American History Hit - The Quaker Who Put Penn in Pennsylvania

Episode Date: May 11, 2026

From being locked up in the Tower of London to founding the 5th most populous state in the country, and the city at the heart of the Revolution, today we are charting the unlikely rise of William Penn and the founding on Pennsylvania.Don is joined by Thomas Hamm, Emeritus Professor of History and Quaker Scholar in residence at Earlham College.Edited by Aidan Lonergan. Produced by Sophie Gee. Senior Producer was Freddy Chick.All music from Epidemic Sounds.American History Hit is a History Hit podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Want to explore even more history? Sign up to History Hit, where you will discover history from around the world. From the American Revolution to prehistoric Scotland, there is plenty to discover. With your subscription, you'll unlock hundreds of hours of exclusive documentaries, with a brand new release every week, exploring everything from the ancient world to World War II. Just visit historyhit.com slash subscribe to bring the past alive. High above Center City Philadelphia, 548 feet high, to be exact, at the pinnacle of City Hall, is the statue of William Penn. Billy Penn, to locals. He is 37 feet tall, one of the largest statues at the top of a building anywhere in the world.

For most of the 20th century, when other American cities were reaching for the sky, in Philadelphia, you weren't allowed to build a building taller than Billy. Penn stood. That was the rule. An unusual gentleman's agreement among developers. But William Penn was an unlikely story from the start. A nobleman's son, he was imprisoned numerous times, once in the Tower of London, for being a Quaker, devoted to ideals of religious tolerance, nonviolence, and simplicity. Eventually, he would cross the Atlantic to found a new English colony based on these principles. Lofty notion indeed, but even now in 21st century Philly, amidst spires of steel and glass,

William Penn and the ideas of his holy experiment still stand tall. Hello and welcome to American History Hit. I'm Don Wildman. Today, to track William Penn's journey from prosecuted troublemaker in England to the founding of Pennsylvania, with a royal grant, no less. For this, I am joined by Thomas Hamm, Emeritus Professor. of history and Quaker scholar in residence at Erlem College. So, without further ado, let's explore the Quaker founding of Pennsylvania. Professor Hamm, welcome to the show. I humbly greet you.

I humbly accept your greeting. Quakers talking to each other. I think I've been carrying around my Quaker classics in brief. I'm showing you on our Zoom all my life. And it's my father's copy, in fact. And it took an appointment with you to finally visit the digested version of No Cross, no Crown, right here, William Penn's memoir in its abbreviated form. So thank you for that. We have explored the earliest origins of Quakerism in England in a previous episode, number 337, Quakers' Rebellious Origins, December 4th, 2005, to be specific, with Erica Canella in her zealots book. All that, 1640s and 50s.

Erica referred you to us. So thank you for joining us. I am very pleased to talk about anything Quaker. Yes. Penn comes to Quakers in its sort of second generation. We talked about with Erica, which is more George Fox time and the real beginnings of everything, he is convinced, as we Quakers call it, call the conversion experience, as a young man in his 20s, 1667. How is it that this rich boy, this privileged son, finds his way to such a way of

life and thinking? Well, as you said, Pan was convinced of truth when he was about 23 years old in early 1667 in Ireland. He was not what people would have thought of as a likely convert to Quakerism. In fact, when William Pan, the oldest son and heir of Admiral Sir William Penn, Second in Command of the British Navy committed to or converted to Quakerism, it really was something of a sensation in the highest levels of English society. I think it would be fair to compare the impression that would be made today if Donald Trump, junior were to announce that he was becoming an Amishman and was going to live on a farm without electricity somewhere in Pennsylvania. This just didn't happen. But perplexingly, Penn, who wrote

extensively on religious subjects, never recorded much about why he became a Quaker. But you get hints of it when you look at his earlier life. He had entered Oxford as a student in 1660 with the expectation that he would receive the polish that the son of an English gentleman should have. But a year later, he was thrown out. He was sent down because he had identified with religious dissenters there. So he's obviously... not comfortable with the established church of England. His father tries to move him away from those uncomfortable tendencies by sending him on the grand tour, to France. There he is actually presented at the court of Louis XIV, and seems to have shown a taste for parent's fashions.

