Star.
London, England, 1812-07-24 00:00:00

TOLERATION.

The Earl of LIVERPOOL moved the second
reading of the Toleration. Bill. His Lordship ob.
served, that in looking into this subject, it was found
that it could not be properly entered into without re-
pealing certain Acts which certainly ought not to be
suffered to remain on the Statute Book, and which
no one would now think ought to be put in force,
but which might be made the means of vexations to
individuals. Amongst the Acts repealed were the
Conventicle Act, and the Five Mile Act ; serre
parts of the former were retained in another shape,
bpt the latter no one would now think of carrying
into executien. It was well known, that lately, a
construction had been put upon the Toleration Act,
different from that which it had practically received
for upwards of a century, and to remedy the incon-
veniencies thus occasioned to individuals, was one
also of the objects of the present Bill. In order to
combine the toleration which it was proposed to give
in the most ample form with the requisite securities,
'it was proposed in the first place, that to assemblies
for the purposes of religious worship there should be
given notoriety ; in the second place, publicity; and,
in the third place, that from the preachers and
teachers in those assemblies, there should be required
some test or security in the oaths to be taken by them.
Meetings for religious worship, where the number of
persons assembled, exclusive of the family of the oc-
cupier of the house or premises where such meeting
took place, did not amount to more than twenty,
were exempt from any restriction, but where the
number amounted to more than twenty, then the
place of meeting was required to be registered, in
order that upon searching the Registers all such
places of meeting might be known. In order to se-
cure notoriety, it was enacted that all such meetings
for the purposes of religious worship should take
place with doors unbolted and unbarred, and not
fastened, so that any one might go in ; and for the
purpose of a sufficient test or security it was enacted 1
that teachers and preachers of congregations should
take the required oaths at the Sessions, but it was
not required that they shotald take the oaths ante-
cedently to their exercising the duties of teaching and
preaching. His Lordship, after adverting to the
other provisions of the Bill, observed, that an en-
larged and liberal toleration was the best security to
the Established Church—a Church not founded to
the exclusion of religious discussion, but in its ho-
milies, its canons, and all the principles upon which
it rested, courting the investigation of the Scriptures
upon which it founded its doctrines.
Earl STANHOPE observed, that the system of
toleration, as seemingly contemplated by the Noble
Earl, appeared to him to be abominably intolerant.
He did not mean to oppose the Bill's going to a
Committee, though the measure, not recognizing
the principle of full liberty of conscience, had his
disapprobation ; because he would now urge some
strong objections to several of the details and provi-
sions of the Bill, in order that the Noble Earl, who
supported, may know what he proposed to object to 1
in the Committee. His Lordship then entered into
a critical examination of certain clauses, which he
contended were inconsistent, absurd, or unintelli-
gible; and he wished he knew who framed the Bill,
whether priests or others, as be would be glad to
toast them in certain company. With respect to the
Noble Earl who claimed the credit of the Bill, it was,
no doubt, in his mind, a beneficial measure.

Lord HOLLAND agreed with his Noble Friend
as to part of the principle of the Bill, because it did
not recognize the right of religious liberty in every
individual. The Bill, however, though it did not
go all the length be wished, yet it was a great step
towards the object 'of religious liberty, in repealing
some of those obnoxious Statutes. He would in this
stage, therefore, support it ; and he did not agree
with his Noble Friend in some of his inferences from
his critical disquisitions upon certain points of the Bill.
Lord Viscount SIDMOUTH observed that from
the principles he avowedly entertained upon the sub-
ject in question, it was impossible he could give an
unqualified assent to the Bill. His Lordship thets
entered into a detailed view of several of its provi-
sions, and took occasion to observe, that as Ea as
these went to repeal the'Conventicle and the Five-mile
Act, be entirely coincided ; but he regretted that the
wholesome provisions of the 19th of the King were
wholly lost sight of, and that any person, let his mo-
ral or his intellectual unfitness be ever so great, was
still permitted to take upon himself that most impor-
tant of all functions that a man can execute—that of
the duty of religious instruction. Upon this po.nt he
was countenanced by the sentiments of Lord Somers
and other illustrious persons who had graced the Bri-
tish Legislature p and whicll were sanctioned by a

remit decision of the Coon of tines Bench. These
were for asserting the ptinciple, as the law helad re-
ferred to prescribed that individuals were not at 6-
berty to assume those sacred functions until their qua-
lifications were admitted or tried by those who had
opportunities of observing them. He disapproved of
allowing exemptions from civil and military duties
to tradesmen and others, who merely preached once
or twice a year to gain such exemptions. Such a
practice had been pursued to a very considerable ex-
tent ; and unless effectual measures were taken to
prevent it, the practice would undoubtedly be still
further extendeded. He panicularly objected to the
assumption of the sacred office a a reliNtous teacher,
' by persons in no respect qualified to discharge the
functions of an office so important. He had thought
it right to say thus much on the present occasion,
though it was not his intention to oppose the Bill's
going to a Committee.
Lord HOLLAND, in explanation, said he had
supported the Bill, as far as it went to extend reli-
gious toleration, but in no instance supported the re-
strictive measures of the bill. He did not approve
of the Bill altogether, but he approved of it so far as
it went to extend religious toleration. The view he
took of the measure was similar to that which had
been taken by Lord Somers of the Toleration Act,
and to the opinion entertained of it by one of the
greatest men this nation had produced—Mr. Locke,
who, he believed, had quoted the words of Horace,
when speaking of that Act, a err quottnn tent: ire,"
and so far was he (Lord Holland) satisfied with the
present measure. The person he had last named
he was di posed to think, approved of the Toleration
Act, not because it went so far as he could have
wished, but because he was afraid that attempting
snore he should achieve less, and it was thus feeling
.that he gave his support to the Bill before the House.
LordSramtorr: explained.

The LORD CHANCELLOR conceived it could
not be beneficial to the people, that tradesmen of all
sorts and of all descriptions, should become religious
teachers, and assuming that character, be exempted
from civil and military duties which might otherwise
devolve on them.
After a few further observations from Lord STAN-
HOPE, who did not object to the Bill going to a Com-
mittee, it was read a second time, and committed for
to-morrow.