confident of the justice of their claims. | noble Lord had introduced, he could asThis subject would require extensive con- sure the House, that it was not at all satissideration; and he regretted to observe, factory to the feelings of the respectable that vacillation perplexed the House, and body to which he belonged. The noble created dissatisfaction amongst the Dis- Lord was not perhaps aware of the vast senters out of doors. He was sorry to find number of Roman Catholics inhabiting that a Member of the Administration had the county of Lancaster. In the town of brought forward a measure which he was Liverpool there were 60,000 Catholics, sure would meet with universal disappro- and in the town of Manchester there were bation. He regretted also, that another upwards of 40,000. The greater number subject had been taken out of his hands, of these were persons who had come over by a proposition for a universal National from Ireland, where they were in the Civil Registration. He was also sorry that habit of having the marriage ceremony the question of Church-rates-another performed according to the rites of their vital subject-was postponed to so late a own Church; and it was utterly imposperiod in the Session. These questions sible to persuade them to go through the were all intimately connected with each form of the ceremony again, in order to other, and ought to be discussed in con- legalize their marriages. If he properly tinuity and at once; and he feared, that understood the measure of the noble Lord the manner in which they were treated the Paymaster of the Forces, there would would cause much trouble to many Mem- be an interference on the part of the bers of the House, and occasion his Ma- Established Church on that point. The jesty's Ministers to lose much of that very publication of bans, to the omission attachment which Protestant Dissenters of which he believed some penal enacthad hitherto evinced towards them. ment attached, would not be submitted to Mr. Ayshford Sanford considered that by these people. They were of the poorer the petition presented by the hon. Mem-class, and their prejudices were invinciber should be considered as an officialble. He did not think that when a mearepresentation of the opinions of the Dis-sure of conciliation was brought forward, senters. The grievances under which they laboured were very great; and he hoped the House would apply a remedy. Those disabilities disunited the Dissenters from the Established Church, and it was the duty of the Legislature to remove them. He was anxious for one general discussion upon that subject: taking it by piecemeal was not productive of advantage. He heard, from every part of the country which he represented, that the Bill to be introduced for the relief of Dissenters gave no satisfaction.

Mr. Baines did not think, that the union of Church and State was one which the petition considered as an important point he imagined that it was merely a theoretical opinion, and not one which was urged upon the Legislature as requiring an immediate consideration. He had a petition in his hand in which the Dissenters declared that they were favourable to a separation of Church and State, but they reserved the discussion of that question for a future time.

Mr. Langdale begged leave to make a few observations upon the question before the House. Without pretending to know all the details of the measure which the

it should be clogged by any clauses which would defeat the object of the boon. He hoped the Bill would be amended in Committee.

Mr. Sheil thought it was a remarkable circumstance that, notwithstanding the petitioners stated they did not at present pray for any separation, they at the outset of their petitions, laid down that abstract doctrine, and appeared to attribute all their grievances to the connexion between Church and State. Although they abstained from calling for separation, it was quite manifest that they called the attention of the House to the source of the evils under which they laboured. The Dissenters would not be contented with the Marriage Bill of the noble Lord, the Paymaster of the Forces. If the Dissenters were relieved from Church rates, why should they not be relieved from tithes? If they could not be legally called on to raise the edifice, why should they be required to support the minister who performed service in it.

Mr. John Stanley considered, that the question of a separation between Church and State affected the members of the Church of England as much as the Dis

senters. He would say, that the Dissen- I members of the Established Church reters would be right in attributing the evils fused to give way, that was no argument under which they laboured to the existence for the dissolution of the connexion beof a dominant Church, if they saw the noble tween Church and State. The principles Lord (Lord John Russell) who had been of the connexion had long been admitted their constant support through the whole and recognised, and had descended to us of his life-if they saw that he withdrew from our forefathers, as part of the estabhis measure of relief in deference to the lished law of the land. He deeply reChurch of England-if they saw their gretted, that in the present petition the just demands thus resisted by the Church, Dissenters had avowed their future intenand relief rendered incompatible with the tion of attacking that connexion. Almost existence of the connexion between Church all the gentlemen who advocated the and State-they would be right, he would removal of the specific practical grievances repeat, in attributing their grievances to used the words "at present," and "now.' this connexion, and calling upon the If the present practical grievances were House to put an end to it as incompatible removed, what guarantee had the House, with the liberties of that country. But if that next Session the Dissenters would the Government and the House relieved not come and apply for a separation of the Dissenters from the disabilities they Church and State? prayed to be relieved from, then it was clear that the union of Church and State was not incompatible with the rights and just demands of the people of England. They ought to accede to those demands whilst they could do so, and not, by putting off the relief to the last moment, render the Dissenters the irreconcileable enemies of the Establishment.

