JUttttalttg 
 
 THE PROPER GROUND TOR 
 
 PROTESTANT DISSENTERS 
 
 RESPECTING THE 
 
 ROMAJV CATHOLIC CLAIMS; 
 
 BEING 
 
 A VINDIC ATION of the Author's Conduct, at two Meetings of the 
 General Body of PROTESTANT DISSENTING MINISTERS, of the 
 three Denominations, in London and its Vicinity, held at the Library, 
 Redcross Street, the 2nd of February & the 2nd of March, 1813, 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 4 REPLY to THE REMARKS of THE REV. JOHN EVANS, M, A. 
 
 ON WHAT HE HAS DESIGNATED 
 
 *AN EXTRAORDINARY CORRESPONDENCE," 
 IN SIX LETTERS TO A FRIEND, 
 
 BY JOSEPH IVIMEY. 
 
 * And with Absolam went two hundred men out of Jerusalem, that were called, tnij 
 tkey went in their simplicity and they knew not any thing." 2 samuu, xv, »1 
 
 *• Study to be quiet and do your own business " FAVfc 
 
 LONDON 
 
 Printed by T. Smith, 29, Winchester Row, Eihpvart Rottd. 
 
 Sold by Button and Son ; Gale, Curtis, and Fcnner. Paternoster Row j 
 Williams and Son, Stationer's Court, a»ul Kent, Holbora, 
 
 Price one Shillmg, 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 THE hislbry of these letters is briefly as follows : — The Rev. 
 J. Evans feels greatly offended on account of two letters which 
 appeared in the Morning Chronicle Newspaper, of the 6th of 
 March, 1813. The first of these, addressed to me by Joseph 
 Butter worth, Esq. M. P. for Coventry, requesting me to 
 give him a written confirmation of what I had related to him 
 in conversation, of the particulars of a meeting held at Red Crosa 
 Street on the 2nd of February 1818, and the other, my reply, 
 giving Mr. Butterworth the statement desired. 
 
 In consequence of this Mr. Evans comes forward as the Pub- 
 lic Censor, at the request, he says, of " some Ministers as well as 
 laymen of the three denominations of Protestant Dissenters up- 
 on whose judgment he places reliance," to chastise me for the 
 crimes of" ill-will" " illiberally," " disingenuousness," and shock- 
 ing "degeneracy!" Heavy charges these, from which I feel 
 myself defended by the impenetrable shield of a good conscience^ 
 That I have been influenced by evil passions is more than Mr. 
 Evans has proved. By what authority is it that he has preferred 
 such accusations? Is he qualified to search the heart? and is 
 this the candour and liberality of which he boasts ? 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 That I have been neither illiberal nor disingenuous I hope is 
 satisfactorily proved in the subsequent pages. And as to my 
 degeneracy — if refusing assistance to a measure that I may not 
 contribute towards the Roman? Catholics obtaining political 
 power, be to render assistance to those who would deprive them 
 of religious liberty, then I have certainly degenerated from 
 the Principle, that it is the unalienable right of every man to 
 worship God according to his own conscience, without being 
 subject to pains and penalties, or disabilities for exercising " that 
 right." Of this, however, I am not yet convinced. When 
 this distinction is proved to be of no importance, I shall either 
 acknowledge my mistakes, or stand justly exposed to shame for 
 my pride and pertinacity, in venturing to assert and endeavouring 
 to defend it 
 
 JOSEPH IVIMEY. 
 
 Red Lion Street, 
 April 16, 1813. 
 
LETTER L 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 THE Pamphlet of which you speak would not have obtain* 
 ed a reply, but from the consideration that my silence may be 
 construed by some as a conviction of having acted wrong in the 
 matter to which it relates. Conscious of my integrity, I should 
 certainly have left it to the impartial judgement of that small 
 part of the public, who will think either Mr. Evans or myself 
 worthy of their notice, to decide whether, even from the statement 
 Mr. Evans has given, 1 have in any respect violated my professions 
 as the friend of universal unrestricted religious libertyl 
 
 But as some importance has been attached to the opposition I 
 have made to the presentation of a Petition to obtain " the repeal 
 of all the penal statutes now in force on the subject of religion." I 
 feel no reluctance in giving you the history of this affair, hoping 
 that however trifling the circumstances which have made this ne- 
 cessary, the cause of God and truth may in some way be promot- 
 ed by it. As it is possible these letters may fall into the hands of 
 persons not so well acquainted as we are with the Penal Sta- 
 tutes which have been, and still are in force against Protestant 
 Dissenters, my first Letter will briefly state these particulars. 
 
 To enumerate all these Statutes is Jiot my intention, even if I 
 had the means pf doing sp ; bwt you may recollect that Barl 
 
Stanhope, on the debate respecting fhe Bill introduced by Lord 
 Sid mouth, to abridge our liberties, mentioned that he had extracted, 
 from the statute books, the Titles and provisions of more than six 
 hundred Penal laws punishing men for their religious sentiments. 
 The first I mention is the 3bth of Elizabeth, which enacted that 
 
 If any person, above the age of sixteen years shall obstinately 
 refuse attending some church, or chapel, or usual place of 
 Common-prayer to hear divine service, for the space of a month, 
 or to receive the communion; or be present at any unlawful as*- 
 semblies, conventicles, or meetings under colour or pretence of 
 any such exercise of religion ; he shall be committed to prison 
 until he shall conform, and go to Church, and make submission 
 as hereafter expressed." This Statute was enforced by the Pe- 
 nalties of fines, imprisonments, banishment and death. 
 
 Soon after the Restoration of Charles II. The Corporation Act 
 was passed. This incapacitated all persons from bearing ofiice in 
 any corporation who had not received the Lord's supper, according 
 to the rites of the Church of England, within a year before his 
 election; as well as taken the oaths of supremacy and allegiance. 
 
 In the year 1662, the Act of Uniformity was passed, which re- 
 quired " the uufeigued assent and consent " of every minister of 
 the established church, " to every thing contained in the Book of 
 Common Prayer." This was enforced by heavy penalties, and was 
 the occasion of more than two thousand excellent ministers leav- 
 ing the National Church, to the constitution of which, in general, 
 they had no objection; though there were some things in her 
 thurgy and ceremonies which they disapproved. 
 
 In 1664, the Conventicle Act enacted that "Any person who 
 should be present where more than five persons above the age of 
 sixteen years should be assembled, at any place, not of the Church 
 of England, for the worship of God, should for the first offence be 
 sent to gaol for three months, till he paid 5£, and for the second 
 offence six months, till he paid £10. ; and the third time, being 
 convicted by a jury, should be banished the kingdom, or pay 
 £100; and in case of return or escape, to suffer death without 
 benefit of Clergy." 
 
 In 1665, the Five Mile Act passed, which restrained all dis- 
 senting ministers, on the penalty of £40. who would not take aa 
 
7 
 
 unreasonable oath from coming within any market or borough-, 
 town, or any place where they had exercised their ministry. 
 
 The Test Act passed in this reign required "all persons taking any 
 office under the government, to receive the Lord's supper, according to 
 the usage of the church of England, within three months after their 
 appointment." The Design of the Commons in bringing in this 
 bill was to exclude Papists from places of trust and profit, several 
 of whom the Court had greatly promoted, and especially for the 
 purpose of preventing a Popish Succession to the throne, as the 
 King's brotlier,(afterwards James II.) publicly professed that religion, 
 who, on its passing, immediately resigned all his Posts under Go- 
 vernment. Though it was not perhaps intended, yet this act wa» 
 so framed that all Protestant Dissenters were excluded from places 
 of trust and prpfit in common with Catholic Dissenters. 
 
 In the latter part Queen of Anne's reign, Another act was pas- 
 sed entitled, The Occasional Conformity Bill. This enacted, " that 
 if any persons in office who by the laws are obliged to qualify 
 themselves by receiving the sacrament, or Test, shall ever resort to 
 any conventicle, or meeting of Dissenters, for religious worship, 
 during the time of their continuance in office, they shall forfeit £20. 
 for every such offence, and be disqualified." &c, 
 
 Soon after another Act, entitled An Act to prevent the growth of 
 Schism, enacted that no persons should be intrusted with the educa- 
 tion of youth, who were not full and entire conformists ; and if any 
 schoolmaster or tutor should be willingly present at any conven- 
 ticle of Dissenters for religious worship, he should suffer three 
 months imprisonment, and be disqualified from teaching school 
 hi future. 
 
 All the above Statutes arc still in force against those Dissenters 
 who are Anti-trinitarians, who on this account, have just cause to 
 complain; because sentiments, however erroneous, are not cogniza- 
 " ble by the Magistrate, unless their prevalence can be proved to be in- 
 compatible with the stability of the Go\ernment, and the well being 
 of civil Society. Respecting every other descriptioa of Dissenters 
 the "Test" and" Corporation" Acts are the only Penal Stautes now 
 in force upon the subject of religion. Mr, Evans has very proper- 
 ly reprobated in strong terms the first of these ''as a picklock to 
 a place," and he might have added as "trampling under foot the 
 Son of Go d," both in his authority as the only King in his church, 
 
8 
 
 and in his atoning Sacrifice for sin. This is certainly a foul blot 
 in our fair and excellent constitution ; — a reproach cast upon the 
 whole body of Protestant Dissenters, as if their sentiments rendered 
 them incapable of serving His Majesty in the lowest offices of 
 trust ; a snare even to serious members of the church of England, 
 who in order to be invested with office, must take the Sacrament of 
 the Lord's supper for the purpose of obtaining a legal qualification, to 
 prove which they must receive from the officiating clergyman, a 
 certificate that at such a time and place they have done so. It is 
 moreover a horrid profanation of Christianity, of which but few 
 dissenters of any respectability have been guilty. Let it, however, 
 be recollected, that even this evil, great as it undoubtedly is, may 
 be overruled for good by HIM who makes even '* the wrath of 
 man to praise him." It presents a powerful test by which to try 
 the strength of attachment to the principles of Dissent from the 
 established Church, and the reality of a profession of belief in 
 Christianity, whose prominent and distinguishing feature is " self- 
 denial." 
 
