In his presidential address to the Friends Historical Society in 1997, Larry Ingle identified seven areas of Quaker history in which he wished to encourage more research, one being the eighteenth century. He also noted that ‘the subtle and complex interplay between men and women and the power they vied for – if they vied at all – has not yet claimed its historian’.1 Since then, research into the Quietist eighteenth century has expanded, and the women are now being recognised for the contributions they made. This article looks at one such woman, May Drummond of Edinburgh Meeting, who became famous as a Quaker preacher throughout England but was silenced by her Meeting in which the men wielded all the power. Wherever her name appears in histories of Scottish Quakerism, the facts of her silencing are dwelt on, taken mainly from the minutes of Edinburgh Meeting. This article goes beyond this to consider her family background, her life, what was written about her, and in what ways she antagonised the Elders in Edinburgh and London.

In the eighteenth-century membership in the Society of Friends was declining. Numbers are difficult to estimate, as formal membership was not instituted until the 1730s, and it took some time for the rules about this to bed in. It has been estimated that adherence to the Society in England was about 46,000 in 1700. There then set in a gradual decline until there were some 22,000 members in 1800.2 Comparable rough figures for Scotland are a membership of 1,000 in 1700 and 100 by the end of the century.3

The annual Epistles from Yearly Meeting were encouraging Friends to resist the ‘allurements and temptations of this evil world’ and ‘a pursuit of earthly enjoyments’.4 These temptations included music, novels, theatre and art.5 Friends were warned about ‘the craft and subtilty of designing men, some of whom have published books tending to alienate the minds of men from the true and saving faith’.6 The warnings went further in 1770 when they were advised against ‘long and frequent conversation upon temporal matters’.7 The emphasis was no longer on spiritual matters, but impinged on daily life to an extent that must have been difficult to comply with. Ben Pink Dandelion describes a duality in which the world and the inner spirituality were held in balance, allowing faithful dealing with the world.8

In his 1859 essay, a study of the reasons for the decline of the movement, John Stephenson Rowntree was highly critical of the leaders in the 1760s who increased discipline even further, describing them as men with inferior minds and a general incomprehension of the true object of church government.9 Peter Collins has analysed how discipline was increased during the century as practice became increasingly codified and prescribed. The Queries evolved to place more emphasis on right action with questions of belief being downplayed.10 Richard E. Stagg has also noted that there was an increasing tendency to comply in a legalistic sense, in other words, the letter and not the spirit.11 John Punshon suggests that with their codification from 1738 onwards the result was ‘a continuous mood of disquiet’ about the state of the Society.12

Meetings were encouraged to be wary of too much ministry. For example, the 1740 Epistle from Yearly Meeting exhorted Friends not to allow their preaching to become too formal but to wait in silence to ‘feel your hearts influenced by [God’s] power’.13 Instructions such as this had an inhibiting effect. Ministry became uncertain.14 There was in addition a tendency at this time in the movement to discourage women from ministering. Jean E. Mortimer quotes the Second Day Morning Meeting that ‘it is a hurt to Truth for women Friends to take up too much time, as some do, in our public meetings, when several public and serviceable men Friends are present’.15

Quakerism had been brought to Scotland by soldiers in the army of occupation following the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1642–51).16 The earliest recorded Quaker presence in Edinburgh was in the early 1650s when meetings were held at the home of Colonel William Osborne, who was retired from the Parliamentary army. There has been relatively little research into Quakerism in Scotland during the eighteenth century, most historians concentrating on England and the Colonies. A paper on Scottish Quakerism was published by the Rev. John Torrance in 1929.17 In 1937 the Rev. George B. Burnet completed his thesis The Rise, Progress and Decline of the Quaker Movement in Scotland.18 He later published this as The Story of Quakerism in Scotland 1650–1950. His essentially pessimistic view of Quakers was balanced in the latter by an Epilogue by William H. Marwick who brought the history up to 1950.

Both Torrance and Burnet were writing from the point of view of ministers in the Church of Scotland who saw Quakerism as a failure. Both analysed the reasons for this, Burnet seeing it as a reaction against the attacks Quakers made on the institutions which the Kirk and the Scottish people held dear: pride in the Reformation; an educated and articulate ministry; the Sabbath; the Communion.19 Torrance analysed it as the Kirk being too strong and sufficiently evangelical to satisfy the people, and the presence of a mystical element in Quakerism being at odds with the Scottish mentality.20

Burnet’s book was meant for a general readership. Remedying the lack of research but intended for a Quaker readership was the series of articles about Edinburgh Meeting by William F. Miller in the Journal of the Friends Historical Society in the early twentieth century. His focus was mainly on the individuals, and it is his articles on May Drummond which formed the starting point for my research.21

May (baptised Marion but always known as May) Drummond was born in 1696 in Edinburgh, the second youngest daughter of John Drummond of Newton and his wife Marie Menzies.22 They were a minor branch of the Drummond Earls of Perth. John Drummond of Newton was a merchant with extensive trading connections throughout Britain and the Colonies and the family had business interests in New Jersey and Jamaica.23 One of May’s brothers was Lord Provost of Edinburgh several times and one of the founders of the Royal Bank of Scotland, another was British Consul in Aleppo. They were among Edinburgh’s elite, embedded in the mercantile, civic and cultural life of Edinburgh.

