GSTC 

 
 A N 
 
 N Q^ U I R Y 
 
 INTO THE 
 
 PRINCIPLES 
 
 O F 
 
 TOLERATION; 
 
 THE 
 
 DEGREE, in which they are admitted 
 by our L A W S j 
 
 AND THE 
 
 Reasonableness of the late Application 
 
 made by the Dissenters 
 
 TO PARLIAMENT 
 
 FOR AN 
 
 Enlargement of their Religious Liberties. 
 
 By JOSEPH FOWNES. 
 The Second Edition, with confiderable Additions. 
 
 Quot adhuc repurgandae latent leges, quas neque ajuiorum nvune- 
 rus, neque conditorum dignitas commendat, fed sequitas fola ? et 
 iJeo, cum iniquz recognofcuntut, merito damnantur. 
 
 Tcrtiilliani Apolog. cap. iv, p. 54. ed. Havercampi. 
 
 SHREWSBURT: 
 
 Printed by J. Eddowes ; and fold by J. Buckland, 
 
 at No. 57, Pater -noli er-Ronjo , London. 177 3. 
 
 9 oSpSLt a' 
 
 r'nte Two Shillings and Six-pence.
 
 [ Si ] 
 
 BK. 
 
 \G\0 
 
 
 ? 
 
 < 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 To the First Edition. 
 
 THE plan of the following cfTay was 
 laid, and the molt material thoughts 
 in it ranged under their refpective heads, 
 before the author had feen Mr. Mauduit's 
 cafe of the diflenters. Upon looking into it, 
 o he found fome of the topicks, which had 
 been comprehended in his original defign, 
 <^> infilled upon to great advantage ; and for 
 ^ this reafon has omitted feveral obfervations, 
 : which he intended to have made, that the 
 reader might not be at the trouble of attend- 
 ing a fecond time, to what had been fo 
 much better faid already. The writer hopes, 
 therefore, that he (hall not be confidered 
 by that ingenious gentleman in the light of 
 a rival, but be received as an auxiliary : 
 an auxiliary in fupport of a caufe, which, 
 z: as he has juftly obferved, is worthy of the 
 S efforts of all the friends of liberty to fup- 
 = port it. 
 
 A % It 
 
 301066
 
 IV 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 It was not till a greatL part, of what the 
 author propofed to himfelf, was finifhed, that 
 the letter to the difienting minifters, who fo- 
 liated parliament, fell into his hands. As 
 two gentlemen of diftinguifhed learning and 
 abilities afe directly attacked, and in a man- 
 ner called upon to defend themfelves, by the 
 writer of that letter ; and as it appeared 
 highly probable, that one of them, at leaft, 
 would undertake the vindication of himfelf, 
 his brethren, and their caufe , it was at firft 
 intended to have taken no notice' at ill of 
 that performance in this piece. But when 
 that part of it, which relates more immedi- 
 ately to the diflenters, came to be confider- 
 ed, the objections, which this gentleman has 
 made to their conduct, lay fo continually 
 and directly in the way, that it was found 
 impoffible not to make fome animadyerfions 
 on his reprefentations and reaibnings. This 
 has made fome confiderable alteration in the 
 form, which this head of the Work would 
 otherwife have worn, and added fomething 
 to the length of it. Who the writer of the 
 letter is, it would perhaps be thought dif- 
 refpedtful to conjecture. He has aflumed 
 no character, which requires or warrants 
 any particular kind of reference -, and there- 
 fore he is all along mentioned only as a 
 writer. A confiderable matter of eafy and 
 elegant compofuion, he certainly is , and, as it 
 
 is
 
 PREFACE. v 
 
 is hoped his meaning has not been miftaken* 
 (defignedly mifreprefented it affuredly has 
 not) fo, it is hoped, there is nothing in the 
 pafTages, in which he is introduced, but 
 what is confiftent with the regard due to a 
 gentleman of abilities and learning, and agree- 
 able to that temper, which ought always 
 to be preferved in controverfial writings. 
 With whatever freedom any of his arguments 
 have been confidered, care has been taken to 
 do it with decency , and not to have con- 
 fidered them with freedom would have been 
 jnjuftice to the caufe, which is here pleaded. 
 
 The whole of this performance was finifh- 
 ed, and put into the printer's hands, before 
 a fight of Dr. Kippis's very fenfible defence 
 of the diflenters was obtained : fo that Very 
 little, if any, alteration could be produced, in 
 what had been written, by the perufal of it. 
 One thought, towards the conclufion of this 
 tract, was inierted, while the meets were work- 
 ing off, which was fuggefted by the Doctor's 
 book, of which an acknowledgement is made 
 at the bottom of the page in which it occurs. 
 The author gladly, takes this opportunity of 
 returning his thanks to the Dodor for the 
 great pleafure received from his book. 
 
 It is only necefTary for the author to 
 add, with his predeceflbrs in publication, 
 Dr. Kippis and Mr. Mauduit, that what he 
 has here drawn up, was drawn up without 
 
 beina
 
 Yl 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 being communicated to a fingle diflenting 
 minifter. He entered upon the fubject un- 
 iblicited and uninfluenced by any motive, 
 but the defire of doing juftice to a good 
 caufe. He hopes there will be nothing found 
 in his performance unfuitable to the temper 
 of one who is a friend to truth, and to re- 
 Jigioiis liberty ; - who honours all, in whofe 
 attention the facred rights of confcience find 
 3, place ; who is a fteady friend to chrifti- 
 anity, and an hearty well-wilher to the fuc- 
 cefs of all attempts to promote it by ex- 
 ample, argument and per fuafion j but an 
 enemy to all meafures of violence and per- 
 secution. Thefe are the characters he will 
 always be defirous to maintain : and thefe 
 characters alone would dictate the fentiments 
 he has here committed to writing, though 
 he were utterly unconnected with any reli- 
 gious body in the kingdom. They are, in- 
 deed, no other fentiments than what Mr. 
 Locke, though no difienter, nor attached to 
 any of their fentiments, (any farther than he 
 approved the general principles, upon which 
 they went, as the principles of that liberty 
 in which all chriftians ought to ftand fail,) 
 has delivered in his preface to his letter on 
 Toleration. The circumftances, which gave 
 occafion to fome of his expreffions, have, it 
 muft be gratefully owned, long fince ceafed 
 to exift among us : and thefe expreffions are 
 
 pre-
 
 I* R E $ A C E. ru 
 
 preferved here for this caufe only, that they 
 could not well be feparated from thofe, which 
 are adjoining to them ; and without the leaft 
 intention of making the moft diftaht appli- 
 cation of them to any perfons now living. 
 But, though his words had a lingular claim 
 to the regard of the times, in which he 
 lived, they are by ho means unworthy of 
 the attention of the prefent, or indeed of 
 any times whatsoever, in which this queftion 
 is under confideration. 
 
 " Narrownefs of fpirit, on all fides, has 
 " undoubtedly been the principal occafion of 
 " our miferies and confufions. But, whatever 
 " may have been the occafion, it is now 
 " high time to feek for a thorough cure. > 
 " It is neither declarations of indulgence, 
 " nor acls of comprehenfion, [alone] fuch 
 " as have been yet praclifed or projected 
 " among us, that can do the work. 'The 
 " firft will but palliate, the fecond encreafe 
 ** our evil. Abfolute liberty, juft and true, 
 ** equal and impartial liberty is the thing 
 * c we ftand in need of. I cannot therefore 
 u but hope, that this difcourfe, demonftra- 
 " ting both the equitablenefs and practica- 
 44 blends of the thing, will be efteemed 
 " highly feafonable by all men, that have 
 " fouls large enough to prefer the intereft 
 " of the publick before that of a party." 
 A glorious, and never to be forgotten Hep 
 
 was,
 
 tiii PREFACE, 
 
 was, about that time, taken towards intro- 
 ducing this important blefling. Whether \% 
 quite anfwered the idea of religious liberty, 
 which is pointed out in the above cited 
 words, let thofe, who have maturely confi- 
 dered it, judge. And if it does not, 1 leav$ 
 them to judge alfo, whether, if this great 
 man were now living, and were to be afked 
 his opinion of the fitnefs of granting the 
 requeft of the diflenters, he would not give 
 it for going this ftep farther ? 
 
 f qrp ffp orb O 
 
 PREFACE
 
 [ i* ] 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 To the Second Edition. 
 
 AN account having been already given, 
 in the preface to the firft edition of 
 this pamphlet, of the rife and progrefs of 
 it, nothing farther is neceffary to be added 
 here concerning it. The differences between 
 the conclufion of this and the foregoing edi- 
 tion will be eafily accounted for by any 
 one, who confiders that at the time of this 
 fecond publication, the petition of the dif- 
 fenters was again laid before the parliament. 
 This additional preface, and the appendix, 
 will fufficiently explain themfelves ; and all, 
 which remains farther to be faid, concerning 
 them, and the eflay, to which they relate, 
 is to recommend the reafonings ' contained in 
 them to the candid attention of fuch as may 
 perufe them. 
 
 What apology may be needful for the 
 whole, or any part, of the enfuing enquiry, 
 the readers of it will determine by their own 
 judgment. That, which the author himfelf 
 apprehended, at the writing of it, might be 
 a thought
 
 x - Preface to the Second Edition, 
 
 thought mod liable to exception, was his 
 employing fo many pages in attempting to 
 eftablifh the general principles of Toleration, 
 which had been fo largely difcuffed by wri- 
 ters of the moft diftinguifhed reputation. 
 But according to his views of the affair, 
 which gave occafion for his book, fuch 
 a confideration of them feemed unavoidable. 
 The more he reflected on the difappointment 
 of the difTenters, the more he was convinced, 
 that it could be reafonably founded only on 
 one of the following fuppofitions : that 
 Toleration is not a matter of right, but of 
 favour -, that, allowing it to be a matter 
 of right, the penal laws againft diffenters 
 are no infringement of that right , i. c. are 
 not perfecuting laws ; that if they are per- 
 fecting laws, the act of Toleration is an 
 exemption from them, adequate to the relief 
 of all, who need to be exempted from them ; 
 or, laitly, that there was fomething in 
 the nature of the requeft made by the dif- 
 fenters, which rendered the farther exemp- 
 tion, which they folicited from thefe laws, 
 unreafanable. That the act of Toleration 
 affords but a very imperfect protection from 
 the feverky of thefe itatutes, is a plain mat- 
 ter of fact, which admits of no difpute. But 
 how far the laws, of which it is a mitiga- 
 tion, are in themfelves uniuilifiable ; or whe- 
 ther there was any thing peculiar in that 
 
 iecuritv
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xi 
 
 fecurity from them, for which the difTenters 
 became fuitors, which rendered their cafe 
 unworthy of regard, mud be determined by 
 an appeal to the original principles of To- 
 leration. For this reafon it was thought 
 indifpenfably requilite to ftate them, and col- 
 led: all the fubfequent parts of this queftion 
 into one point of view with this leading, 
 capital part of all ; that, by the light which 
 it mull of neceflity caft upon the others, 
 the equity of the relief requefled by the 
 difTenters might be clearly determined. And, 
 if it has appeared, upon a careful furvey, 
 that Toleration is the right of all good fub- 
 jects, and members of fociety ; r if it is 
 found, that the penal laws againft difTenters 
 are utterly fubverlive of this right, and, con- 
 fequently, unjuft , and, if it has been 
 made evident, that the principles and de- 
 portment of the difTenters, and the afTurances, 
 which they are ready to give to the ftate 
 for their loyal and unexceptionable demean- 
 or, are fuch as ought, in reafon, to obviate 
 all fufpicion of the contrary : if thefe things 
 have been fatisfaclorily fhewn, the inference 
 makes itfelf, and is too plain and certain, 
 not to be feen and acknowledged by every 
 intelligent perfon ; - that the requeft of the 
 difTenters was reafonable, and that the part 
 they acted in prefenting it was worthy to 
 be approved. 
 
 a 2 When
 
 xii Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 When applications, for relief from bur- 
 thens, are founded upon principles of juftice, 
 it is generally allowed that apprehenfions of 
 ibme accidental, or merely poffible inconve- 
 niencies, with which granting the defired re- 
 lief might be attended, are not of ftrength 
 fufficient to juftify the refufal of it. And 
 yet to this clafs the objections, which have 
 been urged againft the arguments by which 
 the diffenters have defended their cauie, muft, 
 in general, be reduced.- Alarming hints 
 have been given of the dangers, which might 
 have followed, if their defire had been 
 granted. Great refpect has been expreffed 
 for the prefent diffenters , but great doubt 
 concerning their conduct, and an unwilling- 
 nefs to anfwer for their behaviour, were they 
 to carry their point, have been joined with 
 thefe profeffions of refpect. Vague and 
 obfcure prefages of evils, which, in this cafe, 
 might fome time arife, have been entertained 
 and fuffered to work upon the imagination ; 
 and fuppofitions of events have been made, fo 
 chimerical and deftitute of foundation, that it 
 is furprizing that gentlemen of underftand- 
 ing, fliould ever be imprefTed by them. But 
 the groundleffnefs of thefe fuppofitions will 
 be confidered hereafter. What is now to be 
 obferved is, that all thefe reafonings proceed 
 upon an entire inattention to the nature of the 
 cafe, which they are defigned to affect. In 
 
 matters
 
 Preface to the Seeond Edition. xiii 
 
 matters of mere favour, or expedience, fuch 
 confiderations as thefe may be allowed to 
 have their weight; though, even in things 
 of this kind, it is owned, that prefent and 
 probable advantages ought to turn the fcale 
 againft diftant, and merely poflible, difadvan- 
 tages. But, in matters of right, fuch objec- 
 tions as thefe are feldom admitted. Were 
 they fuffered indeed to prevail, there is no 
 liberty fo important and reafonable, but it 
 might be denied ; no right fo facred and 
 inviolable, but it might be taken away. For 
 what right, what liberty is there which may 
 not be abufed ? Or what advantage is there, 
 from which fome poflible inconvenience may 
 not refult ? The diffenters apprehend the 
 relief, which they afked, was no more than 
 the principles of reafon, chriftianity, and pro- 
 teftantifm, warranted them to requeft ; yet 
 fuch objections as thofe, which have been 
 mentioned, feem to be with many confider- 
 able enough to overbalance all, which the 
 petitioners could produce in fupport of their 
 requeft ; and to juflify the retaining of laws, 
 which even they who contend for their con- 
 tinuance, have not undertaken to vindicate ; 
 except it be by alledging, that they are laws 
 not to be executed, but to ftand in terror em 
 only -, an excufe, which is at once utterly 
 infufficient to defend the keeping up of fuch 
 laws , and, (as the argument has been con- 
 ducted
 
 xiv Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 ducted by thofe who have thought proper 
 to have recourfe to it) is, in effect, giving 
 up the caufe. 
 
 To be made in terrorem, is the com- 
 mon chara&er of all penal laws whatfoever. 
 The first intention of them is to prevent- 
 the forbidden actions, by the fear of the 
 penalties enacted on account of the viola- 
 tion of the law. The execution of fuch laws 
 comes in only in the fecond place, and is 
 to be confidered merely as the remedy, which 
 is to be applied, when the bare declaration 
 of the law is not effectual to procure obe- 
 dience. But, if the laws themfelves are good, 
 it is univerfally allowed that, when they are 
 broken, the execution of them ought to fol- 
 low. When laws, therefore, are faid to 
 ftand in terrorem only, or without any view 
 to the infliction of the penalty appointed 
 by them, the very form of the exprefllon 
 implies, that there are fome circumftances 
 annexed to them which render the execution 
 of them unfit. To fuppoie of any laws, that 
 they are not fit to be executed, is giving, 
 at belt, but a very unfavourable, difhonour- 
 able reprefentation of them j and the farther 
 we enter into the grounds of the fuppofition, 
 the more unfavourable to the credit of fuch 
 laws it will appear. For why are they not 
 fit to be executed ? If it is becaufe they 
 are calculated to produce more evil than 
 
 good,
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xv 
 
 good, they are bad laws in point of policy. 
 But if it is bccaufe they arc unjuft, in 
 reipect to their end, or the means by which 
 they direct that end to be purfued, they are 
 bad in point of confcience ; and no competent 
 caufe can be afligned for retaining them. 
 They cannot, as Dr. Furneaux has juftly 
 obferved, a " be confidered as the offspring 
 " of political wifdom, fo much as of an 
 " arbitrary and tyrannical difpofition." And, 
 as they were enacted upon indefenfible prin- 
 ciples -, fo no merely poflible conveniencies, 
 which may be imagined to refult from them, 
 are weighty enough to fhew that it i^ right 
 to permit them to remain, were the reality 
 of fuch conveniencies to be admitted. But 
 in fad, the argument drawn from them is 
 as deftitute of foundation, as it is void of 
 itrength - t and, inftead of fortifying the credit 
 of fuch laws, tends rather to weaken it. 
 
 Let the notion of laws, kept up merely in 
 terrorem, be ftrictly adhered to, and it will 
 be evident, to fay the gentlefl things of 
 them, that they muft be of little or no ufe. 
 If any doubt can arife concerning this, it 
 muft proceed from hence, that lbme laws 
 may be inadvertently comprehended under 
 this denomination, only becaufe it is but 
 ieldom that occafions happen to require the 
 execution of them ; but this is departing from 
 
 the 
 
 Letters to Sir William Blackfione, 2d cd. p. 122.
 
 xvi Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 the fignification of the phrafe, as it is ap- 
 plied in the cafe under confideration. In- 
 stances of perfons fuffering for treafon and 
 rebellion are, in general, but rare, and bear 
 no proportion to the number of thofe, who 
 fufFer on other accounts j/ and yet no one, it 
 is prefumed, imagines, for this reafon, that 
 the laws againft thofe offences, are laws 
 merely in terrorem. The laws concerned in 
 the prefent debate, are laws, the execution 
 of which is laid afide, though the objects, 
 againft which they are directed, are conti- 
 nually exifting. They are laws which are vir- 
 tually condemned, by a general difapprobation 
 of the execution of them, as improper to be 
 renewed. And, when it is afked, of what ad- 
 vantage it can be to retain fuch laws as thefe - 9 
 which are not only fallen into neglect, but, 
 which the very advocates for their conti- 
 nuance confefs ought to be left in this 
 neglected ftate ; the queftion, thus ftated, 
 carries its own anfwer with it : and a mo- 
 derate fhare of attention to the very terms 
 of it will fatisfy us, that their continuance 
 can be of no advantage. When the dread 
 of a law ceales, all the efficacy of the law 
 ceafes with it. When the execution of the 
 law is entirely thrown afide, efpecially when 
 it is by common confent exploded j (which 
 in the cafe; here argued it is) the dread of 
 the law foon comes to an end. For it is 
 
 the
 
 Preface to tlie Second Edition. xvii 
 
 the execution, which fupports the terror, 
 gives it all its permanence, vigour and effect; 
 and when that is given up, all the practical 
 authority of the law is given up alfo : and 
 all their ufe, upon fuppofition that it were 
 pofiible for them ever to be of any fervice, 
 is deftroyed. 
 
 But the ufelefihefs of keeping fuch laws 
 in force is the leaft objection to it : the 
 confequences of it may be highly pernicious. 
 Bad laws may be fuffered to deep for a 
 feafon, and, while they remain in this dor- 
 mant (late, may be treated as very harmlefs, 
 inoffenfive things. But the power of opprei- 
 fing, by their means, abides , this power, 
 by fome combination of unhappy circum* 
 fiances, may be awakened into action ; and, 
 perhaps, among the whole body of obnoxious 
 penal laws, there are none, which are more 
 likely to be molt grofsly perverted, and be 
 made the instruments of the mofl infupport- 
 able evils, than thofe, which have been for a 
 time difcarded, and afterwards refumed for 
 execution. For what is it, which mod com- 
 monly brings them into this difgrace, -but a 
 conviction that they are yokes too heavy to be 
 endured? What, but a conviction that they 
 arc inconfulent with the laws of reafon and 
 humanity , that to enforce them is repugnant 
 to the principles of natural and political 
 jiiftice -, and would be equally oppofite to 
 b the
 
 xviii Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 the fafety of individuals, and the tranquillity 
 of the publick ? The execution of fuch laws 
 can never be fuppofed to be revived, but 
 from bad views and difpofitions : and from 
 this confideration, alone, it is eafy to forefee, 
 of what innumerable mifchiefs they may be- 
 come the occafion. Regard to the laws will 
 be the pretended reafon, for the profecutions 
 commenced upon them ; but the advance- 
 ment of fome finifter defign will be the 
 real one. Private intereft, pique, revenge, 
 and other bafe and unworthy principles, will 
 be (heltered under the cover of what, in fuch 
 feafons, would be ftiled juftice, order, and 
 the fupport of authority ; and a counterfeit 
 zeal for the welfare of the ftate, become a 
 cloak for every malicious and fhameful in- 
 clination, by which we can fuppofe the word 
 of men to be prompted. Nor are thefe only 
 arbitrary affertions, which deferve to be 
 treated as unworthy of regard. All, who 
 are acquainted with hiftory, well know, that 
 fome of the word acts of injuftice, which 
 are recorded in it, have been committed un- 
 der the fanction of obsolete laws j that 
 is (if it be poflible for any of my readers, 
 to want fuch an explanation) laws grown 
 into difufe, though fupinely fuffered to con- 
 tinue in force ; and which, if they were re- 
 membered to be laws at all, were confidered 
 
 as
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xix 
 
 as laws, which were permitted to retain that 
 name in terror em only. 
 
 But if we afcend to the primary princi- 
 ples, to which all political regulations ought 
 to be adjufted, we fhall be furnifhed with 
 frefh evidence, that no laws, founded upon 
 injuftice, let the execution of them be ever 
 fo little intended, or expected, are capable 
 of a folid vindication. Laws ought to guard 
 againft oppreflion, from whatever quarter it 
 is apprehended. Such laws as thefe, give 
 power to opprefs ; incorporate incroachments 
 upon the rights of men into the conftitu- 
 tion ; and arm thofe, who are difpofed to 
 violate the peace of others, with the force 
 of publick authority. They are fo far from 
 being proper means of preferving the pub- 
 lick tranquillity, that they are the moft im- 
 proper ones, which can be chofen for that 
 purpofe. For, in their natural operation, 
 they are adapted only to create diflrefs and 
 confufion : and, if it be poffible for any par- 
 ticular circumftances to arife, in which fome 
 momentary convenience may refult from 
 them i there are other methods, by which 
 the evils, (which it is pretended they may be 
 of ufe to check,) may be remedied with in- 
 comparably greater efficacy, fafety and ho- 
 nour. If the apprehended evils are, in rea- 
 lity, proper objects of punimment by the 
 civil magistrate, furely the regular, obvious 
 
 b 2 COUI'ff
 
 xx Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 courfe to be purfued, is to eftablifh proper 
 laws againft them ; and not to think of fup- 
 prefling them by making or fupporting laws, 
 which decree penalties againft what no hu- 
 man power has a right to punifii , which di- 
 rectly forbid what, it is allowed, ought not 
 to be forbidden , and while they, perhaps, 
 make no mention of what is really an of- 
 fence againft the obligations of good fubjects, 
 condemn only that, which the judgment of 
 men has no authority to reftrain. Laws di- 
 rected againft thole actions, which fall pro- 
 perly under their cognizance ; (in' which the 
 nature of the offence is clearly defined, and 
 the fanflions of them duly proportioned to 
 the offences which they prohibit ) will gene- 
 rally have their influence confined within 
 its proper limits. The terrors of them will 
 be aimed at their original and juft object i 
 and there is, comparatively, but little dan- 
 ger of their being abufed. But to have re- 
 courfe to laws, intended to prevent one thing, 
 to reftrain another, which is totally diftind 
 from it, and has, perhaps, no probable, and 
 certainly no neceflary connexion with it ; and 
 to ordain penalties, in cafes in which they can 
 never be juft, merely becaufe it is poffible, 
 that they may, by chance, be employed in 
 cafes where punifhments may be juft , (that 
 is, in other words, to make the innocent 
 directly obnoxious to fufferings, merely for 
 
 the
 
 Preface to the Second 'Edition. xxi 
 
 the fake of accidentally reaching the guilty jf) 
 is giving fcope to an endlefs variety of op- 
 preflions. P'or^the execution of laws, which 
 are thus made ufe of, being 'directed, not by 
 any rule arifing from the laws themfelves, but 
 by the inclination of thofe, who call in their 
 force, will always be arbitrary in their ap- 
 plication : and the confequence of this is, 
 that they will always be liable to be perverted 
 into fome of the worft engines of tyranny -, 
 engines, againft which no caution is able to 
 guard, and by which perfons, the moft un- 
 quePaonably harmlefs, and without rebuke, 
 may be given up to be harrafled by every 
 man, who has either an intereft to ferve, 
 or a paflion to gratify, by disturbing them. 
 And is this an expedient, to which it can 
 ever beneceflary to the fafety, or fuitable 
 to the dignity, of a well ordered ftate, to 
 have recourfe ? It appears, on the contrary, 
 to be fuch a folecifm in government, and fo 
 inconfiltent with all political wifdom, that, 
 without the ilrongeft evidence, it is not to 
 be imputed to any fet of legiQators what- 
 foever. And, indeed, to urge it in the cafe 
 before us feems to be only an afttr thought, 
 to give fome countenance to the continuance 
 of laws, for the making of which it is not 
 pretended, that any good plea can be offered. 
 This was plainly not the original light, in 
 which they were confidered by the authors 
 
 of
 
 xxii Preface to the Second Edition, 
 
 of them, who fufficiently (hewed themfelves 
 in earned for the execution of them j though 
 the better judgment, and better fpirit of the 
 prefent times, has utterly condemned them. 
 
 When laws are allowed to be indefenfible, 
 the natural expectation, from fuch a concef- 
 fion, is, that thofe, who acknowledge this, 
 ihould approve of giving them up. That 
 the penal laws, from which the diffenters re- 
 quested a farther exemption, are of this kind, 
 feems to be confeffed ; and every argument 
 againft keeping up unjuft laws, in terrorem, 
 in general, muft be acknowledged to conclude 
 againft them in particular j and yet, flrange 
 as it may feem, a necefiity is pleaded for their 
 continuing in force, to keep the diffenters in 
 awe. But let it be allowed to afk, whence 
 this neceffity arifes ? Or againft what is it 
 that all thefe terrors are pointed r It furely 
 cannot be againft attempts to hurt the efta- 
 bliihment by force. Were there no fuch laws 
 as thofe, which we are confidering, in being ; 
 the laws, by which every man, and every body 
 ox men, are protected in the enjoyment of 
 their properties and priviledges, would be 
 an ample fecurity againft all fuch encroach- 
 ments. The continuance of thefe laws can- 
 not, again, be thought neceffary, from a 
 defire to deter the diffenters from writing and 
 {peaking in defence of their religious prin- 
 ciples and practices. For the diffenters to 
 
 admit
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xxiii 
 
 admit this thought, would be to impute to 
 their brethren of the eftablifhment a diftrufl 
 of their caufe, with a fufpicion of which, they 
 might be juftly difpleafed ; and to charge 
 them with an inclination to fubftitute force 
 inftead of argument, which they would dis- 
 claim with indignation. To fuppofe thefe 
 laws are retained from an apprehenfion, that 
 the doctrines of the church could not fub- 
 fift without them, would be a reflection upon 
 the articles of it, which the friends to them 
 would have reafon to refent. Truth wants 
 nothing but an impartial hearing. The 
 way to promote the interefl of it is to per- 
 mit the judgments of men to determine free- 
 ly, by the evidence which appears before 
 them, unbiaffed by the terrors of this world , 
 and it can never be to the honour of any 
 caufe, to think it wants any of thefe aids 
 to fupport it, or redound to the praife of its 
 advocates to depend upon them. And yet, 
 againft what other contingencies thole, who 
 contend for keeping up the terror of thefe 
 laws, can think it necefiary to maintain fuch 
 a powerful guard, it is not cafy to conceive. 
 The apprehenfions of indecency and petu- 
 lance, on the part of the diflenters, need 
 give them no pain ; -Thefe are faults which, 
 wherever they are found, furnilh the beft 
 antidotes againft themfelves, and never fail to 
 difcredit the caufe of thofe, who have fo little 
 
 judgment
 
 xxiv Preface to the.Secqnd Edition. 
 
 judgment and temper as to give way to them. 
 And were thefe excefles to prevail much more 
 frequently, and in a higher degree, than can be 
 reasonably fiippofed ; yet to defire to have a 
 perfon lie at the mercy of cruel and unjuft 
 laws, and be Subject to ruin, merely becaufe 
 in the warmth of a controverfy, he has loft 
 his caution, has fomething in it, which a 
 man of true greatnefs of mind will abhor-, 
 and one, who has a juft reverence for his 
 own reputation, will be. extremely backward 
 to acknowledge. 
 
