I think we cannot repeat too often the facts about who owns the big industrial\u00a0companies. We hear so much talk about a few industrialists holding the\u00a0destiny of all America in their hands, that many people have come to believe\u00a0that a few people actually own the whole country.\u00a0One of the big companies that is submitted to a lot of vilification and\u00a0harsh cd ticism is E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company of Wilmington, Delaware.\u00a0Who owns that great company? On March 31, 1951 DuPont stock was owned by\u00a0131,421 shareholders, an increase of more than 15,000 over the previous year.\u00a0Now get this: 44 per cent of all the stockholders are women.\u00a0Isn’t it plain as day that a company like DuPont needs brainy, efficient\u00a0management? If its management is not efficient, the families represented by\u00a0more than 130,000 persons suffer loss, and of those losers, 52,000 are women.<\/p>\n
Every time our federal government decides to step in and do something more\u00a0for us, it usually also does something to us. Coercion is an ugly word; it is\u00a0quite different from persuasion. Can you force your neighbor to do anything if\u00a0he knows that you cannot injure him in his person, his property, or his good\u00a0name? Neither can government force us to do its will except by its powerful\u00a0threat to injure us — its power to make us pay fines, serve in prison, even\u00a0give up our lives.<\/p>\n
Government is society’s jealously guarded monopoly of coercion, and we\u00a0would not have it otherwise, because we rely on government. for our fundamental\u00a0security — on local government for security against thieves. and. murderers, on\u00a0national government for security against the tyranny of a foreign power. But,\u00a0within the framework of that security, we prize something else that is characteristically American — we prize fteedom. And every time the govemment in\u00a0Washington steps in to do the things that voluntary associations of men and\u00a0women have traditionally done for themselves and for each other, and ought\u00a0still to do, another measure of freedom is lost, and another step on the road\u00a0to totali tarian government has been taken.<\/p>\n
I, for one, am not teady to believe that the gteat majority of Americans\u00a0want either an authoritarian government, threatening all life for us, nor a\u00a0socialist government trying to do everything for us. We want a govemment\u00a0which assures a good measute of indiv1d,ual freedom, and no glowing promises\u00a0of security can take fteedom’s place.\u00a0Along with the test of America, and indeed of all the world, the Kennebec\u00a0Valley owes much to the Society of Friends, commonly called the Quakers. Only\u00a0last week I repeated to you my conviction that, of all sons of Maine, the one\u00a0most deserving of a statue to represent our state in the national capitol’s\u00a0Hall of Fame is Rufus Jones. It is fitting, therefote, that we should devote a\u00a0part of the program tonight to the society of which Dr. Jones was the most illustrious\u00a0modern member, and what that society had to do with the development\u00a0of our Kennebec Valley.<\/p>\n
In 1775, the same year that heard the death-dealing shots at Lexington and\u00a0Concord, starting the War of the Revolution, thete came to Newport, Rhode Island\u00a0a man who hated war and spread the gospel of peace. He was Dav:l.d Sands. He came\u00a0to Newport to attend the Friends Meeting, for he was alteady known as a Friends\u00a0mniste r at Cornwall, New York. At Newport Sands made his decision to travel\u00a0through the scatteted settlements of northern New England, visit the few Quaker\u00a0families he could find, and help them establish groups of their teligious faith\u00a0and even make the fonnal foundation of Friends Meetings.\u00a0It was in the midst of the Revolution in 1777 when Sands reached the District of Maine. Forttmately he kept a joumal, so we know what happened when he\u00a0reached the upper Kennebec. He wrote:<\/p>\n
”We had many meetings, though always passing through a wildemess cOtmtry.\u00a0We had two meetings at the house of Remington Hobbie at a place called Vassalboro\u00a0on the Kennebec River. We next proceeded up the river for two days tthrough great fatigue and suffering, having to travel part of the way on foot,\u00a0finally coming to a Friend’s house, there being no other habitation within 45\u00a0miles. ”<\/p>\n
