The Lord Chancellorpresented a Petition, which he said was most numerously, and, in so far as he had been able to perceive, most respectably signed, frosts the inhabitants of the town of Edinburgh, and from those of Leith, upon the subject of the claims of the Dissenters. The petitioners described themselves as Dissenters from the Established Church of that part of the United Kingdom; and, after setting forth the difficulties under which they laboured, in consequence of the difference which the law made in some respects with regard to them, and the still greater difference which the law made with regard to those who were Dissenters from the Established Church in that part of the United Kingdom, they declared that they considered that the only remedy for these grievances was, to terminate by law all distinctions whatever between any classes of his Majesty's subjects, on account of their being members of, or dissenting from, the Establishment, and to put an end to taxation for the support of such Establishment, and to devote the property and the revenues at present in possession of the Established Church in both parts of the United Kingdom to other national purposes, but having, at the same time, a due regard to the interests of present incumbents. He felt himself highly honoured by the confidence which the petitioners had placed in him, in selecting him to present their Petition to their Lordships; but he should ill repay that confidence if he did not state that, though he agreed to, and supported, to a considerable extent, their Petition, there was one part of the statement contained in that Petition to which he could not subscribe, and the prayer of which did not meet with his concurrence. The part of the statement to which he alluded, was that which set forth, that great mischief arose from the Church Establishment, both in this country and in Scotland; and that such Establishment was upheld at an extreme expense, for the use chiefly of the wealthy classes of the community; and, moreover, that, in both parts of the United Kingdom, it was not supported by that wealthy class alone, but added considerably to the burthens of the people, "while it 665 only comprehended among its adherents a mere minority, which was daily decreasing in numbers." He was not aware that any part of this statement was consistent with the fact. He believed, indeed, that parts of it were utterly inconsistent with the fact, and they who made this statement were misinformed when they were led to suppose that the adherents of the Established Church in England were a mere minority. He was informed, too, that they were equally incorrect in saying the same thing as applicable to the Church of Scotland. Having set forth these matters as the foundation of their prayer—a statement on which he entirely differed from them—they went on to call upon Parliament to abolish the connection between Church and State; to put an end, in fact, to the Church Establishment in one part and the other of the kingdom, and to apply the revenues of the Church to other purposes than those to which they were now applicable. He could not agree with them on this point. He considered that the proposition which began the statement of this Petition led to a directly opposite conclusion. The Petitioners objected to a civil establishment of religion, which, they said, violated consciences, was partial and unjust, was opposed to good morals and good government, and was injurious to Christianity itself; and that all persons had a right to hold opinions which they conscientiously and honestly entertained, and to belong to such church, whether an Established Church, or a sectarian Church, in the doctrines preached at which they could sincerely and conscientiously believe. Now, if the great body of the people of this country, or of Scotland, seriously believed, that a Church Establishment was the best mode of maintaining their opinions, those individuals, whether the minority or the majority, had an undeniable right to have a Church Establishment, and still more undeniably, if they were the majority; for he never yet had heard, that the majority had not a right to maintain any establishment they might think fit. It was a perfectly debatable question. While there was no illegality nor impropriety in the opinion held by the Petitioners, and while the language in which they addressed their Lordships' House was respectful and proper, their Petitions deserved attention; but he trusted, that be should be accused of no disrespect to the Petitioners, in observing that in these parts of the statement, and of the prayer of the Petition, his opinion did not agree with theirs. In one part of the Petition he did 666 concur. The Petitioners stated, that the Dissenters of England were subject, in consequence of the law, to several grievances even still more than those of which the Petitioners themselves complained; that these grievances were unjust in themselves, and hurtful to the State, as enforced against a number of enlightened and powerful men, who had performed eminent services in the cause of religious, moral, and political freedom. There was nothing more just or proper than this well-earned praise thus bestowed upon the Dissenters; and such had been the conduct of the Dissenters on all these points, that he was prepared to say that, whatever praises might be bestowed upon them for their conduct, it was impossible they should be exaggerated. He, therefore, wholly coincided with the Petitioners in saying, that some of the matters of which the Dissenters complained were evils; and in that part of the Petition which prayed, that the Legislature would take such steps as were necessary to put an end to all distinctions in respect of civil and constitutional privileges, as were grounded on differences in religious matters, he most heartily concurred; and he trusted that Ministers would be able to consummate that which they had begun. He might add, that, as far as the revenues of the Church were concerned, so far as those revenues depended upon taxation, he hoped that the measure which the Government had introduced into the other House of Parliament, would be such that it would not be necessary to go further; and, as far as the bulk of the Church revenues was concerned (he meant tithes), he hoped that the measure of which his noble Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had given notice, and which, but for his noble Friend's indisposition, would have been introduced into the other House two days ago, would prove fully satisfactory.