But then he had second thoughts and went off and entered a Calvin. Calvinist Academy and Samur, which seems to have strengthened his tendencies toward religious introspection. The Huguenots. The Huguenots, correct. So when his father sends him off to Ireland in 1666 to get some experience managing the family estates there, it's probably not entirely surprising that he is open to the preaching of a Quaker public friend named Thomas Lowe.

And by the end of the year 1667, William Penn Jr. is in jail in Cork for attending illegal religious meetings. From that time onward, he is a leading friend until his death in 1718. We discussed this about the earlier Quakers as well. This is a very politically fraught time in England, the 1600s,

you're going through civil war and then all the way to the glorious revolution. That's really the context, the framework of his time in England. And all thinkers were doing a lot of thinking about what was right and wrong about government and how people ought to be considering this. England had all the seeds of individualism and the expression of a new kind of representation in government. Magna Carta was centuries earlier. All of this stuff is in the zeitgeist there.

So a kid like William Penn and many others were reading the likes of Erasmus, Locke, the Dutch thinkers, all that stuff was going on. And it's really important to understand how so much is bubbling up. He was a real intellectual, wasn't he? He certainly was. And Penn is almost unique among Quakers of that second generation. there are a few others who would approach him in the depth and breadth of their reading. The Scottish friends, Robert Barclay and George Keith, would come to mind. But Penn is someone who is deeply read in the Bible and in scriptural commentaries,

someone who has read the works of Quaker leaders like George Fox, but also someone who is very comfortable in the political and civil discourse of the times. He's a close friend of Algernon Sidney, who's one of the leading philosophers of wiggery and parliamentary government. He's also a good friend of John Locke, who, of course, is going to become the leading theoretician. of equal rights and limited government in England in the 17th and early 18th centuries. So he's someone who is equally comfortable in theological and political worlds and looks for ways to meld them. Yeah, I mean, these guys who are facing these choices in those days, I mean, I mentioned in the opening, He is imprisoned at least, you know, he's imprisoned at the Tower of London at one point, but four times, at least for publicly stating his beliefs in word and print.

He publishes eventually 42 books and pamphlets in the seven years of his confinement. I mean, he's really thinking this through. These guys who are facing these problems were dealing with religion so much as an active part of society the way we don't think of it because of what they, the foundation they laid. This idea of religious tolerance was so anathema to the Anglican Church at the time, of course, the Catholics. But it was really front and center in people's lives, wasn't it? It certainly was. And if Penn saw any one thing as being his mission in public and political life, it would be as an advocate for religious freedom. Right.

or what he usually referred to as liberty of conscience. Penn was opposed on both religious and civil principle to the idea of coercion in religious belief. And he was posed for several reasons. First of all, he thought that coercing people to worship in a way that, they were not led to, in their own consciences, encouraged hypocrisy. And that meant that ironically, what was supposed to support religion was really leading to ear religion.

Secondly, Penn believed that there were numerous biblical bases for liberty of conscience, that the only true religion was one that you were led to by the light that was within you. Therefore, once again, any religion that you could not personally embrace was worthless and might ultimately lead you toward damnation because you did not follow what the light was marking out for you as the true path. Thirdly, Penn thought that religious persecution was simply bad policy. He pointed out that, you know, one of the most prosperous nations in the world was the Dutch Republic, you know, this small corner of coastal Europe, seven provinces, which had risen in the 17th century to be a major naval and naval. commercial power. It was based on almost complete religious toleration. Penn also, after 1685,

pointed to France, where the revocation of the edict of Nant had ended toleration of the Huguenots, the French Protestant minority in France. There's no question that that badly hurt. the French economy, and nations like England and the Netherlands that welcomed Huguenot refugees had benefited from religious toleration in that way. It's amazing. It is a through line you can follow through history, really. The most prosperous societies are also the most open ones. I mean, it's a roller coaster ride, but you really see it in the Florentine culture,

where they embraced Judaism and brought them back into the world. the court. You find it in the Dutch culture as well, which you're mentioning, where so much egalitarian and toleration was being had in it, they prospered like man. And this is the tension that's happening in London right now is like, how are we going to deal with this? It's happening all over the world and always has, but when are we going to open the doors to this? And the Quakers had found a way that was very revolutionary, and the practice of Quakerism was very revolutionary. At this point in Penn's life, it is a very famous religion, right? It's been around for a couple of decades at this point? It certainly is, and it's a controversial religion. You know, it had radical

origins in the 1640s and the 1650s. After the restoration of the monarchy in 1660, the royalists who dominated parliament, both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, tended to equate religious dissent with sedition. Yes. The reason we had had all of these problems in the 1640s and 1650s is because we had let religious fanatics run wild. The best way to guarantee civil peace is through the preservation of worship as mandated by law. There you go.