 . Hitherto the" propriety of fuffering the pe- 
 nal ftatutes againft difTenters, to hold the 
 place in our laws, which is (till left to them 
 by the act of Toleration, has been confidered 
 as it refts upon the general expedience of 
 keeping them up as laws in terrorem only. 
 But, befides the objections, which have al- 
 ready been urged againft them, upon this 
 footing-, the antagonists of the difTenters, in 
 this cafe, have embarrafled themfelves with 
 new difficulties -, and, by endeavouring to 
 mollify the fe verity of that fide of the quef- 
 tion, which they defend, have taken away 
 the force of all the arguments, by which 
 they attempt to vindicate it. To reconcile 
 the difTenters to their difappointment, they 
 have been told, that all their fears are vi- 
 fionary, that they may make themfelves per- 
 fectly
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xxv 
 
 fectly cafy, b " the ftate will not attend to 
 " their preaching, and the church are en- 
 " gaged in labours of their own. " Let 
 this, for the prefent, be granted. The ques- 
 tion ftill returns, (and returns with additional 
 force :) for what reafon, then, are thofe re- 
 licks of perfecution, which are yet contain- 
 ed in the laws againft difienters, fo tenaci- 
 oufly held fall ? Or on what account is a 
 legal aflurance of that fafety, which it is 
 acknowledged the diffenting minifters ought 
 to enjoy, and which they are fo confidently 
 told they will enjoy, deemed fo improper ? 
 To attempt, in any form, to vindicate the 
 perpetuating of laws confeiTedly bad, mere- 
 ly for the fake of ftriking terror, is attempt- 
 ing an arduous tafk. But to reprefent thefe 
 laws as harmlefs, becaufe no ufe will ever 
 be made of them ; and, at the fame time, 
 fpeak of the repeal of them as a rifk not 
 to be run, is furely very peculiar. It is, if 
 the exprefTion will be pardoned, a felf-de- 
 ftrudtive mode of reafoning, which faps the 
 very foundation, upon which it appears to 
 ftand ; and brings thofe, who adopt it, into 
 the midft of contradictions. If, as the au- 
 thor of the letter to the dilTenting minifters 
 tells them, c all that part of the law, by 
 which they think themielves aggrieved, " is 
 " now as dead, as if the whole were ob- 
 c " folete; 
 
 b Letter, p. 17. c Ibid, p, 57.
 
 xxvi Preface to the Second Edition* 
 
 " folete ; " where is the terror it is fup- 
 pofed to contain ? Or what is become of 
 that fecurity, which it is fuppofed to give 
 to church and ftate ? If thefe laws, on the 
 other hand, are referved, becaufe occafions 
 may call for their execution; from whence 
 can the difTenting minifters derive that en* 
 tire fatisfaction, in their prefent circumftan- 
 ces, which is recommended to them ? If the 
 execution of thefe laws is to ceafe for ever, 
 where would be the harm of a law for 
 quieting the minds of the diflfenters, by gi- 
 ving them a proper, real fecurity from thofe 
 Jaws, which difturb them ? But, if thofe 
 may yet be the inftruments of opprefllon, 
 and the apprehenfion of this may juftly make 
 the diffenters uneafy, why Ihould they be 
 cenfured as raifing a [needlefs] ferment d by 
 their application , ? Or with what equity can 
 they be blamed, as indulging unreafonable 
 jealoufies, when the very reafons aftigned for 
 denying their petition, have fuch an apparent 
 tendency to keep their apprehenfions awake ? 
 When they think, indeed, of the liberal fenti- 
 ments and exemplary moderation, which reflect 
 fo much honour on the members of the efta- 
 blifhment, their fears vanifh. But the fame 
 excellent fpirit, which dwells in thefe valuable 
 perfons, may not defcend to others. If it 
 Ihould, yet, as our laws now ftand, it is 
 
 not 
 d Letter, p. 32.
 
 Preface to the Second Edition. xxvii 
 
 not in the power of thofe, who may have 
 the bed inclination to it, to infure the fafety 
 of the diflenters from the dangers, to which 
 they are expofed : and, when thefe things are 
 candidly confidered, it cannot be juftly 
 thought ftrange, if they are ftill defirous to 
 enjoy the advantage of legal fafety , and be 
 completely affured of the unmolefted exercife 
 of thofe rights of human nature, which, as a 
 very able writer has happily exprefled it, 
 '* ought to have every protection and ground 
 <e of fecurity, which law and the policy of 
 ** free Hates can give them." 
 
 How far the cafe of the diflenters is inti- 
 tled to the benefit of this valuable pro- 
 tection, they mud leave to the judgment 
 of the legiflature ; to which their petition 
 is again, with all deference and humility, 
 fubmitted. With thefe difpofitions, they 
 hope every ftep, which they take, will 
 be found to be conducted ; and as they are 
 fatisfied, that making an application for the 
 removal of what they have efleemed a grie- 
 vance, will never be condemned by thofe 
 great afiemblies, to which they look up ; fo 
 they are willing to believe, that, if any of 
 their fellow fubjects have been inclinable to 
 cenfure them for this reafon, it will, upon 
 further confideration appear, that they have 
 
 been 
 
 e Dr. Furneaux's preface to the ift edit, of his 
 letters, &c. p. 17. 2d edit.
 
 xxviii Preface to the Sewnd Edition. 
 
 been cenfured without caufe; and that they are 
 liable to no imputation of having made any 
 requeft* which it would be unfit for the moft 
 dutiful fubje&s to preferit, or inconfiftent with 
 the honour of government to grant. To 
 borrow the words of a .confefiedly competent 
 judge of this matter; " SapienthTimi etiam 
 " legiflatores non omnia viderunt, quse rei- 
 " publicas utilia aut noxia effe porlunt ; & 
 " plerumque progrefiu temporis accidit, ut 
 " morum, perfonarum, aut rerum mutatio, 
 " alia plane fanciri defideret. Sollemnis 
 " ilia jurifconfultorum romanorum formula, 
 
 " DURUM, SED ITA SCRIPTA LEX EST ; illlld 
 
 " inquam, tamdiu valere debet, quamdiu 
 " fine graviori incommodo, quod durum eft,. 
 " aut tolli, aut emolliri non poteft; sed ubi 
 " primum data est occasio, eo redeat lex 
 " iniqua, unde malum pedem tulerat j nulla 
 " idonea caufa eft, quare fummas poteftates- 
 " audtoritate fua illam tueri porro pergant.' 
 
 > ( 
 
 i Barbeyrac. orat. inaugural, de dignitate, et uti- 
 litate, juris, ac Hiilor. p 17. Droit de la nature, 
 Sc des Genev. edit. Amfterd. 1712. torn ii. a la fin. 
 
 An
 
 [ i 1 
 
 % = jrfk j*% ja*. jr* jBfk r $ 
 # & v luJ SJr kjHi v &3 % 
 
 An ENQUIRY, Sec. 
 
 ?fM^HE worthy and refpectable Dr. 
 Hg T a* Law, a fpeaking of the common 
 St*j42jH( difpofition to extol the former 
 times at the expence of the pre- 
 fent, mentions two circumftances, among 
 others, in which the latter are greatly pre- 
 ferable. One is, " that we have certain 
 " virtues now in greater perfection ; parti- 
 " culatfy, more of true charity, or univerfal 
 <c benevolence, than ever fince the time of 
 *' primitive chriftianity : " b and the other, 
 " that we live under the mildeft, moft in- 
 ** dulgent of all Governments ; and enjoy the 
 " bleffing of liberty in that perfection, which 
 " has been unknown to former ages, and 
 " is fo ftill to moft other nations." c The 
 truth of the obfervation is granted. But 
 mould it be inferred from hence, that the 
 B fpirit 
 
 * The prefent Biftiop of Carlf/Ie, b Con fidcrat ions on 
 Religion, Part III. p. 243. Ed. 1765. c p. 759, 260
 
 2 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 fpirit of the times, and the ftate of our 
 laws are brought to fuch a degree of per- 
 fection, as to need no farther improvement, 
 it would be an error -, an error, which would 
 need correction equally with that, which this 
 candid writer makes it his bufinefs to rec- 
 tify. Thefe are points, indeed, which are 
 never to be taken for granted in the moft 
 advantageous fituation, in which we can fup- 
 pofe ourfelves to be placed. Sober enqui- 
 ries whether there are not flill fome mif- 
 takes to be corrected j fome remains of 
 the injudicious appointments of the feafons 
 of comparative ignorance, which it would 
 be both juft and wife to remove; and fome 
 defects, which greatly need to be fupplied ; 
 are always worthy of attention. Such an 
 enquiry into the Hate of religious liberty 
 among ourfelves is here attempted ; and the 
 author fincerely regrets that there mould be 
 fuch weighty reafons for his entering upon 
 it, as he apprehends there are. It appears, 
 indeed, to be a fubject very far from being 
 univerfally feen in its true light. Whether 
 any thing, which is here offered, may con- 
 tribute to lead perfons to jufter apprehen- 
 fions of it, muft be left to the judgment 
 of others. This can be affirmed with sreat 
 truth that, whatever is faid, proceeds only 
 from a fincere concern to clear up the 
 rights of conference more completely, and 
 
 Dromote
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 3 
 
 promote the exemption of it from every 
 unwarrantable impofition ; which has a much 
 clofer connection with the intereft of reli- 
 gion, and virtue, than is generally ima- 
 gined. Whatever therefore may be the fate 
 of his reafonings, the author hopes the 
 freedom, which he takes of laying his fenti- 
 ments before the world, will not be cen- 
 fured. 
 
 In order to difcover the genuine Principles 
 of Toleration, it is necefTary to look back 
 to the original liberties of mankind : and 
 that, antecedently to the confideration of 
 their being formed into civil focieties, there 
 are certain rights belonging to them, inde- 
 pendent of all human grant, not derived 
 from any compact, and which are, therefore 
 to be acknowledged as the rights of human 
 nature, it is prefumed will not be called 
 into queftion. That a right to judge for 
 themfelves in points of religion, is, in thefe 
 circumftances, one of thefe rights, muft be 
 equally evident ; and to attempt a formal 
 proof of it, is needlefs. It is a principle, 
 in reality, fo obvioufiy true, and reafonable, 
 as to be fcarcely liable to contradiction, or 
 capable of illuftration. But the neceflary 
 confequences of this Universal right of 
 men may deferve more particular attention ; 
 for, while it authorizes every individual to 
 claim the exercife of this priviledge to 
 B 2 himfelf.
 
 $ An Enquiry into the true 
 
 himfelf, it obliges him to allow it, in the 
 very fame extent, to all about him ; and 
 eftablifhes one uniform regulation for his 
 behaviour towards others, and their beha^ 
 viour towards him. It is evident, for in- 
 ftance, that no apprehenfions of the truth, 
 and certainty of any perfon's religious fen- 
 timents, can juftify him in attempting to 
 impofe them on his neighbour : for the fame 
 right of judgment, which any one can claim, 
 belongs, on the fame principle, equally to 
 all, and ought to be equally facred, and in- 
 violable in all ; and no reafon can be al- 
 ledged by him for taking the religious li- 
 berty of others from them, but what will, 
 at the fame time, equally deftroy his own 
 title to it. It can juftify no man in break- 
 ing in upon the peace, property, or enjoy- 
 ments of others. They hold their claim to 
 be unmolefted in all thefe refpects, by the 
 fame tenure, by which he holds his : and 
 it is impofiible for him to fet it afide, in 
 their cafe, without virtually renouncing it 
 jn his own. The injuftice of all fucfy 
 encroachments upon him from others fol- 
 lows from the fame principle, with the fame 
 force of evidence ; and, if any attempt to- 
 wards them (hould be made, common fenfe 
 and equity muft condemn and oppofe it. In 
 fltort, whatever apprehenfions fome perfons, 
 not ufed to think qpon the fuhject, may en* 
 
 tertain
 
 Principles of Toleration, Zee. 5 
 
 tertain, that claiming fuch a. liberty of judg- 
 ment in religion for ourfelves might open 
 a door to invafions of the rights of others j 
 nothing is plainer, than that it gives not the 
 Jeaft real countenance to them. It places the 
 ftrongeft guard againft them, and may fafe- 
 Iy be adopted in all its juft confequences. 
 Whether this claim is weakened by men's 
 entering into civil fociety, is the next thing 
 to be confidered. 
 
 The great end of government is to pro- 
 tect the fubjefts of it from the injuries, to 
 which they were expofed in a ftate of na- 
 ture. Thefe injuries may be divided into 
 internal and external , or thofe to which per- 
 fons, who by any natural tie, or accidental 
 circumftance are connected together, are ob- 
 noxious from each other ; and thofe, to which 
 they are liable from any perfons, or number 
 of perfons, not thus connected with them. 
 This latter clafs of injuries is here out of 
 the queftion, and only thofe of the former 
 come under confideration. Now all injuries 
 imply, in the very notion of them, fome 
 rights, of which they are violations ; all the 
 care, which is taken to guard againft the vio- 
 lation of thefe rights, is an acknowledgment 
 of the reality and importance of them : and, 
 if the primary and leading view of govern- 
 ment be, as it has juft been ftated, to pre- 
 vent or reftrain thofe injuries, to which men 
 
 were
 
 6 'An Enquiry into the true 
 
 were expofed for want of its protection \ 
 it is evidently implied, that, when they enter 
 into civil fociety, they carry thefe rights 
 with them ; that they continue to retain 
 them j and that, inftead of fuppofing them- 
 felves to be deprived of them, the very de- 
 figri, with which they put themfelves under 
 the authority of government, is to secure 
 them the more firmly. I am very fenfible, 
 that this matter is, commonly, otherwife ap- 
 prehended. It is fuppofed by many, that, 
 when men enter into civil focieties, they give 
 up their liberties -, furrender their rights into 
 the hands of the ruling powers , and become 
 entirely dependent, for the enjoyment of any 
 part of them, on the pleafure of their fu- 
 periors. That this is in fact the general con- 
 fequence of their living in fociety, there can 
 be no doubt. But it is not by attending only 
 to the practice of Governors, and to the 
 extent of that mere force and power which is 
 fuppofed in the abftracl: notion of fupremacy, 
 to be annexed to their office ; it is not, I 
 fay, by appealing to thefe considerations, that 
 fuch queftions, as this before us, are to be 
 determined -, but by entering into the great 
 defign of that power, and attending to the 
 exprefs, or implied conditions, upon which 
 it is committed to them, and the meafures, 
 by which the exercife of it is to be adjufted. 
 
 It is certain, again, that reftraint is, in 
 
 fome
 
 Principles of toleration, tec. y 
 
 fome degree, efTential to the very being of 
 fubjection to government. Wherever it is 
 eftablifhed, there muft be fome common laws, 
 by which thofe, who live under it, muft agree 
 to be controuled. There muft be fome com- 
 mon ruler invefted with authority, and armed 
 with power, to enforce the obfervation of thofe 
 laws. The members of the fociety muft 
 confent to leave to the magiftrate the deter- 
 mination of thofe civil difputes, which they 
 either cannot, or do not, compromife between 
 themfelves ; and the punifhment of thofe vio- 
 lations of their rights, for which, if there 
 were no fuch perfon impowered to redrefs 
 their wrongs, they muft have done themfelves 
 juftice. In confequence of this they confent 
 to defift from thofe forcible methods of aven- 
 ging the injuries, which are offered them, to 
 which, in a ftate of independence on go- 
 vernment, all men have an equal right ; and 
 to have recourfe to thofe methods of relief, 
 which are appointed by the laws of the fo- 
 ciety to which they belong. But all this is 
 far, very far, from amounting to an abfolute 
 divefting themfelves of all thofe rights, which 
 they enjoyed antecedently to their forming 
 themfelves into fuch communities. It is, on 
 the, contrary, raifing up perfons to be the 
 defenders of them, and entrufting the prefer- 
 vation of them to common Guardians, by 
 whole intervention, it is prcfumed, they will 
 
 be
 
 8 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 be more vigoroufly afierted, and more eflrec* 
 tually protected, than it is poflible they 
 mould be in a Hate, where there is no com- 
 mon umpire to cheek the evils of oppreflion 
 on the one hand, and reftrain the no lefs 
 formidable evils of immoderate refentment 
 on the other. And if we only give ourfelves 
 leave to reflect a little on the nature of thofe 
 rights, the exercife of which they transfer 
 to the magiftrate, this will make the point 
 I am illuftrating yet clearer. 
 
 For what are the rights which men give up 
 to government ? Not thofe, which may moil 
 properly be ftiled the primary rights of human 
 nature. Not the right, which every innocent 
 man has, to live undifturbed, enjoy the ad- 
 vantages, which he juftly pofTefTes, and be 
 left to his freedom in all things, not injurious 
 to his fellow creatures ; but the confequen- 
 tial, though equally real and certain right, 
 which, where men are not fubject to govern- 
 ment, every perfon has to take the affertion 
 of all his rights into his own hands, and 
 correct the infringers of them, by the in- 
 fliction of fuch pains, or the ufe of fuch 
 other methods of deterring the authors of 
 the wrong, as reafon fhall warrant for his 
 future fecurity. And after all, if we fpeak 
 precifely, even these rights are not abfolutely 
 extinguimed and utterly loft, but fufpended 
 by fuch limitations, as the order and well- 
 being
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 9 
 
 being of fociety require, and fo long as the 
 fuccours of government fhall be effectual ; 
 as is evident from hence, that many cafes 
 may be fuppofed, and are frequently occur- 
 ring, even under the beft regulated govern- 
 ments, in which the ufe of force for our 
 own prefervation is not efteemed culpable, 
 even in a political fenfe. For it is granted, 
 I think by all, who have been moft valued 
 for their judgment in thefe fubjects, that 
 wherever the aid of the fociety is too diftant 
 to prevent the injury, and the evil, which, if 
 we neglect to fecure ourfelves, will be 
 brought upon us, is of fuch a nature as to 
 be irreparable by any redrefs which govern- 
 ment can give ; there all the original rights 
 of felf-defence return, and it is warrantable 
 to repel force by force. d Inquifition indeed 
 always is, and always ought to be made in 
 thefe cafes j to determine whether fuch neceflity 
 exifted : but, if it is found to have been real, 
 and urgent, and the impending evil was irre- 
 parable, and unavoidable by any other me- 
 thod , the felf-defence is allowed, even though 
 it proved fatal to the aggreffor, e From all 
 which it appears, that the primary rights of 
 liberty, fafety, and prote&ion from oppreflion 
 C ftili 
 
 d Puffendorff, L. ii. c. 5. . 7, 8. per Barbeyrac. 
 Grot. J. B. ic P. L. ii. c.i. . 37. Kdit. Barbeyrac, 
 
 e Sir William Blackftone's Commentaries, vol. i 
 p. i?o. 2d Edi:.
 
 io An Enquiry into the true 
 
 (till fubfift in their full vigour. To fuppofc 
 them abandoned, renounced and annihilated, 
 or that government can have any right to 
 deftroy them, is afcribing to it a right to 
 defeat the very end, for which it is eftablifh- 
 ed, and betray the truft repofed in it. It is 
 indeed totally inverting the principle, upon 
 which the power of rulers ftands, and by 
 which the acts of it ought to be guided. 
 Man was not made for government, but 
 government for man ; and the great object, 
 to which all the operations of it mould be 
 directed, is to guard, as much as poflible, 
 the equal, impartial, eafe and freedom of all 
 the fubjects of it. And if it mould be 
 thought by any that thefe expreffions are too 
 ftrong, the author is perfuaded they will alter 
 their opinion, upon their perufal of the fol- 
 lowing excellent paffage from Sir William 
 Blackftone's valuable Commentaries on the 
 Laws of England. It is needlefs to make an 
 apology for the length of the quotation : my 
 readers cannot wonder that I mould embrace 
 the opportunity of availing myfelf of fuch a 
 refpectable authority , and, whether they have 
 already perufed it or not, will dwell upon it 
 with pleafure. 
 
 " The principal aim of fociety," fays this 
 judicious writer, f " is to protect individuals 
 " in the enjoyment of thole ablolute rights, 
 
 " which 
 
 f Comment. Vol. i. p. 124. 126.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. u 
 
 " which were veiled in them by the immu- 
 " table laws of nature, but which could not 
 " be preferred in peace, without that mutual 
 " afiiftance and intercourfe, which is gained 
 " by the institution of friendly and focial com- 
 " munities. -r- Hence it follows, that the firft 
 " and primary end of human laws, is to main- 
 " tain and regulate thefe abfolute rights of 
 " individuals. Such rights as are focial and 
 " relative, refult from, and are pofterior to 
 " the formation of ftates and focieties ; fo 
 " that to maintain and regulate thefe is clear- 
 " ly a fubfequent confideration. And there- 
 " fore the principal view of human laws is, 
 " or always ought to be, to explain, protect 
 " and enforce fuch rights as are abfolute, 
 " which in themfelves are few and fimple ; 
 " and then fuch rights as are relative, which, 
 ft arifing from a variety of connexions, will be 
 " far more numerous and more complicated. 
 " 'The abfolute rights of man, (he goes on 
 " to obferve a few lines after,) confidered as 
 u a free agent, endowed with difcernment t^o 
 " know good from evil, and with power of 
 " chufing thofe meafures, which appear to 
 " him to be mod: defirable, are ufually fum- 
 " med up in one general appellation, and 
 " denominated the natural liberty of man- 
 " kind. This natural liberty confifts propcr- 
 " ly, in a power of acting as one thinks fit, 
 " without any restraint or controul , unlefs 
 C 2 " by
 
 j 2 An "Enquiry into the true 
 
 " by the law of nature ; being a right inhe-* 
 u rent in us by birth, and one of the gifts 
 " of God to man at his creation, v/hen he 
 *' endued him with the faculty of free will, 
 " But every man when he enters into fociety 
 " gives up a part of his natural liberty as 
 " the price of fo valuable a purchafe ; and, 
 " in eonfideration of receiving the advan- 
 " tages of mutual commerce, obliges himfelf 
 * e to conform to thofe laws, which the commu- 
 " nity has thought proper to eftablifh. And 
 " this fpecies of legal obedience and confor- 
 " mity is infinitely more defirable than that 
 " wild and favage liberty, which is facrificed 
 tc to obtain it. For no man that confiders 
 * c a moment, would wiih to retain the ab- 
 " folute and uncontrolled power of doing 
 " whatever he pleafes , the conference of 
 * c which is, that every other man would alfo 
 " have the fame power , and then there would 
 " be no fecurity to individuals in any of 
 " the enjoyments of life. Political, there- 
 f* fore, or civil, liberty, which is that of a 
 " member of fociety, is no other than na- 
 " tural liberty, fo far reftrained by human 
 " laws (AND NO FARTHER) as is ne- 
 " ceffary and expedient for the general ad- 
 '* vantage of the publick. Hence we may 
 " colle5b that the law, which reflrains a man 
 " from doing mifchief to his fellow citizens, 
 " though it diminifhes the natural, increafes 
 
 " the
 
 Principles of foleratiwt Sec. 13 
 
 " the civil liberty of mankind : but every 
 " wanton and caufelefs reftraint of the will 
 " of the fubject, whether practifed by a mo- 
 
 narch, a nobility, or a popular affembly, 
 " is a degree of tyranny. Nay, that even 
 " LAWS themfelves, whether made with or 
 ** without our eonfent, if they regulate and 
 < conftrain our conduct in matters of mere 
 ** indifference, without any good end in view, 
 <c are laws dcftru&ive of liberty , whereas, 
 ** if any publick advantage can arife from 
 
 obferving fuch precepts, the controul of our 
 ** private inclinations, in one or two particu- 
 ** lar points, will conduce to preferve our ge- 
 " ncral freedom, in others of more importance, 
 " by fupporting that ftate of fociety, which 
 " can alone fecure our independency. Thus 
 u the ilatute of King Edward IV. which 
 *' forbad the fine gentlemen of thofe times 
 ** (under the degree of a lord) to wear pikes 
 H upon their fhoes or boots of more than 
 " two inches in length, was a law that fa- 
 " voured of oppreflion ; becaufe, however 
 " ridiculous the fafhion then in ufe might ap- 
 " pear, the reftraining it by pecuniary penalties 
 " could ferve no purpofe of common utility. 
 " But the ftatute of King Charles II. which 
 " prefcribes a thing feemingly as indifferent, 
 " viz. a drefs for the dead, who are all or- 
 <c dered to be buried in woollen, is a law 
 " confident with public liberty ; for it en- 
 
 " courages
 
 14 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 " courages the ftaple trade, on which, in 
 " great meafure, depends the univerfal good 
 cc of the nation. So that laws, when pru- 
 " dently framed, are by no means fubverfive 
 " but rather introductive of liberty j for, (as 
 " Mr. Locke has well obferved) where there 
 " is no law there is no freedom. But then, 
 " on the other hand, that conftitution or 
 " frame of government, that fyftem of laws, 
 " is alone calculated to maintain civil liberty, 
 " which leaves the fubjec"t entire master 
 
 " OF HIS OWN CONDUCT, EXCEPT IN THOSE 
 " POINTS WHEREIN THE PUBLIC GOOD RE- 
 " QUIRES SOME DIRECTION OR RESTRAINT," 
 
 Thus far this able writer. Whether there 
 be any thing in the letter, or fpirit of our 
 laws, contrary to thefe noble declarations, is 
 a queftion, which needs not create the leaft 
 uneafinefs to the author of this valuable per- 
 formance. He could report the laws no 
 otherwife than he found them. If there 
 fhould be any fuch inconfiilency, it cannot in 
 the leaft invalidate the certainty, and weight 
 of the truths, which he has here delivered. 
 They hold, indeed, the rank of axioms in 
 the doctrine of government, carry their own 
 evidence with them, and merit the thanks 
 of all, who are cordially attached to the 
 caufe of liberty, and concerned for the ad- 
 vancement of the welfare of fociety. 
 
