_ Amongft thefe was a catechifm cir- 
culated amongift the diffenters, ex- 
_ prefsly adopted by forne and pub- 
ficly condemned by none, which, 
_ inftead of teaching the principles of 
" revealed religion, was full of the 
_ moft audacious libels upon the na- 
~ tional eftablifhments and continued 
 invettives upon kings and bifhops.. 
' Another was a letter written by 
’ Mr. Fletcher, a diffenter, from a 
meeting of diffenting ‘minifters, 
holden at Bolton, in Lancafhire. 
Mr. Fletcher ftated in his letter, 
"that the meeting avowed fuch vio- 
lent principles, that he would not 
| fay, but came away with fome other 
moderate men. It afferted, that 
‘one member, on being afked what 
) Was their object, and whether they 
meant to feek for any thing more 
than the repeal of the teft and cor- 
- poration atts, anfwered, in the lan- 
” guage of our Saviour, « We know 
‘ thofe'things, which ye are not yet 
“fable to bear.” Ard on another 
"“member’s faying, “« Give them a 
) # little light into what we intend,” 
| they informed him, that they did not 
care the nip of a ftraw for the repeal 
of the teft and corporation ats, but 
"that they defigned to try for the abo- 
 lition of the tythes and liturgy. In 
‘addition to thefe documents, he read 
Several well-known extraéts from 
le writings of Doctor Prieftley and 
oftor Price, expreffive of their hot~ 
tility to all eftablifhments, their per- 
 fgafion that thofe of religion were 
fini ul and idolatrous, and their de- 
‘rmination to procecd ftep by ftep 
till they were demolithed. 
_ Mr. Burke concluded his fpeech 
by declaring it to be his opinion, 
DN account of the many alarming 
and fufpicious circumftances, under 
Which the prefent application came 
parliament, that if the teft and 
“Sorporation atts were sepealed, fone 
a 
HISTORY OF EUROPE. 
[77 
other teft ought to be fubftituted, 
He faid he had a draft of another 
teft in his pocket, and he -had form- 
ed an idea of moving the previous 
queition, with a view afterwards to 
move for a committee’ to examine 
into the recent conduct of the dif- 
ferters. He did not wifh the houfe 
to rely on his faéts before he had 
eftablithed them by proof, of which 
he knew them to be capable. If 
however, they fhould, upon invefti- 
gation, not appear to be founded, he 
would hold himfelf bound te vote 
for the repeal of the teft and corpo- 
ration acts. Jf they fhould think 
the beft way of laying the queftion 
at refit, would be by coming to a. 
vote upon the motion, he would fub- 
mit. 
Mr. Fox mad¢ a ‘long reply; in 
which he partic ularly urged the in- 
juftice of deciuing a general quef- 
tion of right upon the condu& of a 
few individuals: after which the 
houfe divided, for the motion 105, 
againit it 294. 
The next queftion of importance 
which engaged the confideration of 
the houfe of commons, was a motion 
made by Mr. Flood, on the 4th of 
March, for leave to bring in a bill 
to amend the reprefentation of the 
people in parliament. 
The grounds upon which Mr. 
Flood proceeded were thefe: That 
as, by the general law of the confti- 
tution, the majority is to decide for 
the whole, the reprefentative muit 
be chofen by a body of conftituents, 
whereof the elective franchife may 
extend to the majority of the peo- 
ple. For, if the conftituent body 
confifted of but one thoufand for 
the whole nation, the reprefentatives 
chofen by that thoufand could net. 
in any rational fenfe, be the actual 
reprefentative of the people —That 
nothing lefs than a contftituent bo- 
va 