In 1731 May Drummond attended a Quaker meeting being held in the new Meeting House in Peebles Wynd. The visiting speaker was a popular visiting Quaker, Thomas Story (1670–1742).24 Some years after that first meeting, by which time he knew May Drummond well, Thomas Story wrote in his journal about their first encounter when she attended the meeting with about thirty of her acquaintances.

From that time this young woman became nearer and nearer to Friends, and came sometimes to our Meetings, till she found strength to own the Truth in a public manner, to the great surprize of her acquaintances, who are generally of the greater and more polite sort of both sexes, and to the grief and trouble of her relations, who are all against her save only for a younger brother.25

May, most likely, had some knowledge of Quakerism by the time she attended this Meeting. There would have been no shortage of reading material for her to learn. Pamphlets written by Friends were printed in their thousands for distribution by local meetings and by travelling preachers. It has been estimated that more than 3,700 titles were published by Quakers in the eighteenth century.26 David J. Hall quotes a statement from Christopher Story in 1701 that on passing through Scotland he saw it as a fit opportunity to disperse some books.27 There was also a decision in 1672 that Friends in Scotland would take four hundred copies of any book published in London and contribute to the printing costs.28

May Drummond told friends that her family were against her involvement with Quakers. It is likely that her family’s attitudes were influenced by those Quakers who were most visible in Edinburgh at the time. The clerk at the time was William Miller (1655–1743), the head gardener at Holyrood Palace.29 While he and his wife sometimes went into the streets to preach, probably the most visible of the Quakers was Thomas Erskine (or Areskine).30 He frequently evangelized throughout the town and ‘pronounced Woes and Judgments on the inhabitants of the Good Town’.31 It may have been Erskine of whom May Drummond wrote in a letter to a cousin that ‘I am afrayed the imodrat Appearance of sum at Edinburgh professing with us will Sour my near relacions. I regret that but cannot help such things’.32

By leaving the Church of Scotland and joining a dissenting group, she was flouting all the conventions of her age and class. She had not fulfilled the expected role of wife, mother and hostess. She was thirty-four and the society in which she lived had limited expectations of such single women. Public life was closed to her. Literature spelled out for such women a melancholy life of ‘blasted hopes and emotional failure’.33 She could have settled into comfortable middle and then old age. She would have performed the role of spinster aunt. She chose not to live like this. She found her voice in the Quaker meeting and embarked on a life of travel and preaching.

As an independent woman with her own money, free to travel and with no domestic responsibilities, she must have stood in sharp contrast to the other women in the Meeting. She may well already have been accustomed to travelling to London with her brothers. There is no record of what the other women in the Meeting thought of her. They are shadowy figures, not named in the minutes, and only occasionally referred to in the accounts when there appear payments for horses for ‘women friends’, but whether these are members of the meeting or visitors isn’t clear.34

The first recorded instance of her ministry was in 1733 when on a visit to London she preached at Devonshire House (probably during London Yearly Meeting).35 Subsequently, she must have impressed Edinburgh Meeting to such effect that on 24th April 1735 they issued her with a certificate to travel in the ministry.36

It is probable that her first venture into England as an attested ‘Public Friend’ was at Chester under the mentorship of Thomas Story. His journal records the events of Yearly Meeting in 1735 for Cheshire, Lancashire, Westmorland and Cumberland. The public meetings ‘were exceedingly large, consisting of some thousands; for the Quarter Sessions of the Peace happening at the same time, all or most of the bench of Justices came, and many of the women, under the distinction of Ladies’.37

At the end of the week, when the official Yearly Meeting was over, and most of the other Quaker preachers had left, Thomas Story, Joshua Toft, and May Drummond stayed on to address ‘a great multitude to the honour of the Lord, satisfaction of His people, and general satisfaction of the auditory’.38

This was a time when attending religious gatherings of denominations other than one’s own was a popular pastime. May Drummond, as a female and a Scot, would clearly arouse some interest. She seems to have had an attractive appearance. Even in old age she was described as a tall, handsome woman.39 Thomas Story described her as ‘of good capacity, a chearfull, affable deportment and ready wit’.40

William Cookworthy described her private demeanour as ‘generous, open and humane’, though he went on to say

As a preacher, her style is rather too learned, and some of her epithets rather swell too much. There is something, too, in the management & tone of her voice, when she exerts it, a little theatrical. She resembles Milton in being too free with technical words. But I really believe all this to be owing to her education, & not to any affectation or want of simplicity. She has a perfect acquaintance with the world, being what is called thoroughly well-bred.41

Theatricality may well have appealed to audiences seeking amusement. There was also the misconception that she was a member of Scotland’s nobility, one newspaper referring to her as ‘the Hon Mrs Mary Drummond).42 She was known to make frequent references to ‘my worthy cousin Perth’.43

The event which drew her to wider public attention was an audience with Queen Caroline, the wife of King George II, in July 1735. It was a larger gathering than later newspaper reports would suggest. She reported this to the clerk, William Miller, in Edinburgh.

