to point out. You take the liberty of making an historical assertion which passes uncontradicted, "that William III. came down to Parliament, and openly expressed his wish, that all Dissenters should be admitted to offices of trust and power." Now the opinion of King William will be best ascertained, both by his recorded declaration when Prince of Orange, and afterwards by his uniform conduct when raised to the throne. Lord Somers observes, that he was a friend to toleration, but not favourable to the repeal of the Test. It is related, "that William III. when Prince of Orange, was applied to by the Papists, and even solicited by James II. to consent to toleration and removal of the Test, he willingly granted the former, but strongly opposed the latter, on the ground that it would endanger the established religion. When he became king, the Dissenters applied to him for the same purpose; but he remained consistent, and would not consent to the removal of the Test."* Also Hume informs us, in the history of James II. that the Prince of Orange, afterwards William III. con

* Tracts by Lord Somers, vol. ix. P. 185.

с

sidered these laws "as a security absolutely necessary for the established religion." His sentiments on this subject were communicated by Pensionary Fagel, the then minister at the Hague, in the following terms, in which the Princess concurred: "The Prince and Princess said, that it was their fixed opinion, that no man merely because he differed from the established Church, should ever, while he remained a peaceable subject, be exposed to any punishment or even vexation. That the Prince and Princess gave heartily their consent for repealing legally all the penal statutes, as well those enacted against the Catholics, as against the Protestant non-conformists; and would concur with the King in any measure for that purpose. That the Test was not to be considered as a penalty inflicted on the professors of any religion, but as a security provided for the established worship. That it was no punishment on men to be excluded from public offices, and to live peaceably on their own revenues and industry: that even in the United Provinces, which were often cited as models of toleration, though all sects were admitted, yet civil offices were only

enjoyed by the professors of the established religion. That military commands indeed were sometimes bestowed on Catholics; but as they were conferred with great precaution, and still lay under the controul of the magistrate, they could give no just reason for umbrage. And that their Highnesses, however desirous of gratifying the King, and of endeavouring by every means to render his reign peaceable and happy, could not agree to any measure which would expose their religion to such imminent danger.

Such were the sentiments of this wise and virtuous prince, sentiments to which he steadily adhered when he came to the throne. At the same time it may well be remembered, that if William had propossessions in favour of any particular views in religion, it was to the Calvinistic doctrines that he was presumed to be attached which were not at that period, more than they are now, identified with those of the Church of England.† It is curious here to

* Hume, James II.

+ The love of liberty, and the desire to maintain the inviolability of the Church in earlier time from any usurpation, even previous to the Reformation, is thus expressed in the

remark, that the attempt to repeal the Test Laws, an attempt which is at present repeated, was the sole cause and justification of that policy pursued by our ancestors, which obliged the second James to abdicate the throne. He published his sentiments in a declaration one year previous to his abdication, which was couched in the following terms: "Forasmuch as we are desirous to have the benefit of the service of all our loving subjects, and that none of our subjects may for the future be under any discouragement or disability-we do declare, that it is our royal will and pleasure, that the oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, the several Tests. made in the twenty-fifth and thirtieth years of the reign of our late Royal Brother King Charles II. shall not, at any time hereafter, be regarded to be taken, declared or subscribed, by any person or persons whatsoever, who is or shall be employed in any office or place of trust, either civil or military, under us, or in our government." Let it not be forgotten, that this declaration was

first article of the Grand Charter, granted in the reign of Henry III. "Quod ecclesia Anglicana libera sit, et habeat omnia sua jura, et libertates illæsas."

the principal ground-work of his subjects withdrawing their allegiance from him, and making the following protestation: "That James II. by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, ministers and judges, employed by him, did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant Religion, and the laws and liberties of the kingdom.'

You proceed, my Lord, as a prop to your argument, to adduce the opinion of those on whose judgment and learning you seem to place great reliance-Bishops Hoadley and Kennet and Dean Travers. And are these the only Divines among the numerous prelates, whose lives or whose writings have adorned our Church, or have handed down their names to posterity? whose opinions you can record as favourable to the abolition of the Test system? Where are those "shining lights" of the Church who have mixed at all in the political discussions of the day? Permit me to give you the opinion of some of those who were not inferior in talent or

* Declaration in the preamble to the act called the Bill of Rights, made by the Lords and Commons, assembled at Westminster, 1687.