rejecting the Bill brought in by Earl Stanhope, he meant it to be understood that nothing would be done by government with regard to the disabilities under which the dissenters laboured? If so, he should feel it to be his duty, however unequal to the task, to submit to the House some proposition upon the subject. Course all the ministers were eager to be let into so advantageous a secret, thinking that they person ally should be relieved of some of the burdens they were in com mon compelled to sustain but the reverse was the fact, and they were not a little disappointed, and it drew down their faces to an enormous length, when the pre. late informed them that he sug The Earl of Liverpool replied, gested a duty upon adultery and that he felt not the least difficulty fornication [laughter]. His lord. in informing the noble baron, “that ship would not detain the House he was thoroughly convinced that longer, although the question was some alteration of the existing laws of the greatest importance. He is absolutely necessary, and he conjured the Right Reverend pre. would add, that the subject had lates well to weigh the subject, most seriously occupied the atten divested of those prejudices which tion of the cabinet, and of himself they naturally cast into the scale; individually. Every person at he addressed them not only on be. all acquainted with the subject, half of the Dissenters, but on be. would be aware that many diffi half of the Protestant religion. culties were to be overcome, but And for the Dissenters he might his Lordship hoped in the course address them in the eloquent words of a few days (although he by no of St. Paul, when before Agrippa, means could pledge himself) to "Would to God that not only bring forward a bill to apply a rethose, but all who hear me, were medy to the evils now complained not only almost but altogether of." such a one as I am,-except these Lord Holland observed, that bonds." His lordship expressed whatever objections he might feel bis gratitude to Heaven, that there to some of the details of the meawas now some prospect that "these sure just dismissed, yet no bill to bonds" would be broken. Be be proposed by the noble carl, the consequences what they might, would satisfy his mind unless it he would be one of the first to at- were founded on the same princitempt their destruction. ple. The question was then put, that the Bill be read a second time. A division took place, when the numbers were, Contents Non-contents The Bill was accordingly thrown out. On re-entering the House we found 10 31 Protest on the Rejection of Lord Stanhope's Bill, in the House of Lords, on Friday, July 30. Because the toleration hitherto granted to Dissenters by law is incomplete, amounting to nothing more than a partial and conditional Lord Holland upon his legs. exemption from penalties and per He begged to ask the noble Earl secutions, whereas the bill now opposite (Liverpool) whether by rejected, by recognizing the right of private judgment in matters of VASSAL HOLLAND. Letters of Mr. W. Smith and To the Editor of the Morning Chronicle, is my duty towards those millions of clients, whose just and sacred cause I have voluntarily espoused, to expose to their particular notice every attempt, either to maintain the foul and execrable cause of intolerance, or to support the no less despicable system of mere toleration. Liberty, duly recog. nized, in matters of religion, breaks the people's chains; but, toleration (which always necessarily implies a right to be intolerant) tends to rivet them. In the account of Lord Stanhope's speech, given in your pa. I have now to ask this Mr. per of this morning, I observe so William Smith a few plain and very extraordinary an attack made honest questions; and to which on me, in so very extraordinary questions the public will expect a manner too, by name, in a place clear and distinct answers. where I could neither reply, nor First, let me ask him, What even elsewhere regularly notice the future system of laws would what was there said, that I can- have been, supposing that his in-. not but hope that your reporter tended bill had actually passed? has been incorrect; as otherwise I am unavoidably reduced to the necessity of doubting the decorum, the accuracy, and the candour of the noble Lord. I am, Şir, Your obedient humble servant, W. SMITH. Park Street, Westminster, SIR, I mean by that question, What would have been those laws, if carried into execution, which bis project would have left unrepeal ed? Secondly, to come with him. to closer quarters still, I will ask him, Whether any Methodists, or Protestant Dissenters, or any Nonconformists, either men or women, could, notwithstanding In consequence of a strange let the passing of his Bill, go to any ter, signed "W. SMITH, and meeting-house legally, and withdated Park Street, Westminster, out fear of punishment, till after July 4th, 1812," which has ap. such men or such women respecpeared in the Morning Chronicle tively, shall have travelled to the of the 6th instant, I