 How happy, my dear friend, is 'the present condition of Pro- 
 testant Dissenters in this kingdom, compared with that of their 
 persecuted forefathers ! With the exception of the Anti-trinitarians, 
 who, it is hoped,will soon be relieved, they can meet when and where 
 they please, without being exposed to pains and penalties, provided 
 their ministers, if required by the Magistrate, take the oath of 
 allegiance, and subscribe the declaration against Popish supremacy. 
 Our oppressed ancestors would have rejoiced " to see the days 
 which we see." " The lines are fallen to us in pleasant places, yea, 
 we have a goodly heritage." 
 
 That you and I, my dear friend, may be deeply sensible of our 
 mercies, be grateful for our privileges, aud ever exemplify our 
 christian character, j|§ the prayer of 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 In proceeding with a Vindication of my conduct in the 
 affair to which Mr. Evans alludes, it may be necessary first to, 
 mention, that a Meeting was held at the Library, in April 1812* 
 
9 
 
 wlien it was voted by a small majority that a Petition should be 
 presented to Parliament praying for the repeal of all the Penal 
 Statutes now in force on the subject of religion. The Minority on 
 this occasion opposed the measure, as His Majesty's Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer, the late Mr. Perceval, had promised to bring in a 
 Bill to amend the Act of Toleration, so far as to prevent any re- 
 strictions upon the rights of conscience, by forced constructions, 
 which had lately been put upon it by the Magistrates. It was 
 contended that it was improper to present a Petition for the 
 repeal of all the Penal Statuses at a time when we had reason to 
 expect that His Majesty's government were pledged to remove the 
 principal causes of our complaint ; nor were we disappointed, as 
 the event afterwards proved. 
 
 The Resolutions that were then adopted I give you in a Note,* 
 but as the Petition is only the counterpart to these, to copy it 
 would be superfluous. 
 
 * " At a General Meeting of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers of 
 the Three Denominations residing in and about the Cities of London and 
 Westminster, holdenby Adjournment at the Library in Rcdcross Street, 
 on Tuesday, April 21, 1812. 
 
 Resolved, That it is the natural right of all men to worship God 
 agreeably to the dictates of their own consciences. 
 
 That all human laws which serve to restrict them in the exercise of this 
 right, are unjust in their principle, and in their tendency and operation 
 highly injurious to the best interests of religion. 
 
 That this Body regard with deep concern the existence, on the Statute 
 Book of their country, of several laws of this description, which, in what- 
 ever measure recommended at the several periods of their enactment by 
 the plea of political necessity, are at present, from the change that has 
 taken place in the circumstances of the times, and the more liberal spirit 
 which prevails among all classes of the community, no less unwarranted 
 by such plea, than they are repugnant to the principles of Christianity. 
 
 That, with the T>iew of asserting their claim to the unrestricted freedom 
 of divine worship, and to an equal participation with their fellow-subjects 
 of the privileges of the constitution, from w hicli they arc excluded on 
 account of their religious profession, a Petition be presented from this 
 body to both Houses of Parliament, praying for a repeal of all the Penal 
 Statutes now in force, whose operations extend to the province of 
 ftetigion, 
 
 8 
 
10 
 
 Another meeting was called with the same de>ign, on the 2nd 
 of February, 1813, two months before our regular Annual Meet- 
 ing, which would have been probably too hie to answer the end 
 of those who signed the requisition, as the Catholic question was 
 then agitated in Parliament, and might have terminated before the 
 13th of April ; in which case the General Body of Protestant Dis- 
 senting Ministers of the three Denominations, would not have had 
 an opportunity to express their sense upon this great National 
 Subject ! It seems therefore probable that the report of Lord 
 Holland's speech in the Morning Chronicle may be correct that 
 the Petition was " accelerated " for this very purpose ! 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Barrett being called to the Chair, the Rev. Dr. 
 Rees opened the business in an eloquent and impressive speech. 
 He concluded by moving that the Petition presented last year to 
 both Houses of Parliament be again presented, as since that period 
 a new Parliament had been convened, and therefore it was 
 as though the former Petition had never existed. The reso- 
 lutions passed at the former Meeting were then unanimously 
 adopted. Impressed with a persuasion that it would be highly 
 impolitic for Protestant Dissenting Ministers to present a petition 
 on this subject, at a period when the Roman Catholics were zea- 
 lously urging Parliament to concede their claims, and thinking this 
 measure was intended to render them assistance, I had resolv- 
 ed to oppose it. I however waited till the Petition had been 
 lead, as I said, "Days should speak and the multitude of years 
 should teach wisdom." When I found, however, that it was about 
 to pass without opposition, I rose and said nearly as follows, 
 
 u Mr. Chairman, 
 
 «* Before the motion be put that the Petition now read 
 jie presented, I wish permission to deliver my sentiments upon the 
 subject. I do not rise, Sir, to object to any thing in the Resolu- 
 tions, or to the Petition founded upon them ; but I have learned, 
 sir, from high authority that there is " a time for every purpose 
 under heaven ;" and therefore I object to the time proposed for 
 ( preBenting this petition. It is well known that the public mind is 
 now greatly agitated by the applications of the Roman Catholics 
 f.q Parliament to procure what they call emancipation* For a Pew* 
 
11 
 
 titfon to be presented by us, at this time, praying for a "repeal of 
 •11 the Penal Statutes now in force upon the subject of religion," 
 will in my opinion be to amalgamate ourselves with the Roman 
 Catholies. Surely, sir, it would not be wise for Protestant Dis- 
 senters to render them any assistance ! For Protestant Dissenting 
 Ministers to appear on the side of Roman Catholics, will be a new 
 thing in the Earth. I am certain, sir, could the pictures hung 
 round this room,* be animated by the spirits of the venerable men 
 whom they represent, they would lift up their voice against this 
 measure. So far, sir, from ever uniting with Roman Catholics, 
 they voluntarily preferred submitting to the operation of all the 
 oppressive and persecuting penal statutes passed against the Pro- 
 testant Nonconformists in the reign of Charles II. and of former 
 Monarchs. They knew what they were doing, sir, for they had 
 felt the effects of papal political ascendency ; and therefore reso- 
 lutely refused to afford them any assistance. 
 
 Were not these the sentiments also that prevailed at a period 
 which Protestant Dissenters have always spoken of with rapture, 
 I mean the glorious revolution of 1688 ? 
 
 None present, I am persuaded, will be ashamed to own their 
 obligations to William Prince of Orange, of illustrious memory f 
 Previous to this giorious event and the shameful abdication of 
 James II ; that Popish Tyrant was desirous of ascertaining the 
 ientiments of the Prince and Princess of Orange, on the project of 
 an universal toleration in religion, which involved the removal o$ 
 all the tests and disqualifying statutes on account of religious sen- 
 timents. Mr. Stuart was employed to write to the Pensionary 
 Fagel upon this subject. We have the answer of their Highnesses 
 upon record. In this they declare that they weTe willing to 
 consent that both the Protestant Dissenters and the Papists should 
 have full religious liberty ! t But it is added, " their Highnesses 
 
 * The most eminent Nonconformist Ministers of the seventeenth Cen~ 
 MO! Baxter, Howe, Flavell, Owen, &c. 
 
 t Protestants have been used to speak of the restraints on Roman Ca- 
 tholics as being on account of their religion ; and considering their reli- 
 gion as ordinarily, if not universally, involving the persecution of heretics 
 
eould not consent to the repeal of those laws by which the Romaa 
 
 Catholics were excluded from both Houses of Parliament, and out 
 of all public employments, ecclesiastical, civil, and military ; and 
 that they believed they should have much to answer to God for, if 
 the consideration of any present advantage, should carry them to 
 couseut to things, which they believed would not only be dangerous, 
 but mischievous to the Protestant Religion/ '' The object, sir, of 
 the Roman Catholics is not religious liberty, but political power. 
 This is an object which it appears evident to me the Protestant 
 Disienters are not solicitous to obtain; for though they are eligi- 
 
 ■wherever it has gained the ascendency, and this principle has been acted 
 upen. the language is not surprising. Strictly speaking, however, the 
 disabilities of Roman Catholics in Protestant countries are not on account 
 of their religious, but of their political opinions. They may emanate from 
 their religion ; but it is their contrariety to the well-being] of society that 
 renders it expedient to keep back their abetters from posts of high autho- 
 rity. It w as not superstiton, but the political heresy of intolerance that 
 made the Prince of Orange object as he did. He knew that wherever 
 Topery obtained the ascendency, the Protestant Religion would not long 
 be endured. And as religious principles come under the cognizance of re- 
 ligious society. political principles must come under that of political so- 
 ciety, and when found by universal experience to be incompatible with 
 the peace and well-being of the state must be restrained. To call such 
 restraints, persecution is a mis-nomer of the grossest kind ; to plead for in- 
 tolerant men being in power is to plead for intolerance. It is of the nature 
 of love to any object to guard against those whose principles, whenever 
 they have gained the ascendency, have been known to destroy it. If the 
 Protestant religion could be secure, whether owing to the number of its 
 adherents, or any other cause, (of which let the Legislature judge) many 
 who now demur, would gladly see the Catholics in possession of all they 
 ask : but in this case it would not be owing to their attachment to a Pro- 
 testant government, but to their incapacity to overturn it. It would, in 
 this case, be right on our part, as it would be" doing to others as we would 
 they should do unto us," but they have no right to claim this at our hands 
 till they prove by frets, thst they can, and do, in cases where they have the 
 ascendency, place those whom they consider as heretics, on equal footing 
 'with themselves, till this be done, they have no claim to such an equality 
 Jn a Protestant country. 
 
