Star.
London, England, 1828-04-18 00:00:00

other House almost unanimously. The proposition
now made was never more distinctly stated than at
the present moment, since the accession of King
William to the Throne, who recommended a measure
similar in effect.ln the reign of George 1. Earl Stanhope,
then Secretary of State, suggested a clause in the Bill
then before Parliament, which was not adopted. It was
extraordinary that since that period alluded to. nothing
really adverse had been shown to the relief now prayed
for, which at the present moment, he considered, stood,
in a most auspicious point of view. Be hoped that the
Bill would be allowed to pass; for, by so doing, the
future historian would have to congratulate his country
upon the event ; and to show, by a train of reasoning.
that the Parliament had evinced so much light as to
destroy a barrier wh ch impeded the march of reason,
and proscribed so tnany loyal subjects of the realm.—
The Noble Lora, after some further prefatory re.
marks, proceeded to comment upon the Bill, and
noticed the provisions of the Acts of Charles 11. which
provided the Sacramental Test for persons appointed to
office. The two Acts, however, formed a contrast, in-
stead of a parallel; fur the Corporation Act did not
exact any test of the kind alluded to. It was passed in
the heigh-day of loyalty and zeal of the Corporation on
the restoration of the Monarch.' In addition to this,
the greater part of it was temporary, and all had been
repealed except the Sacramental Test. The first object
of this test was to clear the Corporation of Presbyterians,
to restrain the operation of the solemn league and cove.
, mint, and to expel all who refused to comply with that
test. It came up to this House, and then the clause was
introduced of which he had spoken. What was the state
of the Church then ? The Act of Uniformity had not
passed, so that it was idle to say that the persons who
introduced the Act ever intended to exclude Presby-
terians or Dissenters from the Corporations of this coun-
try. The Earl of Southampton at that time took a most
active part. When this clause was moved, Lord Cla-
rendon, he found from the Journals, was not present;
the Duke of Ormond had discovered that Charles was
a confirmed Roman Catholic; he kept the secret from
Lord Clarendon until they came to England, and then,
when he found that the Monarch was contracting a
marriage with the Infanta of Spain, he did disclose his
knowledge of the fact to Lord Clarendon and Lord
Southampton. A Bill was then introduced to make
it a penalty of forfeiture of goods for any person to
say that the King was a Papist. Now, what was the
consequence of this Act ?-....why, driving out numbers
of persons from filling Corporate offices. What was the
consequence of the Act ?—it led to the Act of Unifor-
mity. These Acts never have been in full force since
their passing up to the present time, except for about
three years—viz. 1718, and during the passing of the
Act of Uniformity. The penalty of the Corporation
Act does not insist that a person taking office should
take the Sacrament then, it only provides that he should
show that Fe actually had taken it one year before. If
the Act of Uniformity had been rejected, then the party
taking office would have been at the mercy of the
palish Priest. With respect to the Test Act, it was at
complete variance with the other Acts. The Test Act
was passed in complete distrust of the Wing on the
Throne, for a money Bill was held back until it passed,
so jealous was the Parliament of the prerogatives of the
Throne. History completely proved that fact. Indeed,
the Bill itself furnished the strongest proof, for it pro-
fessed to allay the suspicions which then existed us
to the designs of the Court. All the Dissenters in the
other House of Parliament voted for the Bill—he was
not sure whether the Bench of Bishops sent that
length. Among the most eminent men of that
day, of which Baxter was one, there was a Mr.
