tional. On the ascertainment of the fact refpecting the incapacity of the fovereign, Mr. Connolly noved, February 11, 1789, "That an address be presented to the prince of Wales, requesting him immediately to take upon himself the government of that kingdom as regent, during the continuance of the king's incapacity." This was carried WITHOUT A DIVISION. To this refolution the house of lords acceded. But the lord lieutenant, the marquis of Buckingham (late earl Temple), refufing, by a rash and hazardous exercise of difcretion, to transmit this address to England, commiffioners were appointed by both houses to present the address in person to his royal highness. The rapid and unexpected recovery of the king, happily fuperfeded the object of their commiffion. But the prince in his reply declared, "that nothing could obliterate from his memory the fentiments of gratitude which he felt for their generous kindness."

Among the innumerable evils attending the mode of procedure adopted by the British parliament, one of the moft formidable was the poffible, and even probable, diffimilarity of the decisions of the two legiflatures. Had the prince of Wales refused, under the degrading circumstances with which the offer of the regency was accompanied in England, to accept the government of the kingdom, there is good reason to believe that it would have been conferred upon the queen, while the prince would have been conftituted regent of Ireland, with the usual powers of royalty. This would doubtless have given rife to a queftion of the most important, and at the fame time of the most difficult nature, viz. Whether Ireland, agreeably to the political compact subsisting between the two countries, could conftitutionally emancipate herself from the executive government established in England, under whatever name, or by whatever persons it might be exercised? Of this perplexing and dangerous question, the prudence of the prince in accepting of the regency under all the concomitant comitant humiliating restrictions of parliament, fortunately precluded not only the investigation, but even the mention.

In the speech delivered by the chancellor in the name of the king to the two houses, his majesty conveyed to them his warmest acknowledgments for the additional proofs they had given of their attachment to his person, and their concern for the honor and interest of his crown. It foon appeared that the late proceedings of the ministry were in the highest degree acceptable to the sovereign : and those perfons holding posts under the government, who had concurred in the measures of the opposition, were unceremoniously dismissed from their offices: amongst whom were the marquis of Lothian, the duke of Queenfberry, lord Carteret, and lord Malmesbury.

Before the first auspicious moments of gratulation had fubfided, Mr. Fox renewed his popular motion for the repeal of the shop tax, to which Mr. Pitt did not, in the present circumstances, choose any longer to refuse his affent; though he declared he had heard nothing in the way of argument, which induced him to change his original opinion. He accordingly moved an omiffion of that part of the preamble to the bill of repeal, by which the tax was pronounced a partial and oppreffive imposition, militating against the just principles of taxation.

Mr. Dempster at the same time moved for a repeal of the hawkers and pedlars tax, which was originally imposed on the extraordinary ground of its operating as an indemnity to the shopkeeper; thus facrificing one class of men to the convenience and accommodation of another. A total repeal of this law nevertheless could not be obtained; but a bill paffed to explain and amend the act, by which the more onerous clauses were mitigated, and these friendlefs and injured people restored in fome measure to their civil and commercial rights.

A motion of much greater importance was introduced foon after this (May 8), by Mr. Beaufoy, being a renewal of the application two years ago fubmitted to the house, for the repeal of the corporation and test acts; "prompted, as he said, thereto by the unalterable confidence which the diffenters reposed in the disposition of the house to do justice to the injured, and afford relief to the oppreffed. And they could not forget how frequently the legiflature had granted the requests, which caufeless alarms had at first induced them to refuse."

This motion was supported by Mr. Fox with a force of argument which could not but make some degree of impreffion on the most callous and prejudiced mind. This great statefman laid it down as a primary axiom of policy, "that no human government had jurisdiction over opinions as such, and more particularly over religious opinions. It had no right to presume that it knew them, and much less to act upon that presumption. When opinions were productive of acts injurious to society, the law knew how and where to apply the remedy. If the reverse of this doctrine were adopted, if the actions of men were to be prejudged from their opinions, it would fow the feeds of everlasting jealousy and distrust; it would give the most unlimited scope to the malignant paffions; it would incite each man to divine the opinions of his neighbor, to deduce mischievous consequences from them, and then to prove that he ought to incur disabilities, to be fettered with restrictions, to be harassed with penalties.

1

"From this intolerant principle had flowed every species of party zeal, every system of political perfecution, every extravagance of religious hate. It was an irreverent and impious opinion to maintain, that the church must depend for fupport as an engine or ally of the state, and not on the evidence of its doctrines, and the excellency of their moral effects. Moderation and indulgence to other fects fects were equally conducive to the happiness of mankind and the fafety of the church.

"Since the era of the revolution the church had flourished, because her imaginary fears had been diffipated. She had improved in knowledge and candor, because, inftead of being enabled to impose filence on the diffenters by the strong hand of power, she had been obliged to hear their arguments; and the community at large had found the happy effects, which a collision of opinions in open and liberal difcuffion, among men living under the same government, never fails to produce. There were many men not of the establishment, to whose services their country had a claim. Surely a citizen of this description might be permitted without danger or absurdity to say, though I diffent from the church, I am a friend to the constitution; and on religious subjects I am entitled to think and act as I please.' Ought the country to be deprived of the benefit the might derive from the talents of fuch men, and his majesty be prevented from difpenfing the favours of the crown except to one description of his subjects? Mr. Fox declared himself a friend to an establishment of religion in every country, framed agreeably to the sentiments of the majority of its inhabitants. But to invest that establishment with a monopoly of civil and religious privileges, was palpably unjust, and remote from the purpose of an establishment, which was no otherwife connected with the state, than as it tended to promote morality and good order among the people. The test and corporation acts had fubfifted, it was contended, for more than a century. True; but how had they fubfifted? By repeated fufpenfions. For the indemnity bills were, literally speaking, annual acts. Where then would be the impropriety of fufpending them for ever by an act of perpetual operation? - Let not Great Britain be the laft to avail herself of the general improvement of the human understanding

4

understanding. Indulgence to other sects, a candid respect for their opinions, a defire to promote charity and good-will, were the best proofs that any religion could give of its divine origin. To the church of England in particular he would fay,

Such are the noble and exalted sentiments which have long elevated Mr. Fox to the rank of the first statesman of his age and nation. The motion of Mr. Beaufoy was zealoufly oppofed by lord North, in a speech confifting, as it was justly described by a member of the house in debate, of " a feries of pompous nothings."

Mr. Pitt also again appeared as its opponent, in an ar tificial harangue decorated with a great external shew of candor and speciousness of language. On a division the numbers, were ayes 104, noes 124; so that this important question-important indeed even beyond what the minifter himself probably had at this period any conception of-was lost by 20 voices only. This therefore might be regarded as a decided victory on the part of the diffenters, had they known how to improve their advantage. But their resentment against the court and the minister was not at all abated by the foft and foothing expreffions by which Mr. Pitt attempted to disguise and palliate his refusal: and the ground they had gained in defpite of the courtly machinations against them, excited a degree of elation, which led to gross and fatal indifcretions.

About this time a bill of a nature very meritorious was introduced into the house of peers by lord Stanhope, for the repeal of a number of obsolete and vexatious laws, inflicting penalties upon persons abfenting themselves from the fervice of the church, speaking in derogation of the book of common prayer, &c.

On