 * Baxter's Life and Times, by Calamy, p. 626 Abridge 
 
13 
 
 blc to have seats in the House of Commons, yet there was but 
 one, I' believe, found there in the last Parliament.* 
 
 For these reasons, sir, and thinking that presenting the Petition 
 at this time may promote the cause of the Roman Catholics, I 
 think it would be better not now to present it." 
 
 Dr. Rees, was called up by these remarks, and expressed his 
 regret that the subject of the Roman Catholic claims had been 
 introduced, which he had wished to prevent, and had studiously 
 avoided. He had a sentiment upon that subject, but this was not 
 the time to mention it, as he did not wish to prevent the harmony 
 of the meeting. He recollected (he said) the year 1780, and they 
 wanted no Lord George Gordons ! He had no prediliction for 
 burning of Houses ! He thought the plans adopted to get signa- 
 tures to the Petitions against the Catholics were very improper, 
 and that Dissenters should sign them was highly disgraceful ! 
 But this subject had nothing to do with the business of diis meeting, 
 and the gentleman w ho had introduced it might have been called 
 to order, because his observations were not ad rem; " but I was 
 willing," said the Doctor, " he should finish what he had to say." 
 
 The Chairman here interrupted the Doctor, and declared he 
 would exercise impartiality. He remarked that "as the object of 
 the meeting was to consider the propriety of presenting the Pe- 
 tition to Parliament, that it was quite in order for any one to offer 
 his reasons against it." The Doctor bowed to the chair, made aa 
 apology to me for the remark, and I proceeded — 
 
 " Mr. Chairman. 
 
 " I am happy, sir, to find that in the remarks I made I was not 
 out of order, though I should not have been surprized had that 
 been the case, as I am but little acquainted with the manner in 
 which such business is generally conducted. I can assure you, sir, 
 and this meeting, that what I have said has been with no design to 
 promote division or discord ; but from the convictions of my own 
 mind and the constraints of truth. I know not, sir, that there is 
 another individual in this room who thinks as I do upon this sub- 
 
 * In this it appears. I was mistaken, as it was said, " more than o«f f 
 three or four." This, however, is near enough for my argument. 
 
u 
 
 ject ; so that however nay wisdom may be questioned, my integrity 
 need not be suspected. My fears are, sir, that the measure pro- 
 posed will be considered by the Parliament and the Community, to 
 be in favour of the Roman Catholic claims, and it must be acknow- 
 ledged that the united wisdom of all the Protestant Dissenting 
 Ministers of London will be of great weight ! I have not opposed 
 the Roman Catholics, sir, by signing any petition against them; 
 lest I should recognize a principle which I do not believe, namely, 
 that civil governments have a right to legislate on the subject of 
 religion ! But while I have done nothing to oppose the Catholics, 
 I most certainly will do nothing to promote their wishes."* 
 
 After I had finished, the Rev. J. Townsend opposed the measure 
 upon the principle that many things which were lawful, may never- 
 theless be inexpedient ; and that as he had objected to the Peti- 
 tion last year, on account of the time, his objections were from the 
 circumstance of the Catholic Question being now before the House 
 of Commons, greatly strengthened, as he would do nothing which 
 was likely to embarrass His Majesty's government, which had 
 shewn a readiness on all occasions to serve the Protestant Dis- 
 senters. The Rev. J. Clayton, sen. also opposed the measure and 
 
 •The Catholic claims are considered by the Parliament as involving a 
 teligious question, and any decision upon the subjectwould be considered 
 amongst those laws " the operation of which extend to the Province of 
 religion." Those who think that the religious principles of the Roman) 
 Catholics are intolerant towards those they call Heretics, and destructive 
 to the safety of Society; and that their political principles make them 
 subject to the ecclesiastical authority of the Pope, who is himself subject 
 to the most powerful enemy of England, may certainly be excused fop 
 not petitioning for them ; nor would they act inconsistently with the most 
 extensive regard to civil liberty were they to Petition against them. As, 
 however, the Legislature only can decide whether the ineligibility to 
 civil offices which the Roman Catholics have long been subject to shall 
 continue, or be removed ; I am quite willing to leave the matter 
 with the constituted authorities, without expressing my opinion by a Pe- 
 tition. As it relates to Petitioning the Legislature, I would observe the 
 most strict Neutrality, and " neither curse them at all, nor bless them 
 Skt all." 
 
15 
 
 said he had a strong leaning on his mind to what had been ad* 
 vanced ; he thought it was intended by a side wind to serve the 
 Catholic cause. The Rev. T. Powell expressed his marked dis- 
 sent upon the same principle. Dr. Lindsey replied in a speech 
 more ludicrous than argumentative, and Dr. Rees repeatedly de- 
 clared that they had no intention to amalgamate themselves with 
 the Catholics, as there was nothing in the Petition nor the resolu- 
 tions that even mentioned them ! 
 
 I had hoped that one of my senior brethren would have proposed 
 a motion of adjournment, but in this I was disappointed. My 
 fortitude on this occasion forsook me, so that I declined proposing 
 a resolution I had written for the purpose, namely, " That the fur- 
 ther consideration of this question be deferred till the Petition cao 
 be presented without giving reason for it to be supposed that it is 
 intended by Protestant Dissenting Ministers to make a common 
 cause with the Roman Catholics." It was strongly suspected, by 
 many of the Ministers, that this measure was intended to promote 
 the cause of the Catholics, and subsequent events have strength- 
 ened, if not fully confirmed that opinion. If this were indeed the 
 case, the Rev. Gentlemen who were of the Committee will find it 
 difficult to convince the Public that they were free from duplicity ! 
 It has been said some of them think the Catholic claims ought to 
 be conceded them. Let them then petition exjrressly for that ob- 
 ject, and the Government and the world will understand them. 
 But this is not the question at issue. Some were cf opinion that 
 presenting the Petition thin would be construed as expressing the 
 united sense of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers in favour of the 
 Catholics. How do the promoters reply ? By attempting to prove 
 4hat such an opinion was chimerical ? — that such fears were without 
 foundation ? — that it would have no such tendency ? Not a word 
 like it. Instead of replying by argument, they affect to treat it 
 with a stoical apathy — and charge it with being altogether irrele- 
 vant. " It is not ad rem," said Dr. Rees ! " Some people are ter. 
 f ibly alarmed," says Dr. Lindsey, " but fear has never made a good 
 Pilot ; when did government ever do any thing to serve us but 
 when they could not help it V Why then had not the Movers of 
 the Petition acknowledged that they thought the Protestant Di<- 
 
16 
 
 senters too insignificant to obtain the repeal of the Test laws, un- 
 less they united with the Catholics, whom the government would 
 not resist, as they couldjight as well as pray ? and by these means 
 the Protestant Dissenters would come into power, unobserved in 
 the crowd, or climb up the sides of the Catholics to a share in the - 
 government! Would it not have been more ingenuous, if the Mo- 
 vers of the Petition had acted as the Lay Deputies for defending the 
 civil rights of Protestant Dissenters have since done? I am credibly 
 informed that when the business of their public meeting, convened 
 for confirming the minutes of a former meeting, which had agreed to 
 present a similar Petition, was preparing, a gentleman said, "It is 
 strongly suspected, though it is not avowed, that this measure is 
 intended to serve the Catholics; if this be the case, let it be plain- 
 ly declared, and let every one give a vote undei* that impression.'* 
 With a frankness that did them honour, if their sentiments did not, 
 the friends of the Catholics immediately said they would argue the 
 question upon that principle ; the consecjuence was that though the 
 Motion was carried by a great Majority, yet 25 voted against it,« 
 out of less than 90 who were present. Does it not appear that the 
 Ministers who deprecated introducing the Catholic question, were 
 apprehensive that an avowal similar to the above, would have de- 
 feated their object ? Had they done so, they would either have 
 lost their motion, or if it had been carried, it would have been but 
 by a small majority. As it is, they may boast loudly of an 
 Unanimous vote, but impartial persons will perceive that it was 
 obtained under false pretences ! I do not understand such manoeuvres. 
 Let integrity and uprightness ever preserve me. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 Mr. Evans charges me twice in one Page of his Pamphlet 
 with having "encouraged a member of Parliament to invalidate the 
 object of the Petition by denying its unanimity," which was, he 
 says, "to say the least, an act of disingenuousness and illiberality I" 
 This is an accusation, " to say the least," which Mr. Evans has not 
 
17 
 
 the means of proving. I may have been the occasion of Mr. Evans 
 writing his very elaborate and argumentative letter on the Fast 
 day, and thus improving his valuable time, which it seems was not 
 necessary to give him opportunity to lament the sins of the Na 
 tion — to implore the divine blessing on the government — nor to 
 pray for the peace of the world ! I do not deny that I may have 
 been the innocent occasion of his writing the " Remarks on an ex- 
 traordinary correspondence," but who for this reason will believe 
 that I encouraged him to do it? In order, however, that you may- 
 judge whether the charge be just, I will make you acquainted with 
 all I know on the subject ; and in this instance, I may without 
 vanity conclude, that my knowledge exceeds that of Mr. Evans. 
 
