The Sun.
London, England, 1828-04-22 00:00:00

peace and tranquillity—conceiving the present to be
good opportunity fur securing to the country so inesti-
mable an, advantage—he had felt it to be his duty to re-
commend this measure to their Lordships.. —(Hear.)_
It was on all these grounds that he supported the Bill,
and not on the single ground, the circumstance of its
having bees carried in the House of Commons, as the
Noble Lord had',stated. (Hear.) He MS not one ()I'
those who considered that the best means of preserving
the Con'stitution of this country was by adhering to mean
sures which had been called fur by particular eircum-
stancss, because they had been existence for 200 years ;
since the lapse of time might render it proper to modify,
if not to remove them altogether. The .Nolds Lord
stated that he had objections to this Bill. if the Noble
Lord suffered the Bill to go into a Committee, and would
there state his propositions, every attention would be paid
to them. All lie hoped was, that their Lordships would
not unnecessarily make any alterations in the measure that
were likely to give dissatisfaction ; that they would not`
do any thing which might be calculated to remove that
conciliatory spirit which was now growing up,—a spirit
that would redound to the benefit of the country, and
which, so far from opposing, they ought, on the con-
trary, to do every thing to foster and promote. (Hear.)
The Earl of FALMOUTH—I only mentioned the cir-
cumstance of the success- of the measure in the House of
Commous as one of the recommendatory reasons advanced
by the Noble Duke.
The Earl of HAREWOOD considered a Bill of this
nature, a measure coming from the other House, and
which was so interesting to a large portion of the popula-
tion, not only interesting to those who went by the name
of Protestant Dissenters, but •to other denominations of
Dissenters from the Church of England, called for deli-
berate consideration, and ought not to be hastily passed.
Was this measure brought forward solely on account of the
general feeling of the Dissenters throughout the kingdom?
Because if it were not, he must look for the cause else-
where. He might be wrong; but he must "state what he
conceived that cause to he, .It was, in his opinion, closely
connected with another measure, which involved political
considerations of very great importance. He believed
that it was with reference to that measure that this
question was brought forward at present. , The ques-
tion, however, for their Lordships' consideration on this oc-
casion was, whether the present was a satisfactory mea-
sure. It was brought before their Lordships from
the other House of Parliament—that House having,
by this Bill, admitted that some declaration was
necessary. That fact was placed beyond a doubt by
their own proceeding. Now it appeared to him very
curious, that in the declaration contained in the
Bill, no notice,was taken of this single but important ques-
tion,—namely, whether a man to whom the declaration
was about to be administered was or was not a Christian ?
--(Hear, hear.) He should be very sorry to exclude the
Dissenters from those privileges which they enjoyed under
the Indemnity Bill, and which he was ready to admit they
deserved ; but when they came to that House with a new
declaration, their Lordships ought to see that it was a
proper one. When he looked to the declaration, it ap-
peared to him to be deficient. In forming a declaration
suitable to such a-Bill, it ought to proceed on this simple
proposition,—that the man taking it, thereby declared him-
self to be a believer in Christianity. The answer to this,
he knew, was, that it was useless to provide such a test,
for persons who did not believe would take any oath
that might be propounded to them. But, notwithstand-
ing that; he did not wish to see a declaration that did not
contain some provision of this nature standing on the re-
cords of Parliament. He wished merely that a clause
should be inserted in the declaration, from which it would
appear that any man, who took it, believed in the Christian
religion. It was not because that be expected any great
security from the declaration that he was desirous of hav-
ing it thus altered—but be wished it so to be worded for
the credit of Parliament.

The Bishop of LL ANDAFF was of opinion that a test.
ciaild easily be formed, which would provide for the per-
fect security of the Church of England. As to the Church
of Scotland, it was, he conceived, perfectly safe as the Bill
at present stood. Additions bad been suggested to the
declaration, but they did not immediately meet his ideas
on the subject ; and he meant, at the proper time, to pro-
pose such alterations as appeared to hint more likely to
effect the object which every declaration- must have in view.
The phrase, " the wisdom of our ancestors," had, he
thought, on a former night been taken up and animadverted
on very inconsiderately : be hoped that this arose from the
heat and fervour of the moment. It had been said on
that occasion. that the measures which they ware now called
to repeal, had been framed and carried in a spirit of violence
and faction ; hut he would maintain, on -the contrary, that
tbey were -the result of policy and reason, and were rendered
necessary by the circumstances of the time.—(Hear.)—
Grave and serious attention ought to be bestowed on this

measure before it passed into a law. lie spoke more espe-
cially with reference to the declaration ; but he mentioned
this point without meaning to create any discussion on it at
present. It would, however, in his opinion, he more satis-
factory, if the words of the declaration were framed in a
style of phrase as nearly Auilar to an oath as possible. The
effect of the declaration was to invest certain persons with
civil offices, who, unless they took that declaration, would
be considered unfit fur them. Therefore they ought, in
drawing up the declaration, to take care to provide for the

inviolability of that union of Church and State which at
present existed ; and therefore he thought it would be
proper to call on those taking the test to declare, on the
faith of Christians, that they would not endeavour, by the
exercise of any power with which their, respective offices
might invest them, to interfere with the rights and immu-
nities of the Church of England. With such a modifieiY.--
Lion, he should approve of the Bill ; and, indeed, he con-
ceived it essential to its safety.

