deacon's court respectively, or recorded at the said General or Quarter Sessions; the register or clerk of the peace whereof respectively is hereby required to register the same, and to give certificate thereof to such person as shall demand the same; for which there shall be no greater fee or reward taken than the sum of six-pence. The attention of the Legislature has been called to this subject by Lord Sidmouth, who lately made a motion, in the House of Peers, concerning the number of licences granted under the Toler ation Act. That statute (said his Lordship) cannot be too much appreciated for the blessings which its liberality had conferred upon society +. The object of his motion would, he trusted, meet with equal approbation from those people who enjoyed the benefit of that statute, as it could do from those who espoused the doctrines of the Established Church. Although he was one of those who hailed the blessing of toleration, yet, in reverting to the principle and meaning of that act, so far as it ncerned the granting of licences to those who dissented from the doc trines of the Church of England, it was very evident considerable abuses had been practised under its authority. It would be admitted by all, that some of those who applied for these licences, did so for very improper purposes. Thus it happened; many, particularly at certain periods, obtained the licence of a preacher, merely to free themselves from those claims which their country had on their services, and to which others were so generally liable. After animadverting on this point, he concluded by moving, "That a return be made from the Quarter Sessions of each county in England and Wales, of all Licenses granted under the Toleration Act, from the year 1780 to 1809, specifying the grants of each year.” Lord Harrowby rose in favour of the motion; but he would propose, as an amendment, That the returns should be made to a still more remote period; he would propose the motion should include this king's reign, and that 1760 be substituted for 1780. + The general benefit of toleration was finely expressed by the late Lord Mansfield, in a speech made in the House of Lords, on the termination of a long-contested cause between the City of London and a Mr. Evans, who, being a Dissenter, refused to serve the office of sheriff, or to fine £600 for not serving it, being ineligible, as every Dissenter is rendered by the Corporation Act (see page 368). The Mansion-House had been partly built, it is said, by the fines extorted from Dissenters who, it was expected, would not serve. 66 Conscience," said his Lordship, is "not controulable by human laws, nor amenable to human tribunals. Persecution, or attempts to force Conscience, are only calculated to make hypocrites or martyrs. What bloodshed and confusion have been occasioned from the reign of Hen. IV. when the first penal statutes were enacted, down to the Revolution in this kingdom, by laws made to force conscience! There is nothing certainly more unreasonable, more inconsistent with the rights of human nature, more contrary to the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion, more iniquitous and unjust, more impolitic, than persecution." His Lordship then refers to the penal by-law of the city, which contradicted the Toleration Act, the law of the land, and adds, "It was made in some year of the reign of the late king, I forget which; but it was about the time of building the Mansion-House." The Archbishop of Canterbury professed his high regard for the Toleration Act. From his own experience, in two dioceces, he was induced to believe the Dissenters had increased very much, particularly In the last few years. One cause he conceived to be, the want of churches to contain the people; for, the fact was, our population had far outgrown our machinery. He conceived the noble Viscount'sobject was, rather to aid another measure for bettering the situation of the clergy, than to found any direct proceeding upon the return. Earl Grosvenor expressed his thanks to the noble Viscount for having brought forward the present motion. The Lord Chancellor had a great regard for the Toleration Act; but the circumstances alluded to had often occupied his consideration. He was fully persuaded, many obtained those licences who, at the time they obtained them, did not mean to preach, but made use of that expedient merely for the purpose of avoiding those duties which every truly religious man would be anxious to discharge. The motion was then put, and unanimously agreed to. It is a fact not to be disputed, that some base persons have availed themselves of the act in question, and have entered their names at the Quarters Sessions as preachers, who never did preach, nor intend to preach, but shamefully assumed the charac ter of ministers, merely for the purpose of obtaining an easy exemp tion from serving on the militia. This is certainly a gross abuse; but it has already been corrected, in a considerable degree, by several late acts respecting the militia. In those acts clauses have been inserted, which refuse the exemption to a licenced teacher, unless he be really the minister of a congregation . It is certain that several magistrates have refused licences to Various applicants. It has sometimes been done on the ground of youth, though no age is specificed in the act. Others have been refused, because they were not regularly educated for the ministry; others, beoause they were engaged in trade, or begause they were not ministers