THERE IS DEATH IN THE POT - The University of Texas at Arlington

einstated the women to their positions despite strenuous objections from many members
of Green Street, who were generally sympathetic to Hicks. During the ensuing
controversy, Green Street’s men’s meeting called for secession from the Quarterly
Meeting. The women’s meeting, however, requested more time to consider their
decision. Scattergood and Taylor, as well as Elizabeth Robson, exerted enough influence
to forestall an immediate decision for withdrawal. In response, Hicksite men declared the
women’s meeting “seditious.” Writing to Elias Hicks, William Poole complained that the
Green Street women had been carried away by their “affections.” The men of Green
Street, Poole claimed, were “not standing firmly and uprightly in consequence of the
influence of women.” 39
The confrontation at Green Street was a watershed moment for Quakers,
especially for Quaker women. The Orthodox-Hicksite division centered on events at
Green Street as Orthodox members attempted to regain control of the meeting. Failing
that, Philadelphia Quarterly Meeting “laid down” Green Street and ordered its members
transferred to Northern District Meeting. The Hicksite members of Green Street,
however, refused. Green Street continued under the auspices of the newly-formed
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting (Hicksite). 40 The confrontation at Green Street and the
subsequent schism broke the power of the male-dominated Quaker meeting. The
Court of Appeals. Taken down in short hand by competent reporters, and revised by the respective counsel.
(Philadelphia: P.J. Gray, 1834), 556-558.
39 William Poole to Elias Hicks, May 12, 1826, FHL, as quoted in Ingle, Quakers in Conflict, 163.
Ingle incorrectly dates this letter in his footnotes to 1816. See also Hewitt, “Fragmentation of Friends,” 98-
99.
40 Ingle, Quakers in Conflict¸202-210.
150