The Earl of HADDINGt ON was anxious that the in-
violability of the Church of Scotland should be strictly pre
served. The Noble and Learned_ Lord (Eldon) had stated
that the safety of the Constitution of Great Britain was in-
timately connected with the safety of the Church of Eng-
land. He admitted this position in its fullest extent. He
felt that the Church of England was an essential part of
the Constitution of England ; but he must be all Owed to
say, that the Church of Scotland was as much so. Both
churches firmed a part of the Constitution. That, then,
being the case, he presumed that, to have omitted the
Church of Scotland in this measure, would have been
wrong, because it would appear as if, in point of fact,
when the inviolability of only one church was noticed, the
inviolability of the other was not recognized. The Church
of Scotland, however, needed no test; and with respect to
that point, he himself would never consent that any test
whatever should be imposed with reference to it. Beyond
that, be would state his firm belief to he, that the Church
of England needed tests just as little.—(Hear.) His opi-
nion of the Church of England was such as induced him
to think that she could as safely exist without tests as the
Church of Scotland.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of ELDON said a few words in explanation.

Lord COLCHESTER said he had given his vote most
willingly for the second reading of this Bill, and for its
proceeding to a committee, because there he thought its
merits could best be canvassed. The Dissenters had long,
during the existence of the Test and Corporation Acts,
been enabled to fill offices in the state by the operation of
the annual Bill of Indemnity. By that Bill the original
security was waived, and they were admitted to fill offices
to which they were not by law eligible. Now he did not
at first consider the present declaration to be sufficient, and
he confessed that he still continued to be of the same opi-
nion. It was right that their Lordships should consider
how far the declaration was calculated to answer the pur-
pose for which it was intended. He agreed with the Right
Rev. Prelate in the propriety of making the declaration as
similar to an oath as possible. He also thought it ivould
be proper to revise that clause which gave to th Crown
the right of dispensing with the declaration in all 'cases ex-
cept those which were excepted by the Bill. In Isis opi-
nion, the Bill ought to specify the small classes of office,
the persons accepting of which should not be called on to
take the declaration. Unless an amendment were intro-
duced, going substantively to these two points,—the form
of tk: declaration, and the description of persons who would
and who would not be required to take it,—he should
certainly feel it to be his duty to resist the further progress
of the measure.
Lori REDESDALE should certainly oppose the Bill ;
and his great reason fur doing so was this, that the Consti-.
tutfon compelled the King to be a member of the Church
of England. He was compelled to take an oath, in which
he swore to support the Church of England and Ireland,
as by law established, and yet they Were,gbyw:iiseoßwilli
about to provide that every one of his Alinisters rnight be
of a different church.—(Hear. )---The King
pelted to be of the Church of England, but all his confiden-
tial advisers might profess another faith. This Was suffi-
cient to warrant his opposition. It was his great objection,
and he did nut know bow it could be removal.

The House then went into a Committee on the Bill.
When the clause enacting the repeal of certain parts of
the 13th and 25th of Charles 11., and certain parts of the
Act of the 16th George 11. was read—
' The Earl of ELDON, moved a saving clause, exempting
from the necessity of taking the declaration such members
of the Church of England, and such Dissenters, as bad
taken the Sacrament six months before coming into office,
such a ceremonial having, in fact, qUalified then!, they
ought not to be considered liable to another test. This
would apply to the Mayor or Aldermen of a Corporation,

who ought not to he requited to take this deilitiou it
going to fill any other office, because they weolready
qualified. He could see no reason why individts.who
were willing to take the Sacramental test, shoe be re-
quired to take the new.• Such persons, being metiers of
the Church of England, or Dissenters who did roscruple
to take the Sacramental test, ought to be allowed
under the acts new in force, if they pleased. It ould be
left to their option.
Lord CLARENDON, as we understood, .okted to
the proposed amendment. • •
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, that of the twernend-
ments the first was he would say, wholly unneeessr ; thk
second would be extremely mischievous. Therwould
be no hardship m proposing the inteuded deels*n to
persons already qualified for office under the exissg law,
and they certainly could have no possible objectiA to the
taking of it. The second amendment, howeveiyould be
in its effect extremely mischievous. The obje of his
Majesty's Ministers, and the object of Parliamen was to
preserve the religious peace of the country, and t4O away
with those apparent differences which divided ti several
religious persuasions in this country. It was le desire
and the wish of his Majesty's Ministers to haveuelt dis-
tinctions abolished, and he trusted that they ould be
seconded in their efforts by the decision of that Louse.—
(Hear.)—There should be nu distinction in civilffiees be-
tween Dissenters and Church of England me Both
should be equally admitted to office on deelarin&their de-
termination to support the State and the Constitoon faith-
fully and loyally. He would entreat their Lord4ps not to
mar the object of Parliament in the proposed tnisure, and
not to increase the religious distinctions and ditrenees in
the country.—(Hear, hear.)—He trusted theyzould put
• the Dissenters and the Members of the Church i England
upon the same footing, and that the same qualitiation for
office would be required from both..
The Earl of HARROWBY agreed with Lcd Ellen-
borough in considering the first amendment prposed by
• the Noble Lord (Eldon) as superfluous, and thenext ex-
tremely mischievous. The Noble Lord had sad that it
would be a hardship to require from person. who had
already taken the sacramental test, a new didaration in
the shape of another test. But that test nerdy consisted
of a declaration, to which those who liar already taken
the sacramental test could have no possibe objection,- but
to which they would be most ready and willing to sub-
scribe. The other portion of the Nobe Lord's amend-
ment would-be most mischievous in is tendency, as it
was calculated to maintain those itvidious distinctions
which it was the object of the Bill to emove and dissipate.
The Earl of ELDON said his ornament would apply
not only to members of the church of England and to Dis-
senters—who had, previous to the passing of this Act.
already qualified for office, by takitg the sacramental test
within the 12 months preceding—hit also to such members
of the church of England as had taken the sacrament in
the discharge of their religious (baits. Thisamendment went
to except all persons who had, oy thus taking thli sacra-
ment, given the strongest proof of their confbrmity with
the church of England.
The Bishop of CHESTEE most sincerely hoped that
the amendments of the Nobleand Learned Lord would not