 Mr. Butterwortb, you know, is an active member of the " Protes- 
 tant Union," and consequently his feelings were alive to every public 
 transaction which related to the Roman Catholic Petition then be- 
 fore the House of Commons. In the Morning Chronicle News- 
 paper of the 12th of February, a letter was published signed 
 B. F. and dated Harlow, February the 3rd 1013, the next day 
 after our Resolution was passed. A short extract from this 
 letter will be sufficient for my present purpose. — "As a Friend to 
 unrestricted religious liberty, and as a Protestant Dissenter, I read 
 in your Paper of this day with peculiar pleasure the unanimous re- 
 solution of the London Ministers of the three denominations to pe- 
 tition Parliament for the repeal of all penal laws in matters of reli- 
 gion. The resolution does them honour, and proves that they do 
 not consider the subject in a pitiful, selfish point of view, as affect- 
 ing their own rights only ; but as equally affecting the rights of 
 Dissenters from the established church of every denomination whe- 
 ther Protestant or Catholic." 
 
 On the 15th of February another letter appeared of a similar 
 import, in the same Paper. This was signed E. H. Southwark. 
 The writer says, " I have read with the highest satisfaction the 
 letter of B. F. in your Paper of the 12th. 
 
 f Societies for public and general purposes ought to be brought 
 before the world, and the friends of unrestricted religious liberty 
 ought to b« iriformed and cheered 
 
 c 
 
18 
 
 B. F. feels as every good man must feel, on witnessing the 
 noble stand made by that venerable body, the Dissenting Ministers 
 of the three Denominations in London ; and sir, it is evident that 
 in this act they are to be mdentified with the Dissenters in general. 
 
 " B. F. may rejoice, sir, that thus the great cause is daily gain- 
 ing strength — the Catholics have only to maintain a firm and tem- 
 perate course, and they with all other Dissenters must obtain those 
 rights of which no faction, no government can much longer deprive 
 them, and which no traitor among themselves can effectually 
 betray." 
 
 On reading these letters Mr. Butterworth felt surprized and 
 grieved. Being the Son, he said, of a Baptist Minister, he recol- 
 lected how his Father used to speak of the errors and cruelties of 
 Popery, and therefore he was shocked to find that the Protestant 
 Dissenting Ministers had left their own standard to rally round 
 that of Popery. Having some knowledge of my sentiments on such 
 subjects, it struck him that if I had given my support to such a 
 measure I must have been much altered, and therefore he deter- 
 mined to ask me the history of the transaction at the Library to 
 which those letters referred. 
 
 On Tuesday Evening the 23rd of February Mr. Butterworth 
 called at my house, when I related to him what I have informed 
 you in my last letter ; but without eny knowledge that it was his 
 intention to take notice of what I said in the House of Com- 
 mons : I conversed with Mr. Butterworth not as a Member of Par- 
 liament, but as a fneud. • 
 
 I heard no more of this matter, till I found by the Pub- 
 lic Papers a few days after, that when Mr. W. Smith, M. P. 
 for Norwich, presented the Petition, as the unanimous 
 vote of all the Protestant Dissenting Ministers in London 
 and its Environs for the repeal of all the Penal Statutes, &c &c ! ! 
 that Mr. Butterwotth bad contradicted him by saying the resolu- 
 tion to present the Petition was not Unanimous ! I have since 
 learned that Mr. Butterworth added, " I know there was no divi- 
 sion upon the subject, they had divided last year upon the same pe- 
 tition presented to the last Parliament. It was then found that 
 
19 
 
 31 had voted for it ; 25 against it, and 12 were neuter.* "What I 
 mean to express is," said Mr. Butterworth, " that several Ministers 
 opposed the measure aud therefore it cannot be said to have been 
 Unanimous I" 
 
 Mr. Evans acknowledges that Mr. Butterworth, " by printing 
 my letter, has to a certain degree, exonerated himself." When Mr. 
 Evans exactly defines the degree of blame which still attaches to 
 that gentleman, I am persuaded Mr. Butterworth, if he think it 
 necessary, will be able to exonerate himself fully. The fact is Mr. 
 Butterworth is one of those who say, as Mr. Evans conjectures, 
 " That thepassing this Petition was only ncmine contradicentc, and 
 therefore this would have been a more accurate statement than 
 unanimous." Mr. Evans, however, thinks if this were admitted 
 " there would be an end of all public business ! " This logic is 
 rather too profound for my comprehension, as I cannot perceive 
 how public business would be affected by the term \nemine contra- 
 dicente being employed, which is never designed to indicate that 
 the Resolution was not carried, though it may imply that it did 
 not pass without having been opposed notwithstanding, that op- 
 position was not persisted in so far as to divide the meeting. If Mr. 
 Evans is correct in maintaining that it was an unanimous vote, 
 it can only be so considered in the technical meaning of that term ; 
 as in (point of fact the persons present were far enough from 
 
 " BEING OF ONE MIND." 
 
 Two days after Mr. Butterworth had thus endeavoured to re- 
 move the impression in the House of Commons, that the Petition 
 was intended to express the united sense of the London Dissenting 
 Ministers to be in favour of the Catholic claims, the following 
 circular was sent by the Secretary: — 
 
 " Rev. Sir, 
 
 "An extraordinary Meeting of the General Body of Pro- 
 testant Dissenting Ministers of the three Denominations, will be 
 
 * This statement was made on the authority of Mr. Evans' Pamphlet 
 published last year. The Evangelical Magazine for May 1812, says 
 that the numbers were, for the motion, 30, against it 26. This, I believe, 
 is the more correct representation. 
 
20 
 
 held at the Library, Red Cross Street, on Tiresday next, the 2nd 
 of March, at twelve o'clock, to consider the propriety of taking 
 further steps for promoting the object of their Petition to Parlia- 
 ment. — The chair will be taken at half-past Twelve/ 
 
 I am, 
 
 February, 26,1813. Your humble Servant, 
 
 THOMAS MORGAN." 
 
 The events of this extraordinary Meeting I must defer till 
 a future letter, and till then, I remain, 
 
 Yours, Arc. 
 
 • 'J JfVjrf" * 1:ilU'>'*»I S'r'n i I' « »■{ ).!. «' iwm Hilt f*"t*iYI ili 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 I promised to give you an account of the extraor- 
 dinary General Meeting of the Ministers at the Library, on the 
 2nd of March, " to consider the propriety of taking farther steps 
 to promote the object of their Petition to Parliament." 
 
 When met, considerable curiosity was expressed to know for 
 what purpose tire Meeting was convened ; as on a certain occasion, 
 " the assembly was confused, the more part " not knowing "where- 
 fore they were come together." At length the chair was taken 
 by the Rev. Samuel Palmer, and the business commenced by the 
 Secretary asking pardon of the Society for having forgotten to say 
 in the Notice, " and to receive the report of the Committee appointed 
 to present it." This inadvertency being readily forgiven, the Rev. 
 Dr. Rees rose, and mentioned that the Committee had been very 
 graciously received by Lord Holland and Mr. Smith ; who had 
 declared their willingness to concur in the object of the Petition, 
 and their readiness, if solicited, tc found any proposition upon it 
 the Society might wish : but who recommended that the Petition at 
 present should lie on the table, &c. 
 
 The Doctor then animadverted in very severe and offensive 
 
 terms on the conduct of Mr. Butterworth 1 have drawn my 
 
 pen across this part of the Reverend Gentleman's speech, having 
 
21 
 
 no wish to expose the warmth of temper manifested on this oc- 
 casion, nor to mention the reason which was urged in its vindica- 
 tion. The Doctor, however, concluded a very long, and on many 
 accounts, a very interesting speech, by moving " that the Report 
 of the Committee be received, &c." 
 
 Dr. John Pye Smith rising to second the resolution, said, he hoped 
 after what had been said, that no Gentleman would be at a loss 
 to know on what occasion we had been assembled, nor consider 
 the business unimportant ! I believe there were none by this time, 
 but what saw clearly that though the ostensible reason was to take 
 " further steps for promoting the Petition to Parliament," that 
 the real design was to procure a vote of censure on the conduct 
 of Mr. Butterworth. 
 
 Dr. Smith said he should take that opportunity of declaring his 
 sentiments on a subject which he considered of importance, and 
 which he had avoided the last meeting, lest he should interrupt its 
 harmony; but he should be more happy after he had declared bis 
 opinion respecting the Roman Catholic claims, for he had learned 
 that if he saw his enemy hunger, he should feed him ; and if he 
 heard even his enemy calumniated, he ought upon the same prin- 
 ciple to defend him. He then attempted by many arguments, and 
 by extracts from a printed book which had not yet been published, 
 to prove that the obnoxious tenets imputed to the church of Rome 
 by Protestants were calumnies cast npon her by her enemies, that 
 it was very true that Catholics had persecuted, but Catholics had 
 their martyrology as well as Protestants, &c. &c. 
 
