The Sun. — London, England, 1828-03-19 00:00:00

extent had not long since been carried on at a certain place n Manchester, and the guilty parties could not be brought to punishment, because the affirmation of Quakers was not admissible. He knew also of a case where a quantity of Bank notes had been stolen from a mail-coach, and where the party had escaped punishment from the same cause. In the town of in Hertfordshire, a murder had been committed in the presence of four persons, none of whom were allowed to give evidence because they were Quakers. There was also a case in the West of England of a bank being .robbed, where it was found mpossible to bring the parties to punishment, because the principal witness was a .Quaker. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) could adduce many similar instances in which there had been a failure of justice, owing to the testimony of Quakers being excluded in criminal cases. As 'the law now stood, if a Chinese boy witnessed a murder on the river Thames, he would be allowed to give evidence of the fact, While the scrupulous testimony of a Qnaker would be rejected. Such an anomaly as this ought no longer to exist. The "punishment which attached to perjury in cases where the evidence was given on oath, extended to cases wheee a false affirmation was made ; and.if the evi dence of Quakers was allowed in civil cases, low much more ought it to be allowed in cases where men's feelings were particularly awakened, and where they would naturally be much more on their guard to avoid giving false testimony. 13y the second clause in the Bill now under their Lordships' ' consideration, it was proposed, that in cases of forgery the evidence of the'person whose name had been forged, should be admitted to prove the forgery, notwithstanding any in terest he might have in respect of the instrument forged. According to the present law, a person having an in terest of any sort in the forged instrument could not be admitted to give evidence ; and this had been productive of „great inconvenience, and had in many cases impeded the .:•curse of justice. The present Bill would remove that in convenience, ind the party would be allowed to .give evi .dence on his own credibility. The two remaining clauses ithis Bill were of minor importance. By them it was proposed that every punishment for felony, after it had b ee n endured, should have the effect of a pardon under the treat seal, and that no misdemeanour should render a party ;pi incompetent witness, after he had undergone the puncahment awarded him. The evidence of such a party would of course be subject to any observations that might be suggested on the part of the accused, and the jury would determine as to his credibility from the circumstances ad duced before them. He (the Marquis of Lansdpwne) had now gone through the whole of the alterations proposed to be made in the existing law by these two Bills.' There was .aothing extraordinary or novel in any o! the proposed .mendments, nor indeed would their Lirdships expect hat there should be, for it was only oy slow degrees that alterations in the laws could be intro lured, or amend soents made that would be intelligible or satisfactory to their Lordships. In preparing these Bills, he (the Marquis 3 f Lansdowne) had had able assistance both in and out of that House. He had received the assistance of the Noble and Learned Lord (Lord Tenterden) whom he now saw in his place. The zealous wish of that Noble and Learned Lord to improve the laws added lustre to the high station which he filled, and their Lordships would feel that his anxiety on this subject would at all times afford the best security for any a mendments of the law that might be pro posed to their Lordships. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne) would now conclude by moving that the Bills be read a _ . 6econd time. The Bills were then read a second time, and ordered to e committed on Thursday se'nniglit.—Their Lordships hen adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MARCH 18. Mr. Payne, from the Office of the Warden of the Cinque Ports, presented certain return , . ;ir EDWARD OWEN took the oaths and his seat. DOVER ELECTION. Lots' EBRINGTON presented the Report of the Select Comiratiee, appointed to try the validity of the election of W. H. Tr h ,nt, Esq. to serve in Parliament, as one of The Barons, representing the borough of Dover. The_ Com mittee reported that Mr. Trant was duly elected, and that the petition of Mr. Holcomb, the opposing candidate, was D int frivolous or vexatious. on the motion of General GASCOYNE, the amend ment; introduced into the Liverpool Railway Bill, were a ead a second time, and the Bill was ordered to be engrossed. Mr. HELY HUTCHINSON presented a petition from he :Members of the Hibernian Joint Stock Company, re ident in the city of Cork, in favour of the Bill for dis solving that Company. On the motion of Mr. DENISON the Surrey Co'al Meters Bill was read a second time. Sir H. HAItDINGE presented a petition from Thos. Bledwell, Esq. against the Stockton and Darlington Rail. way. Mr. TALBOT presented a petition from Swords (Ire. Lnd), in favour of the Catholic Claims. Sir P. COTTEa ELL presented a petition from the Malt ters of Hereford, against tho Malt Act. Sir P. COTTERELL presented a petition from the :.Licensed Victuallers of Hertford, against the Retail klrewers. TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS. Mr, HENRY ALEXANDER presented a petition soul Barnstaple, for the repeal of the Test and Corporation ets. Mr. JAMES BROUGHAM presented similar petitions rom Kendal and Cockermouth, county of Cumberland. Similar petitions were presented by Lord NORMANBY, rorn Mahon, Yorkshire ; from Leeds, by Mr. MARSHALL ; and from Whetston, county of Leicester, and from Leices ter, by Mr. CAVE. Mr. CHET W YiND presented a petition from the Mayor and Corporation of Exeter, against the repeal of the Cor oration and Test Acts. .Mr. BOLA 'ERIE presented a petition from the Malt_ :tens Of New Sarum, for the repeal of the Malt Act. Sir THOS. LETHBRIDGE presented a petition from he Archdeaconry of B,tb, against any further concessions t o the Roman Catholics. — Ordered to be printed. Sir JOHN NEWPORT presented a petition from the P.omaii Catholics of Tuam, in favour of Catholic Emanci pation: _ . THE POOR LAWS. „Air. POTTER MACQUEEN rose in pursuance of the notice he had given, to move for the repeal of so much of the several acts as conferred settlement in parishes by hir ing and service. He observed, that when first he had given notice of this motion, he expected that public business would have enabled him to have taken the sense of the House on the principle of the Bill, but as another subject of great interest was likely to come before the House ;his evening, what he proposed was to bring in this Bill, am -I have it read a first time and printed, and to defer the second reading until the principle of the mea sure had undergone consideration. The Bill was very short, and he could not therefore anticipate any objection to the details, and as to the principle there would be sutlie,ient time for discussing that upon the second Beading of the Bill. Sir JOSEPH YORKE thought the country was ex tremely obliged to the Hon. Member for the Herculean task he had undertaken. He feared, however, that the Honourable Member would certainly be wrecked on the same shoal with others who had attempted the revision of the Corn Laws. An Honourable Friend near him (Mr. S. :i3ourne), had made an unsuccessful attempt to introduce some revision in the Poor Laws; he hoped the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. 