Mr. Martin did not rise to enter into the matter of the charge, but only to combat an inference which seemed to fall from the hon. gentleman, that the distresses of this country were to excuse such acts of violence and injustice as tended to relieve their distresses-this was a principle to which he could never subscribe; for if, instead of the present distressed situation of this country, we were in an actual state of bankruptcy, and all the treasures of Hindostan could be transferred to the Exchequer of Great Britain, so it were to be done by injustice and oppression, he should think it a crime highly deserving the pu nishment of the law. The Committee divided: Yeas, 96; Noes, 37. The chairman was then moved to report to the House the various resolutions to which the committee had come, on each of the different charges, which had been considered and discussed; which was agreed to. The House being resumed, The report was ordered to be received on the 2nd of April. Debate on Mr. Beaufoy's Motion for the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts.*] March 28. In pursuance of the notice he had given, A short time previous to the above debate, the following Paper was published and dispersed by the Dissenters: The Case of the Protestant Dissenters, with reference to the Test and Corporation Acts: "In the year 1672, the 25th of the reign of king Charles 2, an act was passed, intituled, An Act for preventing dangers which may happen from Popish Recusants:' by which it is enacted, 'That all and every person or persons that shall be admitted, entered, placed, military, or shall receive any pay, salary, fee, or taken into any office or offices, civil or or wages, by reason of any patent or grant of his Majesty, or shall have command or place Mr. Pitt remarked, that he should cer- of trust from or under his Majesty, his heirs tainly give such a vote on the general or successors, or by his or their authority, or question of the impeachment as would by authority derived from him or them, within correspond with the part which he had al- this realm of England, dominion of Wales, or ready taken; but he must at the same time town of Berwick-upon-Tweed, or in his Maobserve, that having only partially ac-jesty's navy, or in the several islands of Jersey quiesced in the propriety of several of the any service or employment in his Majesty's and Guernsey, or that shall be admitted into charges, particularly in those concerning household or family, shall receive the Sacrathe affair of Benares, and the contractsment of the Lord's Supper, according to the he should endeavour to bring the matter usage of the Church of England, within three before the House in such a way, as would, months after his or their admittance in, or if it should meet the general opinion, re-receiving their said authority and employlieve him from the unpleasant predicament of being obliged either to dissent in toto from a proposition, to several parts of which he wished to give his concurrence, Bill passed, were very remarkable. Papists "The circumstances of the time when this or to vote for one which contained some circumstances to which he was adverse. them were employed in the great offices of were indulged in their religion, and many of But whether he should for this purpose state. The king himself was suspected of make a separate motion, or only move an popery, and the duke of York, his presumpamendment when the business was brought tive heir, had openly declared himself of that before the House by those who conducted religion. This Bill was introduced in direct the prosecution, he was not as yet pre-ing been suspended, contrary to acts of paropposition to the Court; the penal laws havpared to determine. Mr. Burke said, he approved of the right hon. gentleman's proposition, and with regard to what he had said respecting the difference of opinion, which he entertained on certain parts of the charge relative to Benares, and that relative to the contracts, he trusted he would keep his mind open upon those points, as he had no manner of doubt but that he should be able, at a fit opportunity, to convince him, that there was not any real ground for his entertaining the difference of opinion which he professed. ment, in some public church, upon some Lord's day, commonly called Sunday, immediately after divine service. favour of Papists, at the very time when a war liament, by the royal proclamation, chiefly in was begun to destroy the only Protestant state by which England could expect to be supported in the defence of her religion and liberties. On these accounts, the minds of all zealous Protestants were in the utmost fear and consternation; and, accordingly, the design of the Act was, as the preamble declares, to quiet the minds of his Majesty's good subjects, by preventing dangers which might happen from Popish recusants.' The Protestant Dissenters apprehend, therefore, that this Act, as the title sets forth, was made wholly against Papists, and not to Mr. Beaufoy rose and said; I am sensible, Mr. Speaker, that in a business so important as that upon which we are this day assembled, it might have been expected that the large propor tion