 Now
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 15 
 
 Now, of all the rights inherent in human 
 nature, that of thinking for ourfelves, and 
 following the conviction of our own judg- 
 ments in relation to the object of our faith, 
 worfhip, and religious obedience, is the moll 
 facred, incontestable, and, in every view of 
 it, intitled to the moft careful protection. 
 It is, in the nature of it, the moft important 
 to every Being capable of moral obligation. 
 It is the moft efTential to our peace, and 
 that which every good man will be moft 
 tenderly concerned to have fecured to him. If 
 therefore, the prefervation of the great natural 
 and abfolute rights of men be one of the chief, 
 I fhould, perhaps, rather have faid the very 
 first, of all the intentions, with which civil 
 focieties are inftituted, and the rulers of them 
 inverted with power j what is the confequence 
 from thefe premifes ? Mull it not be this, 
 that, in all governments, the rights of con- 
 fcience mould have a principal place af- 
 figned them in the care of thofe, to whom the 
 protection of their fellow creatures is com- 
 mitted ? If the fecuring of equal, impartial 
 liberty in all thofe inftances of it, in which 
 it is not injurious to others, be fo much 
 the object of every equitable, wife, and well 
 conftituted fyftem of laws, that all needlefs 
 encroachments upon it are deviations from 
 the fpirit, which ought to be diffufed through 
 all laws, and impair the very benefit, which 
 
 they
 
 16 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 they ought to confirm; can it be fuppofed 
 that the rights of confcience ought not to 
 be guarded from violation ? To take for 
 granted a renunciation of thefe rights, when 
 men enter into fociety, is, of all preemp- 
 tions, the moft groundlefs. They are the 
 laft rights, which men can ever be imagined 
 to give up to be modelled at the pleafure 
 of others ; nor is there any one principle 
 conne&ed with their fubmifilon to governors 
 in other refpects, from which fuch an infer- 
 ence can be deduced. Does it follow, that, 
 becaufe the magiftrate is etttrufted with au- 
 thority to decide difputes between Us and our 
 fellow citizens concerning property, he is au- 
 thorized alfo to determine points, which lie 
 only between God and our own confeiences ? 
 Becaufe it is allowed to be his office to guard 
 the peace of his fubjects, and to inflict punilh- 
 ments for this purpofe on thofe, who unjuftly 
 difturb it , is it to be taken for granted, that 
 he is to dictate to them what rule of faith 
 they fhall adopt, and in what manner they 
 are to worfhip the Deity, when it is allowed 
 on all hands, that of thefe things the will 
 of God is the only rule, and that no worfhip 
 can be acceptable to him, but what is ac- 
 companied with the fmcere conviction of 
 him who offers it ? Nay, there is no pre- 
 emption in advancing a ftep further, and 
 aiferting that fuch is the nature of this right ; 
 
 and
 
 Principles of Toleration^ &c. i / 
 
 arid in this refpect, it (lands upon a foun- 
 dation peculiar to itielf, and is diflinguiihed 
 from every other right, that it cannot be 
 given up. Property may be refigned, transfer- 
 red, or fubmitted to the regulation of others. 
 ** A man may in many inftances relinquifh 
 his cafe, and fubject himlelf to inconvcni- 
 ences* and, in fo doing, act not only an innc*- 
 eent but a laudable part. Cafes may occur, 
 in which a man may facrifice life itfelf, and 
 the facrifice may merit the higheft applaufe. 
 But his conscience, he cannot refrgn. To 
 prove all things, and hold fall that, which is 
 good, is not only a privilege but a duty ; art 
 obligation laid upon him, by the very nature 
 of religion and virtue, and from which he 
 cannot difcharge himfelf without departing 
 from the principles of both. It mult always 
 remain entire to him ; nor, while the princi- 
 ples of the moft reafonable liberty are al- 
 lowed to fubfift in their due extent, can any 
 attempt be confiftently made to take it from 
 him. 
 
 There is no difficulty in difcerning, that 
 while I am fpeaking in this manner, an 
 objection will offer itfelf to the reader ; and 
 that it will be fuppofed, that my own reafon- 
 ing may be retorted againft me. The more im- 
 portant conicience is repreiented, the more, 
 it will be faid, it falls under the infpection 
 of the mag;iltrate. To exempt it thus from 
 D hi.
 
 1 8 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 his jurifdiction will be thought laying a 
 foundation for excluding him, by degrees, 
 from taking that care of the fafety of his 
 fubjects, which is confcfled to be a part of 
 his office. Religion, it will be urged, may 
 be made a plea for any thing ; and, if go- 
 vernors muft never interpofe to reftrain it, 
 there is no enormity but what will pa<s 
 unpuniflied. But thefe objections arife en- 
 tirely from imperfect views of the principle, 
 which is here aflerted. To contend for a 
 right to think for themfelves in fome, and 
 deny it to others, might indeed be charge- 
 able with thefe confequences. But to con- 
 tend for this, as a right to which every 
 individual has a claim equally valid and 
 clear, never can be juftly liable to fuch an 
 imputation. For a man firft to own, that 
 not only he, but all around him have an 
 indifputable right, the very fame right with 
 himfelf, to be guided by their own con- 
 fciences in religion, (and let it be remem- 
 bered, it is thus the matter has all along 
 been ftated) for a man to allow this, I fay, 
 and yet make his perfuafion a pretence for 
 taking that liberty from them, is a contradic- 
 tion fo grofs and palpable, that it is fcarcely 
 conceivable a perfon in pofleffion of his 
 understanding can fall into it. Were a 
 perfon to be iuppofed capable of this ex- 
 travagance, every one would inftantly dii- 
 
 cern
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 19 
 
 cern that the very principle, upon which he 
 pretends to aft, condemns him. Were it a- 
 gain fuppofed, that the magiftrate was to 
 guard a part of his fubjects only in the 
 rights of confcience, it might be poflible 
 for that favourite part to make it a cover 
 for violating the peace and fafety of others 
 with impunity : but -, let this protection be 
 granted impartially to all of them, an4 no 
 fuch confequences can take place. For pro- 
 tection confifts in the prevention or fup- 
 preflion of injuries , and while this is allowed 
 to be the office and duty of the magiftrate, 
 the duty, which he is to difcharge equally 
 to every one under his care, he will always 
 have an unqueftionable right, as the guar- 
 dian of the whole community, whenever fuch 
 mifdemeanors are committed, to animadvert 
 upon the authors of them. Nor is main- 
 taining this at all repugnant to the general 
 principles here aflerted. For it is not in a 
 religious, but political view, that fuch difor- 
 ders come under his cognizance. It is not as 
 offences againft God, but as hurtful to the 
 community, and breaches of the peace that 
 he punifhes them. B Where this is not vio- 
 lated 
 
 B What is obferved above is not very different 
 from what has been often faid ; but there is one 
 thing more to be confidered here, which, though it 
 mull have occurred to every thinking perfon, I do net 
 
 remember
 
 20 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 lated, the right of following their own 
 convictions in religion without being mo- 
 lefted for it, continues : the more facred, im- 
 portant, and valuable it is, (and valuable it 
 muft be allowed to be to the advancement 
 of truth, the real intereft of fociety, and 
 
 the 
 
 remember to have feen fo diftin&ly mentioned as, 
 perhaps, it ought to have been, viz. that the cnfes, 
 in which the magiftrate. has a right thus tr imprpofe, 
 are the very fame, in which perfons out of civil fo-r 
 ciety would have a right to defend themfehes. Shouid 
 a man, in the (late of nature, be (o weak or {o 
 wicked as., from a real, or pretended, plea of con- 
 fcience, to opprefs, defraud, or in any re'pst mifufo 
 another, every individual thus injured would be juiti- 
 fied in punifmng, or (if that word mould oe thought 
 improper, where no government is fuppofed to exiit) 
 in retraining the tranfgreflbr by force. His neighbours 
 might lawfully affift him, or, if they thought it neceflary, 
 enter into a confederacy to defend themfelvss againft 
 ail fuch attempts, upoa their common, fecurity. This 
 right, indeed, lodged in the hand of the magiftrate, 
 will, in all probability, be much more equitably 
 and efFedually exerted, than by fingle, independent 
 perfons : but the end of fuch an exertion of it is 
 precifely the fame, the nature of the occafions upon 
 which he is to exercife this power is not changed, nor 
 is the lead right to ufe force in matters of confci- 
 ence, as fuch, acquired by him in confequence of his 
 having fuch a truft repofed in him. For his right 
 to fupport his authority in the juft execution of his 
 office neither enlarges, or contracts, the bounds of 
 any part of the office itfelf; the extent of which is 
 always to be determined by the extent of thofe rights, 
 for the defence of which he was invefted with his
 
 Principles cf Toleration, &c. 21 
 
 the caufe of pure and undefiled religion) 
 the more effectually it mould be guarded 
 from every encroachment upon it : and by 
 this general rule, the real, genuine principles 
 of Toleration are to be determined. 
 
 Let what has been obferved then be ap- 
 plied to this purpofe. And we may collect 
 from it in what light Toleration in general 
 ought to be confidered. There is room to 
 think, (more room than was till of late ap- 
 prehended) that it is confidered by many as 
 a matter of mere grace or favour, which 
 government has a right to withhold, grant, 
 abridge, or refume at pleafure. But, if the 
 arguments, which have been advanced, are 
 conclufive, it ftands on a totally different 
 foundation. It is the acknowledgment and 
 confirmation of a right , not one of thofe 
 adventitious rights, which are fubfequent to 
 the eftablifhment of civil focieties, and arife 
 out of the peculiar forms and conftitutions 
 of them ; but of thofe higher rights, which 
 belong to men as fuch, and which ought 
 to be preferved under all Hates and govern- 
 ments whatfoever. It is a branch of pro- 
 tection, which ought to be as effectually, 
 univerfally and impartially fecured, as pio- 
 tection in the enjoyment and exercife of any 
 other right, which can be named. The ex- 
 tent of it again, or, to fpeak more precifely, 
 what is comprehended in the juft idea of it, 
 
 flows
 
 22 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 flows from the fame principles with equal 
 evidence. If liberty of confcience be a right 
 eflential to human nature, all penalties, in 
 cafes merely of a religious nature, muft be 
 an infringement of a right, and a degree of 
 oppression, though inflicted by a law : nor 
 can the expreflion be juftly thought improper* 
 Every law is oppreflive, which is unjuft ; 
 every law is unjuft, which fubverts the eflen- 
 tial rights of mankind : and, if to judge for 
 ourfelves in religion be one of the firft and 
 moft inviolable of all thofe, which have ever 
 been dignified with this title ; it is evident, 
 that every hardfhip, laid upon men for ufing 
 it, is a degree of oppreflion, which the com- 
 plete and perfect idea of Toleration excludes. 
 And, from the fame principles, it can furely 
 be no difficult matter to determine who are 
 entitled to this protection. For this does not 
 depend on the fuppofed truth or error of the 
 fentiments which men may adopt ; but upon 
 the common right which all men have, to 
 be led in thefe points by the light of their 
 own minds, and to enjoy all the fecurities 
 and benefits of fociety, while they fulfil the 
 obligations of it. All, who can give good 
 fecurity to the government, under which they 
 live, and to the community to which they 
 belong, for the performance of the duties of 
 good fubjects and good citizens, have an 
 undoubted claim to it, and cannot with any 
 
 juft
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 23 
 
 juft reafon be deprived of it. If, indeed, 
 there are any, whofe religious principles put 
 it out of their power to give fuch affurances 
 of this, as may be fafely trufted, their cafe 
 may be thought an excepted one ; though 
 in ftridlnefs of fpeech fuch cafes are not fo 
 properly exceptions from the rule laid down, 
 as cafes, which can never with reafon be fup- 
 pofed to be included in it ; for to fay, that 
 all, who give proper, fatisfactory pledges for 
 their being faithful fubjects, have a right to 
 Toleration, can never give thofe the fame 
 right to it, who are incapable of giving fuch 
 pledges. But whatever fuch cafes may at 
 any time appear, or be fuppofed now to exift, 
 the principle upon which this argument is 
 conducted (lands untouched. It is not on 
 account of their miftakes in religion, but 
 their incapacity to be fteady friends to the 
 (late, that they are laid under reftraints. To 
 fix thefe reftraints upon any other footing, 
 would be rendering them utterly indefenfible. 
 It is not error, but injury to the (late, or 
 the individuals, who are under the care of 
 it, which juftirles the animadverfion of the 
 magiftrate ; and all, to whom this cannot be 
 juftly imputed, are the objects of his pro- 
 tection : nor ought it to make any difference, 
 in this refpect, what are the comparative 
 numbers of thofe different bodies of men, 
 which cornpofe the fociety. As the magif- 
 trate
 
 24 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 trate is not to attempt to diftrefs any of 
 them, becaufe they differ from him in judg- 
 ment ; fo neither is he at liberty to facrifice 
 one part to the clamour and bigotry of the 
 other ; but, as the common defender of juf- 
 tice, equity and peace, impartially to preferve 
 the freedom of them all. And here this part 
 of the fubject might be dimhTed, were it 
 not that the intervention of eftablifhments of 
 religion makes, in the opinion of many, a 
 great alteration in the extent of this religious 
 liberty ; for which reafon there feems to be 
 a neceflity of confidering the grounds, and 
 confequences of them a little diftinctly. 
 
 That eftablifhments cannot be juflly found- 
 ed on a right in the magiftrate to impofe his 
 own fentiments in religion upon his people, 
 muft, if the reafonings hitherto purfued are 
 allowed to be folid, be fufficiently clear. For 
 whence can this right arife ? It cannot accrue 
 to him by virtue of his office. That is mere- 
 ly civil , and for him to affume the direction 
 of confcience in confequence of it would be 
 going beyond the end of his power, and ex- 
 ceeding the bounds of his authority. It can- 
 not be given him by the confent of his fub- 
 jects. To give up the independence of con- 
 fcience upon merely human authority, to any 
 government, is making a facrifice to it, which 
 they have no right to make. In this fenfe, 
 they are not at liberty to call any man maf-
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 25 
 
 ter upon earth; and from hence it is no 
 obfcure, nor diflant, but a near and obvious 
 inference, that to fuppofe the office of the 
 magiilrate juftifies him in demanding fuch a 
 fubmiffion from thofe, who are under his 
 power, is to make it incompatible with re- 
 ligion, and letting the duties of the man and 
 the citizen at irreconcileable variance. Let 
 it be ferioufly confidered to what this leads. 
 If religion has a real foundation, and the 
 obligations of it are immutable, and yet no 
 man can become a fubjecl of civil govern- 
 ment, without implicitly refigning his con- 
 fcience into the hands of the magiilrate ; 
 upon this fuppofition, I fay, (for, let it be 
 obferved, it is only upon this fuppofition 
 that this argument is formed) fubmiffion to 
 magiilracy will be unjuftifiable, and go- 
 vernment itfelf will be fhaken : fince it af- 
 fumes to itfelf an authority, which no earthly 
 power can claim, and exacts a fubje&ion 
 which no man can have a right to yield,- 
 If, again, to fupport government on this 
 principle, it mould be aiferted, that the ma- 
 giilrate has fuch an authority over conscience, 
 what becomes of religion ? For a proper 
 authority.in the governor to prelcribe, will al- 
 ways bring with it a correfpondent obligation, 
 on the governed, to obey : nor is this confe- 
 quence to be evaded by laying, that, in fuch 
 cafes, a man mud be willing to fubmit to fuf- 
 E ferings,
 
 26 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 feririgs, rather than do evil. Where a rule of 
 truth and duty is acknowledged independent 
 on, and fuperior to, the pleafure of the magif- 
 trate, this reply is good. But if the direction 
 of the magiftrate is allowed to be the rule 
 of our conscience, or the ftandard, by 
 ' which we are to govern our fentiments, and 
 practice, in points relating to God ; confor- 
 mity to it will become the higheft principle 
 of our actions, and v/hatever he enjoins mull 
 of courfe be our duty. However he mo- 
 dels, enlarges, or contracts religion, (let it 
 be remembered this argument is ftill con- 
 ducted upon this fuppofition only) it is our 
 part to obey ; and, though he fhould com- 
 mand things contrary even to his own con- 
 fcience, which from political or other views 
 is very poflible, we muft be bound in 
 confcience to comply. And is this, I was 
 going to afk, a principle which can be a- 
 dopted by any one, who knows what religion 
 and virtue mean, and is animated with a 
 fincere regard to either ? But it is needlefs. 
 To afcribe fuch a power as this to any 
 earthly fuperior is in reality to annihilate 
 religion ; and, inftead of fuppofing it to 
 have a real immoveable foundation in truth, 
 to refolve it all into the will of a fallible 
 mortal. Nor will it be eafy for perfons to 
 extricate themfelves from the difficulties, 
 which thus prefs them clofe on both fides, 
 
 till
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec. iy 
 
 till they are brought to feparate the power 
 of the magiftrate to guard the rights and 
 fafety of the fubject, and maintain his own 
 authority for that purpofe, from a right to 
 afiume a junfdiction over confeience, which 
 belongs to a much higher tribunal ; and thus, 
 while they render unto Casfar the things 
 which are Caefar's, referve for God, the 
 things which are God's. 
 
 The only juft, reafonable and honourable 
 conception of human eftablifhments of reli- 
 gion, is that of provisions made by the 
 governors of a ftate, for advancing the 
 knowledge and practice of religion and vir- 
 tue. According to this idea they ftand on 
 the fame bafis, and may properly be refer- 
 red to the fame general rank, with all pub- 
 lick institutions for the cultivation of the 
 minds, and improvement of the morals of 
 men : only, when well conftrucled, incom- 
 parably fuperior to them all, in weight, in- 
 fluence, and dignity. They are in our own 
 country, if I may be allowed the expref- 
 fion, (in which I am fure not the mod 
 diftant thought of difrefpect to our eccle- 
 fiaftical eftablifhment is admitted) they are, I 
 fay, incorporations by the legislature for 
 the propagation of the gofpel at home ; and, 
 by a wife profecution of the ends of them, 
 may be productive of Angular benefits to the 
 prefent and future interefts of men. But 
 E % then,
 
 2# An Enquiry into the true 
 
 then, confidered in this light, I apprehend 
 they cannot be deemed laws for the whole 
 community, and univerfally binding on the 
 members of it , but endowments in favour of 
 thofe, who comply with the terms of them,, 
 and fubmit to the regulations enjoined by 
 them. As human appointments they may- 
 be examined, and have any defects attending 
 them calmly pointed out , and methods for 
 the improvement of them may be laudably 
 fuggefted Whatever political neceffities may 
 in fome cafes have given rife to provifions to 
 the contrary, in themfelves they muft certain- 
 ly be akerable : and as it is a principle, in all 
 well constituted governments, that no parti- 
 cular inilitutions erected by them, mould 
 contradict thofe primary maxims, by which 
 all civil focieties ought to be guided ; fo it 
 mull be farther allowed, that eftablifhments of 
 religion themfelves fhould be regulated with 
 a religious regard to thefe maxims. Proceed- 
 ing now upon thefe data, it will be eafy to 
 arrive at the proper conclufion. For if, in 
 all human focieties, the religious rights of all 
 men ought to be preferved to them inviola- 
 ble ; if it be a maxim too certain to be de- 
 nied, and too important to be given up, that 
 every man in the choice of his religion, is 
 to confider himfelf as accountable to God, 
 and bound to worfliip him according to his 
 will, and not according to the commandment 
 
 of
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec. 29 
 
 of men , if thefe are truths, there can be no 
 difficulty in difcerning, that all forcible me- 
 thods of bringing perfons to comply with 
 religious eftablifhments are abfolutely un- 
 warrantable. No encroachments on the na- 
 tive, original, rights of men, to procure 
 them a more extenfive reception, can be 
 juflified. Perfuafion alone is the inftrument, 
 by which they fhould gain ground. The 
 evidence of their doctrines, the goodnefs of 
 their inftitutions, and their conformity to 
 the great ftandard, by which they are con- 
 fefledly to be tried, are the only arguments 
 by which they are to be recommended ; 
 and no power mould be annexed to them, 
 or exerted in favour of them, to compel 
 fuch as difTent from them to embrace them. 
 Upon what principle, indeed, can the ufe 
 of fuch coercive meafures be juftified ? Of 
 themfelves, eftablifhments can claim no au- 
 thority to employ force for this purpofe. 
 The civil power gives them their exiftence, 
 invefts them with their privileges, and con- 
 fers upon them every diftin&ion, which they 
 pofiefs. If the magiftrate has no right to 
 exercife dominion over confeience, in himlelf, 
 lie can impart no fuch right to them ; nor 
 can they acquire it in confequence of his 
 appointment : for, however he may think 
 proper to encourage the members of them, 
 the limits of his power, with refpect to the 
 
 other
 
 30 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 other members of the community, are Hill 
 the fame. Their common rights, as good 
 fubjects, are not deftroyed or lefTened-, nor 
 can any zeal for his own fentiments, or the 
 fentiments of one part of his fubjects, vindi- 
 cate his withholding his protection from 
 the other. And no judicious friend of efta- 
 blifhments can be difpleafed with the manner 
 in which thefe points are here ftated, or 
 think it has any unfriendly aipet, on the 
 ufefulnefs and honour of fuch appointments. 
 Thofe, who are for building them on the 
 ruins of the rights of human nature, and 
 can never be fatisfied that they are fafe, or 
 can be permanent, till all, who in any inftance 
 depart from them, are brought into fubjecltion 
 to them, are, in fact and eventually, their moil 
 dangerous enemies. It is from this excefiive 
 zeal for them, that fome of the ftrongeft pre- 
 judices againft thefe inftitutions have derived 
 their exiftence. To reprefent them as carry- 
 ing fuch claims with them is, in reality, taking 
 the fureft way to difcredit them ; and the 
 greateft harveft of profelytes, gathered by fuch 
 means, would be no acceflion to their praife, 
 or any advantage to the caufe of religion. 
 " Cultus dei nullus ell nifi ab animo vo- 
 " lente procedat. Voluntas autem docenda 
 " $c fuadendo elicitur : non minis non vi, 
 " Coactus qui credit, non credit fed credere 
 *' fe fimulat ut malum vitet. Qui mali fen? 
 
 " fu,
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, Sec. 31 
 
 " fu aut metu extorquere affenfum vult, eo 
 " ipfo oftendit fe argumentis diffidere." Grot, 
 de Verit. R. C. Lib. vi. . 7. 
 
 In all the views then, which have been 
 taken of this fubject, the refult is the fame , 
 that liberty in matters of religion is the 
 right of all ; that a right to protection from 
 the magiftrate is the juft confequence of their 
 claim to this liberty ; and that no difference 
 of opinion, refpecting modes of worfhip, or, 
 in a word, any thing, which does not inter- 
 fere with the rights of others, can juftify 
 his laying any reftraints upon it. And great 
 would be the pleafure to every liberal mind, 
 if, amid ft all the inftances of a wife and 
 vigorous attention to other branches of li- 
 berty, which run through the general fyftem 
 of our excellent laws, this alfo had been 
 kept more fteadily in view. But to the 
 religious rights of men, it is apprehended 
 that feveral of our laws are not altoge- 
 ther fo favourable ; and if, upon an appli- 
 cation of the principles, here advanced on 
 the fubject of Toleration, to them, this (hall 
 be found to be the cafe, it is hoped that 
 pointing it out will give no offence. To 
 fay of the bed code of human ftatutes that 
 they are not without defects, can be no un- 
 due prefumption ; nor can defiring to have 
 thefe defects removed have any thing in it 
 inconfiftent with the character of the bell 
 
 friends
 
 32 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 friends to our conftitution. And if in this 
 part of my defign feveral particulars ihould 
 be mentioned, which have been more than 
 once laid before the publick ; it is not be- 
 caufe there is the leaft defire to give dif- 
 gufl to any perfons among us, or be- 
 caufe any pleafure is taken in the recital -, 
 but for this reafon only, that if they were 
 omitted, the juftice and weight of the re- 
 flections made upon the fubjecr. could not 
 be underflood. 
 
 Laws relating to DifTenters from the efta- 
 blifhed religion in popiffi reigns have no con- 
 cern here. They are all, it is prefumed, either 
 formally or virtually repealed. But upon the 
 revival of the reformation, an act was paffed, h 
 by which it is enacted, that all, who " have 
 " no lawful, or reafonable excufe to be abfent, 
 u fhall endeavour themfelves to refort to 
 *' their parifh church, &x. where common 
 " prayer fhall be ufed, upon pain of punim- 
 " ment by the cenfures of the church, and 
 " upon pain that every perfon fo offending, 
 " fhall forfeit, for every fuch offence, twelve 
 " pence." By a fecond ftatute, * paffed in the 
 fame reign, the fame offence, in every perfon 
 above the age of fixteen years, fubjeefs the 
 offender to a fine of twenty pounds for every 
 
 month, 
 
 h Statutes at large, by Basket and Lintot, 1758. 
 vol. ii. 1 Eliz. cap. 2. . 14. 
 
 J 23 Eliz. C3p. 1. .5.
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 33 
 
 month, during which he fhall fo offend 5 
 and if the faid offence ihall be continued 
 for a twelvemonth, he fhall " over and 
 befides the faid forfeitures," be bound with 
 two fufficient fecurities in the fum of two 
 hundred pounds at leaft, to his good beha- 
 viour, and this bond to continue in force 
 until they " conform themfelves, and come 
 " to the church, according to the true mean- 
 " ing of the ftatute made in the firft year of 
 " her Majefty's reign." In the 29th of the 
 fame reign, another act was patted, to enforce 
 that juft mentioned of the 23d ; and after that 
 the celebrated act of the 35th of Eliz. took 
 place, by which, attendance on the fervice of 
 the common prayer is again required ; k and 
 all perfons above the age of fixteen, who, be- 
 fides abfenting themfelves from the eftablifhed 
 divine fervice for the fpace of a month, fhall 
 be prefent at any affembly, conventicle, or 
 meeting, under pretence of any exercife of 
 religion, contrary to the laws and ftatutes of 
 the realm, are made fubject to imprifonment, 
 in which they are to remain till they conform, 
 and make fuch fubmiffion and declaration of 
 
 conformity, as is afterwards enjoined. ' 
 
 All offenders who do not, within three months 
 after conviction, conform and make fuch fub- 
 miflion, upon warning by the act preicribed, 
 are obliged to abjure the realm ; and it is 
 F farther 
 
 k 35 Eliz. cap. 1. . i, 2. ' Sect. 3. ejufd. cap.
 
 34 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 farther enacted, that if they either refufe to 
 abjure, or if, after abjuration made, they do 
 not depart ; or if, after their departure, they 
 return without fpecial licence from her Ma- 
 jefty, in every fuch cafe, the perfon offending 
 mall be adjudged a felon, and fuffer as in 
 cafes of felony, without benefit of clergy. 
 
 In the two following reigns little occurs 
 in the ftatutes which is very material to my 
 prefent purpofe. Some acts indeed were paf- 
 ied, in the time of James I. againft recu- 
 fants, containing fome claufes, which, it is 
 implied in the act of Toleration, might, as 
 well as thofe mentioned, be extended to protec- 
 tant diffenters , but of thefe I fhall not enter 
 into any detail. From the 4th year of Charles 
 I. to the 1 6th no Englifh parliament was 
 held -, the firft called that year was almoft 
 inftantly diffolved, m and, after the meeting of 
 the fecond, confufions broke out ; a total 
 fubverfion of the eftablifhed church enfued ; 
 a new ecclefiaftical polity rofe up in its room ; 
 and ordinances in many refpects equally fe- 
 vere, and repugnant to all the principles of 
 chanty, juftice and humanity, with thofe 
 which have been mentioned, were publifhed 
 by the powers, which had then the afcen- 
 dant, in fupport of it. But foon after the 
 Reftoration things returned into their former 
 
 channel^, 
 
 !n It met the 13th of April, and was diffolved the 
 cth of May. Macadey's Hift.
 
 Principles of ^oleration^ &c. %$ 
 
 channel, and new laws againft thofe, who did 
 not conform to the ecclefiaftical eftablifhment 
 were introduced; of which notice mult be 
 taken. The celebrated act of uniformity, 
 1 662, forbids n any perfon, not having epii- 
 copal ordination, to celebrate the Lord's 
 Supper, under the penalty of one hundred 
 pounds for every offence ; another claufe of 
 the fame act declares, that every perfon, who 
 is by that act difabled, [and the 15 Car. II. 
 cap. vi. feet. 7. adds prohibited from preach- 
 ing,] who mall during fuch difability preach 
 any fermon or lecture, fhall be imprifoned 
 for three months. By feet. 8. of the fame act 
 it is enacted that every fchoolmafter, though 
 only teaching youth in any houfe, or private 
 family, (hall fubferibe a declaration contain- 
 ing, among other things, a promife to p con- 
 form to the liturgy of the church of En- 
 gland as by law eftablifhed ; and it is added q 
 that if any fchoolmafter, or other perfon 
 teaching youth in any private houfe or fa- 
 mily, fhall undertake fuch inftruction before 
 licence obtained, from the arch bifhop, bi- 
 fhop, or ordinary of the diocefe, and " before 
 " fuch fubfeription and acknowledgment," 
 as is by this act enjoined, he fhall, for the 
 firft offence, fuffer three months imprifonment, 
 and for the fecond, and every other offence, 
 F 2 fuffer 
 
 . 14 of the att. . 21. p . 9. 
 