be agreed to. To those anendments he (the Bishop of
Chester) was strongly opposed; and he could not refrain
from expressing his surprite that some consideration for
his consistency did not Orcrate to prevent the Noble Lord
from proposing them.—.—(Flear.) The Noble Lord had al-
ready declared that he supported the sacramental test as
the means of keeping the Dissenters out of office. Now,
however, he states that many Dissenters do take the test as

a qualification for office, and he proposes to except such
Dissenters from the declaration contained in the Bill before
the House. There were two principles whicll lie should
like to see how the Noble Lord could reconcile. The Noble

Lord would he content with the taking of the. sacra-
ment as a proof of the sincerity of the Church of England
man, and he would include in his exception the Dissenter,
who merely took that sacrament as the means of qualifying
for office, and not as an expression of his conformity to
the communion of the Church of England. The principle
of the present Bill—a principle to Which be (the Bishop of
Chester) should give his decided support—was to prevent
the mingling of the solemn rite of the sacrament with the
qualification for worldly employment.
The Earl of ELDON would recommend the Rev. Pre-

late to attend to his own consistency rather than to the
talking about that of others. He (Lord Eldon) had at
least been as consistent as the Rev. Prelate ou this subject,
and he would take care to be so to the end. He did not
know whether the present Bill applied to the Ecclesiastical
Corporations; indeed he believed the framers of it were
themselves ignorant whether it went to that extent. If it
did apply to Ecclesiastical - Corporations, the Rev. Prelate
opposite, in being promoted, as he (Lord EldOn) thought it
very likely he would be in the course of time, to a certain
high and permanent station in the Church, would be
obliged to take the declaration prescribed by this Bill belbre
he could be admitted.

The Bishop of CHESTER did not consider it fair in

the Noble Lord to put an'hypothesis which was no a fact,
and to argue upon a ease which could nut happen under the
existing laws. He would advise the Noble Lord to found
his reasonings upon something more tangible and snore to

the purpose: Such a course would be more consistent
with the discharge of his duty, and would be more likely,
perhaps, to attain his object.
The Earl of ELDON. begged the Rev. Prelate would
abstain front thus gratuitously tendering his advice. He
had advised him (Lord Eldon) to mind his duty, but he
should not offend the Rev. Prelate by advising hint as to
the mode in which he should discharge his duty.
The Bishop of LICHFIELD said, the Noble Earl
•

(Eldon) would except from the proposed Declaration al!
such :Members of the Church of England, as well as
Dissenters, who had taken the Sacrament according to the
rites of the Established Church. But many Members of
the Church of England might have taken the Sacrament
in the discharge of their religious duties, whereat, to qua-
.. _ _ _ .

lift' for office, it must be taken for that especial purpose,
and before certain magisterial functionaries. Therefore,
many of the persons whom the Noble Earl would except
by his amendment, would not actually, under the existing
law, have qualified themselves for office. He was opposed
to the Noble Lord's amendment.

The Aniendment was then put and negatived.
On the question being put, upon the first clause,

Lord REDESDALE-rose to object to it. He did not
think that the security which it proposed at all sufficient.
Indeed, it was perfectly ridiculous. From experience lie
would say, that in his opinion the declaration would be
entirely nugatory and of no avail. (Cries of " Order.")
The CHAIRMAN informed the Noble Lord, that the
question now was upon the first clause of the Bill, and
that they had not as yet CONIC to the second clause, which
contained the declaration.
Lord REDESDALE begged their Lordship? pardon.
His objection, however, to that clause, was applicable to
the whole Bill. By the Act of Settlement, they bound
the Prince upon the throne by oath to maintain the Pro-
testant establiShment, and at the same time by this Bill they
would leave every officer under the Sovereign free to pro-
fess what religion lie pleased. Could there be greater ab-
surdity in legislation ?

. _
The question was then put upon the first clause, and
carried.

The second clause having been read by the Chair►nan,
The Duke of WELLINGTON proposed as an amend-
ment, that after the words in the declaration—" I, A. 8.,
do solemnly," the following be 'introduced, " and sin-
cerely, in the presence of God, prof6s, testify, and"—
The Bishop of LLANDAFF rose to propose as an ad-
ditional amendment, that after the word " and," and be-
fore the word " declare," there be introduced the words
" upon the faith of a Christian." The principle of the
measure, his Lordship said, was to admit persons to
office who dissented from the communion of the Church
of England. Now he did not conceive it sufficient
to require from such persons, when entering upon
office, to declare that they would ■se none of the
influence of which they might become possessed
in virtue of that office to injure, or weaken, or subvert
the Established Church. lle was of opinion that they
should be further required, as every mag►strate was called
upon in entering office, to promise to discharge the duties
of it, to snaintaiu and uphold the rights and privileges of
the Established Church whenever in danger. Ile would
therefore propose, as a further amendment of the declara-
tion, that after the word "entitled," at the end of the de-
claration, the subscriber to it be further called' upon to say,
under the solemn sanction already imparted to the declara-
tion—" and that I do, as far as concerns the duties of the
add office, respect and maintain the rights and privileges
of the Established Church of these realms."