of the inhabitants of this kingdom who are now, by my voice, suitors to the House, would have been more studious of experience and ability in their advocate. It may naturally excite surprise, that in a cause which so deeply concerns liberties of the people; yet, when he was raised to the throne of these kingdoms, and no danger could be justly apprehended, he told his first Parliament, in one of his speeches, that he hoped they would leave room for the admission of all Protestants who were willing and able to serve him; and that such a conjunction in his service would tend to the better uniting them among themselves, and strengthening them against their common adversaries.' Accordingly, when the Bill was brought in for abrogating the oaths of allegiance, &c. to king James 2, a clause was ordered to be added for taking away the necessity of receiving the Sacrament as a quali House of Lords rejected, contrary to the sentiments of many noble peers, the stedfast friends of their country, and distinguished promoters of the revolution; who declared in their protest, 'That a greater caution ought not to be required, from such as are admitted into offices, than from the members of the two Houses of Parliament, who are not obliged to receive the Sacrament to enable them to sit in either House.' prevent any danger which could happen to the nation or Church from the Dissenters. Indeed, so far were the Protestant nonconformists from being aimed at in this Act, that, in their zeal to rescue the nation from the dangers which were at that time apprehended from Popish recusants, they contributed to the passing of the Bill; willingly subjecting themselves to the disabilities created by it rather than obstruct what was deemed so necessary to the common welfare. Alderman Love, a member of the House of Commons, and a known Dissenter, publicly desired that nothing with relation to them might intervene to stop the security which the nation and Protestant religion might de-fication for civil offices. This clause the rive from the Test Act, and declared that in this he was seconded by the greater part of the Nonconformists. This conduct was so acceptable to Parliament, that, in the very session in which the Test Act passed, and while that Act was depending, a Bill was brought into the House of Commons, intituled, A Bill for the ease of Protestant Dissenters.' This Bill, having passed through the different stages of that House, was carried up to the House of Lords, where likewise it passed, with some amendments. These amendments having given occasion to a conference between the two Houses, king Charles 2, from an apprehension that the measure would prove injurious to the Popish interest, on the 29th of March, 1673, adjourned the parliament to the 20th of October following. In the next session, an attempt was made, in the House of Commons, to discriminate the Dissenters from the Papists, with regard to their qualifications for public offices, by bringing in a Bill for a general test, to distinguish Protestants from Papists; which Bill, having been read a second time, and referred to a committee, was laid aside without being reported. "The late reverend and learned Dr. Burnet, bishop of Salisbury, in a speech in the House of Lords, in the year 1703, took particular notice of the conduct of the Dissenters, with regard to the Test Act; and justly concluded, that, as the Act was obtained in some measure by their concurrence, it would be hard to turn it against them. "Though king William S, of glorious memory, had refused, when prince of Orange, to give his approbation to the repeal of the Test Act and other penal laws against Papists, knowing that the measure was countenanced by king James 2, with the sole view of introducing Roman Catholics into public offices, and that it would have been at that time dangerous to the Protestant religion and the "The Test Act is not the only statute by which the civil rights of the Dissenters are abridged. In the year 1661, the 13th of Charles 2, the year after the restoration, an Act was passed, intituled, An Act for the well-governing and regulating of Corporations:' by which it is provided, That no person or persons shall for ever hereafter be placed, elected, or chosen in, or to, any corporation offices, that shall not have, within one year before such election or choice, taken the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Church of England.' This Act, which was passed in a period of great heat and violence, was probably designed against some of the Protestant Dissenters: 'For,' as a noble lord* expresses himself, in those times, when a spirit of intolerance prevailed, and severe measures were pursued, the Dissenters were reputed and treated as persons ill-affected and dangerous to government.' But both Houses of Parliament in a short time entertained different sentiments of them; and, before the end of that reign, discovered an inclination to relieve them from the disabilities created both by the Corporation and Test Acts. "On the 24th of December, in the year 1680, a Bill was ordered into the House of Commons, for repealing the Corporation Act. * See lord Mansfield's speech in