Talk:History of Quakers in Britain and Ireland

This article has ground to a halt while I try to gather information on Scotland and Ireland, for which I am lacking materials. Any help gratefully received. --Martin Wyatt 19:39, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

"The Reform Act of 1832 enabled Quakers to stand for Parliament." I don't think that's right. I can't see anything in the Act about this. I don't think there was ever a law against Quakers in Parliament, but strict ones wouldn't take the oath required for taking seats. Affirmation was admitted as an alternative by the Oaths Act 1888, though that was a response to the case of Charles Bradlaugh, not Quakers. Peter Jackson (talk) 09:01, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

My wording is probably incorrect. The information I have, admittedly from an author whom I have detected in more than one historical mistake, is that affirmation enabled Quakers to enter the House of Commons in 1832. Bradlaugh's case, as an atheist, was slightly different. I will see what more I can find. --Martin Wyatt (talk) 13:09, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I find this in ODNB: "After the passing of the Reform Bill in 1832, Joseph Pease was elected MP for South Durham, and retained the seat until his retirement in 1841. He was the first Quaker member to sit in the House of Commons, and on presenting himself on 8 February 1833 he refused to take the usual oath. A select committee was appointed to inquire into precedents, and on 14 February he was allowed to affirm." I will adjust accordingly. --Martin Wyatt (talk) 13:41, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Looking at WP's article on Bradlaugh, I see things were more complicated than I thought. It looks like one of those cases where the law was never clearly settled and inconsistent decisions were taken in particular cases. The status of Quaker marriages looks like a similar case you might want to look at. Before 1754, most legal authorities said a valid marriage required the presence of a clergyman ordained in the established church, but the 1754 Act says it doesn't apply to Quaker (and Jewish marriages), which seems to imply recognition. Peter Jackson (talk) 08:59, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

"now Britain Yearly Meeting". Not entirely clear. In the context, readers might possibly take it as meaning the name was changed with partition, but I think you mean more recently. WP says 1995. Peter Jackson (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2016 (UTC)