it to their illwillers to detect the prevarication. Thus ftands the cafe at prefent with these confcientious people.

But to judge what indulgence is fairly due unto them, we fhould confider a little the true grounds of that complaifance which free ftates are always difpofed to fhew to tender confciences. Now I apprehend they understand it to extend no further than to opinions which have no evil influence on the true and effential interefts of fociety. For to carry the indulgence further would be a fpecies of fanaticifm, though of a different kind indeed, yet as mad as that which produces the tender confciences in queftion.

Of opinions thus injurious, there are various kinds; from that which is leaft fo, the unlawfulness of tythes, up through the rifing degrees of the unlawfulness of oaths,-of Self-defence,-of capital punishments; till we come to a reprobation of civil magiftracy itself, and the renouncing of all kings but King Jefus. It will be allowed, that most of them require fuppreffion, rather than indulgence: and I believe all will own that the laft was not unjuftly treated, when, in the memory of our fathers, it was exterminated between the king's guards and the gallows. To the first, the obstinate refusal to pay tythes, in defiance of the public laws, fome indulgence has been reasonably fhewn and that a wayward confcience might lie as light as poffible on their temporal interests, a justice of peace was authorized to wrest from them, in an easy and expeditious way, what they could not keep, and were scrupulous to restore.

But now what return did they make for fo much favour? Why, from thenceforward they never loft an opportunity of teazing the legislature (of which they have given a recent inftance) to exclude the clergy, from every other entrance to juftice. Their endeavours have been hitherto fruitless; and fruitlefs, I fuppofe, they are like to remain: for a more infolent or iniquitous demand was never made on an equal legislature.

Thefe clergy-rights rife upon the fame footing with all the lay-rights in the kingdom; to whom every court of law and equity, as is fit, ftands open. Yet thefe, as a fealed fountain, are to be kept fhut up for the folace of the faints; and the clergy to be admitted no higher than to the muddy ftream of a country juftice.

Had the quakers confined their demand to an exemption from an ecclefiaftical jurifdiction, fome decency of Appearances had been kept, for the fpiritual courts might have been thought too much a party: not to fay that the proper object of their power extends no further than reformation of manners. But to attempt a violation, not of this only, but of all civil communities, in which it is the effential right of citizens to have all the courts of

H 2

justice

juftice thrown open to them, is a fstrain of modesty peculiar to this illuftrious fect.'

In this third chapter of the second book, we have likewise a very confiderable addition, of which we fhall give a particular account the fubject is curious, and, in fome refpects, important; and his Lordship, it must be acknowledged, has difcuffed it with great ability.

The fecond privilege which the church receives from her alliance with the ftate, his Lordfhip tells us, is, a place for her fupericur members in the Court of legislature. In the third edition, inftead of fuperiour Members, we find reprefentatives; this the difcerning Reader will carefully attend to, and compare the following corollaries, in the edition now before us, with those in the former edition: the comparison will give occafion to observe fome masterly ftrokes of genuine Warburtonianifm.

The corollaries which his Lordship deduces from the account he gives of the grounds and original of the above-mentioned privilege, are, in this fourth edition, as follows:

1. "That churchmen who fit in the higher house of legiflature in confequence of this alliance, are to be confidered first, not as representatives indeed, but yet as guardians of the church: the qualification for the exercife of this office being their baronies. They are in the fecond place to be confidered as barons like the other members of that houfe." For not to allow that bishops fit as guardians, would be to take away the most useful, and even the neceflary end of their fitting, which is, to watch over the interests of the church. Befides, this office implies, that the church fill continues a diftin&t, though an allied fociety; whereas to fit only as barons fuppofes the church not only united to, but incorporated with, and diffolved in, the ftate, while lay fees alone are feen to give one and the fame privilege both to the secular and 1piritual lords.

2. “That yet, notwithstanding, these churchmen (though they fit as guardians as well as barons) do not, on the other hand, by virtue of this alliance, conftitute or compofe any diftinct or third eftate in parliament." For this would be attended with all the mifchiefs of a contrary extreme, by putting the allied church again in poffeffion of its independency, while it had a negative on the acts of the state. And this evil, which no management could prevent, fo neither could time itfelf remedy for the union, which is in its nature diffolvable, would by churchmen's fitting as a third eftate become perpetual; every eftate of legiflature being effential to that government whereto it belongs. But whatever is effential can never be feparated or taken away, without a change in the government itself.

Thefe are the two extremes fo hurtful both to religion and civil government, fo deftructive of that benefit which a rightly

formed

formed alliance is fitted to produce. Yet the common fyftem hath joined these two difcordant parts together; and made the bishops at once guardian-barons and a diftinet eftate.

3. A third corollary is, "That as the bishops' right to fit in parliament began with the alliance, fo it muft end likewife with it." It hath been fhewn that the bishops fit there, ne quid ecclefia detrimenti capiat: for the church, by this alliance, having given up its fupremacy to the state, which had now, whenever the grant fhould be abufed, opportunities to do her injury, the principal churchmen are placed in a court of legiflature, as watchmen to prevent the mischief, and to give the church's fentiments concerning laws ecclefiaftical. But when the alliance is broken, and the establishment diffolved, the church recovers back its fupremacy, and from thenceforth the ftate loting the means of injuring, by having no longer a right of making laws for the exterior government of it, the church hath no longer a pretence of having guardians in the legislature: nor will the bihops' baronies remain, to keep them there: for thefe tenures will exift no longer than while the church continues eftablished; it being part of that public maintenance which the state afligns to the clergy of a church in alliance: and which, on the dillolution of that union, reverts back again to the state. So neither the office nor title of guardian-barons remaining, bishops of the univerfal church have no further bufinefs in any particular civil court of legiflature.'