I have been with the Queen at her desire; I got as kind a reception & in as affable a manner as thy Wife could have given me. I was in her dressing Room one hour, one quarter, and two Minutes, nobody being present but the Dutchess of Dorset, the two eldest Princesses, her Dresser and Pitt, Thomas Jackson & his wife, other two Ladies and myself. The Door was shut. We had a very solemn time, and in no place I was ever in had I more freedom to declare the Eternal Truth. The Queen was tendered to a great degree, & expressed her satisfaction to us & afterwards to others.44

This meeting was widely reported in the newspapers, though the other Quakers present were overlooked and the impression was given that May Drummond was the only person there.45

The meeting with the Queen made her famous. Thomas Chalkley, a prominent Quaker, wrote in his Journal for the year 1735:

While I was in and about London, I was at eighteen meetings in that great City, at two of which I was with May Drummond, a virtuous young woman, who hath a good Gift in the Ministry, and had a gracious Opportunity of declaring her Convincement to our noble Queen Caroline (our great King George’s royal Consort). The kind Treatment, and good Reception, she had with the Queen, spread so in City and Country, that many Thousands flocked to hear her.46

That she was becoming popular is borne out by newspapers reports, even allowing for a bit of journalistic exaggeration:

On Sunday last the famous Mrs Drummond preach’d at the Quaker’s Meeting at Hertford, and on Thursday at Tottenham High Cross, at both which Places there was a vast Concourse of People of all Denominations; and wherever she preaches, there’s such Crowds of People to hear her, as is almost incredible.47

And again:

Yesterday, the famous Mrs Drummond, preach’d at the Bull and Mouth Meeting House, before a great Number of People; and what was very particular, her Discourse was on Enthusiasm, which (to be fare) gave the Auditors great Satisfaction.48

Not only was she attracting crowds, she was arousing controversy. There were letters in the newspapers, sermons, and pamphlets both praising and attacking her. One of the most widely read magazines carried a poem, widely reprinted, in praise of her, On the noted and celebrated Quaker Mrs Drummond, By a young lady.49 This praised her as a ‘happy virgin’ adorned with wisdom, who outshone St Teresa and would set women free from false accusations that they have no soul, and are not worth educating. Another young woman, who may have been typical of many who heard about her from friends, wrote of how much she wanted to see and hear May Drummond, and that ‘Her character charms my very soul, tho’ I never had the happiness of seeing her person’.50

She became the focus for satire. One such, the long satirical poem The Female Speaker, used her name as a vehicle to ridicule churches and churchmen.51 A cartoon on the cover showed her in a pointed hat holding out a rather plump arm to separate two fighting clergymen. They are arguing about heresy, while she proclaims she has come as a champion of the truth. Many clergymen were accused of various sins and lewd conduct, though they are identified only by their initials, and most readers would know who they were, including, clearly, May Drummond herself.

May Drummond’s talent was for oratory. She was less able when it came to the printed word. She did however leave a small number of epistles collected together in one tract.52 Her initial public venture in writing was a letter dated 25th September 1733 to John Shaw, who was the minister of South Leith Parish Church, near Edinburgh.53 In this she was following in the example of those early Quakers who challenged the ministers in their own pulpits. He had preached a sermon against the Light Within. She accused him of cant, and condemned preaching for reward.

In February 1734 she read a paper to Edinburgh Quarterly Meeting, entitled Internal Revelation the Source of Saving Knowledge. This was an attack on ‘professors of divinity’ to warn them against ‘teaching for Doctrine the Commands of Men’.54 The Quarterly Meeting agreed this paper should be sent to the Second Day Morning Meeting in London ‘for their examination and approbation to be printed, as also some have agreed that her letter to John Shaw be sent with it’.55

Oversight of what was published in the name of Quakers was one of the responsibilities of this appointed body, the Second Day Morning Meeting.56 Their purpose was to defend the integrity and existence of Quakerism and to answer hostile publications.57 The members were all men, and it was becoming increasingly difficult for women to publish.58

When this committee received the documents, they appointed six of their number to read them and report back.59 The Friends appointed had to be reminded several times, but they eventually brought back the manuscript.60 It was agreed that the corrected manuscript would be returned to Edinburgh with the recommendation that ‘the Friends there may do therewith as they think fit’. As the letter to John Shaw had already been sent, it could not now be corrected, and their instruction was that it was not to be published. There is no record of Edinburgh Meeting expressing a further opinion on this decision, and nothing was published at this time.

In 1735 May Drummond was staying at Bush-hill, near London, the home of fellow Quakers, Thomas Jackson and his wife. While there, she wrote a further tract entitled An Epistle to such as seriously profess Christianity (The Bush-hill letter). It was dated 2nd August 1735. She attacked those who profess to be Christian but have not received true revelation: the use of reason is not enough.61 She now submitted three documents to the Second Day Morning Meeting with a request for permission to publish.62 These were the letter to John Shaw (again), another entitled An Epistle to the People of Scotland, clearly an older document as it was dated 28th February 1733. The third document was the Bush-hill letter. There is no record of either of these two last documents being placed before Edinburgh Meeting for approval, which would have been in right ordering.

The Second Day Morning Meeting clearly had some difficulty with these and it was not until 31st January 1736 that they asked Thomas Story to communicate with her to see if she would ‘acquiesce with them’.63 No further details were given but in February 1736 the minutes recorded that they were in difficulty with the Bush-hill letter and could not allow it to be printed as it stood, and that being the case May Drummond had withdrawn it.64 This was the last of the matter as far as the Second Day Morning Meeting was concerned.

