Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

CHAP.

LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Burke, declaring that the severance of a limb from his body would not inflict greater pain than a public and violent difference of opinion with his right honourable friend, was yet glad he had delivered his Mr. Burke. opinions so plainly as to have drawn forth an explanation so satisfactory to himself, to the House, and to the nation.

Hitherto, although opinions strongly repugnant to each other had been expressed, nothing had occurred which portended a severance of Mr. Burke from Mr. Fox in party, much less any personal hostility; but Mr. Sheridan. Mr. Sheridan, while he paid high compliments to Mr. Burke's general principles, said he could not conceive how it was possible for a person who possessed such principles, or who valued our own constitution and revered the revolution which obtained it for us, to unite with such feelings an indignant and unqualified abhorrence of all the proceedings of the patriotic party in France. He conceived theirs to be as just a revolution as ours, proceeding upon as sound a principle, and a greater provocation. He vehemently defended the general views and conduct of the National Assembly. He could not even understand what was meant by the charge against them of having overturned the laws, the justice, and the revenues of their country. What were their laws? The arbitrary mandates of capricious despotism. What their justice? The partial adjudications of venal magistrates. What their revenues? National bankruptcy. In a fervid strain, he vindicated all the leading acts of the revolution. The public creditor had been defrauded; the manufacturer without employ; trade languishing; famine clang upon the poor; despair on all. In this situation, the wisdom and feelings of the nation were appealed to by the government; and was it to be wondered at, by Englishmen, that a people so circumstanced should search for the cause and source of all their calamities; or that they should find them in the arbitrary constitution of their government, and in the prodigal and corrupt administration of their revenues? For such an evil, when proved, what remedy could be resorted

CHAP.
LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Beaufoy.

Charles the Second, requiring persons taking certain appointments and offices to receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper. He described the test laws as the offspring of persecution and intolerance, founded on the imputation of principles and intentions to bodies of men without the evidence of facts. Much obloquy and unfounded calumny, he said, had been used to asperse the character of the Roman Catholics, on account of the supposed tendency of their religious tenets to occasion the commission of murder, treason, and other horrid crimes, from a principle of conscience; a base imputation, arising from uncharitable opinions. It was the haughty, arrogant, and illiberal language of persecution which led men to judge uncharitably, and to act with bitter intolerance. On the authority of Dr. Hoadley, he argued that the church could not be endangered by a body so small and void of influence as the Dissenters: danger could only arise from the supine indolence of the clergy, contrasted with the superior activity and zeal of the other party. He censured with great asperity a circular letter said to have been written by Dr. Horsley, Bishop of St. David's, to his clergy, and vindicated Dr. Priestley, whose attacks on the church and its tenets had been vigorously repelled by the Bishop. A desire to reform was not to be construed into an endeavour to subvert the ecclesiastical constitution. The Duke of Richmond and Mr. Pitt had both endeavoured to reform the constitution; yet both held high offices in the state; and Dr. Priestley might be at the head of the church with as little danger as the present minister at the head of the treasury. He spoke with some applause of Dr. Price's sermon on the Anniversary of the Revolution*, although he considered that his arguments would have better become a parliamentary speech than a sermon. Το make the pulpit, the altar, or sacramental table, political engines he must ever condemn, whether in a Dissenter or a Churchman.

Mr. Beaufoy supported the motion in a speech of

4th Nov. 1789.

CHAP.

LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Sheridan did not, like Mr. Fox, endeavour to soften the features of political difference, or smooth the asperity of discordant opinion, by appearances of kind regret or friendly recollection; no expression of Conduct of amicable feeling escaped him; on the contrary, he appeared with satisfaction and with pride to assume his station as political opponent of Mr. Burke.

Mr. Sheridan.

Colonel Phipps having made a few observations on Colonel the different conduct of the British troops in 1780, Phipps. and the French guards during the recent scenes, Mr. Pitt, in a manly and prudent strain, reviewed some of Mr. Pitt. the observations which had been made. He thanked Colonel Phipps for the able and eloquent defence of some passages in his speech on a preceding day, applauded the remarks of Lord Valletort in moving the address, approved one part of the speech of Mr. Sheridan, but declared that he agreed with Mr. Burke in every point he had urged relative to the late commotions in France. He had delivered himself with warmth, but a warmth proceeding from a motive which did him the highest honour; his sentiments respecting the constitution inspired him with sincere and lasting gratitude. Happy and genuine freedom was enjoyed by Englishmen under their constitution, while the unqualified nominal liberty of the French was, in fact, absolute, direct, and intolerable slavery.

voted.