Colonel Evans begged leave to say, that the body of Dissenters was extremely dissatisfied with the nature of the Bill brought into that House by the noble Lord the Paymaster of the Forces. His constituents concurred in the prayer of the petition, and he would only express a hope that if the noble Lord should be prevented from bringing in a Bill that would satisfy the claims of the Dissenters, that the hon. and learned Member (Dr. Lushington) would take upon himself the important duty of proposing a Bill that would be satisfactory to that numerous and enlightened body.

Sir Richard Vyvyan expressed his regret, that so many opinions as had been expressed this morning upon so important a subject, should have been allowed to pass without having been replied to. He rose for the purpose of answering an observation of the hon. member for Cheshire (Mr. J. Stanley). That hon. Member had said, that if the members of the Church of England would not give way, and assent to the removal of the grievances under which the Dissenters laboured, then the connexion between Church and State ought to be abolished. He begged leave to say, in reply, that even if the

Mr. John Stanley, in explanation, said, he had only said, he considered the mention of the connexion of Church and State as a mere speculative opinion; and, with regard to their separation, he had merely said, it would only be required when it should be proved, that the existence of the connexion was incompatible with the obtaining for so large a portion of our fellow-subjects their reasonable and just rights. If upon the removal of the specific grievances, there should exist no other practical grievance, then he could not agree to any speculative measure for dissolving the connexion.

Mr. Sinclair said, the hon. Member opposite had faithfully pointed out what the real object of the Dissenters was, and proved to the House, that nothing else would satisfy them but the separation of Church and State. It was true, they did not demand that now-they were too prudent-they wished to put it off, and to content themselves with some minor matters. But why did they act so? Because they knew they would not succeed at present; and because they required those other things as so many stepping stones to the other object.

Dr. Lushington said, in reply, that the Dissenters had a right to maintain their opinions; and if they conceived that the connexion between Church and State was hostile to the interests of Christianity, they were perfectly justified in coming forward and stating that. He would repeat, that nothing short of a proper and general system of registration would satisfy the Dissenters, and he regretted

that the measure of the noble Lord, the | candour of those who had attacked them, Paymaster of the Forces, was not likely the recorded opinions of a very few to satisfy them. With respect to what amongst the cloud of witnesses whom had fallen from the hon. and learned he might cite in justification of their member for Tipperary, he would observe, views. A pamphlet was written on the that the question of tithes was not intro- subject, by Lord Dreghorn, an eminent duced in the petitions of the Dissenters; Judge of the last century, who said, that and he trusted, that such a question would "an opportunity of knowing the particulars of most of the violent settlements for not be raised on the present occasion. ten years past, had given rise to its publication." His lordship observed, that it 'is plain to common sense, that the right of patronage is incompatible with the Presbyterian religion.

Petition laid on the Table.

6

CHURCH PATRONAGE IN SCOTLAND.] Mr. Sinclair presented a Petition from One of them the City of Edinburgh, against the system of Church Patronage in Scotland, and must yield; by endeavouring to keep two petitions from other places in Scot-up both, we run into much absurdity, land, upon the same subject. The hon. contradiction, and indecency.' He mainMember said, he perceived that the tained that it has a manifest tendency to national cemetery for petitions was pre-bring religion into contempt with the pared for the reception of the important common people. What can be more document, which he had the honour to pre- shockingly absurd, than to see a minister sent; but in consigning it to the leathern of the Gospel settled by a troop of mausoleum under the Table, he could not dragoons? what more disgusting, than rest satisfied with acting the part of a to see a minister of the Gospel, though mute. He had often admired the alacrity disregarded and despised by every person in the parish, sit down contented, which Irish Members evinced when laying petitions before the House, to vindi- because, nevertheless, he enjoys the cate the motives of their constituents from manse, the glebe, and the stipend? The 'common people are too sensible not to misrepresentation, or to enforce their sentiments by argument. He should imitate discover that the object which patrons, their zeal, though he could not equal their and others in power, have, is not the eloquence; and he would venture to advancement of religion, nor the comfort claim the indulgence of the House, whilst and instruction of the people, but the 'subsistence of a friend or dependent, he brought under its notice a petition ' and that what this intruding pastor has against Church Patronage, from the metropolis of Scotland, signed by several in view, is not to tend the flock, but to thousand inhabitants, comprising minis-shear the golden fleece.'-' It will not,' ters and elders of the Church, and other persons most ardently attached to its doctrines and institutions. He took that opportunity of noticing an aspersion which had been cast on the petitioners, and others who held similar opinions. They had been charged, not only within the House, but in many influential quarters out of doors, with maintaining principles repugnant to the constitution of the Established Church, which had been uniformly opposed by its most distinguished cham-admitting persons to the charge of souls pion, and must lead, if triumphant, to its subversion. In justice to those who had honoured him with the care of their petitions, and against whom no accusation could be more painful to their feelings, more injurious to their character, or more unmerited by the line of conduct which they had adopted, he should not express any sentiment of his own, but submit to the

