COOTE’S HISTORY 
dissenters, however, were too obstrepe- 
rous.; and, having become ashamed of 
their ewn urgency, they sought to en- 
graft questions more momentous on their 
original object. ‘They boldly promul- 
gated, but in a form less philosophical, 
oh principles respecting the establish- 
ment of religion, which Adam Smith 
has defended in the third-article of the 
first chapter of the fifth book of his 
Wealth of Nations. Lord Bacon de- 
clares himself an episcopalian, Hume a 
presbyterian ; but Adam Smith an inde- 
pendeat, in his idea of church-govern- 
ment. At the symptoms of a league 
between philosophy and fanaticism, an 
established clergy may be allowed to 
tremble: a cry of the church is in dan- 
ger, corroborated the decision of Mr. 
Pitt, and rendered the repetition of his 
refusal less obnoxious than its original 
publication. The refusal produced, 
however, a bad etfect. The dissenters 
were irritated by it in a degree propor- 
tioned not to the magnitude of their ob- 
ject, but to the zealotry of their pur- 
suit; and this irritation had not subsid- 
ed, when the French revolution began 
to occasion the profuse circulation of 
enquiries into the principles of govern- 
ments, and of disquisitions on the rights 
of men. By every publication which 
tended to attack the theory of the Bri- 
tish constitution, and to sap the alle- 
giance of English subjects, the dissen- 
ters, by a natural and necessary conse- 
quence of the displeasure excited in 
them, were more powerfully acted upon 
than their fellow-citizens. Hence they 
celebrated, with a forwarder zeal than 
others, the anniversaries of French libe- 
ration ; and patronized, with distinguish- 
able liberaiizy, the foundation of popu- 
lar pamphlet-clubs. In short, what was 
called the jacobinism of Great-Britain, 
that is, the confederacies of undervaluers 
of church and king, for nobility has no 
enemies in this nation, in a great de- 
gree sprang out of Mr. Pitt’s discoun- 
tenance of the dissenters. It is true 
they cooled, as the multitude heated ; 
and the dissenting teachers gradually 
abandoned the propagation of opinions 
to the gallicizing philosophers: but 
among them had originated a com- 
plexion of sentiment not easily distin- 
guished from republican. Nor was this 
eifect confined to Great-Britain. The 
books concerning toleration, to which 
the controversy about the test-act gave 
rise, began indeed with exclusive claims 
wtake 
OF ENGLAND. 2338 
of unmerited preference, but gradually 
attained a juster temper, and contended 
for the political equality of all religious 
sects. The catholics became interested 
in the controversy, and applied to the 
parliament of Ireland, for a restoration 
of their civil rights. The same con- 
scientious cowardice repeated the same 
unfortunate refusal, and excited in Ire- 
land an analogous, but a more vehe- 
ment discontent. The horrors of the 
catholic persecution which ensued, have 
sullied the national annals, and have 
endangered the historical comparison 
of a protestant sovereign with Philip 
IJ. and of his minister with the duke 
of Alva. May their penitence wipe 
away the remembrance, though it can- 
not the mischief of their intolerance. 
In 1788, a bill called declarative was 
brought in to strengthen the power of 
the board of controul, at the expence 
of the directory in Leadenhall-street. 
By this time the tendency of Mr. Pitt’s 
bill to separate the company and the 
board into hostile authorities, would 
have become very apparent, but for the 
impeachment of Mr. Hastings, which 
furnished them with objects we co-opera~ 
tion, and kept alive their common jea- 
lousy of the framers of the rejected 
India bill. 
About the close of the same year, the 
illness of the king rendered a regency- 
bill necessary. Mr. Pitt claimed, on be- 
half of the lords and commons, a right 
to appoint, with arbitrary limitations, 
the new executive power. How uncon- 
stitutional this doctrine was, soon became 
visible ; for the two houses in Ireland 
appointed an unrestricted regent, and 
the two houses in England a limited 
council of regency ; so that, if the king’s 
disorder had continued, the two coun- 
tries would have been virtually separat- 
ed by law. This doctrine of Mr. Pitt’s 
was consistently welcomed by the re- 
publicans of England. Now that the 
two kingdoms are united, its dangerous 
tendency, as far as respects separation, 
has ceased: its republican tendency 
alone remains. : 
In 1789, Mr. Pitt applauded, with 
inactive philanthropy, the benevolent 
proposal of Mr. Wilberforce to abolish 
the slave-trade: an adjournment was 
voted to the year 1796; but the house 
was dishonourably suffered to forfeit 
its pledge. 
In 1790, an armament took place: 
against the Spaniards, respecting Noot- 
