own corps, but generally throughout the expected that their soldiers, their officers, country, when two hundred thousand Dis- and non-commissioned officers, would bear senters were volunteers. No men could with such a law? He held it to be imdisplay greater enthusiasm in the cause- possible. It was in vain to think of enno men could conduct themselves with forcing the conditions required by these more discretion. It had never entered the acts on a people so attached to their own head of any one to suspect them of dis- opinions as the Presbyterians, and so inaffection, or to represent them as unfit to structed, by those whom they regarded be intrusted with arms. In every capacity as authorities in matters of church governit was the same-their conduct would bear ment and discipline ? They could not the strictest scrutiny. In learning, in enforce it on them, nor on such officers of talent, in morals, they had distinguished the army and navy as were Dissenters. themselves, as well as in the humbler Nay, if it was the misfortune of England virtues which constituted the worth of to have a minister weak and wicked citizens. He could mention names amongst enough to enforce the legal penalties for them which would at once command the the neglect, the Speaker of that House reverence of Christians of every sect—that might expect some afternoon, while he was of Lardner, for instance; but it was un- at his devotions, preparatory to the business necessary to particularize. They could of the day, to see a party of zealots enter boast of eminent men in all professions, the House, as once they had done, and of useful men in all the avocations of life. tell him, that he must go and “ seek the It was ridiculous, absurd, and mischievous, Lord elsewhere.” To be sure, it was said at that time of day, to slander such a class on the other side, “We do not intend that of persons by keeping on the Statute-book these acts should be put in force, and we acts which, though they were not enforced, show you that we entertain no such intenamounted to a gross insult. When he tion by passing an annual Indemnity bill.” considered the nature of religious enthu- What did hon. gentlemen mean by adoptsiasm, and looked back at the actions iting this course? Was it that they desired had given rise to—when he saw amongst to hold the Test act over the heads of the the Dissenters of later date, men who had Dissenters in terrorem? Did the penalties fought the battles of the country, and had mean nothing? If they did not, they were shed their blood in its defence-men to only calculated to inspire ridicule and conwhom we owed our former glory and our tempt. He left it to the House to deterpresent safety-it was impossible not to mine whether the course hitherto adopted feel the gross injustice, as well as the im- ought to be persisted in. prudence, of continuing these obnoxious In looking back at the history of the statutes. The body of men of whom the debates on this subject, he had observed non-commissioned officers were composed an argument put forward under the sancwere generally Scotch. Of the Scotch, tion of some of the greatest names ever he would say, what had been said of them known in this country,