of particular congregations; but, as the law now stands, the magistrates are obliged to tender the oaths, &c. by whomsoever demanded, to cause the same to be recorded, and to order a certificate, or be liable to a mandamus to shew cause why they refused. An instance occurred, not long since, in the city of London, where licences were demanded by several persons; and, it is reported, in a very indecent and improper manner; but the magistrates granted them. Indeed, that the justices at the Quarter Sessions are obliged to grant licences, appears clearly from the Act of Toleration (see page 371). and the act made in the 10th year of Queen Ann, entitled "An Act for preserving the Protestant Religion, for confirming the In the Local Militia Act, passed June 30, 1808, the exemption of preachers is tus expressed: "And be it further enacted, That no licenced teacher of any congregation, in holy orders, or pretended holy orders, and not carrying on any other trade, or exercising any other occupation for his livelihood, except that of schoolmaster, shall be liable to be ballotted for the Local Militia." Toleration Act, and for supplying the defects thereof," the justices, at the General Session are required to tender and administer the oaths, &c. to such minister, upon his offering himself to make the same, and thereof to keep a register." It has been doubted whether an exemption from certain burdens was ever intended by the statute, except to persons who are really ministers of separate congregations. The words in the Act of Toleration are, "That every teacher or preacher in holy orders, or pretended holy orders, that is a minister, preacher, or teacher of a congregation*; but the words in the statute of 19 Geo. III. c. 44, are, Every person in holy orders, or pretended holy orders, or pretending to holy orders, BEING a preacher or teacher of any congregation," &c. From hence, some conclude that the act was not intended to relieve any persons who are not "preachors or teachers of congregations;" that is, as they interpret the words, "preachers or teachers chosen by, or resident among, particular congregations," in opposition to occasional or itinerant teachers; but, in answer to this, it may be observed, that the clause just quoted from the 19th of Geo. III. refers, it should seem, exclusively to those who scruple to subscribe the 39 Articles; for the preamble of that act states, that it is" for the giving case to scrupulous persons," - persons who scrupled to subscribe the Articles; and that for every such (scrupulous) person, pretending to holy orders, being a teacher of any congregation, the declaration before quoted is to be admitted, instead of a subscription to the Articles. Nothing of consequence can be argued from the difference of the words, that is a minister of,' and 'being a minister *.* Perhaps, under present circumstances, and to prevent the future abuse of the Toleration Act, it is only needful to distinguish 6 • It should, however, be observed that, by the 10th Ann, c. 2, preacher, duly qualified, shall be allowed to officiate in any congregation, although the same be not in the county wherein he was so qualified, provided that the said congregation, or place of meeting, hath been duly certified," &e. but the preacher, if required, must produe his certificate. A few years ago, a member of the House of Commons projected a bill, which, having in view the abolition of village preaching, was intended to subject the labours of Dissenting and Methodist Teachers to the controul of neighbouring magistrales. The pulse of the public was felt upon this occasion. It was insinuated, in order to render the proposed bill palatable, that it was not intended to operate against regular Dissenters; but it was understood to be the sense of the whole body that, in such a case, a distinction between Dissenters and Methodists could not be admitted, that it was one common cause, the cause of religious liberty; and that the Dissenters made no distinction between a right to preach to their own appropriate congregations, and that of publishing the glad tidings of salvation in villages where they apprehended the joyful sound had. never been heard. Such was the substance of a communication made by one of their leading ministers to an honourable member of the house; and such were the sentiments avowed by auother eminent preacher, in a friendly conversation with a late venerable prelate at his own table. The pro jected bill was, at that time, abandoned. - See Zeal without Bigotry, p. 44. between Protection and Privilege. I conceive that every preacher, qualified or unqualified, should be permitted to take out a licence, and thereby be put under the protection of the law. It is far better that a few unqualified persons should be allowed to teach, than that it should be in the power of magis trates, who may not always be proper judges, to refuse a licence to a qualified person. The magistrate, it is presumed, has no right to prevent any man from teaching, who gives proper security to the state for his acting as a peaceable subject. Talent, like water, will find its own level. Fools only will hear fools. Men destitute of talents for preaching, will soon fall into contempt and be deserted; and, whatever inconvenience may attend this freedom, it will be small indeed, compared with the mischief which cannot but ensue, by making the magistrate the judge of religious matters. Let every man, who wishes it, obtain a licence and let him be protected by it from