'A. C. 1792.

While the Pamphlets and thefe Reports were thus 'fet about, Mr. Hoadly thought that it became him to affert the Queen's Title, by juftifying the Revolution, out of which it rifes. But what an Outcry was rais'd on this, that one durft difturb the Progrefs of a wic'ked Opinion, that was visibly defign'd to overturn the Government: And yet he afferted nothing, but what the Cooncil for the Prifoner did all fully and plainly · own, That in the Cafes of extream Neceffity, an Exception to the Doctrine was to be admitted, and that that was the Cafe at the Revolution.

• But as thefe Notions have been long let run among us; fo they have appeared in a moft violent and un• guarded Manner, ever fince the Attempt of the Pre⚫ tender, and more of late, fince the Preliminaries upon ⚫ the Overtures for a Peace, feem to extinguish their

Hopes. What Sermons on this Head are preach'd in ⚫ this City, at Affizes, at Bath, and at many Ĉathedrak! • Furious Men fit themselves with fome hot Sermons, ⚫ which they carry about from place to place, to poifon the Nation. This has not only the viffible Effect defigned by it, of fhaking many in their Allegiance to the Queen, and in their adhering to the Proteftant Suceffion; but it has a curfed Effe& on many others, on whom this their Defign does not succeed.

· I am very fenfible there is a great deal of Impiety ⚫ and Infidelity now (pread thro' the Nation: This gives every good Mind all poffible Horror; but I muft tell your Lordships, on what a great Part of it is founded; for fince my Conversation with Wilmot, Earl of Roche• abefter, I have had many Occafions to difcourfe with • Perfons tainted with those wicked Principles, and I do affirm it, that the greateft Prejudice these Perfons have at Religion, at the Clergy, and at the Pablick Worship • of God, is this, that they fay, They fee Clergy-men ⚫ take Oaths, and use all Prayers, both Ordinary and • Extraordinary for the Government, and yet in their A&tings and Difcourfes, and of late in their Sermons, they fhew vifibly that they look another way; from whence they conclude, They are a Mercenary Sort of People without Conscience.

I hope there are not many that are fo corrupted and fo fcandalous: I am fure I know a great many that are far otherwife, who Preach, fpeak and A&t as they • Swear and Pray; but thofe who act in another way, are Noifie and Impudent, and fo bring an Imputation on the whole Body; and unless an effectual Stop is

put to this Miftemper, it is not poffible to forefee all the ⚫ill Confequences that may follow upon it.

I have, I am afraid, wearied your Lordships; but I thought it was neceffary, once for all, to enlarge copi oully on this Argument: And now to come clofe to the Article, and the Sermon, for I meddle not at all with the Person of the Man; Whatever general Expreffions ⚫ might very well have been used, in fetting forth Paffive• Obedience and Non-Refiftance before the Revolution, be

cause odious Cafes ought not to be fuppofed, and there⚫fore are not to be named; yet fince Refiftance was used ⚫ in the Revolution, and that the late King invited all the Subjects to join with him, which was in them certainly Refiftance; and fince the Lawfulness of the Revolution is fo much controverted, the condemning all Refiance in fuch crude and general Terms, is certainly a Condemning the Revolution: And this is further aggrava⚫ted from thofe Limitations on our Obedience, in an Act · pafs'd foon after the Revolution, by which, in Cafe our • Princes turn Papifts, or marry Papifts, the Subje&s are in exprefs Words, difcharg'd from their Allegiance to them. Certainly this puts an End to the Notion of * Non-Refiftance in any Cafe, or on any Pretence whatfoever: For thefe Reasons, I think the firft Article of this Impeachment, is both well grounded, and fully made out.

