QUAKER-ROOTS-L ArchivesArchiver > QUAKER-ROOTS > 2010-04 > 1271075151
From: Chris Pitt Lewis <>
Subject: Re: [Q-R] Quaker Petition of 1783 -- Signing "per order"
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:39:39 +0100
Christopher Densmore <> writes
>----- Original Message -----
>> Two signatories - Jacob Worley on the second page and Benjamin Humphreys
>> on the fourth page - added the words "per order" after their name.
>> Why did they do this? Literally it means "by order", and so implies that
>> they were acting on the instructions of a meeting, presumably one that
>> they represented at Yearly Meeting. But they cannot have been the only
>> such representatives who signed it. Does it imply some personal
>> reservation about the contents?
>> Chris Pitt Lewis
>"Per order" in this case probably means that those two individuals were
>unable to sign by their own hands. Possibly they had to leave before
>they had the opportunity to sign and left instructions for someone else
>to add their name, or were physically unable to sign their names
>because of illness or injury. Far from suggesting a reservation, it
>implies that these individuals went out of their way to be sure that
>their names were included.
>At the 1783 yearly meeting, there were about 160 representatives sent
>by the quarterly meetings (we're counting the men's meeting only as the
>petition was signed by men only). Far more people attended the sessions
>of the yearly meeting than were formally named as representatives.
Thank you. That makes much more sense. I thought there must be a simple
explanation that I was missing.
Chris Pitt Lewis
|Re: [Q-R] Quaker Petition of 1783 -- Signing "per order" by Chris Pitt Lewis <>|