rage and increase, than check adultery, -Lord Beauchamp obferved, that there had been a bill of a fimilar tendency brought into that House some few years fince; which was fuffered to lie on the table unnoticed for three weeks, and would not have been at all attended to, had not a Rev. Prelate sent for an Hon. Gentleman, now no more, who had a feat in that House, and requested him to move for its being read; and after a full difcuffion the bill was rejected. The principle of that bill and this were pretty much alike; they both went to punish the women, and not the male fex, who, generally fpeaking, were moft to blame. Exclufive of this objection, his Lordship faid there was another which ftruck him very forcibly respecting the prefent bill: It went not only to punish the offending woman, but if that woman happened to be with child, to punish the unoffending iffue, by bastardizing it when it came in to the world. This effect of the bill he reprobated as most unjust and inhuman.

Lord Nugent alledged, that the real caufe of the progrefs of adultery, was that abominable ftatute, the marriageact, a bill that ftruck at the root of perfonal freedom, and which was firft brought into parliament to tickle the vanity of fome Noble Lords in the other Houfe. His Lordship, in a very ludi crous and laughable manner, examined the effects of the marriage-act, declaring it to be a wretched piece of policy, tending to prevent an union of willing hearts, and to hinder young girls from giving their hands to fuch hearty young men as they could like and love, in order that miferly parents might couple youth with age, beauty and deformity, health and difeafe. To the marriage-act, and that aJone, he attributed all the family-unea fineffes, all the quarrels between man and wife, and all the difobedience of children to their parents, that had been fo remarkably confpicuous fince the bill into a ftatute. He compomend the ladies of England, by faying that he was fure there were more good women, more chale wives, and inore happy mothers in this kingdom, than in the whole world, Ireland only excepted [a loud laugh]; and declared, that, much to the honour of Ireland, he had found upon inquiry that there never had been but two inftances of divorce before the Irish parliament.

Another member faid, that, in the o

pinion of very intelligent men, the mar riage-act contributed to the prefervation of domeftic peace, and was conducive to the increafe of marriages, inasmuch as it was a fecurity to thofe men who married, that their children were not likely to be made a prey to needy and defign ing adventurers. He attributed the bad conduct of wives, chiefly to the ridicu lous doctrine of recrimination; defcant ed on this matter very scientifically; an obferved, that if women proved to hav committed adultery, were rendered lia ble to forfeit their jointure, as well a their dower, it might poffibly operate i a preventive to adultery.

Mr James Luttrell oppofed the bil because it aimed chiefly at the weak fex, and did not at all go to punish t men. He took occafion to draw a con parifon between the conduct of mini refpecting America, and the tendency the bill refpecting women; declarin that the quarter it came from render it in his eyes liable to fufpicion: had been brought in by those two wort prelates who had done themselves much honour by oppofing measures ten ing to promote the further effufion human blood, he fhould have thought was founded in meeknefs, Chriftian and juftice; with neither of which principles of the bill as it then ftood, peared to be compatible.

On the 4th of May, 'the day appoi ed for the second reading, the Hon. F derick Montague spoke of the neceßt of proceeding on the bill from a com rative view of the number of divorces the prefent and former times; obfervii that from the Reformation to the beg ning of the late reign, there had be only fifteen divorces on the records parliament; during that reign there h been twenty-two; from the commen ment of the prefent reign to the pref feffion, there had been forty-two; a the table of the other Houfe was n covered with applications of that fa beides thofe paffing through that Hoa From all which he urged the neceflity a law for the prevention of a crime whi fo much disturbed domeftic peace and vil fociety.

Abel Moyfey, Efq; faid, that nate and reafon pointed out the mode of p nifhing the female in this cafe: if the di ficulty and hardthip was theirs, fo w. the palm of virtue and honour; the wanted no other guard from the law

tha

loud laugh]; and he could venture to affert, that no Atheistical publication had appeared in this country for twenty years paft. Pure Deifm had indeed made a rapid progrefs: but who were the eminent writers on this fubject? Not Diffenting minifters, but clergymen of the established church, of the church of England; of which, Sir, I am a member [another loud laugh], as well as the Hon. member; but I do not, like him, apprehend any danger either to the church or the state from granting relief to the Proteftant Diffenters, who are justly intitled to it, and cannot be denied it with any decency.

Sir Roger Newdigate enlarged upon the danger of the church, and the perfecuting fpirit of the Prefbyterians; and afked with what face gentlemen could apply for relief for Diffenters, who, where they had any power, would not grant any to Epifcopalians? The conduct of America was a proof of what he faid; for scarce a fhip arrived from that country which did not bring home fome martyr to the caufe of the church. He inftanced the cafe of a clergyman, a reJation of his, who was driven from a very good living for not praying for the Congrefs the clergyman, he faid, would have temporifed, and omitted the King's name in the church-fervice: but that would not do; he fhould pray for the Congrefs. He refused to do it, and was driven from the country.

