The Pennsylvania packet, or, The general advertiser — Lancaster, Pa.;Philadelphia, Pa., 1779-02-11 00:00:00, page 2

L 0 UDO N.
H 0 USE of LORD S, November 27, 1778.
;S Ron $ the King had concluded his speech and the
li. Commons withdrawn, the Lord Chancellor again
read it to the Lords, when
H:s G^e the Duke of Chandos rose, and after approv
ing every paragraph of the Kang's speech, as expressive of
wif lorn and p rental care, moved for an address &f thanks,
which those of our readers who have a curiosity to know,
have only to add to every sentence of the King's speech
the following words: " Hmby to thank bis Majefy for?
and they will be infor ed of the whole particulars.
Lord Plymou h seconded the address, but his Lerdfh p
spoke in such a manner as we confefs we did not for the
mod part underhand him. One thing he particularly in
fixed on, which was, that in his neighbourhood in the
country, he could affme their Lordfllips several mechanics
who employed a hundred men, could only now employ
a forth part of that number; ergo, enforcing the Ame
rican w r was the only method he could think moss expe
dient for remedying this and every other grievance.
Lord Coventry spoke against the address, particularly
against that part of it which enforces the further continu
ance of the American war. He said he was induced to
this opinion from experience; Administration had tried
the prosecution of it for four years unfuccefs fully, and
now they were again trying, at great ^xpence, what they
ought to know was impracticable. After expatiating up
on this with great temper abd good sense, he aiked their
Lordships what refeurces, what inducements they had to
continue the prosecution of the war? Was America in a
greater disposition to sue for peace now file had declared
her independency, than before? Was she weakened by
her new alliance with France? Was Lite transportation
of men, ammunition, provisions, &c. less expensive than
before ? Or was commerce in a more flourishing state ?
When the affirmative could be given to none of these
queflions, his Lordfllip said he z:uft vote against that part
of the address.
Lord Briftoi said he objected to the address on a larger
ground. he disliked the whole of it, and insisted that, pre
vious to any address, at such a time as this, an enquiry,
a Rri& enquiry, fliould be made into the caues of all our
mifearriages. Here his Lordship, with his usual spirit
and accuracy, enumerated many of them, and particular
ly the necessity of an enquiry into the tranfaaions of the
fleet on the 27th of July last, relative to the cendud of
the Vice Admiral of the Blue (Sir H. Pallifer); he did
not at the fame time charge, nor did he hope any thing
could be brought against that gentleman; but when the
Commander of that fleet declared he would not fail in
company with him, the necessity of the times demanded
at lead an enquiry. His Lordship concluded a long
speech with negativing the address.
Lord Effingham spoke against the address, and referred
to many instances to Brew the imbecility of Administrati
on in thinking to c^ry on the American war any longer.
Lord Suffolk rose to disclaim any pension he had from
the Crown, or would ever expert from it; that he was an
independent mats, and though unworthy of the great of
fie he held under the King, yet he would maintain to the
lift the honour ana dignity of the C'rown, which was
highly concerned in the prosecution of the American war.
Hitherto he confeffed the war w$ unfuccefsful, owing to
the lenity of government; but his Lordship said now a
mode was to be adopted, which was hitherto forborne,
that he did not doubt would convince the Americans of
the superiority of the British arms. What that mode was
his Lordship did not fay. but it was generally supposed to
mean burning and plundering the sea-port towns, &c.
Lord Derby answered him with great spirit; said though
he had voted against America, in refpeA to taxation, he
was now convinced of the impracticability of pursuing
the war ; that every day conv need him more and moreof
it, and that nothing but madness and delusion could in
duce any body to persevere in so fruitlefs an attempt.
Here he mentioned many particulars of the ridiculous con
duct of Administration, and warned the noble Lord in
the Blue Ribband (Lord Suffolk) to beware of his new
mode of carrying on the war with fire and sword. The
French, my Lords, fays he, are the Allies of the Ameri
cans, and tno' otherwise a humane people, they will be
taught to make reprisals. Your sea ports lie open to
them, and whilst our fleets and armies are plundering and
defraying one part of our brethren in America, we will
be fubjed to the fame depredations here.
Lord Sandwich objected to the mode of voting totally
against the address; he said it was unprecedented; he had
been forty years in the House, and never knew the like.