The seeds sown by David Sands bore fruit. In 1780 the first regular Friends\u00a0Meeting in our region was established at Vassalboro. As one historian put it,\u00a0“As the settlers increased, many embraced the peculiar views of the Quakers.”\u00a0How did the Friends happen to be called Quakers? George Fox, founder of\u00a0the movement, called his followers Children of the Light. The name Quaker was\u00a0almost certainly given them in derision. In his joumal Fox wrote: “Justice\u00a0Bennett, in 1650, was the first that called us Quakers, because we did bid him\u00a0tremble at the word of the Lord.” On the other hand, Robert Barclay’s book entitled\u00a0“Apology” states that the Quakers got their name ”because of the trembling\u00a0Friends sometimes experienced in their meetings”.<\/p>\n
Although they never disclaimed the name Quakers and indeed came eventually\u00a0to take pardonable pride in it, they have always preferred and still prefer the\u00a0name Friends. They are, and long have been, officially the “Religious Society of\u00a0Friends”.\u00a0Tie Friends Meeting House at Vassalboro Was opened in 1786. In 1788 was\u00a0confirmed the first marriage to be held in it. This was actually a double wedding,\u00a0for on the same day two sisters were married according to the Quaker custom;\u00a0Sarah Taber marrying Joseph Howland and Lydia Taber marrying Pelatiah Hussey.\u00a0Present as a w1.tness at that first wedding in the Friends Meeting House\u00a0was Remington Hobbie, the good Quaker at whose home David Sands had stopped in\u00a01777.\u00a0A week ago little did I .think I should ever see the signature of Remington\u00a0Hobbie. much less see it on an original marriage document of a Quaker wedding.\u00a0But only a few days ago I did see that signature, and I saw it on what I regard\u00a0as a precious historical\u00b7 document of ancient Vassalboro.\u00a0The document to which I refer is owned by Mr. Edward J. E.stes of Mohegan\u00a0Street, l-linslow, and it is the official statement of a Quaker marriage at Vassalboro\u00a0in 1791. It is not a photostat, not a copy, but the original document\u00a0with the names of 36 witnesses appended by their own hands.\u00a0No minister officiated at that or any other true Quaker marriage. The bride\u00a0and groom perform the ceremony themselves. This is the way Mr. Estes’ old document\u00a0reads:<\/p>\n
”Peleg Dileno of Vassalborough, son of Peleg DUeno of Vassalborough, in\u00a0the County of Lincoln and State of Massachusetts Bay, and Sarah his wife, and\u00a0Ruby Hoxie, daughter of Hezekiah Hoxie of Vassalborough afo-resaid, and Elizabeth\u00a0his wife, having declared their intention of taking each other in marriage before\u00a0several monthly meetings of the people called Quakers, in the county aforesaid,\u00a0according to the good order used among them, their proceeding after due inquiry\u00a0and deliberate consideration thereon, were allowed by the said meeting,\u00a0they appearing clear of all others and having consent of parents.\u00a0Now these are to certify all whom it may concern, that for the full accomplishment\u00a0of their said intentions this 27th day of the seventh month in the year\u00a0of our Lord 1791, they the said Peleg Dileno and Ruby Hoxie appeared at a public\u00a0assembly of the aforesaid people and others in their meeting house in Vassalborough,\u00a0and the said Peleg Dileno, taking the said Ruby Hoxie by the hand did\u00a0openly declare, as followeth: Friends, I take this my friend Ruby Hoxie to be\u00a0my wife, promising through divine assistance to be unto her a loving and faithful\u00a0husband until it shall please the Lord by death to separate us. And then\u00a0the said Ruby Hoxie did in like manner declare as follows: Hy friends, I take\u00a0this my friend Peleg Dileno to be my husband, promising through divine assistance\u00a0to be unto him a loving and faithful wife until it shall please the Lord by\u00a0death to separate us — or words of the like import.\u00a0“And the said Peleg Dileno and Ruby Hoxie, as a further confirmation thereof\u00a0have hereunto set their hands, she after the custom of marriage assuming the\u00a0name of he r husband.”<\/p>\n
Now all through the document the name is spelled DILENO. But the signatures\u00a0of bride and groom stand out clearly Peleg DELANO Jr. and Ruby DELANO. The scribes\u00a0of that time were never careful about spelling, and it is not unusual to find\u00a0two or even three different spellings in the same document.<\/p>\n
Now what makes this old marriage document of great local value historically\u00a0are the signatures of those 36 witnesses, for they show us clearly who was who in\u00a0Friends Meeting at Vassalboro in 1791. Rem. J. Hobby is certainly David Sands’\u00a0Remington Hobbie. There were several Tabers; besides the women were Silas, Jacob\u00a0and Bartholomew. There were a number of Husseys, including the well known patriarch\u00a0of the family, Isaac. Of course the Hoxies were there, for one of their\u00a0kin was the bride. Hezekiah, Silas and Abel Hoxie all signed the docwnent. There\u00a0were three Bowermans — David, Elizabeth and Peace; two Sleepers — Moses and\u00a0Hannah; only one of the Howlands — Joseph. And the first name, leading all the\u00a0other 35 is that of Vassalboro’s great pioneer, Joshua Fry.