 1 . 11.
 
 36 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 fuffer the fame imprifonment, with the addi- 
 tional penalty of the forfeiture of five pounds. 
 Before this, by the very firft act r of this fef- 
 fion, it had been made criminal for five or more 
 of the perfons called quakers, of or above the 
 age of fixteen, to affemble themfelves at one 
 time in any place, under pretence of joining 
 in a religious worfhip not authorized by the 
 laws of this realm : the penalty appointed is 
 any fum not exceeding five pounds for the firft 
 offence, or ten pounds for the fecond-, and 
 for want of diflrefs, or in cafe of non-payment 
 within a week, imprifonment and hard labour 
 for the fpace of three months for the firft 
 offence, fix for the fecond : and for the third 
 offence it is enjoined, that they fhall either 
 abjure the realm, or be liable to tranfpor- 
 tation , unlefs they take fuch oath or oaths s 
 for which they ftand committed, and give 
 fecurity that they will, tor time to come, 
 forbear to meet in any luch unlawful affem- 
 bly : in which cafe they are discharged of 
 the penalties aforefaid. In the year 1665, 
 the act for restraining non-conformifts from 
 inhabiting in corporations, generally known 
 at that time, and mentioned by writers 
 fince, by the name of the five mile acl, was 
 patTed. l By this ftatute, all parfons, &c. 
 who have not declared their unfeigned affent, 
 
 &c. 
 
 r 13, 14 Car. II, cap, i. . 2. s . 5, 
 
 t 17 Car. 11. cap. ii.
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 37 
 
 &c. and have not fubfcribed the declaration 
 contained in feci:. 9. of the late act of unifor- 
 mity, u and fhall not take the oath prefcribed 
 by this act, (and all perfons preaching in any 
 unlawful aflembly,) are forbidden, till they 
 have taken this oath, to refide within five 
 miles of any town, which fends members to 
 parliament, or of any place, wherein they had, 
 fince the act of oblivion, been parfons, &c. 
 under the penalty of forty pounds for each 
 offence , and, upon refufal of the oath, after 
 fuch offence fworn againft them, are liable to 
 imprifonment for fix months. And fuch per- 
 fons are farther enjoined, w " to frequent divine 
 " fervice, as eftablifhed by the laws of this 
 " kingdom,'* or elfe to abftain from teaching 
 publick or private fchool, or from taking any 
 boarders or tablers, to be inftructed by them- 
 felves or by any other, upon pain of forfeiting, 
 in like manner for every fuch offence, the fum 
 of forty pounds. And this wars followed, in 
 the 22d year of the fame reign, by another 
 act againft conventicles, x which fubjects eve- 
 ry perfon of the age of fixteen years, who 
 fhall be prefent at any affembly, &c. under 
 colour or pretence of any exerciie of religion, 
 in other manner than according to the liturgy 
 and practice of the church of England, to a 
 fine of five millings for the firft offence, y and 
 of ten {hillings for every fucceeding one. z 
 
 The 
 u 13, 14 Car. If. cap. iv. v . 4. x 22 Car. IT. 
 cap. i. y . i. z . z. 
 
 .'Ji)J 066
 
 38 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 The preacher at every fuch affembly is liable 
 to the penalty of twenty pounds for the firft: 
 offence, and of forty pounds for each fuc- 
 ceeding one. a By the fame ad, a fine of 
 five pounds is impofed on all conftables, &c. 
 who fhall willingly omit giving information, 
 of fuch meetings or conventicles held with- 
 in his precincts, &c. to fome juftice of the 
 peace, or the chief magiftrate ; b and then it 
 is declared, contrary to the general rule 
 with refpect to all penal ftatutes, d viz. that 
 they muft be conftrued ftrictly, that " this 
 " act and all claufes therein contained, fhall 
 " be conftrued mod largely and beneficially 
 " for the fupprefiing of conventicles, and 
 " for the j unification and encouragement of 
 " all perfons to be employed in the execu- 
 " tion thereof." Upon this footing I ap- 
 prehend the laws againft aftemblies for reli- 
 gious worfhip, in any manner not conform- 
 able to the eftablifhed, remained during the 
 refidue of that reign, and through the reign 
 which fucceeded it. What alteration was 
 made in them, by the aft of Toleration, will 
 be more properly confidered hereafter ; in 
 the mean time let us take a review of them, 
 as far as this account has been continued. 
 
 And nothing, I think, can be more evi- 
 dent than that, through the whole tenor of 
 
 them 
 
 a 3- b ". c . 13. 
 * Blackllone's Comment, introd. . 3. p. 88.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 39 
 
 them, non-conformity, mere fimple non-con- 
 formity to the eftablifhed worfhip, and join- 
 ing in religious worfhip in any manner not 
 according to the practice of the church of 
 England, are confidered as proper objects of 
 punifhment by the civil power, and loaded with 
 heavy penalties. I am fenfible it may be faid, 
 and juftice requires it mould be acknowledged, 
 that feveral of thefe laws were originally or 
 chiefly levelled againft the roman catholicks, e 
 and that the incurable enmity which they dis- 
 covered to the perfon and government of 
 Queen Elizabeth, was the caufe of their being 
 pafTed. It may pofiibly be faid farther, that 
 as the roman catholicks were the perfons 
 againft whom the penalties of thefe acts 
 were chiefly intended, fo abfenting from 
 church is confidered in them as a mark of 
 popifh diflaffection, and that it is for this 
 reafon fuch a ftrong guard is placed againft 
 it. Let this alfo be admitted, as far as 
 it can with any juftice be defired. It mult 
 neverthelefs be acknowledged, that the bare 
 act of abfenting from the eftablifhed worfhip, 
 abftracted from any connexion with other ob- 
 noxious circumftances, is prohibited that in 
 confequence of thefe laws, thofe penalties 
 might fall, indifcriminately, on all who did 
 not comply with thefe claufes of them ; and, 
 
 from 
 
 e Preamble to 13 Eliz. cap. ii. Heads of cap. i. 
 and preamble to 23 of Eliz. cap. i.
 
 40 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 from 1662 to the Revolution, it will not be 
 difputed, I imagine, but the whole body 
 of thofe, who did not join in the eftablifhed 
 worfhip, were fuppofed to be comprehended 
 under them. f The act of the ift of Eliza- 
 beth, appears to be directly and originally 
 intended againft: all who did not thus con- 
 form. The aft of the 35th of Elizabeth 
 mult be allowed to be aimed againft fectaries 
 in general : and, whoever is acquainted with 
 the ftate of things at the palling of it, will 
 have little doubt but that it was defigned to 
 affect the puritans, if not principally, yet 
 equally with any other. If I had faid it was 
 contrived almolt folely with a view to them, I 
 mould not, I preiume, have erred ; fince it is 
 declared in the fame act, g that no popifli 
 recufant mail be compelled or bound to 
 abjure, by virtue of it. That it was on 
 account of protestant dilTenters from the 
 national form of worfhip, that all the laws 
 made in the time of Charles II. which I have 
 been now enumerating, that it was, I fay, on 
 their account, that thefe ftatutes were palTed, 
 and againft them that they were immediately 
 intended to operate, is univerfally allowed. 
 Roman catholicks, it is well known, were 
 
 the 
 
 f The ftatute of 16 Car. II. cap. iv. for fupprefling 
 of feditious conventicies exprefly declares the 35th of 
 Eliz. to be in force, and that it ought to be put in 
 execution. 
 
 8 . 12.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 41 
 
 the favoured party, with fome of thofe at 
 the helm, during a confiderable part of that 
 reign. Whatever was done to reftrain them 
 was extorted by the voice and the murmurs 
 of the people, and the remonftrances of the 
 two houfes, when they began to be aware of 
 the defigns of the court. The proteftant non- 
 conforming were the obnoxious kt of men, 
 who were to be harrafled and oppreffed. 
 No fhort indulgencies were granted them, 
 but what were fufpe&ed, at lead, to proceed 
 from fome dangerous defigns ; and when it 
 was found that no ftratagem was effectual to 
 bring them to countenance meafures, which 
 they judged inconfiftent with the liberties of 
 their country, and hazardous to the intereft 
 of the proteftant religion, all the power, 
 which the laws had thrown into the hands 
 of their enemies, was exerted to crufh them 
 with as much eagernefs as ever. 
 
 Now, in order to juftify thefe laws, it 
 mull be fuppofed that non-conformity is in 
 itself a crime, and a very heinous one. 
 For to fay that the laws have made it a 
 crime is faying nothing : fince, upon this 
 principle, there is no action, how innocent, 
 how laudable foever, but what may be con- 
 verted into a crime, and the law, by which it 
 is punifhed, may be vindicated. If this me- 
 thod of reafoning be juft, it was a crime in 
 Daniel to perfiit in his devotions after they 
 G were
 
 42 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 were forbidden by the decree of Darius ; and 
 the death, which the enemies of that noble 
 example of fortitude in the worlhip of the true 
 God, infilled on his Suffering, was no more 
 than he merited. By this argument it was cri- 
 minal in any of the Jews to acknowledge Jefus 
 as the Meffiah, becaufe it had been made a 
 rule among them, that if any man did con- 
 fefs that Jefus was the Chrift, he fhould be 
 put out of the fynagogue. When the fpirit 
 and fitnefs of any laws are under confideration, 
 the determining point is, what reafons there 
 were, antecedently to their being enacted, to 
 induce the legislators to adopt them ; and 
 the queftion in all penal laws in particu- 
 lar muft be, whether the thing prohibited 
 by them is ' in itfelf a juft object of punifh- 
 ment. If this great requifite to their j uni- 
 fication be wanting, all attempts to defend 
 them will be impotent and vain. 
 
 To affert, that non-conformity to the efta- 
 blifhed religion of any country, is in itfelf 
 an offence againfl the flate, is to maintain a 
 pofition unsupported by fcripture, reafon and 
 experience, and indeed confuted by every one 
 of them. St. Paul evidently fuppofes, that 
 non-conformifts might be the bell of fubjects 
 to the civil magiflrate, when he enjoins chris- 
 tians, whofe religious principles flood in the 
 mofl direct oppofition to the eftablifned wor- 
 fhip of the heathens, to be " fubjecl to the 
 
 " higher
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 43 
 
 " higher powers," b and commands that they 
 fhould be taught to be " iubjed: to principa- 
 *' lities and powers, to obey magiftrates, and 
 " to be ready to every good work." ' St. Peter 
 muft have been fully convinced that difap- 
 probation of the authorized religion of the 
 Roman empire was perfectly confiftent with 
 loyalty to the rulers of it, when he requires 
 thofe to whom he wrote, k " to be fubjecl to 
 " every ordinance of man for the Lord's 
 " fake i whether to the emperor ' as fupreme, 
 " or unto governors as unto thofe, who are 
 " fent by him for the punifhment of evil- 
 " doers, and the praife of them that do well : " 
 and yet, while he warns none of them to 
 fuffer as evil-doers, encourages them, if they 
 fuffer as chriftians, not to be afhamed, but 
 to glorify God on this account. Where in- 
 deed is the repugnance between not aiTenting 
 to the eftablifhed worihip, and retaining at 
 the fame time the warmefl: affection to the 
 welfare of the flate ? Men may yield fub- 
 jeclion to the civil laws of their country, and 
 bear their fhare of the publick burthens ; be 
 zealoufly attached to their fovereign, benevo- 
 lent to their fellow fubjects, unite with them 
 in their endeavours to fupport the authority of 
 the government, and to refift their common 
 enemies whether foreign or domeftick ; and, 
 G 2 in 
 
 h Romans xiii. i. ' Titus Hi. !. 
 
 k 1 Ep. ii. 13. x Grot, & Beza on the verfe.
 
 44 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 in a word, enter chearfully into every mea- 
 fure, which is neceffary to advance the peace, 
 profperity, and reputation of the community, 
 though they may differ widely in their reli- 
 gious fentiments from their fuperiors, or from 
 the majority of thofe about them. Nor is 
 this mere theory. It is certain and notori- 
 ous fact. In Switzerland we have an inftance 
 which comes nearly up to this. There pro- 
 teftant and popifh cantons are all vigorous 
 in keeping a confederacy, for the preferva- 
 tion of their common liberty, unbroken. In 
 the United Provinces we have an inftance 
 which comes nearer to it {till. Calvinifts, ar- 
 minians, and other religious denominations of 
 that republick, have unanimoufly fhown them- 
 selves ready to afTert its freedom , purfued 
 the interefl of their country with unremitting 
 attention j and, notwithstanding all their va- 
 riety of religious tenets, live amicably one 
 with another. Our own nation has for many 
 years happily afforded us a cafe of this na- 
 ture, which is fully in point ; and whoever 
 looks back to the year 1745, and recollects 
 the fervour and animated refolution, with 
 which all parties among us rofe up, as one 
 man, to repel the attempt, which was then 
 made, to fubvert the fettlement of the illuf- 
 trious houfe of Hanover in the throne of 
 thefe kingdoms, and defend the wife and be- 
 neficent conftitution, from which they derive 
 
 fuch
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, ore. 45 
 
 fuch invaluable bleflings : whoever attends 
 to this, and to the friendly intercourfe, which 
 fubfifts between the members of our religi- 
 ous eftablifhment, and thofe, who in fome 
 relpects differ from it, will want no farther 
 confirmation of what is here afferted. It is in- 
 deed only a contracted view of things, which 
 can lead any to call it in queftion. And if any 
 inftances mould be fuppofed to occur in hif- 
 tory to the contrary 4 it will be found, upon 
 examination, that they have never been really 
 occafioned by the juft principles of religious 
 liberty. The non-tolerating fpirit has been 
 the true fource of them j 
 
 " Hoc fonte derivata clades 
 
 " In patriam, populumque fluxit." 
 
 If non-conformity then is in itfelf no of- 
 fence againft the ftate, and yet diffenters, as 
 fuch, are (till confidered as the proper fub- 
 ject of punifhment, from what principles 
 muft this judgment be formed of them ? 
 From thefe, and thefe only, that all perfons 
 are bound to take their fentiments in religion 
 from the legiflature : that it is a duty in- 
 cumbent on them, to acquiefce in, and con- 
 form to, what the ruling powers eftablifh ; and 
 that to feparate from it, and conduct religi- 
 ous worfhip in a manner not prefcribed by 
 them, is a fufficient realon for inflicting pe- 
 nalties
 
 46 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 nalties upon thofe, who are convicted of it. 
 From thefe maxims the laws, which are now 
 under confideration, derive their exiftence j 
 and whoever carefully weighs the language, 
 and enters into the fpirit of them, will find 
 that thefe are the principles which are im- 
 plied in every one of them. It is true, in- 
 deed, that different reafons are amgned in 
 the laws themfelves for palling them. The 
 35th of Elizabeth, fo often mentioned, is 
 faid to be " for the preventing and avoiding 
 " of fuch great inconveniencies and penis, 
 " as might happen and grow by the wicked 
 " and dangerous practices of feditious fecta- 
 " ries and difloyal perfons. " m But, befides 
 what has been fuggefted of thefe a<5ts in gene*- 
 ral, and is particularly true of this, that they 
 are fo conftructed as to involve all, whether 
 peaceable or- feditious, loyal or difloyal non- 
 conformifts, in one common condemnation; 
 it will perhaps be found that mere diffenting 
 from, and cenfuring fome appointments of, 
 the eftablifhed religion, are the very grounds, 
 in part at leaft, upon which this fedition is 
 laid to their charge. And this appears to me 
 evident from the fubmiffion, which, by this 
 act, perfons who had tranfgreffed it were al- 
 lowed and required to make, in order to 
 avoid the penalties which they had incurred ; 
 and which, as it may poflibly never have been 
 
 feen, 
 
 m See the beginning of the aft.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 47 
 
 feen, or perhaps fo much as heard of, by 
 fome perfons, into whofe hands this eflay may 
 fall, is here tranfcribed. " (1) I A. B. do 
 " humbly confefs and acknowledge, that I 
 " have grievoufly offended God in contemn - 
 " ing her Majefty's godly and lawful go- 
 " vernment and authority, by abfenting my- 
 " felf from church, and from hearing divine 
 " fervice, contrary to the godly laws and 
 " ftatutes of this realm, and in ufing and 
 " frequenting difordered and unlawful con- 
 " venticles and affemblies, under pretence 
 " and colour of exercife of religion ; (2) 
 " and I am heartily forry for the fame, 
 " and do acknowledge and teftify in my 
 " confcience, that no other perfbn hath, 
 " or ought to have, any power or auth'o- 
 " rity over her Majefty ; (3) and I do pro- 
 " mife and proteft, without any diflimula- 
 " tion, or any colour or means of any dif- 
 " penfation, that from henceforth I will, from 
 " time to time, obey and perform her Ma- 
 " jefty's laws and ftatutes in repairing to the 
 " church and hearing divine fervice, and do 
 " my uttermoft endeavour to maintain and 
 " defend the fame." n And if from hence we 
 defcend to the laws of later date, which have 
 now been before us, we mail find the fame, 
 or.fimilar principles interwoven with them, 
 und infeparable from them. Thay clearly 
 
 fuppofe, 
 
 ! 5-
 
 48 An Enquiry into the 4rue 
 
 fuppofe, that the rule enjoined by the .go- 
 vernment ,is the rule, to which every perfon 
 in the realm is to conform in publick wor- 
 
 fhip. That his non-compliance with it 
 
 brings him under a guilt cognizable by hi*, 
 man tribunals, and juftifies the magiftrate in 
 laying any penalties upon the fuppofed de- 
 linquents, which fhall be judged neceffary to 
 compel them to fubmifiion. To go on to 
 enquire, after this, how far fuch laws are re* 
 concileable to the principles of Toleration, 
 would be almoft an affront to the under- 
 standing of the reader. More has been faid 
 already than would have been thought need- 
 ful, were it not for the implicit approba- 
 tion, which fome may give to thefe laws 
 without ever reflecting on the foundation of 
 them. -On this account it was thought rer 
 quifite to trace them up to their firft prin r 
 ciples -, and nothing can be clearer, than that 
 they {land in the fulleft oppofition to all 
 claims of religious liberty. According to thefe, 
 in matters relating to God, every man is to 
 judge for himfelf. But thefe laws virtually af- 
 fert, that the magiftrate has a right to judge 
 for him. The principles of Toleration affirm, 
 that, for the ufe of this merely religious 
 liberty, no man ought to be hurt with ref- 
 pect to his peace, freedom or eftate. Thefe 
 laws imply, that for this caufe alone, he may 
 be punilhed with refpect to all thefe interefts : 
 
 that
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 49 
 
 that is, in other words, that he may be 
 perfecuted for confcience fake ; for thefe are 
 the very principles upon which perfecution 
 relies for its defence : they are pregnant with 
 all the evils of which that dreadful iniquity is 
 productive , and, wherever they are admitted, 
 vindicated, and the effects of them juftified, 
 the principles of Toleration are fo far exclu- 
 ded. To be confident advocates for the con- 
 tinuance of penalties founded on fuch a bafis, 
 and friends to the rights of confcience in 
 their due extent, is impofiible. So long as 
 thefe laws remained in their full force and 
 extent; fo long as they were the rule of 
 judgment upon all thofe who thought them- 
 felves bound to diffent from the ecclefiaftkal 
 eftablimment ; no liberty of choofmg any 
 kind of religious publick worfhip but that, 
 which was commanded by the government 
 was acknowledged to belong to the fubjects 
 of it. All fuppofition of any right in per- 
 fons to be tolerated in departing from points 
 determined by that eftablifhment, was fo far 
 from being fuffered to take place, that it 
 was rejected as utterly inadmillible, and a 
 power virtually afcribed to the magiftrate of 
 prefcribing, to thofe under his jurifdiction, 
 whatever articles and forms of religion he might 
 think proper. For the fame principles, by 
 which conformity to thefe doctrines, and modes 
 of worfhip was required, might, with equal 
 H juftice,
 
 50 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 juftice, have been applied to any others en- 
 joined in like manner ; the fame arguments 
 which were urged for inflicting punifhments 
 on thofe who refufed fubmiffion in cafes 
 already fettled, would have been judged 
 equally clear and cogent for the ufe of them 
 in all others of a fimilar nature ; and no 
 pleas of confcience, how fincere foever, would 
 have been allowed as a fufficient reafon for 
 exemption from them. 
 
 When the ever-memorable and aufpicious 
 Revolution had taken place, the feverity of 
 thefe laws was exchanged for a toleration of 
 the fentiments and worfhip of thofe perfons, 
 who had fo long and greatly fuffered in confe- 
 quence of them , and the dawn of conftitu- 
 tional religious liberty broke in upon the 
 kingdom. The diffenten joyfully and grate- 
 fully owned the alteration, which was made 
 in their favour , and it is with the fame dif- 
 pofiticns, that the difTenters of thefe days 
 look back to the relief, which was then 
 granted to their predeceiTors, and attend to 
 the happy confequences, which may be con- 
 fidered as refulting from it to themfelves. It 
 is with a degree of pain that they find them- 
 felves under a neceifity of fpeaking of it as 
 in any meaiurc inadequate to the relief of 
 thofe, who, upon the right principles of To- 
 leration, ought to be placed in fecurity. But 
 if the limitations contained in it be confi- 
 
 dered.
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec. 51 
 
 dered, it will appear that the eafe given by- 
 it to confeientious diffenters, though great, 
 was not abfolutely a complete one, even at 
 the time of its paffing. In thefe days it is 
 much lefs fo. The great changes which the 
 religious fentiments of all denominations in 
 the kingdom have undergone fince, exclude 
 great numbers who are entitled, upon all the 
 principles of reafon and humanity, to enjoy 
 religious liberty, from the benefits of it ; and 
 render the Toleration which is granted by 
 it, in fact, a very defective, contracted one ; 
 and that not only in the light of political 
 juftice, but I believe it may be added, upon 
 the very principles of many of the moft 
 eminent adverfaries to any extenfion of it. 
 
 The quakers, it is well known, are entitled 
 to the advantages of the act of Toleration, 
 upon fubferibing the declaration againft 
 tranfubftantiation, making a declaration of 
 fidelity to the government, profefling their 
 belief in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghofl, as 
 one God, and acknowledging the infpiration 
 of the Holy Scriptures. But, in order to be 
 comprehended in thele claufes, it mull furely 
 be neceflary for a man to profefs himfelf a 
 quaker ; and every preacher among the dif- 
 fenters, who cannot do this, muft either fub- 
 fcribe to all the other articles of the church, 
 excepting the 34th, 35th, 36th, part of the 
 H 2 20th, 
 
 . 13. compared with . z.
 
 52 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 20th, and that part of the 27th which relates 
 to infant baptifm, or be liable to all the 
 penalties to which he would have been fub* 
 ject, had the act of Toleration never taken 
 place. Let it be confidered then who are, 
 by the tenor of this ad, deprived of all ad- 
 vantages from it. By the ill and 2d ar-r 
 
 tides, not only thofe, who openly contradict 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, as ftated in the 
 articles, but every one, who, from the diffi- 
 culties which he may find attending it, is not 
 able to declare his afTent to it, is debarred 
 from all the benefits of Toleration.- The 5th 
 article excludes all thofe, who think with the 
 Greek church concerning the proceftion of 
 the Holy Ghoft And the 8th article, by de- 
 claring the creed of Athanafius to be one of 
 thofe which ought thoroughly to be received 
 and believed, will be thought by many to ex- 
 clude all thofe, who do believe this part of 
 the eftablifhed dodtrine, if they cannot at thi 
 fame time declare all thofe, who do not re- 
 ceive it, fubject, without doubt, to perilh 
 everlaftingly. By the 17th, all thofe who 
 are diffatisfied with the doctrine of predefti- 
 nation, in what is commonly ftiled the calvi- 
 niftick fenfe of the do&rine, and, who are 
 neverthelefs perfuaded that in this fenfe it is 
 taught in the article, and that the profefiion 
 of it, in this fenfe, is implied in their fub- 
 fcription ; all thefe, I fay, are debarred from 
 
 the
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. $$ 
 
 the benefit of the ad in like manner. To 
 fay, they miftake the meaning of the article, 
 does not leffen but, in the event, rather ag- 
 gravates the hardfhip : fince, in this cafe, 
 they are excluded, not for any error in doc- 
 trine, but merely by underftanding the article 
 to teach a doctrine, which not, only the lan- 
 guage of it ftrongly favours ; but which it was 
 generally fuppofed to teach for many years 
 after it received the fanction of authority ; 
 and which the commons in parliament, in the 
 year 1628 p avowed, in opposition to the 
 {tn(e of the arminians, to be delivered by 
 publick act of the church of England, and 
 by the general and concurrent expofition 
 of the writers of that church. It was, in- 
 deed, if bifhop Hoadley's authority may 
 determine this matter, one of thofe points, 
 which were once thought as fundamental 
 and efiential to orthodoxy, by numbers in 
 the church of England, as they ftill are 
 among fome proteftants, till, as he tells us, s 
 archbifhop Laud altered the whole current 
 of the received doctrine, and accommodated 
 this doctrine fo altered, to the words of the 
 articles firft framed upon another fcheme. 
 It will, again, be a matter of very ferious 
 doubt, at lealt, with many, whether, in con- 
 sequence 
 
 p Macauley's hiit. vol. ii. p. 35. 8vo. ed.- 
 1 Anfwer to the reprefentation of the committee, 
 p. 268.
 
