The Sun.
London, England, 1821-04-18 00:00:00

which establiihed the purest system of Christian
faith, but had to the utmost possible degree suc-
ceeded in securing the religious and 'civil liberty
of those who dissent from it, whether Catholic or
Protestant Dissenters; and now he mentioned
the Protestant Dissenters, he should observe, that
the framers of the present Bill seemed to have
forgotten them aitogether,—(Hear !)—and to
. have overlooked the fact that so many great
Statesmen had .thought
,it. necessary to defend the
ChkirA against them, by refusing -repeal
,the
T.ist-aed Corporation Acts.. But they Were told
thak this they 'were wrong,- and that they
.let • the, Chtirch .Establishment take its
41s4ee. He was .Ofa- different opissiOn ; .if he
sveev at the, last. OR of his life he shbuld as-
ser;•fhat an established religion was the greatest
befit to a people,.ntit. to make. the Church poli-
tttal,- but to tnalse'the State religious. ;—(Hear!)
—arid he was firmly convinced that the interests
of religion wouldAe better. Consulted by saying,
Pir.s. there should be a Worse religion established,
avi a,n enlightened, toleration, than by saying
tboe should be no establishment ; for he believed
th4st- in the preseet state of society, the existence
of an -establishment was the best way of promot-
-14 the religious an 4 civil interests of every man
in.tb:e country.—(Hear !)—He could not agree
that -the Mode in which the discussion had pro-
.cestled had ,bronght them to the true question in
this:r..ase ; he would not go into those early scenes
o. -the history, of this country before the Refor-
rnation, when there were a Popish King and Po-
pish Houses of Legislature acknowledging the
authority of the Pope. But the House would go
alOng with him in saying, that never were there
Pretensions so unfounded as those set up by the
Pope, and even as those which were acceded to;
'and he would also do justice by•admitting, that
never was the love cf liberty more strongly dis-
played than in those struggles with the Pope. But
that was not the period to look to; for, till the
period of the Reformation, the question of foreign
influence was never looked at in the same point
of view or with the same interest as now. He
:wished their Lordships would read the various
• statutes respecting the King's supremacy, passed
in the reign of Henry VIII. But he could not
pass the earlier times of our history without pay-
ing a tribute to those great men, who defended,
. bat did not lay the foundations of English liberty,
which were laid at a much earlier period ; for
the. Church of England having lived in this
• conniry before the Church of Rome was brought
. W hat the supremacy approved by the Pope
in this country had been he could only know
frnn the statutes of the country. If they read
the- Ist Philip and Mary, c. 8, they would see
what supremacy at that time of day was. There
cettid be nothing more humiliating, there could
t be a more debased and degraded record re-
.ep.ecting a nation, than that absolute submission
of all the States of this Realm to a Foreign Pre-
late.' He begged their Lordships to read it ; he
hardly knew a man who had read it. No man
who would read it would fail to arise alive and
: trembling, lest they should open again the door
to that lion which .had so nearly devoured us.—
Those who framed the present Bill seemed not
. to know that there were common law oaths as
'well as statute oaths. But lawyers would tell
them that the old Oath of Allegiance was the
wrie as the modern Oath of Supremacy. Allegi-
ance, according to the common law, was un-
divided allegiance. Lord Hale said, that the
Oath of Supremacy had become absolutely
necessary to inform the people that they
co:ild not have a civil allegiance distinct
from' ecclesiastical or spiritual allegiance. It
was introduced to " unrivet" (that was his ex-
pression). those errors which had crept into the
minds of the subject, and to explain in what man-
- nen he pledged 'himself to the Crown,as the head
of the civil and spiritual state of the country.
The Bill before them appeared to him (the
Lard .Chancellor) to be framed with the ex-
press purpose of undoing what the Oath of Su-
premacy. meant to ,effect. The greatest men,,
Seldon, Clarendon, Locke., and Lord Somers,
had .not hated Popery on account of its religi-
(las tenets, but on account 'of its tendency to in-
.troduce:slavery and subjection to a foreign power.
Mr- Locke, indeed, had said, that because the
Ce.tholics acknewledged foreign 'authority, they
could not tie. at 'all tolerated in a State.—The
Rey. Prelate (the Bishop of Norwich) shook
his head--,he (the LOrd Chancellor) could shake,
h;r. head'. laugh 1.)•-•-:-He thought Mr.
14Ocke ha. d.a.,;one too:far-4111a he had lost on that
hccasfon the.autrian Uiuderstanding. When the
:Reformation had. made some progress, Queen Eli-
salsostbssent ,forsli an .ittipisnition to.her subjects,
Ella. c.. 1, To his utter • aitonishatenr, he
(tlse.lorsl-0.) had seenit-dehlared, that this ad-
rnoo:tionovsts an exposition of what the Oath of
f-shipess'sna.cy. tneant;.,. lie " would co the length of
, Sayress, thatseitinsi tho indiyidowl..who vtai.then
addressing their Lordships, or
,those Who passed
that..Reolution as to .Queen Elizatieth's'admoni-,
not .knoW..the meaniii of common lan-
.was evidezit to hint that;it had nothing
jails's; ,world to do with the oath` of Sakeinacy.
It.irs..assiii.d.hy;.theaciVocates of the Present bill,
that .the Pr.otestant Vistablisherient was sec lied in
plO.ce by the acts of William antr Mary ;
in the-secolitl place by the .troion with Scotland;
• arid thirdly,, and 'post effectually, by the Union
He was ready to, agree to all this
.ifthey perinitted- the means 'to- remain by which
the establislimentwas secured, They had heard
other places, of paper and pirchment.eonstitu-
. .tiActils, .but what was the Act of Settlerneht but a
.pape.rnonstitutiou, if 'they took away the means
.ny which its provisions were effected ? It Was
10.14 bill, that the Catholics were ready to
ahjere all allegiance except what 'referred to re-
,ligious belief. Then, why; he asked, was not the
oath, framed accordingly ?: He begged any one
.i.oresacl that oath, and to ask whether it was not
- • left entirely to the mind of the person who took
..tiae..,oath, to. say what was matter of belief or not?
•I.t.e.was willing to give credit to the Catholics for
more s,koopuas and integrity than the present bill
attributed torthem. But why was the person Who
belonged toiflie Church'of England togive greater
pir)dgesfOrtheseCtlrityofthechuich than the Ca..
tholics? We, the Protestants, were to give the
rope no authority at all) the Catholics were to