expressed his wish that the civil disabilities of Dissenters might cease; but was only able to modify their operation by a statute (5 Geo. I. C. 6), limiting the liability to prosecution to a period of six months, &c. George II. was said to be not less willing than his father to relieve his Protestant Dissenting subjects, to whom he was largely indebted for the defence of his throne against a rebellious Pretender. In 1736, Mr. Plumer's motion for the repeal of the obnoxious Acts was lost by a majority of 251 to 123. In 1739, the majority was 188 to 89. After an interval of forty-eight years, the question was renewed in Parliament by Mr. Beaufoy, in 1787, when, after a debate of seven hours, the proposed repeal was lost by 178 against 100 votes. In 1789, the measure was again introduced and lost by a diminished majority of 124 against 104. The motion was renewed in 1790 by Mr. Fox; but was opposed by Mr. Pitt and all the influence of the Government, and the majority was swelled to 294 against 105 votes. In 1823 and 1824, there was a feeble agitation of the question; but it was not thought desirable to carry it into Parliament.

66

To the Non-Con Club belongs the merit of having originated the proceedings which led to a triumph of religious liberty as gratifying as it was unexpected. In the minutes of the Club, under the date Jan. 17, 1827,* there is this entry: " An interesting discussion took place as to the most effectual method of bringing the question of the repeal of the Test Laws before the public; and it being considered practicable to ensure a numerous general meeting of the London Dissenters under the auspices of forty or fifty leading names, the names of several gentlemen of the various denominations were noted down for that purpose.'

The course contemplated was soon after taken by the Committee of the Deputies for the several congregations of Protestant Dissenters of the Three Denominations, in and within twelve miles of London, appointed to protect their civil rights. At a meeting of this Committee, held March 9, 1827, a letter was read from the British and Foreign Unitarian Association, urging the Deputies to convene a general meeting to secure the co-operation of the several bodies of Protestant Dissenters in London. A similar letter was immediately after sent by the Board of Congregational Ministers. Before the close of the month, a meeting was held, at which were assembled the Committee of the Deputies, and representatives from the Protestant Society, the Unitarian Association, the Body of Ministers of the Three Denominations, and the Board of Congregational Ministers. The chair was taken by Mr. William Smith, the veteran Representative of Norwich, who had had the honour, in 1787, of being teller in the unsuccessful division on Mr. Beaufoy's motion. Mr. Aspland appeared as one of the elected representatives of the Presbyterian Ministers of London, and had the great satisfaction, throughout these important proceedings, of being aided by

The members present were Rev. R. Aspland (Chairman), Rev. Dr. Barclay, Rev. D. Davison, Thomas Gibson, Esq., Mr. R. Hunter, Rev. J. S. Porter, Rev. Dr. Rees, Rev. Benjamin Mardon, Richard Taylor, Esq., Edward Taylor, Esq., and Christopher Richmond, Esq. (Secretary).

†This body was constituted in 1732, and the first assembly took place on the 29th of December in that year, Mr. Holden being Chairman. He was succeeded in 1736 by Dr. Benjamin Avery, who continued to preside over their proceedings for twenty-seven years.

a colleague of great experience and zeal unsurpassed, Dr. Thomas Rees. It was unanimously resolved to seek an early interview with several distinguished Members of both Houses of Parliament, in order to discuss and arrange with them the best mode of applying to Parliament for the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts. The interview was without difficulty arranged, by the mediation of Mr. William Smith, and took place at Brown's Hotel, Palace Yard, April 6th. Lord Holland, never absent when religious liberty needed his services, took a very active share in the proceedings of the day. He was the only Peer present. The Liberal party of the House of Commons was suitably represented at this interesting conference by Lord John Russell, Lord Nugent, Mr. Marshall (recently elected on the ground of religious freedom as the Representative of the great county of York), Mr. Warburton, Mr. Spring Rice, the Hon. Robert John Smith (Bucks), Mr. Easthope, Mr. John Smith (Midhurst), and Mr. William Smith. All agreed that the Dissenters had too long withheld the prosecution of their just claim to equal civil rights, and recommended an immediate and a vigorous application to Parliament for relief. When the Members of Parliament had withdrawn, the Deputies and their associates passed an unanimous resolution, requesting Lord John Russell to move the House of Commons at such time as he might think proper during the session. With this request Lord Russell expressed a ready compliance. To conduct the proposed application to Parliament, an United Committee was formed, consisting of the Committee of Deputies, and delegates (not exceeding six in number) from each of the societies and bodies in London desirous of acting in unison. In addition to the bodies already named, the United Associated Presbytery of London sent delegates to the United Committee. But none were sent by the Society of Friends, by the Wesleyan Methodist Conference, and the Presbytery of the Scottish Church. In order to enlighten the public mind on the history of the question, and to awaken the dormant zeal of the Nonconformist body, it was resolved to prepare and publish a series of works advocating the claims of Dissenters. One of these, a periodical, entitled, "The TestAct Reporter," which was extended to thirteen Nos. (including 516 pages), was entrusted to the editorial care of Mr. Aspland.