The Earl of CLARENDON reminded the Rev. Prelate
that one amendment should be disposed of before they pro-
ceeded to the discussion of another. That proposed by
the-Noble Duke of Wellington had the precedence.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, it would be com-
petent in the Rev. Prelate either to move his amendment as
an amendnient upon the amendment proposed by the Duke
of Wellington ; or, if he had no objection to that amend-
ment, he could postpone his proposition until that amend-
ment had been disposed of.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF entirely concurred in the
amendment proposed by the Noble Duke. •
Lord HOLLAND said the amendinents should be taken
in point of precedence; one by. one. Though he (Lord
Holland) was not willing to change the declaration as it
stood in the Bill, yet he was perfectly ready to agree with

the' Noble Dike>+ amendment, which introduced no mate
vial alteration into it.

Lord ELDON'proposed that the word " swear" he sub-
' stituted for the word " declare," and that the subscriber to
the declaration be further required to state that he was a
Christian, and that be believed that the Scriptures, the
Old and New Testaments, as received by the Protestant
Churches., contained the_ revealed word of God. These
who took the oath of abjuration were obliged to profess
themselves Christians ; but this Bill required no such pro-
fession, and it merely mentioned the rights and privileges
of the Established Church. lie would like to know, from
those best calculated to give theta information on the sub-
ject, what those rights and privileges were. If the sub-
scriber were required, not merely to maintain the rights
and privileges of the Established Church, but the rights
and privileges of the Bishops and Clergy of that Church,
then he (Lord Eldon) could • well understand what was
meant. But the phrase as it at present stood was per-
fectly unintelligible to him.
Lord TENTERDEN said, the amendment proposed by
the Noble Duke (Wellington) should be considered sepa-
rately front the other amendments, and decided. upon its
own merits.—(Hear.) As that amendment was calculated
to give greater solemnity to the declaration, he (Lord Ten-
terden) was prepared to vote for it. As for the declara-
tion itself, it required Much amendment, and he hoped a
far different one would be required.—(Hear.)
The amendment proposed by the Duke of WELLINGTON
was then put amiagreed to.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF then proposed, that after
the word " declare," the words " upon the faith of a
Christian," be introduced.

The Earl of ELDON claimed precedence in point of
order for his amendment. He moved that the word
"swear" he substituted for " declare."

The Bishop of LLANDAFF was about addressing the
House, when
Earl GREY rose to order. The amendment respecting
the word " declare" should be discussed and decided
,be-
fore those proposed by the Rev. Prelate.
The Bishop of LLANDAFF said, that in proposing
the introduction of the words " upon the faith of a Chris-
tian;" he wished to meet the objection to the declaration
as it at present stood—namely, that it could be taken by
those who were'not Christians at all. Now the introduc-
tion of the word swear did not appear to him to obviate
that object ion, for any inn` might swear.
After a few words from Lord TEsTXRDEN, the ques-
tion was put from the, Chair upon Lord Eldon's amend-
ment substituting " swear" for " declare." - •

