Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1889-03-06
VIM. PENN.
WAS HE A TRULY GREAT MAN.

WAS HE TRULY GREAT MAN.
AN NINvEsTIG ALTON INTO THE CHARGES
MADE BY MACAULEY as TO THE
CHARACTER OF THE FOUNDER
OF PENNSYLVANIA.
Macauley, IN his Hist Dry of England.
has characterized VIM. Penn as vain,
week, garrulous and false to his pro-
fessed principles. 1t Will not be diff
cult, / think, to show the injustice OF
such a Characterization. Macauley's
charges are based on some acts and
sayings of Penn, indicating his friendly
feelings for James the III, and that
there was no good reason for the
revolution of 1858. at the accession
of James the III, there was no religious
freedom in England except for the
established Church. That Church was
part of the government, and its
influence was such as to cause the
persecution of all the other sects- Its
head, King James, was Roman Catho-
lie, and though the head of the Church
of England was naturally desirous of
freeing his own sect of its disabilities.
But, he knew that in order to free his
own, 1t would be necessary to free all
other sects. He, therefore, issued a
declaration of Indulgence, making all
forms OF religious worship alike free.
This declaration he ordered to be read
on stated days by all the bishops and
Clergy of the established Church. Seven
of the bishops and most of the clergy
refused. The seven bishops refusing
to give bail were promptly sent to the
Tower on the charge of having pre-
sented a seditious and rebellious petl-
ton to the King. This aroused to the
highest pitch of Indignation almost the
whole Protestant population OF Eng
land. ArIaigned and tried before the
Court OF Kings Bench they were trl-
unphantly acquitted. Ever since the
establishment of the Church OF Eng
land there had existed between that
and the Roman Catholic Church the
most intense hatred. Both these
churches were alike hostile to the
dissenters. Down to the accession OF
James the II, an unceasIng judicial
war of persecution had been waged
against the weaker sects, by the one
that CHANGED to be in power. Severe
penal statutes had been enacted, for
bidding them to worship In meeting
houses or even in the open air. No
senter could legally hold any office in
the realm. Before the death of Charles
the ii, it was known that his brother
James, Duke of York, and heir appar-
ent to the throne, was a Roman Catho-
lie. The Wings in Parliament, dreading
the advent of Roman Catholic to the
throne, attempted to pass what is
known in history as the Exclusion
Bill" by which no Catholic could
occupy the throne of England. 1t
failed to become a law, and at the
death of Charles ii, James, an avowed
and devoted Catholic, was without
opposition declared King. at this time
the jails of England were full of Catho-
lies, Quakers and other dissenters.
Through the intercesslon of William
Penn, who had long been on intimate
| terms of friendship with James, about
| fifteen hundred Quakers and nearly
| twice as many Catholics were liberated.
As sincere and devoted Catholic,
James very naturally wished TO free
his sect of all political disabilities. As
| Catholic King at the head OF the
Anglican Church, he conceived 1t not
| only TO be his right but his duty to
| disregard the Test Act and appoint
Catholics to high places in ecclesiasti-
| cal, civil and mill airy departments. To
| this there was no opposition more than
there would be in this country when a
President appoints his political friends
| to all important offices. Thus encour-
aged, he issued his celebrated 'deelara-
tion of indulgence by which all the
sects were made alike free from perse-
| cution.
He fully expected that such a decla-
| ration would be received by all the
prosecuting sects with high favor. But
| by all, except the Quakers, 1t was
| summarily rejected. such was their
| than miss the pleasure OF seeing them
prosecuted, they chose to be prosecuted
| Themselves. They were, therefore,
warmly welcomed as allies of the
Church of England. 1t was contended
that the declaration of Indulgence wa.
beyond the Kings prerogatlve, it wa:
| Illegal and unconstitutional. Black.
| stone lays it down as an axiom, that al
law is necessarily founded in justice
| and that whenever a law can be shown
| to be unjust, il becomes null and void
The great organic law of Nation is iti
| constitution, and rests on the same
basis 1t therefore, follows logically
that If religious prosecutions be wron
| there can be no law to sustain il, anC
that If religious freedom be the self
evident right OF all, the Klng's declsra
ton of Indulgence was ju and did not
exceed his prerogative. 1t is well K
note that the British Constitution L
not a written instrument like our own
but is made upof important precedents
such as the Magma Charta and the Bill
of Rights. 1t is not surprising thai
that the Nation were divided as to tn,
Constitutionallty of this declaration o
indulgence. Even in our own country
with its written constitution, there ha!
always existed a wide difference o.
opinion as to the Cons itutionality o
many important Acts Of Congress
The fugitive slave law may he cited a
one of many prominent examples
Macauley charges that James was no
a sincere friend of religious freedom
That it was for selfish motives that h
issued the declaration of indulgence
But surely, We have no night to I'm
peach the motive that prompts to tn
doing of an act self-evidently good. !
. man saves you from q deadly peri