 Mr. Clay ton, sen. replied in a tone and in sentiments of marked 
 disapprobation, and deprecated the Roman Catholics being en- 
 trusted with the affairs of government, &c. When Mr. Clayton 
 had sat down, I addressed the Chair in nearly the following words — ■ 
 
 " Mr. Chairman, 
 
 " Sir, I am convinced fiom what 1 have now heard that my 
 conjectures at the last meeting of this body were not without foun 
 dation, and that the effect of the Petition, will be an impression 
 that the Dissenters are making a common cause with the Cilholics. 
 I have been really surprised, sir, to hear a Rev. Gentleman avow 
 
22 
 
 himself as the patron of Poperty ;* and cannot help feeling shocked 
 that we should in any way give our support to a cause subversive 
 both of civil and religious liberty. I consider, Sir, that every 
 grain of political power a Roman Catholic may possess, is 
 just so much thrown into the opposite scale to that of liberty. I 
 ask, have not the Roman Catholics always supported despotism 
 in the state and persecution in the church ? When did Roman Ca- 
 tholics ever plead for general liberty, but when they have wished to 
 obtain power to enable them to deprive others of it ? t Nor does it 
 appear to me that their principles have changedor can be changed ! 
 While they hold that there is no salvation without the pale of the 
 Holy Catholic church, and that they may lawfully use the fire and 
 faggot to ' compel them to come in ! ' What security can there be for 
 Protestants where Papists have the supreme power? I know 
 other churches are charged with holding similar sentiments ; it may 
 be true, I am no apologist for them. But it will be said, They 
 will be bound by solemn oaths! Did not James II. take such 
 oaths at his coronation ? — but did oaths bind him? Was not every 
 thing at this ceremony at the request of the King and Queen done 
 in a Protestant manner? Bishop Burnet speaking of Sir Edward 
 Hales at this period having violated the most solemn engagements, 
 
 * This expression gave offence to the Rev. Dr. Collyer, who made some 
 remarks upon it. I by no means intended any tiling disrespectful towards 
 Dr. Smith, for whose character, especially as the successful opponent of 
 the Socinians, or as the Rev. Dr. Rees once said in conversation with me. 
 " Unitarians, as they call themselves," I have always felt great veneration. 
 But without charging Dr. Smith with designing to patronize Popery by 
 the remarks he made, I am of opinion that the tendency of his arguments 
 adopted on this, and on a former occasion in 1812, at the Library, were 
 calculated to serve such a purpose: 
 
 t Here the Rev: Dr. Lindsey vociferated, " When the Barons com- 
 pelled King John to grant Magna Charta ! " To this it might have been 
 replied, That the subject I was speaking of w as religions liberty. Magna 
 Charta relates solely to civil liberty, though the Parties who obtained 
 it were Papists, yet in this case their church and religion were not con- 
 cerned. The Doctor's wit, however, produced a laugh from the company, 
 instead of a reproof from the chair. 
 
23 
 
 says,' I was led to see that no credit was to be given to that sort of 
 men where their church and religion were concerned ! ' But it is 
 said, their spirit is altered. Yes, some of them are loud now in 
 their professions of regard to the cause of religions liberty. If 
 they had never fawned before, we might have believed them ! 
 Did not king James the Popish Tyrant in 1686 talk much, and con- 
 stantly to his Nobles of the great benefits of an Universal Tolera- 
 tion ? " Nothing, said he, can be more reasonable, more just, 
 more politick !" Bishop Burnett says, speaking of the year after 
 the insurrection in the West in favour of the Duke of Monmouth, 
 " Now all was grace and favour to the Dissenters !" And why was 
 this 1 Because the king wished them to assist in opening the door 
 to admit the Papists to his councils and government ! Because he 
 wished them to lay their bodies at the ground, that the Papists may 
 pass over them, as stepping stones to political power ! But adds, 
 Burnett, " the wiser men among them saw through all this." And 
 who were these wiser men ? Names we need not blush to own ! 
 Men in whose company I consider it an honour to be found ! Our 
 Baxters — our Meads — our Kiffins ! Men who not only wrote but 
 suffered in the cause of Protestantism ! I much wish that some per- 
 son of more consideration in this Society than myself, would pro- 
 pose a resolution by which those of us who object to affording any 
 assistance to the Catholics may have an opportunity of publicly 
 and unitedly avowing our opinion. 
 
 Letus not, sir, forsake the principles of our venerable forefathers. 
 If, instead of treading in their steps, we do any thing to promote 
 the cause of the Catholics, I consider that we shall trample upon 
 the ashes and blood of our ancestors ! " 
 
 These remarks called up the Rev. Dr. Collyer, who endeavoured 
 to defend his friend Dr. Smith from my imputation that the Doc- 
 tor had appeared as the Patron of Popery, and declared it to be 
 his opinion that the Catholics should be granted all they demand 
 , ed. And " that so far from acting inconsistently in giving them 
 support, he thought those Protestant Dissenters who acted differ- 
 ently would trample upon the ashes and blood of their ancestors." 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Douglas endeavoured to prove the impropriety of 
 the conduct of those Dissenters who did not oppose the Catholic 
 claims, &c. He was proceeding at some length when Dr. Rees 
 
24 
 
 rose and as at the f inner meeting, declared that f he was sorry 
 that the subject of the Roman Catholics should have been intro- 
 duced as it was quite irrellevant from the object of the Meeting, 
 and on this account he had interrupted the Gentleman in his very 
 important observations which he had permitted him to bring for- 
 ward, not doubting but observations as important would be made 
 in reply. A Gentleman, said the Doctor, I have full in my eye 
 (looking at me) a very respectable person I dare say, was the first 
 in the transgression. And you sir (directing his speech to the Rev. 
 Mr. Barrett, now at the bottom of the Table) were the second. 
 You should not have suffered him to proceed, I said so then ; but 
 I bowed to the chair, as the chair, sir, is always infallible !* Aud 
 these gentlemen opposite (meaning Dr. Smith and Dr. ColJyer,) 
 with whom I always consider it an honour to act, they also have 
 been Wrong in adverting to the Catholic question. The Rev. Mr. 
 Aspland here ealled to order, as he said, " If Gentlemen were 
 prevented from speaking their sentiments who opposed the opinion 
 of those who were friendly to the measure, while those who sup- 
 ported it were not interrupted, it would certainly have the appear- 
 ance of unfairness." This procured Mr. Douglas an impatient 
 hearing from many of the gentlemen present, who it is presum- 
 ed would have found it difficult to answer many of his argu- 
 ments. 
 
 After much discussion, the unjust conduct of Mr. Butterwortii 
 was again brought forward. Mr. Clayton, sen. spoke as follows in 
 his vindication. " Sir, I know nothing of what Mr. Butterwortii 
 said in the House of Commons on this subject, and was at a loss to 
 know who was the Bookseller alluded toby the Mover of theResolu- 
 
 * As a proof however that the Rev. Mr. Barrett acted deliberately and 
 from sentiment, the following little Anecdote is related. On February 
 12th, about ten days after the period alluded to, I met that gentleman at 
 the Free Mason's Tavern on the Provisional Committee of the Blooms- 
 bury and Pancras Auxiliary Society. Mr. B. said, " I fear you have not 
 gone to the Library to sign our Petition." " I most certainly have not 
 sir." " I am sorry for it," said Mr. B. " I assigned my reasons, sir, at 
 the meeting." " You did, said he, and I was very solicitous you should 
 obtain a hearing." *? You were very polite, sir, I was greatly obliged to 
 you." 
 
25 
 
 lion till his name was mentioned. I have had no communication 
 with that gentleman, directly or indirectly respecting our last 
 Meeting ; but I have no doubt that his observations referred to 
 the opposition which was made against the Petition being present- 
 ed on account of the time proposed being improper. You know, 
 sir, I particularly objected to it, and so did some others, audi had 
 intended to propose that the Petition be presented this day three 
 months ; but was prevented by the declarations made by those who 
 supported the measure that it was not intended to render assist- 
 ance to the Roman Catholics. I am persuaded it was to this op- 
 position Mr. Butterworth alluded, if he has said that the Petition 
 was not passed unanimous. I thought it right to say thus much 
 sir, to vindicate the absent." Dr. Rees said " he could not suffer 
 the construction of the Rev. gentleman to pass, certainly it had 
 passed unanimous, as there were no hands held up against it!" 
 
 The Doctor's opinion of course prevailed, and the following re- 
 solution was adopted. 
 
 " That this Meeting has heard, with great surprise, of the 
 statement publicly made by Mr. Buttei worth in the House of Com- 
 mons, that the Petition lately presented to Parliament by this Body, 
 for the repeal of all the Penal Statutes now in force on the subject 
 of Religion, was not unanimous, and that the Members of this 
 Body feel themselves bound to declare, that the Representation 
 sent by their Committee and Secretary, to the public papers, and 
 communicated to Lord Holland and Mr. Smith, was perfectly 
 correct." 
 
 Many of the Ministers had gone away before this, one person 
 only held vp his hand against it I This must have been over- 
 looked by the excellent Chairman, or it could not have been de- 
 clared to have passed unanimous ! Surely even the hand of 
 any member of the Body should not have been thought unworthy 
 of regard t but had it not so happened it would have excluded the 
 expressive and favourite term Unanimous ! 
 
 From the manner in which those were treated at this meeting 
 who ventured to deliver their own opinions, it was apparent that 
 they were more indebted to the laws of the Society which secured 
 the right of free discussion, than to the forbeaiauce of the Rev, 
 
 D 
 
26 
 
 Doctor and his friends. The Doctor certainly proved he could be 
 warm, and much too hot to be entrusted with the Magistrate's 
 sword. But for the liberty of speech which is the unalienable 
 right of every member of the Society, and which is secured to 
 them by law, those of us who were in the Minority would not, I 
 am persuaded, have been granted toleration— — much less li- 
 berty ! ! It remiuded me of the remark of an. excellent Presbyte- 
 rian Minister who opposed this measure in 1312, " While you are 
 pleading the cause of universal liberty of conscience, I hope you 
 will not persecute me !" 
 
 I am, Yours, &c. 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 On the Resolution of censure mentioned in my last letter 
 appearing in the Public Papers, Mr. Butterworth sent me the fol- 
 lowing letter — 
 
 " Fleet Street, March 3, 1813. 
 
 " Rev. Sir, 
 
 " I enclose a Copy of a Resolution passed yesterday at the 
 Meeting of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers, at Redcross Street 
 Library, signed Samuel Palmer, Chairman ; and shall be much 
 obliged by a written confirmation of what you stated to me, and 
 which I accurately repeated in the House of Commons, respecting 
 the Petition to Parliament adopted by the Dissenting Ministers, on 
 the 2d of February last, for the Repeal of all the Penal Statutes 
 now in force on the subject of Religion. I am, Rev. Sir, 
 
 Your faithful obedient Servant, 
 
 JOSEPH BUTTERWORTH.'' 
 