 54 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 fequence of the fubfcription required to the 
 1 8th article among the reft, fuch as cannot 
 bring themfeives to deny falvation to the moll 
 virtuous heathens, and in a word to all 
 thofe who have not heard of the gof- 
 pel, are not excluded alfo. And it is pre- 
 fumed it is out of all queftion, that all 
 perfons, who do not acknowledge, that the 
 " fault or corruption of the nature of every 
 " man, that naturally is engendered of the 
 
 ** offspring of Adam in every perfon 
 
 " born into the world, deferveth God's wrath 
 " and damnation ; " r all, who afcribe to 
 man, fince the fall of Adam, an ability " to 
 ' turn and prepare himfelf by his own na- 
 " tural ftrength and good works, to faith and 
 ** calling upon God ; " s and all thofe, who 
 fcruple to affirm, that " works done before 
 " the grace of Chrift and the infpiration of 
 ** his Spirit, are not pleafant to God ; " l and 
 know not how to fay they Ci doubt not that 
 " they [fuch works] have rather the nature 
 " of fin : " there is no queftion, it is appre- 
 hended, but that all, who are included in 
 this number, will, if fubfcription implies be- 
 lief, be incapable of deriving any fecurity 
 
 from this act. Let thefe particulars now 
 
 be weighed, and how narrow will the limits 
 of this Toleration appear ? Were the efta- 
 blifhment of the church of England now to 
 
 be 
 r See article 9th. ! Article 10th. : Article 13th.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. $% 
 
 be formed, or were it thought expedient to 
 model the articles of it anew ; the appeal is 
 chearfully made to the laity, the*clergy, and 
 even to thofe, to whom the government of 
 the church and clergy is committed, whether 
 fubfeription to all thefe decifions woulcl ftill 
 be required ? Would they think it confiftent 
 with the wifdom and charity, with which 
 they would undoubtedly conduct fuch an 
 undertaking, to make afienting to proporti- 
 ons fo doubtful, and which have been the 
 fubject of fo much controverfy, as fome of 
 thefe are known to have been, the condition 
 of being admitted to the miniftry ? Would 
 they fix upon that as the center of union, 
 which, inftead of uniting, muft divide ; give 
 uneafinefs to numbers of candid, thoughtful, 
 and ingenuous minds ; and perhaps keep ma- 
 ny of thofe, whofe concurrence would be a 
 ftrength and ornament to their caufe, from 
 continuing among them? As the eftablifh- 
 ment is now conftituted, it is a fact univer- 
 ially known, that there are the wideft dif- 
 ferences of fentiment, among the clergy of 
 it, upon feveral of thefe topicks. So far is 
 this from being accounted a reproach, that 
 it is appealed to as a token of the extenfive 
 charity and moderation of the church of 
 England, that fuch freedom of thought fub- 
 fifts among thofe, who are received into her 
 bofom. And,, if they think it would be 
 
 wrong
 
 cjo An Enquiry into the true 
 
 wrong to infift upon greater uniformity of 
 judgment in thofe of their own body, can it 
 be reafonable to exact it from others, in or- 
 der to their enjoyment of a Toleration ? It 
 is undoubtedly an error (and deferves to be 
 efteemed a very great one) when doctrines of 
 doubtful difputation, and unefTential to the 
 intereft of religion, are bound upon the mi- 
 nifters of any church, and thofe, who can- 
 not afient to them, are rejected as unfit to 
 partake of the advantages, or difcharge the 
 duties of that important character. The 
 nearer any eftabliihments approach to pure, 
 original chriftianity, and the more the genu- 
 ine fpirit of the gofpel appears in them, with 
 all its native luftre and fimplicity ; the more 
 excellent, the more amiable they are in the 
 eyes of their friends. The more fuperior to 
 all the objections of their enemies they will 
 always be found : and, wherever any advances 
 are made in bringing any of them to great- 
 er degrees of this perfection, there is not a 
 judicious advocate for truth and charity, who 
 will not be ready to fay, with an illuftrious 
 promoter of both ; Blejfed be they who have 
 contributed to fo good a work. u But to con- 
 tend for making doctrines greatly controvert- 
 ed, and which, if they were not already in 
 poiTefiion of a place among the articles of 
 
 the 
 
 u Biihop Hoadley's poitfeript to his anfwer to Dr. 
 Hare,- p. 207.
 
 
 - 
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 57 
 
 the church, \vould perhaps never be admitted 
 into the number : to contend, I fay, for ma- 
 king thefe the boundaries of a Toleration^ 
 and, (which is the plain meaning of it, how 
 harfhly foever the expofition may found,) 
 plead for leaving thofe, who fcruple affenting 
 to them, fubject to the terrors of fines,* impri- 
 fonments, and all the hardfhips which thefe 
 penalties may bring with them, hurts huma- 
 nity itfelf. Thefe are feverrties, which it ought 
 not to be fuppofed one, even of thofe gen tie- 
 men, who oppofe making the act of Tolera- 
 tion more extenfive, would wifh to take place. 
 And I am perfuaded that I do no more than 
 juftice to the equity and candor of their dif- 
 pofitions, when I fay, that were the execu- 
 tion of the laws which flill fland in force, 
 againft all thofe, who cannot come up to the 
 conditions required by the act of Toleration, 
 to be revived, they would find all the ge- 
 nerous feelings of their hearts revolt at the 
 confequenoes. But what part then might it 
 be expected every one, who profeffes himfelf 
 a friend to Toleration, when the queltion 
 comes before him, and waits for his fober, 
 impartial decifion, fhould choofc ? What ? 
 But to join in placing it on a more enlarged 
 bafis, and procuring for thofe, who requeft 
 it, that extenfive legal fecurity, which the 
 fpirit of the gofpel requires they fhould enjoy, 
 I and
 
 58 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 and to which natural juftice gjves them art 
 unqueftionable title ? 
 
 And this, of courfe, brings on the confe- 
 deration of the ftep, which the diffenters fo 
 lately took, of applying for an enlargement 
 of the liberties which are granted them by 
 the act of Toleration. It may indeed be 
 fuppofed that, if what has been faid be 
 granted, all occafion to add any thing far- 
 ther upon the fubjeft is precluded. And 
 were the principles of religious liberty admit- 
 ted in their juft confequences, and the nature 
 of the application made by the diffenters 
 univerfally underftood, it would be fo. But 
 fince the attempt itfelf has been much unap- 
 prehended , fince there are perfons, truly ref- 
 peftable for their underftanding and cha- 
 racter, who have fo amazingly overlooked 
 the natural inferences from their own prin- 
 ciples, as to profefs to adopt the moft ge- 
 nerous notions of Toleration, and yet mown 
 themfelves utterly averfe from granting the 
 relief requefted , it cannot be fuperfluous to 
 debate the queftion. The reflections which 
 the attempt has drawn upon the diffenters, 
 render it every way expedient ; and, far from 
 deferving to be thought an inftance of over- 
 officious zeal, it is but a mere aft of juftice 
 to remove the objections which have been 
 made to their conduct. The time and man- 
 ner of their application are only circum- 
 
 ftances.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 59 
 
 ilauces, in which the merits of their cafe 
 have little or no concern. It is the nature 
 of their requeft, which is to determine the 
 judgment of every man relating to it : and 
 if it fhall appear, that what they afked was 
 reafonable in itfelf; that it was not afked 
 without occafion ; -that the evils apprehend- 
 ed from granting it were either imaginary, 
 or insufficient reafons for rejecting it ; - that 
 their general character and conduct afford no 
 ground to judge them unworthy of the li- 
 berty which they fblicited ; and that the 
 terms upon which they defired to enjoy it, 
 were adequate to every demand, which could 
 reafonably be made upon them : if thefe 
 things fhall be found evident, it is prefumed 
 their application ftands clear of exception, and 
 will be found to aim at nothing contradictory 
 to the principles of good fubjects, confiftent 
 proteftants, and fincere chriftians. 
 
 Let the nature of their requeft be firft 
 confidered. For if this was wrong in itfelf, 
 the point is already decided. But upon what 
 principle can this be afferted ? Will it be 
 maintained that the laws from which they 
 defire a farther exemption are, in themfelves, 
 right and equitable ? If there be any re- 
 maining who can ferioufly retain this opinion, 
 and think it fit that mere difTenters from the 
 doctrines of the church mould continue lia- 
 ble to legal penalties, it is natural for them 
 I z to
 
 So An Enquiry into the true 
 
 to efteem the matter of the requeft wrong. 
 In their apprehenfion the ad of Toleration, 
 limited as it is, . muft be unreafonable ; 
 and they muft judge, in oppofirion to the 
 fenfe of our rulers, who firft palled the act, 
 and the repeated and moil publick declara- 
 tions of all the conftituent parts of the le- 
 giflature, that, inftead of being extended, it 
 ought not to be in any degree maintained, but 
 revoked, and that all the feverities of former 
 days mould be acted over again. But it is 
 not to perlbns of this complexion that the dif- 
 fenters can be fuppofed to refer the merits of 
 fheir late petition. They founded their hopes 
 of fuccefs in a perfuafion, that perfecuting laws 
 were now allowed to be indefenfible ; and that 
 the juftice of Toleration, and the political wif- 
 dom of it too, had the univerfal fuffrage. That 
 the matter of their petition therefore, mould 
 be condemned, as wrong in itfelf, by gentle- 
 men profeffing to efpouie thefe fentiments, ap- 
 pears to them beyond explication. Whether 
 any of the articles, which the diffenters may 
 fcruple to fubfcribe, in any refpect vary 
 from the truth or not, is a point, into 
 which it is utterly needlefs here to enquire. 
 The queftion to be attended to is this ; does 
 their doubt of any of them affect their cha- 
 racter as good fubjects ? Is their declining 
 to profefs their belief of a number of doctri- 
 nal propofitions, (the fenfe, of fome of which, 
 is difputed, and the certain meaning of others 
 
 of
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 6x 
 
 of them utterly contradicted, by numbers of 
 the ableft, moft learned, and moft refpectable 
 of thofe, who enjoy the emoluments, which 
 are annexed to the eftablifhed church,) a fuf- 
 ficient ground to judge them unworthy of the 
 protection of the government r" If not, it 
 mull ftill be a wonder, that any of the advo- 
 cates for Toleration fhould aiBgn tlie mere 
 matter of the requeft of the diffenters as a- 
 caufe for rejecting it ; and will continue to be 
 fo till a very convincing reafon is afligned for 
 the refufal. For it is to be confidered, that,, 
 if Toleration be the general right of all, who 
 approve themfelves good members of fociety, 
 thofe, who oppose it are the perlbns, uporr 
 whom it is incumbent to prove that it ought 
 not to be granted. 
 
 The author of the letter to the difTenting 
 minifters, who applied to parliament for re- 
 lief, has, it rauft be owned, attempted to 
 Ihow this. His reafon in fhort is, that the 
 act paHed for the relief of diffenters at the 
 Revolution, confines Toleration to matters of 
 difcipline only ; and that the Toleration then 
 granted to protectant diflenters, as fuch, 
 could not be meant to extend farther than 
 to the points, in which they differed from 
 the national church, with which, at that time, 
 they agreed in points of doctrine. w Had 
 this reaioning been advanced by a pcrfon of 
 
 lower 
 v ' See the letter, p. 4 n.
 
 62 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 lower abilities, many would be difpofed to 
 think that the bare ftating of this objection 
 to the application of the diflenters, is, in ef- 
 fect, anfwering it, and that it might be fafely 
 difmilTed without any reflections. But the de- 
 ference due to a writer, who certainly dis- 
 covers much, both of the language and ad- 
 drefs of a gentleman, in his manner of wri- 
 ting, requires that more particular notice 
 fhould be taken of it. With fubmiffion to 
 his authority then, it may be obferved, that 
 his reprefentation of the ad of Toleration 
 itfelf is not perfectly exact. He fays, that 
 the act " did not mean to tolerate doctrines 
 " different from thofe of the chriftian church 
 " in general." * How then came the body 
 of the quakers to be included in it ? Their 
 doctrines, at that time, were certainly differ- 
 ent, in lbme refpects, from thofe that were 
 generally held by the chriftian church ; and 
 their denying the obligation of the facra- 
 ments in particular, was a departure from the 
 moil univerfal confent of the fentiments and 
 practice of the chriftian church, which can 
 be urged in favour of any points, which 
 were ever called into queftion. Whoever at- 
 tentively confiders the conftruction of the 
 act of Toleration, and the judicious remarks, 
 which the author of the cafe of the dhTenters 
 has made upon it, will find reafon to believe* 
 
 that 
 x Letter, p. 9^
 
 Principles of 'toleration, Sec. 63 
 
 that the intention of the act was to com- 
 prehend all proteftants, who aflented to the 
 received doctrine of the Trinity , and that 
 the meafure of their fubferiptions, or decla- 
 rations, relating to religious doctrines in other 
 particulars, was adjufted to the degree, in 
 which the feveral denominations of them 
 were known to approach to, or depart from, 
 the articles of the national church. Had not 
 this been their defign, it is inconceivable that 
 the quakers, who flood at fo great a dis- 
 tance from the eftablifhed church, in points 
 of doctrine as well as difcipline, fhould have 
 been comprehended in it, and " enjoy, " a9 
 the ad exprefsly fays they fhall, " all the 
 " other benefits, privileges, and advantages, 
 " under the like limitations, &c. which any 
 " other diffenters fhall or ought to enjoy, 
 " by virtue of this act. " y And can it be 
 fuppofed then, that, if the prefbyterians or 
 independents had differed farther in their fen- 
 timents, than at that time they did, from the 
 articles of the church, the fame parliament, 
 which confulted in this manner the eafe of 
 that body, (which, ufeful and refpectable as 
 it is, was certainly the leall popular, in ref- 
 pect to religious fentiments, of all the other 
 tolerated bodies of men,) can it be fuppofed, 
 I fay, that, in this cafe, the eafe of the 
 other diffenters would not have been equally 
 
 con- 
 
 ' * 13.
 
 64 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 confulted ? z But, admit the fad to be as this 
 author has ftated it ; of what weight is it ? Is 
 it a confequence, that becaufe that parliament 
 went only thus far, fucceeding ones mult go 
 no farther ? If the diffenters of thofe times 
 needed nothing more to make them eafy, 
 and therefore afked for nothing more, does 
 that make it unreafonable for their fucceffors 
 to afk and obtain more? In a word, the 
 queftion is not, what was formerly determi- 
 ned, but what the rights of confcience make 
 it equitable for men to requeft, and for the 
 legiflature to grant : and if the laws againft 
 diffenters were wrong in themfelves, and 
 thofe, who ftill lye open to them, have an 
 equally juft plea to be placed out of the 
 reach of their oppreflion with thofe, who are 
 now ilieltered from it ; nothing can be plain- 
 er than that they ought to be put in the 
 fame fecure fituation ; and that the requeft 
 of the diffenters was juft and good. 
 
 To fuppofe that Toleration is to be limi- 
 ted, by the articles of the national church, is, 
 in effect, reducing the Toleration of protef- 
 tant diffenters to very little in this ; and, in all 
 roman catholick countries, it is giving up the 
 Toleration of the whole body of proteftants 
 entirely. They differ from the national 
 churches of the ftates, of which they are parts, 
 
 not 
 
 Eifhop Burnet fays the Toleration a>5t palled 
 i-ASitY. vol. ii. p. jo. folio,
 
 Principles of Toleration, &e. 65 
 
 not only in difcipline, but in doctrines. Their 
 opinions are inconfiftent with thofe, which are 
 eftablifhed by law, in points, which the ca- 
 tholicks efteem fundamental ; in thofe which 
 concern the rule of faith, and the objects 
 of worfhip : and they have given it as their 
 judgment, that the honours paid to faints, 
 to images, and to the hoft, are nothing lefs 
 than idolatry. Will this writer therefore fay, 
 they ought not to be tolerated, but lie open 
 to the punimment of the gallies, imprilbn- 
 ments, and all the tortures of the inquifi- 
 tion ? If he efteems this too abfurd to be 
 admitted, with what confiftency can he fup- 
 pofe, that the diffent of proteftants from 
 a Protestant church, in fome points of 
 doctrine, deftroys their title to a legal Tole- 
 ration ? It is no juftification of this Oppref- 
 fion, to dignify the principles, thus enforced 
 by penalties, with the founding titles of doc- 
 trines, which have been acknowledged by the 
 chriftian church in general, and the fuppofed 
 fundamentals of chriftianity. The content 
 of all the churches upoo earth, in favour 
 of a doctrine, creates no obligation upon 
 others to receive it, in oppofition to their 
 convictions, that it is unfupported by fcrip-f- 
 ture ; nor authorizes the application of penal- 
 ties to enforce it. Chriitianity itfelf is not 
 to be propagated by the terrors and cruel- 
 tics of perlecution. It is not many ages 
 K finer
 
 66 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 fince tranfubftantiation, and all the mercilefs 
 load of the other enormous corruptions and 
 fuperftitions of popery, were " maintained " 
 by all the eftablifhed churches of the weftern 
 world, and it was efteemed impiety to dif- 
 pute them. To infinuatc, therefore, that 
 perfons become unfit for a Toleration, by 
 departing from thofe doctrines which an 
 eftablifhed church, or all eftablifhed churches 
 (if that expreflion is liked better) judge to 
 be fundamental ; to infinuate this, I fay, is 
 fixing a brand upon the Reformation. It 
 opens a door to oppreflion wherever fuch 
 diflent from the publick religion is to be 
 found, and, in a protestant, is fomething 
 aftonifhing. Every church, as Mr. Locke 
 obferves, and as it has been innumerable 
 times obferved after him, is orthodox to 
 herfelf, and judges her doctrines to be thofe 
 of chriftianity. The church of Rome main- 
 tains feveral of thofe doctrines, which are 
 utterly rejected by proteftants, to be the 
 ancient catholick faith of chriftianity , and, 
 whatever fome of her more moderate mem- 
 bers may do, in her publick, authentick 
 acts, excludes all, who deny them, from 
 being truly parts of the chriftian church. 
 So that wherever the faith of that church 
 is eftablifhed, all thofe who adhere to the 
 doctrines of the Reformation, mull, upon 
 this author's own principles, lofe their claim 
 
 to-
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 67 
 
 to a Toleration. But there is a peculiar 
 unreafonablenefs in confining this privilege 
 within thefe limits, if, as he affirms, * there 
 are doctrines inferted in the articles of the 
 church, which were not intended by the 
 compilers as credenda, or things necefTary 
 to be believed. To be obliged to fubferibe 
 thefe is furely more than can be neceflary 
 to a Toleration, even upon his own princi- 
 ples : nor is it any alleviation of the bur- 
 then, that the dirTenting miniflers were for- 
 merly fuppofed to approve them, and have 
 actually afTented to them in their writings. b 
 Whether they approve them or not, the 
 dirTenting miniflers are laid under the fame 
 necefilty of fubferibing these articles, as 
 they are under to fubferibe the mod fun- 
 damental doctrines, which can be named a- 
 mong the whole collection : and it very little 
 mitigates the hardfhip, that they are fpoken 
 of under the foftening title of articles of 
 peace. c This is a diftinction in the articles, 
 which the diffenters know not that they 
 have any warrant from publick authority to 
 make ; and, if by this is meant, that they 
 are only articles not to be oppofed, the an- 
 fwer is, that to declare an approbation of, 
 and fubferibe to an article, is, in the judg- 
 ment of the difienters in general, an act of 
 K 2 a very 
 
 * Letter, p. 7. b Ibid. p. 7. c Ibid. p. 9.
 
 68 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 very different amount from a bare promife 
 po keep filence in relation to it. 
 
 But fuppoflng all this to be admitted in 
 favour of the diffenters, their application is 
 flamed by mauy, as being a needlefs one. 
 The ftate of their cafe, delivered to the 
 members of the two houfes, is fpoken of as 
 dwelling upon appearances of a perfecution d 
 which no where exifts, and only flipping as 
 it were by accident, into an indirect acknow- 
 Jedgment that the violation of the law has 
 been connived at. But was it pofllble for 
 the cafe to be otherwife drawn up ? Does 
 not every petition for the redrefs of grie- 
 vances, carry in it a reprefentation of thofe 
 grievances ? Were the diffenters to lay be- 
 fore the legiflature their deflres to be relieved 
 from burthens, without fpecifying what thefe 
 burthens were ? To charge them, though 
 ever fo indirectly, with an intention to infi- 
 nuate, that they fuffer hardlhips from which 
 they are entirely free, is to load them with 
 an imputation of unfairnefs, for which they 
 have given no caufe. Their complaint was 
 not of the fpirit of the times, but of the 
 fpirit of the laws, from which they hoped to 
 be relieved. This, whether thofe laws are 
 executed, or unexecuted, is in itfelf ftill the 
 fame ; and if the recital of the fubflance of 
 them excites " horror and companion," c the 
 
 reproach 
 d Letter, p. > r Ibid, ubi fup.
 
 Principles of tolerat'ioi^ &c. 69 
 
 reproach falls upon them, and not upon the 
 administration of the government, the mild 
 and gentle tenor of which is thankfully per- 
 ceived, and chearfully owned, by every dif- 
 fenter in the kingdom. But connivance is 
 not legal Toleration , non- execution of the 
 penal laws, againft non-conformifts, is a very 
 different thing from proper exemption from 
 them. And, if this be what they are per- 
 fuaded they may reafonably aik, upon what 
 principle they can be blamed, merely for 
 making an application for it, is little fhort 
 of being utterly incomprehenfible. Was it 
 ever imputed to men as a crime, as an in- 
 stance of reftlefihefs, or even a want of 
 decorum, that they defired not to be left 
 open to oppreflion ? Or can it be any reafon 
 for cenfuring perfons as not eafily fatisfied, ' 
 that they are folicitous to be guarded from 
 dangers, to which they are always expofed, 
 and from which, though they have no im- 
 mediate profpect of it, great evils may pof- 
 iibly come upon them ? To fay, that the 
 diflenters labour under no grievance, though 
 in one fenfe it may be allowed, falls far fhort 
 of the point. If the laws in queftion are in 
 themfelves unreafonable ; if feveral of them 
 were at firft dictated by a fpirit of revenge ; 
 calculated for bad purpofes ; and may be 
 made the instruments of breaking in upon 
 
 the 
 f Letter, p. 37.
 
 jq An Enquiry into the true 
 
 the peace, property and liberty, of perfons 
 of the moft unexceptionable behaviour, and 
 irreproachable character, whenever the ma- 
 lice, animofity, or avarice of fome of the 
 worft of men, may inftigate them to fuch 
 means of gratifying thefe pafiions : if this, 
 I fay, be really the cafe, to be liable to 
 fuch evils is itfelf a grievance ; a grievance 
 which it would be want of prudence, of re- 
 gard to the welfare of thofe in whom we 
 are interefted, and of a juft concern for the 
 common caufe of liberty itfelf, not to be 
 folicitous to remove. To reprefent the pe-* 
 tition of the dilTenters, therefore, as a foli- 
 citation for what is apparently fomething, 
 but really nothing, g is, with fubmifiion to 
 a late writer, fcarcely confident with that 
 candor of which he makes fuch ample pro- 
 feflions. And were it fo, the difficulty would 
 only fall back upon himfelf, and leave every 
 man, who is unwilling to admit unfavourable 
 thoughts of the juftice and humanity of his 
 fellow creatures, at a lofs for a reafon for 
 his being fo much difturbed, by the diflen- 
 ters making an application for, what he 
 calls, an unfubftantial favour. h To fay, " it 
 " was too much to be granted, and too little 
 " to afk, " * may pleaie the imagination by 
 the antithefis, but has too much the air of 
 an enigma in it ever to fatisfy the under- 
 
 ftanding, 
 
 * Letter, p. 4. h Ibid. p. 4. ' Ibid. p. 37,
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec. yi 
 
 Handing. It may found prettily, but will 
 not bear the teft of a fober examination. If 
 the judgment of the petitioners is to deter-; 
 mine this point ; what they apprehend it rea- 
 fonable to requeft, and worthy of their ap- 
 plication to obtain, is neither too great to 
 be granted, nor too little to be afked. If, 
 on the other hand, the perfons, to whom 
 the petition is addrefTed, allow the requeft 
 to be reafonable, it may be, indeed, in their 
 opinion too little to be afked (for it mould, 
 in that cafe, have been given without afking) 
 but it can never be thought too great to 
 be granted. And mould it be fuppofed, once 
 more, that the requeft is deemed an unrea- 
 lbnable one ; the contradiction flill remains. 
 The fubjefb of the requeft may, it is true, 
 be judged too great to be granted : but then 
 it can never be too little, but too much, 
 abundantly too much to be afked. To con- 
 fider a grant as next to nothing, and yet ta 
 oppofe it with the ferioufnefs with which 
 this author feems to oppofe it, is, in reality, 
 almoft without a precedent. The fmallnefs 
 of a favour has often been deemed a good 
 reafon for beftowing it ; but it is not eafy 
 to recollect an inftance, in which it has been 
 judged, of itfelf, a fufficient ground for 
 with-holding it. And were the alteration 
 defired by the petition of the diffenters, only 
 an apparent improvement of the Toleration, 
 
 there
 
 72 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 there is reafon to believe, that many of the 
 eftablifhment, as well as the difTenters, would 
 fincerely rejoice to fee it adopted, as a pur- 
 gation of our laws from what numbers con- 
 lider as fo many blemifhes in them, the ta- 
 king away of which they cannot help think- 
 ing would greatly encreafe their beauty, and 
 give new force to that noble, and, in the 
 main, juft encomium of them, that the 
 " idea and practice of political and civil 
 *' liberty flourifh in their higheft vigour in 
 " thefe kingdoms, where it falls lfttle fhort 
 se of perfection." k But many it feems judge 
 differently, and prefage that fuch an altera- 
 tion would be productive of great and a- 
 larming evils : and it is fit that the ob- 
 jection mould be impartially confidered ; for 
 it muft be confeffed it is a popular one, 
 and fuch as may ftrike forcibly on the minds 
 of thofe, who do not attend carefully to the 
 real ftate of the queftion. 
 
 It has been faid, then, that were the re- 
 queft of the difTenters to be granted, here- 
 iies would increafe, and the common faith 
 of christians be fubverted ; and therefore it 
 is fit, (for this muft be the meaning of the 
 objection) that the laws relating to diffenting 
 minifters mould continue as they are. It is 
 eafy to fee, that this reafoning afcribes to 
 the magiftrate a right of retraining herefies, 
 
 or 
 ''- Bhckflcne's Comment, vol. j. p. 126.
 
 Principles of toleration, &c. J3 
 
 or opinions which are not orthodox, by pe- 
 naltiesj or elfe it proves nothing. If it is 
 allowed to afcribe this right to the magis- 
 trate, it proves too much ; much more than, 
 I am perfuaded, thofc, who now make ufe 
 Of it, will be difpofed to acknowledge. For, 
 by the very fame train of reafoning, all the 
 edicts of heathen governors againft chriftians, 
 the execution of, the decrees of popes, and 
 councils, againft protectants, by popifh prin- 
 ces, and, in a word, all perfecuting exertions 
 of power whatever againft thofe, who depart 
 from eftablimed doctrines, might be eafily 
 juftified. But other alarming confequences 
 of complying with the defire of the diflen- 
 ters are apprehended. One of their writers, 
 it is alledged, has charged every church 
 which maintains the doctrine of the trinity 
 with being idolatrous. ' Becaufe the diflenting 
 minifters inferted no offer in their bill, to 
 fubfcribe to the doctrine of the Trinity, it 
 is concluded, not by the ftricteft rules of 
 logick, that this is one doctrine which fome 
 of the petitioners defire to be at liberty to 
 oppofe or deny j m - and from hence a fup- 
 pofition is formed, that there is a poflibility 
 " that by urging the precedent of the ido- 
 " latrous people of Canaan, " n the hearers 
 of diflenting minifters may be ripened " for 
 " the expulfion or extermination of " the 
 
 L members 
 
 * 
 
 ' Letter, p. 11. r ' Ibid. p. 13. ? IbiJ. p. 15.
 
 74 dn Enquiry into the true 
 
 members ofthe eftablifhment, " as an a6fc 
 " of obedience to the divine command.'* 
 Difienters, it appears, are not the only peo- 
 ple liable to be thrown into panicks. But 
 to be ferious. All this is only a proof of 
 what has been already fuggefted ; that the 
 petition of the difienters has been ftrangely 
 mifunderftood. All, which is defired by it, 
 fo far as the articles are concerned, is, in 
 effect, this ; that diflenting minifters may be 
 exempted from the penalties, to which their 
 not having complied with the fubfcription 
 to them, required by the act of Toleration, 
 leaves them fubje<5b. The words of the bill 
 are, " Whereas, by an act made in the ift 
 ct year of the reign of King William III. 
 " &c. preachers or teachers of any diflent- 
 " ing congregations, are required, &c. to 
 " declare their approbation, and to fubfcribe 
 " the articles of religion, mentioned in the 
 " ftatute of the 13th of Queen Elizabeth, 
 " except as in the faid act, &c. is excepted ; 
 " and whereas, many fuch perfons fcruple to 
 ct declare their approbation of, &c. be it 
 " enacled, &c. that fo much of the faid 
 " aft, &c. as relates to the faid articles, or 
 " to any of them, fhall be, and the fame is 
 " hereby repealed." Suppofe this had been 
 granted, what would have been the eftecl: ? 
 