His Lordship then went into his favorite fubjed the navy,
said what it would be towards the latter end of next year,
that it would be equal by that time to what it was in 1/59,
when we had 97 fllips of the line in commission ; he con
feffed indeed there were delays in carrying on the Ame
rican war, and in refpe& to France; that government
was too backward in both businesses, but then these de
lays were upon a good ground. As to enquiries, he would
never be the firft to introduce them, he was not for hang
ing up—[Here his Lordship paused for feme time, which
created a laugh]—any measures to public view that ought
to be concealed; however, if they were once begun, he
would not be backward in giving every assistance to them
in his power.
Lord Eriftol fully replied to Lord Sandwich, and was
feeonded very ably by the Duke of Bolton. After which
Lord Shelburne rose and made one of the most mafler
ly and pointed speeches against the whole conduct of Ad
miniflration we remember to have heard within these walls,
the force of which had such an effect on the imprudent
zeal of a few gentlemen below the bar, that they clapped
it • a circumstance, we think, that could have only hap
pened among those unacquainted with the Arid etiquette
of this Assembly.
The majority Lords instantly took fire at this public
breach of order, and unanimously cried out, “ Clear the
bar Clear tne bar ;" when all below the bar were imme
diately obliged to quit, and all the outward doors were
immediately locked.
The debate then went on, but being excluded an audi
ence of it, we can only report, that after a few more ex
cellent speeches made by the Duke of Richmond and some
other Minority Lor Is, the motion of address was called
for about half an hour after nine o'clock, when the num
bers were, For the address 76, Against it 31. Majority
in favor of the address ,5.
N. B. The lafenefs of the hoot when the House dol
ed, prevented us from giving the whole of the speeches of
Lord Brxßol, the Duke of Eolton, and Lord Snelburne,
till to-morrow. The last, as we have before observed,
was remarkably spirited, and spoke to the critical Situa
tion of our present affairs, as demanding our most atten
tive recollection.
HOUSE of C OMMO N S,
Thursday, November 27, 1778.
The House, as soon as they returned from the Upper
Assembly, proceeded to take the King's speech into their
consideration. The speaker read it twice, and Mr. Gre
ville moved an address of thanks to his Ma^fty, that con
tained in it the several passages of the speech from the
throne, and he recommended it to the House to be una
nimous on the occasion.
Mr. Thomas Townfhend objected to the address as
moved, and called the attention of the house to several
enormities of the Ministry, that rendered it necessary for
them to amend the address, by praying his Majesty to re
move the present Minißry. He was lend in his complaints
against them ; they had made Holland our foe, they had
disdained to cultivate continental connexions, and they
had proved themselves incapable of governing this king
dom. He intimated that ke would move another amend
ment in the course of the debate, Brewing the fence of the
house on the zeal and spirit of the officers of the militia ;
and he concluded with moving to amend the address, by
substituting, in the room of the original motion, words ac
knowledging the necessity of the conjunXure, and giving
a promise of large Applies; but intimating at the fame
time the necessity of enquiring into the condud of the pre
lent Ministry.
Mr. Fox, in one of the most rapid, nervous, and in
teresting fpeech.es that ever was delivered in that assembly,
reprobated the measures ofthe Ministry in every instance.
They pray (fays he) for unanimity, they who have de
stroyed unanimity, who have torn brother from brother,
and reviled and undermined every social band of inter-
Course. They pray for unanimity in an address of thanks
in a conjuncture of the most calamitous nature, brought
on by their own impotence and negleX. Unanimity, he
knew, was necessary to refeue the country from its present
calamities, and its greatest calamity was, that the men
who had ruined it hill were Mmifters. He condemned
the speech from the Throne, that is the speech of the Mi
nister, because it was falfe. It called the late commissions
to treat of peace the aX of the Parliament; it was not,
they never saw it, and it was a libel against Parliament to
charge them with it. He reprobated the Ministry for not
forming continental connexions, though indeed he belie
ved it to be impracticable for them to accomplish any,
for foreign powers would hardly trust themselves in the
hands of men who had ruined their own country.
He condemned the King's speech for the expression,
that our successes last campaign had not been so great as
might have been expelled; he declared they were greater
than could reafonabiy have been expected ; and had not
good fortune done more for them than their own wisdom,
the successes must have been even more Blameful than they
are; he charged the Admiralty with having advanced a
palpable falßiocd, in faying in November that they had
forty-two fail of the line ready for sea, and yet not hav
ing ships fufficient to dispatch Byron till fix weeks after
d'Estaing had failed. It is impossible for us, in the nar
row compass that we must prescribe to ourselves, even to
have the outlines of a speech filled with a series of the most
powerful oratory we ever heard.