 Having no objection to avow myself as Mr. Butterworth's in- 
 formant, 1 immediately sent him this answer — 
 
 " Red Lion Street, March 4, 1813. 
 
 " Sir, 
 
 I am happy to explain the account I gave to you, at my 
 House, of the Meeting of the Protestant Dissenting Ministers of 
 London and its environs, at Redcross Street, on the 2d of Febru- 
 
27 
 
 Dry, 1813, respecting the Petition to Parliament for " tlie Repeal 
 of all the Penal Statutes now in force on the subject of Religion." 
 
 I was present at the Meeting, and, with three other Ministers, 
 opposed the measure. I have since ascertained that several more 
 were also decidedly against it ; but we did not divide on the sub- 
 ject. A division had taken place at a former Meeting, respecting 
 the same Petition; which was presented to the last Parliament. 
 At that time it was found that 31 had voted for it ; 25, among 
 whom I was one, against it; and 12 were neuter. 
 
 I wish you, Sir, to understand, that we did not object to the 
 Petition itself, but to any Petition being presented at this time, 
 lest it should be considered as being in favour of the Claims of the 
 Roman Catholics.* This was, however, expressly disavowed by the 
 movers of the Petition ; which, in my opinion, was the cause the 
 motion for presenting the Petition was carried. I have since re- 
 gretted that a motion of adjournment was not made, as I have no 
 doubt it would have been supported. 
 
 This, Sir, is a plain statement of facts, which I have no doubt 
 many who were present are ready to attest. I am, Sir, 
 
 With sentiments of respect, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 JOSEPH IVIMEY. 
 
 * The Rev. Thomas Rees lias charged me with having misrepresented 
 the supporters of the Motion. What they disavowed, it seems, was an 
 intention of making a common cause with thein. Doubtless, there is a 
 difference between this and the other. W hen a certain well-known cha- 
 racter engaged to betray his Master, the chief priests, to accomplish their 
 own ends, were very willing to serve him, and did sene him by furnishing 
 silver and men, and swords, and staves, and lanthorns, and torches ; but 
 when those ends were answered, and the betrayer seized with remorse, 
 they were far enough from making common cause with him: "What is 
 that to us ?" said they, " See thou to that." Whatever difference there is, 
 however, it seems to have been overlooked. The Morning Chronicle, as 
 we have seen, does not hesitate to put this construction upon their con- 
 duct, and it looks as if the Gentlemen of the Deputation were not suffi- 
 ciently explicit in giving instructions to the Noble Lord and the Honour- 
 able Commoner who presented their Petitions. 
 
28 
 
 As Mr. Evans has not ventured to contradict any part of the 
 above statement, my communicating this information must be the 
 only crime for which he has exhibited against me the charges of 
 illiberality, disingcnuousness, and degeneracy, intimating that I 
 am an illegitimate son of the fathers of the English Baptists, men- 
 tioned in my History of that Denomination, &c. &c. &c. Per- 
 haps Mr. E. acted upon the principle of Festus, who thought it 
 " unreasonable " to send Paula Prisoner to Caesar "and not withal 
 to signify the crimes laid against him." The sequel however 
 shews that it was much more easy to signify the charges the Jews 
 had exhibited against Paul, than ft was to meet the Apostle's chal- 
 lenge) "Neither can they prove the things whereof they now 
 accuse me." 
 
 Whether I have any just claim or not to the character of the 
 English Baptists' legitimate -son, Mr. Evans must be conscious that 
 he resembles them neither in sentiments nor in spirit. By reading 
 the History he professes to admire he must have ascertained that 
 all the English Baptists, till towards the close of the 17th century, 
 both Particular and General, were zealous supporters of the doc- 
 trines of the Trinity ; the proper Divinity of Jesus Christ ; the 
 total depravity of man; the absolute necessity of the Divine in- 
 fluence of the Holy Spirit to renew and sanctify the heart ; the 
 future eternal misery of impenitent sinners, &c. &c. Had Mr. 
 Evans lived at that period, and had he preached and published his 
 present sentiments, he would have found himself placed in com- 
 pany with Faustus Socinus and John Biddle. The English Bap- 
 tists would not indeed have persecuted him, for they had main- 
 tained th an address presented to the Government many years be- 
 fore (1GJ5) that persecution for conscience sake was unlawful even 
 though that conscience was misled by ignorance and blinded by 
 error. But neither would they have countenanced him. He 
 would not have been admitted into their pulpits, nor into their 
 churches. Had he published his "Sketch of all the Denomina- 
 tions in the religious world" at that time, instead of its reaching a 
 twelfth edition, it would have been considered a sceptical per- 
 formance calculated to promote a spirit of infidelity ; and had the 
 Author at the same time been z«alous that a way should be opened 
 
29 
 
 for Roman Catholics to come into stations of high authority, it 
 would probably have been suspected that it was in this spirit that 
 they felt to be near akin. But in the present age, fortunately for 
 Mr. Evans, there are not a few, who are partial to productions 
 of this tendency. 
 
 Mr. Evans charges me with having deserted the Principles of 
 unrestricted universal religious liberty so well understood and pro- 
 pagated by the old English Baptists, by venturing to maintain that 
 it is inconsistent with the character and principles of the Protestant 
 Dissenting Ministers to make a common cause with the Catholics in 
 their struggle for political power ? Does he not know that in all 
 the political conflicts between Protestantism and Popery in this 
 kingdom, from the Pievolution till IG43, the Dissenters always 
 rallied round the standard of Protestantism ? Can he produce an 
 instance to the contrary ? Does he not know that the Dissenters 
 have always supported the Whigs against the Tories in the State, 
 because the former supported Protestantism and a limited Monar- 
 ch}/ against the attempts of the latter to bring back Popery and aa 
 absolute despotism 1 Let him read Neal and Burnett, and the 
 History of the four last years of Queen Anne. 
 
 Buthe says "my best friends must feel astonished," and that 
 even others "must lament my degeneracy." This is a proof that 
 Mr. Evans is not acquainted witli the men whom I consider my 
 best friends : I can assure him they do not. Nor should I think 
 much either of the good sense or the friendship of any persons who 
 would pour out any lamentations on account of my conduct on this 
 occasion. Have I degenerated from the spirit or the sentiments of 
 the venerable William Kiffin, the founder, and for more than 50 
 years the Pastor, of the particular Baptist Church in Devonshire 
 Square, and one of the Aldermen, after James II. that despotic 
 Monarch had given to the City a new Charter? Mr. Evans must 
 have forgotten this part of the History he has professed to have 
 read with so much pleasure ! It is as follows. " This great 
 storm being over" (says Mr. Kiffin, alluding to the death of the 
 two Hewlings his grandsons) "it did in a great measure effect that 
 which was intended by them ; for although now there appeared no 
 difficulty in the way, but Popery might be set up, and that there 
 
'30 
 
 would be little or no stop to that design, means Were used with the 
 Members of the house of Commons to promise upon the sitting in 
 Parliament, to take off the Parliament Tests, which was the only 
 hinderance to Roman Catholics being chosen Parliament men. 
 They did generally refuse the making any such promise, and the 
 insolency of the Papists in their meetings, which now began to be 
 more and more public, did so much alarm both the ministers of the 
 church of England and also all true Protestants in general, that the 
 interest of Popery rather abated, and dissatisfactions grew. 
 
 " Therefore a new project was set on foot to engage the Protestant 
 Dissenters, by giving them the liberty of their meetings, and pro- 
 mising equal authority in the nation with other men; but this was 
 in the tail of it, to engage them thereby to promote the taking off 
 the Test, and to strengthen the Papist interest by setting the Pro- 
 testant Dissenters against the Protestants of the Church of England, 
 but indeed they were but few, and for the generality of the meaner 
 sort, William Penn being indeed the head of the party. I thought 
 it my duty (adds Mr. Kiffin) to do all I could to prevent those Dis- 
 senters of my acquaintance from having any hand therein. But 
 from the sense they had of their former sufferings, and the hopes of 
 finding all things as was promised, I could not prevail." 
 
 Again, speaking of the honours and advantages promised him if 
 he would use his interest to serve the king, Mr. Kiffin adds, "But 
 I thank the Lord those proffers were no snare to me. Being fully 
 possessed in my judgment that the design was the total ruin of the 
 Protestant religion, which I hope I can say was, and is dearer to 
 me than my life." 
 
 Another of those whom I consider to be a Father of the English 
 Baptists, was the celebrated Joseph Stennett, pastor of the Baptist 
 Church in Little Wild Street, London. If Mr. Evans has ever 
 read his Life, he must have forgotten some circimistances which 
 took place in his history at the closeof Queen Anne's reign. I mention 
 these to shew that I have not degenerated from the spirit and senti- 
 ments of this very superior man. The author of his life says, "When 
 the scene of affairs altered towards the latter end of the reign of 
 Queen Anne, it happened that a noble friend of Mr. Stennett fell 
 in with the change : and as many addresses waited on her Majesty 
 
31 
 
 with congratulations on the peace concluded with France, so great 
 endeavours were used to engage the Dissenters to compliment the 
 Queen and her Ministers on this occasion. And when they could 
 not in their united circumstances be prevailed on, it was thought 
 proper to try if any of the Denominations singly could be brought 
 into those measures. 
 
 " That noble Lord, with the assistance of another Peer, was em- 
 ployed to try what could be done with the Baptists. Mr. Stennett 
 was presently sent for; and it was presumed that if they gained him 
 a considerable step would be made towards effecting their design. 
 Some things were insinuated to him, which tended to create a diffi- 
 dence between the Baptists and the other bodies of Dissenters, and 
 he was assured at the same time, that such an acceptable compli- 
 ance as this with the expectations of the court from him and his 
 brethren, would bring them into the royal esteem, and secure them 
 any favour they could reasonably expect. But he assured their 
 Lordships, that neither himself nor his brethren could ever be 
 brought to justify with their hands what their hearts disapproved ; 
 and that no particular advantages to themselves could ever coun- 
 terbalance their regards to their country. 
 
