« PreviousContinue »
WEEKLY POLITICAL REGISTER.
Vol. XXIII. No. 20.]
LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 15, 1813.
[706 the true account of the quarrels between SUMMARY OF POLITICS,
the Prince and Princess of Wales. He BERKSHIRE MEETING.-6. SPIRIT OF THE left it with me to read. I read it, and I 6 Book." -This county, one of the very found (for I had seen part of the real Book first in the kingdom to step forward in all before) that, not only was it a mere rocases where justice calls for the people's in- mance, that it was, as to its intended meanterference, met on Monday, the 4th in- ing, a string of lies; but, that the author stant, to address the Princess of Wales. never could have seen the Book, or any part
-Mr. Monck moved the Address, and of it.- -When, therefore, Mr. Haydn was seconded by Mr. MAKANESS, who returned, I gave him his manuscript ; was followed by Mr. Hallett. These told him it was all falsehood; told hinu that Berkshire men talk too freely for me to dare it was very unjust to publish such a thing; to insert their speeches. But, I have read, and advised him to have nothing to do with with great pleasure, all the excellent things the matter. The production was, how
- , they said about the parties, high and low, ever, published; and Mr. Haydn brought concerned in the transactions of which they me a copy and
He asked spoke. There was a Mr. REYNARD, me to mention it in the Register. I told who spoke against the Address, who was him, that I could not do any thing tending very neatly answered by Mr. H. MARSH. to give the work currency, because I knew But, what I am anxious particularly to no- it to be wholly false, and because I regardtice with regard to this Meeting, is, an ob- ed it as containing matter calculated to do servation of Mr. Reynard, relative to a pub- great injustice to the Princess of Wales. lication, called the... SPIRIT OF THE He then asked me to be so good as to “ BOOK.” This gentleman is reported to write against it! That I also refused, as have said, that that work contained matter being likely to aid in the circulation.against the Princess, which had not yet However, it wanted no aid of mine. Cubeen answered. -That any person, pre- | riosity; the love of diving into such mattending to speak at a public meeting, should | ters; and the manner of dressing up the have named such a publication, as contain- story, sent it through all the circulating liing any thing worthy of serious notice, is braries in the kingdom. The sale was imquite surprising; and it only shows to mense; and the profit, as I am told, not what shifts and tricks the enemies of the less than three or four thousand pounds. Princess are ready to resort.---The thing
The thing ---This is the true history of the work, having been mentioned, however, and on which Mr. REYNARD thought proper to resuch an occasion, I will, for the informa- fer to at the public Meeting of a county, as tion of the Tax-payers of Berkshire, give containing serious i matter against the the real history of this publication. I Princess of Wales.---What, after this, -I
, saw it in manuscript : it was while I was will not the enemies of the Princess trump in Newgate for two years, for having writ- up? Will they stop at any thing? I ten about the flogging of English militia- think it is not likely that they will; and, men, at the town of Ely, in England, under therefore, the public ought to be upon their the superintendence of German Troops, guard against every thing which they say. and about a year before I paid the Prince - The Address, in Berkshire, was, it Regent a fine of a thousand pounds, for the seems, carried with only two voices against same crime; while, I say, I was thus in it; but, as we are told in the Morning Newgate, a young man, who said his Chronicle, Mr. Dundas, one of the Counname was HAYDN, came to me with the ty Members, has refused to present it, on 66 Spirit of the Book,” in manuscript, and account of certain parts in it censuring the told me that it was the writing of a person conduct of the four Lords, who held the then in the King's Bench prison. ---He Inquiry. If this be true, the people of told me, that, under feigned names, it was Berkshire ought to bear it in mind. What
right has. Mr. Dundas to refuse to comply | little deficient; namely, in not having adwith a vote of the whole county upon such dressed
the Regent upon the subject of his a ground as that which is here alleged? Royal Consort's escape from so base and The people of the county voted, that the wicked an attempt against her honour and Address, which they agreed to, should be life. -His joy must be as much greater carried up by the county Members; and, if than any other man's, upon thie occasion, those Members refuse, what pretty repre- as his honour was more at stake. Her acsentalives they are! They seem to think, how quittal; the complete proof of her innocence, eyer, that they are not chosen by the peo- and of the guilt of her infamous enemies; ple; they well know, that it is not the free the shame, the disgrace, now affixed for popular voice that has placed them where ever on the heads of the " suborned and they are; and, therefore, they disregard, " perjured traducers," must give him, very likely, that voice. The Meeting above all men, satisfaction. —