Mr. Edgar Taylor, the eminent legal adviser of the Unitarian Association, prepared a very able "Statement of the Case of the Protestant Dissenters under the Corporation and Test Acts," which was widely circulated, especially amongst Members of Parliament and the conductors of the public press. By the costly agency of the Quarterly Review, with which it was stitched up, it penetrated into college halls and libraries and country rectories; while by that of the Edinburgh Review and a variety of other periodicals, it found its way to persons of every class and denomination. Resolutions were passed and petitions signed, and all the other customary modes of carrying on the agitation of a public question, were put into active operation. In the preparation of these documents, Mr. Aspland took an active share. The General Body of Ministers adopted without alteration the draft of a petition which he had prepared. It is inserted in the Test-Act Reporter (pp. 30, 31), and may be read with advantage, as containing, in a very brief compass, a comprehensive statement of the case of the Protestant Dissenters, expressed in a perfectly English style, combining strength with purity.

While all this preparation for an active campaign was going on, Lord Liverpool, the Premier of a compact and powerful, but not very popular Administration, was struck down by what proved a fatal illness. The death, a few months previously, of the Duke of York, had inflicted a heavy blow on the High-church and Tory party. To this party, the Premiership of Mr. Canning, resisted unsuccessfully by secret treachery and open hostility, was the source of bitter mortification. The brief session of Parliament which followed the construction of Mr. Canning's Government, gave little promise of any great measure like the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts being carried. Party feuds were exasperated by the personal rancour of some of the leading opponents of the new Administration. The leading Whigs, notwithstanding the haughty remonstrance and protest of Lord Grey, gave Mr. Canning an almost enthusiastic support. If the Dissenters did not altogether share the confidence felt by their representatives in Parliament, it was easily explained by their surprise and regret at Mr. Canning's declaration of his purpose to oppose, at least for a time, the repeal of the Test Act.

Rev. Robert Aspland to Rev. R. Brook Aspland.

"Hackney, May 17, 1827. "Dear Brook,-There is no division amongst the London ministers on the Corporation and Test Acts. We are proceeding in spite of Canning's threatened hostility. But he is trying through Brougham to put us to sleep: he will, however, try in vain. We are to have a little Parliament on Tuesday morning, consisting of some half-hundred Members of both Houses, and our General Committee. The object of the meeting is to impress Peers and Commoners with our feelings, and to agree with them upon the extent to which we shall go this session."

The conference was long and earnest. It was attended by Lords Holland, King, Althorp, Milton, J. Russell, Ebrington, Clifton, George Cavendish and Nugent; by Mr. Brougham, Mr. Byng, Mr. Sykes, Mr. J. Wood, Sir Robert Wilson, Mr. John Smith, Hon. R. Smith, Mr. A. Dawson, and many others. By the majority of these distinguished men an opinion was expressed that the active prosecution of efforts to obtain the repeal that session was inexpedient. From this counsel Lord John Russell and Mr. John Smith explicitly dissented, the latter gentleman expressing his conviction that the Dissenters would, by retreat at such a moment, abandon victory when it was in their sight. The United Committee subsequently met and agreed, by a majority of votes, that Lord John Russell should be requested to postpone the intended motion until the following session. Mr. Aspland had expressed more than doubts on the wisdom of this course; and his friends Dr. Rees and Mr. Bowring, and some others, spoke and voted with him in the minority. It was the unanimous opinion of the Committee, that the Dissenters should every where proceed with their petitions, and forward them for presentation to Parliament.

Early in June, Lord John Russell announced in the House of Commons, on the occasion of presenting various petitions for the repeal of the Test Acts, the course which, in deference to the recorded opinion of the United Committee, had been decided upon. Alluding to the recent change in the Administration, he said, "Üpon that event many of the Dissenters, feeling, as it were by instinct, that a Ministry was formed more favourable to religious liberty than any which had existed

during the thirty-seven years in which this question had slept, doubted whether it were fair, and whether it were politic, to force such a Ministry to an immediate expression of opinion upon this important subject. Others, with whom I agreed, did think that the present was a favourable time for the discussion." He added, that though he felt himself bound to obey the instructions of the United Committee, he had received various intimations from individuals that in their opinion the majority of the Dissenters wished the question to be pressed.

The death of Mr. Canning, immediately after the termination of the session, struck the friends of liberal opinions in England with consternation and grief. In their inability to forecast coming changes, they feared that the removal of this brilliant advocate of Catholic Emancipation had deferred to a far distant day the triumph of religious liberty. Dissenters shared the common grief at Mr. Canning's untimely removal. They had previously been satisfied that his declared hostility to their claims had escaped from him hastily in the irritation of debate, that he had no settled purpose of opposition to their just demands, and indulged the hope that, when firmly seated in power, he would give his assent to all measures necessary to the relief of conscience.

