The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-07-03

oihitscu tuat ~ QenOin1HdL1OH LUG DapIISts
| have uniformly maintained the true doc
tr1ne OF soul liberty" With certain records
before me it could not be otherwise.
"TsUTH" is entitled to the production Of
sufnclent oi these to sample the ground for
| the statement in the cases of the denonina-
tons he names. There is, even in the case
Of the peaceful Quakers. this one instance:
In 1890 George Keith, a " Separate Quaker"
dissenting from the Orthodox" was ar.
rested fined, and imprisoned in the Quaker
colony of Pennsylvania, and was released
from prison by John Holmes, then the only
Baptist magistrate In the colony, Holmes as
signing as his reason for release that 1t was
a religious dispute, and therefore not ft for
Il civil court" {" Bakers Sects Us. The Bap-
tists," p. 8; Benedict's Hist. N. Y, 1866,
PIP. 597, $685. and Keith himself, In, bis pub
lished " Reasons for Separation" signed by
forty-seven others, in 1891, complains in his
third reason of the fines, imprisonments,
and other species of persecution which they
endured from their brethren" Other au-
| thority might be cited for this single case.
but it certainly destroys the uniformly"
The Journal of the House OF Delegates Of
Virginia, October 2S, 1776, p. 80, says: ga
petition of the people commonly called
Methodsts was presented to the House, and
| read, setting forth that the dissenters are
preparing to lay petition before the House
| for abolishing the present establishment of
| the [Episc0pal] Church, and as they 1.-THE
MethodSts] may, i'll the opinion of some,
also come under the denomination Of dis
| senters, they beg leave to declare that they
are religious society in communion with
| the Church of England, and do all in their
| power to strengthen and support the said
| church and as they conceive very bad con-
sequences will arise from the abolishing of
| the establishment they therefore pray that
| the Church of England, as it ever has been,
| may still continue Ito be the established
| church." This was certainly not the true
doctrine of soul liberty" as Baptists
| have ever held it, or as now generally held
| 10y Protestants in this country; and if this
were the only record, as it is not, it certainly
| destroys the " uniformly"
Many Of the memorials of the Presbyte-
| rians before and after 1884 are eloquent and
powerful appeals for religious freedom in
| this State. They did much and deserve
much credit, but in 1884 the Hanover Pres.
| bytery, then a representative body of Pres.
! byterians in this State, did deliberately pre-
pare, in its session at Timber Ridge, Octo-
Der u, 1884, and present to the Virginia
House of Delegates, November II, 1884,
| Gtalics mine) "a plan 10 admit general
assessment for the support Of religion ~ t6,c,'
proposing "2d. That public worship and
| public periodical instruction to the people
| be maintained in this view ['a cic'l view,
as preserving the existence and promoting
the happiness Of society,] by a general as
sessment for this purpose. Sd. That every
man, as Il good citizen, be obliged to declare
| himself attached 10 some religious con1n,u-
| Mtg publicly known to profess the belief OF
one God, His righteous providence, our ac-
countabeness to Him, and future state ofre'
wards and punshments." BY this "plan" each
Taxpayer was to be permitted to designate
his tax ito such community as he chooses y
| Whether this "was entirely Hypothetical"
or not is best shown by Mr.. Jefterson's and
| Mr.. MadiSon'S Judgment at the time. They
were contemporary and colaborers in the
achievement of religious freedom in Virginia
| DR.. Curry has already quoted from their
letters. But the record of the House OF
Delegates, November II, 1854, p. q, record
| ed by common appreciation of the House,
shows lis that the Virginia House of Dele
gates did not regard it as merely "hypotheti
cal" The record says OF this plan, in ga
memorial of the united clergy of the Pres
| byterian Church." that it set forth that q
| general assessment for its support (relgion,
| ought, they think, TO he extended to those
who profess the public worship of Deity
and are comprised within the Declaration oil
| Rights.o November IA, 1854, Mr.. Madison
wrote of this plan I" The Presbyterian
clergy have demonstrated against any mar
row principles, but indirectly favor more
comprehensive establishment" (Rives's Life
and Times of Madison, p. GO6.) Now, /
this was not faltering. what was it? Does
principle uniformly maintained admit o.
Il Hypothetical" petition natureIy adopted
in very able body and formally presented
10 q legislative assembly? Better call il
mildly, "faltered." "Procu Jove, procu
Il fulmine."
By no means was it meant to assert that
"Bapists began their efforts for liberation
and equality ut the beginning of the Reyo
luton" They never did advocate mere
liberation, permission, but always liberty
the right to all. This they maintained uni
formly in Virginia from the Mill'SwamT
church, at Burleigh, Isle Of Wight. Ills
down, and long before this every where
where they had cbu They also re.
sisted and testified against any establishment
by persistently refusing, even under imprl-
sonment and whippinss, to do what oul
Presbyterian brethren felt at liberty to do
acknowledge State jurisdiction enough tt
take license to preach and worship. The,
denied all State authority in the premise:
without any hypothesis.
DR.. Smith attended the Legislature to bear
under appointment of Presbytery, the plat
of assessment, and his three-hourS' speech
was, no doubt, consistently made in Commit
tee of the Whole against the pending bill &c
incorporate the Episcopal Church, to which
Presbyteriaus were opposed. The journal
of the House puts it (p. III: That the,
disapproYe all acts for incorporating the
clergy of any society independent of theirs
1t is scarcely likely that the good Doctor op'
posed the measures of his own Presbytery
and turned against measure lie was sent tl
present. That is scarcely Hypothetical
| Of the reference to Cromwell l have only
space to say that if he did give Scotch
| PRESBYTERIAN ministers liberty TO attack him
he certainly did not grant religious liberty
to Episcowlians or Papists. ..
III Mr.. Jefferson were alive" he would
| say in 1873 what he wrote Z" to the members
| of the Baptist church of Buck Mountain,
| April Is, 1892: ave have acted together
from the origin to the end of memorable
| revolution, and we have contributed, each
| al ppIp0vnrS IN M