. Indeed the included, as it ought, all persons in the whole of the Royal Family, and, amongst: county, paying taxes; and, surely, a man the female part, the Queen, that good olda
. who pays taxes, ought to have something Lady, her aunt and mother-in-law, musta to say in the affairs of the country and the feel her heart warmed at the wiping off of: government.me Here, again, we see (and, these aspersions on her family. I think, indeed, it meets us every where), the want that Her Majesty also ought to be addressof a reform in the parliament. The
The state. ed; for, as I find from the Gazette, she was ment about the conduct of Mr. Dundas addressed
upon the marriage of the Princess, be untrue; but, if he has refused, the cause and upon the birth of her child. Why is, that be knows that he does not depend not address the Queen now? I would, if I for his seat upon the payers of the taxes ; had any thing to do with Addresses. I do but, in the first place, upon the dependants not like the idea of creating the Queen as if: of Government; upon the aristocracy and she were out of date. There can be no the church; and, then, upon their dependo doubt ; it would be disloyal to doubt, that unts. If every man who pays taxes had Her Majesty must feel the most lively sahad a vote in the county, Mr. Dundas would tisfaction upon the occasion; ;
by all not have refused to present an Address of that's loyal, address her I would ! The the people. Mr. HALLETT made an ob- people must meet again. They have but
servation that was very striking.
half done their business. Indeed, though this: that, when the Addresses were going the Ministers have, perhaps, too much moon against the conduct of the Duke of York, desty to say it, they, I dare say, are ofthe movers were accused of factious and fended to see no Addresses coming forward. disloyal motives; and, that, now that they to the Queen and the Regent. This, now are addressing the Princess upon her escape I rightly think of the matter, must be the from the machinations of disloyal conspira- cause why they appear so cold upon
the tors, they are still accused of factious and casion. Go at them, therefore, with Addisloyal motives.-As he observed, these dresses to the Regent and the Queen, and I accusers are very difficult to please. The will engage, that they will discover a strong truth is, they depend on the Government fellow-feeling in the work.It is, perfor the whole, or part, of what they pos- haps, for this second series of Addresses sess, and, they imagine, that Addresses that the Clergy are reserving themselves; for the Princess are as disagreeable to those and, I must confess, that I am impatient to in power as Addresses were against the see those gentlemen come out.
They have Duke of York. - That they think this is seldom been behind hand, when the work manifest enough; but, the wonder is, why of Addressing was going forward in favour they should think so: Why they should of any one of the Royal Family; and,
! imagine, that Addresses, expressing joy upon an occasion like this, where an innoat the escape of the wife from a foul, cent woman has escaped from a base comand base, and infamous conspiracy, should bination against her, the Church, it appears be displeasing to any one in power. Why to me, ought to have stood in the front. they should think this is the wonder; and Why the Clergy have hung back I cannot yet, that they do think it, appears very imagine. I wish some one, at least, of clear to me; because I always see them them would give us the reasons for what ready to pour in Addresses, when those appears so astonishing. But, at any rate, Addresses are manifestly pleasing to the if they will not come out, let us bear the Government. -There is one thing, in fact in mind. which, I think, the people have been a
The TRINITY.- This seems an odd was accordingly done. ---> Lord Gassort of topic for a Political Register ; but, “ TLEPEAGH said, he certainly did not see it belongs to politics as much as war does, any reason to object to the principle of
, it having become the subject of Acts of Par- "6 the Bill. When the Bill was before the liament, and being now, if the news-papers House, he would then be enabled to see tell us truth, about to become the subject“ if there was any thing in the mode of of a new Act.---This Act will, if pass" granting the relief liable to objection. . ed, make a much greater change in the re- -The House went into a Committee, ligion of this country than has ever yet
66 when leave was moved for and obtained, been made. It strikes at the root of Chris. "" lo bring in the Bill in question.' tianily itself. Now, mind, I say this as Now, as the reader will understand, if my deliberate opinion; and the reasons, on this Act pass, any person may, with impuwhich I found this opinion, I will state nity, openly talk, prate, or preach, that fully, when I have inserted the report of the Doctrine of the Trinity is a false Doca the proceedings in the House of Commons. trine. -What, then, is this Doctrine ?