51acqueen), however, would be more fortunate ; and if he was, he would confer material benefit on the country. Mr. STURGES BOURNE said that the branch of the subject which he had introduced had been satisfactorily arranged, and he was daily receiving. letters from different I: arts of the country, informing him of the satisfaction which the alteration made in the existing law had given. Me'. BERNAL thought there could be no objection to the Hoo. Member bringing in the Bill in the manner pro posed, but he had never known any measure brought before the House NI the subjectof the Poor Laws which met with even a shadow of success. After a few %voids from Mr. POTTER MACQUEEN, in ex planation, leave was given: to bring in the Bill. LICENSING SYSTEM IN SCOTLAND. Mr. HOME DRUMMONDn;;Tedfo; leavetnbrin , r in a Bill for regulating the licensing of Alehouses and Inns in Scotland. He proposed to follow the example of the lion. Member (mi . . Estcourt) who introduced a similar measure with respect to England, and that th e Bill should he read a first time and printed,, and ,the principl e di scusse d at a ;future period.—Leave was given to bring in the Bill. Mr. Alderman WA ITHMAINI presented a petition from the protestant Dissenters of Tunbridge, p raying for a re peal of Ole Test and Corporati on Acts. He to ok that Op portunity of stating his con currence in the p ra y er of the petition, and of expressing a hope that no new Test wou ld be imposed upon the Dissenters. Lord EDWARD IOIIERSET presented two petitions from the Clergy of the Diocese of Gloucester against the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, and against the Unitarian Marriage Act, Lord E. SOMERSET presented a petition from the Rural Dean of Gloucester against the repeal of the Roman Catholic disabilities. An lion. Member, whose tame we could not learn, presented a similar petition from the Clergy of Winchester. Mr. W. SMITH' presented twenty-seven petitions from "Protestant Dissenting - Congregations in different parts nt the country, praying for a repeal of the Test and Corpo ration Acts. Sir H. PARNELL presented a petition from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of Ballinakill, in th l e Queen's county, in favour of the Roman Catholic Claims. Lord HOWICK presented a petition from the Dissen ters of Northumberland, praying for a repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Mr. Alderman WOOD moved that there be laid before ' the House a return of the number of persons committed to prison under ~ execution from the Courts of Request in Middlesex, London, and Southwark, from January, 1826, to January, 1828, stating the amount of each debt, the number of days each person was imprisoned during each year, and the number of times each prisoner was com mitted. Mr. HUME moved for a return of the amount of duty paid upon Fire Insurances by the different Insurance Offices in London and the country for the quarter ending Dec. 1827, distinguishing the amount paid by each office in town and country respectively. Mr. MARSHALL presented two petitions from the Protestant Dissenters of Barnsfield and Halifax, praying for a repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Mr. WM. SMITH presented a similar petition from the Protestant Dissenters of Brickley. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in presenting a petition of a similar nature from the inhabitants of Uxbridge, took oc casion to correct an error into which an Lion. Baronet (Sir John . Shelley) had fallen on a former evening. The Hon. Baronet had been mistaken iu stating that no petition from Lewes had been presented to the House ; there had been a petition signed by 400 of the inhabitants of that town, praying for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. I Sir JOHN SHELLEY explained ; but the purport of . his explanation was not understood in the gallery. The petitions were laid upon the table. Sir. F. BURDETT put a question to the Right Hon. Secretary of the Home Department, relative to the Com mission appointed to inquire into the Supply of Water for the Metropolis ; but the Hon. Baronet spoke in so low a tone of voice, that the precise import of the question was inaudible irtithe gallery. Mr. Secretary PEEL said the same question was put to him the other night by the other Honourable Member for Westminster, in the absence of the Hon. Bart. and the answer, which he then gave, he could not object to give again. He stated then, that when he came into office he found that a commission had been appointed by his pre decessor, to inquire into the supply of water for the Metro. polis, and that a question had arisen as to the extent of the powers of the Commissioners. Upon reference to his predeces sor he found that the powers given to the Commissioners were ample, and went the extent of authorizing them to ex amine witnesses upon oath, and to make other enquiries, with the view to ascertain the quantity and quality of the water supplied in the metropolis. Another question arose as to the power of the Commissioners to make surveys and levels, and to appoint engineers for, that pur pose. It appeared to him that Parliament did not contem plate to give such powers to the Commissioners, or at least to defray the expence of taking such levels. He was also asked whether an analysis of the water was to take place, and his answer was that he thought that necessary, and that the expense attending the making of such ana lysis of water taken from different parts of the river would be defrayed by Government. The persons named in the Commission were, Mr. Telford, the engineer; Dr. Roget, and Mr. Brandt, and when he mentioned those names lie had no doubt the House would agree with him that no men better calculated to perform such duty could be ap pointed. He believed the report of the Commissioners would be ready in six weeks, and it would then be for Parliament to consider whether it would be necessary to extend the powers of the Commissioners; but he (Mr. P.) much doubted the policy of having the expense of taking those levels defrayed by Government. After a few words from Mr. S. BOURNE, in confir mation of what was stated by the Right Hon. Gent., Sir F. BURDETT said he did not think it necessary that a commission without any other powers than these of ana lysing the water should he appointed, for the water was so bad, as to be apparent without submitting it to any chemical process. CORN LAWS. the objections which the Dissenters naturally entertained against the present tests, they would not risk the loss of a great advantage for the accidental attainment of an advantage still greater. He did not intend to propose the taking of an oath as a qualification for office—he thought that a declaration, solemnly subscribed, would be equally effective and binding. • He should there fore propose that a declaration should be made‘to the fol lowing effect by all candidates for office at the time, wh en by the existing . law, the oaths of allegiance, and supre macy were to be taken :—" I, .A. 8., do_ solemnly and declare, that I will not ;nee any PoWeraj'With which I may b e i nv e s t e d by t hi s effiee, to ,subvert; 'or to endeavour to stitwert, The principles of the ,Churcltor Eng land, Scotland, Or Ireland, , as by law eStabliShed:" H e bad endeavoured` in this deClaration to avoid the use of any terms that were . vague and 'indefinite ;, and he should be well satisfied to see it made a part' of the Noble Lord's present' Bill. He had now stated the sum and substance .of .all that he had to propose. ' The declaration.. would apply equally to the privileges of the • Established Church of Scotland, and to those of the. Established. Church of England and Ireland, and must be taken by all the King's subjects - alike be fore their admission into any public office. Before he con cluded, be would beg leave to be allowed to say a few words respeeting the conduct of the clergy of the establishment. It could not have failed to strike the attention of every Member of that House, that the clergy had not thought fit, except in one or two instances, to trouble the House with j petitions on this subject. He inferred from that circum stance, that they reposed with confidence in the attach ment of Parliament to the establishment of which they were the pious and active ministers. Anxious as he was for the security of the Church of England, he would con fess that he. thought that they had done more by their silence to advance its interest and welfare, than if they bad covered the ,table of the House with leads of petitions against the repeal of these statutes. