country, much uneasiness and much debauching PART II. of conscience would have been saved, and the general machine of government would have proceeded more smoothly on its way. There is One, however, who brings good out of evil; and it seems not impossible that the very objectionableness of the arrangement, will prove the means of soon putting an end to an improper expenditure, which, had the funds been raised in a less exceptionable way, might have been protracted to an indefinite period. object of a tax the morality ment. Among the many extraordinary attempts which The specifie have been made in this controversy, one of the may affect strangest has been the endeavour to show that of its paythe circumstance of the tax being avowedly levied for a specific purpose, admitted to be sinful, makes no alteration in the moral character of paying the impost. Is there no difference in my giving my property for what I consider one of the most important of sublunary good things-the maintenance of regular civil government, and my giving my property for one of the worst of sublunary evil things the desecration of religion, and the perdition of souls? One would think every person who venerates apostolic authority must consider the question as settled. Eating flesh, even though offered in sacrifice, if the individual was unaware of this, was quite lawful. "What is sold in the shambles that eat, asking no questions for conscience' sake. But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice to idols, eat not for his sake that showed it and for conscience' sake.”* * 1 Cor. x. 28. PART II. On the same principle, let the magistrate demand money of me for the general purposes of government, and I will conscientiously give it him; but if he say, Give me money to do what is impious and immoral, I cannot, without sin, give it, though, without sin, I may suffer it to be taken from me.* War taxes. Tax for the support of idolatry. On this ground all war taxes, i. e. all taxes for the support of a particular war, are objectionable. In many cases, wars have been obviously unjust. In the estimation of some of the best and wisest men the world has ever seen, all wars are necessarily unjust. I cannot see how any man can consistently pay taxes levied avowedly for the support of an unjust war; and I am sure, a very great part of the subjects of any government are ill fitted to form a true judgment with respect to the character of a particular war. It is far wiser to impose general taxes: for in proportion as men become more intelligent and more conscientious, the difficulty in obtaining payment for such taxes, as are levied for objects respecting the lawfulness of which doubts are entertained, except by means calculated to make a government odious, will increase. Perhaps, however, the present system of providing for the expense of belligerent operations, by specific taxes, may be permitted to continue, and the growing difficulty of collecting such taxes may be one of the means to be employed by the Prince of Peace, to put an end to war among mankind. A tax for the support of idolatry, is another in * Vide Note XXXI. stance in point. This is the case put by Dr PART II. Watts in his excellent "Essay on Civil Power in Things Sacred :" "If a heathen prince impose a tenth penny on all his subjects, as a tax to maintain heathen worship, would a Christian willingly pay it, and think himself bound in conscience to do it?" The good Doctor puts it in the interrogative form, under the impression that the question could be answered only in one way. Well acquainted as he was with the strange tortuosities of the human mind under the power of prejudice,† he little dreamed that just about a hundred years after the publication of his valuable tract, a Christian man, denying like him the lawfulness of Ci * A New Essay on Civil Power in Things Sacred, or an Enquiry after an Established Religion consistent with the Just Liberties of Mankind, and practicable under every form of Civil Government. Works, vol. vi. p. 24. +"The doctrine of Prejudices" is discussed with great judgment in the third chapter of the Second Part of Dr Watts' Treatise on Logic. The following picture is very forcibly sketched. Every body, but the original (who lives in our age as well as in Dr Watts') will recognise it. By what means soever the dogmatist came by his opinions, whether by his senses or his fancy, his education or his own reading, he believes them all with the same assurance that he does a mathematical truth; he has scarcely any mere probabilities that belong to him; every thing with him is certain and infallible: every punctilio in religion is an article of his faith, and he answers all manner of objections by a sovereign contempt. Persons of this kind are seldom convinced of any mistake. A full assurance of their own notions makes all the difficulties on their side vanish so entirely, that they think every point of their belief is written with sunbeams, and wonder how any one should find a difficulty in it. They are amazed that learned men should make a controversy of what is to them so perspicuous, and indubitable. The lowest rank of people, both in learned and in vulgar life, is very subject to this obstinacy."-Logic, P. ii. C. 3. § 6. 1. Works, vol. v. p. 105. PART II. Vil Establishments of religion, should publicly declare that were the self-called Christian government of Britain to impose a tax for the maintenance of the most impure and cruel of all heathen idolatries, he would consider it his duty to pay it, and would cheerfully do so as a piece of obedience to Jesus Christ. Most men would consider this as rather an extraordinary way of "honouring the Lord with his substance." An opinion like this is in no danger of making converts, except among those who have a very strong predisposition to receive it; and on such persons experience seems to teach that any thing like reasoning is thrown away. Tax for the support of a civil estab religion. This The limitation of the obligation of the law of lishment of tribute, however, which at this time has the strongest claims on our attention, is that which, in the estimation of many, exists, in the case of taxes imposed for the support of a civil establishment of a particular modification of religion. question, in its own nature highly interesting, involving in it many most important fundamental principles of religion, psychology, morals, government, and political economy, is peculiarly interesting at present, as its right settlement is necessary to the safe quiet of many consciences, and may have a most powerful influence on the ultimate arrangement of the great practical measures, which, sooner or later, must be taken in this country and throughout Europe, in reference to the complete disseveration of Church and State. The religious establish ments of this country. Every body knows that in this country two forms of Christianity-that embodied in the Articles and Liturgy of the Church of England, PART II. and that embodied in the Westminster Confession, Catechisms, and Presbyterial form of Church government-have received the formal sanction of the civil authorities of the empire,-the first in England and Ireland, and the second in Scotland, -and public provision has been made for the support of the religious buildings, and ministers, necessary for the performance of public worship according to these forms. That provision chiefly arises from a tax on land, under the name of tithe or teind, and in some places, as in this city, from a tax on a certain class of the inhabitants-rated according as they reside within certain limits, and occupy houses paying a certain rent.* founders. The great body of those who were most actively Views of their engaged in settling the two Protestant Establishments, were, as every one knows who has studied the history of this country, not chiefly actuated by religious principles-they sought secular ends in a secular spirit. Even the truly religious men, who took part in these transactions, had their minds very imperfectly, if at all, enlightened in the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom, and in the proper limits of civil dominion. Glad to be delivered from a spiritual tyranny which had converted the secular power into its slave, they too readily gave that power an authority, in reference to the church, to which it had no just claim, and thankfully received as favours what, if they had been better informed, they would have resisted as usurpations of Christ's authority. When dissent * Vide Note XXXII. |