It was an arguby a high authority — that the Scotch ment that was expected to silence all oppoPresbyterian was not a very docile animal : sition, and was to this effect :-" That on the contrary, he was disposed to ad- Dissenters were troublesome and impertihere firmly to his religion ; and it was the nent persons, to complain of the exercise opinion of one of the most eminent men of that right which every government enin the Scotch church, that a Presbyterian joyed, to regulate as it pleased the conduct complying with the regulations of the and profession of all persons who should Test act, abandoned his own faith and take office under it, either civil or military.” followed that of the Church of England. This right, it was contended, was an abThey had had Scotchmen amongst them stract right, which every government might who held situations of high importance; a enforce, it being for those who sought office circumstance not to be wondered at, when to consider whether or not they would it was considered, that their talents, their comply with the regulations imposed upon industry, and their moral character, were them. He was ready to meet the asserof a description to give them a preference tion of this principle with utter disdain. over the natives of most other countries. He denied it altogether, and would take He asked, were such individuals to be ex- the liberty, as a plain man, to employ his posed to the annoyance of an enactment common sense in looking at it. He held like that now in question? Was it to be that no man could claim to exercise a right to the wrong or injury of another. in defiance of such laws and the penalties If this was true in the case of a single in- they threatened, and the poverty they endividual, it was true as it regarded a coun- tailed, stood firm to their conscientious try. He submitted the assumption which opinions, instead of being objectionable, was made to fix certain regulations upon were “ worthy of all acceptation,” and taking office to the criterion of public were much more worthy of employment utility. He meant by the phrase "public than those who were capable of courting utility," that course which gave the greatest it by the surrender of their principles. Was happiness to the greatest number of indi- there any man in that House who could viduals. Referring to this principle, he withhold his admiration from the purity of could not discover how the right claimed sentiment, and from the elevation of mind, contributed to the happiness of any; but which these individuals had so long dishe clearly perceived that it impaired, or played ? And yet, what was the reward might impair, the happiness of all. It which they had hitherto received? Their was, therefore, incumbent on the House reward was a cruel and unjust code of to repeal an act which in principle was so penal laws. He was sorry that such laws hostile to the spirit of the constitution, and should ever have found their way into our which in practice was found to be attended Statute-book ; for in every country in with so many inconveniences. The sub- which such laws had been established, they ject was too ridiculous to admit of argu- had been found the certain promoters of ment. He would refer to a publication bitterness and discord, if not of bloodshed by a gentleman whom it was impossible to and civil war. name without respect and admiration-one The motion of that night called upon who had always exerted his talents, and them to do an act of justice to threethey were various, on the side of liberality eighths of the population of Great Britain, -he alluded to the rev. Sydney Smith -- who were insulted, and grossly insulted, who, in one of his publications, had said, by the continuance of these unjust, and in reference to the exclusive principle un- ridiculous, and antiquated laws. Let the happily adopted in our domestic policy, House also reflect on the injury which that it was not more rational to persevere these laws were inflicting on the inbabiin it, than to make a regulation that we tants of another part of the empire. They should employ no individuals who happened were injuring, in Ireland, seven millions to have red hair. The Dissenters felt no of persons, by keeping them in a state of objection to the sacramental rite, but in degradation and ignorance, which was not so far as it was considered a holy one; but only dreadful to themselves, but dangerous they did not wish that a. rite ordained by to the common weal. Were these laws rethe author of our religion, for sacred pur- pealed, the Dissenters would cherish feelposes, should be profaned by applying it ings of amity towards the established to the attainment of civil offices. Rather church, and á union would be cemented than do so they were content to remain in between England and Ireland, which had poverty and obscurity: and surely their hitherto existed in little but name. They objection was a conscientious one. A lived in an age that well deserved to be Baptist or Unitarian might, for different called extraordinary and wonderful-an reasons, say, that they would not comply age in which moral improvement, and with the sacramental test, because they scientific improvement, and mechanical entertained conscientious scruples which improvement, were raising men far above they were not content to sacrifice to their their former level, were giving them powers personal advantage. This might be con- and endowments which they had never sidered a foolish principle, but he respected previously possessed, and were inciting it. The parties making objections of this them, with a force which could not be rekind took for their rule the law of the sisted, to those manly and invigorating Almighty, as they understood it, and by pursuits after truth, which could not fail that law endeavoured to regulate their to confer the most signal benefits upon soactions. Hypocrites in religion might dis- ciety. Would they, under such circumpense with the form as well as the sub- stances, persist in the support of laws stance, when it suited their convenience to which had been engendered by fanaticism, do so; and it was the curse of a country and nourished by unrelenting ignorance which enacted such laws, to make hypocrites and prejudice? They ought not to forby act of parliament. But the men who, get, that Great Britain had been the nurse of toleration; and that, though she had of Commons (even constituted as that often acted in the spirit of persecution, she House was), to enforce such a law. Then had been the first to teach a milder and a why keep it on the Statute-books ? It better spirit to the civilized world. He was worse than childish to hold a rod over was sure that if common sense should con- our backs which they dared not use. These tinue to exercise its influence in the coun- intolerant laws had been repealed in every try, all the acts which disqualified indi- civilized country, but our own. England, viduals for civil offices on account of their enlightened England, was the only country religious opinions, must be obliterated which cherished and preserved them! It from the Statute-book. Whenever that was believed by some, that these laws were blessed period should arrive, Great Britain a security to the established church, but would be hailed as the arbitress and bene- this was a most mistaken opinion. What factress of mankind; and he was con- could compensate the church for the odium vinced that she was only prevented from which these laws created against it ? for enjoying that high distinction at the pre- the irritated and resentful feelings of a sent moment, by the cruel enactments majority of the population of the kingdom, which she still retained among the statutes who were deprived of equal civil rights with of her land. He was sorry to have tres- that class of their fellow-citizens, who enpassed so long upon the attention of the joyed the whole of the revenues which the House; but the importance, the para- state appropriates to religious services? The mount importance, of the subject must be Dissenters were accused of denying to his excuse. “If you shall determine to their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects, the proceed in the career which you have so enjoyment of those equal rights which they long pursued,” said the hon. member, claimed for themselves; and it must be "you may depend upon it, that great evils admitted, that some Dissenters were not will impend over you, whereas all of them free from old anti-catholic principles; but may be averted by your adopting a differ- these prejudices were now fast disappearent course: peace and happiness may then ing. The House had received many peticome among you, and remain with you to tions for the repeal of all civil disabilities, the most distant generations.” In conclu- on account of religious belief. The Corsion, he thanked the House for listening poration act was yet very generally acted to him so patiently, and ended by second-on, to the exclusion of Dissenters. This ing the motion of his noble friend. was, in some respects, a privilege rather

