HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
If the principle that had been laid 
down by Mr. Fox was admitted, that 
_ aétions were the only teft. that ought 
to be reforted to in cafes like the 
prefent, there would be an end of 
_what had always been efteemed one 
of the tefts of political wifdom, the 
policy of prevention. He confidered 
the church of England, as by law 
eftablithed, to be fo effential a part 
of the conftitution, that whatever 
endangered it, would neceflarily 
affect the fecurity of the whole ; 
and therefore that it ought to be 
guarded with the moft watchful jea- 
loufy. It was for this reafon, he 
conceived, that the legiflature had 
thought fit even to abridge one of 
the undoubted prerogatives of the 
_ crown, by preventing the fovereign 
_ from employing perfons in offices of 
' trait, who could not give a certain 
pledge of their attachment to the 
_ eftablifhed government in church 
and ftate. And he reminded the 
houfe, that our conftitution owed its 
prefent exiftence to the fanction of 
thofe laws; that had they not ex- 
ifted, the family of Stuart might 
have been at that time in poffeflion 
_ of the throne, and that houfe de- 
ai of the privilege even of de- 
iberating upon the queftion then 
before them. 
The conftitution, he faid, by 
' invefting the executive power with 
the fole appointment to offices of 
troft, and making it ultimately re- 
fponfible for their execution, mutt 
_ be fuppofed to have joined to it the 
_ power of judging of the fitnefs or 
“unfitnefs of individuals to occupy 
thofe ftations. In the exercife of 
this diferetionary authority, the ex- 
ecutive power might poflibly be in- 
uced, by peculiar circumftances, to 
_ exclude fome certain defcriptions of 
“people ; and furely what the exe- 
cutive government might adopt as 
[75 
a meafure of neceflary policy, the 
fupreme legiflative power might 
enact upon the fame. grounds of ex- 
pediency. ‘The claim as of right to 
civil offices, appeared to him per- 
fe&tly abfurd and ridiculous, unlefs 
it were agreed, that the offices in 
queftion were created for the ad- 
vantage of thofe who occupied them, 
and not as trufts for the benefit of 
the public, and that they ought to 
be diftributed upon the principle of 
public lottery, in which every man 
ought to have an equal chance for 
a prize. ; 
Having argued the queftion of 
right, Mr. Pitt proceeded to confi- 
fider that of expediency. And here 
he gave it as his decided opinion, 
that the aéts in queftion were ne- 
ceflary to the fecurity of the efta- 
blifhed church. He could not, he 
faid, avoid remarking a little on 
the conduét of the diffenters, who, 
at the moment they were reprobat- 
ing a teit, had pretty publicly indi- , 
cated an intention of forming affo- 
ciations throughout the whole coun- 
try, for the purpofe of putting the 
members of that houfe to a telt, and 
.of refolving to judge of their fit- 
nefs to fill their feats by their votes 
on this fingle queftion. They had 
explained themielves fince indeed, 
and declared, that they never meant 
to put a teft to any one; in the ex- 
planation, however, it appeared that 
they had retained the fubffance, 
though they had done away the 
word: for in the refolutions of 
their meeting, figned by Mr. Jeffe- 
ries, it was declared, that they meant 
to give their fupport to fuch mem- 
bers as proved themfelves to be 
friends to religious and civil liberty, 
the true meaning of which general 
terms muft ftrike every man. It 
was evident, that the diffenters 
would not confider any one a friend 
te 