deem it quite General Sessions of the Peace, in necessary to interrogate a little order, in open court, to qualify that gentleman before the public. themselves, even to hear at a Mr. William Smith, so interro- meeting-house a discourse about gated, shall no longer have to say, religion, or to say their prayers (as he has stated in his printed there publicly, supposing them to letter) that he can "" neither be so inclined? ply," nor "regularly notice" my propositions. re. As a warm, zealous, and sinsere friend of religious liberty, it Thirdly, The expence attending the carrying the Yorkshire freeholders only to the place of poll, at the last general election, being estimated at one hundred swers themselves. But if Mr. thousand pounds, I will ask Mr. Smith shall insist that his project William Smith, Whether the tra is a wise one, this grand question velling expences of the whole body between him and me may be of the male and female noncon- submitted to the decision, either formists of the county of York of the liberal and enlightened pub alone, which would be incurred lic at large, or to that of the worfor the purpose of obeying the thy citizens of Norwich in parti law, would not amount to two cular. millions of money, or to some other enormous sum, independent. Berners-street, July 8th, 1812. ly of the loss of their valuable time? And let him recollect, that time is the poor man's property; and that depriving him of it wantonly is in fact, robbing him To the Editor of the Morning Chronicle. of his estate. STANHOPE. Mr. W. Smith's Reply to Lord SIR, Fourthly, Does Mr. William Some of my friends have exSmith, who affects in his letter pressed their surprise, that I should such mighty respect for "deco- have taken any public notice of rum," deem it either decent or the attack which Lord Stanhope decorous, that the female part of made on me in the House of Lords, the community, of all ages, should and in deference to their opinion be stuck up in open court, in pre. I will confess, that, had the knowsence of a grave bench of laical ledge of what his lordship then and clerical justices, and a gazing said been confined to the walls public, to take oaths, and to of Parliament, I should have make declarations, before those thought any defence of myself unfemales are to be by law permitted necessary: but I think these gen to attend a place of worship, and tlemen under-rate his lordship's to offer up to the Deity either their power, on his 'vantage ground. thanksgivings or their prayers? The introducer of a liberal proposition naturally and justly meets with a favourable reception from the public: nor is a peer of the realm supposed to prefer grave charges on insufficient foundations. Fifthly, I will now ask him, Whether any man (and what man by name) except himself, has since the commencement of this nineteenth century, ventured to propose to the ministers of the crown, either the revival or the continuance of laws of such unbounded absurdity, so contemptible in principle, so repugnant to every sound notion of religious liberty, and in practice so infinitely oppressive? If Mr. Smith shall not chuse to answer these pointed questions, the nonconformists of all denominations will supply the proper an Thus I reasoned last Saturday; and the same reasons induce me again to trespass on you, and to request the public attention to this answer to his lordship's letter and questions of Thursday last.-My note his lordship calls " strange." Why? That I should not be dis posed to pass wholly unnoticed, so direct and fierce an attack, and from such a quarter, he himself, at least, ought not to think strange. Was it then "the manner," or "This Mr. W. S. proposed by his "the substance" of my letter Bill a completely new system, by which excited his lordship's asto- which no man was to preach, no nishment? By not taking for old woman to say her prayers in granted the accuracy of the re- a dissenting place of worship, porter, I afforded the speaker an without a licence, and from him!" opportunity of correcting, or dis. But for the kind information of the avowing any error or misstatement. noble lord himself, I should have Did this forbearance create sur- been as much at a loss as any prise? Or, did it seem strange to other human being to have form him that this charge, so unusually ed the slightest conjecture as to made, should strike me as indeco- the meaning of this. Let the pubrous, when I do not find that even lic learn the fact and admire. his own ingenuity can suggest any After several communications other defence of it than the gratu. with Mr. Perceval in the course of itous imagination of my being the the last spring, on some inconveni advocate for "sticking up" females ences and hardships to which the of all ages in open court to "take Dissenters were subjected, the oaths before they say their pray. main object of which was to obers?" If this, Sir, were as true tain the repeal of the primary of me as it is otherwise, even then, evil, the Conventicle Act; Mr. as an argument, how