.66 MR. WM. SMITH said, he believed. Our Church tells us, that, unless we beno opposition would be made to the ino- lieve in it we must be damned; the belief " tion he was about to submit to the House, of it is, our Church says, absolutely neces; 66 and he therefore would not take up two sary to salvation; and, to allow people 6 minutes of their attention. The Act of openly to say that it is a false doctrine, " King William, known by the name of what is this but to allow people to do their " the Toleration Act, denied to persons utmost to procure and ensure our damna“ who disbelieved in the Trinity the bene- tion; and, pray, what did Mr. Paine, or " fit of toleration. An Act of the 19th of Mr. Eaton, or any body else ever do, or “ His present Majesty required only the ge attempt to do, more than this ?-But, I
I 66 neral belief in the doctrines of Christi- am before my story. What is the Doctrine " anily and the Scriptures; but it so hap- of the Trinity ? -Why, it is this. That
pened, that though by the Act of the GOD, the Maker of the Universe; the “ 19th it was not necessary to subscribe the Creator and Sustainer of all things; did, " Articles of the Church of England, pro- through the instrumentality of the Holy
fessing the belief in the Trinity, the Acts Ghost, assuming the shape of a Dove, be66 of the 9th and 10th of King William get upon the body of a woman, his son
were not repealed. By these Acts, per- Christ. That Christ, so, begotten, was
sons who in writing or conversation deny GOD; and that the Holy Ghost was GOD; " the existence of any of the persons of the and yet, that there were not, and are not
Trinity, are disabled in law from liold- three Gods, but only one God. -There “ ing any office, civil, ecclesiastical, or are persons who deny this. They say, that so military, on conviction; and if a second they do not believe, that God the Father, " time convicted, they are disabled to sue God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, are
or prosecute in any action or information, one God; they deny that the two latter are
or to be the guardian of any child, and Gods, and acknowledge only as God, God Si . “ liable to be imprisoned for three years, the Father, ---Who is right and who “ The only object of his Bill was to do wrong, I have not the presumption to say; " away these penalties. He said the libe- but, this I say, that both are not right; that
I 6 ral Act which was passed last year was
one of the two is wrong; and, I further say, "highly creditable to the liberality of the that he who denies the divinity of Christ is “ Ministers of this country, and the times no Christian ; whence it follows, that, in “ in which we lived. The only question my clear opinion, the proposed Act, if for consideration was, whether those passed, would be a sanction to the
open “persons dissenting from the Church of preaching against Christianity. The di
England, should be still liable to the pe-- vinity of Christ is the basis of Christianity. “nalties of the Acts of King William. He if he was not God; if he inay be consider46
therefore moved for leave to bring in a ed in any other light; if he may be re"Bill for granting farther Relief to the dif- garded as something less; where is the * ferent Persuasions of Christians in this boundary? Once ket the people be told, " Country, who disbelieved the Doctrine of that he was a man, and what becomes of “the Trinity.---The SPEAKER observed, the whole system? Take away the law, as " that the regular course was to move first, it now stands, and see to what lengths men " that the motion should be submitted to a will go. Every one will give his opinion ¢ Committee of the whole House ; which freely upon this point; the incarnalion ;