He is finally, as I mentioned in the opening of this, finally imprisoned in the Tower of London, where he writes the book, No Cross, No Crown, 1669. This is his Gandhi moment. He goes to trial at the old Bailey in 1670, and Penn argues against the proceeding against him, and the jury refuses to vote guilty, right? He is acquitted on this. Right. This was a landmark case in the history of English law. Pan had in another Quaker, named William Meade had been locked out of the Quaker Meeting House in Grace Church Street in London by the authorities because Quaker meetings were worshiped were illegal under the law. Penn and Meade instead gathered together a group of people and preached in the street outside the meeting house. That, of course, is also illegal. When they're hauled into court house, However, Penn argued, first of all, that the indictment that was alleged against him was indefinite and therefore was invalid, and that secondly, this was therefore a violation of the rights of Englishmen as guaranteed under Magna Carta. As you mentioned, the jury refused to convict him.

First of all, it brought in a verdict that he was guilty of speaking in Grace Church Street, which really was a crime. When the outrage judge sent them back and subjected them to all sorts of coercion, ultimately they brought in a verdict of innocent. The judge was outraged and directed them to, bring in a verdict of guilty, which they refused on appeal. That refusal was upheld, and it established the very important principle in English law, which is carried over to the United States, that a judge cannot direct a verdict of guilty.

This was new? This was new. Interesting. This man is going to rock this world, and he's already doing it at home as a young and then as a young man, thrown in and out of jail, we need to underscore the fact or remind audiences, we're talking about a kid who has the golden ticket here. He's a rich boy in a society that celebrates that.

He could be going to clubs right now. He could be traveling to France. He could be doing all sorts of wonderful things with his life. And instead, he's going this direction, which is this really hardcore thing. But he's not doing it in a sort of cult fashion. This isn't a crazy person. This is a person who's really thinking things through,

writing about them, reasoning them out, making alliances, I would imagine, right? He's building a whole network, I imagine. He certainly is almost immediately after Penn became a friend. He emerged as a Quaker leader. Yeah. Partly because of his writings, partly because he has real gifts as a public speaker speaking in meetings for worship, and partly because he quickly wins the friend. and admiration and respect and trust of leading friends like George Fox.

He and Fox become very good friends very quickly. Fox has no children of his own. And you could certainly make an argument that in a lot of ways, William Penn was something like a son to George Fox. Interesting. I had not considered that aspect of it. That's fascinating. We're going to make a big leap here, which is to say,

at this time, you have to figure the English colonies are kind of still beginning, 1620s, Massachusetts, earlier than that for Jamestown, but it's still a kind of murky world. What has happened is that the Dutch have capitulated to the British 1664, New York, and all of that New Netherlands suddenly becomes British. That had to be a big headline for William Penn at this moment, because that's going to open up the gate for a lot of new possibilities in life. But he's not necessarily thinking, I'm going to start a colony. How does that come around, this idea of going to the new world and beginning this idea? It's a utopia he wants to build, right? In many ways, yes. Penn had first become interested in the British colonies in North America in the 1670s, when he became an investor in what were then the two separate colonies of, East Jersey and West Jersey, what now make up the state of New Jersey.

Both of those had originally been granted to English nobleman, who in turn, not having any particular interest in this land in North America, sold it to groups of investors. Some difficulties emerged about land titles and legalities, and so, became interested. He put some of his money into both colonies, eventually became the single largest proprietor of the colony of West Jersey, and began to envision it as a distinctively Quaker colony. But there were problems with legalities there, and so it was interest, his interest in, and knowledge of what's now New Jersey. The directed is attention west across the Delaware River

to what will become Pennsylvania. Right, exactly. This is a good chance to really nail something down here, which is fascinating to me, in just preparing for this conversation. When we talk about Quakerism, so many people think of it as, you know, mistake it for Amish and all the rest of, you know, utterly simple stripped-down life.