\u00a0How did Mr. Estes come by this valuable document? He isn’t quite sure. He\u00a0only knows it was in an old desk brought to Winslow by his mother many years ago.\u00a0The Estes family goes back many generations in <l1ina and Vassalboro. Mr. Edward\u00a0Estes is still a vigorous man of only 71, but his father, a veteran of the Civil\u00a0War, was bom in 1840. After the war the veteran and his father, Edward Estes’\u00a0grandfather, conducted a hay and grain business at Getchell’s Comer. Somewhere\u00a0in the past Mr. Estes t branch of the family was related to the Hoxie’s and into\u00a0the Estes family, by some now unremembered route, came the marriage doc\\Dllent of\u00a0Ruby Hoxie, written and signed when George Washington was President of the United\u00a0States.<\/p>\n
I hope the diversion to that fine old marriage document has interested you\u00a0as much as it did me. Now let’s get back to the story of the development of the\u00a0Quaker movement in our vicinity. We had left that story with the opening of the\u00a0Friends Meeting House in 1786 and the double marriage held in it in 1788. By\u00a01790 a number of Friends had settled in the eastern part of Vassalboro, near the\u00a0outlet of China Lake. In 17,98 a. meeting house was built there, called East Pond\u00a0Meeting, to distinguish it from the River Meeting. For many years the Vassalboro\u00a0monthly meeting alternated between the two meeting houses — the older one\u00a0at Vassalboro and the newer one at East Vassalboro.\u00a0In 1831 was built the well known brick meeting house at East Vassalboro.\u00a0In 1803 Abel Jones had come to China from Durham and had joined a small band of\u00a0Friends on the east sn-ore of the lake. In 1806 he married Susana Jepsen. the\u00a0first Friends marriage in O1ina. On the east shore, about three miles from the\u00a0north end of the lake, a Friends meeting house, known as the Pond Meeting House\u00a0the first in China — was built in 1807.<\/p>\n
Prior to 1795 the Friends Quarterly ~eting at Salem included all Friends\u00a0east of Boston. That meeting did hold one session a year at Falmouth (the old\u00a0name for Portland) to accomodate the gtowing number of Friends in Maine. In\u00a01795 a regular Quarterly Meeting was established at Falmouth, and by 1813 the\u00a0society had become so numerous in Vassalboro and China that Vassalboro Quarterly\u00a0Meeting was established and continued to flourish. The Vassalboro Quarterly\u00a0Meeting had thus been in existence for seven years when Maine became a State,\u00a0and it was that meeting which secut:ed the passage of Article 7, Section 5 of the\u00a0Constitution of Maine, which to this day exempts members of the Society of\u00a0Friends from military service of the State.<\/p>\n
On a later program I want to tell you mot:e about those early Quakers of the\u00a0Kennebec, especially about their staunch religious beliefs which won the respect\u00a0of all their neighbors. And I want to tell you about some of them who,\u00a0as individuals, became nearly as distinguished as did Rufus Jones. But tonight\u00a0we have left only time to quote what was said of them in 1892 by the young man\u00a0who was then principal of Oak Grove Seminary. For that young principal was Rufus\u00a0Jones himself. In those days, long before he had become the great Quaker of\u00a0international fame, he wrote of those founders of the Kennebec Society of Friends:<\/p>\n
“These people were with very few exceptions ignorant of book education. The\u00a0Bible was, in many cases, their only book. The heroes of faith pictured in the\u00a0Old Testament were the only heroes they ever heard of. David and Isaiah were\u00a0their poets. The Bible furnished their only history and their only ethics; it\u00a0was the child’s reader and spe,lling book. But with all their days devoted to\u00a0stubborn toil, with all the scarcity of books and their difficulty in reading,\u00a0these people of the wilderness grew refined and took on a culture and a grace\u00a0admired by all who knew them.”<\/p>\n
Year: 1951<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Read the script for “Little Talks” program #106, broadcast on April 29, 1951<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":405,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[786,35296],"tags":[],"builder_content":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7224"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/405"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7224"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7224\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7224"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7224"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7224"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}