A Modern Quaker Follows George Fox’s Example in Court

“THE COURT: Take your hat off. 

THE DEFENDANT: I think that is an honor reserved only for the Lord. 

THE COURT: Take him out. Confine him. 

The preceding is from a certified transcript of a court action that took place not in 1673 but 1973. On Twelfth Month 21, 1973, Joseph P. Kinneary, senior federal judge for the southern district of Ohio, ordered Grant D. Kaufmann, aged 19, of Barnesville, Ohio, to the baildock for contempt in refusing to observe hat honor. 

Grant, like many Friends, publicly refused to register with Selective Service. The FBI arrested Grant last autumn while he was perched in an apple tree harvesting the year’s crop. 

Grant, in characteristic Christian fashion, offered the agent an apple, but he declined because he was “on duty.” The agent turned out to be a Baptist which led to much discussion on the duties of a Christian. When Grant was The judge, however, did not accept this viewpoint. He was quite willing to tolerate failure to rise and plain clothes, but not the failure to observe hat honor. turned over to the U.S. Marshal, the agent finally accepted an apple because he was no longer “on duty.” At the sentencing he spoke up to mention Grant’s letter of nonregistration to the draft board to show the judge that Grant did not evade detection for violating the Selective Service law, but publicly refused to register for reasons of conscience. 

In order that the judge would be prepared for meeting a plain Friend in his courtroom, Grant wrote to Joseph Kinneary: 

As to the use of titles (such as “your honor), rising, removing the hat, &c.: believing all people to be equal before God and children of the same Heavenly Father, regardless of their station in this world, we have felt it required of us to refrain from the use of “titles of respect” as well as from bowing, kneeling, rising, removing the hat or similar gestures of deference to our fellow human beings. We feel that it cheapens these gestures when they are offered to mortals like ourselves and believe it far better to reserve all such acts of submission for Almighty God to whom we owe all the glory and all the honor. – Letter of 6th of 11th Month, 1973 

The judge, however, did not accept this viewpoint. He was quite willing to tolerate failure to rise and plain clothes, but not the failure to observe hat honor.

The judge then asked me as Grant’s attorney to persuade Grant to observe hat honor. A plain Friend myself, I agreed to explain the Court’s position to the defendant. However, a Friend’s later remark, that if Quakers have not been able to change their minds on this testimony in 300 years, how could there be a change in twenty minutes, reflected my own feelings. One of the clerks happened to be a Gurneyite Quaker, and he was overheard to remark that Grant would never come down from the baildock. 

A temporary compromise was reached. Grant would leave his hat in the baildock in order to proceed with the arraignment. He would be given an opportunity to discuss the reasons for failure to observe hat honor with the judge. A not guilty plea was entered.

After the arraignment, Grant met with a clearness committee comprised of elders from Stillwater Meeting in Barnesville. Grant gained from this the strength to follow Friends testimonies and a sense of clarity with regard to his witness.” 

— David R. Morrison, 1974 (source)
American Quaker lawyer