Star.
London, England, 1812-01-30 00:00:00

LAW INTBLLIOENCR.

COURT OF ICING'S BENCII, JAN. TO.
bISSENFERS.
THE KING, AT THE PItOSECO lON Of ELLINGTON, W. Till

JUSTICES Or SUEPOLK.
. This was a conditional Rule obtained by Mr. Gun..
NEN on a former day, for a Mandamus to the 'nitre( s
of Suffolk, directing them to achniniver the oath, and
permit the prosecutor to subscribe the articles end
perform theothernecesc try qualifications as a preacher
and teacher ef a Protestant Dissenting Congregation
at Melledori Hall, in that county, purstraht to the
provisions of the Toleration Act. By the Bth see-
tion of this Act, all persons applying for a licence as
a Protestant Dissenting Minintsur to any ccngr;ga-
tion, were required to prove, that they v ere duly 'p..
pointed the preacher if such congregation, and OE-
ciated in that capacity ; and by thilsth section re the
same Act, it was required, that the meeting.' ewe r I
such congregation should he licenced and regis e•eci.
The A -reorießY GENERAL, in she wing cause rg
I this Rule, o'eserved, that it was by no means di. w 1:
of the Justices of Suffolk, to threw any unnecessary
impediment in the way cl this Gentleman ; but so
• many applications of this nature had been made •to
them by different persons (not meaning any allusion
particularly to this Gentleman, who was most respec-
table), many of whom were found to be wholly iee-
i ligible, that they were under the necessity of adr.p.
ting a practice which was found highly expedient, and
j this was, that the person applying for a licence as a
!Teacher or preacher of the Gospel to any Dissenting
' Congregation should produce a certificate from sense
of the leadOg Members of such Congregation,
testifying that he had been duly appointed as the
I Minister of such Coegregation. In the present
case, the Gentleman who applied '•ifor this Rule
refused to comply with the established practice of the
Justices of Suffolk, in producing such certificate of
his appeirtrnent. It certaialy was true he had
I
sworn that he was duly appointed, and offered to sub.
scribe to the articles and other qualiticetirms provided
by the Act ; but he (the Attorney General) was
I sure the Court would not compel the Justice* of Sof-
folk to forego this most useful and necessary regula-
; tion, without some stronger grounds on the part
lof this Gentleman, patticulatly when he might,
' with so much facility, prectire the testimonial they
required. And although this might not be the um-
vernal practice. yet it was one attended with so much
! benefit, even to Dissenting Congregations themselves,
•he was s aisfied the Court would pause before they
would compel these Justices to dispense with it ; and
' this for the most obvious reasons. The Justices of
Suffolk had no objection whatever to the character of
. this gentleman ; he had sworn that he was the offi-
cienne Minister of this Congregation for six months •
; previous to his eppicaton, and that he had been duly
appointed as thee- Past T. Ihe Justices had no doubt
of the feet ; all they required was uuutormity in their
proceedings. He did not mean to cast any reflections
whatever upon this class of persons ; he had know.)
many Dissenting, Clergymen, whom he highly re-
spected ; but the Calve would see the necessity of ad.
hering to the principles these gentlemen had laid
down for their gureence in all such cases. There
was also another objectien to their granting the pre-
sent application ; the 15th section of the Act requires
that all Dissentieg Meeting-houses should be Leen-
ced and registerej. In this cue it only appearee that
the Meetinghouse ht question was licenced, but Lot
i registered ; and upon such an applicai .n ..s this the
Court would expect that alt the provisions of the Act
were complied with. For these reasons he hoped the .
'Rule would de discharged.
i Mr. DAMPIER, on the same side, contended, hat
I this objection of the Justices might be easily Cirri ited
by the production of the certificate they irqu'red,
' which this Gentleman could find Go Jrffieul: y in pre.
curing. It was, therefore, an ungracious coatentioa
i on his part, and when the Coart perceived such a Jis.
position on his part, they would not so /caddy lend a
favourable ear to sear an epslication.
1 Mr. Gunteev, in support of the Rule, contended,
' that this Gentleman had fully complied with the pro-
'
visions of the Bth section of the Act, under which
alone he grounded the present application. He had
sworn that lie was duly appointed to this Coagrega-
den, had officiated, was ready to take the necessary
oath, and subscribe to all the necessary qualifications
provided by that Act, which did not requite him to
produce the certificate. As to the 15:1) section, it had
nothing whatever to do with the present question;
and as the practice cf producing the certificate, not be-
ing general, he trusted the Court would trot refuse the
motion on that ground.
, Mr. Justice BAYLEY said the Act required, that it
should be a house or place of meeting certified and
registered. He did not observe that it appeared on
I the face of the prosecutor's affidavits, that the place of
worship, in question; stood in this situation; of course,
it did not appear that the question came before the
Court in such a shape as justified their interference,
by this extraordinary exercise of their authority.
Mr. GUIS EY contended that he sufficiently fOrtified
Ihimself under the Bth Section of the Act, which re-
, garded the quali tica t ions of Preachers, Teachers, arc.
I Mr. Justice BeYeer adted —Did not the 19th Sec.
• tion of the Act quality the Bth, by requiting that the
house or place to which such Preacher or Teacher
' i was appointed must be registered ? A fact which did
not here appear in evidence.
. ' Mr. GURNEY being tillable to satisfy the Court on
this head, Mr. Justice Ls BLit= sa'd, ihe prosecutor's
' skewing, that he was preacher or teacher to a Con-
gregation, without also skewing that the Congtega.
tion to which he had been appointed was a legal Con.
' I gregation, by the house or place of meet-ng haying
' been certified and registered as required by law, was
I not sufficient to entitle the Court to issue this Prero-
,
. ' gatrve Writ,
Lord ELLEtrsonevon lamented, that when the '
course to be pursued was so easy the're should be a
disinclinetinn to comply with it. As parties chose,
• however, to stand on the extreme point of right, his
Lordship could not prevent it. Ao present he did
not find it necessary fur him to determine, whether
the Justices were correct, in demanding the certificate,
' or the patty, in supposing that his own oath was suf-
ficient. It was enough for his Lordship. now to see
that it did not appear on the face of the affidavits that
this was one of those houses or places of worship dis-
senting from, the forms of the Church of England,
which the Bishop would have been called on to give
the necemary sinAlificatiuu.—[ Rule refused.]

IN