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving, " That it be an instruc tion to the Committee to provide for the taking of a se curity or. declaration, by all those persons who, under the existing Act, are required to take sacramental tests previous to entering on any corporate office.'.' Lord EASTNOR said; that in seconding the motion of his Right Hen. Friend, lie should not make more than a few observations to the House. He could assure the Noble Lord, that though he bad formed one of the minority on the former evening, lie was not at all insen sible to the inconveniences of the present laws respecting the Dissenters. It was impossible to avoid seeing that it was full of inconsistencies, when a Bill of Indemnity was annually passed to suspend the severity of their enact ments. It was impossible also, to avoid seeing that the test which required individuals to use the most sacred ce remony of the Church as a qualification for office, was a profanation of religion which ought to be continued no longer. He would candidly confess, that lie had voted on the former night against the motion of the Noble Lord, because he was not prepared to support the abolition of the existing tests without having some declaration substi tuted, for them, acknowledging that the Church of England was an integral part of the Constitution, and pledging the person taking office to consider it in that light. Ile was now of opinion that some declaration, such as his Right Hon. Frieud had proposed, might be framed so as to satisfy both sides of the House. He was aware that it might be said, that if lie was im pressed by such sentiments he ought not to have voted as he did on the former night, because it would have been easy for him, when the Noble Lord's Bill came to its pre sent stage, to have proposed that a similar instruction to the present be given to the committee. He must confess that if the Noble Lord in his speech—whichhe owned with pleasure to be a most able and conciliatory speech—had propounded any intention of substituting a declaration in stead of an oath as a test, lie should have given his support" to the Noble Lord's motion. He had, however, supposed that such was not the intention of the Noble Lord, and bad voted accordingly. He acknowledges it to be his opinion, that if the Noble Lord had not carried his motion on the former night, the subject would have been taken up by Govern ment; and if it had been so taken up, the repeal of these sta tutes would have been more satisfactory both to the Go vernment and to the Dissenters. He admitted that the de claration which had been just proposed obviated the ob jections which he had formerly felt to the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts. He had always voted for the Catholic Question, and he sincerely hoped that nothing would ever occur to prevent his support of that measure. Whatever circumstances had occurred in former times to render penalties necessary for the maintenance of the do minion of the Established Church, as well as for the pro tection of the best interests of the country, he thought the time had at length arrived when all these disqualifications ought to cease, and that the parties who were at issue upon them ought to be allowed fairly and honourably to extricate themselves from their consequences, by an arrangement mutually fair, and mutually just. A middle course was therefore what he should recommend, as being more likely to be generally acceptable ; in that view he should support the amendment. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I hope I shall be forgiven if lam anxious at this early period to state my sentiments on the new question propounded by the Right Hon. Gentle man. The Noble Lord is perfectly correct in his recollec tion, that neither I, nor any of those who sit near me, pro posed any test or declaration as a substitute for that we wish to abolish; on the contrary, in conformity with all the pe titions nn the table from the Protestant Dissenters, we asked for the total repeal of the existing law, on general principles of justice and policy; and notwithstanding what has fallen from the Right Hon. Gentleman, I believe that such was the sense of the majority of this House who sup ported us—(Cheers.)—Uudoubtedly an Hon. Friend of mine, whose absence on this occasion,l regret, stated that his reason for voting for the Repeal of the Test and Corpo ration Acts, was the hope that it would be followed by a motion for their suspension ; but I cannot believe that many concurred in that sentiment, and the motion was not broached until towards the close of the discussion. Before Igo further—before I enter upon the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman, let me congratulate the House that the question of to-night is very different from that which Mr. HUSKISSON, in the absence of his Right Hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, begged leave to give notice of his Friend's intention to submit to the House on Friday the 28th inst., a motion to take into con sideration the preSent state of the Corn Laws. CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS. Lord •JOHN RUSSELL, in presenting a petition from the Protestant Dissenters of Uxbridge, in favour of the re peal of these acts, took occasion to observe, in reply to an observation of the Hon. Member for Lewes, that the in ' habitants of that place were by no means unanimous in their opposition to the repeal of these acts. A petition of 400 Dissenters of that place had been presented to the House a few nights ago, praying for their repeal. Sir JOHN SHELLEY said a few words in reply, which excited great laughter and cheering from the op position benches. They were perfectly inaudible in the gallery. REPEAL OF THE CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL then moved that the Order o the Day be read, for the House resolviug itself into a Committee of the whole House upon this Bill. It was read accordingly. On the question that the Speaker do now leave the Chair— Mr. STURGES BOURNE addressed the House, but in so low and indistinct a tone that he was throughout the whole of his speech nearly inaudible in the gallery. As well as we could make out the tenour of his observations they were to this effect :—ln the absence :of his Hon. Friend, tke Member for Devonshire, it fell to his lot to bring forward a proposition, which he trusted would have the effect of reconciling the differences of opinion which existed in the House upon this most important of all ques tions. As the Noble Lord opposite had discussed it with sc»nuch candour and good temper, he would endeavour, in the few observations which he had to make, to follow his example, and would avoid every topic that was at all calculated to excite any unpleasant or irritating discussion. It appeared to hint that the House had determined, by no unequivocal sign, that the sacramental test ought to be abo lished. He might perhaps be permitted, without offence, to suppose that the Hon. Members who had formed the majority on this question on a former evening, had come to the:same conclusion upon it front very different premises. Some might be of opinion that all tests were improper, and that there fore the tests required by these acts ought to be abolished : others too might he of opinion, that though tests were on some occasions of efficacy, these tests were neither proper in themselves, nor efficient for the purposes for which they ' were imposed. But both parties he believed were of opi nion that they led to the most revolting profanation of one of the holiest ceremonies of the Christian religion. He therefore thought that