 " Robert Harley, Esq. afterwards Earl of Oxford, attempted at 
 the same time with powerful insinuations to influence Dr. Williams; 
 but met with a brave and steady repulse. And the whig Lords 
 deputed a noble Earl, who then bore a principal figure among 
 them, but is since dead, to make due acknowledgements for this 
 seasonable stand of the Dissenters." p. p. 30, 31. 
 
 You will, my friend, be ready to exclaim, how different is the 
 conduct of the present Protestant Dissenting Ministers of London, 
 from that of these patriotic men ! They saw through the design, that 
 it was to pave the way for the return of the Stuarts am\Popery ; 
 and the exclusion of the illustrious house of Biitnswickwa.fi of Pro~ 
 tcstantism. Thus the ministers of that period escaped the snare 
 which a corrupt court had laid to draw them into their insidious 
 measures. Mr. Stcanett was assailed by temptations which some 
 ministers now could not have resisted ! He too might have been 
 honoured by the company of Honourable Commoners and Noble 
 Peers — he might have sat at their table and enjoyed their smiles — ■ 
 he might have even basked in the sun-shine of earthly prosperity — 
 
32 
 
 but he dared to refuse, and because he would not assist the Roman 
 Catholics in their attempts to procure political ascendency in the 
 State. Let Mr. Evans look at this noble example of Puritanism 
 and old English spirit, and if he cannot blush, while thinking of 
 the degeneracy of himself and his friends — why then, we must 
 blush for him. 
 
 Mr. Evans reiterates the charge of my having deserted my prin- 
 ciples of religious liberty. I ask, Is a refusal to lend my aid to pro- 
 cure for the Catholics political power, a dereliction of the principle 
 which would oppose all persecution for the sake of conscience? Is 
 it a dereliction of this principle to state what were the sentiments 
 of the illustrious Prince and Princess of Orange at the period of the 
 Revolution? and of all the Protestant Dissenting ministers at that 
 time? Is it any dereliction of this principle to be willing to leave 
 it to the decision of the Legislature, whether there be any tenets 
 held by the Roman Catholics which render them ineligible to hold 
 the highest offices in His Majesty's government? Would it have 
 been any dereliction of this principle, even if I had contended, 
 that persons who hold principles subversive of the safety of civil 
 society, were not to be intrusted with power to injure those who 
 differed from them in opinion, merely because such persons call 
 their sentiments religious, and conscientiously hold and maintain 
 them? Would Mr. Evans undertake to prove that the Jacobites 
 in the reign of William III. were not by their religious prin- 
 ciples (maintained indeed very conscientiously) rendered in- 
 eligible to be Lord Chancellor? Till Mr. Evans has done this, 
 and answered the questions proposed above, he will not have made 
 good his charges against roe. 
 
 If Mr. Evans had proved the inconsistency of advocating the 
 cause of religious liberty, and refusing to concur in a measure 
 which tended to invest with political authority those who have 
 uniformly been its decided enemies, he had a right to apply the 
 words of Milton as he has : but till this is proved, it is without 
 point ; and should those who have been so anxious to exalt the 
 Roman Catholics, ever unite with them in opposing even toleration 
 to the friends of religion, (and from the coldness with which a 
 
33 
 
 Tecent question was entertained, this is far from being impossible,) 
 it may prove that another passage from the same author would 
 have been more appropriate, — 
 
 " Faithful found among the faithless, 
 
 Nor number, nor example with him wrought — 
 
 To swerve from Truth." 
 
 I am, Your's, &c. 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 My dear Friend, 
 
 You will recollect that I expressed my fears at the Li- 
 brary on the 2nd of February, that the impression made by the 
 Petition on the minds of the Legislature and of the Public would 
 be, that the Protestant Dissenting Ministers had made common 
 cause with the Roman Catholics. This was considerably strength- 
 ened by the aspect which the debate assumed, and the tone em* 
 ployed by some of the supporters of the measure, after it was too 
 late for those who would liave opposed, had the same sentiments 
 been avowed at the former meeting. Since this time, many events 
 have taken place which have fully confirmed my opinion that the 
 general sentiment on that measure is that the Protestant Dissenters 
 and the Catholic Dissenters are now amalgamated into one mass, 
 and that their applications to Parliament are one and the same. 
 The tw o letters mentioned page 17, afforded evidence of the cor- 
 rectness of my fears, as these were w ritten upon the principle of 
 the Protestant Dissenting Ministers having made a " noble stand " 
 in behalf of the Catholic Dissenters, and it appears were intended 
 to make such an impression universal. It is a little singular also, 
 that when Mr. W; Smith, M. P. presented the Petition in the House 
 of Commons, the Clerk of the House, attending to the common 
 routine of business, indorsed it, "Petition of the Dissenters in favor 
 of the Catholic claims, read February 24th." This was very incon- 
 siderate, most certainly, but the Clerk seeing the Petition come 
 into the House in a crowd, though in the company of foreigners, 
 
 F 
 
34 
 
 yet hearing it speak the same language, naturally enough conclud- 
 ed it came from the same country. When the same Petition was 
 presented in the House of Lords, by the Right Honourable Lord 
 Holland, if the remarks of his Lordship were correctly stated in the 
 News-Papers, his Lordship said, he "courted investigation respect- 
 ing it;" — that "the Petitioners were Successors of the Ministers 
 ejected by the Act of Uniformity in 1662 — and of those who in the 
 times of James II. voluntarily preferred suffering themselves the 
 operation of the Tests, rather than contribute towards their being 
 removed from the Roman Catholics." — that " from its having been 
 said by noble Peers on the opposite side that Protestant Dissenters 
 and some Dissenting Ministers had signed Petitions against the 
 Catholics, this Petition had been accelerated, to shew that these 
 Petitioners were desirous of obtaining equal liberty for all." 
 
 Whether this report be correct I have not the means of ascer- 
 taining ; nor am I certain that the Deputation who waited upon 
 his Lordship instructed him to say that they had accelerated the 
 Petition on account of the conduct of some "traitors" among the 
 Protestant Dissenters who had ventured to sign Petitions to the 
 Legislature against the claims of their Dissenting brethren of the 
 Catholic communion. Of this however I am quite certain, that 
 no Meeting has been convened at the Library to complain of the 
 misrepresentation given of his Lordship's speech; nor has any de- 
 putation been appointed to wait on his Lordship to assure him 
 that " this Meeting has heard with great surprize of a statement 
 publicly made by his Lordship in the House of Lords, that the 
 Petition lately presented to Parliament by this Body, for the repeal 
 of all the penal statutes now in force on the subject of religion, 
 was accelerated for the purpose of expressing the- sense of this Body 
 in favour of the Roman Catholic claims, and that the Members of 
 this Body feel themselves bound to declare that this representa- 
 tion arose from his Lordship's misapprehension of their design, as 
 thev had always disavowed all intention of presenting their Petition 
 with any such object." But, my friend, I ask you, and through 
 you all who read this letter, whether " this Meeting of Ministers 
 Will do justice to themselves, to their Chairman, to their Secretary 
 
35 
 
 and to the Deputation, till they have passed some such resolution, 
 and have transmitted a copy to the Right Honourable Lord Holland 
 and Mr. William Smith, and have inserted it in the public papers 1" 
 Till they have done this, some by standers will think, after all, that 
 the report of his Lordship's speecli was tolerably correct ; and 
 that the Body of Protestant Dissenting Ministers are less con- 
 cerned in being considered as the public advocates of the Roman 
 Catholics, than in having it even suspected that their Petition was 
 not carried unanimous. 
 
 There are some parts of the History of this celebrated Petition, 
 which Mr. Evans has not related to his country friend, which I 
 shall take the liberty to supply. Be it known then to all men by 
 these presents that the Petition of all the Protestant Dissenting 
 Ministers of London and its Vicinity, after a request being sent 
 round to many of the Members of the General Body to come and 
 sign it, bears the signatures of 48 persons, including the chairman ! 
 Of these, 20 are of the Presbyterian — 19 of the Independent — 9 Of 
 the Anti-paidobaptist Denominations; 5 of the latter are of the 
 Particular, and 4 of the General Baptists ! 
 
 You will perhaps think that this is but a very inadequate repre- 
 sentation of the sentiments of the General Body of Protestant Dis- 
 senting Ministers of the three Denominations in London and its 
 Vicinity, as this Body consists of above 100 Members; much less 
 of the aggregate number of Dissenting Ministers, which including 
 those of the Associated Calvinist Methodists amounts to about 200. 
 