Lord ELLENBOROUGH entreated the House not to
be led away thus by theproposal of amendment after amend-
ment, until the declaration should be entirely and com-
pletely altered.—(Hear, hear.)—The Reverend Prelate
(the Bishop of Llandaff) first proposed the introduction
of the words " upon the faith of a Christian," and then he
wanted to require from the Dissenters accepting office, a
pledge not merely that they would not employ their influ-
ence to injure or weaken the Established Church, hut that
they would maintain and support the Church of England.
Would it not be preposterous to require such a pledge
from the Dissenters? For the last 80 years they had been
admitted to office under the Annual Indemnity Bill, with-
out taking the sacramental test, and what protection did
the Church of England require during that period against
them ? They should not he placing the Dissenters now
under difficulties and subjecting them to a control uncalled
for and undeserved, and casting a suspicion upon them
which should never be entertained.—(Hear, hear.)—
This was a measure of conciliation : its object. was to
establish religious peace in the country, and it was one
well merited by the Dissenters, who had uniformly ex-
hibited the greatest zeal and loyalty in support of the Con-
stitution. —( Hear. )—lt was a measure of grace, and should
be attended with confidence instead of distrust.—(Hear.)—
He objected to the amendment introducing the words—
" upon the faith of a Christian" as unnecessary. There
were very few, he trusted, in this country, who would ob-
ject to the taking of it; but it went to show a suspicion
which was not justified, and therefore it should be rejected.
—(Hear.)—The Act of the 9th and 10th of William and
Mary already provided against any danger which the Rev.
Prelate might imagine would arise from persons not pro-
fessing the Christian religion obtaining possession of office.
Under that Act, any person who, by writing, or otherwise,
expressed his disbelief in the Christian religion, er in the
authority of the Sacred Scriptures, might be deprived of his
office. Therefore, any additional precaution on that head
was quite unnecessary. He disliked the alterations now
proposed, as they went to change the healing character of
the measure, and he therefore trusted they would be re-
jected.-(Hear.) '
The Bishop of LLANDAFF explained.
The Earl of MALMESBURY, although he had objec-
tions to the ordinary application of so solemn a service as
the Sacrament for civil purposes, yet be was ready to make
the substituted declaration as strong as it could conveni-
ently be rendered, for the satisfaction of those who felt its
protection necessary. lie was quite ready to get rid of
the objectionable parts of these acts, and to adopt in their
place, an adequate declaration ; and he really wished to
have it framed strong enough to exclude Uuitar:aus from
eligibility to office, because he did not think they tendered
the same belief in Christianity which other sects affirmed.
Not being willing to see that class of persons in office, he
certainly should vote for any test which would have the
effect of keeping them out.
Lord TENTERDEN did not think that a sufficient die-
tinctiou bad been drawn between the principle and the
object of the Test and Corporation Acts. Ile explained
the circumstances out of which these Acts sprung, and
thought that while those who had to govern corporate
towns should he obliged to conform to the leading doc-
trines of the established church, the same narrow ground
of qualification need not be required from the general
classes who were called upon by virtue of the Test Act.
The Earl of HARROWBY thought that the distinction
between the principle and object of the two Acts could be
better discussed in a future stage of the Committee, than
upon the present clause. He, for one, could certainly not
conceive what danger could arise to the State from leaving
the Bill with the original clause ; nor could he apprehend
the additional value of the proposed substitute to counter-
act such a dagger, if any should happen to arise. He was
fortified in this opinion by the conduct of the Legislature,
not at any one particular period under a sudden exigency,
but during'an uninterrupted series of years, when they had
uniformly interposed to suspend these Acts, and thereby
manifested their indisposition to believe that any danger
arose to the church from this considerate protection of
the great body of the Dissenters. A Right Reverend
Prelate had re-stated what lie (Lord Harrowby) believed
to be an historical mistake, respecting the origin of
these statutes—namely, that they were originally in-
tended to exclude from civil office all who were not
bona file members of the church of England. This was
certainly not the fact, for in the Parliament immediately
after the restoration,- as the Reverend Prelate had him-
self admitted, 52 out of 54. Dissenters were said to have
taken the sacrament after the form of the church of England.
Ile owned that when he looked to the recorded inutility of
the existing Test Laws, his first impression when he beard
of this Bill was, that the better course would be a total re-
peal, without any substitute. The object being religion,
peace, and mutual harmony among religious sects, he
thought the surest way of securing so desirable an object
would be, by the unequivocal display of confidence and li-
berality on the part of,those who weroconferrhag the boon.
ses(Hear.)—As a member of the Church of England,
-sin-
cerely professing and practising its faith; . and believing
that times were in: which it had occasionally rested its
existence.and security on mere secular support, instead of
reposing its strength upon the higher and nobler grounds
of its pure apostolical doctrines and enlightened‘creed—
(Hear),—he was most anxious on this occasion to see the
more liberal, and what he felt the better, course adopted.
At the same time he Would lean 'to the accommodation of
the opinions of others, and not refuse any reasonable con-
cession to sooth and allay individual differences. These
tests had been miscalled bulwarks ; and if any reasonable
substitute were agreed upon, which though it really af-
forded no buttress to the fortress, yet appeared to answer
the same end as the old qualification, it should' have his
support, provided, however, that it did not fritter away
the grace of this measure to the Dissenters, and prevent
their accepting itwith joy and delight, or make it a quei-
tion among them, after what they had passed, whether or
not they had received a boon when this Act should haVe
been enacted for them.—(Hear.)—In looking at the ori-
ginal Test, and that proposed in its room, they ought to be-
gin by comparing the relative value of the two stipulations.
The sacrament was one, and a declaration the other. What
was the force of the former ? What in fact did a man
profess upon taking the sacrament? He certainly made a
solemn declaration to God ; but so far as his obliga-
tion referred to the civil concerns of this world, it was
very incomplete. It was really unwise to attach so
much importance to forms which the Legislature bad been
compelled, from its own sense of reason and justice, to
permit to repose in slumber, as far as the Dissenters were
concerned. He thought, on the whole, that the declara-
tion, as given by the Bill, gave the fullest assurance which
it was possible by any other form of avowal to obfaiti,
and in a way the least objectionable to those whose
feelings they professed a desire to consult on the present
occasion ; while the obligation proposed as a substitute for
it went to afford the Church a degree of enjoined support,
for which it was not thought necessary to call in any of the
other great institutions of the country. What necessity

was there for evincing ;lily desire to carry their appre-.
bensions to that length, in defiance of the experience
which they had of the value of conciliation and .the
diffusion of goodwill among all classes of Christians'
Surely they had already oaths enouvb upon the statute
1,061 c, without seeking in this manner to add to the number.
—(Hear.)—ln every view which he could take of the
subject, be saw no necessity for the proposed amendment
of the Bill which had been sent up to their Lordships'
House.

The Bishop of Duni'Am defended the Clergy of the
Established Church from any excessive proneness to sect:
the aid of the secular arm. However, if they were al.
together to abandon the benefit of that security, they
might as well be :it once without the enactment of the
various statutes which had fenced round the Established
Church. With respect to the question before them, he
knew that many persons were alarmed at the omission in
the Bill of any thing like a strong profession of Chris-
tianity. This objection ought certainly to he removed.
The Earl of HARROWBY protested, that nothing
was further from his intention than to say any thing which
could excite an unpleasant sensation in the mind of any
Member. of the Reverend Bench. He tlrought in what
he had said he had Sufficiently guarded himself against
any such imputation, It ought not to be supposed, that
in saying that the amendments proposed were so nume-
rous and so various, that it appeared as if they were pro-
posed with no other intention than to defeat the Bill,
that he was making any reflection on the Reverend
Bench, especially as only one of the Amentlinents which
had been proposed came .from that quarter. He never meant
to impute, to the Reverend Bench that they had any wish
to defeat this Bill. He declared his solemn belief that
they had no such intention. Such an intention would be
opptfsed to the enlightened and liberal sentiments which
had been expressed by many and concurred in by all the
members of that bench. He owed an apology to their
Lordships, if in the course of his observations he had said
any thing which-appeared to them derogatory to the high
situation which they held in the Church. All that he had
intended to do was to express his regret that the Church
had in some instance depended ton much upon the securer
arm of the State, and too little upon the strength and
veracity of its doctrines,—an observation Which he be-
lieved had found an echo in the breast of every man who
heard him.

