CHAP.

LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Sheridan did not, like Mr. Fox, endeavour to soften the features of political difference, or smooth the asperity of discordant opinion, by appearances of kind regret or friendly recollection; no expression of Conduct of amicable feeling escaped him; on the contrary, he appeared with satisfaction and with pride to assume his station as political opponent of Mr. Burke.

Mr. Sheridan.

Colonel Phipps having made a few observations on Colonel the different conduct of the British troops in 1780, Phipps. and the French guards during the recent scenes, Mr. Pitt, in a manly and prudent strain, reviewed some of Mr. Pitt. the observations which had been made. He thanked Colonel Phipps for the able and eloquent defence of some passages in his speech on a preceding day, applauded the remarks of Lord Valletort in moving the address, approved one part of the speech of Mr. Sheridan, but declared that he agreed with Mr. Burke in every point he had urged relative to the late commotions in France. He had delivered himself with warmth, but a warmth proceeding from a motive which did him the highest honour; his sentiments respecting the constitution inspired him with sincere and lasting gratitude. Happy and genuine freedom was enjoyed by Englishmen under their constitution, while the unqualified nominal liberty of the French was, in fact, absolute, direct, and intolerable slavery.

After a few observations from Sir George Howard Estimates and Viscount Fielding, the resolutions were agreed to.

voted.

In the debate, which is thus copiously abstracted, Observations. will be perceived the first public and authentic declaration of differences of opinion among the members of the opposition party; a disunion of that compact, and apparently well-cemented body, which, by its steady unanimity, no less than by its formidable ability, had so long divided and so powerfully influenced public opinion. The further proceedings of the session, although not devoid of importance, will require less specific detail.

March 2nd.

Mr. Fox's mo

Mr. Fox, taking the station before occupied by Mr. Beaufoy, moved for a committee of the whole House to consider the acts of the 15th and 25th of act.

tion on the test

CHAP.
LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Beaufoy.

Charles the Second, requiring persons taking certain appointments and offices to receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper. He described the test laws as the offspring of persecution and intolerance, founded on the imputation of principles and intentions to bodies. of men without the evidence of facts. Much obloquy and unfounded calumny, he said, had been used to asperse the character of the Roman Catholics, on account of the supposed tendency of their religious tenets to occasion the commission of murder, treason, and other horrid crimes, from a principle of conscience; a base imputation, arising from uncharitable opinions. It was the haughty, arrogant, and illiberal language of persecution which led men to judge uncharitably, and to act with bitter intolerance. On the authority of Dr. Hoadley, he argued that the church could not be endangered by a body so small and void of influence as the Dissenters: danger could only arise from the supine indolence of the clergy, contrasted with the superior activity and zeal of the other party. He censured with great asperity a circular letter said to have been written by Dr. Horsley, Bishop of St. David's, to his clergy, and vindicated Dr. Priestley, whose attacks on the church and its tenets had been vigorously repelled by the Bishop. A desire to reform was not to be construed into an endeavour to subvert the ecclesiastical constitution. The Duke of Richmond and Mr. Pitt had both endeavoured to reform the constitution; yet both held high offices in the state; and Dr. Priestley might be at the head of the church with as little danger as the present minister at the head of the treasury. He spoke with some applause of Dr. Price's sermon on the Anniversary of the Revolution*, although he considered that his arguments would have better become a parliamentary speech than a sermon. Το make the pulpit, the altar, or sacramental table, political engines he must ever condemn, whether in a Dissenter or a Churchman.

Mr. Beaufoy supported the motion in a speech of

* 4th Nov. 1789.

great length and ability, and was aided by Sir Henry Houghton, Mr. Martin, Mr. William Smith, and some other members.

CHAP.
LXVII.

1790.

posed by

Mr. Pitt, although he paid a tribute of high ap- Motion opplause to the Dissenters for their conduct on many Mr. Pitt. great public occasions, declared a continuance of the test laws highly expedient. A reference had been made to their repeal in Ireland without danger to the constitution. The situation of the Irish and English churches was materially different; the former found a security in the superior numbers of the Catholics over the Dissenters, which bore a proportion of six to one, and therefore needed not, like the English church, the protection of test laws.

Mr. Powys said, that, on the principles Mr. Fox Mr. Powys. had laid down, not the Dissenters alone would be entitled to hold offices of trust and power, but the Jew, the Mahometan, the disciple of Brama, Confucius, and every head of a sect. (Mr. Fox cried "Hear! "hear!").

