On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
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.
Untitled Article
be no longer tolerated ; though if they toeant to preach Unitarian ism , they must have known that their object was at that moment not tolerated . Mr . Shad we 11 protested against its being supposed , that he intended , or wished to prevent persons from 1
thinkingas they pleased on these subjects , but contended that preaching and propagating . such opinions was attacking the very vitals of Christianity , was contrary to the law , which had by the recitals of its acts pronounced it blasphemous and wicked , and ought not to be countenanced by the Court .
He then commented on the other points of the case . Mr . Ching followed in the same line of argument , and suggested that it ought to be the policy of the Court to render the minister independent of his congregation . Mr . Solicitor General appeared for the defendants , and said he should not enter
into the doctrinal questions that had been raised , conceiving the case lay in a very narrow compass , whether the majority of the trustees should have the management of the trust ; and whether a trustee who had never acted for thirty years , and who had left the place , ought not to be considered as deserting the trust .
The question as to the change of sentiments of the minister did not at all arise 5 the defendants stated , that they themselves were of various opinions on some religious subjects ; all they insisted for was the liberty of choice , having chosen the present
minister for three years , and being now desirous of another election . If , as Mr . Maunder alleges , this trust is misapplied , why had he quietly laid by more than thirty years , knowing that the congregation were as they have always been Unitarian ; and why did he now , in 1817 , come forward to complain of those doctrines being taught ? He contended that the doctrines had
nothing to do with the question , and that the defendants were entitled , under the trust deed , to the management of the charity . Mr . JBenyon also argued in the same way . He could not see that this doctrinal point had any thing t& do with the question , and was therefore totally unprepared
to argue it ; but as Mr . Shadwell had made so extraordinary a speech on the subject , he could not sit down without protesting agpainst it . If the Dissenters of this country were really in the situation he described , they had gained very little . He was exceedingly sorry to hear such a speech , and trusted that Mr . Shadwell would before the
cane closed , retract what he stated , for nothing could be more mischievous or more void of foundation in law . He had attempted to prove that impugning the doctrine of the Trinity was an offence at common Jaw—» and how ? fijr two cases which settled that Christianity was part of the
Untitled Article
law of the land , and as such , the impugners of it were indicta * b ) e 5 and who doubted this ? Nobody contested that point ; but was this proving his case ? To do this , he had supposed in the absence of any kind of legai
decision on the subject , that this Christianity meant the doctrine of the Trinity , and had given them a learned account of the councils of Nice , Trent , &c . to shew what nobody doubted—tbut these councils and the Church of Rome had been believers in
the doctrine of the Trinity . He had then shewn that this was not one of the points on which the Protestant Church of England differed from the Roman Catholic , and from all this it followed that the doctrine of the Trinity was the Christianity which formed part of the law of England . If all this is so , it extendsto every article of the Church
of England , and every one who impugns any one of those articles , is liable to indictment and punishment . And this is the state in which all Dissenters , but particularly Unitarian Dissenters are , to stand . We have been used to bless ourselves for being
born in a happy country , a country of free inquiry and toleration ; but if this is the law , we have been very much deceived in our estimation . He considered the question as irrelevant , but he could not let such a mischievous statement of the law
pass without raising up his voice to deny it . He had always understood , and still did believe , that the law did not take cognizance of particular opinions , except such a& impugned the divine authority of religion and the Holy Scriptures ; and the cases which Mr . Shadwell had cited , would be found carefully to guard against the lavr being extended any further .
Mr . Phillimore followed on the same side , arguing that it was perfectly competent for the trustees to choose the minister for a term of years . That in this case they had done so , and that Mr . Steward had accepted the situation , which he now
refused to give up on those terms . That the congregation were all unanimous on the subject , and had actually chosen another minister in Mr . Stewards place , and that he and Mr . Maunder ought not to be permitted to prevent the general wish of the ^ whole congregation .
Sir Samuel Romilly in reply , observed , that the question was , what was proper to * be done by the Court ; it being quite clear that something- must be done to put an end to the present discordant state of this congregation , and whether defendants were to be suffered to get possession of four-fifths of this endowment , for it was admitted on all hands that the whole could not be
recovered . He contended that the injunction , must , if granted , extend not only to stay execution bat also trial , for all they could recover was four-fifths , and what good would that do ? Mr . Maunder would still
Untitled Article
4 S 4 Intelligence . — -Proceedings in Chancery regarding Unitarians .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1817, page 434, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2466/page/58/
-