Mr. Marshall said, that having pre-than a penalty to the person excluded, sented many petitions from his consti- who could decline to serve a troublesome tuents, who were anxious for the repeal of office, without being subject to any fine these intolerant laws, he could not give a for not serving it, which others would be silent vote on this occasion. He did not subject to. But the act was here injurious participate in the great anxiety which some to the public interest, by limiting the choice persons felt for the repeal of these laws, to a smaller number, and excluding men because he considered them as virtually who might be most competent to fulfil the repealed by the annual Indemnity acts. duties of a useful office. It was also highly The Test act had been laid asleep for injurious to the public interest, by keeping nearly a century, during which period not up that intolerant party-spirit, for which one opportunity had occurred, not one some corporations were so remarkable. solitary occasion, upon which the friends Mr. Wilbraham said :of intolerance and bigotry had dared to Mr. Speaker; I feel how many apologies put it in force. Could they, then, hope—are due, not only to the hon. gentleman could they flatter themselves, that any fu- who has given way to me, but to the ture occasion could arise, which would House itself, for thus early presenting myself give them the power of enforcing this to its notice, and for claiming its attention odious law ?-A law which might inflict at a moment when the opinions of so the most atrocious penalties on a man, many more able and experienced memwho had served his country in some useful bers are anxiously looked for. But, office, but who had refused to profane a Sir, the present is one of those subjects solemn religious rite for secular purposes. which have ever made a deep impression on It would be too revolting to the spirit of my mind : it is one in which those principles the age, too gross an insult on common of civil and religious liberty which I have sense, for any legislature, for any House I ever been taught to revere, are so intimately involved, that I make no further posed, not on account of the religious opiexcuse than to acknowledge my incapa- nions of those who were their victims ; city to do justice to the great cause in not because this man believed in transubwhich I find myself engaged.

stantiation, or that held doctrines inconsisThat a state should be placed in such tent with the national creed ; but because a situation as to be obliged, for whatever there were certain feelings and polireasons, and under whatever circum- tical attachments supposed to be inherent stances, to renounce the services of a con- in, and inseparable from, these religious siderable part of its subjects, ought ever professions. "If you can prove that the to be esteemed a matter of serious regret; Catholics of the present day are aiming but when those causes which gave rise to a at the subversion of our constitution, and necessity have ceased to operate-when are desirous of bringing back a race of those circumstances have been changed kings, whose only pretension to the throne .by the lapse of time--then that exclusion of these kingdoms was founded upon which state policy originally might have the shadowy claim of legitimacy, I own justified, becomes little less than a tyranny, that they might fairly be looked upon as and an arbitrary interference with the objects of suspicion. But then, the bur.sacred and equal rights of mankind. then of the proof rests with those who would

If I were inclined to trace this exclu- deprive them of their rights as citizens. sive policy to any other feeling than to If you could prove that the Protestant, that common vulgar feeling which actuates Dissenters were plotting the overthrow of men to monopolize to themselves, and to our establishments in church and state, I a small circle around them, the honours then—as undoubtedly was the case in the and emoluments of the world ; were it ne- century before the last-should be obliged cessary to trace it to any other princi- to confess that it would not be unjust or ple than to that principle by which the unfair to debar them from all offices of strong are universally found to oppress the trust and power. But then another conweak, I might ascribe it to the prevalence sideration would present itself: I should of a system, or rather to the abuse of a ask, do they possess the means, the physystem, which has grown out of a supposed sical power, to carry their designs into alliance, between the Church and the effect? for it would be absurd in us to State. Now, Sir, according to my view enact new laws, or what, in fact, is the same of this subject, I cannot conceive two thing, to continue laws already existing, things, the origin of which is more distinct, inorder to suppress mere abstract opinions-and the purpose of which ought to be opinions not demonstrated by any overt act. . more dissimilar, than Religion and the But, were I even to allow, for the sake of. Civil government. And yet by this sys- argument, that these evil dispositions did tem, we are taught to blend and to con- exist in conjunction with the means of found them together. We are taught to giving them effect; and here I must be clothe the Statewith the sacred mantle of Re- understood, as admitting that proposition ligion, and to ascribe to it a character and for the sake of argument only; for I do attributes which cannot be said to belong not think that there exists a body of to it : and we are taught to look upon men more loyal and more attached to the religion as the mere handmaid of the constitutional liberties of the country, government, itself a constituent part and then the Protestant Dissenters — then estate of the realm, and we end by worship- would come before us this great question, ing it as an engine in the hands of the civil and then only would it be necessary to enpower, and as the stepping-stone to indi- tertain it, for where there is no danger, vidual ambition. Not that I am ready there is no need of security - whether broadly to assert that, under no assignable the laws as they now stand, whether the circumstances, a state can be justified in Test and Corporation acts, and the other remaking religious distinction the ground of strictive laws, are adapted to furnish that civil disability. I am not prepared to say that security, and to ward off the danger which, our ancestors have universally been wrong under that supposition, might be said to in making religious faith the criterion by impend over us. which to judge of loyalty and attachment Now, Sir, I think it might easily be to the state. But then this great distinc-shown, that of all the laws that could be tion ought never to be lost sight of; devised, these are the least calculated to namely, that these disabilities were im-effect the purpose which they profess to