Mr. Penton enumerated the ships we had, agreeable to
the assertion of the Board of Admiralty, in November
last, and Rated that the number was actually 44, of
which, however, three were in the dock in commission,
but unmanned.
Sir John Wrottefley condemned the commissions, and
said they had wrought such effeX upon America, that
50,000 Ruffians would not now vanquish and reduce that
country.
Mr. Temple Lutterel, Mr. Wilkes, Mr. P. Bunel, Mr.
James Lutterel, and Lord George Gordon, all reprobated
the conduX of the Ministry.
Governor Johnftont rose to vindicate the honour of the
Commissioners. He admired the Earl of Cirlifle. He
looked upon the commission to have had, at the time it
was issued, a good promise of success, but the Ministry
had ruined its efFeX by rhe most unparalleled impotence.
Had he known that Philadelphia was to be evacuated, he
never would have accepted of that Commission. He declared
upon his honour, that though he might have taken some
Reps towards gaining over some part of the Congress, he
never made any overtures, as it is asserted, to Joseph
Reed. There was no lady authorifed by him to make
any offers to him, and thifehe solemnly protested to be
true. He thought it necessary to support 25,000 men in
America, if we meant only to carry on a defenfive war,
and protect the places we had in cur poffeFen. Give
America Independance, fays he, and ihe will take Canada
Nova-Scotia, Newfoundland, and the Weft-Indies, into
the bargain, but reduce America and the empire is secure.
Lord North answered Mr. Fox particularly, and defend
ed himfelf and his colleagues with his usual address. He
confeffed he had not been one to advise subsidiary con
nections in the time of peace. He said the reason why
Admiral Byron did not fail till fix weeks after d'Estaing
was, that he might not take advantage of the failing of so
many capital Blips, and remain in the Brit ih seas. He
defended the evacuation of Philadelphia, because on the
difeovery of the French intentions, he might have found
it necessary to draw off part of the army, and as eit er
Rhode-IRaxid, Philadelphia, or New York, must be ne
ceffarlly evacuated, since he could not fend any more
reinforcements, he thought it most eligible to evacuate
Philadelphia. He defended the expression of the fuccehes
not being adequate to our expeXations. Both Mr. Kep
pel and Mr. Byron were equal to the French, and yet, owing
to a Borm in the one place, and accidents at another,
they had failed. We had made exertions, we had hopes,
we had disappointments, and yet no one appeared as yet
to be in blarae. He said it was now the time to take our
ground, and vigorously exert ourselves to punifli the per
fidy of our malignant enemy, arid reduce the claims of
our revolted fubjefls.
On a division the numbers were for the amendment,
ayes 226, noes 107.
The house broke up at half past two o'clock.
[See the Pennsylvania Packet of January 28 for the piece
preceding this, by the fame author.]
PERHAPS many may think, that the two authors
I have quoted upon religious eftablifoments, are of
opposite fentime^ts if not of different denominations, in re
ligion. Could this thought be supported by evidence, it
would readily be admitted; rather then to suppose them
guilty of such felf- contradiction, as they most certainly are.
For falls abundantly fliew, that Dr. Chauncy has exerted
himfelf, from time to time, to defend the establishment we
complain of, much more than Mr. Payson has done. And
to defend it against the bifliops, the firft of those gentlemen
sys " It does not appear, to us, that God has entrusted
the Rate with a right to make religious establishments."
The other warns our civil rulers, against fuffiering any
changesin their “ eftabliflied modes and usages in reli
gion." The firft declares, that such establishments have
in fad) been of infinite damage 10 the cause of God and true
religion, in all ages and in ad places. The other fays,
The thoughtful and wife among us, trust that our civil
fathers, from a regard to gospel worship, and the conjiitu
tion of these churches, will carefully //refaror them; and at
all times, guard against every innovation, that might tend
to Gverjet the public icorfbip oj God."
Ihe Jews at Theffalonica, whenmoved with envy, cried
to their rulers, These that have turned the <world upJide
doewn, are come hither also. But for a profeffed minister of
Chriß, to alarm our civil rulers of danger, that the <wor-
Jbi, oj God would be overfet, if the, did not carefully pre
jerque theft churches, is much more furprizing! He fays,
" Persons of a gloomy, ghostly and mystic cast, absorbed
in visionary fcer.es, deserve but little notice in matters, ei
ther of religion or government." And indeed I think so
too; and to whom can these epithets belong so properly,
as to those, who think that thechurch ofChrift, and the
worship of God, would be overfet, if secular force was not
used to support them? Are such churches built upon the
rock, or upon the sand?
