we do not
know of more than one of our members that is in the practice of
trading in distilled spirits." In 1815, a committee on the subject
reported that the membership contained "one retailer and 17 who
have disposed of their fruit for the purpose of distillation." In a
report to the monthly Meeting on the 18th of 12th month, 1822, it
was noted that "sixteen members have taken their fruit to the
Distilleries . . . but some have given us encouragement they would
relinquish the practice. A few are in the practice of using and
handing it out to laborers as a common drink at particular times."
This phase of liquor problem apparently was brought under
satisfactory control shortly after the above date as no further
reference is made to it.
Friends gradually accepted a total abstinence attitude regarding the
use of alcoholic liquors and entered the field of liquor control by
political means in the period when local option was a paramount
issue. In the minutes of the Monthly Meeting on the 12 of 1st month,
1897, the following "Memorial to the Plainfield Common Council"
appears: "This Meeting respectfully and earnestly requests that in
the exercise of the legal option rested in you, you will not renew of
grant any licenses for the sale of intoxicating liquors for beverage
purposes for the year 1897 within the municipality of Plainfield."
During this period, Aaron M. Powell, a member of the Meeting, was
an active worker for the cause of temperance, often speaking before
public gatherings. In the report of the Philanthropic Labor
Committee for the year ending 4th month, 1898, it was noted that
"Aaron M. Powell delivered an address at a temperance mass meeting
held in Plainfield," and that "an opportunity for active temperance
work having opened at the time of the Plainfield city election, by the
decision of the Common Council to permit the people to take an
informal vote on the question of 'License or No License,' our
committee issued an 'Appeal to Voters,' one thousand copies of
which were distributed."
The meeting continued to appeal to the City Council to refuse
licenses until the 18th Amendment was made a part of the
Constitution of the United States in 1918 and took up the work again
in somewhat the same manner after the amendment was repealed.
In the Monthly Meeting held the 19th of 12th month, 1934, the
Philanthropic Committee reported "that the members of the
temperance section attended a public hearing of the City Council and
spoke in favor of more strict requirements in the laws governing
liquor licenses."
And so, for over 200 years at least some of the members of the
Monthly Meeting have had a concern relative to the problem of
temperance. Just how this will be expressed in the future remains
to be seen.
|
Visit us
Directions
Map of our block
Map of surrounding area, if coming from the south
View Larger Map
A Newcomers Guide to the Plainfield Meeting
Being a Quaker
|