This is not William Penn. William Penn embraces his own prosperity. he's okay being a rich guy. His real interest in this world is in religious tolerance, right? This is really the core of it all. It isn't necessarily about the acidic qualities of Quakerism that fascinate him. He sees there's simplicity and there's ideas that are George Foxes that are very fascinating, but he's okay with being a rich guy and being a Quaker.

That's a really interesting distinction, isn't it? Well, it is. And it's a contradiction that a lot of people see in Panker. although he is convinced that he has resolved it satisfactorily. William Penn becomes a Quaker because he is convinced that Quakerism is primitive Christianity revived. That it is the purest form of Christianity that exists in the world in the 17th century. his desire to see Quakerism flourish, leads him to be a preacher, leads him to be a writer, leads him to engage in politics. At the same time, however, Penn always sees himself as a gentleman.

He may believe that all people are equal in the sight of God, and certainly he repudiates a lot of the practices of a definite, referential society that you would have associated with the English upper classes. But he never repudiates being a gentleman. He never repudiates the status that gives him an English society. Indeed, he sees that as an opening to advance the good causes that he thinks God is leading him to advance. There's a lot of very prosperous Quakers later on who take comfort in this idea of what Penn, the Cadbury's and the like, who make a lot of money and who are good Quakers, nonetheless. Eventually comes the idea of Pennsylvania. In some ways, this idea was sparked by Roger Williams,

right? Rhode Island, 1640. The idea of a colony that is religiously tolerant is, of course, Roger Williams' idea. How much did William Penn know or correspond with him? I'm not aware that Penn and Williams were ever in direct contact with each other. Certainly, there are a lot of Quakers in Rhode Island. Penn would have been aware of them. George Fox himself had visited Rhode Island in the 1670s when he made a trip to the English colonies in North America. And interestingly enough, Fox and Roger Williams didn't get along at all. They agreed on religious toleration, but they were fundamentally at odds on a lot of religious issues. And, in fact, Williams engaged in pamphlet wars with several leading Quakers.

The important thing here, though, is that, you know, Williams may think that Quakers are, you know, badly misled on some important religious issues, but it never would have occurred to him that they ought to be persecuted, because they are mistaken. Right. So it may well be that Penn was aware of Rhoda Island as a successful colony based on religious toleration. If he specifically referenced that, though, I'm not aware of it. I'll be back with more American history after this short break. Penn is really about free will, isn't it?

He's about finding your own way and be. being allowed to do it. That's kind of the moral stand of it all, right? And that would fly in the face of Roger Williams in a bit, I guess. Yes, I mean, Williams is definitely a Calvinist. Penn has moved beyond that. Right. Exactly. So let's talk about Pennsylvania. How does this land come to pass in his life? How is this related to his father? And what are the famous events that we all hear about in Sunday school when we're Quakers? But let's revisit them. Sure. Well, beginning in the late 1670s, Penn began approaches to King Charles II about receiving a grant of land in North America. There was one significant piece of land, roughly the size of Ireland, between the Duke of York's colony of New York and Lord Baltimore's colony, Maryland that had not been allocated to an English proprietor or nobleman.

Okay. And that was the area that will become Pennsylvania. As Penn told the story, King Charles II agreed to give him the land that would become Pennsylvania because King Charles owed a significant debt to the Penn family. was originally 11,000 pounds that Admiral Sir William Penn had used to supply the Navy in the 1660s. The debt had never been repaid. So by 1681, with interest, it's increased to 16,000 pounds. That would be several million pounds today. Penn proposed that instead of repaying that debt that the king simply give him land in the new world. The problem with that explanation is that

Charles had never been particularly worried about owing money to anybody. He's the king. Yeah, he's the king. You can't sue him. In 1672, he had legally declared bankruptcy. So if he doesn't want to pay this debt. He's not going to pay it. Historians who've looked at that have seen other plausible explanations for why Charles would have looked with favor on this request. He could have seen it as a way of getting Quakers out of England. Religious dissenters are always in the eyes of the English government, possible sources of trouble. If you put them on the other side of the Atlantic, they'll be out of your hair.