The Earl of CARNARVON, though anxious to give the
Reverend Bench every reasonable satisfaction, could not
refrain from reminding them, that if they would listen to
every suspicion which ingenuity would discover for them,
they would make this measure not a measure of peace, but
a measure of religious animosity and discord. The ques-
tion which the'e: Lordships were now called upon to decide
was, whether they should introduce an oath instead of a de-
claration into the Bill now before them. Now it appeared,
to him, that their Lordships had already virtually de-
cided that question by agreeing to that part of the
clause, which called upon every person taking office under
his Majesty, to • sign a declaration. The Bill itself was
intended as a measure of religious peace ; but it would. not
retain that character if it made it incumbent upon indivi-
duals to say, "I swear" so and so, instead of " I declare"
so and so. He hardly knew whether a Bill which bad been
introduced into the House that Session for the purpose of
conferring relief in certain cases on Quakers, had pas.ed
through the House or not ; but if it had, it would be ren-
dered nugatory by the substitution of the words " I swear"
for " I- declare ;" for as their religious tenets prevented them
from swearing, those words would effectually exclude them
front any office of trust and importance. Independently of
this objection of substituting an oath for a declaration, there
was much force in the argument which had been so well put
by the Noble Earl opposite, that in the various laws whirls
the House had already made, it had gone much too far in
the multiplication of useless and unnecessary oaths. Their
Lordships had made men so familiar with oaths, that
they took them • without even listening to them, as
they were mumbled over by a clerk, who generally read
them in such a manner as if he was anxious that they
should not be understood. - From their youth upwards,
men were perpetually called upon to take one sort of an
oath or another. At college, they swore to oaths which
were either dead letters or absolute nonsense; and day
after day the Legislature went on multiplying oaths, with-
out increasing the security either of Church or State.
The real question, however, for their Lordships' considera-
tion was simply this—is not a solemn declaration, in the
face of God, equivalent to an oath ? He called upon their
Lordships to consider what was the•security, if indeed it
were one, which the legislature bad provided against the
Roman Catholics. It was the declaration against transub-
stantiation—for there were many conscientious Roman Ca-
tholics who would take the oath of abjuration, but whb
would nnt make the declaration against transubstantiation.
If, then, that declaration was the principal, if not the only
security, whichaleprived the Roman Catholic's of the rights
and privileges epjoyed by their fellow-subjects, why should
it now be deet.ed necessary to introduce into the Bill a
word which would 'exclude front the benefit of it one of
the mildest and most beneficent sects of the British Em.
pire ? He would not detain their Lordships by makin;;;
any remarks on the other parts of this Bill. This, how-
ever, be would say, that the less you cavil against this mea-
sure, which was already strong enough* for all practical
purposes, and which was intended to be a substitute for the
security provided by these Acts; which were now admitted
on all hands to be mere dead letters, the more will you do
away with the gracious effect of your last debate, which
had been more conducive to the establishment of religious
harmony between the Church and the Dissenters, than any
other event which he had known in the whole course of his
political life. He should certainly-give his vote in favour
of the words " 1 declare," and against the introduction of
the words "I swear."

The Bishop of CHESTER expressed himself more
favourable to inserting a declaration titan to inserting an
oath in this BilL ThC declaration in question was to be
made in the presence of Altnighty God, and be could not
see that there was more in an oath than in such a decla-
ration.