 Would 
 
 See the bill, at the end of Mr. Mauduit's pam- 
 phlet.
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, &c y$ 
 
 Would it have put the dififenters into pof- 
 feftion of any legal liberty to write or preach 
 againft any of the doctrines of the eftablifh- 
 rnent, from which they are now excluded ? 
 By no means. Not to be obliged to fub- 
 fcribe to, and declare an approbation of 
 principles, i& one thing ; to write or 
 preach against them is another. To defire 
 not to lie under a load, which would crufh 
 the moft humble, filent, ancl cautious dinen- 
 ter, as well as one of the moft oppofite 
 qualities j and to afk for a legal right to 
 give way to thofe angry, indecent invectives, 
 to which fome perfons feem to think the 
 diffenters fo greatly addicted, are two points, 
 fo totally diftinct, that it is furprifing that 
 gentlemen of abilities mould ever confound 
 them together. The generality of diffenting 
 minifters have very little inclination, I be- 
 lieve, to conlume the time devoted to their 
 publick inftructions, in preaching againft the 
 cftablilhment. They have greater points in 
 view. But had their application been fuc- 
 cefsful, the doctrines of the national church 
 would have been very little, if any thing, 
 more expoied to fuch attacks, than they arc 
 now it has mifcarried. It has been fuppo- 
 ied p that the provifo in the act of Tolera- 
 tion, [ which fays " that nothing therein 
 " contained mall extend, or be conftrued to 
 L 2 " extend, 
 
 " See the letter to the difTentcrs, p. i:, 13.
 
 7 6 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 " extend, to give any eafe, &c. to any pa- 
 " pift, or to any perfon that fhall deny, 
 " in his preaching or writing, the doctrine 
 " of the bleffed Trinity, as it is declared in 
 " the aforefaid articles of religion : " q ] would 
 have been affected if the bill in queftion 
 had pafled. There is room for a doubt, at 
 leaft, whether this clauie would have been 
 at all affected. r But grant that it would ; -m- 
 
 pro- 
 
 q n- 
 
 1 It is allowed, that the expreflion in the bill, at 
 ;he end of the cafe of the diffenters, is very comprehen- 
 five : for it defires that Co much of the faid aft, &c. as 
 relates to the faid articles, or to any of them, may be 
 repealed. And, were the expreflion to be taken fingly, 
 and independently ,cf any other words, with which it 
 is connected, there might be fome appearance of reafon 
 for the application, of which the author of the letter to 
 the diflenting rainilters, fuppofes it capable. But, if 
 it be considered that it makes only the conclufion 
 of a fentence, in which the fcruples of the difTenting 
 minifters, relating to fubfcription, are afTigned as the 
 ground of their application to parliament; that the 
 defired repeal of what relates to the articles, in the 
 aft, has a direft reference to thofe fcruples, and is 
 propofed as a remedy againft the difficulties occafioned 
 by them : when all this is laid together, 1 fay, it may 
 furely be concluded, that the faireft and moft candid, 
 and indeed the moft natural interpretation of the words 
 is, that a repeal of fo much of the aft, as relates to 
 a subscription to the faid articles, or to any of 
 them, is defired. Ir is not, indeed, after all, of any 
 material confequence, which of thefe conffruftions is 
 fuppofed to be the trueff. However this may be de- 
 termined,
 
 Principles of Toleration^ Sec. yy 
 
 profecutions for herefy, according to the no- 
 tions given of it by our laws, s woulo) have 
 flood upon the fame footing, upon which 
 they fland now - 3 i the honour of the liturgy 
 would have been kept under the fame pro- 
 tection, which now defends it;' the ioth 
 of William III. would have retained its au- 
 thority ;* in a word, all thefe guards of the 
 principles and worfhip of the eftablifhment, 
 would have fubfifted in their full vigour. 
 And upon what foundation then, can the 
 application of the diflenters be confidered as 
 a requeft for permiflion by law, to preach 
 againft the fundamental doctrines of the na- 
 tional church ? Or with what propriety could 
 the compliance of the legiflature have been 
 reprefented as ' fetting up the opinion of a 
 fmall body of. diffenting minifters againft 
 the fundamental doctrines of the chriltian 
 
 church ? 
 
 termined, the do&rine of the Trinity is ft ill guarded 
 by law, as ftrongly as can be defired. But when fur- 
 mifes are fubftituted inftead of certain facts ; when fuf- 
 picions fupply the place of proofs; and infinuations 
 are introduced to play upon men's prejudices, alarm 
 their jealoufies, and divert their attention from the 
 real point in queftion ; it is fit that the requeft of the 
 diflenters fhould be precifely ftated, and cleared from 
 all thofe mifapprehenflons, which might incline per- 
 fons to think unfavourably of it, and form difadvanta- 
 geous judgments of thofe who promoted it. 
 * i Eliz. cap. i. . 36. r 1 Eliz. cap. ii. . 9. 
 
 10, 11.
 
 yS An Enquiry into the true 
 
 church ? Or what fhadow of reafon can 
 there be in urging the apprehenfion of one 
 thing, as a plea for retaining a power of pu- 
 niming perfons for another, which is utterly 
 different from it, and has no relation to it ? 
 That men may have invincible objections to 
 fubfcription, and yet be zealous advocates for 
 the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine 
 of Satisfaction too, the warmed oppofers of 
 the diffenters in this affair will fcarcely de- 
 ny. And by what one good political maxim 
 can it be juftified, to contend for leaving 
 room to reftrain actions by the means of 
 laws, which, if executed, muft bring hea- 
 vy fufferings upon thofe, who never were 
 guilty of the offence, which, it is pretended, 
 makes them ncceffary ; and, if they are not 
 to be executed, muft be wholly ineffectual 
 to guard againft it ? 
 
 The argument, which has been drawn from 
 this laft confideration, to mow that a more 
 extenfive Toleration will not be productive 
 of inconvemencies, is treated, indeed, by the 
 author of the letter fo often cited, with fome 
 contempt. u But the diflenters muft beg his 
 pardon, if they think it merited a different 
 anfwer. What they advance flows with un- 
 deniable evidence from his own affertions - y 
 and he muft cither admit the juftice of it, 
 or give up all, which he has faid to fhow 
 
 the 
 
 u Letter, p. 21.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 79 
 
 the requeft of the diffenters to be a needlefs 
 one. As long as it is but intimated, that 
 circumftances may occur, in which it may- 
 be proper to have recourfe to the penal laws 
 againft diffenters, and the continuance of 
 them is contended for as neceffary, though 
 they are pretended to be kept up only in 
 terrorem ; fo long the difienters will have 
 reafon to be alarmed. Should the execution 
 of them once be put in motion, none can 
 fay where it will (lop : nor may it be always 
 in the power of the greateft perfons to check 
 its violence. If it is certain, on the other 
 hand, that no fuch thing will ever be at- 
 tempted, thefe laws muft lofe all their ef- 
 ficacy. It is too much to be taken for 
 granted, that the reftraints of law are always 
 of real ufe. w The reftraints of good laws 
 are real blefiings. Thofe of bad laws are real 
 evils. But it is only on a fuppofition that they 
 may be executed, that they will be either. 
 Indeed for this gentleman to imagine that 
 keeping up an obligation to fubfcribe, when, 
 by his own confeffion, " that part of the law, 
 [which requires it] " is now as dead as if the 
 " whole law were obfolete " x can have any 
 great influence upon the mode of thinking 
 and fpeaking, of which fuch terrible appre- 
 henfions are entertained, is utterly miftaking 
 the true fource of it. For it is not the dii- 
 
 uic 
 v - Letter, p. 21. x Ibid. p. 3-.
 
 So An Enquiry into the true 
 
 ufe of fubfcription, which has produced this 
 freedom of thought and language upon re- 
 ligious fubjects | but it is this freedom of 
 thought, which has produced the difufe of 
 fubfcription. Taking away the obligation to 
 fubferibe would make very little alteration 
 in the cafe. If this liberty of fpeech mould 
 afterwards encreafe, the change in the law 
 would be fo far from , deferving to be thought 
 the proper caufe, that it could fcarcely be 
 thought, with juftice, to be the remote oc* 
 cafion of this increafe. The real caufes would 
 continue to be the fame, which they ever 
 have been \ the growth of an inquifitive 
 difpofition , and the advancement of that 
 largenefs of mind, which invites perfons to 
 propofe their fentiments freely , makes the 
 exertion of the civil power, on account of 
 difference in opinions, odious , and, thus 
 checks the operation of thofe laws which, 
 in time's of another complexion, would be 
 carried into rigorous execution. 
 
 But admit that, to adopt the language 
 which has been ufed on this occafion, he- 
 refies might abound fomething more , is keep- 
 ing up penal laws the proper remedy againft 
 them ? Is this a competent reafon for re- 
 futing the difienters that liberty, which, upon 
 all the juft principles of Toleration, they 
 are entitled to enjoy ? For to thefe principles, 
 after all, the appeal muft be made ; and if 
 
 they
 
 Ptintiples of Toleration, &c. Si 
 
 they are again brought before the mind of 
 the Teadef, the repetition, cannot, with rea- 
 fon, be blamed. Gentlemen who know not 
 how to difpute their truth, and yet are un- 
 willing to admit their plain confequencesj 
 may, to evade the force of them, be in hafte 
 to fay, " 'tis needlefs to urge them they are 
 " admitted; but they are mifapplied." * But 
 when all, which is owned to be indifputable 
 in the right' of private judgment, (which has 
 generally been thought to include a right 
 of publick worfhip, according to that judg- 
 ment) feems to be reduced y to tlie bare pof- 
 feflion of that inward conviction',- to which 
 *' no power of government can extend,'" and 
 for which it is needlefs to fupplicate even 
 " in an arbitrary ftate ; " is- there not a caufe 
 to have reco.urfe to them ? When defiring 
 not. to be criminals in the eye of the ftate, 
 till fome real offence againft that ftate, (which 
 not profefling an agreement with the articles- 
 of the national church can never be,) is pro- 
 ved upon them : when this, I fay, is unfairly 
 confounded with " a pretended right to ex- 
 " empt certain publick acts, " univerfally, 
 ffor this word mud be underftood, though it 
 is not exprehed,) from the cognizance of the 
 civil power ; can inculcating the principles 
 of Toleration, in tlvefe circumftances, with 
 any reafon be thought needlefs ? If the 
 M right 
 
 >' Letter, p. 24, 2;.
 
 82 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 right of the governors of the ftate, or of the 
 churchy to " prevent the opinions of private 
 " men from ciafhing with fuch of the efta- 
 " blifhed doctrines as are fundamental ; " * 
 that is (for this is, in fad, the cafe) which 
 they think fundamental, u fo long as it can be 
 " done ^without violence - % " if thisy I fay, be, 
 urged as a plea for continuing laws in force, 
 which, i they operate at all, muft have 
 fqme degree of violence in their operation ; 
 every man is left to judge, whether to lead 
 the thpuglits of men back to the true, 
 grounds of religious liberty, does not become 
 highly neceffary. Nor can it, with any rea- 
 fon, be faid, th,ey are mifapplied, * The 
 iafety of the ftate, and the principles of 
 Toleration, it is allowed, are in perfect 
 confiftence with each other. The bounda- 
 ries, which determine the right exercife of 
 power on the one hand, and of liberty on 
 the other^ are to be marked out with an 
 impartial view to both thefe important points. 
 But the. fafety of the ftate can never be- 
 rightly pretended as a reafon for laws in- 
 confiftent with the clear dictates of juftice 
 and humanity. And. that the fafety of the 
 itate is at all concerned in fubfcription to 
 a number of articles, fome of which are 
 owned to be fuperfluous, b to have been in- 
 ferred to reconcile the predeceilors of the 
 
 diflenters 
 
 2 Letter, p. 28. * Ibid. p. 18. b Ibid, p. 46.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 83 
 
 diffenters to the church, and are hbw not 
 confidered as important ; the diffenters never 
 did admit, neither do they yet admit it. They 
 think they may add, with reafon, that the 
 largeft degree of Toleration which they have 
 folicited, carries nothing in k e incompati- 
 ble with any fecurity, which the eftablimed 
 church can equitably defire , and believe, 
 that if they declare they, cannot yet fee the 
 manifeft impropriety of their recjueft, d it 
 will be no impeachment of their understand- 
 
 ing- 
 
 Whether the general character and deport- 
 ment of the diffenters have given. any' juft oc- 
 cafion for them to be efteemed unworthy of 
 the liberty which they have afked, is chear- 
 fully left to the judgment of all who are dif- 
 pofed to judge candidly. Their loyalty has 
 been acknowledged in the moft publick man- 
 ner. With refped to their zeal for liberty, 
 and the fupport of the conftitution, if we are 
 rightly informed, they have been honoured 
 with the fingular, and perhaps not wholly 
 unmerited applaufe, of having been, in fome 
 ieaibns, almoft the only deadfall adherents 
 to that glorious caufe. For their zeal for 
 the honour of chriftianity, and their merits 
 as advocates, in behalf of it, they prefume 
 they may chearfully turn themfelves to the 
 reverend the clergy of all orders, as their 
 M 2 fa- 
 
 c Letter, p. 54. d Ibid. p. 14.
 
 $4 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 favourable judges. From the fame, refpect- 
 able body, they doubt not but they may 
 hope to receive an honourable teftimony to 
 the application, learning and fagacity, with 
 which many among them have devoted their 
 abilities to the illuftration of the facred wri- 
 tings. Jt has been urged againft them, that 
 {hey are an intolerant feet. They own, with- 
 out hefitation, that time was when too 
 many, who paffed under their denomination, 
 wpre juftly chargeable with this fpjrit -, and, 
 with as little hefitation they confefs, it was 
 a reproach to their predeceflbrs that they 
 were fo. But it was the common error of 
 t,he age. Numbers of their brethren of the 
 eftablilhment, were once liable to the fame 
 objection. But they have, in general, re- 
 nounced their error, and thinly their affuranr 
 ces of this ought to be helieved. The dif- 
 fenters have long fince, and umyerfally, done 
 the fame'; and hope they may, with equal 
 reafon, expect to have credit given them for 
 the truth and reality of their repentance, 
 For reafons, which have often been laid be- 
 fore the world, they decline conftant and 
 entire conformity to the worfhip of the 
 eftablifhed church \ but the juftice, which 
 they have been always ready to do to the 
 writings of her members, and to the piety, 
 learning;, and eminent attainments of her 
 clergy ; the zeal and refolution, with which 
 
 they
 
 Principles of Toleration, &x. 85 
 
 they have, in very criticial and hazardous 
 feafons, joined with their fellow fubjefts, in 
 withflanding attempts, which were made for 
 her deftruction ; and the felf-denying fteadfaft- 
 nefs, with which they have refufed to con- 
 cur in meafures, which they apprehended were 
 concerted with defigns unfriendly to their 
 proteftant brethren, even at a time, when 
 too many of thofe brethren difcovered not 
 the kindeft difpofition to them : all thefe 
 are convincing tokens, that though they dif- 
 fent, they do it not only with charity, but 
 with high efteem. The general tenor of 
 their deportment, towards the clergy and 
 laity of the national church, they prefume, 
 gives a new proof of their being filled with 
 thefe fentiments. Let it not be faid, they 
 make a merit of this. They take a plea- 
 fure in owning, that great numbers of their 
 brethren of the eftablifhment, and thofe, 
 perfons of rank and eminence, have given 
 them a pattern of moderation and gentlenefs, 
 which it was their duty and praife to imi- 
 tate, and treated them with an' affability and 
 good nature, fufficient to make impreflions 
 on hearts, far lefs fufceptible of friendly 
 fentiments than thofe, which, it is hoped, 
 are commonly lodged in the bofoms of dif- 
 fenters. But this may be faid with great 
 truth, that the diffenters have had no ex- 
 ample of this kind fet before them, but 
 
 what
 
 S6 An Enquiry into ihe true 
 
 what they hare been earneftly defirous to 
 follow , and have received no marks of be- 
 nevolence and friendship, but what they 
 have always been folicitous to return, in the 
 moft ample manner, which has been in their 
 power. And though, from their late appli- 
 cation to parliament, occafion has been ta- 
 ken to introduce oblique charges of viru- 
 lence and hatred ; e and the relief, which 
 they afked, has had the furprizing complaint 
 made of it ; f that it " could only anfwer 
 " the purpofe of manifeftirig to the world," 
 that they " were indilpofed to tolerate " their 
 brethren, " as an eftablifhment : " they de- 
 lerve to have a much milder fentence paf- 
 fed upon them. Their minifters, in particu- 
 lar, upon whom thefe intimations are like 
 chiefly to fall, are men of a better fpirit : 
 men, who would have rejoiced to clofe 
 breaches* rather than to widen them ; and 
 who, when they have reflected upon the 
 character of many of the clergy, whofe abi- 
 lities they efteem, whofe learning they Value, 
 and whofe virtues they honour, have filently 
 lamented, that there fhould be fuch a wall 
 of partition remaining, to keep them and 
 their brethren aiunder. They have the fatis- 
 fa&ion to obferve, that the gentleman him- 
 jfelf, from whom thefe expreflions are taken, 
 ]n other parts of his pamphlet, fpeaks in 
 
 milder 
 c Letter,- p. 56, 58. f Ibid. p. 58.
 
 Principles of Toleration* &c. Sy 
 
 milder terms of them. He owns, indeed, 
 the merit of feveral among them, with a 
 politenefs, which entitles him to their molt 
 refpe&ful acknowledgments ; and makes it 
 rather furprizing how difpofitions fo oppo- 
 fite to thofe, which really influence them, 
 and views fo diftant from thofe, # which were 
 the true fprings of their application, could 
 be imputed to them. 
 
 One thing more remains to be confidercd ; 
 which is, the declaration which the diflenters 
 offered, inftead of the fubfcription, now re- 
 quired, by law. And forry I am that there 
 ihould be any oecafion to vindicate this from 
 objections , and much pleafure would it have 
 given me to have fpared fome animadver- 
 iions, which, by the exceptions made to 
 this part of their conduct, are rendered 
 unavoidable. The declaration, as it ftands 
 in the bill, prepared for the relief of the 
 diflenters, is this. 7, A. B. do declare* as in 
 the prefence of Almighty God, that I believe 
 that the Scriptures of the Old and New Tejta- 
 ment contain a revelation of the mind and will 
 of God , and that I receive them as the rule 
 of my faith and pratlice. g The reflections 
 which the author of the letter to the dif- 
 ienting minifters makes, upon this declara- 
 tion, arc thefe. " You offer to fubfcribe to 
 ** the Holy Scriptures, as containing a re- 
 
 " velation 
 * The cafe of the diflenters, p. 60, 6i.
 
 83 Ah Enquiry into the true 
 
 " velation of the mind and will of God> 
 " and being the rule of your faith and 
 " practice. You know full well, gentlemen, 
 " that there is not an error, however ob- 
 " noxious to chriftians, or however fubverfive 
 " of civil fociety, which may not be cover- 
 *' ed, under the cloak of this fubfcription. 
 " Need I tell you, that tranfubftantiation, 
 " purgatory, invocation of faints, idolatry,- 
 " murthers, rebellions, and almoft every evil 
 " work, have been drawn from mifinterpre- 
 " tations of fcripture ? Had you refufed all 
 " fubfcription, the ftate had been full as 
 " fecure as in the offer of one fo very un- 
 " fatisfactory and indeterminate. It had, 
 " really, the appearance of trifling with the 
 " legiilature, which, as you could not intend 
 " it, had, at beft, the appearance of pre- 
 " fuming upon their total inattention to mat* 
 " ters of this fort, or upon their taking 
 " them very fuperficially into confiderati- 
 
 on." h 
 
 In the twenty eighth page of this pam- 
 phlet, " an eminent writer " among the dif- 
 femers, is charged with carrying his idea of 
 liberty, quite to a mocking extreme. Shock- 
 ing is a ftrong term, and were it to be re- 
 turned upon this gentleman, on account of 
 the length to which he is carried, by his 
 zeal for fubfcription to human articles, he 
 
 might 
 
 R Letter, p. xc, ) i.
 
 Principles of Tokratisn, &c. 89 
 
 might pofiibly complain. But certainly ir. 
 may be faid, that he has, in this palTage, 
 made ufe of cxprefiions, which the calmeft, 
 mod difpafiionate perfon, cannot read with- 
 out emotion*. Could it have been expected, 
 indeed, that an author, whofe performance 
 exprefles fo much of a concern for chrifti- 
 anity and proteflantifm, would have allowed 
 himfelf in fuch degrading language as this, 
 concerning a folemn declaration of cordial 
 aflent, to the whole body of the facred wri- 
 tings ? Is that doctrine, which is according 
 to godlinefs , ' that icripture which the 
 apoftle declares, to be " profitable for doe- 
 " trine, for reproof, for correction, for in- 
 " ftruction in righteoufnefs, that the man of 
 " God may be perfect, thoroughly furniflied 
 " unto all good works, " k fo loofe, defec- 
 tive and indeterminate, " that there is not 
 an error, how obnoxious foever, or however 
 fubverfive of civil fociety, but what may be 
 covered under the cloak of fubfeription to 
 it ? " ' When it is the acknowledged defign 
 of the whole tenor of the books of the Old 
 and New Teftament, to eitablim the worfhip 
 of the only 'living and true God, and to 
 teach men to deny all ungodlinefs and worldly 
 lufts : m can the ferious profefTion of our 
 owning them, as the rule of our faith and 
 N pra&ice, 
 
 1 I Tim. vi. 3. ,: 2 Tim. iii. 1 3. 
 
 1 letter, p. 10, II. m Titus, ii. i?..
 
 90 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 practice, be juftly fuppofed to contain in it, 
 no affurancc of the orderly, virtuous deport- 
 ment of thofe who make it ? When we find 
 this revelation of the will of God declaring, 
 in the moll expreffive terms, that neither 
 idolaters, nor adulterers, nor thieves, nor 
 drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, mall 
 inherit the kingdom of God *, is the language 
 of it fo indeterminate and void of force, that 
 it places no effectual guard againft thofe enor- 
 mities r* Becaufe it may have happened, that 
 tranfubftantiation, purgatory, invocation of 
 faints, idolatry, and other errors and evil 
 works, have been fheltered under mifmterpre- 
 tations of fcripture -, are the words of it to be 
 fuppofed fo deftitute of clearnefs and precifion, 
 as to give no fufficient pledge to govern- 
 ment, for the good behaviour of thofe who 
 own their divine authority ? Or would the 
 refufal of all fubfcription, which might have 
 left it uncertain whether perfons acknow- 
 ledged any religion at all, have made the 
 ftate full as fecure as the profeflion of thofe 
 principles, which carry in them every awful 
 reftraint from evil, and every powerful mo- 
 tive to good actions, which can be prefented 
 to the human mind ? If this declaration is 
 not an adequate iatisfaction to the legifla- 
 ture, what iatisfaction can the fubfcription 
 required by the act of Toleration be ? Men 
 of franrick, enthufiaflick minds, may abufe 
 
 every
 
 Principles of Toleration, 6cc. 91 
 
 every thing. Men of difhoneft and infin- 
 cere hearts may, and will, fubferibe any 
 thing ; take any oaths, conform to any teft, 
 which human policy can invent : and no 
 articles, were they to be diverfified and ad- 
 j ufted to the exigencies of the times ever 
 fo often, and encreafed till they equalled the 
 mod voluminous confefllon, which ever ex- 
 ifted, will be fufficient to bind them. All 
 thefe fecurities muft imply common fenfe and 
 integrity, in thofe who give them, to make 
 them of the leaft avail : and if this gentle- 
 man allows, as he profeflfes to do, (and, I 
 doubt not, with fincerity,) that the petitioning 
 minifters have fome right not to be account- 
 ed deftitute of either of thefe qualities ; he 
 will, it is hoped, upon fecond thoughts ac- 
 knowledge, that the fecurity, which they of- 
 fered, in their propofed declaration, was nei- 
 ther trifling nor fallacious ; but as determi- 
 nate and perfectly adapted to prevent every 
 doubt, which the rulers of a date can rea- 
 fonably entertain, as any of which they could 
 poflibly have made a tender. The legiflature 
 has indeed already, in effect, accepted it as 
 fufficient, in the cafe of the quakers ; for 
 excepting the eftablifhed doctrine of the 
 Trinity, (which, however true it may be in 
 itfelf, and how important foever in a theo- 
 logical view, makes the reftraints of the gof- 
 pel upon immorality and difobedience to go- 
 N 2 vernment,
 
 '92 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 vernment, no more precife and. determinate 
 than the arian or foeinian doctrine of it -, ) 
 they are only required to profefs their belief 
 in the infpiration of the fcriptures. And, if 
 the ftate be fecured by this declaration from 
 them, why mould more be neceffary for this 
 purpofe from other proteftant diflenters ? n 
 
 To 
 
 If this writer fhould fay, that by giving fatis- 
 fadtion to the ftate, he means declaring an appro- 
 bation of fuch merely religious opinions, as the go- 
 vernment has thought fit to take into the national 
 church, he has exprefled himfelf ambiguoufiy, and not 
 very properly. All, which is understood by fecurity 
 to the ftate, in the common acceptation of the words, 
 and all, which the ftate can, in reafon require, is, 
 fufficient affurance that men will behave as peaceable 
 members of fociety, " pay tribute to whom tribute, 
 " cuftom to whom cuftom, fear to whom fear, and 
 " honour to whom honour is due ; " and be faithful 
 and bear true allegiance to thofe, who rule ever them. 
 But there is a much greater' imperfeilion than mere 
 impropriety, in making an affent to the dcclrincs cf 
 an eltablifhrncnt a neceffary part of the fatisfadion 
 due to the ftau- ; for it implies, that the magiftiate 
 has a right to enforce his own fenfe of fcripture, by 
 penalties, on thofe, who do not acquiefce in it. Whe- 
 ther this be the meaning of this author I will not 
 pretend to affirm j but it ought not to be his mean- 
 ing. A writer, who has expreft'ed himfelf with fuch 
 lauiable indignation, againft the fhare, which Calvin 
 had in the death of Servctus, has not left himfeif at 
 liberty to be an advocate for reftraining a diiTent, from 
 the eilablifhcd faith, even by the fmalleft puniihments ; 
 which a fpirit of perfecntion will always be ready to 
 change into greater, till it has accomplilhed the de- 
 itruction of all, which ftarids in the way of its fury.
 