Charles also sees colonies as potential sources of wealth and power. They can be trading partners. And right now, this wilderness along the Delaware River isn't doing any particular good. If he turns it over to Penn, it may well produce some revenues for the English crown. and revenue is also, is always welcomed by the king. One thing that's important to keep in mind here, William Penn wanted to call his colony Sylvania, basically meaning woodlands. It was King Charles who insisted on calling it Pennsylvania in honor of the admiral, Sir William Penn.

So technically Pennsylvania isn't named for William Penn, the Quaker, it's name for his very Anglican father. Wow. He calls it a holy experiment that he wants to pursue in the new world. Can you define that for me? What's important to keep in mind when you talk about Pennsylvania being a holy experiment is that experiment in the 17th century did not necessarily mean testing a hypothesis or let's try doing this thing and see how it turns out. Instead, when Penn used the word experiment, he meant it more in terms of an experience. Pennsylvania will be a place where we will have the experience of living according to Quaker principles, and that, therefore, will create a society that is pleasing in the other. eyes of God. I'm not aware that Penn ever used the word utopia to describe what he was trying in Pennsylvania, although I'm sure he probably would have been familiar with Sir Thomas Moore's book,

Utopia. But instead, he saw it as certainly an ideal society that would live out Quaker principles and would be a good place because it does. Yes. He builds this thing based on the frame of government that he actually writes down in 1682, he will go on a campaign of recruitment. He will advertise that this society is beginning and that it abides by these principles. Front and center will be religious tolerance. I mean, though he's inviting people, he's not telling them they have to dress in, you know, black and white and wear, you know, funny clothes. He's actually saying, this is okay to be who you who are. That's the whole point of this. Are people hearing that at the time as revolutionary as it

sounds? Certainly, yes. People hear it at the time and throughout the 18th century liberal thinkers, not just in England, but in France as well. Voltaire, for example, considered Pennsylvania to be a model society, one that showed the desirability of religious toleration and freedom of conscience. Right. In the frame of government, Penn indicated that anyone who worshipped the one God would be welcome in Pennsylvania. So that certainly included Christians of every kind. it will later apply to Catholics. Philadelphia will become an early Jewish center in North America.

I think it probably would have applied even to Muslims, although I'm not aware of any open Muslim worship in Pennsylvania in Penn's time. So certainly it is to be based above all on freedom or liberty of conscience. And eventually the capital city is called Philadelphia, which is the love of brothers, Philo and Adelphos brothers. And that unity of purpose and that quilt of different colors is the whole point of the city. But this is a pragmatic view as much as it's any kind of noble idealistic one. He knows in his heart that if you let people be who they are, they will be stronger and more energetic engines of economy, right? I think so. You know, it's important to keep a good. mind that for Penn, Pennsylvania will be an ideal society. But it's also a place that's going to produce revenues for him. You know, you have to remember, King Charles has given all of this land to William Penn to do with as he pleases. You know, the assumption is, of course, that he's going to set up a colony that will increase the wealth of the British Empire and make money

for William Penn at the same time. If Penn had wanted to, he could have treated Pennsylvania as one huge estate and made everybody arriving there tenant farmers. Sure. But he knows that that isn't going to produce maximum prosperity. It isn't going to yield him maximum revenues. So while he retains large chunks of land for himself. for his own estates. Most of Pennsylvania is made available on easy terms to actual settlers.

And it attracts thousands of immigrants to Pennsylvania between 1681 and Penn's death in 1718. And that continues to be the case after Penn died. Pennsylvania is the most rapidly growing colony in 18th century British. America. It has the reputation of being what one German immigrant to Pennsylvania called the best poor man's country. There is abundant fertile land available on easy terms. And for productive farmers, you have an almost ideal marketplace for what you're producing in the city of Philadelphia. Not only its residents buying produce from farms and the surrounding countryside, but the port of Philadelphia providing a place where those products can be exported to the

rest of the world. Right. It is a refuge for religion. It has no established church, no standing army. It will focus on civil liberties. This is all within the framework that he's written. Education is prioritized. He creates Penn Charter School, founded in 1689, still there. Simple lives are recommended. If that's not your choice, then that's how you'll go. But simple lives, farmwork, artisans, merchants. The idea of simplicity, if anyone ever flirts with the idea of Quakerism, that's what you hear about. The idea of living a simple life. That's why so many Quakers drive sensible cars and wear flat shoes. One contradiction about Penn that's very surprising to people is that he had slaves. He did. And