The Earl of ELDON shortly replied, but in so low a
tone of voice'as to be almost inaudible below the bar. We
understood bins to say; • that as their Lordships called on
the King in his Coronation Oath to swear to maintain the
Church, and the Bishops, and the Clergy, in their 'due
rights and privileges, it was only fitting that they should
call upon all subjects who held office under him to take
the same oath. He doubted whether this measure would
be what its proposers called it—a measure of religious
peace. The acts. which it sought to repeal better deserved
that appellation, for on the one hand they were confirma-
tory of the supremacy of the Church, and on the other
they held out an indemnity to all Dissenters, in all cases
where such indemnity could safely be afforded them. One
objection which he felt to this Bill was, that it gave a dis-
pensing power to .the Crown, and would leave it to his
Majesty to determine whether any. of the persons who
held offices of trust under him should take either decla-
ration or oath. He called upon their Lordship, whatever
might be the consequences, to do justice to the Consti-
tution in their conduct regarding this Bill. He had
heard it said with surprise and regret, that oaths
had of late years been so multiplied by the Legislature
that they now went for nothing. He could not bring him-
self to believe that there was any foundation for such an
assertion. He had a firm persuasion that, with some few
Miserable exeeptions, an oath had a mighty effect upon the
consciences of Englishmen.. After a long life spent in the
administration of the justice of the country, he felt him-
self bound to say that nothing could be more dangerous to
the morality of the community than to bear Noble Lords in
their places in Parliament publicly disparage the effect of
an oath by comparing it with that of a declaration. Fie
was of opinion, that as an oath was much more solemn in
its nature, it ought in this case to be preferred to a decla-
ration. In his opposition to this Bill, he protested that he
was governed by nothing else than. a sense of what was
due from him to the country of which he was a subject;
and acting upon that sense of duty, he felt himself bound
not to lend his assistance to depriving his fellow-subjects of
the constitution which they had so long enjoyed. On these
grounds he bad met the Bill with a decided negative ; but
as the House had decided by its vote that the Bill should be
read' a second time, he was now desirous of making it as
innocuous as possible.
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS voted for the repeal
of the Test and Corporation Acts, in the expectation that
the repeat of them would promote peace and good under-
standing between the Church and the Dissenters. He
trusted that the Bill for the repeal of them would be so
framed as to render it a boon, for which the Dissenters
might feel some gratitude. For that reason he would ra-
ther have a declaration than an oath inserted in the Bill.—
There was only only one alteration that he wished to he
made in the declaration as it now stood. He would add,
after the words of the declaration, the followirig words, h,
the name of Jesus Christ." He thought that no offence
could be taken at those words by any conscientious Dis-
senter. It would be shameful if any person who took
office in a Christian country should be reluctant to declare
publicly that he was a Christian.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was desirous of addres-
sing a few words to their Lordships on the motion then
under their consideration.- He was of the same opinion
with the Noble Earl who hid spoken early in the debate,
and indeed with every Noble Lord who had since addressed
them, that it was almost impossible to look at this amend-
Ment without looking todem intuitu at the amendMenb
and elauses which they knew would very shortly be sub- t