Sir Adam Ferguffon denied that the Prefbyterians were intolerant. In ScotJand they allowed the Epifcopalians, who are Diffenters there, the greateft toleration; and, in Edinburgh, the highchurch fervice was performed with no lefs fplendor than in London. In America, the acts alluded to by the worthy Baronet did not proceed from a spirit of intolerance, but from the policy of the new state.

Sir John Goodricke thought it was the propereft time of any to grant the relief requested union was much wanted throughout the kingdom, and this would promote it, instead of caufing any heats or animofities; they fubfifted now, for want of fuch a measure.

The motion paffed without a divifion; the Houfe went directly into a committee, Mr Montague in the chair, and a refolution was made, that leave fhould be given to bring in the bill.

This refolution having been reported, March 17. Sir William Bagot moved to

poftpone the bringing in the bill for four months; infifting, that it was dangerous to attempt giving fuch general toleration at a time when the nation was fo critically circumftanced; and inftanced the mischiefs committed in Scotland on the apprehenfion of a repeal of the penal. ftatutes against Roman-Catholics. He contended, that fuch of the Diffenting minifters as were truly Chriftians, were against the prefent bill, being fearful that the caufe of Christianity would fuffer by the opportunity which would thereby be given to Methodifts, and an infinite num ber of other improper teachers, to spread fchifm and disorder through the mind of the people.

Lord Lewisham wifhed to know wha hardships had been of late imposed o Diffenters; and he undertook to thew from the preamble of the act of Charles II which impofed the reftraints on Diffent ers, that they tended to prevent diff mination, not only of fchifm, but treafon and rebellion, as appeared upo the face of the act.

Mr T. Townshend asked, if there wi fo effential a connection between o church-establishment and our conftit tion, that any alteration in one muft danger the other, how could the fam legal government fupport two diftin church-eftablishments, that of Englan and that of Scotland, which differed very effentially from one another?

Sir George Saville went more met phyfically into the fubject, to fhew ho little the theoretical opinions or inte pretations of particular articles or my fteries of faith could affect the gover ment of our ftate. He marked the i decency as well as the abfurdity of pening the door of toleration to fom Diffenters, and telling others, we coul not think of letting them pass; and å concluded, by declaring it to be his q pinion, that if fingularity between of church and conftitution was really ne ceffary, our church would infallibly ap proach nearer to the liberal conftruction of our government, in proportion as i approached towards univerfal and unli mited toleration.

On the queftion put, the number were, for poftponing the motion 6, gainst poftponing it 76.

The following petition paffed unani moufly in full convocation at Oxford March 29. and was prefented to the Commons, next day, by Lord North, Chancellor of the univerfity.

"Sheweth

"Sheweth, That whereas bill is now depending in parliament, intit. led, A bill for the further relief of Proteft ast Diffenting minifters and schoolmasters; and whereas the faid bill does not provide, that such minifters and schoolmafters fhall make any profession whatever of their belief in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, or even the authority of the holy fcriptures, as contain ing a revelation of the will of God; and whereas, without fome fuch provifion, Diffenting minifters and schoolmafters of all denominations will be at liberty to preach any doctrines, and inftil into young minds any principles, how repugDant foever to the Chriftian faith: We, therefore, the Chancellor, Mafters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford, en trufted, by the very nature of our inftitution, with the education of youth in the principles of true religion; friends, at the fame time, to toleration, fo far as the fame may be confiftent with the interefts of Chriftianity, and the fecurity of our happy establishment in church and fate; do humbly pray, that fuch bill, which we cannot but regard as injurious and dangerous to both, may not be permitted to pass into a law under the unlimited form in which it is now propo

fed."

In the committee, April 20. Lord North expreffed the warmeft approbation of the laudable objects which the bill had in view, a relief of many very loyal and worthy fubjects; and he thought that defirable purpose might be effected without roufing the apprehenfions of any members of the Proteftant church of England. As the bill at prefent food, he confeffed, it gave room for fome fufpicions; gentlemen were allowed to preach and teach at schools, under the immediate protection of magiftrates, from an idea, that they were Proteftant Diffenters, and confequently Chriftians, without ever giving any fort of account of themfelves, or without their congregations or pupils fo much as knowing, but as they fhould be able to difcover by their fyftems and practices, whether they were in fact Chriftians or not. This furely the Diffenters themfelves could not with for; their principles and doctrines were not by any means fuch as would warrant the idea: it was therefore moft certainly to the manifeft intereft of the Diffenters, that fome criterion should be eftablished, by which a