 Some of these Ministers must be at a loss to know what was in- 
 tended by the Reporter of the speech of the Right Honourable 
 Lord Holland, when it was stated that they were the "successors" 
 of the 2000 ejected ministers, and of the Nonconformists iu the 
 reign of James II. and at the period of the Revolution in 1GG8. 
 Was this intended by the Reporter as a sarcasm ? If so, it is as 
 cutting and severe as if on receiving an account at the News-paper 
 office that such an one had yesterday paddled himself round the 
 fish-pond in his garden in a little boat, the Editor were to insert, 
 that this gentleman was a "successor" of the immortal Cook, the 
 circumnavigator of the globe ! Who could believe it was intended 
 
seriously ? all would conclude it was a satirical and caricature re- 
 presentation ! The Presbyterians and General Baptists " successors " 
 of the ejected Ministers. In what / In their orthodox Principles I 
 They are as remote from them in this as the Poles aie from each 
 other, in every sentiment by which these ejected Ministers were 
 distinguished from Socinians from whom they were not less averse 
 than from Papists. Do they succeed them in religious zeal ? Who- 
 ever hears of the present race even professing to imitate these pious 
 confessors and intrepid sufferers in their anxious desire to main- 
 tain and propagate even their own sentiments, much less the sen- 
 timents of the Bible? Is it in their precision, self-denial, separa- 
 tion from the world ? Who ever thought of calling a modern Pres- 
 byterian Minister a Puritan? Is it in their places of worship T 
 A few of thein, and but a very few indeed, are possessed by them ; 
 most of them have passed into other hands on account of the cold 
 system of Socinianism having driven away those who were pious 
 worshippers of God, and engendered such a spirit of indifference 
 respecting divine worship in persons of another description, that 
 they were not able or willing to keep their Ministers and pay the 
 expenses attending the public services of religion ! Is it to the 
 funds provided through the influence of these pious and evangeli- 
 cal Ministers, for the purpose of maintaining a succession of men 
 
 * By referring: to Maitland's History of London, pp. 516, 517, the 
 reader will find that in 1739, the Presbyterians had 28 Meeting-houses 
 in London and Westminster ; the Indcpendants had 26, and the Baptists 
 33. Of the Presbyterian places 8 are now in possession of the evangeli- 
 cal Dissenters and Methodists, about 10 more have been removed. Tin y 
 have at present about 16 Meeting-houses ; 6 of which belong to the 
 Scotch Presbyterians who are all evangelical. The Indepcndants have 
 about 45, the Baptists 43. Of these 5 are General Baptists, one of which 
 is an Arian congregation where the Rev. J. Evans, M. A. presides, and 
 the other is a congregation of Socihian Univcrsalists, whose pastor is the 
 Rev. Mr. Tidier. In comparing the present race of English Presbyte- 
 rians and these two last congregations of Baptists with their zealous and 
 puritanical forefathers, we cannot help exclaiming, * How is the gold 
 become dim ! how is the most line gold changed !" 
 
37 
 
 to preach evangelical principles with pious fervor? If it be true 
 in any sense, tliis must be its meaning; but this I will not absolute- 
 ly determine — perhaps some one of these reverend Ministers will 
 be so kind as to inform us in what sense it is to be understood that 
 they are the "Successors" of the ejected Ministers.* In addition 
 to the important information Mr. Evans has given his friend respect- 
 ing the Petition, he has communicated some through the medium 
 of the Press, with which we might have thought his friend had 
 been previously acquainted. As that "the late Dr. George Camp- 
 bell, of Aberdeen, was his venerable tutor " — that " Dr. Abraham 
 Ileesis his venerable friend " &c. &c. But without this letter the 
 public would not have known that Mr. Evans was the "Chairman" 
 of the Meeting at the Red Cross Library when this Petition was 
 originally passed ; and that as Chairman he " afterwards stepped 
 forward to vindicate it from some misrepresentations that had gone 
 abroad respecting it P' To this Mr. Evans adds, " I do indeed 
 deem my having presided on this occasion the most honourable day 
 of my life !" 
 
 You must know that it happened to fall to the turn of the Anti- 
 paedobaptists to take the Chair, and it chanced that Mr. Evans was 
 fixed upon for this purpose, after it was ascertained who were pre- 
 sent. If this were indeed the day on which Mr. Evans arrived at 
 the most distinguished honor he had ever enjoyed, what are we to 
 think of his previous attainments ? But I conclude, subscribing 
 myself 
 
 Your faithful friend, 
 
 JOSEPH IVIMEY. 
 
 * The Rev. Gentlemen, who are the Trustees of Dr. "Williams's Li- 
 brary, would confer an obligation on the writer, by stating the tenure by 
 which they hold that valuable property ? Is it not left to Persons being 
 Protestant Dissenters, who hold the Doctrines put forth by "The Assem- 
 bly of Divines " in their Catechisms? Is it not, at present, held by 
 those who have given up those principles ? Are they not conscious that 
 the Will of the Donor is violated, and the property alienated ? If one of 
 the Societies " for defending the civil rights of Dissenters " would in- 
 stitute an enquiry of this kind, they would render an important service to 
 the christian public. 
 
58 
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 Since writing my Letters, two general meetings have been held at 
 the Library, and as some events have taken place which have arisen 
 out of the former measures, I am desirous that you should know 
 them to prevent all missapprehensions on the subject. 
 
 The Annual Meeting of the 13th of April, was called that in addi- 
 tion to the usual business we might consider the propriety of pre- 
 senting Petitions to the Legislature for the propagation of the gospel 
 in India. I feel satisfaction in having written, and, with others 
 signed, this requisition, as the object was quite in unison with 
 the character of Protestant Dissenting Ministers. 
 
 We soon found however that business of greater importance 
 than the conversion of 50 Millions of Pagan Idolaters was to 
 occupy the attention of the Meeting. After a long speech from 
 Dr. P».ees, in which he alluded pointedly as possible to me, amotion 
 was submitted, and seconded to this effect, "That it has been the 
 invariable practice of this Body to have its transactions recorded 
 in the Public Papers written by the Secretary, and signed by the 
 Chairman ; and any deviation from this rule is highly improper 
 and ought as far as possible to be discouraged and restrained." 
 
 Knowing this measure was intended to be a recorded censure 
 of my conduct in having written a letter to Mr. Butterworth who 
 had printed it in a public "paper, I requested the Rev. Doctor to 
 name the person who had been guilty of this impropriety of con- 
 duct. This however he repeatedly declined. At length, after I 
 had pressed the enquiry, my name was mentioned as having ap- 
 peared in a public paper connected with an account of the 
 business of a former meeting. I then entered upon a vindication 
 of my conduct, and related the substance of the former letters. 
 Most present, I believe, were satisfied that my conduct was not 
 deserving of censure. As the motion was however pressed, I said 
 that if my name was not disavowed as connected with it, 1 had 
 
39 
 
 some thoughts of proposing another, viz. " That as it appears from 
 the report of Lord Holland's speech, when he presented our 
 Petition, that it was thought this Body had made a common 
 cause with the Catholics, when no such thing was intended ; re* 
 Solved, that a deputation wait upon his Lordship to request him 
 to take an early opportunity to set us right with the House 
 of Peers and the Country at large." It was now said by many 
 of the ministers that the motion did not allude to me, — that it was 
 not retrospective, but prospective, &c. <ic Under these declara- 
 tions it was put and carried by only six hands being held up 
 against it. 
 
 As much of our time had been consumed by this important 
 discussion, and the resolutions and Petitions relative to India 
 prepared by Dr. Smith, contained many things exceptionable to 
 the Anti-trinitarians, Dr. Rees moved an adjournment for a week, 
 and a Committee was appointed, consisting of two ministers from 
 each denomination, to expunge all the objectionable matter 
 that if possible a body so heterogeneous might act in unison in a 
 petition to the Legislature for the propagation of Christianity. 
 On the 20th Instant we met again, our former C him man, the Rev. 
 W. Newman, took the Chair; and the Resolutions and Petitions 
 were vnanimously adopted. Our unanimity on this occasion as well 
 as the signature of the Chairman was omitted by the Secretary in 
 sending the account to the Public papers. "Peradventure it was 
 an oversight" — "Charity hopeth all things and is kind." 
 
 When this business was nearly settled, I intimated my desire of 
 bringing forward a question relating to privilege, and requested 
 all the members to continue. Desirous of bringing those to the 
 point who had as I thought acted with duplicity, upon the Catholic 
 question, I said, " It will be recollected that I was charged at 
 the last meeting with having misrepresented the movers of the 
 Petition for the repeal of all th$ penal statutes, &c. in saying that 
 they had disavowed all intentions of serving the Catholics — whereas 
 what they disavowed was, according to their own declarations, an 
 intention of making common cause with the Catholics. Accordin<* 
 to this statement,'it appeared to me that this Body had been traduc- 
 ed in one of the Public Papers, and therefore I intended submitting 
 
40 
 
 a motion upon the subject. V>t. Rees here interrupted me, ana* 
 moved an adjournment, which was immediately seconded. I claimed 
 my privilege as a member of the Body to propose my resolution. 
 After great difficulty, I obtained a hearing, and read as follows, 
 " That as two letters have appeared in the Morning Chronicle of 
 the 12th and 15th of February which assert that this Body had 
 made a common cause with the Roman Catholics ; and as the 
 Petition lately presented by this Body made no mention of the 
 Penal Statutes which related to the Catholic Dissenters, nor was 
 intended to make common cause with them — Resolved, that some 
 effectual step be taken to counteract such injurious and reproach- 
 ful insinuations." Mr. Morgan moved the previous question, 
 which was immediately seconded. I said "Take care what you 
 do, if you negative my resolution, it will be a proof that you 
 have joined the Catholics heart and hand." The previous question 
 was put and carried, not unanimously, but there were only two 
 hands held up ngainst it. 
 
 Having fully ascertained that however my brethren thought 
 proper to act in continuing their connection at the Library, that 
 both from the theological and political sentiments of the Anti~ 
 triiiitarians ( the Soul that animates that Body ) it was impossible I 
 could act in union with them ; I have since sent in my resignation 
 as a Member of that Society, which at present deprives me of the 
 privilege of meeting at the Library as a Protestant Dissenting Mi- 
 nister of the three Denominations. 
 
 Lately published by J. Frimry. 
 
 A History of the Euglish Baptists from the curliest period to which, 
 it can be traced, to the close of the 17th Century. Pi ice 12s. in boards. 
 
 A Second Volume of the above History is in the Press. Price 10s : 
 6d. to Subscribers; 
 
 Smith, Pi inter, 29, Winchester Row.