neither of them would object to having the test changed in such a manner as would do away with the injury which they' had inflicted at present upon tender consciences. It was under these circumstances that he was induced to hope that a proposition which might re concile the differences of opinion which existed on this question, might be proposed without inconvenience at the present stage of ihe Bill. To those who had resisted _ . we debated on the fo - rmer occasion. We are no longer dis puting whether persons dissenting from the Church of Eng land on points of religious faith can by possibility be worthy to hold civil and military office in the state. We arc no longer encumbered with any of these theological difficulties which I always considered most. improperly introduced into legislative discussions : we are no longer contending against an ancient principle, which, though not now in confor mity with the practice, is still held consistent with the theory of our law—that no person can be judged worthy to serve the state unless he agree with the religious creed of the Church of England. The ques tion is now different : what is proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman is no declaration of religious opinion —as I trust no violation of conscience—bet affecting only the civil and political conduct of those who are to be affected by it.— In arguing it, therefore, I enter upon fresh grounds, and I am sorry to say that although I rejoice that the question is not what it was, yet I am nut prepared to agree in prin ciple with the Right Hon. Gentleman. Th e fi rst reason that strikes my mind why such a declaration is perfectly unnecessary is, that there is no danger. Whether the Cor- poration and Test Acts do or do not rest on a soundfoun the - motion of the Noble Lord on a former evening, he would beg leave to say a few words, in order to remind them of the effects which these Statutes had already produced. Persons who did not belong to the church of England were obliged to qualify themselves by takieg the sacrament to hold certain offices in the State. That enactment soon led to a conference between the two Houses on the subject of occasional conformity, which, after some discussion, ended in a quarrel between them. Soon afterwards a Bill was brought in to repeal the Act for occasional conformity; but that Bill was found to be so severe in its enactments, that after the lapse of a short time, another Bill was brought in to suspend it—a Bill which bad been annually passed ever since. That such a Bill should ever have been deemed a security to the Es tablished Church was a point which, he fairly owned, as tonished him much. It might keep out of office honest and conscientious men, but it never could operate as a re straint upon men of a contrary disposition. He had hoped that the enactments of the Corporation and Test Acts had become a dead letter—and therefore it was that he had heard with so much sorrow that there was a particular church in London to which individuals went, on stated occasions, to take the sacrament as a qualification for office. He was convinced that the church could receive no benefit from such a profanation of one of its most solemn and' awful rites ; and therefore he thought that there could be no particular desire in those gentl emen who dation—whether they were or were pot well adapted to their end, at least it must be confessed that they were enacted to meet a great, and what then appeared over whelming dangers; there were persons at that time who almost openly avowed an intention to destroy the Constitu tion in Church and State ; but at the present moment I say that no declaration is called for, because no danger can be pointed out rendering necessary such a s ecur ity. I would appeal to all who hear me whether any complaint can be made against the , conduct of Protestant Dissenters who have been admitted into office.—(Hear,l;;;;)L: Whatever the theory of the law may be, it must not be for, gotten that in practice, for the greater part of a century, numbers of Dissenters have been admitted into civil and military offices. Have they shewn any disposition to sub vert the institutions of the country ? Have they made any attempt to lead you to believe that they are I) ing in wait to destroy any thing by law established.—(Hear, hear) ? If not, I call upon the House not to sanction an imputation where there is no charge —n u t to express dis trust where there is no want of confidence.—(Hear, hear.) The next ground on which I object to the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman is, that I really see no reason why Dissenters admitted to office should be required to make a declaration of this kind with respect to the Church when they are not calle,l upon to make similar declarations with respect to any other establishments in the country. Persons of all opinions are abroad—among them a few who are absolutely hostile to the constitution of the country. Some declare a House of Lords perfectly useless; others, that Annual Parliaments and Universal Suffrage is the true and best form of Government ; and others avowedly entertain:no tions which majorities of both Houses of Par!iament would consider subversive of the Constitution ; yet nobody thinks it necessary to guard such institutions as the trial by Jury, the independence of the Judges, or other institutions of the same kind, by any such declaration. It seems to me, therefore, far better to leave the Church, like other insti tutions, to the general security that all the inhabitants of the kingdom are ready to obey the laws, than to enforce any separate and distinct protection". But I maintain, moreover, that such security is not the best you can ob • tain ; the best security for the Church is the general ad formed the minority of the former night to retain the pre sent Tests, if any other could he substituted in their stead. With respect to the Gentlemen who sought the entire re peal of the present restrictive statutes, he was afraid that it might be more difficult to reconcile them to the propo sition which he intended to submit to the House; for they might be of opinion that all tests were unnecessary and improper, and might be inclined not to incumber the boon which they sought to confer upon the Dissenters by Any limitation whatever. He could understand the feel ing on which they were prepared to act; but be trusted that if it were possible to frame a declaration which would give satisfaction to the members of the established church, and which was at the same time free from all mission into office of Dissenters, now excluded; and that security must depend upon that temper of mind, that con ciliatory disposition towards all the establishments of the country, which is likely to be produced by the repeal of all tests and disabilities.—(Hear, bear, hear.)—All history tells us, that when persecuting laws are abrogated, a dis position,has arisen among the sect so persecuted to incline towards the religion of the majority, and to adopt opinions more generally in vogue. The Right Hon. Gentleman al luded' to the debates on the Occasional Conformity Bill, and Bishop Burnet showed, that since the passing of the Toleration Act the number of Dissenters had diminished one-fourth. Why had this been the result ? Because the bar of persecution had been removed—because restrictions Were repealed, and the party spirit which they had gene rated was at an end. This is one instance in poirt, and I may mention another analogous to it. Never were religious wars carried on with greater fury than in France. The party of the Hugonots included persons of the highest rank and influ ence,and we all know the persecutions, massacres, assassina tions,and burnings that arose out of those struggles; but Henry IV. by the Edict of Nantz, admitted the Hugonots to all offices and employments, and what was the consequence ? About a century afterwards Louis XIV. came to the Throne, and at that period, nearly every person of consequence and their families had conformed to the established religion— (Hear.)