Judgment of
Lord Stowell.

with, if it be a court day, otherwise on the court day then next following, at the usual and accustomed hours for hearing of causes and doing justice, then and there to answer to certain positions or articles to be objected against him for the health of his soul, and the lawful correction and reformation of his manners and excesses, and more especially for advisedly maintaining or affirming doctrine directly contrary or repugnant to the articles of religion, as by law established, or some or one of them, and against the act or statute made in the parliament holden at Westminster, in the 13th year of the reign of her late majesty Elizabeth, Queen of England, and so forth, entitled, An Act for the Ministers of the Church to be of sound Religion,' and further to do and receive as unto law and justice shall appertain, under pain of the law and contempt thereof, at the voluntary promotion of Charles Bishop, Esquire, his majesty's procurator-general. And what you shall do, or cause to be done in the premises, you shall duly certify our vicargeneral and official principal aforesaid, his surrogate, or other competent judge in this behalf, together with these presents.

The case was argued by the king's advocate, Dr. Laurence, and Dr. Swabey, in support of the proceedings, and by Mr. Stone, who appeared in person to conduct his own defence.

["Judgment. Sir William Scott.-This is a prosecution against the Reverend Francis Stone, rector of Cold Norton, originating in a citation in the name of the Bishop of London, though the bishop might be personally ignorant of the existence of such suit. It is the constant style of the court, and it is not in the power of the bishop, by any intervention on his part, to refuse the process of the court to any one who is desirous to avail himself of it, in a proper case. The suit is promoted by the procurator-general of his majesty; and, certainly, he is not an unfit person to superintend the management of a suit, which has for its object the maintenance of the established religion of the state. It is not peculiar to this court, but is common to other courts, and familiar to every day's experience, that suits for public interests are in the name and under the directions of the law officers of the crown. Mr. Stone appeared under protest, and the grounds of that protest, as set forth in objection to the citation, have been argued by his counsel (g), whose fidelity and ability he has himself fully ac

(g) ["Drs. Arnold and William Adams were employed in that part of the proceeding. Mr. Stone afterwards conducted his own defence in a written vindication of the opinions with which he was charged. The substance of his defence was, that he had done no more than fulfilled his

engagements with his ordaining bishop; that he had conformed to the church of England as by law established, and that he had not offended against the statute; and that the prosecution was unjust and oppressive."" -ED.]

knowledged. That protest was overruled (h); and it was open to the party to have appealed against that decision, or to have prayed a prohibition; but he has done neither. He has confined himself, in his defence, to a loose verbal protestation, of which it is impossible that any notice can be taken. The court, therefore, is under the necessity of administering the law, according to the nature and extent of its jurisdiction, on the offence alleged and proved. This offence is laid under the statute 13 Eliz. 'for advisedly maintaining or affirming doctrines directly contrary or repugnant to the articles of religion.' These articles are not the work of a dark age (as it has been represented); they are the production of men eminent for their erudition, and attachment to the purity of true religion. They were framed by the chief luminaries of the reformed church, with great care, in convocation, as containing fundamental truths deducible, in their judgment, from Scripture; and the legislature has adopted and established them, as the doctrines of our church, down to the present time.

["The purpose for which these articles were designed, is stated to be the avoiding the diversities of opinions, and the establishing of consent touching true religion. It is quite repugnant, therefore, to this intention, and to all rational interpretation, to contend, as we have heard this day, that the construction of the articles should be left to the private persuasion of individuals, and that every one should be at liberty to preach doctrines contrary to those which the wisdom of the state, aided and instructed by the wisdom of the church, had adopted. It is the idlest of all conceits, that this is an obsolete act; it is in daily use, viridi observantiâ,' and as much in force as any in the whole statute book, and repeatedly recommended to our attention by the injunctions of almost every sovereign who has held the sceptre of these realms. It is no business of mine, in this place, to vindicate the policy of any legislative act, but to enforce the observance of it. I cannot omit, however, to observe, that it is essential to the nature of every establishment, and necessary for the preservation of the interests of the laity, as well as of the clergy, that the preaching diversity of opinions shall not be fed out of the appointments of the established church; since the church itself would otherwise be over

(h) ["The protest objected that the citation was irregular and insufficient in calling on Mr. Stone to appear before the judge, instead of the bishop in person; and secondly, that the nature of the cause, and the quality of the promoter, were not sufficiently explained.' The court overruled these objections, holding, that the citation was in the usual form;

that it might have issued independently of the statute; and that the words of the statute before the bishop of the diocese or the ordinary' were to be interpreted according to the usual style and form of judicial proceeding in this court;' and on the second point that there was no want of due specification.""-ED.]

whelmed with the variety of opinion, which must, in the great mass of human character, arise out of the infirmity of our common nature. For this purpose, it has been deemed expedient to the best interests of Christianity, that there should be an appointed liturgy, to which the offices of public worship should conform; and as to preaching, that it should be according to those doctrines which the state has adopted, as the rational expositions of the Christian faith. It is of the utmost importance that this system should be maintained. For what would be the state and condition of public worship, if every man was at liberty to preach, from the pulpit of the church, whatever doctrines he may think proper to hold? Miserable would be the condition of the laity if any such pretension could be maintained by the clergy.