Love, a Member of the House of Commons, who
strenuously supported the Bill. It went part pa=
with the Corporation Act. The real fact was, that those
great and wise men who passed the law, in the reign of
Charles 11. took it for want of a better. Many sincere
Church of England men were willing to concede in the
limitations which, went to exclude a Popish succession.,
That distrust did not exist at the present moment, con-
sequently all the apprehensions which existed when it
passed being done away with, it was idle to continue
'the restrictions. The Act has no other effect than to
distrust a Protestant Prince, which, thank God ! there
was no reason to do now. 'With respect to the pre-
rogatives of the Crown, they were given to the Monarch
for the benefit of the people, and were part of their
privileges. They could not be infringed upon without
injury to the people. Every Prince of the House of
Brunswick must love the prerogative on that ac-
count. The principle recognised by this Act was con-
trary to justice, to liberty, and to humanity. It bound
the conscience, and deprived the subject of his right. It
was in fact an accursed law. The principle was therefore
abominable, because the refusal of political power was
nothing abort of persecution. Though the subjects
professing religious sentiments opposed to the Church
were stigmatised ; and though called upon for taxes,
and to contribute by other means for the preservation of
the State, they were yet held up as enemies to the State.
The consequence of the Acts way to let in the unprin.
cipled, who not feeling the stings of conscience, would
be tempted to take the Sacrament to obtain place, and
thereby he seals his own damnation. The Act therefore
was in its operation not only cruel, but legally so.—
By the laws of the land, he understood that an action
would lie against any Clergyman whq refused to
administer the Sacrament to a perm' on taking office.
What the Ecclesiastical law was in that respect he
did not knoir. The Noble Lord supposed a case, in
which a Clergyman refused the Sacrament to a Lao yer,
on account of his immoral life, the lawyer would be at
liberty to commence,his action. Their Lordships would
see, therefore, the extreme hardships of these Acts.—
He referred to the opinion of Luther on this subject,
who declared that lawyers in their profession were s. next
neighbours to the Devil himself." Their Lordships
would see that the poor Clergyman was placed in an
awkward situation. The Noble Lord then alluded to the
clause proposed byEarl Stanhope for the relief of Clergy-
men in respect of this sort of prosecution. But to look at
the question in the other point of view,the Dissenter wish.
ing
a t 7 a was placed at the mercy of the Clergy-
" whoke omihigcelit tefuse to administer the Sacrament,
ncr t then,see the injury which was iollicted upon the
subjects of the realm in consequence of this refusal. It
might be said this Act was an imaginary grievance.
Thts the Noble Lord denied--it was a great griev-
ance, for it left the badge and sting behind. It
placed the administrator of the law in a degraded
state. He wished to know what dank could aria*:
from repealing such a law, which had not limb

operative for years? He contended that the grievance
was great to every person, not merely Dissenters, but
other persons connected with the Church of England,
by placing them in a state of inferiority. He was
sore the Legislature would not desire to refuse those
rewards to which every sect were entitled, but which
these Acts denied. With respect to the Indemnity
Acts, they provided for the relief of those persons who
neglected to qualify. The Corporation of London, In
the early part of the last century, looked out for per.
sons as Sheriff those who would not qualify, and the
Mansion House was built from the fines which were
imposed in consequence. At length Mr. Evans with-
stood the infringement upon the rights of the subject,
and the decision of Lord Mansfield confirmed the appeal
which that person made to the laws of his country,—
The consequence was, that as the decision of that
Learned Lord had removed the pressure which fell
upon Dissenters in that respect, yet it fell with great
severity upon the Church of England men who
were called to fill the office of Sheriff. The Noble
Lord then recapitulated the principal points of his
speech, and contended, that be had shown enough to_
satisfy their Lordships that the repeal of the Acts in
question would be nothing less than an act of justice to
an immense part of the population of the empire. They
were no longer necessary to preserve the Establishments
in Church and State, and, consequently, onght to be
erased from the Statute Book. The arguments grhich
be had used were brought forward on former occasions.
with much weight by Dean Swift, in 1703. repub.
fished in a pamphlet in 1726, as the subject of Sacra..
mental Tests in Ireland. He quoted the opinions of
, that celebrated man, which were afterwards used in
1780, when the Test Act was repealed in Ireland. That
Act had been repealed for nearly half a century, and
none of the dreadful consequences apprehended had
followed. He therefore was justified in conceiving that
nothing could follow now, if the Acts in question were
repealed. Two objections had been stated to the repeal
—the one that it would propel Catholic Emancipation,
and the other that it would retard the emancipation of
that sect. Now, the Catholics were not desirous of ob-
taining their rights, if the attainment operated to the
prejudice of that class of Dissenters more immediately
connected with the Establishment is Church. With
respect to persons taking office, he saw no objection to
a declaration being demanded, which would secure the
safety of the Church Establishment. But he would not
wish to bind or fetter any future Legislature, by any
provisions which the Bill now before the House were
calculated to provide.
