nigh buried in oblivion, again revived between members of the same body. We should see an increase of hostility and envy aroused against all the faithful members of the Establishment, the prevailing patronage bestowed by Corporate Bodies on members of their own persuasion-the repairing to the Conventicle instead of the Church—and lastly, all that spirit of disaffection and encroachment revived, which had been long checked by the wise enactments of our ancestors, now again burst into a flame at their removal, while similar scenes of anarchy and revolution, may again stain the plains of England with her sons' blood. Is this a picture of fancy? History is a mirror in which all men may read the future in the past. Let history tell. The annals of the seventeenth century can furnish a tale, which ille qui spernit dementat. But if the Dissenters considered this such a serious grievance, how comes it to pass, that so few instances of their presenting themselves to Parliament have occurred for nearly a century.

The whole question then turns on this point; whether the strict alliance which has for centuries existed between the civil and ecclesiastical

institutions of this country does not require the restrictive principle of the laws. If you have a Church establishment, will you not for the safety of that establishment, exclude those who are inimical to its principles and doctrines? Not only the preeminence of the Church, but its very existence, appears to demand this. The present petitions prove-that the Dissenters are averse to the Test; and if averse, that they are not friendly to the Establishment;-since no faithful son of the Church will hesitate one moment in submitting to any Test, or in giving any pledge of his loyalty to the throne, and veneration for the church. The Dissenters themselves, though they may object to Tests as being barriers to their admission to political power, cannot abstractedly object to their being excluded from office by a state of which the Church is a main branch, and to hold place under a king, who is of that Church the supreme head. It is objected, that in other countries, as America for instance, there are no religious Tests. If any religion be the tolerated religion of the States in America, it is merely tolerated, it is not the established religion of the state inviola

bly united to it by the first principle of the laws. But though in America they have no religious Tests, since religion is not fostered and supported by the government, yet they have a constitutional Test, and all who are admitted to political power in the United States must previously swear to preserve the constitution.* As it has been well observed on this point; "in the pledge of obedience to the laws, American and British subjects are on an equality; for it is required of both, if they would fill offices, and be invested with public authority, that they should previously be bound by an oath to support the whole of the constitution in all its branches. The oath leaves no pretext for exception to this or that branch." There are two other objections to any departure from the existing system of Tests. The one derived from the consideration, that any alteration which will strengthen the hands of the Dissenters, and give them increase power in the state, will have a tendency to

of

* Even William Penn, in his form of government for the province of Pennsylvania, excluded all persons from a share in the administration of justice or seat of power, but those who professed christianity.-Vide Warburton's All.

G

break the harmony and disturb the good-will which at present subsists between the Churchman and the Dissenter; and the other, that all concessions in this important question, all ⚫ breaches in the walls of the sacred fabric, which is already partially undermined, must render the safety of the whole structure more precarious. For with regard to the latter point, the repeal of any part of the present Test Laws will be vantage ground gained by the Catholics. It will advance them one step nearer the ultimatum of their wishes. The principal securities which the Church at present has, against their admission to power are comprised in those very acts,* which are proposed to be altered and amended. Those who are opposed to the grand question of Catholic Emancipation may do well to pause before they give their sanction to any alteration of the Test Laws, and reflect whether they

*The acts in question which bear on the Catholic question are the 13th, 25th and 30th of Charles II.; the acts of Uniformity of Elizabeth and Charles II. and of William and Mary, and the 5th of Anne. The acts of Charles II. the last as amended by that of George I. your motion went to repeal. These are the principal barriers of exclusion to the Roman Catholics.

would not by that measure be advancing the Catholic claims.*

Lastly, you state that you consider it the duty of government to bow to the improvement of the times. Improvement, my Lord, is sometimes another word for innovation. Your own experience and knowledge of history, might teach you the lesson of not acceding to the "civium ardor prava jubentium." You might have known, that the wise of all ages have uniformly resisted popular reform. That novelty captivates only the superficial and thoughtless,"t and that the spirit of the British Constitution is comprised in the sentence, Nolumus leges Angliæ mutari." You might have learnt, that the

66

* It was well argued by the present distinguished Secretary for the Home Department, that if Roman Catholics were admitted to the Bench, the custom of attending Divine service at the assizes, before the judges proceed to court, would either be dispensed with or transferred to the Catholic Chapel. But would not the same event be likely to occur in the case of the elevation of a violent Dissenter, for instance, a warm descendant of the Presbyterian of former days ? If offices of trust and responsibility are generally to be filled by those who are hostile to the Establishment, shall we be surprised at seeing the Meeting-house or the Conventicle preferred to the Church?

+ Johnson.