—No doubt the party would have been completely at an end if Louis XIV. had not, in a degree, revived the system of persecution. I have said that the best security is to impose no test or declaration at all ; that it would be such a shew of confidence--such a demonstration of trust in the conduct of the Dissenters, that from that moment there would be nothing to fear.—(Cheers.)—But to ask for declarations and securities, certainly implies distrust; and the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman looks as if the church wished for a kind of salvo—as if it was not ready to make the concession with a good will, and in the full spirit of confidence and conciliation. I have still another objection to securities of the kind. Although the words in which the Right Hon. Gentleman has couched his motion, and in which he meane to propose it to the Committee, are perhaps as unexceptionable as any that can be found, yet such declarations are always liable to various interpretations. A conscientious man may take a declara tion and may faithfully mean to observe it in his sense of the terms, but he may still be held guilty of misconduct by those of a different creed, who give the same terms a diffe rent construction. This will appear, when I read the last words of the test proposed by Mr. Burke. lie suggested that persons taking office should engage not to subvert or destroy the Church ; but he carried his security further, and in order to slaw what he means by the words " any attempt to subvert or destroy the Church," he makes the Dissenter say, " I will not employ any power or influence I may derive from any office corporate, or from any other office under his Majesty, to destroy or subvert the Church, or to cause members to be elected into any corporation, or into any Parliament, or give my vote for any such members on account of their attachment to any other or different reli gious opinions or establishment." I think the House will agree with me, that if there be two candidates for office, or for Parliament, in other respects equally unexception able, it is impossible for a Dissenter not to lean rather to the one whose religious opinions most nearly resemble his own ; and yet against this course many may be of opinion that he has taken a solemn declaration. These are the ob jections on which I found my opposition to the motion of the Right Hon. Gentleman ; but when I call it my op position, I am ready to declare that that opposition is not un conquerable.—(Much cheering.)—l consider a declaration of the kind objectionable on principle; but I profess myself ready to listen to the opinions of the House, whether it be fit or not that it should be admitted. I would not take upon myself to close the door of peace.—(Hear, hear.) — If there be a chance that Dissenters will be admitted to their just rights and privileges, under a declaration which is not offensive to their consciences—and if the Church is satisfied that that admission, accompanied by the declara tion, may be made without danger—l should listen to the proposal with the most earnest hope, and endeavour to make the reconciliation complete.—(Cheers.)—Having stated my objections, I will not go further in the way of dissent from, or assent to, the declaration, than to wait for _the expression of the general sense of the House upon a question, in reference to religious liberty, as important as any that perhaps was ever submitted to its deliberation._ (Hear.) M. PEEL—When this subject was last under the con sideration of the House, I asked the Noble Lord, in all sin cerity on my own behalf, and:on behalf of many who concurred with me in the attempt, which proved fruitless, of resist ing the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, to give us Jill opportunity for maturely deliberating on the course it !!sight be most fitting to pursue under the altered circum stances in which the question was submitted to our view. I made that application with an earnest determination to apply my mind:to the subject ; and the only purpose for which I asked delay was, that I might consider, with others, what arrangements could be made, under all the circumstances of the case. A majority—a considerable majority of this House having pronounced their opinion that an alteration in the existing law was desirable. I wish ed for time to consider what course could be adopted which was likely to gain general assent, and particularly the as sent of those whose sanction and authority are indispen sible. This object seemed most likely to be attained, byconsult ing the feelings of those whose interests were more specifically brought under the view of the House by the Noble Lord; and of that other great party in this country which, by its adherence and sincere attachment to the Church of Eng land and its doctrines, must feel a deep anxiety as to the result. The delay I asked for on that occasion was refused me ; and I was told, with I must say, a degree of injustice and presumption I hardly expected, that I required post ponement with different motives to those which I honestly professed—(Cries of No, no, and Hear, hear)—and be cause I was desirous of defeating the measure. I assure the Noble Lord, it is impossible that any thing that passed on that occasion—whatever injustice was done to me and my motives—can in the slightest degree influence my view of this question, or abate my anxiety to promote that ar rangement which, under all the circumstances, would he most conducive to the general warfare.—(Hear, hear.)— In the course of the discussions, since the first introduction of the question by the Noble Lord, various propositions have been submitted by different Hon. Members ; and, with permission of the House, I will enumerate them. In the first place, there was the proposal to adhere to the existing law, and we defended it under the impression that it did not entail on Dissenters the practical grievance com plained of. We did not deny the force of the objection urged against that part of the law which required the Sa cramental Test as a qualification for civil office ; but we thought that the force of that objection was almost, if not altogether, done away by the annual practice of passing an Indemnity Act, which, in point of fact, relieved us from the painful necessity of enforcing the Sacramental Test. I said to the Noble Lord from the first, that I thought in mat ters of that kind nothing was more unwise, nothing more calculated to disturb existing harmony, and to give rise to animosity, than a pertinacious and useless resistance to the general wish of the Legislature. Therefore, I thought the majority of forty-four decisive at least of this point—that the existing law ought to undergo a material alteration.