HL Deb 09 May 1811 vol 19 cc1128-33
Viscount Sidmouth

rose, in pursuance of the notice he had given on a former day, to propose to their lordships a Bill "to explain and render more effectual certain Acts of the 1st year of the reign of King William and Queen Mary, and of the 19th of George 3rd, so far as the same relate to Protestant Dissenting Ministers." The noble viscount said, it was his intention at this time to bring under their consideration the abuses which had arisen in the interpretation and the execution of two statutes, the 1st of William and Mary, and the 19th of George 3rd, so far as the same related to Protestant Dissenting Ministers. No man more than himself respected the rights given to Dissenters by these Acts of Toleration; but all classes of mankind in this country, the Dissenter as well as the member of the Established Church, were interested in removing those abuses which he alluded to; for in the proper exercise of religious duties was involved the dignity, the honour, and the sanctity of religion itself. The full advantage and happy blessings of toleration were not experienced before these statutes; for it unfortunately occurred, that one intolerant party in religion was succeeded by another equally intolerant; and it was not till the reign of king William that a true spirit of toleration was extended to those whose conscientious opinions led them to dissent from the doctrines and discipline of the Established Church. King William attempted several salutary measures, some of which, he was happy to think, he did accomplish; and others, he was sorry to say, had not been successful: but he effected one, the Toleration Act, which had secured religious liberty to the people of this country. Another act was passed in the 19th of the present reign, which amended that of king William. But if their lordships would turn their attention to the terms of these two acts, they would find that the appointments of ministers and teachers of religion were made contrary to the spirit and true intent of those statutes. He should ever consider the present mode of appointment as injurious to society, and such as he was sure was condemned by every worthy and enlightened Dissenter. It was a matter of importance to society, that not every person, without regard to his moral character or his intellectual faculties, should assume to himself the office of instructing his fellow-creatures in their duty to God. It could never be the wish of the Dissenters; indeed, from the communication he had had with that respectable class of men, he knew it was contrary to their ideas that a person should thus take upon himself the assumption that he was competent to become the religious instructor of others. On this subject he had gained extensive information, and had been made acquainted with facts, which shewed that abuses existed to a considerable degree in the self-appointment of improper individuals. For such was the mode generally pursued on this occasion, that if any person, however depraved, however ignorant and illiterate, whether descending from a chimney or a pillory, if he appeared at the quarter sessions, and claimed to take the oath of allegiance to his Sovereign and that against Popery, and made the necessary declaration provided by the 19th of Geo. III. he was entitled to, and could demand a certificate, although there was no proof of his fitness to preach, or of his having any congregation requiring his ministerial services. Thus it resulted that the immunities granted by these acts were in a number of instances claimed and enjoyed by individuals, to the greater burden of the rest of their fellow-subjects. Down to 1802, one of those immunities was an exemption from military services; and, to this time, from serving on juries, and other civil duties, which were forced upon other members of society. There was considerable evil in this respect, as the immunities were extended to persons who certainly, by every fair interpretation of the act, were not intended to receive that privilege. With respect to the mode of rectifying such abuses, he now meant to present a Bill to their lordships, and then should desire that it be read a first time. The object of this measure was, in the first place to procure a clear declaration of the law, to remove the erroneous interpretation adopted by magistrates in general, and to prevent improper persons from their own assumption taking upon them an office of all others the most important to a well-regulated community. He should be sorry if it were thought that he cast any imputation upon the different orders and classes of men; but in the account of abuses he had received, and the individuals described, though he would forbear to mention any name, there were persons claiming those certificates, who were coblers, tailors, pig-drovers, and chimney-sweepers. He could see a noble lord (Holland) smile at this recital: perhaps he considered this a fanciful objection; but he could assure the noble lord, he meant no imputation on the trade or employments of those men. But when he looked round the House, he felt the strongest respect for their lordships, and yet they would not feel displeased when he assured them he should be sorry to see any of them taking the place of lord Wellington, of lord Gambier, or of sir Edward Pellew. In that sense he thought the situation of those men he had mentioned disqualified them from being teachers and instructors of their fellow-subjects. It would also be understood, that he was not wishing to alter the Act of Toleration, but to provide that persons applying should not be entitled to their certificate, unless they had one signed by six reputable housekeepers of the persuasion to which he belonged. The noble viscount read the provisions of the two Acts, and inferred from them that the intention of the legislature was not to grant the certificate to any but such as were in holy orders, or were the teachers of a congregation. Indeed, the statutes had been differently explained in different counties, for the certificates had not been granted, of course, in the counties of Devon, Buckingham, and Norfolk, but several had been refused. This, however, was not effectual against the applicants, for they could easily obtain the certificate from an adjoining or more distant county. With respect to the intellectual qualifications of those claiming this office, though it was a matter also of great importance, he should not in the least interfere. But he did think it incumbent that such persons should not act upon their own assumption of their own competency, without any proof of their being proper to be so appointed by a certain number of their own sect. From the returns on the table, it did appear that there was also required more attention to the Established Church. If it was a vital part of the constitution, it deserved their most anxious solicitude, for whatever tower of strength they might erect in the country, their security depended upon the firmness of their foundation. The Church of England must ever be considered, both by Protestant and Dissenter, as that steady guide which directed the opinions and judgment of the whole nation. But if this part of our national constitution was not better attended to, we should be in danger of having a nominal Established Church, and a sectarian people. It appeared from the returns, that there were places where the church could not contain more than a quarter of the population/in others a much less number, and where the majority of the inhabitants lived upwards of four miles from the church. In the reign of queen Anne, the necessity of erecting more churches occupied the attention of parliament; and it was at length ordered, that fifty new churches should be erected in the metropolis. Notwithstanding the extent of the city at that period, there had been only 10 built in pursuance of those proceedings, and since that time the population and the buildings had increased to twice the extent of those preceding, which induced the House of Commons to agree, in bad times, that there was a necessity to build 50; therefore upon the same reasoning, there was now a necessity to build 100.—The noble viscount next noticed the ideas he had before entertained respecting pluralities, when he thought they were only to be found in the hands of poor individuals; but he was sorry to say he had authentic information that they were only to be found amongst the higher beneficed clergy. In bringing this measure forward, he again most strongly disclaimed any motive or intention of adopting any measures of intolerance towards the Dissenters; he was abhorrent towards a disposition of that nature. The noble viscount concluded by presenting the Bill to the House, and moving that it be read the first time.