says Dr. M'Crie, 'be denied by any who
understand and love the principles of the
Church of Scotland, that patronage is a
And again, Is there a
grievance.'
minister of the Church of Scotland-I
speak not of elders - but is there a
minister, except one who has pledged
himself in the cause beyond the hope of
redemption, who will stand up in defence
of lay patronage, who will deny that it is a
grievance, or plead that it is a method of

'honourable to the individual nominated; conducive to the spiritual interests of 'the people; consistent with the due freedom of the Church Courts; or, what is of still higher moment than all of these, pleasing in the eyes of the Chief Shepherd ?' The great complaints,' says Dr. Chalmers, of our more ancient assemblies-the great burthen of Scot

6

'tish indignation-the practical grievance which, of all others, has been hitherto felt the most intolerable and galling to 'the hearts of a free and religious people, ' is the violent intrusion of ministers on 'parishes. An effectual provision against this enormity, this unfeeling outrage, 'which, in the exercise of a reckless and 'unprincipled patronage, has so often 'been perpetrated in our beloved landan outrage, by the appointment of an ungodly party, on the rights of conscience, and the religious sensibilities of

a sorely aggrieved people-a provision

the spirit of a pure and enlightened benevolence, they will infallibly regard the right of patronage as nothing more than the means of gratifying a friend, or bribing a political opponent, or rewarding the services of a useful and active adherent. This temptation is felt to be peculiarly strong in those cases where the patron has no property in the parish or does not reside in it. There is no tie of affection or interest binding him to 'the inhabitants; and if he be, as we are now supposing, a stranger to the principles and feelings of an enlarged philan

against so deep and so wide a moral in-thropy, their religious and moral im'jury as this to the families of a parish,

provement will be forgotten or wilfully I should feel the most valuable of all the disregarded amidst the calls of private 'legislative expedients or devices which friendship, or the mean and despicable 'could be proposed on the present occa-considerations of political expediency.' 'sion.' To the same purpose, it was Dr. Brown, of Langton, a divine of great maintained by another divine, Dr. Mac-learning and ability, after contending that farlan, of Greenock, in a very able and temperate pamphlet on this subject, that this system of lay patronage is utterly ' indefensible; and, in point of fact, has 'not been defended by any one, except by the vituperations of the opposite system ' of popular elections. No attempt has been made in the present day, so far 'as I know, to defend the principles of 'an absolute and unmodified patronage, at least by any man who has thought 'seriously upon this subject, or is capable of reasoning and judging with respect 'to it. By the silence of its friends, it is 'virtually admitted to be erroneous.'

"

6

the Church of Scotland never recognised the right of the people to elect their ministers as founded in Scripture, or in principles of ecclesiastical polity, added, that 'she looked upon patronage as an evil and a grievance, and submitted to it from necessity, and looked forward to the day when she hoped that it would be abolished.' He should only further trouble the House by referring to three periods in the ecclesiastical annals of Scotland, which illustrated the effects of patronage, and might enable them to apply the great Christian principle of trying a system by its fruits. The following The power is so great, the duty of a was the account given of the state of Scot'patron so arduous, and the consequences land in 1648, in the Acknowledgment of of an unwise or a corrupt election are so Sins,' printed with the Confessions of injurious, that the right of patronage Faith.' Patronage had at that time existought not to be vested as a patrimonialed, partly in conjunction with episcopacy, right in any one individual. By this and partly without it, during a long course system, the happiness of hundreds or of years, and the consequences were stated 'perhaps thousands of our fellow-men, as follow:'their religious and moral improvement, 'their usefulness as members of society, and their spiritual welfare, are placed in the hands of one person, and in so far ' as the means of salvation are concerned, ' are entirely at his disposal.' With what force, and what justice did he afterwards proceed to observe, that by possessing the right of presentation irresponsibly and as a kind of property, patrons are ' under strong temptations to employ it for 'private purposes. If they have no fear of God before their eyes, no hope of their responsibility to Him, and none of