A noble Peer having faid fomething in favour of Dr. Sacheverell, and reflected on fome Bishops Voting contrary

A. C. 179000

to their Doctrines, the Bishop of Oxford took from thence The Bishop Occafion to speak on the other Side. In the firft place of Oxford's he laid down two Premiffes, IA, That Government Speech. ⚫ in general was, in its Original Inftitution, defigned for the Good of the whole Body; For Men were not form'd into Socities, only to be Subjects of the arbitrary Wills, ⚫ the flavish Inftruments in the gratifying the Ambitions, or other corrupt Defigns, of any one or more Men; but for the Safety and Property of the whole Communicy. 2dly, That in the Holy Scriptures there's no Specification of any one particular Form of Government to which all Nations and Bodies of Men, in all Times and Places ought to be fabject; nor are there fuch exact Accounts of the Extent of the Power of the • Governour, or the Obedience and Submiffion of the Govern'd, as can reach to all Cafes that may poffibly happen. He urged, That the moft zealous Contenders for the absolute Power of the Prince, and gnconditional Submiffion of the Subject, found ⚫ them

A. C.

themselves upon the 5th Commandment, Honour thy 17. Father and Mother, which they expound as comprehending Political as well as Natural Parents: But that if a Parent, in a Frenzy, Fit of Drunkenness, or Paffion, fhall attempt to kill his innocent Son, the latter may grapple with him, and difarm him; That the Prime Law of Nature, of Self-Prefervation, will justifie him in it; And then why may not the fame Law juftify the • Political Child, the Body of the People, in defending 'their Pilitical Life, i e. their Conftitution, againft plain ' and avowed Attempts of the Political Parents, utterly to deftroy it? He allow'd, That in all Governments there is an abfolute Power lodg'd fomewhere; But contended, That with us, That Power is lodg'd in the Legislature; to which purpose he quoted Sir Thomas Smith, de Repub. Angl. who fays, That the Parliament gives Forms of Succeffion to the Crown. He own'd, that the Executive Power with us is lodg'd with the Prince ; That those Commiffion'd by him, ating according to 'their Commiffion, and within those Laws, with the Execution whereof he and they are trufted, are irrefiftible; That the Perfon of the Prince is always inviolable, 'fo that nothing less than a total Subverfion of the Confti'tution can juftify any forcible Refiftance of his Subjects

But that if in a legal Monarchy, where the Laws en' acted by common Consent of Prince and People, are the Measures both of his Government, and of their • Obedience, that limit his Power as well as fecure their 'Rights and Properties; the Prince hall change this • Form of Government into an abfolute Tyranny, set aside thofe Laws, and set up an Arbitrary Will: When the Cafe is plain, and when all Applications and Attempts of ' other kinds prove unfuccefsful; if then the Nobles and • Commons join together in Defence of their ancient Con. ftitution, Government and Laws, He could not call them • Rebels.

Several other Peers, particularly the Earl of Wharton, the Duke of Devonshire, the Lord Chancellor, and the Lords Summers and Halifax, spoke in Vindication of the late Revolution, and maintain'd, that in extraordinary Cafes Refiftance is necessary and lawful; and concluded, that the Commons had made good the firft Article. The Archbishop of York, the Dukes of Leeds and Buckingham, the Earls of Nottingham, Rochefer, and Anglefea; the Lords Gernfey, North and Grey, and Carmarthen, and the Bishops of London, Rockefter, and Bath and Wells, who fpoke on the other fide, declared, They never read fuch a Piece of Madness and Non

Senfe,

fenfe, as Dr. Sacheverell's Sermon preach'd at St. Paul's; but did not think bim Guilty of a Misdemeanour: The Earl of Anglefea adding, He never knew Nonsence to be a Crime. The D. of L -s, who made a very long Speech, own'd he had a great Share in the late Revolution; but faid he never thought things would have gone fo far as to fettle the Crown on the Prince of Orange, whom he had often heard fay, He had no fuch Thoughts bimfelf. The Bishop of Bath and Wells allow'd what the Bishop of Oxford had advanc'd about the Neceffity and Legality of Refiftance ia fome Cafes; but was of Opinion, that Doctrine ought to be kept from the Knowledge of the People, who were naturally too, too apt to refift; and that the oppofite Doctrine ought rather to be maintain'd and enfore'd. After a long Debate, which lafted till paft Nine in the Evening, this Queftion was propos'd, That the Commons have made good their firft Article of Impeachment againft Henry Sacheverell, Doctor in Divinity And after further De bate thereupon, The Queftion was put, whether this Queftion fhould be now put, which being Refolved in 'the Affirmative, Forty-Eight Lords enter'd their Dif fent, Because they conceived, there were no Reflections 'therein contained on the Memory of the late King Wil liam, nor the Revolution and that there was no Of'fence charged therein upon Dr. Sacheverell against any ⚫ known Law of the Land.