Many talk so plausible about religious liberty, that our
good friends, who have not had sensible experience; of a
contrary practice, can hardly believe, that a religious ef
tablilhment by human laws, is so evil and dangerous as it
really is. This makes a recital of a few plain faffs, highly
proper at this time, in order to prevent such evils for the
future.
Many of the baptifis in this State, have long been con
vinced, thata giving in the annual certificates, required
by the ruling party, as the condition of our exemption from
taxes to their ministers, contains an implicit acknowledg
ment of a power assumed by man, which in reality, be
longs only to God. And in our appeal to the public,
printed in Boston five years age, we have given the par
ticular reasons, why we cannot in conscience perform that
Condition. Yet, only because we have refufed to wrong
our coafeiences in that refpeft, our people, in various pl:-
ces, have been taxed from year to year, to padebaptift
ministers. And lam credibly informed, that the towns
of Lancaster and Aihby have voted this year, that dißrefs
Ihall be made for such taxes, upon the baptifis therein,
who refufe a compliance with that condition, And ano
ther town has violated religious and civil rights to a much
more surprising degree.
Peppereli, in the county of Middlesex, has had a name
for religion and regularity, and for an uncommon zeal in
the defence of cur country, against foreign invaders. But
their attachment to their ecclesiastical establishment, by
human la%s, has betrayed them into the following extra
vagances, viz. Because Mr Daniel Davis, who had some
acquaintance with the baptists before he removed in to that
town, requeued Mr. Samuel Fletcher, of Chelmsford, to
come and preach at his house, and he, by a letter, had
appointed a meeting there on March ig, 1778; his letter
was broke open as it came into Pepperell, after a town
meeting, and Mr. Nehemiah Hubbard their town-clerk,
and one of their fele&men, was for calling a vote whether
be Biould preach there or not. And as some afleed who
this prea her was. Mr. Hubbard said, he is old Timothy
Fletcher's son ; the fox-hunter's son, &c.=Such behaviour
caused Dr. Ephraim Lawrence to remind them of what
was once said about the carpenter's son; and so prevented a
vote upon it; and Mr. Fletcher came and preached accor
ding to appointment. And, at Dr. Lawrence's request,
he came again and preached at his house, on March 27th.
But in the time of worship, the house was assaulted, by
many inhabitants of the town, some of whom were their
leading men; and one Temple, a traveller, was sent in to
break up the meeting, who spoke out repeatedly for that
purpose, till he was turned out of the house; and then they
went to an adjacent tavern, from whence a scurril
ous letter was wrote to the preacher, which, by advice,
he burnt. Soon after another was sent, directed thus:
“ To Samuel Fletcher, now in Pepperell." Wherein they
fay, “ We frould be glad that you will not come into
town ever agamupon such an errand; and you may rely
upon your being treated with opposition and scorn.
Don't, upon your peril, come into town again on such an
errand, as it will certainly be opposed, as ever such doc*
trine is delivered again in Pepperell, as we are united, and
desire no bhptifts in town. This for your intereft.'
March 27, 1778.
“ It is acquiefeed in by all friends to freedom add uni
ted nefs."
This I copied from the original letter. Other threat
nings were given out for the f^me purpose ; though Mr.
Fletcher was not deterred thereby from preaching again in
that town in May. And on June 2<, Mr Isaiah Parker,
pastor of the baptist church in Harvard, came with him
and preached there. The next morning they met again,
when the aforefaid Mr. Davis, Mr. Simeon Shattuck, and
his wife, and three single young persons, gave a fatisfying
account of God's dealings with their fouls, inorder for bap
ti m. In the afternoon they met by a river-fide, for
preaching and the administration of that ordinance, upon
lands that three of them were heirs to, which at present
is improved by their mother, Mrs. Lydia Wright.
Alter praying and finding, Mr. Fletcher read a text, and
began bis sermon, just as Lieut. Col. Henry Woods,
Capt. Nathaniel Lakin, Cornet Simon Gilfon, Lieut. Jo
nas Varnum, Capt. Jeremiah Shattuck, the before named
Mr. Hubbard, and a great number of their followers,
came up ; some of whom were armed with clubs and poles,
and forbid our friends either to preach or baptize, any
where within the limits of Pepperell. Upon this breach
of the peace, Mrs. Wright spake to those disturbers, and
ordered them to depart from off her lands ; but they re
fufed to go. Mr. Parker desired they would ad like men,
if they wpuld not lik^ Christians; and reminded them of