Slavery and the slave trade were not banned under Penn's frame of government. It won't be until 1780 that slavery is abolished in Pennsylvania. You know, if you're looking at any major moral failure in Penn's life, it's probably this. Because in his lifetime, there are at least a few Quakers, like the friends in Germantown, Pennsylvania in 1788, who asked Philadelphia, Quakers to examine the issue of slaveholding, arguing that there was no way you could reconcile enslavement with the Golden Rule. But Pan-like, the overwhelming majority of Quakers in his lifetime, just doesn't seem to have given a lot of attention to this. It is important to note, however, that in his will, he provided that the people he was enslaving were to be liberated at his

death. So something seems to have gotten to him about this, but it's certainly not something that he ever addressed in a thoughtful or deep way. Right. His legal code, Penn's legal code, 1682 to 1701, is something that we should discuss. It's called the Great Code. Why is that? Well, it was intended to be the code of laws for Pennsylvania. And I can't help but think that Penn had in mind here Magna Carta, which is Latin or Great Charter. So the Great Code for Pennsylvania will be the Pennsylvania equivalent of Magna Carta. And certainly by even contemporary standards, it's enlightened in many ways.

In contrast to 18th century England, or 17th century England and 18th century England, where there are dozens of crimes that are punishable by death, there are only two capital crimes in Pennsylvania, treason and premeditated murder. For criminals, the emphasis is not so much on punishment as reform, that jails will not be simply places of confinement. there'll be workhouses where criminals will be taught useful trades and occupations. As we mentioned already, there is complete religious freedom in Pennsylvania. There is no established church. There will be no ties or church taxes that everyone is required to pay. Trial by jury, freedom of speech are guaranteed. in Pennsylvania. One interesting innovation is that in civil lawsuits, the first resort will be to boards

of arbitrators rather than county or city courts to see if legal problems can be worked out without the expense of bringing in lawyers or taking things to court. On the other hand, This is a Quaker colony, and Pan makes sure that certain bad behaviors will not be tolerated in Pennsylvania. Vice is outlawed, so there are laws against gambling, against prostitution, against horse racing, against drunkenness. In fact, Penn's legal code, even while it does not ban alcohol entirely. it discourages the abuse of alcohol by making the drinking of toasts or healths illegal. I see. I never heard that before.

That's funny. So, I mean, certainly by contemporary standards in 1680, this is an enlightened liberal code of conduct. It must be quite the envy of the other colonies, I would think. What are those puritans looking down and saying, hey, what's going on? doing pretty well there, letting people do what they want to do. Well, I think that the other colonies, which, you know, were generally under the control of a colonial aristocracy, they would have seen this as dangerous. I mean, Puritans in New England would have seen tolerating religious error as, you know,

leading people to damnation. The first families of Virginia would not have, like the idea of a government looking over their shoulders telling them that they can't race horses or drink hell. That's right. But they liked how they were making money. They admired that. People always did that. That's true.

They always had to, they look sideways at the Quaker lifestyle, but they're really good at business, they always say. One of the most famous aspects of this society, and this is early on as he first arrives, famous for apocryphal illustrations, William Penn sitting with the Native Americans who are there and negotiating fair and just treaties. with them about the land. How much of this is really true, or is it myth? Well, Penn, unlike other Lord's proprietors who had been given colonies by the English crown in the North America, started with the assumption that the native peoples were the

legitimate owners of the lands that he wanted to take up. So Penn makes a series of agreements with the Lenape peoples for the purchases of various tracks of land and what is now southeastern Pennsylvania. The image we have that begins with Benjamin West of, you know, Penn and his Shadbelly coat negotiating a formal treaty with the Lenape. There's no proof that that actually happened. But certainly he makes a series of agreements. with them, and the Lenape seem to have entered into them freely. One reality here is that the

Lenape have been greatly reduced in numbers by epidemic disease over the course of the 17th century. They seem to have been agreeable to trading the land that Penn wants in return for promises of protection against other Native Americans, particularly the Iroquois Confederacy, and the trading goods that Patent's colonists could provide. Right. And it seems to have worked pretty well. There is no war between Indians and colonists in Pennsylvania until the 1750s. And that's a record that no other English colony in North America could begin to match.

