Besides the three representatives mentioned, there were a host of others, many of them still earlier but perhaps none who exercised so great an influence. Among those worthy of mention were George Keith, a dissenter among Quakers, but one of the earliest teachers in Philadelphia, and a very ardent antagonist of slavery. Others, whose zeal outran their discretion, such as Ralph Sandiford, Benjamin Lay,[1170] and William Southeby, might be profitably discussed here, but lack of space eliminates their consideration. Still other itinerant ministers, Banks, Pennington, and Chalkley, though not so precipitous in their actions as the three above named, were none the less worthy spokesmen of the cause. THE CHURCH ORGANIZATION AND THE NEGRO QUESTION [Sidenote: Study of the meeting records referring to Negro education] Under this head it is intended to present, (1) the activity of the society as an organization, and (2) the establishment of Negro education in the various meetings where any record of it remains. In doing so, let the reader keep in mind the principles set forth previously by the three representatives who have been mentioned as leaders in the cause of Negro education and liberation. [Sidenote: The meeting organization against slave traffic] [Sidenote: Germantown memorial against it] As is quite naturally expected, after this brief introduction to the belief of the Quaker leaders, we find that the society placed itself as a unit opposed to the perpetuation of bondage among the Blacks. Friends were astonished to find, when they arrived, that slavery existed in Penn’s colony, and as early as 1688 those settled at Germantown entered a memorable protest against it.[1171] Five years later George Keith, a Quaker who a few years later came into disfavor with the society, entered a vigorous denunciation of the practice of holding slaves.[1172] The general tenor of these protests is against _perpetual bondage_, their idea being that since it already existed, there should be a time limit set at the expiration of which all those held should become free. It would have been possible for individual protests and those of smaller meetings to have gone on indefinitely and still have accomplished but little in the way of influencing others. Similar expressions from a central organization, speaking with some semblance of authority, could have accomplished much more, and did so, though not till some years later. The advices issued by the yearly meeting were usually in the nature of reproof, scarcely or never mandatory. One of the earliest was drawn up at the yearly meeting in 1727 and sent to the meetings subject thereto. [Sidenote: Yearly Meeting regarding slave trade] It is the sense of this meeting that the importation of negroes from their native country and relations by Friends, is not a commendable or allowable practice, and is therefore censured by this meeting.[1173]