 Principles of 'Toleration, &c. 93 
 
 To employ many words in refuting other 
 objections againit this declaration, fuch as, 
 that it might be made by heathens, deifts, 
 or mahometans, (and jews might as well have 
 been added to the lift,) would be little better 
 than trifling with the time of the reader. 
 To acknowledge, that the facred fcriptures 
 not only contain a revelation of the will of 
 God, but that they are to be received as 
 the rule of faith and practice, plainly im- 
 plies, not barely that they contain truth, but 
 fo far as it is to be learnt, from revelation 
 only, all truth which we are bound to re- 
 ceive on the authority of it. The obvious 
 force of the expreflion is, not only that the 
 Old and New Teftament are a ftandard, by 
 which truth and error are to be judged, but 
 that they are the only fupernatural ftandard, 
 to which we are to have recourfe, for this 
 purpofe. And how totally repugnant this 
 is, to the principles of thofe who reject all 
 revelation ; of thofe, who admit the autho- 
 rity of Mofes, but reject that of Jefus ; 
 or of thofe, who admit the divine million 
 of Jefus, but fuperfede his Gofpel, by intro- 
 ducing the pretended million of Mahomet, 
 and contending for the Koran, as the rule 
 of faith and practice ; is too plain to need 
 enlargement. He indeed, who does not dif- 
 cern it of himfelf, will lcarcely difcern it by 
 the help of any arguments which can be of- 
 fered
 
 94 & Enquiry into the trut 
 
 fered to him. The declaration, fairly inter- 
 preted, equally implies the great principles of 
 the Reformation, and is utterly jnconfiftent 
 with thofe of Popery j and, whatever fufpici- 
 ons might be entertained, from the compre- 
 henfive nature of it, by fome perfons \ yet if 
 the affair be impartially confidered, it will be 
 found the only one, which, without coun- 
 teracting their own views, and the avow- 
 ed principles of their denomination, they 
 could propofe. The dhTenters, it is well 
 known, though not more widely diftant from 
 each other, than many of thofe who, in the 
 eflablifhed church, are acknowledged as her 
 members, admitted to her communion, and 
 advanced to the higheft preferments ; are very 
 far from being uniform in their fentiments, 
 concerning the controverted points of divi- 
 nity. To have drawn, up, and offered par- 
 ticular fubfcriptions, relating to any of thefe, 
 therefore, would h^ve been excluding many 
 of themfelves from the benefit d^fired. 
 Could they have agreed in a confefilon, in 
 which the majority would have united ; to 
 have folicited relief only upon that footing, 
 would have been grofly and indefenfibly 
 partial. It would have been leaving the bur- 
 then, and that probably with much aggravated 
 weight, upon others, whom,, how far foever 
 they may be from adopting fome of their te- 
 nets, they think to have an equal right, up- 
 on
 
 Principles of 'Toleration^ Sec, g% 
 
 on every equitable principle, to Toleration 
 with themfelves. But, above all, it would 
 have been departing from that fundamental 
 maxim, upon which they are proteftants and 
 diifenters, stnd, by adhering to which, they 
 think they fhall befl ferve the caufe of real 
 ehriftianity ; that the words of God, and not 
 the explications of fallible men, are the au- 
 thentick tefts of truth and orthodoxy. The/ 
 thought themfelves bound therefore, to offer 
 no fubfeription, but to the facred writings ; 
 and laudably fetting aftde all their internal 
 diftinclions, agreed in this, as the only con- 
 fident and catholick principle, upon which 
 their caufe could be relied. 
 
 Catholick and charitable, however, as their 
 conduct to each other may appear; it is 
 charged with' difcovering a different fpirit, 
 towards thofe of the eftablifhment. It is 1 
 reprefented as confidering the confeflion of 
 faith of the church of England, " as a 
 " yoke or a burthen, too heavy to be borne 
 ** by proteftants." To intimate this is ap- 
 prehended to have a manifeft tendency to 
 " diffolve the proteftant union ; and the 
 * time, it is (aid may eome, when the dif- 
 '* fenters will not regret, that they are ac- 
 " knowledged by law, as members of the 
 ** proteftant church." Do the remonftrants, 
 in Holland, then, diflblvc the proteftant uni- 
 on, 
 Letter, p. 50,
 
 gS . An Enquiry into the true 
 
 on, by rejecting fome articles of the Belgiek 
 confeflion ? Or are they confidered by the 
 ftates, as no part of the proteftant church, 
 becaufe they are now difTenters, in points 
 of doctrine, from the eftablifhed church of 
 that republick ? With fubmiffion to this 
 gentleman's better acquaintance . with thefe 
 things* it is apprenended that true proteftant- 
 ifm, and an attachment to scriptural chrif- 
 tianity, are the fame thing \\ that to main- 
 tain the fumciency and perfection of fcrip- 
 ture, is what properly conftitutes a protef- 
 tant ; that the agreement of thofe who firft 
 bore the name, in feveral points which were 
 maintained by the firft reformers, was merely 
 accidental to the character ; and that all, who 
 affent to the infpired writings, as the only 
 rule by which chriftians are to be bound, re- 
 tain their title to this honourable name. And, 
 the more clofely they adhere to thefe facred 
 oracles, and the more carefully they bring 
 all confeflions and fyftems of opinions to 
 them, as the touchftone, by which the va- 
 lue of all human decifions in religion is to 
 be afcertained, the more -confiftently and 
 perfectly proteftant their behaviour deferves 
 to be accounted. . 
 
 But it is not only with a kind of apoftacy 
 from proteftantifm, but want of a friendly 
 ipirit to the eftabliihment, that the difTenters 
 are charged for their late attempt. Succefs 
 
 in
 
 Principles of Toleraiisn, &c. 97 
 
 in it, we are told, p would have " been but 
 " the poor femblance of a triumph ; " perfift- 
 ing in the attempt will be a caufe, it is 
 faid, for confidering the diffenting minifters 
 as men, who u to make their hatred to the 
 " eftablifhment more effectual, are ready to 
 " feize upon every favourable time and op- 
 " portunity of manifefting it.'" 4 The ap- 
 plication is taxed again, for it feems to be 
 a favourable topick, with " implying a defire 
 " to make a reconciliation more defperate 
 " than ever : " r and granting the requeft, 
 it is afferted, would have been declaring by 
 a " new law, that the bond of union, " be- 
 tween " his Majefty's proteftant fu ejects, 
 " who are luppofed by law to makltain the 
 ** fame chriftian doctrines, is broken. " s Per- 
 fons of ability and refinement, may flrike 
 many meanings out of any meafufe, which 
 never entered into the hearts of thofe who 
 engaged in it. But this meafure authorizes 
 no fuch conftruction. It implies, it is true, 
 that the preient diffenters have objections to 
 fubfcribing to fome of the articles, which 
 their predecellors had not. But this has been 
 long known -, and petitioning not to be fub- 
 ject to penalties, on that account, makes not 
 the leait alteration in the cafe ; nor had the 
 petition been granted, would it in the leall 
 O have 
 
 p Letter, p. 4.1. 1 Ibid. p. 58. r Ibid. p. 3S. 
 Ibid. p. 22.
 
 98 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 have leffened the ties of affection, by which, it 
 is hoped, thofe, who are of the eftablifhment, 
 and thofe, * who diffent from it, would ftill 
 have been bound to each other, as thofe who 
 are " of the fame body, and partakers of the 
 " fame promife in Chrift, by the gofpel." But 
 ' let the cafe be as this gentleman has Hated it. 
 What has rejecting the petition done towards 
 preferving this union, for which he profefles 
 himfelf fo folicitous ? It cannot be fuppofed 
 to bring the judgment of the diffenters a 
 ftep nearer to the articles than they were 
 before ; and all thought of compelling per- 
 fons to exprefs their approbation of them, 
 contrary to their judgment, is what he ut- 
 terly difclaims. Had the bill paiTed, it would 
 have been a noble addition to the proofs, 
 which the church of England has given of 
 her moderation to diffenting proteftants ; and 
 had the fathers of the church been zealous 
 in promoting it, they would have erected 
 
 MONUMENTUM AERE PERENNIUS tO their 
 
 praiie. But rejecting the bill, has rather the 
 appearance of excluding thofe, who decline 
 fubfcription, from the number of thofe whom 
 the eftablifhment choofes to acknowledge as 
 brethren. Inftead of difcovering an unwil- 
 lingnefs to part with them, it looks much 
 more like a readinefs to caft them off, as unfit 
 to be comprehended in that legal protection, 
 which they were moved to feek, by no other 
 
 principles
 
 Principles of Tokration y &c. 99 
 
 principles than a regard to their own fafety, 
 and to the caufe of liberty ; and, on their 
 application for which, a defire to fhow the 
 leaft hoftile difpofitions to the members of 
 the eftablifhment, had not the remoteft in- 
 fluence. 
 
 So far, in reality, are the diflenters in ge- 
 neral, from being actuated by fuch motives 
 as thefe, that the very reverfe of this is 
 the truth. Senflble and moderate men, both 
 in the eftablifhment and out of it, feem to 
 be gradually moving on to a more open and 
 friendly intercourfe with each other. Their 
 fentiments on points which were formerly 
 the fubjecl of much and warm controverfy, 
 more generally coincide. The diftinction 
 between the great end and efTentials of re- 
 ligion, and the mere circumftantials which 
 attend it, is better underftood and more ge- 
 nerally acknowledged. But it unhappily falls 
 out, that the nearer the diflenters approach 
 in fome of thefe things, to a great part of 
 the members of the eftablifhment, to the 
 greater diflance they find themfelves removed 
 from fome of the articles of it. The lefs 
 diflike fome among them may retain to the 
 mode of the publick fervices of the church, 
 the greater objections they have to fome of 
 the materials, which are incorporated with 
 them i and thus, while fome circumftances 
 might feem to prepare the way for a more 
 O 2 perfed
 
 ioo An Enquiry into the true 
 
 perfect union, there are others, which, as 
 things are now fettled, raife up new and 
 ftill ftronger obftacles to it : obftacles, which 
 not even the example and authority of the 
 great Chillingworth, x will enable them 
 to furmount. The diffenters have always 
 held the memory of that eminent man in 
 the jufteft veneration. They think of him 
 with peculiar fatisfaction, for the noble and 
 fuccefsful ardour, with which he aflerted the 
 fole right and authority of the facred fcrip- 
 tures to command the aflent and fubmif- 
 fion of chriftians : but they cannot implicit- 
 ly give themfelves up to his judgment, and 
 follow his example contrary to their fenti- 
 ments. His practice, indeed, if we may 
 credit the account given of his fubicription, 
 by hands, which appear to be good, bears 
 po fuch teftimony to the articles as iems 
 to be collected from it. His own fenfe of 
 it, as we are told by the author of his life, 
 is exprelfed in thefe words : " I do verily 
 " believe the church of England a true 
 " member of the church catholick ; that fhe 
 " wants nothing neceffary to falvation, and 
 " holds nothing repugnant thereto." " And 
 " I thought (he adds) that to think fo, had 
 c ' fufEciently qualified me for a fubferipti- 
 " on.' " Were this all, which is intended 
 
 by 
 
 1 Letter, p. 52. 
 u Free and candid Difquifit. p. 169. ed. 1749.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. 101 
 
 by fubfeription, the diffenters would have 
 much lefs object ion to it than they have ; 
 and it is reafonable to believe this applica- 
 tion to parliament would never have been 
 heard of. But by what competent authority 
 has this ever been determined ? Bifhop Bur- 
 net w fuppofes indeed, that this is all, which 
 is implied in the communion of the laity 
 with the church ; but, defirous as he was 
 to foften the hard injunction of fubfeription, 
 againft which he left his dying teftimony, * 
 he could not apply it to the declaration re- 
 quired of the clergy. I think it may be 
 juftly doubted, whether this author himfelf 
 will admit of this fenfe of fubfeription. Ex- 
 pounded in this manner, it carries nothing 
 more in it than what arians, focinians, 
 or in a word any, who reject thofe articles 
 of the church, which he confiders as fun- 
 damental, may fubferibe, if they have but 
 charity fufficient to acknowledge the belief 
 of them confident with falvation. And 
 with what juftice then could he imagine 
 that the example of a perfon, who is be- 
 lieved to have fubicribed only in this mean- 
 ing, could be of any force to remove the 
 fcruples of the diffenters concerning it ? 
 
 Indeed till this gentleman, or fome other 
 of the zealous advocates for fubfeription, 
 
 have 
 
 w Expofit. of the article*, p. 6. ed. 1720. 
 * Concjufion of his hift. p. 624. vol. ii. folio ed.
 
 102 ... An Enquiry into the true 
 
 have more precisely determined the meaning 
 and extent of it, the doubts, not only of 
 thofe out of the eftablilhment, but of num- 
 bers of thoughtful perfons in it, will con- 
 tinue in all their ftrength. From the ftrefs 
 laid upon it, by this writer at leaft, which 
 is fo great that he treats releafing the dif- 
 fenters from k, as an indulgence which might 
 have been pernicious to the ftate, y (and by 
 which, the chriftian religion itfelf might have 
 been affected, z ) fuch as are unacquainted with 
 what has been faid upon the fubjedt, might be 
 led to fuppofe that the import of it was out 
 of all diipute, and that it was allowed to be 
 an indifputable affurance of affection to the 
 doctrines of the articles. And yet there is 
 fcarcely a point more controverted. Some 
 contend earneftly, that hearty affent to them, 
 in the fenfe of the compilers, is the neceffa- 
 ry meaning of it ; and confider fubfcribing, in 
 any other fenfe, as incapable of vindication, 
 Other gentlemen, of great learning, think 
 themfelves warranted in fubfcribing with 
 greater latitude. Others have been defirous 
 to confider the articles as articles of peace j 
 and others may have views of the matter 
 different from all thefe. While thefe difputes 
 are left undecided, what great lecurity can 
 fubfcriptions give to any church of the found- 
 nefs of its minifters ? AYhile there is fuch a 
 
 diyerfity 
 K Letter, p. 58. - Ibid. p. tz.
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec, 103 
 
 diverfity of opinions concerning the very act, 
 which is required in order to prevent it ; 
 who can wonder that the diffenters choofe 
 to decline it, left they fhould have construc- 
 tions put upon their conduct which they can- 
 not admit, and from which they may be 
 urged with conceflions, which they cannot al- 
 low themfelves to make ? And they have 
 the pleafure to fee, that, however the practice 
 of the above mentioned eminent defender of 
 the proteflant caufe may be quoted againft 
 them, his principles may be quoted, and 
 fpeak forcibly, very forcibly, for them : and 
 fully juftify the fubfeription they propofed. 
 So long as that memorable fentence (lands 
 in his incomparable book j the Bible, the 
 Bible only is the religion of proteftants, 
 the diffenters will think they have a right 
 to glory in him, as a patron of their caufe 
 in their late application : efpecially when 
 they join with it that noble motion of his, 
 which is more appofite ftill to their pur- 
 pofe: " Let all men believe the fcripture, 
 ** and that only ; and endeavour to believe 
 " it in the true fenfe, and require no more 
 " of others ; and they fhall find this a bet- 
 " ter means not only to fupprefs herefy, but 
 " to reftore unity. For he that believes the 
 " fcripture fincerely, and endeavours to be- 
 " lieve it in the true fenle, cannot poflibly 
 " be an heretick. And if no more than 
 
 * this
 
 104 dn Enquiry into the true 
 
 " this was required of any man, to make 
 " him capable of the church's communion, 
 " then all men fo qualified, though they 
 " were different in opinion, yet, notwith- 
 <c Handing any fuch difference, they mult 
 " be, of neceffity, one in communion. " * 
 
 Whether there be any reaibn to expect, 
 that by any fchemes, which may now, or 
 fome time hence, be in contemplation, fuch b 
 a change will be effected in our eftablifhment, 
 as will open the doors of it wide enough 
 for good men of all parties, to enter into 
 it , the diffenters pretend not to be mafters 
 of fufficient intelligence to determine. It 
 gives them great pleafure to have but hints 
 from gentlemen, who appear to fpeak from 
 authentick information, that fuch a defign is 
 ferioufly entertained. What they have heard 
 fome of great eminence have faid mufl be 
 done, they flatter themfelves, fome time will 
 be done. But if a century, and perhaps 
 much more than a century, from the lafl 
 fettlement of the church, mufl intervene be- 
 fore fo much as one ftcp, which can be 
 laid to have produced any effect, is taken 
 in this good worK. , if, after fuch a flep is 
 take.i, it fhould be found infufficient to an- 
 fwer the defired end, and another period of 
 equal duration mufl complete its round be- 
 fore 
 
 * Conclufion of his preface, to the author of charity 
 maintained. b letter, p. 47, 59.
 
 Principles of Toleration, &c. ft) 5 
 
 fore a fecofld will be found admifiible, not 
 only Dr. Furneaux, but others may doubt, 
 without reprobating the eftablifhment as un- 
 worthy of them, whether they (hall live to 
 fee the time when they can have the fatis- 
 faction of being comprehended in it. Should 
 fuch a day open upon them, I am fatisfied 
 the diuenters will not be indifpofed to make 
 every due acknowledgment to the wifdom 
 and piety of the gentlemen, who quickened 
 the approach of it. In the mean time, why 
 mould it be thought fo reftlefs in them to 
 be willing to be fecured ? Or what obftruc- 
 tion can their attempt, in reafon, create to 
 the defirable undertaking ? Had it fuc- 
 ceeded, it would have put no new difficulties 
 in the way of conformity, as the terms of it 
 now ftand , and mould thofe, which as yet 
 fubfift, be removed, refufing the difTenters 
 their requeft, makes their way into the church 
 no eafier, nor can it render their minds at all 
 more difpofed to it, than if their defire had 
 been granted. But there is one confidera- 
 tion more, which has great weight with the 
 difTenters, and which they beg leave to re- 
 commend to the moit ferious thoughts of alj^ 
 who undertake to judge of their conduct. 
 They have propofed fubfeription to the Bi- 
 ble as a qualification, upon which they wifh 
 to enjoy the advantages of Toleration. If 
 the conductors of any defign, for lefTening 
 P the
 
 io6 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 the difficulties of the clergy, and bringing 
 in the difTenters, fhould entertain the fame un- 
 favourable opinion of this fubfcription, which 
 the author of the letter, fo frequently men- 
 tioned, appears to entertain of it ; c tiiere is 
 no ground to fuppofe that any alterations will 
 fix the admiffion of minifters into the church, 
 upon this extenfive principle : and if not, 
 there is room to believe, that fame good, 
 very good men, may ftill be kept out. 
 All thofe who are fhut out from fuch an 
 eftablifhment, will moft afTuredly be fhut out 
 from the benefit of Toleration, as it is now 
 bounded by law. " And mould Toleration 
 " itfelf affume a new form, in confequence 
 " of any change in the eftablifhment , yet, 
 tc if fubfcription to this new fet of articles 
 <c fhould be the condition of it, .numbers may 
 " ftill be deprived of all advantage from it ;" 
 for whofe fafety, therefore, fome provifion will 
 be neceffary, and whofe cafe will be highly 
 worthy of regard. d Since, inconsiderable as 
 they may be efteemed on account of their 
 circumftances, and, unpopular as they may 
 be mads by their fingularity ; they may, ne- 
 yerthelefs, be fome of the moft truly con- 
 
 fcientious, 
 
 c Letter, p. 10, n. 
 d For fo much of the above fentence as is marked 
 with commas, and which was added while the meets 
 of the firfi: edition of this eflay were printing off, the 
 author is indebted to the hint given by Dr. Kippis; 
 p-8i. iftedit.
 
 Principles of Tvleration, Sec. 107 
 
 fcientious, and greatly virtuous men in 
 the kingdom ; and it can never be fit, 
 that the peace of perfons of this charac- 
 ter, mould lie at the mercy of bigotry, ha- 
 tred, or perhaps of ftill meaner princi- 
 ples. Let the prefent days be ever fo 
 mild and gentle, yet, if, in the rotation of 
 human events, it is fuppofable that the diflent- 
 ers may become the eftablifhed church j c it 
 is furely equally pofTible, and much lefs im- 
 probable, that, in the- courfe of the fame 
 rotation, events may happen in fome diflant 
 times* which may raife the fpirit of perfe- 
 ction again among us, and bring on a re- 
 petition of the fe verities and fufferings of 
 the former days. And though the prefent 
 diffenters may be ever fo eafy for them- 
 felves , yet, as the friends of mankind, and 
 thofe who confine not their views to the 
 prefent generation, but look forward to the 
 poffible cafe of poilerity-, they think them- 
 felves juftified in their endeavours to enlarge 
 the legal bounds of Toleration, and promote 
 a nearer advancement of them to the extent 
 of that juft and reafonable liberty, which, 
 at prefent, prevails, with general approbation, 
 in practice. And if it is allowed to be fit 
 to prevail in practice, what good reafon 
 can be given, for which it mould not alfo 
 prevail in the language of law ? 
 
 P 2 The 
 
 c Letter, p. 27.
 
 io8 An Enquiry into the true 
 
 The matter indeed is reduced to this (hort 
 and plain iflue. Either the juft principles 
 of Toleration muft be facrificed ; or the laws> 
 from which the duTenters defire to be fhel- 
 tered, muft be allowed to be indefenfiblc 
 The truth of the one, and the juft ice of the 
 other, cannot ftand together. If one of thefe 
 oppofttes muft be parted with, it is eafy 
 to fee which is the better, more chriftian 
 choice. And could the author of this pam- 
 phlet imagine, that it would ever rife to the 
 notice of thofe in fuperior rank ; he would 
 beg leave, with all the deference which be- 
 comes him, to fubmit it to their ferious con- 
 iideration, whether, as it is a matter of con- 
 fcience with them not haftily to admit 
 requefts for the extenfion of religious li- 
 berty *, it ought not alfo to be matter of con- 
 science not caufelefsly to reject them. In 
 the nervous language of a late prelate, of 
 diftinguifhed eminence, " if it is not. very 
 " right to punifh men for their opinions -, 
 " there is no medium , it muft be very 
 " wrong. " { The ftatutes, which authorize 
 iuch a practice, muft be fubjecr, to the fame- 
 alternative. If they are not very just, they 
 muft be very unjust. And if this be their 
 only true denomination, it can fcarcely bear 
 a doubt, what ought to be determined con- 
 cerning 
 
 f Difficulties and difcouragements which attend the 
 ftudy of the {captures, p, 25. 9th edit.
 
 Principles of Toleration, Sec, 109 
 
 cerning them. Certainly it can never be 
 unworthy of the equity, clemency and wif- 
 dom of government, to fhut the door which 
 is ftill left open for their being made in- 
 ft rumen ts of opprefiion ; and entirely take 
 away the power, which they always give, 
 and the temptations, which they may some 
 time offer, to perfons of bad difpofitions, 
 to injure men of integrity, virtue and piety. 
 
 Whether fuch an happy alteration, with 
 refpect to thefe laws, will be the confequence 
 of the farther attempt, which the diffenters are 
 now making to obtain it -, they muft leave to 
 the wifdom of the great council of the king- 
 dom, (to whom their defires are again, with 
 all deference, fubmitted) to determine. And, 
 if the diffenters humbly apprehend, that there 
 is no impropriety in the repetition of their re- 
 queft ; what is there culpable in this apprehen- 
 iion ? So far as the fenfe of the legiflature was 
 concerned, the queftion was left undecided ; 
 and, upon all the principles of reafon and 
 equity, there was ample room left for them 
 to apply for a rehearing of their caufe. The 
 honourable houfe of Commons allowed the 
 juftice of their requeft; and bore teftimony 
 to it in a manner, which will remain an evi- 
 dence in favour of it, as long as the me- 
 mory of the tranfa&ions of parliament mall 
 endure. Nor can it, they apprehend, be 
 deemed an inftancc of the leaft want of that 
 
 regard
 
 no An Enquiry into the true 
 
 regard, which they always defire to retain 
 for that illuftrious affembly, in which their 
 petition was not viewed in the fame advan- 
 tageous light; that the diffenters, a fecond 
 time, prefume to fubmit their requeft to the 
 noble perfons, who before rejected it, with 
 full reliance on their willingnels again to 
 honour it with their impartial, deliberate 
 attention. Among fuch as, inftead of bring- 
 ing law to reafon, bring reafon to law, and 
 haftily conclude, that whatever is done legally, 
 is done juftly ; the diffenters are fenfible they 
 may have many prejudices raifed againft them. 
 But this age and kingdom abound with per- 
 fons, who are placed far above the reach of 
 all fuch impreffions -, " who are men of re- 
 " fined and exalted understandings, who have 
 " a large compafs of thought, and have 
 " looked into the principles of things. Thefe 
 " know, that written laws are but deducti- 
 " ons from the law of nature, which is prior 
 4C to all human inftitutions ; that thefe fome- 
 " times deviate from that unwritten law ; 
 " and, when they do, are of no real, intrin- 
 " fick authority. They know, that a thing 
 " is not juft and reafonable, becaufe it is 
 " enacted ; but, in good governments, is 
 " enacted becaufe it is juft and reafonable." h 
 And it is with great fatisfaction that the 
 
 dif- 
 
 h Difnculues and difcouragements, &c. p. 25. 
 
 oth edit.
 
 Principles of toleration, &c. in 
 
 diffentefs reflect, that it is before perfons of 
 this clafs that the caufe, which they have 
 fo much at heart, is to be reviewed. 
 With men of this truly elevated fpirit, they 
 may juftly hope they mall obtain a candid 
 audience ; and they cannot but be confirmed 
 in the hope, when they turn their thoughts 
 to that truly refpectable band of worthies, 
 who have, already, in this queflion, rifen up 
 and avowed their caufe : perfons, great in 
 their rank, and by the trufts repofed in 
 them , great in their abilities, and the re- 
 putation, with which they have filled up 
 high and important ftations : but great above 
 all in this, that, though connected by no ties 
 of party, nor united by any views of inte- 
 reft , yet, when the venerable form of truth 
 appears before them, they with one accord 
 refort to her, and range themfelves under her 
 banners. Many fuch, the difTenters are fatis- 
 fied, there are alfo among thofe, who were 
 not inclinable, when this affair was firft pro- 
 pofed, to favour their caufe : nor can they 
 relinquifh the hopes, which they entertained, 
 that, when once thofe fears were fubfided, 
 and thofe mifapprehenfions removed, which 
 prevented the real ftate of their cafe from 
 being feen in its true light ; they mould 
 have the pleafure and honour of numbering 
 thefe truly refpectable perfons among their 
 friends alfo. But, however thefe hopes may 
 
 be
 
 H2 An Enquiry into the Principles ', &c. 
 
 be anfwered, or difappointed 5 there is one 
 fatisfaction, which they will always enjoy ; 
 that the views, by which they are anima- 
 ted, are fuch as, inftead of deierving to 
 be condemned, are worthy to be applaud- 
 ed. It is not the intereft of a party ; 
 but of chriftian liberty, truth, and cha- 
 rity, which they are labouring to ferve ; 
 and, however fome perfons may attempt to 
 fet thefe interefts at variance, nothing is more 
 certain than, that they will all be found ul- 
 timately to coincide with each other ; and 
 that the greater regard is paid to each, in 
 its feafon, the fwifter advances will be made, 
 to that defirable ifTue, which is the hope, 
 and wifh of the diffenters, (and in which 
 every good heart will concur with them, ) 
 
 that BROTHERLY LOVE MAY CONTINUE j that 
 
 all thofe remains of jealoufy, which have of- 
 ten defeated noble deligns, for promoting the 
 caufe of truth and peace, may be more com- 
 pletely taken away ; that zeal for the advance- 
 ment of genuine chriftianity may temper all 
 inferior views -, and that all may increafe in 
 their defire, with one heart and one 
 
 MOUTH, TO GLORIFY God, EVEN THE FA- 
 THER of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 APPEN-
 
 [ "3 3 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 IN the courfe of writing the foregoing 
 Treatife, feveral points occurred to the 
 Author befides thofe confidered in it/jwnich, 
 though they appeared to him not unworthy 
 of attention, he did not then choofe to en- 
 large. Farther thoughts upon the fubject 
 having led him to alter his judgment, in 
 this refpecl, the fubftance of his reflections, 
 Upon thefe and fome other Heads is added 
 in this and the following pages. 
 
 Note I. 
 
 Page 17. line 24. " There is no difficulty 
 " in difcerning, that while I am fpeaking 
 " in this manner, &c." 
 
 As it has been apprehended, by a judicious friend, 
 that what is faid in this paragraph, though it is 
 allowed to be a fufficient anfwer to the objection 
 propofed in it, will fcarcely be feen to be fo, by 
 fome perfons, without farther explication ; it may 
 not be amifs to ftate the whole affair a little more 
 diilindUy ; that the miitake of the objection, and 
 the force of the reply to it, may be the more eafi- 
 !y underflood. 
 
 Q The
 
 ii 4 APPENDIX. 
 