Mr. Yorke and Mr. Wilberforce were also oppo- Mr. Yorke and nents of the motion; but the greatest share of atten- Mr. Wilbertion was bestowed on Mr. Burke.

force.

In discussions concerning religion, he said, he was Mr. Burke. sorry to see any appearance of party spirit. To that he attributed an observation by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that, countenanced by a minister of Mr. Fox's bold and enterprising character, the Dissenters might occupy places of great trust, and endanger the civil constitution. A minister, a man of brilliant talents, who had directed the government of this country with great glory, and great safety to the constitution, both in church and state (he alluded to the Earl of Chatham), in a debate in the upper House, when Dr. Drummond, the Archbishop of York, had called the dissenting ministers "men of close ambition," treated the charge as uncharitable and defamatory. After a pause, the noble Earl exclaimed, "The dissenting ministers are represented as "men of close ambition. They are so, my lords; and "their ambition is to keep close to the college of fish"ermen, not of cardinals, and to the doctrine of in

СНАР. LXVII.

1790.

66

66

spired apostles, not to the decrees of interested and aspiring bishops. They contend for a spiritual We have a Calvin"creed, and spiritual worship. "istic creed, a Popish liturgy, and an Arminian clergy. His right honourable friend had laid down the principles of toleration, and exclaimed against persecution! all persecution, civil or religious, was certainly horrible; but abstract principles might deceive even themselves. Of abstract principles he declared his utter dislike; he detested them when a boy, and he liked them no better now he had silver hairs. Abstract principles of natural right, which the Dissenters rested on as their strong hold, were most idle, useless, and dangerous. They superseded society, and broke asunder all those bonds which for ages had formed the happiness of mankind. Professing his peculiar regard and reverence for the established church, Mr. Burke spoke of the causes from which danger was to be apprehended, and commented on two printed catechisms circulated by the Dissenters for the use of young non-conformists. The first, written by Mr. Robinson, contained no precept of religion, but consisted of one continued invective against kings and bishops, forming by its misrepresentations a catechism of misanthropy and anarchy; and these catechisms, placed in the hands of Dissenters' children, were teaching them in their infancy to lisp out condemnations against the established church, and forming in them a rising generation of its determined enemies, while, possibly, the preachers were themselves recommending a robbery and plunder of the church similar to that in France. Mr. Burke dwelt at large on the destruction of their church by the French; and from their proceedings, letters and publications, he inferred that the Dissenters were very likely to train up their rising generation to similar acts. He descanted with peculiar severity on a letter of Dr. Priestley, who declared that he hated all religious establishments, and thought them sinful and idolatrous, and

These words are given as reported in the Parliamentary History; but see vol. i. p. 569. n.

one in which he talked of a train of gunpowder being laid to the church establishment, which would soon blow it up; " and if they refused to repeal the test and corporation acts, the establishment would soon tumble about their ears." He also read passages from Dr. Price's sermon, shewing, as he contended, that the total subversion of the church was the aim of some leading Dissenters. For the body at large he professed great respect, and admitted that, had the present motion been made ten years earlier, he should have been among its supporters.

CHAP.

LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Fox, in his reply, analyzed, most ably, the Mr. Fox in arguments which had been adduced against him, and reply. expressed the greatest concern at the speech of Mr. Burke, which had filled him with grief and shame; but he was consoled by observing that it avowed every doctrine which he had laid down. He had stated principles, and argued from an application of inferences deducible from them; while his right honourable friend had resorted to pamphlets, private letters, anecdotes, conjectures, suspicions, and invectives. On such grounds, he had opposed a motion to which he would have been a friend ten years ago. He was astonished to hear that a test was imposed by the Dissenters upon their representatives, because they had declared that at the next general election they would support no candidate who was not well affected to the cause of civil and religious liberty. Did not gentlemen on the other side declare, that although their own opinions were friendly to the motion, yet, in obedience to the instructions of their constituents, who were churchmen, they considered themselves bound to oppose it? Was not this imposing a test? How different the conduct of the Dissenters, who were the constituents of two honourable members*, who assured them they might vote according to their conscience! In Doctor Priestley's manly declaration of his individual opinion, he saw no criminality. Influenced by sentiments of compassion at the late events in France,

* Mr. Windham and Mr. Tierney.