interested individuals, however, have not fcrupled to oppose the progress of a bill which has been propofed for more effectually reftraining this practice. In the pamphlet now before us, Mr. Anftie is a ftrenuous advocate for such restraint; and it is to be hoped, that in an affair of fo great national importance, the general good will triumph over the artifices exerted for private emolument.

New Information and Lights, on the late Treaty of Commerce with France. By Robert Pigott, Efq. 4to. 15. Ridgway.

Mr. Robert Pigott, who dates his Letter from Hieres, in Provence, brings up the rear of the literary troop which has waged war with the miniftry and parliament of Great Britain on account of the commercial treaty. Of new information and lights, which he pretends to exhibit, we meet with nothing in the whole pamphlet. It is merely the refufe of political rancour, poured forth with petulance, and in language that violates the plaineft rules of English grammar,

Alarming Progrefs of French Politics. 8vo. 15, Jameson. The effufion of an affected, bombaftic, vifionary declaimer; as little acquainted with politics as Mr. Pigott with good

manners.

TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS. The Cafe of the Proteftant Diffenters, with Reference to the Teft and Corporation Acts. One Sheet, Folio.

This Cafe ftates the origin of the two acts mentioned in the title. The first that is mentioned is the test act, which passed in the year 1672, and profeffedly intended to prevent dangers which might happen from popifh recufants. So far, it is ob ferved in the Cafe, were the Proteftant nonconformists from being aimed at in this act, that in their zeal to refcue the nation from the dangers which were at that time apprehended from popish recufants, they contributed to paffing the bill; willingly fubjecting themfelves to the difabilities created by it, rather than obftruct what was deemed fo neceffary to the common welfare. It is farther remarked that alderman Love, a member of the houfe of commons, and a known diffenter, publicly defired, that nothing with relation to them might intervene to stop the fecurity which the nation and Proteftant religion might derive from the teft act; and declared, that in this he was feconded by the greater part of the nonconformifts. This conduct was fo acceptable to parliament, that in the very feffion in which the teft act paffed, and while that act was depending, a bill was brought into the houfe of commons, entitled, A Bill for the Eafe of Proteftant Diffenters.' This bill having paffed through that houfe, was carried up to the house of lords, where likewife it pafled, with fome amendments. Thefe

having

having occafioned a conference between the two houfes, king Charles II. from an apprehenfion that the measure would prove injurious to the Popish intereft, adjourned the parliament. In the next feffion, an attempt was made in the house of commons to difcriminate the Diffenters from the Papifts, with regard to their qualifications for public offices, by bringing in a bill for a general test, to diftinguish Proteftants from Papifts; which bill, having been read a fecond time, and referred to a committee, was laid afide without being reported.

To this evidence adduced from hiftory, in favour of the Diffenters, it is added that Dr. Burnet, bishop of Salisbury, in a fpeech in the house of lords on the fubject of the occafional bill, in 1703, took particular notice of the conduct of the Diffenters, with regard to the test act; and concluded, that, as the act was obtained in fome measure by their concurrence, it would be hard to turn it against them. It is likewise added, that, though king William had refufed, when prince of Orange, to give his approbation to the repeal of the test act, and other penal laws against Papifts, knowing that the measure was countenanced by James II. with the fole view of introducing Roman Catholics into public offices, and that it would have been at that time dangerous to the Proteftant religion, and the liberties of the people; yet when he was raifed to the throne, and no danger could be juftly apprehended, he told his first parliament, in one of his fpeeches, that he hoped they would leave room for the admiffion of all Proteftants who were willing and able to ferve him; and that fuch a conjunction in his fervice would tend to the better uniting them amongst themfelves, and strengthening them against their common adverfaries. Accordingly, when the bill was brought in for abrogating the oaths of allegiance, &c. to James II. a claufe was ordered to be added for taking away the neceffity of receiving the facrament as a qualification for civil offices. This claufe the house of lords rejected, contrary to the fentiments of many peers, who had been promoters of the Revolution, who declared in their proteft, that a greater caution ought not to be required from fuch as are admitted into offices, than from the members of the two houfes of parliament, who are not obliged to receive the facra ment to enable them to fit in either house.