The Archbishop of YORK—My Lards, I cannot
feel satisfied to give a silent vote on the Bill now before.
your Lordships ; and I feel it the snore incumbent upon
me to state my sentiments now, because the Most
Reverend Prelate, with whom upon this question I per-
fectly agree, is prevented by severe indisposition from
attending his duty at the House. My Lords, it is scarcely
necessary for me to assure your Lordships that nothing
but severe indisposition would have deprived my Most
Rev. Friend of the opportunity to state his own feelings
upon this subject to your Lordships. Your Lordships who
have so long witnessed the zeal with which he di-charges
his Parliamentary duties, will, I am sure, readily believe
than his absence could have arisen from no other cause.
My Lords, I will trespass upon your attention only
for few minutes, and upon this Bill 1 will confine my-
self to a single point. I have no hesitation in declaring
that I feel bound to give my vote for the repeal of an
Act which has led, in too many instances, to the pro-
fanation of our Holy Religion, My Lords. I consider
religious tests imposed for political object•, as in their
nature calculated to endanger religion, and that nothing
but paramount necessity—a necessity nothing short of
danger to the State—could justify their imposition. It
cannot, of course, be forgotten that the causes which led
to their being imposed, no longer exist. At the same
time I will confidently affirm, notwithstanding what
the Noble_Lord has said, that those Acts were origi-
nally designed expressly for the protection of the &tab.
fished Church. The Church has therefore, I think, a
right to expect and to claim that somethiqg shall be
substituted for this test, avowedly and in 1,114. as far
as possible, to retain the same object. Whether or net '
the provisions of the present Bill will produce this
effect, will be best ascertained when the Bill goes into
Committee. In the earnest hope that such nsay be the
case, I cordially give my vote for its second reading.
The Earl of WINCHELSEA thought it imperative
upon their Lordships to insert in this measure some
clause rendering the support and maintenance of ortho-
dozy necessary on the part of those Dissenters who were
appointed to public offices. The Church oughs to be
protected against the machinations of persons who
avowedly professed Deists and Infidelity. It was not
his intention to oppose the second reading of the Bill ;
but when it went into a Committee, he should propose
such alterations in the preamble as would, in his opi.
nion, have this effect. Was:it:not, he asked, right to
have some provisions made against blasphemy and
'irreligion? He hoped that if he should have the honour
to propose any such clauses, he should receive the
support both of their Lordships and the country at
large. They had been told by the Noble Baron near
him. that the period of danger which caused the
enactment of these laws bad gone by ; but let their
Lordships take care that a wise and vigilant Legislature
was not, even at this moment, called upon to watch
'and counteract the machinations of a set of persons
who were striking at the root, not only of the Church,
'but of Christianity. He alluded to what they had all
witnessed within a few years amongst what were deno-
minated Freethinking Christians. Their Lordships had
upon their table Petitions from that denomination of
persons, which not only contained blasphemy, but struck
st the root of the Church and of Christianity. It was
against such persons as these, and not against the con-
scientious Dissenter, that he directed his charges of
immorality and infidelity. If the Legislature did nct
take care to repel such attacks, they would soots
see the alarming results which would follow. By allow-
ing these people to go on in their efforts to overturn
Christianity, they would open a door to the greatest
'evils. He, for one, was opposed to receiving Petitions
from persons who were not only opposed to Christianity,
but even denied the existence of an hereafter. He re•
peated. that he was anxious to support every conscien-
tious Dissenter ; but he was its decidedly determined to
oppose theinnovations of Freethinkers and Other slobs:.
heves'. who treated Christianity with derision, contempt,
land ignominy. These opinions he wished to go forth;
andla further wished it to be known, that he looked
upon thriatiapity as part and parcel of the law of the