After a few observations from Sir George Howard Estimates and Viscount Fielding, the resolutions were agreed to. In the debate, which is thus copiously abstracted, Observations. will be perceived the first public and authentic declaration of differences of opinion among the members of the opposition party; a disunion of that compact, and apparently well-cemented body, which, by its steady unanimity, no less than by its formidable ability, had so long divided and so powerfully influenced public opinion. The further proceedings of the session, although not devoid of importance, will require less specific detail.

March 2nd. Mr. Fox's mo

Mr. Fox, taking the station before occupied by Mr. Beaufoy, moved for a committee of the whole House to consider the acts of the 15th and 25th of act.

tion on the test

CHAP.
LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Beaufoy.

Charles the Second, requiring persons taking certain appointments and offices to receive the sacrament of the Lord's supper. He described the test laws as the offspring of persecution and intolerance, founded on the imputation of principles and intentions to bodies of men without the evidence of facts. Much obloquy and unfounded calumny, he said, had been used to asperse the character of the Roman Catholics, on account of the supposed tendency of their religious tenets to occasion the commission of murder, treason, and other horrid crimes, from a principle of conscience; a base imputation, arising from uncharitable opinions. It was the haughty, arrogant, and illiberal language of persecution which led men to judge uncharitably, and to act with bitter intolerance. On the authority of Dr. Hoadley, he argued that the church could not be endangered by a body so small and void of influence as the Dissenters: danger could only arise from the supine indolence of the clergy, contrasted with the superior activity and zeal of the other party. He censured with great asperity a circular letter said to have been written by Dr. Horsley, Bishop of St. David's, to his clergy, and vindicated Dr. Priestley, whose attacks on the church and its tenets had been vigorously repelled by the Bishop. A desire to reform was not to be construed into an endeavour to subvert the ecclesiastical constitution. The Duke of Richmond and Mr. Pitt had both endeavoured to reform the constitution; yet both held high offices in the state; and Dr. Priestley might be at the head of the church with as little danger as the present minister at the head of the treasury. He spoke with some applause of Dr. Price's sermon on the Anniversary of the Revolution*, although he considered that his arguments would have better become a parliamentary speech than a sermon. To make the pulpit, the altar, or sacramental table, political engines he must ever condemn, whether in a Dissenter or a Churchman.

Mr. Beaufoy supported the motion in a speech of

4th Nov. 1789.

one in which he talked of a train of gunpowder being laid to the church establishment, which would soon blow it up; " and if they refused to repeal the test and corporation acts, the establishment would soon tumble about their ears." He also read passages from Dr. Price's sermon, shewing, as he contended, that the total subversion of the church was the aim of some leading Dissenters. For the body at large he professed great respect, and admitted that, had the present motion been made ten years earlier, he should have been among its supporters.

CHAP.

LXVII.

1790.

Mr. Fox, in his reply, analyzed, most ably, the Mr. Fox in arguments which had been adduced against him, and reply. expressed the greatest concern at the speech of Mr. Burke, which had filled him with grief and shame; but he was consoled by observing that it avowed every doctrine which he had laid down. He had stated principles, and argued from an application of inferences deducible from them; while his right honourable friend had resorted to pamphlets, private letters, anecdotes, conjectures, suspicions, and invectives. On such grounds, he had opposed a motion to which he would have been a friend ten years ago. He was astonished to hear that a test was imposed by the Dissenters upon their representatives, because they had declared that at the next general election they would support no candidate who was not well affected to the cause of civil and religious liberty. Did not gentlemen on the other side declare, that although their own opinions were friendly to the motion, yet, in obedience to the instructions of their constituents, who were churchmen, they considered themselves bound to oppose it? Was not this imposing a test? How different the conduct of the Dissenters, who were the constituents of two honourable members*, who assured them they might vote according to their conscience! In Doctor Priestley's manly declaration of his individual opinion, he saw no criminality. Influenced by sentiments of compassion at the late events in France,

* Mr. Windham and Mr. Tierney.

« ПредишнаНапред »