The National Register. — London, England, 1811-05-26 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER. • religious persecution, he a' horned. The Bible was in all mens' • „bands, and he scrupkd not to declare, that he deemed the creed t Of that sect to be the best which should most truly and clearly - interpret that sacred text. Coercion in all 'matters of opinion was not only unjust and absurd, but impracticable. It was generally acknowledged, and be believed could hardly be denied, 1, that the spirit of liberal toleration was the basis of the English Church, and so long as that Church should last, there was •no d.ingtr of tolerations being destroyed or impaired. The • object of the Noble Author of the Bill was first to make uni form the acts of toleration, and secondly to secure to dissenters the credit and benefit of wise and competent Ministers. The purity of his motive could hardly by any sect or person be mis taken ; but while he saw the number of petitions against the Bill, presented and si::ned by the very persons in whose behalf it was principally framed, he could not help suggesting to the Noble Lord his opinion of the propriety of withdrawing it. Lord ERSKINE could not help wishing that the further con sideration of the Bill had been postponed, when instead of the number of Petitions then on the Table, ten times that number would be accumulated. The Bill was in its letter as well as spirit directly repugnant to the Act of Toleration ; and, in the very otitet of it, the first paragraph was contradicted by the second. He not. only objected to the principle of the Bill, but the very preamble and era,:tnieuts were incongruous and in consistent. Upon the subj •ct of religions toleration he con ertvost it was the inherent right of evt.ry man to interpret the Holy Scriptures of God in that way in w :tich they presented themselves to his mind. This Dill affected to give some tolera tion,- vi.ic it tc directly rei•ugnant to Cie Toleration Act. • lie consldereil it the - right of every an to teach and propound the Scriptures iii* any way he might think roost conducive to the ialrt:ioo of mankind, peov dk no; preach Lila phony or•libelloui matter; and being wholly adverse to the principle_ of the Bill, he inovi.d, a', an amendment, that it be read a se cond time this day six months. The LORD enA Nc ELL° a felt, that l i nnder the existing circumstance, and in the present di position of the House, it Would be uwst prudent not to press the B:11 until this question should become more generally understood; at the same time he thought the Bill would ultimately confer the most beneficial • erects upon Dis, , enters in general. Lord !fort AND oljected warmly to the principle Of the Bill, which he considered as almost subversive of religious liberty. It had evtr been, and ever should be his. principle, in civil or rel4,itai3 libtny, that every man bad a right to entertain his own opinions, provided they were not incompatible with the rules of society. Earl STA:inure. said, he feh more pleasure than he could well express at seeing so many petitions presented to th , ,ir Lord ships Against this wretched bill ; it was a convincing proof that there was tench a thing as a public voice in rhe country, and gave the lie direct to those ho would assert the contrary. lie was rejoiced that there were so many in the country to be found who would .vnth: forwar4l to express their opinions in a rnanrer which so Wtll becante them. lie begged leave to,make a ley: obiervatirnis en the present question, not merely to state his objections to the Bill , because he considered it dead and gone, and consigned to the grave, never to rise k!ain ; and no nuinof sense would ever think of quarrelling with its carcase. This Was not an enacting, but a declamatory Bill; and he dared all . the Lawyers in that Home to contradict him, and state that it declared the Law was Law as it exactly is. He was one of those who detested the Act called the Toleration Act, because .that Act did not go far enough. He was per haps the only person who had read more upon this subject than all the Lawyers in the Land, or even my Lords the Bi shops ; and he had extracted from npv.-ards of :300 laws on reli sion, and Ns-ere he to read them, he was convinced he would Make their Lordships disgusted with all there statutes, and laugh " 'at the ignorance of their forefathers. But as his Noble Friend was fond of bringing in Bill 3 of this description, he should give him a precedent to follow, and the best Act he found in our code was that of Edward die 6th, who was the first true Protestant, for he could not call Henry the Bth a true Protestant. He • should also reconfmend to his Noble Friend, for an example, the law of North America, in Connecticut, where there was no tithes: 11l these laws thvre was a remark.lbie provision, that no Clergyman could sue 1w a bond in any court of justice, because if he did his duty he could want no payment was the right of human nature to express men's opinions upon religious sub jests--no Parli:nnt nt, no I .ev