The corporation act was paffed in the year 1661, and enacted, that no perfon or perfons fhall hereafter be placed, elected, or chofen in, or to, any corporation offices, that fhall not have, within one year before fuch election, or choice, taken the fa crament of the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the church of England. This act appears to have been designed against the Diffenters, but it certainly was paffed in a period when civil and religious animofities greatly prevailed. In 1680, a bill was ordered into the houfe of commons, for repealing this act. It was read a fecond time, and referred to a committee. While this bill was depending in the houfe of commons, a bill

came

came down from the lords, entitled, An Act for distinguishing Proteftant Diffenters from Popish Recufants.' It does not appear that there was any divifion on either of these bills, but they were defeated by the fudden prorogation of parliament on the 10th of January. The commons being apprized of the king's intention, had only time to pafs fome votes on the ftate of the nation, one of which was to the following effect, viz. That it is the opinion of this houfe, that the profecution of Proteftant Diffenters upon the penal laws, is, at this time, grievous to the fubject, a weakening of the Proteftant intereft, an encouragement to Popery, and dangerous to the peace of the kingdom. The parliament was foon after diffolved by proclamation.

Such is the hiftory of the two acts contained in the case of the Proteftant Diffenters, and to be relieved from which they made their late application to parliament. Several reasons, partly of a confcientious nature, and partly derived either from the indignity, the unneceffary rigour, or the injuftice of an invidious diftinction, are affigned as the motives of their conduct. Their efforts on this occafion, it is fufficiently known, have been fruftrated; but there is reafon to believe, that they are not without the hope of proving more fuccefsful at fome future period.

An Appeal to the Candor, Magnanimity, and Justice of thofe in Power, to relieve from fevere and opprobrious Severities and Penalties, a great Number of their Fellow Subjects, who will give every Security and Teftimony of their Fidelity and Attachment to the prefent Eftablishment, which does not oblige them to violate the Rights of Confcience. One Sheet, 8vo.

This pamphlet is intended as a Supplement to the Cafe of the Proteftant Diffenters. It defcribes the penalties which may be inflicted by fubfifting laws, on thofe perfons who, from principle, refufe to qualify, by taking the facrament according to the ufage of the church of England, for the purpose of holding civil offices and places under the government. The penalties are certainly fuch as mark, in ftrong characters, the violence of the times when they were enacted. Amongst a few additional grievances fpecified in the Appeal, particular mention is made of the Diffenters being debarred from the right of marrying according to their own forms, though the Quakers enjoy that privilege.

Obfervations upon the Cafe of the Proteftant Diffenters. 8vo. 6d.

Debrett.

The author of thefe fhort Obfervations, who ftyles himself A Lay-Member of the Church of England, fets out with obferving that the Proteftant Diffenters take great pains to prove, from the difpofition of the times when the teft act paffed, that it was aimed at the Papifts only; but he thinks the flighteft in

spection

fpection of the act is fufficient to fhew how far that was from being the cafe; for that part of it which makes the renouncing the doctrine of tranfubftantiation a neceffary qualification for an office, would have excluded the Papifts as effectually as any additional teft whatfoever. With regard to the corporation act, which the Diffenters admit to have been defigned against some of the then exifting fects of Proteftant Diffenters, but to have been paffed in times of great heat and violence, the author afcribes this temper of the legislature to the recollection of recent calamities, which the members of the church of England had fuffered from the perfecuting fpirit of thofe lately in poffeffion of the powers and authority of the ftate.

In answer to the argument ufed by the Protestant Diffenters, that an exclufion from offices of truft and power, except upon certain prefcribed conditions, is a mark of infamy, he obferves, that if it is, the crown itfelf is fo branded by the 12th and 13th of king William, where it is enacted, that whofoever fhall come to the poffeffion of the crown, fhall join in communion with the church of England, as by law established.' In this pamphlet there occur a few other obfervations, which, though they cannot place the fubject beyond controverfy, must be admitted to have weight in a candid examination of the question. The Subftance of the Speech delivered by Henry Beaufoy, Efq. in the House of Commons, upon the 28th of March, 1787, on his Motion for the Repeal of the Teft and Corporation Acts; including alfo the Subftance of bis Reply. 8vo. 15. Cadell.