However, she defied the Second Day Morning Meeting and published her writings. She must have abandoned An Epistle to the People of Scotland, which was not heard of again, possibly because she saw no point in publishing it in England, but she went ahead and published the other three, the Internal Revelation paper, the letter to John Shaw, and the Bush-hill letter, all under the umbrella title of Internal Revelation the Source of Saving Knowledge: Candidly Recommended in Several Epistles. The publisher added a foreword of his own, and the whole pamphlet ran to twenty-seven pages.65 This was in clear defiance, not only to the Second Day Morning Meeting but of any opinion which Edinburgh Meeting might have in the matter.

May Drummond continued to preach across the next few decades. The accounts of Edinburgh Meeting record regular payments for a horse, and latterly a chaise to transport her on the first part of her journey south. She appears to have set out in May of each year, no doubt returning to Edinburgh for the winter. The last recorded payment for this is in May 1752.66 She appears to have spent a few years living in Bristol, for it was the meeting there which issued her with Certificates in 1750, 1753 and 1758.67 This suggests that she was resident there long enough to be considered a member of Bristol Monthly Meeting. The wording on each certificate is the same, that she was ‘of a sober and orderly conversation whilst among us and in unity both as a Minister and a Member’.68

She returned to live in Edinburgh in 1758, but found the Meeting there in a sorry state. This decline had begun in the early part of the decade. Visiting Friends found a sad falling-off. Catherine Payton, one of the most active of the travelling women preachers, recorded in 1752 that in Edinburgh it was ‘most distressing, a libertine spirit having carried away the youth, and an easy indifferent one prevailing amongst those farther advanced in years’.69 Another visiting Friend, Thomas Crewdson of Kendal, wrote in 1756 of ‘the wide and distant walking of some from the principle they profess’.

Edinburgh Meeting’s carefully written records ended in 1752 after which the accounts became less meticulous and were no more than rough notes written in different hands. Minutes of the Monthly Meeting were becoming scrappier and there were none between 1757 and 1764. This may have been because of the age of William Miller, the clerk. He died in 1761 at the age of 87. An undated note recorded that Monthly Meetings were not being held because ‘of the fewness of Friends’.70 Meeting for Worship continued, but business was not being attended to in any formal way.

A few of May Drummond’s letters from this period have survived and they hint at some friction between herself and the Elders. She wrote to a confidant, James Wilson, in Kendal in June 1758, that the meeting was ‘few in number’.71 A year later she was writing to him again describing how they were keeping the doors closed during meeting, desiring only their own company. She disliked this but, she says, did not see it her place to argue.72

She wrote again to James Wilson from Westerhall, near Dumfries where she was staying with friends in April 1759. When she left Edinburgh a month earlier ‘our little meeting there Apeared in a better way’.73 But she went on to say that she ‘believed it to be my place to Absent myself from them for some time’. Clearly matters by this time were not comfortable for her, but there is no evidence, in view of her regular absences, that she was complicit in the general decline of the Meeting.

William Miller was succeeded as clerk by his son, also called William Miller (1722–1799).74 An undated note in the minute book recorded that though members were few in number, Monthly Meetings would be resumed on the First day of every month. The first minute of the new Monthly Meeting recorded that the Trustees for the meeting house and burying ground were all deceased except for one. The Queries were no longer being read in the Meetings for Worship because the book could not be found.75 New trustees were appointed and the clerk obtained a copy of the Queries for the meeting’s use. Subsequent minutes recorded only routine matters until February 1765 when the clash between May Drummond and the Elders of the meeting came to a head.76

There is no record of what led up to this, but in February the Monthly Meeting instructed the clerk to write to May Drummond. The letter he wrote dated the 2nd day of the 3rd month 1765, was recorded in full in the minutes. Part of it read:

I observe that thou can come to the meeting and stay away at thy pleasure however I can acquaint thee that we have far better meetings in thy absence than when thou art present. And I have also to acquaint thee that friends in general and myself in particular are highly dissatisfied with what thou hath to offer in the meetings for we sincerely believe that thou in thy present situation has nothing to say from the Lord so that thy words are a great burden to us therefore I beg for the future thou may be silent in our meetings till thy Doctrine and conduct correspond with the following Queries which were sent down from London to us.

The letter went on to quote Query 3 ‘Are all ministers careful not to burden sensible friends of your own or other meetings with words void of life and power? And do they keep sound doctrine and the form of sound words in your ministry and do none come abroad without in the approbation of your own monthly meeting?’

May Drummond was not allowed to attend this Meeting to defend herself. William F. Miller notes that a younger brother of the clerk, by name George Miller, was ‘a partisan of hers’.77 If he spoke to defend her there is no record of it. Not everyone was against her. In the 19th century one of the Miller family (possibly the grandson of George Miller) was able to write that his grandmother retained a kind feeling towards her.78

It may only be a coincidence that in 1765, and possibly for some time before, that there was a demand for a Women’s Meeting in Edinburgh. Many areas already had these and May Drummond would have known about them from her travels. There seems to have been resistance to this in Edinburgh. There was a minute in 1765 to the effect that the clerk would speak to his mother-in-law to take soundings about it, but nothing came of this.79 It was not until 1791 that the and first Women’s Meeting took place in Edinburgh.