the House of Lords, February 4, 1767. New Parl. Hist. Vol. xvi. p. 316. their interests and their honour, they | confidence in the justice of their cause, should have committed the management and they have equal confidence in the of their suit to a man of so little preten- candour and liberality of the House. sions to parliamentary skill, and of talents They know that in addressing the most so humble as mine. Sir, their conduct enlightened men of the most enlightened admits of only one explanation: they have age, the artificial aids of rhetoric cannot On the 6th of January following, this Bill was read a second time, and referred to a committee. While this Bill was depending in the House of Commons, a Bill came down from the Lords, intituled, An Act for distinguishing Protestant Dissenters from Popish Recusants.' It doth not appear that there was any division on either of these Bills, but they were defeated by the sudden prorogation of the Parliament on the 10th of January. The Commons, being apprized of the King's intention, had only time to pass some votes on the state of the nation, one of which is in these words: That it is the opinion of this House, that the prosecution of Protestant Dissenters, upon the penal laws, is, at this time, grievous to the subject, a weakening of the Protestant interest, an encouragement to popery, and dangerous to the peace of the kingdom.' "Such public testimonies in parliament, in favour of the Protestant Dissenters, they cannot but consider as affording a full evidence of their zeal and concern for the Protestant religion and the liberties of these kingdoms, and of their being hearty and sincere friends to the public peace, both in church and state. They therefore humbly hope for the repeal of the said Acts for the following reasons: 1. "Every man, as it is now universally acknowledged, has an undoubted right to judge for himself in matters of religion; nor ought his exercise of this right to be branded with a mark of infamy. 2. "The Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, being a matter purely of a religious nature, and being appointed by our blessed Saviour only for the remembrance of his death, ought not to be applied to the secular ends of civil societies. 3. "As Dissenters are universally acknowledged to be well-affected to his Majesty and the established government, and are ready to take the oaths required by law, and to give the fullest proof of their loyalty, they think it hard that their scruple to receive the Sacrament after the manner of the Church of England, or after the manner of any church, as a qualification for an office, should render them incapable of holding public employments, civil or military. 4. "The occasional receiving of the Lord's Supper, as a qualification for a place, cannot, in the nature of things, imply that those who thus receive it mean to declare their full and entire approbation of the whole constitution and frame of the Estabished Church; since men may be compelled by their necessities, or allured by secular advantages, to do what they would not do were they left to their free choice. As, from these motives, persons may be induced to conform to the Established Church in this particular instance, though they do not approve of its forms and ceremonies in general; so, from the same motives, others may comply with the sacramental test who are not even Christians, and who therefore cannot be supposed to wish well to Christianity itself, or to any national establishment of it whatsoever. Hence it is apparent, that such a test can be no real or effectual security to the Church of England. It is also apprehended, that, independently of any remarks upon the doctrine of papal dispensations, the sacramental test complained of may be received by many Papists, because many of them hold the Church of England to be no church, her ministers no ministers, and her sacraments no sacraments. 5. "The Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, and the Declaration against Transubstantiation, have, without the sacramental test, been found effectual, for more than a century, to exclude Papists from both Houses of Parliament. 6. "The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, while it would, be a relief to many of his Majesty's faithful subjects, would lay no difficulty or hardship on any others of them. It would no way affect the Established Church. Religion, and the National Church, were established before these Acts were passed, and would continue to be established were they repealed. The doctrine, the discipline, and privileges of the Church, would remain exactly the same as they are at present. Its constitution and its form of government are not secured by these Acts; nor would they be injured by the total repeal of them. On the contrary, every serious clergyman would find, in such repeal, ease to his conscience, and safety from vexatious prosecutions; for the service of the Church of England, in its notice respecting the celebration of the communion, forbids blasphemers of God, slanderers of his word, adulterers, &c. to come to the holy table; and yet the minister, as the law now stands, must admit all such persons to the Sacrament when they demand it as a qualification for an office, or subject himself to a prosecution. 