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Whatever might be my opinion, the sense of the House having been fairly taken, I should not have pressed it for a moment in the hope of controuling the judgment of the majority. I repeat, that the sense of the House was fairly taken, after due discussion, and that decision controuls my opinion : and I yield the point, that the law, as it stands, must be changed. Another proposition was thrown out by an Hon. Baronet, the Member for Devonshire, on the first night of (rebate, and subsequently repeated, which seemed to meet with considerable countenance ; namely, that instead of passing an Annual Indemnity Bill, we should suspend that part of the law requiring the Sacramental Test. This course would .give Dissenters admission ; and it was sug gested that the suspension might be annual. I pressed the Noble Lord to consider that proposition, and I was after wards taunted for having declined to express my opinion by my vote. I heartily rejoice that I did not so express it, for I thus reserved to myself the privilege of exercising an unfettered judgment. The result of re-consideration has been, that I have changed my first impression ; and I now think that the proposed suspension would be subject to all the inconveniences belonging to the Annual Indemnity Bill. Hence the objection of conscientious men, both among. the Members of the Church of England and the Dissenters would not be removed, viz that it is not right that the per manent law of this country, mitigated only by indemnity, should recognise the principle that the sacramental test shall adoption of susp e nsion in the place of e ., e be appliqp a matter of necessity as a qualification for Civil offic indem nity might he liable to further objection ; because it would be an implied recognition of the propriety of the prac tice generally of requiring the sacramental test, and would tend to fortify and confirm it. The third proposition was made by my Right Hon. Friend lately in the office of the Colonial Department, although I am not quite sure that he went so far as to bring it forward in his place here. He was not in favour of a suspension, but that there should he a time named at which the operation of these Acts should cease; that for the next five or seven years, for in stance, the existing law should remain in force, and then expire. That proposal seems to me open to very consider able objections, and I think we should gain nothing what ever by it. 'We should have an interval of five or seven years for the expressitin of irritating and useless jealousy and suspicion, without the slightest additional security to the Church. The consequence might be, that at the end Bill on the first night, underrated the practical grievances of the period fixed we might come to the consideration of suffered by the Dissenters : if we have justly been told the subject (if, indeed, consideration on our part was ren- that the present law is pregnant with injustice and oppres tiered necessary), in a state of feeling and temper far less siun to them, the more strongly that injustice and oppres favourable than at the present moment.—(Hear, hear.)— sion have been proved, the more earnestly do I conjure Id o not hesitate to say, that if the question were merely those who advocate their cause to accept that relief between an immediate repeal anti a prospective repeal of which in the words of one of our greatest writers, would this kind, I should at once say, " Let us have the benefit give them, "for ever, the dignified consciousness of facto of the grace of concession."—(Cheers.)—I have already rity" (Cheers. )—This law, as I purpose it should be, will, on mentioned three courses that have been brought und e r our the other hand, secureNtoo t p he riv C il l e t g ar e c o h r tt p f o E w n e g r la t u b d ey tha m t a p y ro pos teci notice, and there remain two other s t o w hi c h I shall also tion which it has a right to require from th ose w h o di ssen t briefly advert—the one, that of th e N o bl e L ord who asks from its doctrines. for the simple and unqualified repeal of the Test and Cor- seso, by hording office underor the t,)li C att r i o r u h , :, i ca n n th be e e t: J ed :yr : e n v : poration Acts, and the other, that of my Right Honour- siatently with that declaration, under any circumstances, to able Friend, who wishes that the repeal should be accom- the injury of the Church, panied by a declaration to be substituted in lieu of the Sa- of any of its rights or possessions. I will not enter at length cramental Test, requiring the party entering office to state into the discussion of the Noble Lord's arguments in favour something or di sc l a i m s o m e thi ng respecting the Established of a simple and absolute repeal of the existing Acts--I Church. After th e b es t c o ns id era ti on I have been able to will content myself with saying, that Ido not think he give the cas e , I am i nc li ne d t o thi n k that course which shewed successfully that it is not necessary to take some shall secur e a fi na l arrangemen t an d general acquiescence security for the Established Church. In the United States is to be preferred. Whatever m a y be the abstract princi- of America, or in any other country where there is no i pies to which th e N o bl e L or d may pro f ess hi s a tt ac h ment, t h e Established Church, the removal of all Tests would be en inquiries I ha ve ma d e s i nce th e l as t discussion have induced tirely justifihle ; but the experience of this country for me to think th a t th e w i sest an d best co urse is that which centuries has shewn, that religious opinions enter into promotes a fin a l ar rangemen t w ith th e acquiescence of the secular affairs, and materially influence the conduct of different branches of the Legislature, without offending the men, and that an Established Church is necessary as an conscientious scruples of Dissenters, and with a conviction essential part of the Constitution of the country ; and I on the part of the other great i n t eres t, and the Members of hold that we must take stronger measures for the security the Church, that the existing lawought to be repealed with of the Established Church than those we should possess if valid security. The Legislature would take that oppor- this Bill were passed in its present shape. When I affirm tunity of recording its sentiments of the Church of Eng • that this House considers the Established Church as an land, and of requiring that security from the Dissenters essoatial part of the Constitution, which was fair, just, and reasonable. I assure the Noble " Non meus hie sermo." Lord that he does the Governm e nt and myself injustice if In the Bills passed by this House for the relief of the Roman he supposes we have not turned our attention to this subject. Catholics from their civil disabilities and disqualifications, I thought my Rt. Hon. Friend's proposal iu this stage of the which Bills were introduced by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, business might merely be, that it should be an instruction to it was especially declared, with the view of procuring the the Committee to attach a declaration to the Bill of the Noble assent of this house, and, no doubt, equally making known Lord-s-to introduce into that Bill some clause, containing the strong conviction on their minds of the truth of the either a declaration or obligation on oath, to be taken by allegation, not only th a t th e P rotestant Episcopal Church parties now liable to the sacrament a l t es t. l am prepare d , i s " established permanently and inviolably," but that the if the House should be disposed to recognise that grin- relief was to be granted, because it would " tend to pro ciple, as I trust it will, to propose to the consideration of mote the interests of the Established Church, and 'strengthen. the Committee, a declaration to be taken by persons enter- that free constitution of which that Church is an essential ing office corporate, or in the appointment of the Crown. part." These were the very terms of Mr. Grattan's Bill, We have already had it under discussion, whether it would and they constituted an express recognition by Parliament, or would not be proper that that declaration should be that the Established Church is an essential part of the Con made upon oath, or whether we ought to be content with stitution. To that recognition there was not one dissenting the affirmation of the party; and I wish to state to the voice in Parliament. We must then, iu considering this House the feelings with which I propose my declaration. subject, begin by bearing in mind that the Church of Eng- I 'consider that to impose a declaration or an oath which land is a permanent and inviolable establishment.—(Hear.) Dissenters cannot take, would be virtually to repeal the It was with great pleasure I heard on every side, during progress the Noble Lord has already made for the relief of these discussions, frill justice done to the temperate and Dissenters_(Hear.)