the enunciation ; the whole thing will be are, it seems, quite willing to be bound to come a subject of free discussion, and then a belief of the Scriptures ; they believe, it will puzzle any one to devise the means they are content to be bound to believe, of criminating any man, who shall write that God came down, in the cool of the upon the Christian System. Remove this day, and walked in the Garden of Eden; great prop, and, in my opinion, down that he came down and talked to Moses in comes the fabric. The morality of the a Cloud ; that the Red Sea opened and Gospel is nothing in support of Christianily, formed a sort of walls while the Israelites which stands upon faith ; and, if you take passed over ; that the Sun and Moon stood away the divinity of Christ, where is ground still at the command of Joshua; that the for your faith? The moralily taught by walls of Jericho fell down at the sound of a . Christ' was taught long before his birth. trumpet ; that five loaves and a few small There was, as our Clergy show us every fishes filled thousands of hungry people: day, nothing new in the morality. It was all this, it seems, they are willing to believe the super-natural things that took place in as well as we Church people; and why, I Palestine that were new; it was the mira- should be glad to know, are they to be percles, the resurrection, &c., and, if you take mitted openly to preach against the belief away the divinity of Christ, what becomes of Christ being God? Why do they not of all these? To suppose, that God had a come, at once, and ask for leave to deny son, after the manner of men, is something the whole as well as a part ? They cannot so monstrous, so low, so degrading, so ab- comprehend how Christ can be God, by surd, so ridiculous, that it cannot live for a whom he was begotten. Oh, oh! And moment, except in a mind brutified by ig- can they comprehend how the Devil came
And yet, this you must believe, to take Christ up to the top of a high if
you believe that God and his Son are lwo mountain, and to offer him all the kingdoms distinct persons, and in nowise united in of the world ? Can they comprehend how
What, then, is your belief, Mr. all the animals got into one single ark? SMITH, or, rather, the belief of those in Can they comprehend why Deborah and whose behalf the Bill is to pass into a law ? Barak sang the praises of Jael, who drove That Christ was not the Son of God? Is the nail through the head of Sisera, while this their belief? If it be, with what de- he was asleep? No: they pretend not to cency do they profess to believe the Scrip- comprehend these. They do, however, ture? With what decency do they call believe them as we Church people do ; any one, and by way of reproach too, a they do, like us, regard them as mystical ; Deist? You say, that the Act of the and, why, I again ask, cannot they accom19th of the present King, requires ONLY pany us through the whole of our faith? " the general belief in the Doctrines of Besides, what do they mean by being Christianity and the Scriptures? ONLY! forced to believe this, or that? They are Why, Sir, this Doctrine is the all-in-all. forced to believe nothing; they are only Without it there is no more in being a forbidden to tell any body that they do not Christian than there is in being a Pillite or believe so and so. That is all. If they will a Foxite, and, I should be very glad to see but hold their longues and their pens, they any one attempt to prove the contrary. may believe, or disbelieve just what they
-No, if this part is taken away, the please." Tender Consciences," indeed! And whole fabric totiers. An Act of Parlia. how are their consciences hurt, how are they ment will, in such case, allow people openly violated, by a law which forbids the telling to say, that the great Greed of our Church of folks that the Doctrine of the Trinity, is a falsehood. Our Church lays down a Doctrine some hundreds of years old, and one point of faith as indispensable in order taught by all our Bishops and Clergy, is to obtain salvation; and the proposed Act false ? They are not, as under some tywill permit any one to say, at the Church rannical governments, compelled to make door, that no man need believe any such open declarations that they do believe acthing, for that the assertion is false, and cording to the Church; they are only for-': that one of the most venerable of the Fa. bidden to say that they do not believe acthers of the Church was a retailer of false- cording to the Church ; they may keep sihoods.
What, then, you will say, per- lence; that is their remedy; and I know haps, are people to believe what they can not why they should be suffered to express not believe? " Cannot believe,'
pray their opinions about Christ, any more than what does that mean? The people, in may not be suffered to express mine about whose behalf you bring forward the Bill, the Regent, or his Judges, or his Ministers.