Right. That becomes a very controversial war where another tenet of Quakerism is nonviolence. Of course, you don't have guns. You don't act out violently against people. And suddenly there was these attacks that were happening, just as they did in other colonies. And there was a lot of controversy in that Philadelphia society. Are we going to fight back? It's a fascinating story. It is. And of course, by the 1750s, Quakers are a minority of Pennsylvania's population. Most of the people who are. settling out on the frontier in proximity to Native Americans are either Germans or particularly Scots-Irish. Probably the last group of people you would have found in Europe who were less likely to want to live on a basis of nonviolence with neighbors they regarded as heathen barbarian were the Presbyterian, Scots, Irish. I've never wondered about this, but how much did Penn think beyond the Philadelphia area to those westward lands beyond. I mean, Pennsylvania, all of those colonies went far beyond where they are today. Had he considered

the development of the frontier as part of his vision? Well, he certainly had it in mind that eventually the lands in southeastern Pennsylvania around the city of Philadelphia would fill up and there would be a need to acquire new lands. And so there was a provision in one of his agreements with the Lenape that at some future point, the government of Pennsylvania could acquire more lands from them as much as a man could walk in the length of one day. I see. And that led to an infamous fraud in 1737. By that time, William is dead.

Pennsylvania has been inherited by his sons who are no longer Quakers. They are basically English aristocrats who are interested in bringing in as much money from Pennsylvania as they can to support their lifestyles in London and on their country estates. And so in 1737, they invoke this walking purchase agreement. And what they do to prepare for that is to clear paths, through the forest and then employ professional runners to carry out this one-day journey. And this goes far beyond anything the Lenape had envisioned. You know, they're weak enough that they have no choice but to agree, but it leaves a really bad taste in their mouth.

And it explains why in 1756, many of them go to war. Right. It doesn't go well in the third generation of the pens. unfortunately. That's a different story. I'll be back with more American history after this short break. For William Penn's original vision, Philadelphia, this goes very well. It's an extraordinary

success to the point that, of course, it becomes the national capital. Part of that is geography, isn't it? I just want to establish this. It's a great place to have a city because you have two rivers, major one being the Delaware, but the Skuco comes in from the, you know, is the way out to the hinterlands in the middle of it. of things. So it's orderly, it's clean, it's compared to New York, it's not that European squiggly line kind of thing. He has created this real orderly city that you can still see. It's

still intact, the four parks, which are equidistant from each other, the grid-like lines. It's all very temperate, very English, as a matter of fact, without the squiggly lines. How did it become important in the colonies to the point that it becomes the capital? Well, James Michener remarked in one of his novels that... A very famous Quaker, I must say, let's not forget James Mitchner. Although he wasn't writing specifically about Quakers at this time. But he said that in southeastern Pennsylvania, around Philadelphia, you have the happy coincidence that isn't the rule in human history, that hardworking, thrifty farmers were set down.

on fertile lands. You have to begin with the lands. You know, southeastern Pennsylvania is still a very prosperous, productive farming area. You know, you have naturally rich soil. You settle on that hardworking peasant farmers, whether they're coming from Germany or from England or from Northern Ireland or from Wales, whether or not they're Quakers. They very quickly discover that the land on which they're living is so productive that it's producing a significant surplus of crops that they can market. And in the city of Philadelphia, you not only have city people who need to be fed, but you also have one of the best natural ports on the east coast of what would become the United States. So Philadelphia becomes a major Atlantic Trading Center, a major center of Atlantic Commerce that links Europe, Africa, the Caribbean,

and North America. That combination of thrifty, hardworking inhabitants, good geography, a great port lead to Philadelphia becoming the fastest growing city in 18th century America. Indeed, it's time of the American Revolution. It's the largest city in North America. And its central location explains why it becomes the first capital of the United States. And halfway between New York and Washington, D.C., when that has started, doesn't hurt. It's a good central location for everything. So many institutions, I mean, the likes of Benjamin Franklin finds themselves very at home in a place like Philadelphia because it's so much about, you know,