་

A. C. 17.

• Then the main Queftion was put, That the Com- The Lords mons have made good their firft Article of Impeachment refolv'd that against Henry Sacheverell, Doctor in Divinity, which being 'alfo Refolved in the Affirmative, several Lords enter'd 'the following Proteft.

Diffentient,

the Commons bave made good the first Article.

Several Peers pro

Because by the Laws of the Land, the Laws of Parliament, and the inherent Right of Peerage, every teft against Peer is to Judge for himself, both of the Fact, as well that Refoluas of the Law, and can't be precluded from it, by any tion. Majority which indeed muft determine the Cafe in Refpect of the Criminal, but never did, nor can preclude any Lord from Voting, the Party accus'd, Guilty or not Guilty of the Fact, as well as of the Crime of fuch • Fa&;

·

Speech,

Weymouth,
Stawell,
Gernsey,
Beaufort,
Denbigh,

R. Ferrers,
North & Greg,

Osborne,
Abington.

The next Day the Lords took into Confideration the fecond Article of the Commons Impeachment againft Dr. Sacheverell, and the Bishop of Lincoln open'd the Debate March 17. with a fine Speech, wherein he gave an Account of the Debates Delign of a Comprehenfion fet on Foot, towards the End in the Houfe of King James IId's Reign, by the late Dr. Sancraft, of Lords a-then Archbishop of Canterburry, and prompted by the bout the 2d, moft Eminent Divines of the Church of England; par3d, and 4th Articles. ticularly Dr. Patrick, late Bishop of Ely, and the prefent The Bp. of Archbishop of York, and Bishops of London and Ely; Lincoln's which was, To impower, and if poffible to enforce our • Difcipline, to review and enlarge our Liturgy, by Cor. reding of fome, Things, and adding of Others; and by leaving fome few indifferent Ceremonies, in order to ' reconcile Diffenters to the Church. That Dr. Sachbeve • rell had made a ftrange and false Representation of this Defign, which was again fet on Foot, and openly efpoùfed by K. William and Q Mary, but which unhappily "miscarried; and then proceeded to offer to their Lordfhips, fuch Paffages (out of Dr. Sacheverell's Sermon) as did plainly and fully make out the fecond Article of the Commons Impeachment; concluding, that fomewhat fhould be done to put a Stop to fuch Preaching, as if ⚫ not timely corrected may kindle fuch Heats and Animofities among us, as may truly endanger both our Church and State. As for the Preacher Himfelf; I am, said be, very willing to come into any Measures of Favour to Him, that are Confittent with your Lordships Honour and Juftice; and will answer the Ends of the Impeach· ment that has been brought before Us againft Him. The Bishop of Norwich enforc'd what the Bishop of • Lincoln had faid about Toleration; Inveigh'd against the The Bp. of Infolence of Dr. Sackeverell, who had arraign'd ArchNorwich's bishop Grindall, (one of the moft Eminent Reformers in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth) as a perfidious Prelate, for favouring and tolerating the Genevian Difcipline; Check'd his Prefumption, in taking upon him, in bis Sermon, to prefcribe Rules to his Superiors, by telling them, when they are to thunder out their Anathe • mas against Schifmaticks; fhew'd that the proper Ufe of thofe Spiritual Weapons is to fupprefs Vice, Immorality ⚫ and Prophaneness among the Members of the Church;

Speech.

• and