 The obje&ion, in fhort, is this ; that if the mi- 
 giflrate has no right to lay reflraints upon confci- 
 cnce, as fuch, wherever a plea of confcience inter- 
 venes, his authority is at an end : that, as he can be 
 no judge of men's hearts, whether this plea be real, 
 or pretended, the efFecl which it will have upon his 
 jurifdidtion, will be the fame : and that the greateft 
 crimes, by being fheltered under this excufe, may 
 be committed with impunity. The inflances, in 
 which this inconvenience may be fuppofed to arife 
 from liberty of confcience, may, I prefume, be ge- 
 nerally reduced to one of thefe cafes. The cafe 
 of perfons, who think themfelves bound to ufe force 
 for the propagation of what they apprehend to be 
 truth. The cafe of thofe, whofe principles lead 
 them to judge, what are commonly thought vices 
 hurtful to fociety, to be innocent, and what may 
 be indulged without fcruple. Or, laftly, the cafe 
 of thofe, who are fo unhappily milled as to incor- 
 porate things hurtful to fociety into their religion, 
 and account it their duty to praftife them. Thefe 
 cafes will, in fome cirCumftances, perhaps, run one 
 into another; but it is proper to mention them 
 diilindUy : and a few words, it is hoped, will make 
 it appear, that the principles, here eftablifhed, nei- 
 ther lead to thefe evils, nor take away the power 
 of the magiflrate to reftrain them. 
 
 As to the firft of thefe cafes ; that allowing every 
 man a right to think for himfelf in matters of reli- 
 gion can never authorize perfons to offer violence 
 to others, for differing from them in religion, is felf 
 evident ; for to affirm that it would authorize them in 
 this, is the fame abfurdity as faying, that to affert a 
 right is giving power to take away that right. That 
 any man fhould ever attempt to ufe compulfion in 
 religion upon the principle of every man's having a 
 right to think for himfelf, is, at leafr, a moral im- 
 poffibility, if it is not a natural one. For to allow 
 
 that
 
 APPENDIX. u 5 
 
 that every man has a right to judge for himfelf, in 
 matters of confcience, is allowing, almoft in exprefs 
 terms, that confcience is not to be forced ; and that 
 a man mould ever lay this down as the foundation, 
 upon which he attempts to force confcience, is in- 
 conceivable. In order to juftify himfelf in fuch a 
 conduct, he muft go upon a dire&ly oppofite prin- 
 ciple; and maintain that all men have not a right 
 to judge for themfelves, but that fome others have 
 a right to judge for them. If any doubt then can 
 remain upon this head, it muft be this ; why a per- 
 fon who thinks himfelf authorized to impofe his 
 fentiments on others, fhould not be fuffered to aft 
 according to his judgment, as well as others be 
 fuffered to ail according to theirs ? But the anfwer 
 is obvious, and arifes almoft inftantaneoufly out of 
 the premifes here mentioned : viz. becaufe his fol- 
 lowing his judgment, in this cafe, is deftrudtive of 
 all the right, which others have to follow their 
 judgments; becaufe the liberty, which he takes, is 
 breaking in upon that liberty, which ought to be 
 preferved in the fame extent to all ; and becaufe no 
 imaginary right, which he may arrogate to himfelf 
 of obliging others to be directed by his judgment, 
 can annul the real rights of others to be guided by 
 their own. Every attack, which he makes upon their 
 perfon, liberty or eftate, for this purpofe, is an in- 
 jury, which comes within the limits of the civil 
 power ; and which the magistrate is not only allowed, 
 but is, by virtue of his office, obliged to reftrain : for 
 conniving at thefe als of injuftice in fome, would 
 be a breach of his truft in behalf of others. In- 
 deed to imagine that becaufe men have a right to 
 be protected in adling for themfelves in religion, 
 while they offer no injury to their fellow fubje&s, 
 therefore they muft have a right to be protected, 
 when they do offer injuries to them ; is as idle as 
 in fuppofo, that becaufe perfons have a right to be 
 O ?. fafe
 
 n6 APPENDIX. 
 
 fafe in pafling peaceably and incffenfively along the 
 publick road, they have alfo a right to be unmo- 
 lefted, when they infult, and plunder all who fall 
 in their way. 
 
 The fame reafoning, only a little varied in the 
 application of it, will entirely remove this objection 
 alfo in the fecpnd cafe. Fraud, robbery, perjury, 
 and other crimes of the like nature, are dire&Iy 
 repugnant to all the effential and acquired rights 
 of men. Immoralities of other kinds, are a&s of 
 injuftice to individuals, and fubverfive of the welfare 
 of the publick. When inftances of them occur, there- 
 fore, the magiftrate has again a right to interpofe; 
 and, upon the very fame principles, to correft them : 
 nor can this right be controuled by any pleas of 
 confcience, whether real or fictitious, which may be 
 advanced in excufe for them. The nature and con- 
 fequences of the injury are what properly comes 
 under his infpeftion ; and not the inward fentiment. 
 The violations of the rights of fociety and the mem- 
 bers of it, are the evils, againft which he is to guard ; 
 and, wherever thefe are to be found, he has a proper 
 and direft authority to check them by fuch penalties, 
 as their malignity, and the circumstances attending 
 them, require. 
 
 To enter into a particular consideration of the 
 third cafe, after what has been faid, would be tedi- 
 ous. Every intelligent reader will carry on to it, 
 the obfervations, which have been already made ; 
 and the folution of it will be the fame. Religion 
 muft be the refult of convi&ion ; and every man 
 muft, therefore, have a right, and is under an obli- 
 gation, in proportion to his abilities, to judge for 
 himfelf in the choice of it. But if his judgment 
 fhould unhappily lead him to make any thing a part 
 of his religion, which is injurious to others, and 
 contrary to the fundamental laws of fociety ; he fo 
 far ftill falls under the animadverfion of the magi- 
 strate.
 
 APPENDIX. u 7 
 
 /Irate* But then, it muft always be remembered, 
 that it is not becaufe the magiftrate has an authority 
 to diftate to confidence, that he is thus warranted 
 ro interpofe ; but becaufe the rights of others, whom 
 he is equally called to defend, are infringed ; and 
 the fafety of the civil fociety, over which he is to 
 watch, is ftruck at. He a^s not as the di&ator 
 to his fubie&s in fpirituals, but as the guardian of 
 their temporalities, and the impartial proteclor of 
 their civil and religious liberties. By attending to 
 this obvious diflinttion, the rights of confcience and 
 the real rights of government will both be preferved ; 
 and the pernicious extremes of calling either in quef- 
 tion will be avoided. Religious liberty will be kept 
 from running into licentioufnefs ; civil authority be 
 preferved from degenerating into tyranny ; and the 
 eonclufion, which has been already drawn from the 
 whole, may be fafely admitted ; that as no man 
 can derive from his right to follow his own con- 
 viftion in religion an authority to infringe the rights 
 of others ; fo, while he keeps clear of this, it " muft 
 " always remain entire to him ; nor, while princi- 
 " pies of the mod reafonable liberty are allowed to 
 " fubfift in their due extent, can any attempt be 
 " confidently made to take it from him." f 
 
 j- Page 17, of this Efliy. 
 
 Note II. 
 P. $j. 1. 26". " What, but to join in 
 u placing it on a more enlarged bafis, and 
 " procuring for thofe who requeft it, &c." 
 
 So much has been already faid, in this pamphlet, 
 to cftablifli this title of good fubjeils to religious 
 liberty, that it is prefumed, in what follows, it 
 may be confidered as a principle, from which the 
 diffenters may fairly reafon, as often as occafions for 
 
 having
 
 n8 APPENDIX. 
 
 having recourfe to it may offer themfelves. It may be 
 proper, however, to obferve here, that the very adl 
 of Toleration, the imperfe&ion of which has been 
 the fubjett of fome of the foregoing pages, carries 
 in it a legal acknowledgment of the right under 
 confideration. A writer of diftinguifhed abilities, in 
 what has been commonly called the Bangorian con- 
 troverfy, aflerts indeed, as I find him quoted by 
 Bilhop Hoadly, " That the legiflature knows no reli- 
 *' gious rights, but what are contained in the efta- 
 ' blifliment of the church of England." What ufe 
 was intended to be made of this affertion in that 
 part of the controverfy, which gave occafion for 
 them, it is not to our prefent purpofe to enquire : 
 and that, before the Revolution, the Legiflature knew 
 of no religious rights, but fuch as this writer men- 
 tions, is very willingly admitted. It was the very 
 grievance, of which the nonconforming, in the 
 reigns preceding that important event, complained; 
 that liberty of confcience, as far as law could de- 
 prive them of it, was entirely taken from them. 
 But, at the time when the writer referred to ad- 
 vanced this afiertion, it had been long contradicted 
 by the voice of law. The parliament, which pafled 
 the aft of Toleration, plainly fuppofed thefe rights 
 as the foundation, upon which they refted the fitnefs 
 of that law ; and herein all the fincere approvers of 
 it mull concur with them. For as the excellent 
 author, from whom I take this account of the 
 affertions of his celebrated antagonift, juftly argues : * 
 * f This either was the right of the diflenters, or it 
 " was not. If it was not, then the legiflature 
 " granted them what they had no right to, and 
 "* acled a piece of injuftice to the eftablilhed church. 
 
 ** But if it was their right, then here is a right, 
 
 " and this a religious right, reftored by the means 
 v of the Revolution, diftintt from all thofe religious 
 
 <c rights, 
 * Bp. Hssd!y"i common rigkts of fubjedls. P, 24.3.
 
 APPENDIX. u 9 
 
 " fights, which are implied in the eftablifhment of 
 " the church of England. The legiflature granted 
 " this as a right, and a religious right: and there- 
 " fore, it is a groundlefs imputation upon it to fay, 
 " that the legiflature knows no religious rights, but 
 " what are contained in the eftablifliment of the 
 ' church, when it is fo evident that the legifla- 
 " ture knows the right of Toleration, upon which 
 " the exprefs law for it muft be fuppofed to be 
 " founded, unlefs you will fuppofe them to have 
 " done wrong to the eftablifliment by it." The 
 force of this reafoning, it is prefumed, will be al- 
 lowed : and it is an obvious remark, that if rights of 
 any kind, and religious rights in particular, are 
 juftly fuppofed in law as the ground of it, there 
 muft be a degree, in which they fubfift independently 
 of law. And if this be granted, it will furely be 
 admitted with it, that in whatever degree, reafon 
 and the found principles of political focieties fhew 
 them to fubfift, it is fit that law fhould allow them 
 to fubfift alfo. 
 
 But had it ftill been fadl, that the legiflature knows 
 no religious rights but what are contained in the 
 ellablifliment of the church of England ; what would 
 it have proved ? Nothing but the palpable injuftice 
 of" thofe laws, which refufed to admit fuch rights. 
 During the time, in which this was really the lan- 
 guage of the laws, the diflenters juftly thought 
 themfelves kept in a ftate of heavy bondage 
 and oppreffion ; and herein the wifer and better 
 part of the nation concurred with them. There 
 were, even then, great numbers, who faw (though 
 ftill, it muft be owned, but impeffe&ly) that there 
 were religious rights inherent in men, of which no 
 human power could juftly attempt to deprive them. 
 From a fenfe of this they more tha,n once nobly 
 ftruggled to refcue their brethren from the flavery 
 which was entailed upon them ; and had at length 
 
 the
 
 i2o APPENDIX. 
 
 the pleafure to fee this deliverance take place. But 
 had the diflenters never obtained fuch a recognition 
 of their religious rights; would their rights have 
 been lefs real ? Or the effefts of thofe, who laboured 
 to reftore the exercife of them, lefs laudable ? " To 
 " take our notions of religious rights from human 
 ** laws, or of what Almighty God has veiled man- 
 " kind with, from the declarations and decifions of 
 * his fallible creatures,"* (that! may again borrow 
 the words of that able and confiftent defender of civil 
 and religious liberty, whom I have before quoted,) to 
 do this, I fay, is following an erroneous rule of judg- 
 ment. *' Suppofing, as he proceeds, f the legiflature 
 " in Spain to know no religious rights, but what are 
 " contained in the eftablifhment of the popifh church 
 '* there: will it follow, that opprefled and injured 
 * proteftants there, have no fuch rights? Suppofing 
 " the legiflature in Scotland, before the union, knew 
 ' nothing of any religious rights, but what are 
 " contained in the eftablifliment of the Kirk of 
 " Scotland ; or that the prefent legiflature of Great- 
 " Britain, knows nothing of any other religious 
 u rights, in that kingdom : does it follow, that 
 '* therefore, epifcopal men, being good fubje&s, have 
 ' no religious rights there ? I prefume not*" The 
 application is obvious. 
 
 * Common rights of fubjefts. p. 243. f p. 244. 
 
 Note III. 
 
 P. 64. L 2. " Is it a confequence, 
 " that becaufe that parliament, went only 
 " thus far, fucceeding ones muft go no 
 " further ? " 
 
 It is eafy to fee, that, if this way of reafoning 
 were juft againft an enlargement of legal Toleration, 
 now, it would have been equally juft immediately 
 
 after
 
 APPENDIX. i2i 
 
 after the Revolution, againft any aft of Toleration 
 at all ; fince that was more than had been, till that 
 time, granted by law. It would, I think, be very 
 unjuftihable to fuppofe, that the author, whofe rea- 
 foning is here confidered, entertains any diflike to 
 the Toleration as it now Hands. But it may fure- 
 ly be worthy of his confideration, whether his man- 
 ner of arguing, in this part of his letter, is not, 
 in its juft confequences, unfavourable to it. The dif- 
 fenters have been often condemned for feparating from 
 the ellablifhment on account, of ceremonies, forms, 
 matters of difcipline, and comparatively indifferent 
 things. This feems, at lead, to be fomething of a 
 conceffion, that if their diffent was founded on points 
 of doftrine, it would be more defensible ; and yet 
 now that they defire to be exempted from an obli- 
 gation to fubfcribe to the doftrinal articles of the 
 church, they are told, that this is an indulgence 
 never intended for them by the aft of Toleration ; * 
 that it was what their predecefibrs never defired, f 
 and from hence it is infinuated, that the liberty 
 which is afked, is too extenfive to be allowed. But, 
 notwithftanding the diftinftion made between thefe 
 two cafes, the right of differing from the national 
 efiablifhment in religious doftrines, and the right 
 of differing from it in rites and ceremonies, Hand 
 or fall together. If the civil magiltrate has an au- 
 thority to command his fubjetfs what doftrines 
 they fhall make a part of their religion ; he has 
 the fame right to command what lites, and modes 
 of worffiip they fhall admit into it alfo. If he has 
 no authority to oblige them to receive thofe modes 
 of worfhip, which he efpoufes, he can have no au- 
 thority, to oblige them to receive thofe articles of 
 faith, which he embraces. They have the fame li- 
 berty, and are under the fam obligation to enquire, 
 and adhere to the direftion of their ccnfciences, with 
 R refpeft 
 
 * Letter to the diflenting mbiftcrs, p. 6. f IbiJ. p. S.
 
 j22 APPENDIX. 
 
 refpedl to one as well as the other ; and their dif- 
 ftnting from his judgment, in either cafe, can never 
 be juitly confidered as an offence againft. his real 
 authority ; nor, while they difcharge the duties of 
 good fubjefts, can it be any warrant for (hutting 
 them out of his protection. 
 
 Note IV. 
 
 P. 65. 1. 18. " It is no juftification of 
 " this opprefiion, to dignify the principles 
 " thus enforced by penalties, with the 
 " founding titles of doctrines, which have 
 " been acknowledged by the chriftian church 
 " in general, and the fuppofed fundamen- 
 " tals of chriftianity." 
 
 How far this gentleman extends his notion of the 
 unfitnefs of a Toleration of diffent, in points of 
 do&rine, from the eftablifhmenf, it might be run- 
 ning a rifle of mifapprehending his meaning to af- 
 firm. There is fomething fo general, and indeter- 
 minate in his expreffions, whenever he touches upon 
 this fubjec"!, that it is difficult to fee, precifely, 
 what his idea is of it. If he thinks, however, that 
 merely departing from eftablifhed articles, is, in any 
 cafe, a reafon for with-holding a Toleration ; he 
 will have no reafon, furely, to complain of being 
 injured by a fuppofition, that he is of this opinion, 
 in the cafe of a departure from, what he . calls, 
 fundamentals. * But to make a mere difference from 
 the religion eftablifhed by the magiftrate, even in 
 fundamentals, a reafon for the refufal of a Tole- 
 ration, is ftill treating Toleration, not as the right 
 of the good citizen, but a priviledge of which he 
 may be deprived for no offence againft the com- 
 munity 
 Letter, p. 2, 9.
 
 APPENDIX. 123 
 
 munity, to which he belongs, but merely on account 
 of nonconformity to the ecclefiaftical eftablimment 
 of it : and thus we are infenfibly brought back to 
 the miftaken apprehenfion of a right in the ma- 
 giftrate to oblige his fubjefts to regulate their re- 
 ligious profeflion by his own. For, if he has 
 no authority to require their fubmiflion to his 
 fentiments in religion in general, he can have 
 none to require it in fundamentals ; and, if he 
 has no right to demand it, to fay he has a right 
 to inflidl punifhment for the refufal of it, is an 
 abfurdity. And though limiting this power in the 
 magiftrate to the cafe of fundamentals, may feem, 
 in a great meafure, to refirain the exercife of it ; 
 yet, when the limitation is fearched to the bottom, 
 it will appear to amount to very little, if to any thing 
 at all. For, as it is left to the magiftrate to de- 
 termine what are fundamentals, it will always be 
 in his power to adjuft and enlarge the lift of them, 
 as he judges it necefTary. Conformity to the whole 
 fyftem of his religious opinions may be made the 
 conditions, upon which the peace and fafety of his fub- 
 jects are to depend ; and want of light, and bigotry, 
 may lead him into all the excefTes of perfecution, 
 which can arife from the moil arbitrary and defpotick 
 exercife of power. It is, in reality, little more than 
 a limitation in name ; which, in effect, afferts the 
 very thing in more plaufible language, which it 
 is not thought expedient to maintain in plainer 
 terms ; and will, by degrees, take away all liberty 
 of diflenting from the eftablilbed church. 
 
 But, indeed, the more I reded on this fubjeer, 
 the more I am inclinable to think, that the gentle- 
 men, who argue in this manner, infenfibly con- 
 found fundamentals in the church, with effentials, 
 or fundamentals in the ftate, (if the expreflion will be 
 allowed,) and imagine that what is to be compre- 
 hended under this title in the one, muft, of courfe, 
 R 2 b.e
 
 124 APPENDIX. 
 
 be fo in the other. Did not fomething of this 
 kind mingle itfelf with their reafonings, it feems 
 difficult to conceive, that perfons of fuch unquef- 
 tionable good fenfe, mould adjuft the limits of 
 Toleration by a ftandard 'fo foreign to the real 
 principles of it. And I have the pleafure of 
 finding " this conjecture confirmed by a very able 
 writer, by whofe favourable mention of this pam- 
 phlet, the author of it thinks himfelf greatly ho- 
 noured, and fome of whofe words, upon this occa- 
 fion, the reader- will not be difpleafed to fee. The 
 writer, to whom I refer, is the prefent Dean of 
 Gloucefter, who obferves, in his letters to Dr. Kip- 
 pis, * (which fell into my hands while this note 
 was in writing,) that it was " a pernicious maxim, 
 " univerfally embraced by every proteftant ftate, at 
 " firft, that all the members of the fame ftate 
 " ought, en that very account, to become members 
 
 " of the fame church." " They confidered non- 
 
 " conformity to the external mode of publick wor- 
 *' fhip, and non conformity to the civil laws of a 
 *' country, as one and the fame thing ; and, there- 
 *' fore, they punilhed both actions on the fame 
 " principle. " The gentlemen, who are here con- 
 cerned, do net profefs to carry this matter fo far. 
 They are for tolerating a difient, but not in funda- 
 mentals. But why not in thefe, as well as in non- 
 fundamentals, excepting it be that, what is funda- 
 mental in the religious eftablifhment of a nation, 
 is fo likewife to the political fafety of it; and that 
 whoever departs from the one, becomes an adver- 
 fary to the other ? But, if this be their meaning, 
 it is taking that for granted, which has never yet 
 been proved ; nay, which may be eafily difproved. 
 Since nothing is eafier to conceive than, that per- 
 fons who differ from the articles of the national 
 
 church 
 * Paee 61, 67.,
 
 APPENDIX* 125 
 
 church, in feveral points, thought fundamental by 
 that church, may be, neverthelefs, unfeignedly zea- 
 lous for piety, juftice, and all thofe practical prin- 
 ciples in which the welfare of the ftate can be 
 at all concerned. Nor is there any thing more 
 certain, in fatt, than that numbers, who have thus 
 differed from the eftablifhed fyftem of opinions, 
 have been eminent for their fidelity to the govern- 
 ment, love of their country, and all thofe moral 
 and political virtues, which are the props of civil 
 fociety. Upon the whole, not acquiefcing even in 
 articles, which may be deemed fundamental in reli- 
 gion by the formers of an ecclefiaftical eflabliihment, 
 may be confiftent with all the duty which can be 
 expected from the beft of fubjects j and therefore 
 can never be a juft reafon for cutting perfons oft' from 
 the religious rights of good fubjc&s. Where no 
 civil duty is violated, no penalty, on a civil account, 
 can juftly take place. It can be inflicted only on 
 an account ftrictly ecclefiallical, and, therefore, mult 
 be, itnctly and properly, perfecution. 
 
 Note V. 
 
 P. 77. After the conclufion of the note, 
 at the bottom of this page, add as fol- 
 lows. 
 
 A writer in one of the publick papers,* to whom 
 the author of this piece owns himfelf much indebt- 
 ed, for his civility, Teems to queilion whether the 
 doubt, to which the foregoing note relates, is a real 
 one; and aCcs, whether, if it be, the author fliould 
 not have taken this opportunity to have argued in 
 favour of a more extenfive Toleration than the 
 claufe in the act, referred to in the paflage to which 
 the note is annexed, would allow, provided it fhould 
 
 no:. 
 
 London Chronicle, Dcr. 2224, I 77 2,
 
 i 2 6 APPENDIX. 
 
 not be affected by the words of the bill prefented 
 by the diffenters ? In anfwer to the firft of thefe 
 particulars, the author affures him, that the doubt 
 was a real one. In anfwer to the fecond, the writer 
 of the letter is defired to confider, that the bufinefs 
 of this treatife, in this part of it, was only to en- 
 quire, whether the confequence charged upon the 
 bill in queftion, would, in fact, have followed from 
 it, if it had pa{Ted ; and to {hew that if the confe- 
 quence really followed from it, with refpeft to the 
 act of Toleration, there were other equivalent, and 
 more than equivalent legal fccurities of the honour 
 of the eftablifhed doctrine and worfhip of the church 
 of England, which would not have been affected 
 by the liberty requefted by the diffenters ; and as 
 this was the author's only view, in this place, this 
 was all which he thought it neceffary to fay here 
 upon the fubjeft. But endeavouring to fhew that an 
 objection is made without foundation in fad, is, 
 by no means admitting that, if it had been other- 
 wife, it would have been of fufficient force to an- 
 fwer the end for which it is produced. It is rea- 
 dily agreed, with the writer, for the removal of 
 whofe doubts this paragraph is inferted ; that the 
 followers of Athanafius, Arius, Arminius, and Soci- 
 cos, may, all of them, be equally good fubjects j 
 and, as fuch, equally entitled to the protection of 
 the magiftrate in their refpeclive religious perfua- 
 fions. No judicious friend of truth will object to 
 having any human expofitions of the articles of 
 revelation, left open to fober and candid difcuffion ; 
 nor do the gentlemen, who are defirous to have 
 Inch enquiries reftrained by worldly terrors, if any 
 fuch there be, at all confult the honour and fafety 
 of the doctrines, for which they are fo tenderly 
 concerned. " If there be a way upon earth," as it 
 has juftly been obferved, " to render a doctrine fuf- 
 ' peeled, it is to enforce the belief of it by pains 
 
 " and
 
 APPENDIX. 127 
 
 " and penalties." If the dottrines of a national 
 religion are founded in truth, they will Hand ; and 
 neither argument, nor ridicule, (how improper fo- 
 ever the ufe of it on fuch fubje&s may be) will 
 be able to fubvert them. If they are not found- 
 ed in truth, their fincereft defenders will not wifli 
 them to ftand ; nor will it be in the power of pe- 
 nal laws always to fupport them. The author 
 fpeaks not this in the character of an enemy to 
 the doctrines of the articles, with the merits of 
 which his book does not require him to intermed- 
 dle. His concern in it is not with the truth and 
 falfhood of opinions, but with the principles and 
 juft extent of religious liberty ; and he thinks it 
 an happinefs, that, for the j unification of his zeal 
 in favour of fo excellent a caufe, he need look no 
 farther than the authority of a late very celebra- 
 ted writer, whofe words, in his letter to Horace 
 Walpole, Efq; concerning American Bifhops, p. 23, 
 it may not be improper to repeat. *' It is not 
 * merely from my attachment to the church of En- 
 * gland, that I am a favourer of the fcheme in 
 ' queftion : but from my love of religious liber- 
 < ry . wn i c h, in this point, the members of the 
 " church of England, in our colonies, do not en- 
 " joy." Whether, from the fame principles, the 
 cliflentcrs are not juflified in their application, the 
 reader is left to judge. 
 
 Note VI. 
 
 P. 87. 1. 9. " He owns, indeed, the 
 " merit of feveral among them, with a 
 " politenefs, which entitles him to their 
 " mod refpectful acknowledgments j &:c." 
 
 Great ftrefs is laid by the author of the letter 
 to the difTenting minilteis upon the oppufition, which 
 
 the
 
 128 A P P E N DJ X. 
 
 the diffenters are fuppofed to have made to the 
 fcheme of eftablifhing bifhops in America ; and he 
 fpeaks as if it had baen confidered as almoft decifive 
 againft them. The impreffion which this reprefen- 
 tation of the conduft of the difTenters might make 
 is not here difputed. The juftice of the charge 
 againft the diffenters, it is ftill expe&ed, will be ex- 
 amined by a better pen. But if it is this writer's 
 defign to insinuate that the diffenters, and efpecially 
 their minifters in general, are concerned to hinder 
 their epifcopal brethren abroad, from enjoying the 
 advantages of the defired inflitution, he is much a 
 ftranger to their difpofition. Dr. Furneaux's letters 
 which were appealed to as a witnefs in this cafe 
 againft the diffenters, contain a fufficient teftimony 
 for them, * that with proper fecurity for the liberty 
 of thofe of other denominations, they will be fo far 
 from oppcfing, that they will be advocates for fuch 
 a fcheme. But were the fadl otherwife j the ufe 
 made of it by this writer, in the affair under confi- 
 deration, is, in the judgment of the lately quoted 
 primate of the church, a very unjuftifiable one. He 
 fays, indeed, f " that he cannot imagine how the 
 ' diffenters can pretend to be lovers of [religious 
 * liberty,] and wifh it to be with-held from their 
 * fellow fubje&s." But admit they fhould j what 
 is his reflection ? " God forbid that we fhould ever 
 " be moved by this, or any other provoca- 
 " tion, to wifh it with-held in any instance 
 " whatever from the diffenters ! " J 
 
 * P. 191. ad edit, -f Letters to Horace Walpole. p. 23. 
 
 J Ibid. p. 24. 
 
 THE END.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 NOV 7 
 
 Z ii '^ 
 
 WAN 24 1958 
 
 NTERL1BRARY LJDAN 
 
 DEC 20 \<&U 
 
 TWO WEEKS FROM DAT BI3 
 
 NON-RENEWABLE 
 
 U2b? 
 
 |fEJr0O5-'ulft 
 
 ,*3 
 
 mffOfr 
 
 OCT 
 
 JAN 1 4 13S? 
 
 C ffD LU-U 
 
 H 
 Z 
 UJ 
 CO 
 
 UJ 
 
 < 
 
 
 fJftfcP 
 
 im 
 
 \ 
 
 
 s 
 
 UJ 
 
 3^8 
 
 , c0 < 
 
 gvfujQ 
 
 JUN 
 
 - *, *aa& 
 
 DYERSITY of califobj
 
 i oaiiiofma, los 
 
 L 007 037 661 1 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 A A 000 093 276 4