an activist society creating new things. And all of the spirit really, really permeates the place right up until the latter part of the 1800s. You know, things start to go south after the bad bank crises of that time, 1880s and so forth. But New York also rises because of the Uri Canal and all that stuff. It all shifts. But surely for that time period, those 200 years, really, Philadelphia was where it was at. And that's all due to Penn's foundation. I think you can certainly make a case for that, that, you know, without William Penn's vision, without the liberal institutions that he established, I don't think that Philadelphia would have become the most prosperous and the most innovative city in the British colonies in the 18th century. Yeah, my Quaker ancestors, I still have the collection of all their books that they went to the Philadelphia exhibition, 1876 exhibition in what became Fairmount Park. And, you know, Philadelphia was just claiming this as their, you know, proof of the success of all this uniqueness of their society.

It really, really worked out for them. All things sort of decline, of course. And those are different reasons and different kinds of stories to tell about immigration and so forth and the shifts of industrialism and all of that. But I'm fascinated by the fact that that city still has that vibe. There's something different about Philadelphia that does not exist elsewhere. and it still has to do with that Quaker influence. Remarkable. William Penn dies in 1718. I mean, this is all a colonial, American colonial story as far as he's concerned.

But after he dies, his sons take over, there's a whole long story to do with that. But in general, there's a decline in the influence of Quakerism in Philadelphia. How does that take place when it was so much the point of the place? You could argue that Quakerism in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania was a victim of its own success, or at least of its own ideals. The fact that good land is available on easy terms, combined with religious toleration and a liberal legal code, means that Pennsylvania is the most popular destination for Europeans coming to 18th century America. Already by 1700, Quakers are a minority in Pennsylvania.

And after 1720, the overwhelming majority of immigrants coming to Pennsylvania are not Quakers. They are either Germans coming, particularly from the Rhineland area of Germany, or Scots-Irish coming in from Northern Ireland. and they particularly are the overwhelming majority of people who are settling on Pennsylvania's frontiers. Politically, Quakers remain in control of the government of Pennsylvania, really down to the time of the American Revolution. There's a brief interruption during the war of 1756 to 1763, but Quakers maintain political power, partly through gerrymandering. They set up the legislature in such a way that the Quaker dominated counties around Philadelphia have most of the representatives. But they also maintain power because they generally have a good

working and voting alliance with German immigrants. And there are complex. complicated reasons for that. But generally, after 1720, it's Quakers and Germans versus the Scots-Irish. The Scots-Irish have no use for Quakers, first of all, because they are Quakers. They think that their theology is deplorable. But secondly, because Quakers are protectors of the Native Americans whose lands the Scots-Irish want. Finally, comes the American Revolution. Friends as pacifists refuse to take up arms. Truth be told, probably most Quaker sympathies were with the Crown. The independence movement in Pennsylvania is led by the Scots-Irish for the most part.

Quakers have done pretty well as subjects of the British crown. Most of them are probably reluctant to be engaged in a revolution. So Quaker political power ends with the American Revolution. Nevertheless, you see a continuing Quaker influence, particularly in the city of Philadelphia, well into the 19th century. Even as late as the 1840s or 1850s, you have the Episcopal Bishop of Philadelphia saying that anytime I want to start a humanitarian or reform movement, anytime I'm trying to to win the confidence of the public in a good cause, I have to have one or two conspicuous Quakers involved. Philadelphia becomes that door through which so much, even the Pope comes, you know, famously early in my childhood, the Pope comes over. And William Penn had his problems with the Catholics, but eventually he made his peace with

him. And there is that door into this country that so many people found from all walks of life. That was what Philadelphia represented. Thank you so much, Tom, for talking to us. We have been graced by the presence of Thomas Hamm, Professor Emeritus of History and Quaker scholar in residence at Erlem College in Richmond, Indiana. He is considered one of the leading scholars on the history of Quakers, and now you know why. Thank you, Tom.

Great to meet you. We will talk again. There's still more to talk about with Quakerism. Hey, thanks for listening to American History Hit. You know, every week we release new episodes, two new episodes dropping Mondays and Thursdays, all kinds of content from mysterious missing colonies to pass. powerful political movements to some of the biggest battles across the centuries. Don't miss an episode.

By hitting like and follow, you help us out, which is great. But you'll also be reminded when our shows are on. And while you're at it, share it with a friend. American History Hit with me, Don Wildman. So grateful for your support.