It appears she ignored the letter, and continued to minister. Another letter was sent to her, asking that she keep silent in meeting, and that friends could not unite with her.80 Undaunted, she left Edinburgh and next we hear of her is in London where she was to be found attending several meetings at which she ministered.81 However, she did not have a certificate to do so, and it was this that prompted the Second Day Morning Meeting to ask Edinburgh how she stood with them.82 Edinburgh’s minute records their reply.

Dear friends, We are sorry to hear May Drummond hath assumed to preach in your meetings, it being quite irregular, she having no Certificate from us. And as you are desirous to know how she stands with our Meeting, we shall now acquaint you most of the friends of this meeting being quite burdened with her preaching and praying it appearing to them to be altogether dead, formal and without the true spring that can only make words efficacious. They could no longer bear it, without testifying to her their sense of it, so accordingly the monthly meeting appointed their Clerk to acquaint her with their sentiments concerning her public appearances which was done in writing.

They finished by advising that she took offence and sat ‘in a seat below the Gallery’ until she left for London. The letter was signed on 27th May,1766 by the clerk, William Miller, and by seven other men, presumably all those present, and this was recorded in full in the minute. It is odd that all the men at the meeting felt obliged to sign the letter. Nowhere else in the minutes for this period were letters quoted in full, nor a record made of those who signed them. Perhaps they wished to emphasise that they were all in agreement on this, or perhaps the clerk, William Miller, wished to show that it was not a personal matter between himself and May Drummond.

When we look at these signatories to this letter, can see that some of them were not above reproach. At the same time as May Drummond was being censured, there was a minute that one of them ‘has given acknowledgment unto this Meeting for the abominable adultery which he committed some years ago’.83 The following year another admitted fornication but without any penalty.84 None of them was disowned. The clerk, William Miller, was a divisive figure who held rival meetings. He was disowned some years later for marrying out and for other reasons.85

We can only speculate in what way they were finding May Drummond’s ministry unacceptable. It may have become dull through constant reiteration. On the other hand, there may well have been some personal animosity. It may be that she was ‘different’ in a way that the meeting found hard to come to terms with. It is possible that from her early days she raised the antagonism of some by her confidence in ministry. The most influential members of Edinburgh Meeting were tradesmen and birthright Quakers, their families having been in the movement since the very early days of the 1660s. Some of them had lived through the troublesome days of the late seventeenth century, and the persecution which in Edinburgh persisted into the eighteenth century. May Drummond had a background in the Church of Scotland and was part of Edinburgh’s elite. Her knowledge of the history and philosophy of Quakerism came from books. There is much about her ministry that harked back to the early days, for instance, her attacks on paid ministers. There may have been discomfort from the beginning. Her open publication of the letter to John Shaw may have caused embarrassment to people who wanted to live quietly and unobtrusively. The readiness with which she made her voice heard may have offended those, both men and women, who believed women should be self-effacing and tend to domestic matters, an attitude that was prevalent in society generally.

Perhaps she focussed too much on preaching against envy, malice and backbiting and she was saying things they did not want to hear. As early as May 1733, when she ministered at a meeting in Devonshire House, London, she spoke of ‘Envy, Hatred and Malice’ and that Quakers who are guilty of these are not true Quakers.86 Her letters in the following years speak of the same thing. In a letter to a woman with whom she corresponded regularly she wrote ‘people will tell lies about me’ and warned her against being too trusting. She also said in that letter that there were those who were ‘wanting an opportunity secretly to stab my reputation’.87

In her letter to James Wilson in June 1758 she spoke of the ‘tyde of Malice’ running high against her and of lying tongues and went on to say that popularity, which she never wanted, always attracted the breath of envy. She added that her persecutors were people she once called friends.88 In her next letter to him, dated 3rd May 1759, she continued to speak of the malice and envy directed towards her.

This might be dismissed today as paranoia, except that there is evidence that there was tale-bearing in the meeting. The minutes of Edinburgh Quaker Meeting for the next few years show several references, as for instance, ‘With regard to tale bearing and detraction it remains under the care of Friends’.89 One of the signatories to the London letter admitted his guilt in this respect, acknowledging that he ‘behaved inconsistently with the rules of the Society being mistaken and was sorry for it’. He promised to behave well in the future.90

This tale-bearing tendency seems not to have been peculiar to Edinburgh Meeting. We can see this in the various Epistles coming from London Yearly Meeting. As early as 1727 before May Drummond joined the Society there was ‘a weighty concern’ against ‘talebearing, false reports, jealousies and evil surmisings’.91 The Epistle from Yearly Meeting for the year 1733, the year May Drummond preached in Devonshire House, has a paragraph which began: ‘We also think it proper to exhort Friends everywhere, to avoid all whisperings, backbitings, and talebearings, tending to blemish the reputation of any, or to sow discord, and create evil surmisings one of another’.92 In 1760 there was once more a mention that they should ‘guard against listening after, or giving any encouragement to reports tending to the prejudice one of another’.93

The Second Day Morning Meeting may have been glad to have a reason to silence her. She had offended in various ways. She was ministering in different meetings without a certificate. She had published her work without express permission, and in the cases of the letter to John Shaw, in contravention of their instructions. She had attracted a great deal of publicity, not all of it favourable, and exposed Quakers to satire and mockery. It was possible that by this time there was no one willing to speak up for her. The men she counted as friends and with whom she had shared platforms had died, Andrew Pitt in 1736, Thomas Story in 1742, Samuel Bowness in 1753. Thomas Erskine is not mentioned in the minutes after 1750 and appears to have parted from Friends alleging that they had ‘lost the kernel of religion and preserving the husks of external plainness’.94

