INTRODUCTION.

DISSENT IN THE REIGN OF WILLIAM III.

THE booming of the cannon on the beach of Torbay, November 5, 1688, was a joyous signal for the Protestant Dissenters of England. The Prince of Orange landed as the deliverer of the oppressed, the champion of civil and religious liberty. "Since the English nation had ever testified a particular affection to his consort and himself, he could not but espouse their interests, and contribute all that in him lay for maintaining both the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of these kingdoms." So ran the manifesto of William; and many a group of anxious citizens might be seen reading the document, as it was fastened, still wet, to the column of some old market-cross; and there were eager eyes at the same time tracing its lines as it was brought into the dwelling of

B

some nonconforming burgess. The declaration was not very strong, and only by implication gave hope to the Protestant sufferers for conscience' sake. But it was doubtless interpreted with the full knowledge that the Prince of Orange considered conscience to be God's province, and had found by experience in Holland that toleration was one of the wisest measures of human government.* Welcome indeed was the hope of religious quietude after such times as the Dissenters had seen. The worst and most infamous of mankind had been hired to accuse them the commission of perjury, convictions without juries, and the summary punishment of the accused, had been common things. Goods rifled, estates seized, property embezzled, houses broken open, and families disturbed, often at midnight, in the absence of any cause or shadow of cause, if only a malicious villain happened to suspect a meeting there are the atrocities enumerated by the calm and candid Howe, just as the storm of intolerance was passing away.t

• Burnet's History of his Own Times.

+ John Howe's "Case of Protestant Dissenters Represented and Argued."-Life by Rogers, p. 356.

William was in religion of a catholic spirit; his ecclesiastical policy was large and liberal. He came to England with the purpose of establishing toleration, and with the hope of accomplishing more even than that. He was anx

ious that Dissenters should be admitted to offices of trust and power, thinking, with the illustrious divine just named, that for the State to deprive itself of the services of such men, "for anything less considerable than those qualifications are by which they are useful, was like a man tearing off from himself the limbs of his body for a spot on his skin." And further, he was decidedly favourable to such a modification of the Established Church as would have allowed a number of the Presbyterian body to enter within its pale. But he was completely thwarted in these latter views: the High Church party would not consent to their emoluments being now shared by the men to whom they had successfully looked for sympathy and aid when Popery, rampant under James, had threatened the ruin of the entire Protestant cause.* As to the Dissenters them

* Seven attempts were made to alter what is imposed by the Church of England, so as to remove the scruples of Dissenters.

selves, they would in general have been glad of the removal of such tests as excluded them from office, but great numbers of them were by no means favourable to a comprehension. Policy on the part of some of the Presbyterians induced them to oppose the measure; principle on the part of all the Independents must have prevented them from sharing in its advantages. The wall of partition between the endowed Episcopalian and other sects stood as strong and lofty as before; and the gateway to the honours and rewards of the State continued to be formidably flanked by the Test and Corporation Acts.

Before any one could become a civic magistrate, he was required to receive the Lord's Supper in the Church of England. Some Dissenters did not object to occasional communion in the Establishment, among whom were two

"The first was the Hampton Court Conference, in the reign of James I. Bishop Usher's scheme for the reduction of epis copacy, was a second measure of the kind in the time of Charles I. After the restoration of Charles II., proposals for a comprehension were four times brought forward. This, under William III., was the seventh. Ever since, the affair has laid dormant."-Toulmin. Historical View, p. 66.-It should be added, however, that the thing was much talked about in 1748. Dr. Chandler had an interview with the Bishop of Norwich on the subject.-Doddridge's Correspondence, vol. v. p. 41.

celebrated aldermen of London, Sir H. Edwin and Sir Thomas Abney. The latter had frequently communed in the parish church, when, in 1700, he was elected to serve the office of Lord Mayor. Feeling no scruple about joining in the episcopal service under common circumstances, he came to feel no scruple about that act as a qualification for office-a view of the matter which, however conscientious it might be, was certainly of a nature to awaken suspicion in the minds of those who were not much imbued with the love that thinketh no evil. Some Dissenters, especially Defoe, condemned the practice with extreme severity. A controversy on the subject arose, in which Mr. Howe was involved. After the accession of Queen Anne, a very different kind of opposition was made to the practice by the High Church party, who sought, by what was termed the occasional conformity bill, to exclude from office such men as Sir T. Abney.*

Freedom of worship, however, was ceded to all except the Papists, and those who denied

Sir H. Edwin, however, not only continued to attend, during his mayoralty, his own place of worship, but ventured to take the City regalia with him.