We are informed by an advertisement prefixed to this Speech, that it has been published at the requeft of feveral gentlemen, who had been urgent with Mr. Beaufoy to favour them with the fubstance of what he had delivered in moving the repeal of the teft and corporation acts. As it appears that he had made such a motion at the deûre of a committee of the Protestant Diffenters, it is natural to imagine that he likewife was folicit ous for an opportunity of gratifying them, by an authentic account of the arguments which he had advanced on that occafion. That he has not been deficient either in zeal or ingenuity in the fupport of their caufe, is clearly evinced by this Speech, which is copious, argumentative, and animated. After a fuitable and modest preamble, he proceeds to fhew the nature of thofe provifions, in the teft and corporation acts, from which the Diffenters fupplicate relief, and to defcribe, in strong colours, the penalties which thofe acts impofe. He next fhews at what periods, and under what circumftances, thofe reftrictive laws were paffed. He endeavours to prove that the Diffenters were not the object of the teft act; and that with refpect to the corporation act, there is not now any juft pretext for its neceffity. He obferves, that after the propofed repeal, all those who cannot take the abjuration oath, which operates as a bar to all but Chriftians, and makes the declaration which excludes

the

the Catholies, will continue as completely rejected as before; and that even their willingness to give thefe pledges of attachment to the laws will avail them nothing, unless, in the estimation of their fovereign, their merit fhall be fuch as to render them worthy of an employment in his fervice. He farther infifts that the repeal will increase the strength of the kingdom, by enabling his majesty to bring into action the talents and affections of all his Proteftant fubjects; and that, by removing an invidious diftinction, it will give additional fecurity to the church. Such are the general arguments advanced by Mr.. Beaufoy, who enforces them with great plaufibility, and has embellished them, in various parts, with the tropes and figures of eloquence.

Bishop Sherlock's Arguments against a Repeal of the Corporation and Teft Acts. 8vo. 25. Robinfons.

This eminent and worthy prelate argues with great earnestnefs against the repeal of the corporation and test acts, which he confiders as intimately connected with the tranquillity and fafety of the church and state. That prejudices and apprehenfions with refpect to the Proteftant Diffenters fhould fubfift for many years after the middle of the last century, was a natural confequence of the ferment which had been excited in the nation by religious fectaries; but whether fuch prejudices and apprehenfions, injurious to national happiness, ought to be perpetuated, is a queftion which, we must acknowledge, it is difficult, confiftently with candour, to anfwer in the affirmative. It feems as if nothing lefs than great and evident danger can juftify the exclufion of a particular clafs of fubjects from the civil and military offices of the state; and that any fuch danger now exifts, from the difpofition of the Diffenters, we know not any reafon to fufpect. The only plea for fuch apprehenfions is the poffible renewal of thofe civil commotions which diftracted the nation in the last century. But between poffibility and probability, the difference is extremely great; and we wish to reconcile with juice the continuance of a retraint which is founded upon a fingular contingency in the annals of human kind. At the fame time that we make this acknowledgement, from motives of impartiality, we must obferve, in favour of bishop Sherlock, that the indecent language of a fanatical Diffenter, whom he quotes, may have justly irritated the natural moderation of his temper. How could you fuggeft, fays that perfon, that we don't fo much as pretend the terms of your communion are finful *?' You may depend upon it, that the great body of the Diffenters judge the terms of communion to be finfully impofed †.' We rejoice to fee the foundations (of the ecclefiaftical constitution) fhaken, and the fabrick finking, as we never doubted but it would fome time or other ‡.”

The Diffenters Reasons, &c. by James Pierce.

† Ibid.

#Ibid.

The