After hearing from Edinburgh, the Second Day Morning meeting sent a delegation to her to reinforce the request for silence. Her response was an answering attack on them.95 In this letter she fought back. She spoke of a ‘reputation blasted by invidiously false Reports’. She used the word Vindication several times, claiming that ‘if any Man or Set of Men forbid such as are call’d upon by that Voice [to minister] then the Judgment of that Man or Set of Men is under a Cloud’. She claimed that to be ‘approved by God in our own Conscience is all the truly Devout wish or want. Undisturbed we are, when approved of him, tho’ the whole Race of Mankind disown Unity with us’.96

This gets to the heart of the attempt to discern whether ministry is from God or from the self. She believed her voice was given to her by God and dared them to argue. She published this riposte. but that is the last we hear from her. She died in 1777. After her death there seems to have been an effort to tarnish her name. In 1797, Joseph Wood wrote of her in his commonplace book that ‘Being so much followed had a tendency to lift her mind from that state of humble watchfulness in which alone preservation is witnessed’.97 Similar sentiments were expressed in a series of articles published in 1851 in an American publication, The Friend.98 The same author attributed her fall to the use of ‘opium or some other intoxicating substance’.99 Nowhere in any of the contemporary material relating to May Drummond was there any mention of addiction. Opium was an ingredient in laudanum which was not considered abhorrent. Laudanum, or a common remedy Dover’s Powders which also contained opium, were believed to be efficacious in treating many ailments. They were easily available. Many who became addicted first had it prescribed for treatment of illness. Doctors generally failed to recognise its addictive qualities.100 However by the mid-19th century its use in whatever form was recognised as an addiction and moreover was seen as an indication of moral failure. The piece written in 1851 has the air of being written to give a warning. It fits in with the Victorian narrative that ‘neglect and poverty’ are the inevitable reward for addiction. The nuances of the problems between May Drummond and Edinburgh Meeting were lost.

The journals of female preachers, much edited under the supervision of the Second Day Monthly Meeting, portray an ideal Quaker woman. They followed a pattern: childhood; searching for answers; reading religious literature; convincement; longing to testify and finally courage to minister.101 This is so idealised that the flesh and blood woman has disappeared. This ideal pious Quaker was one who sought ‘simplicity and nothingness of self; in humility and lowness of mind’.102 May Drummond, coming to Quakers in confident middle age, could not conform to this.

Personal animosity may have played a part in the matter. It can be seen from the records that much was tolerated in the men of Edinburgh meeting. It may be that Edinburgh Meeting, struggling with falling numbers, sought a scapegoat. There were, no doubt, many undercurrents in the matter which are now hidden from us. What we do know is that here was a woman who turned her back on a comfortable middle-age to travel, preaching the Quaker message. She acted with conviction and there was no accusation of preaching anything contrary to the Quaker message, but she broke the rules, preaching without a certificate and publishing without consent. She stuck fast to her Quaker ideals to the end, and it was only old age that eventually silenced her.