a

a

have in view. And this for two reasons :- most powerful and dangerous of that body, In the first place, a man may be a very and to compel the resignation of the duke good and regular communicant with the of York, (which in fact was its real object), Church of England, and yet entertain ideas who then held the office of high admiral. very hostile to the liberties and the consti- But I should ill requite the indulgence tution of his country. Let me cite the which the House seems inclined to extend example of the bishops who, in the reign to me, were I unnecessarily to take up any of Charles the 2nd, all, with the exception considerable portion of its time, and I of three, voted against the Bill of Exclu- should give but a poor specimen of my sion; and the same bishops did, in the discretion upon the first time of addressing succeeding reign, unanimously oppose the it, were I to enter upon a field which has Revolution and the establishment of king been already occupied with so much William. Thus, if these orthodox com- ability by the noble lord who has preceded municants had obtained their object, which me. I shall, therefore, confine myself to was the permanency of their legitimate make a few remarks upon the most obking, they would not only have destroyed vious and prominent of those objections the civil liberties of the state, but they which have usually been made to the rewould also have upset their own hierar- peal of the Test and Corporation acts. chy, the preservation of which they owed, In the first place, I must take notice of in great measure, to those very Dissen- that argument by which it is pretended, ters whom, afterwards, they had the mean that, in consequence of the annual act of ness to persecute.

Indemnity, these laws are rather an imaMy second argument is one to which ginary, than a real, grievance. Now, I I think some favour ought to be shown in must say that it is a singular mode of dethis House. And here, it must be con- fending any body of laws, to say

that they fessed, that we have an advantage which are only made tolerable by their constant rarely falls to any disputants; for we are and systematic infraction. But it must be not only supported by those who are recollected, that a bill of Indemnity, howusually called the friends of religious ever useful for the service of the state, and liberty, among whom may be reckoned to protect even members of the church some of the brightest characters of the age, from the penal effects of those statutes, but we have also the silent acquiescence, is but a temporary concession, it is a and the tacit consent of our opponents licence granted; it is not a liberty recogthemselves; for, to what other principle of nised; on the contrary, it recognises that common sense can I reconcile it, that false and vicious principle of government, these gentlemen should come down to this by which the stronger are allowed to supHouse, year after year, and give their votes press and exclude the weaker portion of the for the bill of Indemnity (which is in fact community on account of their religious a virtual repeal of those laws which they opinions. But I deny that they can be now pretend are essential as bulwarks to esteemed merely imaginary grievances. our establishments) unless they were in What! is it no grievance for an Englishtheir own minds intimately convinced of man to hold his liberties by an annual their utter inutility and worthlessness. lease only? Is it no hardship to hold his

Were it necessary for me to go into the rights by such a precarious tenure? Is it historical part of this question, I think it no grievance to be subject to the caprice of could easily be shown, that the Test act any one branch of the legislature, and to was enacted as a check upon the royal owe it to their forbearance only that he is power, at a time when the king could not not crushed by the weight of the penalties be intrusted with the nomination of his attached to these laws ? Are these no grievown servants. Strange it is, that it should ances? now be supported under a monarch of a And here I must generally remark, that different character, and upheld, too, by the evil of exclusive, and restrictive, laws gentlemen who have lately derived so does not consist so much in the actual much benefit from the free exercise of this deprivation of place and power to those prerogative ; I think, too, it could easily who are their victims, as in the stigma be shown, that the Test act was intended which they cast upon them, as in the to control the Catholics; for its imme- degradation into which they undeservedly diate consequence was the deprivation of plunge them, and in the insolent superilord treasurer Clifford, who was one of the ority with which they awe their opponents. VOL. XVIII.

2 A

а