Let them hold their tongues and their well as others, opposed to the intended þons, and their faith is absolutely without Act, Our Church says, that this doctrine shackle: -When Mr. EATON was tried, is the basis of our faith; that to believe in the Attorney-General, Gibbs, called for the Trinity is absolutely necessary to our punishment upon the old man, because his salvation ; and, why, I ask, is a particular book was calculated to endanger the souls set of men to be allowed to endeavour of the people, by causing them to disbe- openly to prevent us from entertaining this lieve the doctrines of Christianity. Now, saving belief ?-I am no Doctor. I do of the Doctrines of Christianity the princi- not understand Greek and Latin. But ! pal one is, that Christ is God; that there understand how to count my fingers ; and is God the Father, God the Son, and God it requires little more to enable any one to the Holy Ghost; and that these are not discover, that, if one sect be allowed to three but one.
This, our Church says, préach against one part of the Church faith, we must believe, or we cannot be saved. every other sect ought to be allowed to What, then, having Mr. Eaton's prosecu preach against any part of that faith which tion and punishment in our eyes, are we to they may happen to dislike.--I dare think of a proposition for passing a law to say, that an Unitarian Priest will tell me, permit people openly to preach, that this No. He will, I'll engage for him, say, Doctrine is false ; that this faith, upon that people ought to be permitted to deny which the Church tells us our salvation ab. the Godhead of Christ, but that they solutely depends, has no truth in it; and ought not to be permitted to deny the authat we ought to believe no such thing ? thenticity of any Chapter in Genesis or
These are my reasons against the pro- Numbers. No : such latter denial does posed Act. But, besides these, there are not, probably, suit him.
That might others. If the Unitarians are to have an lead to consequences that he would not like. Act passed to authorize hem to preach If those chapters were set aside, others against the Trinity, why should not the might, and, at last, away might go the Deists have an Act passed to authorize them whole ; there would then be no want of an to preach against Revelation altogether. interpreter, and his priestship would be at If one. Sect is to be indulged in denying an end. No, no : I am for no partial rewhat they do not believe, why not ano: her peals. I am for a general Act, permitting Sect in denying what they do not believe? every man to say or write what he pleases If I am told, that it is right to ease the upon the subject of religion, or, i wish Tender Conscience of the Unitarian, I ask the whole thing to remain what it now is. why the Tender Conscience of the Deist is -* wonder that the Clergy, so active as not to be considered ? I have no objection they are upon other occasions, where the to an Act of Parliament to allow men to interests of the Church are in question, say and to write whatsoever they please should be so silent on this occasion. They upon the subject of religion ; but, if such cry out that the Church is in danger, when an Act is not to be passed, I really can see a few Roman Catholics want only to share no reason for this favour to one particular in the good things under government; but, Sect. If this Sect be indulged in preach- here, where the very bowels of the Church ing against the Trinity, another may ask are aimed at, they say not a word! Is it, for permission to preach against the Resur- because they do not perceive that the Unirection, and so on, till, really, our laws tarians want to get at their temporalities? will have chipped the whole of the Scrip-. I do not know that they do ; ; but, I dare tures away and all the doctrines growing say they would have no objection to come out of them, or ingrafted upon them. An in for a small portion. Act to permit men to say and publish what they please upon the subject of religion MB. CREEVEY.- The case of this genwould be much less hostile to the Church, tleman was argued, last week, in the than would be an Act giving permission as Court of King's Bench, upon a motion of to one particular doctrine ; because in this Mr, Brougham for a new trial, upon the latter, the parliament seem to give up ihat ground of misdirection on the part of Judge doctrine to be demolished ; whereas, if the. Le Blanc, who presided at the trial at permission were general, it would seem to Lancaster.
-I have inserted the proproceed merely from a wish to remove all ceedings below. They are of very great restraint as to men's faith.- - In short, I importance. The Court decided against do not see why this particular sect should him; and, in my opinion, decided very be indulged; and I ain, on that ground as fairly. The only thing that Mr. Cree