On this page
-
Text (1)
-
8
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Adopting The Same Order In Which Tormer ...
the if _rap _& ty of a _« xragtegati 0 i *; and it _soeaqred also 4 iffie _$ U 4 © refusesuch an application as : wad made to them in a recent case , w _& era _lajia * yas offered by a _benevolent individual t <> a can _^ regation too poor tQ a _& rd tbe _^ means of _secu , ring' the bounty of _thfe _contributor ; but 01 * the other hand _, the _Committee We felt tka _$ there was a great difficulty in drawing a lin _£ , which should prevent the i % _reQnrenieat _, increase of calls _ojitthe » i for assistance _ip this _department , and they doubted whether it was the intention or could be within the means Of this A 8 s © _ciafci ( _fri i to become the general resort o £ _congregatiofiSj who were
unable or indifc _|> _osed to bear the fexpense of takiqg the proper means of securing their _triistjFumls . * > They have _endeavoured to act upon as fair a discretion as they were enabled to exercise , having a regard to the means placed a _| their disposal $ and they have entered thus fully into the _subject _ia order to triford an opportunity
to the general Meeting , if it be so disposed * to _gWe any directions , or to point out any particular principle as a guide to the _discretion of future Coimnittees . The Committee beg * _Igave to add _^ that they have given directions in the _laat case ( which was one in Which they were , called . _upofi to frame ai _* original trust deed of a new endowment ) , that the deed _shQukf he prepared with a view tQ
forming a proper precedent , to be recommended in future cases of a similar nature _* M many of which _> probably * the information imparted by the mere communication of the form whioh this Society recommends for adoption ; will supersede the accessary and consequent ; expense o _£ further inter * _fetence . Considering the original object of this Association , your Committee would not , perhaps , be justified in passing over without some notice the proceedings of the courts oh the subject of offences against religion punishable at common law . It will be recollected that ( though . in the _Wolverhainpton
Case a high authority gave some sort of weight to the doubt , whether the impugrifng of the doctrine of the Trinity might not still Jail within the common law jurisdictiop , as an offence against the Established Religion of the country , so as to render the relief afforded by the act of the 53 d Geo _. III . of little value as confined to the repeal of the _statutory penalties only , ) yet various considerations seemed to _sheW that the duty 01 your Committees _^ and the interests of
the Unitarian _hody , would suggest rather a vigilant attention to the opinions and decision , of the courts on any _question that might oceur , and active assistance to any parties \ vho might be exposed to _difficulties or vexation in the mean while , than any immediate application to the Legislature on the subject . It seemed generally felt that the opinion was one unfounded in reason , principle , or policy i , To have gone to the _legislature we must , to a certaii _^ _exr tent , have admitted our penal liability , and it appeared premature to apply
for relief from an evil against the existence of which we ourselves were contending . It behoves the Committee , however , to watch with care every case in which the same opinion can be expected to come into discussion , and they have hitherto seen an anxiety _expressed by the judges before whom-imputed
offences against religion have been tried * to negative any idea that the eortkmbh law _jurisdiction is levelled against the free discussion of _theological questions , confining it to attacks upon religion iii general , as the basis of moral _obligations * or to injurious and _contumelious slanders , tending to molest and irritate individuals , or 4 t break the _peaee- _"
In the late case , however , of the King , and _Waddjngtpn , * one of ctha _judg _^ has thrown out _observations which certainly place the liberty of discussion , on the part of any branch of Dissenters , on a very slippery foundation : and the Committee will therefore shortly detail the facts , and the opinion of th $ judge alluded to * with _aome _observations on its _statements _* the _inaccuracy of which Will perhaps remove any apprehension as to ithe additional _^ weight
which it might be supposed to add to the doubts before _# a _$ ert , & i _# ed It was asserted by the _defeMattt , on _moviug fox a _»^ w tr _^ al _^ tbat the JU _> r 4 _Chitf _Jdstlce had _chained the jury to _com _^ f h _| m for a libel de _^ yin _^ : _^ _ertviofty of _Jieeos _Glurist , _whereat itot d < dfe & 4 _<* p % _argtood _tiizt , _& im $ *> hei _&** ? _BoriitweOl _aUd _AMcrstm _^ _Hfpon _% _YoLVJU _m-86 . ' : _*
8
8
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), June 4, 1823, page 8, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/smrp_04061823/page/8/
-