Had Mr. Canning's life been protracted, it is probable that the relief of Protestant Dissenters would have been postponed. It was generally, but most erroneously, supposed that the Protestant Dissenters were irreconcilably opposed to the admission of Roman Catholics to civil privileges. Not only Mr. Canning, but many Liberal Members of Parliament, indulged the fear that if the Dissenters were first admitted to the full enjoyment of the Constitution, they would afterwards prove bitter opponents of similar concessions to the Roman Catholics. This fear shewed want of acquaintance with the recent rapid growth of liberal opinions amongst the Dissenters, and also indicated an inability to estimate the power of a great principle, like that of religious liberty, to force honest minds, however unwilling at first, to receive and apply it in its full extent.

Lord Goderich's feeble Administration, which followed, fell to pieces before Parliament met, and a new, and, as it was at the time supposed, Tory Administration was formed by the Duke of Wellington.

The apparent darkening of the political horizon increased the energy of the Dissenters in making fit preparations for what they believed was to be only the first of a series of struggles to be continued from year to year. At a special meeting of the General Body of the Ministers of London, Mr. Aspland proposed an Address to Protestant Dissenting Ministers throughout the United Kingdom, and to the religious public in general, on the subject of the scandal thrown upon Christianity by the Test and Corporation Laws, and the gross perversion of the Lord's Supper in making it a mere civil or political test. In not one of the numerous documents and publications of the time was this, the religious part of the argument, more earnestly stated and discussed; and the fact that this Address,* penned by an Unitarian minister, was

* The "Address" deeply moved the feelings of one of the most eminent and learned ministers of the Independent body, who was present at Dr. Williams's Library when it was brought forward, and who a few hours afterwards addressed to Mr. Aspland a letter of respect and affection, and made the reverent feeling evidenced in the Address the ground of an appeal to him to re-consider

adopted, nay, received by acclamation, by a very numerous assemblage of ministers, nine-tenths of whom held Orthodox opinions, ought to be regarded as a proof that, in spite of all the divisions of the Christian church, there is a common Christianity which all alike revere, and which might be made the basis of a closer union than has ever yet existed amongst the sects of Christendom.

Notwithstanding the altered relations of parties, there were still here and there doubters and objectors in the Nonconformist ranks, who alleged that the time for action was not come, or that the course pursued was not the best. An extract from Mr. Aspland's Diary at the beginning of 1828, will shew that there were some difficulties in the path of the United Committee besides those created by Tories and Highchurchmen. The gentleman referred to was one of great and deserved influence in public life, but one in whom the "native hue of resolution" had given way to age and that habitual despondency which was the result of a life of unsuccessful opposition.

"I spoke my mind very freely to —as to his constant clogging our cause with doubts and fears, and endeavouring, against the sense of our best Parliamentary friends, to keep us back. He avowed (as I told him I had predicted of him, as he must remember, last year) that this was not a fit timein one sense, less fit than last session; that we were wrong in petitioning, especially the Lords; that we should wait for a strong Whig Administration, who would grant us our claims quietly. Against this I argued and protested, all the other gentlemen being in great measure with me. I told him I would rather not have our question carried than that it should be smuggled through. The benefit of it would consist in its coming as a matter of open right, a concession to justice and liberty. I anticipated a long struggle, but the sooner we began the nearer would be the victory. Parliament and the country, and even the Dissenters, wanted discussion to enlighten them. No Ministry would ever volunteer to give us our rights, and perhaps the Whigs least of all, who do not need the charge of being Dissenters to make them odious. And though we cannot force our question, we must make a show of strength to have it seriously considered by the Legislature and the Court. The aged Member pleaded his experience," &c.

As soon as Parliament met, the Committee were occupied from day to day in making the necessary preparations. On Mr. Aspland it devolved, in company with a small deputation, to wait on the principal Members of the Liberal party. The Diary mentions visits to Lord Holland, Lord John Russell, Mr. John Smith, Mr. Spring Rice, Lord Milton, Lord Nugent, Mr. Baring, Sir Robert Wilson, Lord Normanby, Mr. Brownlow, Sir Francis Burdett, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Hume, Mr. Onslow, Mr. Benett, Sir James Mackintosh, Mr. Ward and Sir John Newport. There are traces of Mr. Aspland's intention to make a note respecting each of these visits: it was, however, owing to the great press of work at this time, only partially fulfilled.

"The United Committee having appointed a Deputation, consisting of the Chairman (Mr. W. Smith, M.P.), Mr. Henry Waymouth (Deputy Chairman), Mr. Busk, Dr. Browne, Mr. Robert Winter (the Secretary) and myself, we went up, Saturday morning, January 5, by appointment, to Mr. John Smith, M. P., in Grosvenor Square. He received us with great affability, and we

his theological system. It is much to be regretted that this letter, in one view most creditable to the Christian sympathies of its author, and Mr. Aspland's reply, have not been preserved.

3z2