judgement might be formed of their tenets; fome method devised, by which the world might know, that the religion we were about to tolerate, was not repugnant to, but altogether compatible with, nay a strong supporter of Christianity and vitrue. The propofition he was about to make, would, he conceived, answer this purpose, as well as give every degree of fatisfaction to that refpectable body of men, the Chancellor, Profeffors, and Students of the Univerfity of Oxford, whofe approbation, he thought, ought, on this occafion, not to be totally difregarded.-There had been, his Lordship remarked, two bills of a fimilar nature to that before the committee, already paffed the House of Commons, but both of them were rejected in the Upper Houfe. What might be their Lordships motives for acting in that manner, he could not take upon him to fay; the most probable fuggeftion was, that thofe gentlemen whofe functions placed them in fuch a fituation as to make it their duty more immediately to watch over every fpecies of religion exercifed in this kingdom, were fomewhat jealous of the measures pointed out by fuch bills, and did not think they would promote the caufe of Chriftianity. If this was the cafe, which, in his opinion, was most probable, he could not but think, that those objections would, in a great measure, be removed, if not totally deftroyed, by the amendment which he would take the liberty of offering: for he could not think, that the Upper Houfe meant to difcourage toleration, when properly founded; they only defired, as far as from circumftances he could judge of their opinion, to prevent an indifcriminate exercise of fuch forms of worship as might be repugnant to Chriftianity, and to that mode of religion which the Diffenters were defirous of preferving in the utmost purity. He would therefore move, that perfons claiming a protection, and the privilege of exerciting their religion as Proteftant Diffenters, under the prefent act of parliament, and who fhould refufe to take the oath prescribed by the act of the ift of William and Mary, fhould take the following oath, viz. "That they were Chriftians, and Proteftant Diffenters; that they believed in the Old and New Teftament, and in the revelations contained therein; and alfo in the thirtynine articles of the church of England;

by

by which alone their religious inftructions were to be governed." This declaration would, his Lordship faid, remove every apprehenfion of improper perfons being tolerated by the prefent bill, whilft it would afford that relief to our valuable fellow-fubjects the Proteftant Diffenters, which juftice and policy fo loudly demanded of us.

Mr Croft feconded the motion, and was entirely of opinion with the Noble Lord, that fuch à declaration ought to ftand part of the present bill, and to be a condition under which the terms it contained fhould be granted.

Sir Harry Houghton objected to the Noble Lord's propofition, which, if adopted, would render the prefent bill nugatory, at leaft take off a great part of the merit which that Houfe would otherwise have in paffing fuch an act. Befides, the amendment itself was entirely useless; it was creating a difficulty, without the leaft profpect, or indeed poffibility, of producing any good effect. Were not the acts which would ftill remain upon our books, fufficient to reftrain Atheists and Deifts from propagating their doctrines? or did gentlemen imagine, that fuch defcriptions of men would, after the prefent bill fhould have paffed, have a fanction for promulgating their opinions? That could not furely be the cafe but even if it was, fo far from that making an obftacle to the bill in its present form, it ought rather to be an excitement to the Houfe to pafs it; for he would ever maintain, that toleration, not partial and limited toleration, if he might use the expreffion, but a general unreftrained permiflion to all orders and fectaries of religion, to think and act for themselves, and to worship the Deity as should be moft agreeable to their own ideas of propriety [40. 674.], was a political maxim, which we ought to adopt. Upon the whole, he would oppofe the amendment, as well upon the grounds he had just stated, as from a conviction, that no human laws could prevent any perfon from impofing upon the legislature; and that a mind which was not governed by religion, could not be awed by the terrors of an oath.

Mr Wilkes was alfo against the propofition offered by the Noble Lord; it carried with it fo much the appearance of that prejudice and illiberality, which once he knew to have exifted in this country, but which, he then hoped, was

buried in oblivion: in this hope, however, he found himfelf deceived; and the Noble Lord, as if fearful that any o ther person than a Diffenter should have protection under the prefent bill, had introduced fuch a clog to the bill as would inevitably confine its utility to a very narrow compafs. What was the declaration which the Noble Lord had propofed? It was, That every perfon claiming protection under the bill, fhould profefs to believe in the Old and New Teftaments, and the revelations contained therein. This, he would venture to say, was utterly impoffible for any man to do. The whole of the fcripture, no one he was fure would argue, contained the revelations of the Deity. Solomon's Songs, for inftance, what revelation did they contain? They were, indeed, pretty poetry; but that was all. Many other parts of the fcripture were equally exceptionable. But yet the whole of it was to be implicitly believed! With refpect to the Articles, the Creed of St Athanafius, &c. he was fure very few of the former, and very little of the latter, could be underftood; but the whole of them must noté withstanding be believed, before our fel low-fubjects could obtain that protection to which they were fo juftly intitled; protection, he faid, for he would never call that a privilege which one perfon had a right to demand of another. The caufe of Chriftianity and religion he was ever anxious to defend; but he thought that it was the duty of every man to chufe fuch a mafter and teacher for his children, as might be likely to inculcate into their minds true notions of Chriftianity, without confidering what fpecific form of religion he profeffed. A Noble Lord, (Lord Shelburne), whose judgement and integrity were fuch as rendered him very worthy of imitation, had fet this example of liberality, by committing his fon to the care and inftruction of a very worthy Diffenting minifter, who, as well as many other gentlemen of that perfuafion, did honour to the principles which they efpoufed.

Sir George Yonge was against the amendment; he thought it unneceffary, as the general tenor of the bill was fufficient to defcribe the perfons who were intended to be benefited by it. It was, by the title of it, confined to Proteftant Diffenters; and by that term, he under food, was meant thofe who protested gainft fuch of the fuperftitious tenets and