On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    disability , but on the contrary , a decla * ration merely affecting the civil conditions upon which the tenure of office was to be held by those who were ready to admit the paramount obligations of the constitution . Though he thus rejoiced that the question was not what it had been , and was at length put upon

    fresh ground of argument , yet he could not concur in the conclusion that any fresh declaration was necessary . He had many reasons to prevent his adopting such a conclusion . The first reason , that there being no pretensions for danger , there could be no necessity for demanding security . Whether the Test and Corporation Acts were originally

    just and proper , —whether their provisions were adequate to the presumed necessity for their enactment , it was now rather too late to inquire . But they had at least this plausibility , or supposed advantage , in the principle of their construction—that they were really enacted against the presence , if not threats , of an impending or overwhelming danger . At the time to which he

    referred , there did exist a set of men who had sought to destroy the constitution , as in Church and State established . At present , what pretence was there that any declaration of religious test was called for to protect either Church or State from any particular danger ? Had any complaint been made against the principles or practice of any of the Dis-Renters who had obtained office ? And

    it must not be forgotten that Protestant Dissenters , if they really meant hostility to the Established Church , had had the power of fomenting their machinations during the greater part of the last half century , in which time they had been practically admitted into office . Had they during that lapse of years sought the subversion of the established church ?

    Had they attempted to oppose the dominion of the law ? Had they ventured to introduce disorder or civil contention into the kingdom ? The answer of history was , No . If , then , they had not , he called upon the House of Commons not to sanction an imputation where no charge either had or could be made- — not to express a distrust where no

    confidence had been violated . ( Cheers . ) His next reason against the proposed amendment was , that he saw no cause why the Dissenters should make any declaration respecting the Established Church , which they were not called upon to make towards any other establishment of the State , or against any other doctrine that was supposed to be subver-

    Untitled Article

    sive of the constitution . For instance , there were those abroad who thought any established religion unnecessary —* there were those abroad who advocated annual Parliaments , and universal suffrage ; yet nobody dreamt of providing countervailing declarations against such constitutional innovations . There were

    likewise established institutions which were interwoven wftfo the spirit of British liberty—the trial by Jury , for ex * ample—the independence of the Judges ; yet in no instance had a declaration been called for , or deemed necessary , for their preservation—and why ? Because it was more politic for the State to presume , that all its subjects felt a common interest in the due maintenance of

    whatever was essentially useful for the whole , than to fritter away their allegiance into privileged or excluded classes . He would say , moreover , that this sort of verbal security was far from being the best a government could obtain . The best security for the impartiality of the trial by jury—for the independence of the judgewas the perfect confidence which the state

    reposed in the one and the other , and the deep implied obligation of the sacredness of the trust . It must surely be obvious , that to ask for tests and declarations , was to inspire distrust . Why was it , then , persons called for their perpetuity ? Was it , that in the performance of an act of tardy justice , the pride of the Established Church required a qualification or salvo ,

    as if it were not ready to make a fair concession of its own free and good will , and in that full spirit of conciliation which ought to be impressed and maintained in coming to such an adjustment ? He had likewise another objection to the proposed declaration . Although the Right Honourable Gentleman ' s words might be unexceptionable , yet

    declarations of this kind were always liable to various interpretations , according to the sense in which they were construed by those in whose behalf they were said to be taken , or by whom they were actually adopted . There was always , then , a dangerous latitude , however conscientiously suggested , in these different interpretations of the respective

    communities . Surely such a danger ought to be avoided . These were generally the objections which he entertained to the course proposed to be taken to qualify or alter the present bill . But , in stating these , he was ready at the same time to declare , that his opposition was not unconquerable . ( Loud cries of hear . ) Placed as he was iu such a question as this , involving delicate , feelings and mo ~

    Untitled Article

    27 $ Intelligence Corporation and Tesi Acth

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), April 2, 1828, page 278, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2559/page/62/