The curious reader who compares the above corollaries with thofe in the third edition, befides other remarks which he will naturally make, will not fail to obferve, that his Lordship produces, in the third edition of his work, a paffage from a MS. treatife of Lord Chief Juftice Hales, touching the right of the crown, in fupport of the doctrine which he endeavours to eftablifh.-Thus far this great lawyer, fays his Lordfhip ;-and, this great authority has all the force requifite to determine a question of fact.-In the edition now before us, we have the fame paffage from Lord Chief Juftice Hales, and our Author employs fome pages in pointing out the defects of the great lawyer's reasoning,' -tells us there is much inaccuracy and confufion in what he fays on the subject, and that it is with regret he takes notice of a piece of management and argumentative finesse in the most candid of all writers.This is extremely curious;-but our Readers will make the proper reflections upon it.

After confidering the nature of that ftation which churchmen hold in parliament, as it is de jure, deducible from the principles of his theory, his Lordship proceeds to confider it de facto, under the feveral forms it affumed, as the conflitution kept improving and refining, till it arrived to that perfection, in which we pow enjoy it, This part of his work, the reader who is con

verfant with the subject, will perufe with great pleasure. What his Lordship has to obferve upon it, will be beft digefted, he fays, in a refolution of the three following queftions: - First, Whether the bithops in parliament now make one of the eftates there? Secondly, Whether they be barons of parliament ? And thirdly, Whether they be peers of parliament ?

As to the first question, it hath been held, we are told, as a conftitutional point, by many writers of great name, among whom are, Lord Chancellor Hyde, Bifhop Stillingfleet, and Archbishop Wake, that the bifhops even now compose an estate in parliament.-He who looks no farther than into the prefent face of the conftitution, his Lordship fays, will wonder how fuch a doctrine ever came to be received; fince ftance relating to, and, at prefent, attending on the bishop's feat circumevery in parliament, manifefts the falfhood of it. They have no negative voice, which is effential to an eftate: they have no feparate houfe for confultation, which hath been long the established ufage of an flate: they are not in numbers fufficient, on the feudal fyftem, to constitute an estate.

If we would know from whence this venerable error hath arifen, we muft, his Lordship fays, go up to the very cunabula of the English constitution.

As in the infancy of Letters, continues he, there was no accurate feparation of fcience; fo in the infancy of the northern policy there was no diftinct feparation of estates.

Till the Norman conqueft, the bishop and the alderman sat together on the bench, in one common judicatory. William made a fit and proper feparation of the magiftracy, as the terms of an alliance, between the two focieties, require. Which had it not been for an accident of the times, the accumulating fuperftition and the rapacious fpirit of ufurpation in the church of Rome, would have been of great advantage to the community, by marking out and afcertaining the proper bounds and limits of each fociety. For churchmen were very improper minifters of the crown, to judge in caufes merely civil, both from the peculiar nature of their office, and the implied prohibition of their mafter; who himself disclaims all temporal jurifdiction. Befides, the practice of the bishop's fitting with the alderman rendered the original of the former's coercive power, there exercif.d in a coequality, very doubtful and uncertain. As the atderman's authority was feen to be from the flate, men would be naturally mifled to think that the bishop's was from the church at a time too, when churchmen allowed fo little to the civil magiftrate; whereas all coercive power being derived from the ftate, and to be exercifed only for its ufe, it is of the highest moment not to have it mifunderstood. From henceforward the church became in a more juft and proper fenfe than before, one of

the

the three eftates of the realm. But it was not till long after that they became, as properly, an estate in parliament.

For, though the bishops and prelates fat in parliament as barons, and as guardians of the church in fpiritual matters, even from the conqueft, yet it was not till the twenty-third year of Edward 'that churchmen constituted an eftate in parliament. They and the commonalty receiving this quality or condition of eftates together, from the mode of granting their aids in parlia ment; which was by taxing themselves diftinctly; and fupporting themfelves in this right (as appears from all the records) by the exertion of a negative voice; a privilege which conftitutes, and is effential to an estate in parliament. And the way of funmoning the clergy thither, as an estate, was by adding the præmunientes claufe to the bishop's writ: in confequence of which, the whole body of the clergy appeared, partly in person, and partly by proxy; the bishops, prelates and the procuratores cleri compofing this eftate. But as their principal and almost only bufinefs was granting fubfidies to the crown, it happened, as much on this account, as because the three eftates fat all together in one place, that the exercise of their negative, otherwife than in ecclefiaftical matters, is not fo clearly delivered down to us. For, till the latter end of Edward III. the eftates of parliament fat together in one boufe. Till then, they debated in common and granted apart: as now, they fit apart and grant in common.

I

But against this account of the firft eftate, it may be objeeted, "That even while the clergy gave feparate aids in parliament, the lower clergy, at times, were not fummoned." answer, that this makes nothing against their quality of an eflate; for in thofe irregular feafons of the conftitution, the commons themselves were fometimes neglected, as in the 19th year of Edward III.

It may be further objected, that " according to this fyftem, the fecond eftate, confifting of the temporal peers, fhould have - taxed themselves, feparately from the third, confifting of the commons; in the manner of the first." This is true. And in

fact they sometimes did thus tax themselves: though sometimes they did not and there was fufficient reafon for both these practices. The property of the kingdom might be confidered in two lights, as feparated either by their different tenures; or by their fuppofed different originals. When confidered in the first light, the tenures of the lords and commons were so very unlike, that it was no wonder they fhould (as they fometimes did) grant their fubfidies feparately and diftinct from one another. But when property was confidered according to its fuppofed original, one part founded in human right, and the other in divine, it then divided itfelf into lay property and clerical; and the property of the lay lords and the commons fell into one of the divifions.