་

1648-ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SINS. We have refused to be reformed, and have walked proudly and obstinately against the Lord, not valuing his gospel, nor submitting seeking after Christ, not studying to honour ourselves unto the obedience thereof; not him in the excellency of his person, nor employ him in the virtue of his offices, nor making conscience of public ordinances, nor private nor secret duties, nor studying to edify one another in love. Ignorance of God, and in the land. The greatest part of masters of of his son Jesus Christ, prevails exceedingly

families, amongst Noblemen, Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses, and Commons, neglect to seek God in their families, and to endeavour

the Lord was not worshipped by reading, singing, and prayer. Nobody complained of our Church Government more than our tavern

the reformation thereof; and, albeit, it hath been much pressed, yet few of our nobles and great men, even to this day, could be persuaded to perform family duties themselves, and iners, whose ordinary lamentation was, their their own persons, which makes so necessary and useful a duty to be misregarded by others of inferior rank. Nay, many of the Nobility, Gentry, and Barons, who should have been examples of godliness and sober walking unto others, have been ringleaders of excess and rioting.

It were impossible to reckon up all the abominations that are in the land; but this blaspheming of the name of God, swearing by the creatures, profanations of the Lord's Day, uncleanness, drunkenness, excess of rioting, variety of apparel, lying and deceit, railing and cursing, arbitrary and uncontrolled oppression, and grinding of the faces of the poor by landlords, and others in place and power, are become ordinary and common sins.

In 1649 this system was abolished, and ceased to be in operation for several years; and Kirkton thus described the condition of the Church at the Restoration, when a more popular system of elections, decreed by the assembly, to which the power had been delegated by Parliament, had for some time prevailed :

At the King's return every parish had a minister-every village had a school--every family almost had a Bible, as in most of this country, all their children of age could read the Scriptures, and were provided with Bibles, either by their parents, or by their ministers. Every minister was a very full professor of the reformed religion, according to the large confession of faith framed at Westminster by the divines of both nations. Every minister was obliged to preach thrice a-week, to lecture and catechise, besides other private duties, in which they abounded, according to their proportions of faithfulness and abilities. None of them might be scandalous in their conversations, or negligent in their office, so long as a Presbytery stood, and among them were many holy in conversation and eminent in gifts; nor did a minister satisfy himself unless his ministry had the seal of a divine approbation, as might witness him to be really sent of God. Indeed, in many places the Spirit seemed to be poured out with the word, both by the multitude of the sincere converts, and also by the common work of reformation upon many who never came the length of conversion.

After a communion, there were no fewer than sixty aged people, men and women, who went to school, that even then they might be able to read the Scriptures with their own eyes. I have lived many years in a parish where I never heard an oath; and you might have ridden many a mile before you heard any; also, you could not, for a great part of the country, have lodged in a family where

trade was broken, people were become so sober. Marchmont, who had been a witness and partaker of what had passed in his own time, gives his testimony to the truth of what is here narrated.

Such was the state of this Church, by irrefragable evidence, proved to have been during that important period. Dr. Chalmers says:

It was when a high-handed patronage reigned uncontrolled, and without a rival, that discord and dissent multiplied in our parishes. The seasons immediately succeeding to 1649 and 1690, when the power of negation was lodged with the people, not, however, as a force in exercise, but as a force in reserve; these were the days of our Church's greatest prosperity and glory, the seasons both of peace and righteousness. Persecution put an end to the one period, and unrestrained patronage put an end to the other.

Without adverting to the intermediate periods, what, he would ask, was the statement of Dr. M'Crie, as to the state of the Church in 1784, when the Act of Anne had been in operation for seventy-years?

From the Revolution down to the present day, never were the interests of religion sunk lower within her pale than they were in the year 1784. Truth and godliness sickened and pined away under the influence of false philosophies and a specious moderation. Socinianism had notoriously infected the minds of not a few of the clergy, and we know, from the highest authority, that some of the most active managers in ecclesiastical affairs could with difficulty be restrained from bringing forward a Motion for discarding the confessions of faith and all texts of orthodoxy-a fit Motion to accompany its predecessor, which virtually declared, in the face of the unanimous judgment of the Church of Scotland from the beginning, that patronage was no grievance! None more fit for wreathing an oppressive and degrading yoke about the necks of the people than those who would release themselves from the obligations of the most reasonable bonds, into which they had themselves voluntarily entered. But no minister will now choose to recall that melancholy era, and I scarcely think that even a ruling elder, honourable or simple, will be found so bold as to appeal to the act by which the light of the Church of Scotland was put under a bushel, and her glory turned to shame. If our rowers wish to shipwreck the vessel, of which they have obtained the management, they will steer it by the lurid

star of 1784.

He had made these extracts in vindica