["It is said, that Scripture alone is sufficient. But though the clergy of the church of England have been always eminently distinguished for their learning and piety, there may yet be, in such a number of persons, weak and imprudent and fanciful individuals. And what would be the condition of the church, if such person might preach whatever doctrine he thinks proper to maintain? As the law now is, every one goes to his parochial church, with a certainty of not feeling any of his solemn opinions offended. If any person dissents, a remedy is provided by the mild and wise spirit of toleration, which has prevailed in modern times, and which allows that he should join himself to persons of persuasions similar to his own. But that any clergyman should assume the liberty of inculcating his own private opinions, in direct opposition to the doctrines of the established church, in a place set apart for its own public worship, is not more contrary to the nature of a national church than to all honest and rational conduct. Nor is this restraint inconsistent with Christian liberty; for to what purpose is it directed, but to ensure, in the established church, that uniformity which tends to edification; leaving individuals to go elsewhere according to the private persuasions they may entertain. It is, therefore, a restraint essential to the security of the church, and it would be a gross contradiction to its fundamental purpose to say, that it is liable to the reproach of persecution, if it does not pay its ministers for maintaining doctrines contrary to its own. I think myself bound at the same time to declare, that it is not the duty nor inclination of this court to be minute and rigid in applying proceedings of this nature, and that if any article is really a subject of dubious interpretation, it would be highly improper, that this court should fix on one meaning, and prosecute all those who hold a contrary opinion regarding its interpretation. It is a very different thing, where the authority of the articles is totally eluded; and the party deliberately declares the intention of teaching doctrines contrary to them. With these observations

on the law, I have only to inquire whether the doctrine which this gentleman has preached is contrary to the articles? That will be a very short discussion on the evidence which has been laid before the court.

["The first article states the doctrine of the Trinity; the second, the Divinity of our Saviour, and the atonement by His death and sacrifice. It is alleged, that Mr. Stone has, in a sermon, publicly impugned these doctrines, and that he has since committed these sentiments to the press. It is not necessary, that I should state the particular terms in which these fundamental tenets have been impugned. The court has heard those observations repeated more frequently than it wished, and more than could be agreeable, it hopes, to many of the auditors. Mr. Stone himself has admitted, and is ready to admit, more so perhaps than those who had the management of his defence would have advised, the total opposition of his doctrines to the articles in question. I have listened with patient attention to what he has offered this day, but I find it little more than a repetition of his sermon. It is not necessary

for me to go through the rest of the evidence, or to state the facts in detail. The preaching and the publishing are both abundantly proved.

"Then what is the duty of the court? It cannot refuse its authority to carry into effect the statutes of the land. It might proceed immediately, as suggested by the king's advocate, after the persisting in those doctrines which we have heard this day, to pronounce the sentence of the law. But the court is disposed to act with the greatest indulgence to the party, and will now content itself with admonishing him, though not encouraged to expect any effect from this admonition, to appear the next court day to revoke his errors, with an intimation that if he does not obey this admonition, the court will feel itself under the necessity of proceeding to inflict the particular penalty which the statute directs (i)."

66

[On the next court day Mr. Stone tendered a paper, which the judge characterized as "a mere promise of future silence, but no revocation of past error;" and he proceeded to say, am, therefore, under the painful necessity of considering Mr. Stone as having declined to revoke his error, and to comply with the requisition of the statute; and I must direct the registrar to record that the party has not revoked his error. It is only necessary to observe further, that by the canons of the church (k), it is prescribed, that when sentence of deprivation is to be passed, which I must declare to have been incurred by this offence, it must be pronounced by the bishop.

["The Bishop of London was then introduced, attended

(i) [1 Hagg. Cons. Rep. 424 to (k) [Can. 122.]

by the Dean of St. Paul's and two of the prebendaries; when having taken the judge's chair, he was informed by the judge of the nature of the offence, and the proceedings instituted against Mr. Stone. The bishop then stated, that he had read the depositions, and was clearly statisfied that the offence was proved; and proceeded to read and sign the sentence of deprivation, which the judge directed the registrar to record.

[“ Affirmed, upon appeal, 24th April, 1809 (1) (m).”]

Articles for Proceedings by-see Practice.

Assessment for the Repair of the Church-see Church.

Assets-see Wills.