—My declaration, therefore, while it wise course pursued by the Church of England, with respect provides for the present and future security of the Church, to this question; and Ido trust, that after the full con& contains not one word which may not be fairly required deuce the Church has shewn in the wisdom, justice, and dis from any Dissenter on entering office. I have been stn- cretion of Parliament, we shall take for the Church what diously anxious to fr a me the declaration so as to make it ever security may be required for its preservation. It impossible for a conscientious man to object to it. The would be needless to vindicate the Church, for no asper- Noble Lord sa y s , th a t we ought not to require the renun- sions have been cast upon it; or to panegyrise the conduct elation of a r e li g io u s creed; and I reply, that my decla- of its Ministers, for I know the universal feeling of this ration is framed upon that principle. Then the Noble House is this, that they have pursued a course of modera- Lord urges that we ought not to require the expression of tion and peace.---(Cheers.) It was said by the Noble a religious opinion—l answer, that my declaration does Lord, and °there who supported this measure on the fist not require it. On a matter of this kind, lam rather in- night of the debate, that because the Dissenters had re clined to take a solemn affirmation than an oath, because it mained tranquil for 37 years; because they had not during accomplishes the object of the Noble Lord, and opens the that long period approached the House with their petitions, door more widely for the admission of Dissenters of they had fortified their claim to the consideration of Par every class. I believe the obligation to be equal ; and liament. If that silence and acquiescence on their part that affirmation is even, on some accounts, a better justly entitled the Dissenters to that consideration, Ido say security than an oath. A declaration on oath would that the conduct of time Church of England gives it a claim be more in uniformity with the ordinary course of the to all the consideration to which any appeals from it, how law in this country, and a security beyond all doubt ever earnest, could entitle it.---(Hear.) Ido hope that equally valid : hut in this case I should prefer a solemn one feeling only will pervade this House in consenting to affirmation to a declaration on oath. I think we may as the repeal of these laws, which have been considered by well at this moment postpone the discussion of the terms some of our most distinguished writers on Constitutional of the declaration, though in order that I might be pre- subjects as the great barriers and bulwarks of the Church, pared to put the House fully in possession of my views, I in favour of which, lam certain, there exists a strong opi havedrawn oneurn—(Cries of " Read, read.") 'should state nion through the country—(Cheers.) --I do believe, that that I have not had an opportunity of consulting any pro- in consenting to this repeal, and in giving the Dissenters a fessional adviser. Some modifications, verbal or technical, permanent admissibility to office, we shall decide— may be necessary ; but I think the general outline will be not by a majority at all, for I shall not be satis perfectly intelligible. The Noble Lord has stated, that if a fled unless the vote be unanimous ; but if it should declaration seemed necessary in the opinion of the majority be necessary to take the sense of the House, I do of the House, he would not object to its introduction into hope it will be by an overpowering majority, that we the Bill. Indeed I understood that the Noble Lord, if it shall decide against the proposition of the Noble Lord was the decided wish of the House, would not risk the fate for a simple repeal, and attach some such declaration of the Bill by opposing it. In stating my proposition, I as I have proposed, and which I again say, if it be will take the liberty to repeat an observation I have before engrafted on the Bill, will, I have confident expectation, made on this subject, namely, that a declaration to this effect contribute to its ultimate success, and thereby insure that has been included in every Bill proposed of late years, for permanent and satisfactory settlement of this question, the removal of the civil and military disabilities under which, whatever part I may have taken in the discussions, which the Raman Catholics labour. The preamble I pro- it will be one of the proudest acts of my life to do all I pose is copied from the preamble of the bill brought in can to procure—(Loud cheers.)---The Right Hon. Gent. by Mr. Grattan for the Relief of the Roman Catholics, concluded by moving an instruction to the Committee to and afterwards introduced in substance into time Bill drawn ins L el o t n t i h s e A cl N au n se o s N rea s d ai i d n , i tl i i s a t sl in eec v l o h ting as one of the ma up in 1825, by my Right Honoutable Friend (Lord Plun on this question, he bad voted for the simple repeal kett), now a Member of the other House. The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the Preamble, which, was mu -silty of the Test andiCorporation Acts • and he was, after hear ' g the Right Hon. Gentleman, ' still as averse as ever to tatis mutandis, the same as that of the Bill which passed rile - substitution of any declaration, in lieu of the Tests to the House of Commons in 1825, for the relief of the Ro man Catholics. It stated, that the Protestant succession be repealed. of the Imperial Crown was establish e d permanently and in- Mr. FEP.GUSSON ac k now l e d ge d t h e s i gnal liberality land and Ireland, and the Prot es t an t P res b yter i an Church violably ; that the Protestant Epi scopa l Ch urch ' of Eng of the clergy of the Established Church, but cou ld not to give them the fancied security sought b , the of Scotland, and their respective doctrine, discipline and consentlam i d de government,c ton propose by the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. were by the Acts of Union between the n countries severally es t a bli s h e d permanently and inviola- Peel). Ti me Ch urc h was never more secure eve it when bly ; but that aft er d ue cons id erat i on o f t h e s i tuat i on, the Corporation and Test A c t s were p asse d than was at dispositions, an d con d uct o f t h e P rotestant Di ssenters, i t this mom en t. Sh e h a d got a ll t h e security she ought to possessd. It declaration was not only unnecessary but was expedient to admit them to hold Corporate and n e e t c h e e ss e a ti a n s o. a l g aw ain r s t t , t u lm i e re P d r o eftr etu ria n n o Civil Offices in England and Wales, on subscribing, in t oa e lf : s t Su f c o o r t landt was admissioninto beeauuns civil lieu of taking the Sacramental Test, a Declaration, by . which the subscribing party bound himself not to exercise against the Catholics of Irel an d, inasmuch as this Bill any power, authority, or influence he mi g ht o b ta i n or against possess by virtue of that Act, to injure or we a k en th e P ro - would still leave unrepealed th e greatest di sa bili ty unne testant Episcopal Church as by law establish e d, nor to di e- them, namely,as against th e members of the Church the oath of supremacy , . it was cessar of Erigl an d, as h e y turb its Ministers in the enjoyment of an y r i g h ts or pri vileges they might now enjoy. The c l ause i n w hi c h t h e could not be expected to subvert his own chu rc h. Wh then should it be enacted against the Protesta n t Dissenters y taking of this Declaration was r egu l a t e d, state d t h at i t alone , only? atio l n twasn w ot ashe inroilndidusatliicoew,bvuetryanlibinesruall:: andniaes deciar • itself a • , t a concession as ' the Dissenters couyl have expected. should be subscribed by the party taking it in the pre sence of two Justices of the City or Borough in which feeashould, however, ob'ect to them on principle. the Office was situated ; and in their absence, in time pre sence of two Justices of the adjoining county. The clause u „,, , J required.