Lord Holland

said, he would not act so irregularly as to oppose the first reading of a Bill, but he thought it right, in candour, to state, that he could not agree with the noble viscount in the object proposed. The noble viscount founded his measure upon an opinion, that it was only by the permission of government that persons were entitled to preach those religious doctrines which they held. Now, he on the contrary, was of opinion, that every person had a right to preach those religious opinions which he conscientiously believed. He regretted that the noble viscount had spoken invidiously of persons in inferior situations of life becoming preachers, for surely they were fully as entitled to preach those religious opinions which they conscientiously believed, as those who received the advantages of the rich endowments of the church, He regretted also, that his noble friend should have at all touched upon the subject, as in his opinion it could only tend to excite dissentions. No case had been made out which called for the interference of Parliament. The exemptions from civil duties, of which the noble viscount complained, could only apply to a few persons, and it was better that those few persons should have their exemptions, than that Parliament should run the risk of exciting those dissentions which must be caused by meddling with the Toleration Act. He agreed with the noble viscount as to the propriety of increasing the number of churches, but whilst he had no objection to a grant by Parliament for that purpose, he thought that the Church itself ought to be called upon to contribute to an object, in which the interests of that Church were so materially involved. He would not now go further into the subject until he had read the Bill, but to the object slated by the noble viscount he was decidedly hostile, thinking it much better, and infinitely the wiser course, that the Toleration Act should remain untouched.

Lord Viscount Sidmouth,

in explanation, disclaimed the slightest intention of speaking in the least invidiously of the persons whom he had alluded to, on account of their inferior station in life. As to the Toleration Act, it was no part of his object at all to alter it; his only purpose was to have it ascertained with certainty what the law was. On the subject of Churches, he thought a Bill ought to be passed, enacting, that in every new church or chapel a certain portion of the area should be set apart for the admission of the people, without any charge.

Earl Stanhope

thought it would be better for the noble viscount to begin by some measure for building places of worship to accommodate those members of the Established Church who were now, as stated, for want of that accommodation, obliged to go to meeting-houses, before he tried his hands with the dissenters.

The Bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be printed.