Notes

  1. Ingle, L. H., ‘The Future of Quaker History’, Journal of the Friends Historical Society 58 (1997), pp. 9–10. [^]
  2. Fincham, A., ‘Faith in Numbers: re-quantifying the English Quaker population during the long eighteenth century’, Religions (2019), p. 9. [^]
  3. Burton, P., A Social History of Quakers in Scotland 1800–2000, Lampeter: Edward Melton Press, 2007, p. 95 and p. 97. [^]
  4. ‘1740 Epistle’, Epistles from the Yearly Meeting of Friends held in London to the Quarterly and Monthly Meetings in Great Britain, Ireland and Elsewhere from 1681 to 1857, vol. 1; London: Edward Marsh, 1858, p. 232. [^]
  5. Punshon, J., Portrait in Grey, a short history of the Quakers, London: Quaker Home Service, 1984, p. 130. [^]
  6. ‘1750 Epistle’, Epistles, vol. I; p. 7. [^]
  7. ‘1770 Epistle’, Epistles, vol. 2; p. 3. [^]
  8. Dandelion, B. P., ‘Guarded Domesticity and Engagement with “the World”: the separate spheres of Quaker Quietism’, Common Knowledge 16/1 (2010), p. 95. [^]
  9. Rowntree, J. S., Quakerism Past and Present: Being an Inquiry into the Causes of its Decline in Great Britain and Ireland, London: Smith Elder & Co., 1859, p. 119. [^]
  10. Collins, P., ‘Discipline: the codification of Quakerism as orthopraxy, 1650–1738’, History and Anthropology 13/2 (2002), p. 86. [^]
  11. Stagg, R. E., ‘Friends’ Queries and General Advice: a survey of their development in London Yearly Meeting 1682–1860’, Journal of the Friends Historical Society 4/4 (1961), pp. 209–235. [^]
  12. Punshon, Portrait, p. 143. [^]
  13. ‘1740 Epistle’, Epistles, vol. I, p. 231. [^]
  14. Healey, R. R., ‘Quietist Quakerism, 1692-c.1805’, in Angell, S. W., and Dandelion, B. P. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Quaker Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, p. 50. [^]
  15. Mortimer, J. E., ‘Quaker Women in the Eighteenth Century: opportunities and constraints’, JFHS 57/3 (1996), p. 234. [^]
  16. Burnet, G. B., and Marwick, W. H., The Story of Quakerism in Scotland 1650–1950, Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press, 1952, p. 18. [^]
  17. Torrance, J., ‘The Quaker Movement in Scotland’, Records of the Scottish Church History Society 3 (1929), pp. 31–42. [^]
  18. Presented for his Ph.D. at the University of Glasgow, 1937. [^]
  19. Burnet and Marwick, Quakerism in Scotland, ch. 29. [^]
  20. Torrance, J., The Quaker Movement, pp. 41–42. [^]
  21. Miller, W. F., ‘Episodes in the life of May Drummond’, pt. 1, JFHS 4/2 (1907), pp. 55–61, and ‘Episodes in the life of May Drummond,’ pt. 2, JFHS, 4/3 (1907), pp. 103–114. [^]
  22. ‘Old Parish Registers’, Births 685/1, p.32. http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk. [^]
  23. Johnstone, D., Scots Emigrants to East Jersey, 1682–1702: motivations and outcomes, Glasgow: University of Glasgow, 2025, p. 21. [^]
  24. Gerona, C., ‘Thomas Story’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. [^]
  25. Moore, E. E., Travelling with Thomas Story: the life and travels of an eighteenth-century Quaker, Hertfordshire: Letchworth Printers Ltd., 1947, p. 249. [^]
  26. Hall, D. J., ‘Spreading Friends Books for Truth Service: the distribution of Quaker printed literature in the Eighteenth Century’, JFHS 62/1 (2010), p. 4. [^]
  27. Hall, ‘Spreading Friends Books’, p. 5. [^]
  28. Hall, ‘Spreading Friends Books’, p. 8. [^]
  29. Miller, W. F., ‘William Miller at the King’s Gardens’, JFHS 2 (1905), p. 107. [^]
  30. Miller, W. F., ‘Thomas Areskine, Brewer in Edinburgh’, JFHS 5 (1909), pp. 30–33. [^]
  31. Caledonian Mercury, 19th January 1736, p.3. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk. [^]
  32. Drummond, M., Letter to John Drummond, 24th February 1736. National Records of Scotland, GD24/3/373. [^]
  33. Vickery, A., ‘No happy ending? At Home with Miss Bates in Georgian England’, Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal 27 (August 2015), p. 134. [^]
  34. For example, Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Accounts. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/12. 9th March 1750. [^]
  35. ‘May Drummond’s Opinion of Conscience and Account of the Quakers principles, delivered in her Sermon at Devonshire House, the 29th day of the 3rd mo. 1733’, in Commonplace Book, pp.36–37. LSF, vol. S487. [^]
  36. Recorded in the index of the minute book of the Second Day Morning Meeting, LSF, p.30. According to the same record she was subsequently issued with certificates to travel in the ministry by Edinburgh Meeting in 1737, 1742, and 1746. [^]
  37. Moore, Thomas Story, p. 248. [^]
  38. Moore, Thomas Story, p. 249. It is at this point in the Journal he describes his first meeting with her some years earlier. [^]
  39. Chambers, R., Traditions of Edinburgh, vol. 2; Edinburgh: W. and C. Tait, 1825, p. 50. [^]
  40. Penney, N., ‘Logan-Story Correspondence: the letters’, Bulletin of Friends Historical Association 15/2 (1926), pp. 53–54. [^]
  41. Cookworthy, W., Letter to Richard Kingston, 1st August 1744. LSF, Cookworthy Papers, ms. box V4/1, p. 24. [^]
  42. Ipswich Journal, 4th October 1735. p.2. https://www.britishnewspaperarchives.co.uk. [^]
  43. Burnet and Marwick, The Story of Quakerism in Scotland, p. 162. [^]
  44. Miller, W. F., ‘Episodes in the life of May Drummond’, JFHS 4/2 (1907), p. 58. [^]
  45. Caledonian Mercury, Edinburgh, 8th July 1735, p.1. https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk. [^]
  46. The Journal of Thomas Chalkley, Philadelphia, PA: Friends’ Bookstore, 1870, p. 350. Harvard University Collection. http://www.archive.org. [^]
  47. Read’s Weekly Journal or British Gazetteer, 2nd August 1735. https://www.Gale.com. [^]
  48. London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 7th August 1735. https://www.Gale.com. [^]
  49. The Gentleman’s Magazine, September 1735, p. 555. https://www.ezproxy.lib.gla..ac.uk. [^]
  50. Hobhouse, S., ‘New Light on Fanny Henshaw’s Convincement’, JFHS 29 (1932), pp. 76–79. [^]