--(Loud aflt N r ihuylnei the r el,A i . when..:ci Acts s(s 01, 1 : i nno e t olvdf question,ohctlee ide cheering.) hem's—on n i n g t d h n. i the former t h f N o na r oc : : pebdoreai because occasion ts a s whe iietohhnge great e f : o aiied r t g fi l n e c a t l finally enacted, c m te a d k , e t that in D ca ec s l e ar a a n ti y on D , ihssisenetleerctioomnitatnedd all o r actsne- done in consequence of it should become void. Ido not Englandwt the a o Ir e..etll repeal e w ao expe l c d tation that any declaration in the way of security wish to impose any penalty on the party omitting to take the oath, but simply to declare the election void. lam not f as ardent oth a er zea for the security of the Church of aware that great difficulties will be found in taking this of Dissenters ny anger to the Church from the admission d se were agreed—but because he could declaration in respect of many offices in the' appointment majority a dan t ger in these laws to which the term barriers and but, Crown,ncl it if ion it p w r e ec re ed p e r n o t po to sed en t t o eri s n u g bs i t n it to ute li i m t e ogffiencee-, to office, nor could he see any security against in like manner as the party is now liable to be required to take the Sacramental Test. There arc a great num roafiltyheasaco warks were appli e d ; they were not a bulwark to keep out her ofinferior and subordinate offices in which the sub- t he flood, but rather a net, stretched across, over which the large scribing to this declaration would only tend to throw rids- fish leaped, and through whose interstices the it, andrender it useless and contemptible. If little ones glided, though a certain species of fish called an cute upon an attempt were made to state in the law all the offices Alderman was sometimes caught in it.—(Laughter.) The that should on this account be excepted, I think it Proposed declaration was, however, a healing measure, and would be found extremely difficult in general terms to one which the House ought to pass, through a respect for state the exceptions. I submit, therefore, to the House, the rights of conscience in those members of the Esta whether, in order to regulation as this wou ld no t b e found expedient :--. pet. For himself he could see no danger that rendered "Be it further enacted, that it shall and may be lawful these securities necessary, nor could he conceive how a for his Majesty to require any person appointed to any Dissenter becoming a member of a corporation could en office or trust whatsoever, or to hold any commission danger the church, whether he took the declaration or not. in which he may now be required to take the Sacramental If, however, the adoption of the clauses proposed by his Test, to make and and in such manner, as his Majesty may be pleased to ap- success of the Bill in that House, and facilitate its success point." Time words of this clause would exclude from its elsewhere, he should be inclined to yield a little and adopt operation Protestant Dissenters in Ireland and the holders of he considered theproposal, Scotch clauses ; particularly as Scotch offices. These are the propositions I shall submit after all, a great concession on the part of the opponents to the consideration of the House. The last clause will of the Bill, nor could he think that there was greater secu enable the Crown to apply the declaration to those by whom rity in the other oaths that were exacted, for in s t ance , it ought to be taken, while the inferior officers, from who m those denying the right of any foreign Prince or Potentate these realms. Even th Earl u no. it is not necessary, may be passed over. Whatever part I to exercise power in from the d Der may nave taken on this question—however I may have re- wentwater himself; if raised o take the oathead, would not sisteff the proposition of the Noble Lord, Ido assure him hesitate in these days to Right„ 11013. abjuring the Cairn* and the House, that, considering the discussion that has of the Pretender. T that the House Memberwould go concluded by taken place, and the majority by which the Motion expressing a hope dividing on a sub' • go into the Com was carried, Ido not yield to the Noble Lord in the mittee without Jett on which all were in- • sincere desire I feel to settle this question, in the course dined to agree. of itr ob'ected to the declaration by Dis ci the present Session, satisfactorily and for ever—(cheers.) Lord ALT h il eir takin j oin ce —I do hope, therefore, that this proposition of mine-- 'salters on affording any sou_.., ti E ;O a th th e unnecessary, and incapa a proposition so perfectly reasonable in itself—will not be ble of atilluu.ction of the clause would tend to Church.lf, however, rejected by any person who is an advocate of the cause of the intto the Bill, lie of the Inu, would not interpose his individual the Dissenters.—(Hear, hear.)--It is impossible for me ir- success against the concession, however revocably to pledge others ; but I think I may say, that opinion- hold the declaration proposed, The declaration ' if this proposition be accepted, Ido entertain a confident mightproposed by the Right Hon. Mover the of instructions hope that this Session will not expire without enabling us (M. S. Bourne) should have his support, on account of to congratulate ourselves on a satisfactory and permanent its simplicity, before the declaration 'settlement of this question.—(Loud cheers.)—lf tire b Hon. Secretary (Mr. Peel.) if; suggested by the Right clauses be incorporated in the Bill of the Noble Lord, with- s was required to be taken with however, the declaration out presuming to answer for others, it is my honest belief my the omission of it, he would hearnever penalties attached to that they will ensure the passing of this Bill ; , a r i d e, that of pains and penalties on the w consent to it, as !ffi.ll ow. part, I do declare, and always will scumsackow iti g e, , 1 and He congratulated his Noble Friend (Lord pr of R England, I shall be satisfied to acquiesce in the Bill Cheers.)— bringing forward a measure which (Lord J. us . se )on i would hand his name I will do what I can to promote its success.-- the ( r, there are down to posterity at On each side of this question, as of every 0 . li . a mace and harmony of the people. the same time promote tli r app mg sae I extreme opinions ; and the only mode of f mutual compro- Sir M. W. RIDLEY wished time Bill tisfactory adjustment is, by the away o r by the Annual gival state as first proposed to pan in its pri m miss and concession. Let us no longe , .. tl sal of th H. le propo e bythe Noble Lord ;as bow- Indemnity'ple that an adherence ever, Right Hon. Secretaryit appeared to Act, recognise the prino' qualification to C orpo- to proceed front liberal feeling, l e to the Church of England is 'the only Protestant Noble Friend to agree to it. -' 1- would recommend his to allow rate and Civil Offices. I eta prepared if they will give the se-. Mr. D. W. HARVEY hoped the prepositionof th Dissenters to be eligible to office, Right Hon. Secretarywould - to- rarity of this declaration with respect to their feelings .acceded to, as it would Y If we, who opposed the I ewe an opportunity to the accredited organs of the Aiwa wards the Established Church. ten to I mittee. Mr. F SELL se' That it L he hereb) declarati( Jaw, be 4ziatradi l On th 4 resolved Mr. s apologizii nism; tl he had tit might be did enter tistactory to a s sure sated to t It eras form par The 11 L g . bra Laken int amended, t)p tl4 hoived its Inent Bili Some sunned ; considera fixed for Mr. S D a y on IEII. __ After c oacluded wan Opp t.ep to inq pppoOe tlt Mr, any tuale atrongly pass ohger Mr. R' in, and n Mr. G 111 r. s u n. Mei tbink. c ourage e. the mann emigra daring to *Miter n ative eoi d e voted t he Chanl igq44F4g l b g it, az were not i cree trad e, huma n ue zu ost unpt the Repor t o e bim di s ease bei If food an I