mitted to their discussion. He naU,t extend his vie.W 6.
the subject to the general character of the remedy which
they Were now providing, not so much to meet any set°
danger, as to show not only to this House, but also to the
country, to the church, aed to the Dissenters, that thoei
spirit iu which this act of relief was conceived, was one
mere relief to the Dissenter, without intending to take on
jot either from the strength or the security, or, he 'nigh'
even add, the perpetuity, of the church of England'
—ln approaching this subject, he felt relieved in r°'
fleeting that lie was not in the present stage of the
proceeding called upon to argue whether it was fitting v.'
retain upon the statute-book Acts which- their Lo d 1
ships annually recognized, but which they were calls!'.
upon to recognize only to avert the mischief:" which, '
not corrected, they would of necessity produce,--0
which they had never noticed for 100 years, except to arr°l
and nullify, not to further and protect the Operation ° ,
their enactments. He felt relieved, he said, in reflector
that be was not called upon to contend that the holiest rite
of our religion was not the most fitting key that could br
selected to open the door to civil employment. He 'Cil
happy to find that it appeared to he the general opinion °i
their Lordships to do away with securities so urinecests!l
and so useless as were those provided in the Acts who"
this Bill intended to repeal ; and he would therefore tai's
that opportunity of stating, that so far from its being .
sudden thought So bring on a discussion on these MO°
answer the purposes of a certain party in Church and State'
it had for Years past been an object for which Vila
Dissenters had been preparing, and for which their pre
parations bad produced a just and beneficial effat'
After several observations on the beneficial cosy
quences of the repeal of the Test Act in Ireland, the
Noble Marquis proceeded as follows ;—" I must bare
protest, my Lords, against what I can never hear with
pin and surprise—that these acts of exclusion are part!'f
of the Constitution. lam one of those, my Lords, who eana
never subscribe to any such doctrine. King, Lords, OA
slongadmit, parts of omfeetthse
weoithnsttihteuitrions,pparo,
church,sCoolizsntres,are,l
a
bation and support.' 'But are the means which
devise for the support of the Constitution, part of wed
Constitution itself? They may be necessary or they 10.'
be not—they may be rejected or they may be not/
they vary according to times gel circumstances, 87,
cording to the feelings, the prejudiCeS, and I Will even ad
d+
principles of men. But there is one principle of v,.,'
Constitution which never varies; there is one principle Ua
it, which I may call its fundamental and pervading prid,
ciple, and that is, that every subject of the realm is ai
miscible to every office Within it. The Noblelitif Learn
Lord, and those with whom be has acted, hire in Cow:,
of their public career, been guilty—perhaps,'lteceesariu
guilty of several innovations upon the Conititntion, be:
cause they seemed them expedient to its safety. ' They 0
troduced the Convention Bill—they suppOrted theStispen;
sion of the habeas corpus, and perhaps they did both, 0°
without reason. Now, I will venture to say, that if o°'
fortunately it had been necessary to continue those men
r;
sures to the present time, the 'Noble and Learned Lc'
would be the last man in the country to say, that because
they were necessary to secure the' Constitution, they there
fore formed part of the CoostitutiOn. I must alitasof°
your Lordships, that I cannot go the length of the Re'",
Prelate tcho addressed us early in the evening, and who
we are all so happy to see among us; I cannot, I say, sige:
with him that in adopting this Bill we are adinitting,
new principle into the Constitution. ' The principle oftt!'
constitution, as I before stated, is, that every subject P
admissible to office,—that principle may, 'I allow, be le'
gaily and legitimately suspended ; but when we renl°';'
the suspension, we revert to the ancient, the fundameote4
and the immutable principle of the Constitution,-that
who tender allegiance to the'state are admissible to e'en'
office of trust and authority in the.State.--tdbeers.) I.'
Noble and Learned Lord likewise tells you that you er",
compelled to substitute for this test of the sacrament,' 811
oath, or something that shall be equivalent to it; becsu'esi,
you have a right to demand that from - the obit'
which, by a solemn compact, you -demand fmna:
the King. Now I tell you that it is exactly because )Is--
impose upon the King an oath to maintain the churclh!
rights and privilegbes, that you are left at liberty to cbre
pense with it as far as regards others. . The King is VP
Head of the Church, and 'must therefore be in strict c 001."
munion with it. In that very circumstance, my..Lor'l
gem find a security for the Church only inferior to tbsfi
which you derive from the opinion in which it is held, as
which, I trust, you Will always find its best sa,fcg.o';
against assault. and injury—a security far superior to any
Which it may derive from oaths, or declarations, or tea, tst
sor any thing, which any Legislature can devise for' its
de"
a j
the
'eticiehurhof, estimationEii.g7d reverence fence. oaths, When most 'eMeacithis,; asieslaut frail and
P tPl:ai:
impregnable nhvagpopayb Iteo
ssatyt
artificial props te'recleiiastiCaleStablishmeptes. Their zol0f:
which they are held by the great mass
.of, the people. ,'
the opinion and the reverence of 'the people; and that tka;
• reverence, arid that that opinion is much increased by "4
conduct which the Bishops of the . Church haye",pursa',
on this occasion, and' which appears as a pledge of.ree'
on their part to every sect of dissenting Christians.
(Ilear.)—The Noble Marquis then proceeded to abseil'
that he was most anxious to adopt the clause in such .atbra'
as would best reconcile it both to the. Church of Eti
iaiid
flourishes
:Pit
land and to the Dissenters at large. Ile cede
that the amendment of the Noble Dula in ;tit Pre
emit form, presented the fairest pledge of its character'
He did not see any reason for adding to the declaration
the words—" in the name of Jesus Christi" ate many oaths
must now be taken on the faith of a Christian-by-any per'
son who aspired to high and important office. He so°',
ceived the simplicity, of the declaration to be much in i'
favour, and he could not conceive of what staff his coo'
science could be made, who could make a distinction be'
tween taking an oath to support the -Church, anda sole
declaration iu the face 'of God not to assail it. ' 'lf there
were any such men in existence, against them - Acts e(
Parliament would be of no force. They could only be ro,
down by the indignation which would burst upon, then'
whenever their acts exposed the laxity of their principle'
It would be vain to expect to catch such miscreants witlliha
the nets of ordinary legislation; they would breaktbsPufr
them with difficulty, and would only laugh at our effort'
to embarrass and annoy them. For these reasons be(
cordially joined with the Rev. Prelate on the other, side 0
the House, in declaring that he preferred the declaratio°
to the oath, because it had all the security of an oath, with'
out causing that mischievous multiplication' of, oatle
against which it was incumbent that the Legislature
should guard, when they were not necessary for the secti'
rity of the Church. In concluSion, he stated his convic'
tion that unless this Bill passed at present, it would 13'
made year after year a ground of disturbing the religioo
peace and harmony of the community.
The Committee then divided, when there appeared--
For Lord Eldon's Amendment
Against it . 100 •
Majority - 7--65,
The amendment was then lost, and the. words "1 des
(dare" were continued in the clause.
On our re-entering the House, a considerable number of
their Lordships were standing around the table listening V°
another amendment proposed by the Duke. of Wellington'
which the Earl of SITAFTEsBURY, as Chairman, of the
committee, was reading to them. .We understood that it
called upon the person making the declaration to,deels°
his belief in the different books of the Old 'and Neii Teets'
went, as received by authority in the Protestant' elanicitee
The Archbishop of YORK ospressed his satiisfsolian
that the words " I swear" were not insertedin the' clause'
He hoped that the Dissenters would receiveV the.Bill,Wheo
it passed, in the same spirit of kindness in which it tree
granted.
A confused conversation then took place between several
Noble Lords across the woolsack, of whieli Ititrehid be
quite impossible to give any report. In the midst 4 it.
The Earl of MANSFIELD rose and pro Posed thht the
declaration should run in this form, " I declare in the foot
of God, and in the name of his son our Saviour Neu°
Christ."
The Earl of LAUDERDALE could not see the near
city for making a man declare his belief in .the booksof the
Old and New Testament, as received by' authority. ' Dig'
pUteS would arise among the different sects of Protestiiitst
as to what was meant by the terms " by authority."'
The Duke of WELLINGTON said a few words in esc'
planation ; but they were inaudible below the bar.
The Bishop of LINCOLN hoped that the Noble Earl
would not press thssclause of which be had just given notice
' to' a division, because it would place several of their Lord'
ships in the invidious situation of appearing to dissent fool,
a proposition, in the abstract propriety of which they all
concurred. If it were necessary tcsintroduce thessalre
of the second Person in the Trinity into the declaration,
why were they to omit the name of the third, whili
was equally sacred ? It was his opinion, that in aOl
of this nature, they ought above all things to avoid dognia"
tizing upon points of faith.—(Great cheering.)—This (le"
claration would serve for Christians of every sect and.dee°-
mination ; and it would satisfy every rational friend Of tb°
church, if those admitted to office under the Constitution
were to make this declaration solemnly in the face of :PI
and to declare their belief in the Scriptures received by a
Protestant churches. ' •
The Earl of MANSFIELD—I cannot consent to soSI,
draw this addition to the words .of the sniginal d.estlerati°P•
My avowed object is to exclude from office all those Pe:,
M -441 S who falsely—and, indeed, I may add, abettrdly—°