  51. Anon, The Female Speaker, or the Priests in the Wrong, being an Epistle from the celebrated Mrs. D—mm—d to Dr. St—b—g and Mr. F—st-r Occasioned by their dispute on the subject of Heresy, London: 1735, p. 18. [^]
  52. Drummond, M., Internal Revelation the Source of Saving Knowledge, repr. HardPress, 2019; Reading: Jonathan Nelson, 1836. [^]
  53. Drummond, Internal Revelation, p. 17. [^]
  54. Drummond, Internal Revelation, p. 13. [^]
  55. Edinburgh Quarterly Meeting, Minutes, 7th February 1734. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/1. [^]
  56. Trevett, C., ‘“Not Fit to be Printed”: the Welsh, the Women and the Second Day Morning Meeting’, JFHS 59 (2004), pp. 115–144; Hall, D. J., ‘”The Fiery Trial of their infallible examination”: self-control in the regulation of Quaker publishing in England from the 1670s to the mid-19th century’ in Myers, R. and Harris, M., (eds.), Censorship and the control of print in England and France 1600–1910, Winchester: St. Paul Bibliographies, 1992, p. 60. [^]
  57. Hall, ‘“The fiery trial’’, p. 60. [^]
  58. Trevett, ‘“Not Fit to be Printed”’, p. 120. [^]
  59. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 15th April 1734, p. 409. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  60. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 20th May 1734. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  61. Drummond, Internal Revelation, p. 21. [^]
  62. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 25th August 1735. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  63. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 31st January 1736. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  64. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 23rd February 1736. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  65. Drummond, Internal Revelation the Source of Saving Knowledge: Candidly Recommended in Several Epistle, repr. HardPress,. 2019; London: Jonathan Nelson,1736. [^]
  66. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minute Book No. 12, 25th of 5th mo. 1752. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/2. [^]
  67. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes. LSF, vol. 14, index. [^]
  68. Second Day Morning Meeting, Minutes, 7th of the 11th mo.1750. LSF, vol. 14. [^]
  69. Miller, W. F., ‘Stranger Friends Visiting Scotland 1650–1797 Part IV’, JFHS 13/1 (1916), p. 6. [^]
  70. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minute Book No. 13. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3. [^]
  71. Drummond, M., Letter to James Wilson, June 1758. LSF, MS 334/1 no. 89. [^]
  72. Drummond, M., Letter to James Wilson, 8th April, 1759. LSF. Quoted in Miller, W. F., ‘Episodes II’. [^]
  73. Drummond, M., Letter to James Wilson, 2nd February 1759. LSF, ms 334/1. [^]
  74. Miller, W. F., ‘Note’, JFHS 11/4 (1914), p. 193. [^]
  75. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minute Book 13, 29th July1764. National Records of Scotland, 10/1/3. [^]
  76. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minute Book 13, 3rd February 1765. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3. [^]
  77. Miller, W. F., ‘Episodes II’, p. 111. [^]
  78. Miller, W. F., Letter to John Crosfield, 20th March 1843. LSF, ms. vol. 214, item 91. [^]
  79. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 29th Oct. 1765. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3, 65. [^]
  80. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 3rd May, 1766. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3. [^]
  81. Diary of John Grubb (1737–1784), as quoted in JFHS 15/3 (1918), p. 87. [^]
  82. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting. Minutes, 27th June 1766. National Records of Scotland, p. 67. [^]
  83. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 5th July 1765. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3, p. 64. [^]
  84. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 30th June 1767. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3, p. 70. [^]
  85. Miller, W. F., ‘Notes on the Early records of Friends in the South of Scotland from 1656 to about 1790’, JFHS 1/2 (1904), p. 70. [^]
  86. May Drummond’s Opinion of Conscience. LSF, ms. vol. S487. [^]
  87. Drummond, M., Letter to Amelia, 19th July 1746. LSF, ms. vol. S78. [^]
  88. Drummond, M., Letter to James Wilson, June 1758. LSF, ms. 334/1. [^]
  89. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 16th May 1769. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3. [^]
  90. Edinburgh Monthly Meeting, Minutes, 24th February 1769. National Records of Scotland, CH10/1/3. [^]
  91. ‘1727 Epistle’, LYM Epistles I, p. 178. http://www.archive.org. [^]
  92. ‘1733 Epistle’, LYM Epistles I, p. 200. http://www.archive.org. [^]
  93. ‘1760 Epistle’, LYM Epistles I, p. 316. http://www.archive.org. [^]
  94. Miller, W. F., ‘Thomas Areskine, Brewer, of Edinburgh’, p. 33. [^]
  95. May Drummond, To the Meeting assembled in the Chamber at Gracechurch Street, 11th July 1766. LSF, vol.E /69/35430. [^]
  96. May Drummond, To the Meeting assembled, p.1. [^]
  97. Wood, J., The Large and Small Notebooks of Joseph Wood, a Yorkshire Quaker 1750–1821, transc. Pamela Cooksey; Huddersfield: High Flats Quaker Meeting, 2011, pp. 7–10. [^]
  98. The Friend 24/11 (1851), p. 84. [^]
  99. The Friend 24/9 (1851), p. 69. [^]
  100. Kramer, J. C., ‘Opium Rampant: Medical Use, Misuse and Abuse in Britain and the West in the 17th and 18th Centuries’, British Journal of Addiction 74 (1979), p. 387. [^]
  101. Skidmore, G., Strength in Weakness: Writings of 18th century Quaker Women, New York, NY: Yale University Press, 2010, p. 17. [^]
  102. Quoted in Dandelion, B. P., ‘Guarded Domesticity and Engagement with “the World”: the separate spheres of Quaker Quietism’, Common Knowledge 16/1 (2010), p. 98. [^]

Competing Interests

The author has no competing interests to declare.