islature, could deprive them of it ; and it was thou this principle that he did, in a former Parli.t rlient, endeavour to clime their Lordship, to repeal many Of these aborni able exi..ting statutes. lie professed not to be fond Of toleration alone, but of human liberty' as connected with the • liberty of con science ; and' :le abhorred what he called that blasted term, toleration. The Earl of BUCKINGHAIIsUIRE said, there was nothing be had heard in the course of the dvb . .ze th.:t did nut sacn3thcat Iris opinion, that this Bill should go to a Committee, save and except the opinion delivered by his Noble Friend (Lord I.iver. pool), who had declared, that it was not kit siable to make any further progress in the Bill at present. It wa- ,ertainly however, that great difficulties had arisen lion the construction of the Toleration Act, and the diffefence of opinion great both in and out of the House. The ttia! - ,!strAtes found them selves under considerable di ffi culties in the construction of the Act, which it was the object of the Bill to remove ; Inv. as an opinion had been expressed against pressing it at present, from set high an authority, he should vote for its postponriert. Earl GitY.Y was adverse , not only to the principle. but the modification of the Bill. le was the frknd i uni - .trsal tole ration, but the Noble Viscount (Sidnaouth; deel-u ed it'expe dient and necessary that a Bill of Restrai t should pani, with out giving any reason whatever for such ret•taaint. Lord SIDMOUTLI shortly replied, that finding it was the general sense of the House that he should ~ o t Ness t'w. further at present, he would At it altogtttier i,iut he would not pledge himself that he woniti net, at some future period, bring in another Bill, in such a !have as. to aitet their Lordships concum:nce. The question was then Fr, t , and :he secf,nd reading of the Bill negatived. After some turther routine business, the Hoi:-.e adjourned at Twelve o'clock. • ••••1••••II tirEDNESDAY, MAY 23. The Earl of P AD NOR TOSL to :t,! - art to a circumstance which kid fact night takei place in tilt :tber blouse of ?..rhament, and lit thought :it, one in . that House could view i! s aF sr circumstance almost involving the imiel:exident, ex; scer ce of the liou,e of Lords. He 0104 , 1 to a gra:it of an address to the Prince Refrevt for he payment to an individual of no less a sum tl, an 5),000i. without consulting that House, htfore which the subject of the claims of that individual had co n e alreL.:.y • and by which those claims were thrown out as improper. l ie did not mean to give notice of any motion on tti;: subject, merely hoping t hat his Majesty's Ministers would not let it pass without further enquiry. Lord I. an ler& le, Earl I uira, ar d the Lord Chancellor, said a few words on the subject, ce:nciding with Lord Radnor. Tl:e Duke of Noaro r.x said, that this subject would corne before the 'lease among other pecuniary matters, irr the shave of a Bill, when their Lord.hips mibut object to any p: at of it. The conversation then dropped — A djourned WI Friday. FRIDAY, MAN 24. . The House proceeded at one o'clock to the further .comide,a-4 tion of the rerkeley Peerage, in which they were occupied till' ',ix o'clock Oil,: eveyiug, whey, the fur:ll(T hearing of witnesses tLerein was app Anted tiT Mon }ay next, at one o'clock. A great Lumber of and. private Bill were brought up from the Commons, all ul which were read a firs time. BREACH OF PRIViLEGE, Lerd VITERDAT,F. rose to COMpiaill of A great breach of their Lordships Privileges, by the interineddiing of certain per sons with•the chairs of-a Conunittee of that Hou , e, by sending circniar letters to its Members, rale:;tiogo i their eor.duct lit such Commit tue. • His Lordship was interrupted by Lord Moitr rom, at whose in.tance the Bar was cleartr.d, and strangers were instantly ex cluckd. _ _ On our ream we found the House engaged with Sir S. Romlily'a FELONY BILLS. Lord Hor.LAND moving the secnnd reading of the first of them, viz. that respecting shoplifting, on which a loog discus sion to k place. Lord ELLEN aostottort stating Ms objection* to three out of the five. He approved of the two Bills for altering the punhh ments respecting robbing bleach-grounds. but he opposed the rest ) and concluded with moving an amendment, that Instead of the word . " now," there be inserted " this day six months." Lord LAUDERDALE oppOstd the motion. Lotd HOLLAND summed up the arguments of the Noble Lords who we.re opposed to him, and enforced his own reason ing with much ingenious illustration, when the question being put (after reading the amendment), that the word 714011 1 stand part of the motion, a division took place, in whi c h th e was lost--27 to 10.—A:ljourned. SATURDAY, MAY '2 At four o'clock their Lordships met, whetr the following Bills received the Royal Assent by Commission, viz. the Cop per Duty Bill, the Bristol Port Bill, the Calico Weaving Bill, the South Sea Fis.hery Bill, the Bank of Ireland Security Bill, the Iriih t Bill, the Cinque Ports Jurisdiction I