7. "No other instance can be produced, among all the reformed churches, in which the Sacrament is ever applied as a qualification for civil employments and advantages. 8. "The Episcopalians in North Britain, who are the dissenters from the Church es be necessary to enforce the arguments of reason. They know that in addressing a parliament which possesses, beyond any that ever assembled within these walls, the confidence and affection of the people-a parliament under whose auspices, and by whose guidance this kingdom, to the disappointment of her enemies, and the astonishment of the world, has recovered from her desolated state; a parliament whose decisions proclaim to every part of the empire, that under their government, no individual shall be deprived of his rights without just cause, nor penalties be inflicted without the commission of a crime; -they know that in addressing such a parliament, it will be sufficient for them to prove that, contrary to the first principles of justice, they are subjected to punishment without the imputation of guilt; amerced of the common privileges of citizens, without the suspicion of offence; and condemned to perpetual degradation and dishonour, unless they will consent to incur the guilt of renouncing that right of private judgment in matters of religion which the God of nature has given them. Three different classes of our fellowsubjects are aggrieved by those provisions in our laws of which I shall propose the repeal. The first is composed of all those Englishmen who are Dissenters from the Church of England. The second is composed of all the members of the Established Church of Scotland. The third consists tablished in that part of the United Kingdom, are not liable to any incapacities in consequence of their not qualifying themselves by receiving the Sacrament according to the usage of the Church of Scotland; but are capable of all the advantages of the civil government by taking the oaths, &c. as appointed by law. Whence it follows, that it is not reasonable or just, that such of the members of the Established Church of North Britain as are resident in England, should be subject to the ungracious alternative of acting inconsistently with their principles, or of incurring the penalty of disqualification for the service of their Sovereign, in any office, civil or military. 9. "In the year 1779, the 19th of his present Majesty, an Act was passed in Ireland, 'for the relief of his Majesty's faithful subjects, the Protestant Dissenters of that kingdom; whereby it is enacted, "That all and every person and persons, being Protestants, shall and may have, hold, and enjoy, any of fice or place, civil or military, and receive any pay, salary, fee, or wages, belonging to, or by reason of, such office or place, notwithstanding he shall not receive or have received the [VOL. XXVI.] of all those respectable clergymen of the Church of England, who think that the prostitution of the most solemn ordinance of their faith to the purposes of a civil test, is little less than a sacrilegious abuse. Of these several descriptions of my fellowcitizens, entitled as they all are to particular regard, the Dissenters have the first claim to my attention; for they have publicly requested,-a request which they confined to their own case, lest they should be thought presumptuous in expressing the complaints of others,-they have publicly requested that I would submit to the consideration of Parliament the propriety of relieving, from penalties of disqualification and reproach, so many hundred thousands of his Majesty's ardently loyal and affec tionate subjects. Of the earnest, anxious solicitude they feel to obtain relief; and of the unanimity with which they prefer their prayer to Parliament, the House will be enabled to judge from the mention of a single fact. The Dissenters of England are chiefly composed of the Presbyterians, the Independents, and the Baptists, who differ in many circumstances of doctrine and discipline, but who all agree in the custom of annually appointing two deputies from each of their congregations in the metropolis, and in all the neighbouring districts within ten miles of the metropolis, for the management of their affairs; a custom which has long been established among Sacrament of the Lord's Supper,-without incurring any penalties--for or in respect of his neglect of receiving the same.' The Protestant Dissenters of England, therefore, humbly hope, from the moderation and equity of the Legislature, for the same just restitution of their civil rights, to which alone their application is confined. "For these reasons the Dissenters are induced to make an application to Parliament for relief, humbly apprehending that their request will appear to be founded in justice, and that a compliance with it will redound to the honour of religion, will tend to the security and strength of the Protestant interest, be conducive to the welfare of the nation, honourable to the King as the common father of his people, and no way injurious to any one subject in his