persecution: but it is quite another thing to excuse every man who chuses to preach from serving on the militia, when his country demands his assistance, or to relieve him from parochial duties, by which he may essentially benefit his neighbours. These privileges were certainly intended by the Legislature for stated ministers of congregations, whose time was required for study, visiting the sick, with other duties of the pastoral office;-but persons who preach only occasionally, and have no pastoral charge, and especially those who carry on business for their support, do not appear to be entitled to the same privileges. If, therefore, the distinction between protection and privilege be duly observed, there will be no great difficulty in avoiding the evil complained of, and, at the same time, preserving the Act of Toleration inviolate. Let all preachers be protected in their religious exercises from injury and insult; but let the exemptions be made, 1st, in behalf of stated ministers; 2d, of those who have been such, but are now disabled; and, 3d, of students, who are preparing for the work of the ministry *. Whether it be the wish of certain persons to restrain itinerant ministers within narrow limits, and prevent their disinterested efforts to do good to the souls of men, remains to be discovered. For the sake of peace and religion, it is devoutly to be wished that no such attempt should be made; but, if it be, the Methodists and the Dissenters will console themselves with the recollection of his Majesty's promise, in his first speech to par liament, Nov. 18, 1760, and in which his faithful subjects have the utmost reason to confide, "I will maintain the Toleration inviolable." EUSEBIUS. These are merely hints thrown out for discussion. Probably, the readers of this work may suggest something better. A respectful atten tion will be paid to them. MRS. STAPLETON. Obituary. MRS. STAPLETON, widow of the late Dr. Stapleton, of Colchester, died in Bristol, on the 20th of January, aged 53, Many of the last years of the life of this excellent woman were peculiarly afflictive, and, indeed, her whole history, were it recorded, would appear to have been highly eventful. She was the daughter of the late Mr. William Dicks, of the city of Chester, a man eminent for piety, sincerely attached to the doctrines of grace, and a decided, but liberal Dissenter. He was a member of the church formerly under the pastoral care of the venerable Matthew Henry; but on the majority of that society departing from the truth, Mr. Dicks, with a few others, withdrew, and invited neighbouring ministers, of evangelical sentiments, to visit them, and to preach unto them the gospel of Christ. This procedure was sanctioned by the divine blessing, and laid the foundation of the present Independent Church in the city of Chester. At what period Mrs. S. became experimentally, acquainted with divine truth, we are not informed; but her piety was unquestionable. In the year 1780, she married the late Dr. Stapleton, of Colchester, and, during an union of 17 years, they lived in the exercise of strong and mutual affection, and were very honourable members of the church of which the late Mr. Hobbs was the pastor. By a mysterious and affecting dispensation, Dr. S. died, in consequence of a paralytical seizure, in the year 1797; and thus, at little more than 40 years of age, our deceased friend became a widow, having four daughters, and a son who was only between five and six years old. She saw her daughters in quick succession rise to the stature of women; and, by the superior mental powers they possessed, and the accomplishments by which they were distinguished, was animated by many a sanguine expectation of seeing them occupy some important stations in society. These fond hopes, however, were, by a sad series of events, blasted; for, within the space of three years, these four amiable young women were the victims of a fatal consumption. Though under these trying circumstances their mother was much supported by the consolations of the gospel, it will not be thought strange that such repeated shocks should have made very strong impressions upon a constitution at best but delicate; nor that she should now feel but little in terest in a world which, in her view, was so strongly marked with vicissitude and sorrow. In the year 1806, she visited Dublin, where she had a sister; and in that city she remained till May, 1808, when she returned to England, intending to reside in Bristol, in the neighbourbood of which place an eligible situation had been obtained for her SOA. Her health had been for some time on the decline; and some of her friends began to entertain discouraging fears respecting the event. On her becoming a resident in Bristol, she attended the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Lowell, became communicant in his church, and, for two or three months, was one of his family. In the course of the summer she visited Devonshire; but, prior to her return, requested that apartments might be procured for her near the meetinghouse, being apprehensive that, unless the distance was very short, she should not be able to attend public worship, to which she was most devoutly attached. A situation suited to her wishes was found; but on her arrival, though her spirits were comparatively good, all her friends were much struck with her emaciated appearance. She had * Mrs. Hutton, the wife of John Hutton, Esq. brother to the late pious and benevolent Alderman Hutton. |