relevant P. said, he was ready to accede would it be, and how conclusive! to our wishes, so far as “to place But I am also reduced to doubt the Toleration Act, unquestion❤ the noble lord's accuracy and can. ably, in law, on the footing of the dour-whether in this I shall be generally accustomed practice; entirely singular, let those who with one or two other minor conmay have the fortitude to read cessions; and desired that we this letter through, determine. His would state the manner in which lordship in his speech asserted, we should think "these objects that "one Mr. W. Smith," (whom might best be accomplished, laying he knew, pretty intimately, full aside for the present all matters on five-and-twenty years ago)," had which we might differ, and going on lately been dabbling in the matter together till we should be obliged on which he was speaking, but to separate." To this proposal, (sarcastically) not with much suc- protesting against it as incomplete, cess." How fortunate, and how we agreed, and heads for a Bill disinterested is Lord Stanhope in were accordingly sketched out by his selection of the criterion of a professional man, on this pritis merit, for any proposed legislative ciple, avowedly short of our enactment! Success! In the wishes and claims, but not creats names, Sir, of that crowd of his ing any new system, only estab own abortive offspring, (numbers lishing and confirming the most of which, in my opinion, deserved a better fate) I protest against it. Could they but rise and speak, how would they deprecate the standard to which he so mercilessly subjects them! To proceed; liberal construction of the old one; not requiring any licence, but for the express purpose of preventing magistrates from changing quali fications into licences, (terms, of which the noble lord must know the difference, however he has con- tion. I answer also, that my pro founded them). This sketch, with ject was to leave as few as possible perhaps some few alterations, was of the obnoxious laws unrepealed. submitted to another body to be His second and third queries apcompared with one they had pre- ply to the first clause of the Tolpared, to decide which was prefer. eration Act, not to any system or able, or whether they might be wish of mine;-the obligation to amalgamated with advantage; but take the oaths which it contains it was never entirely settled, was had better be repealed, and pronever shewn to the minister, (to bably might have been, if it had my knowledge at least) nor was not been long disregarded and alever determined on as a measure most forgotten. His lordship's to be brought forward. If the fourth interrogatory states a bare noble lord can impugn this state- possibility, and, practically, affects ment in any one point, material nobody. To the fifth, I shall to his argument, let him; if he only reply by asking, what must has any other ground for his be thought of a disputant who im. charge against me, let him produce putes to his antagonist "a propo it; if neither, let the charge of sal for the continuance of unproposing," "by a Bill," "a bounded absurdities, contempti new system," " of establishing a ble principles, and infinite oppres new universal necessity for licen- sions," because he endeavours, ces," (I omit the "from him," as in the way which approves itself a figure of speech, though it was to his judgment as most effectual, not inserted for nothing) let this, to destroy and abolish as many of 1 say, be compared with "an un- those absurdities, follies and opfinished sketch," introducing no pressions, as his power and oppornew system, but endeavouring to tunities enable him to cope with. correct the inconveniences of the The truth is, that Lord S. has been old one," and particularly de- saying a great deal, and I have stroying as far as possible the been endeavouring to do as much very idea of a licence," and, sure- as I could. I quarrel not with ly," he who runs may read." I him for his saying; on the conam ashamed, Mr. Editor, of hav. trary, I very generally agree with ing so long trespassed on your paper, the principles and proposed enand the patience of your readers; actments of his Bill; but I knew but I hope that this explanation, it could not pass, and said so to if tedious in itself, will enable many who were fascinated with me the sooner to dispatch the its theoretic beauty, which much noble lord's very pointed interro- enraged some of them, and may gations. His first question, as lu- possibly have caused the present cidly explained by himself, is, ebullition of the noble lord's spleen, "What would have been those which I can assign to no other laws, if carried into execution, immediate cause. I object to the which his, (i. e. my) project would word toleration, and the doctrine have left unrepealed." My answer implied in it, as much as he can is, those laws, if carried into ex- do, for the same reason too, and ecution, would have been the same have long since declared that laws as if not carried into execu- opinion in Parliament as expli |