Majesty's dominions. Arguments so weighty and cogent as those which have been represented, cannot, they trust, fail, in conjunction with the enlarged and liberal spirit of the times, to procure from the Legislature the repeal of statutes, which can in no degree be considered as grounded on public necessity or public advantage.” [3 E] them. Now, it is by the unanimous voice of that assembly of delegates, supported by the wishes, earnestly expressed in letters, of their brethren in all parts of the kingdom, that the present request solicits the attention of Parliament. With the permission of the House, I will read to them two resolutions which constitute, in the present business, the principal proceedings of the delegates. "At a general meeting of the deputies of three denominations of Dissenters, held at Dr. Williams's Library, Redcross-street, London, on Friday the 5th of January, 1787, to consider of an application to Parliament, for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. Edward Jefferies esq. in the chair. The question being put and fully debated, it was thereupon resolved unanimously, That an application be made to Parliament for a repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, so far as they concern Protestant Dissenters. Resolved also, That it be referred to the committee, to take the most effectual measures for carrying the above resolutions into execution." "At a meeting of the Committee, held at the King's-Head Tavern, in the Poultry, on the 2nd of February, 1787, Mr. Jefferies in the chair, resolved, That the mode of proceeding in the House of Commons, for the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, be by motion. Resolved, That Mr. Beaufoy be desired to make the motion for that purpose."-From these proceedings the House will be convinced how very idle and frivolous those reports are, which intimate that the Dissenters in general do not desire relief. Thus authorized, I am happy, in the outset of our deliberations, to declare that the grievances of which the Dissenters complain, are of a civil, not of an ecclesiastical nature. They humbly solicit a restoration of their civil rights, not an enlargement of their ecclesiastical privileges. It is of consequence that this fact should be distinctly stated, and clearly understood; for the very word Dissenter leads so naturally to the supposition that their complaints are of an ecclesiastical kind; and their acknowledged merit as citizens, so naturally excludes the idea of its being possible that the law should have deprived them of any of their civil rights, that I feel myself under a necessity of stating, at the very threshold of the business, that their prayer has nothing ecclesiastical for its object. They wish not to diminish the provision which the Legislature has made for the Established Church; nor do they envy her the revenue she enjoys, or the ecclesiastical privileges of dignity and honour with which she is invested. If their aim had been to attack the rights of others, and not merely to recover their own, they would not have chosen a member of the Church of England for their advocate, nor could I have accepted such trust. So far are they indeed from trespassing on the rights of others, that even the restitution of their own they did not solicit till the public tranquillity was completely restored, and till a season of leisure from other avocations had afforded the Legislature a convenient opportunity of considering the hardships by which they are aggrieved That men of acknowledged merit as citizens, of known attachment to the Constitution, and of zealous loyalty to the Sovereign, should at no time solicit relief from unmerited disabilities and undeserved reproach, is not to be expected from the Dissenters, for it is not to be expected from human nature. But in praying for that relief, they have chosen the time which they thought the most convenient to Parliament, and the mode which they deemed the most respectful to the House. United in sentiment on this occasion, to a degree which I believe unexampled in any body of men, and hitherto unknown among themselves, and forming, in most of the towns of England, a large proportion of the inhabitants, they did not choose to crowd your table with petitions. They wished to owe their success, not to the number of the claimants, but to the equity of the claim; and they have observed that justice never pleads more powerfully with the House, than when she approaches them accompanied only by her own complete perfections. The disabilities which the law has imposed on the Dissenters, are contained in the provisions of two acts of parliament, that were passed in the reign of king Charles 2nd, and which are generally known by the name of the Test and Corporation Acts. In the first place, therefore, I shall state what those provisions are. In the next place I shall describe the periods at which, and the circumstances under which they were severally made. I shall then prove, on the clearest evidence, that the Test Act, which constitutes their most extensive grievance, was was not levelled against the Dissenters, and that the causes which dictated the Corporation Act have |