I791«. ON THE TEST ACT. 5^ 



I'd the Editor of the Bee. 



On the Tejl A^. 



Sir, 

 From your lad number, I was happy to fee, that a- 

 midlt your agricultmal and chemical difquifitions, you 

 or your correfpondents are not quite inattentive to the 

 (in my opinion) very important application regarding 

 the Tefl. The General AiTcmbly have thought proper 

 10 apply for a repeal of the acl, fo far as refpecls 

 PrelLyterians. But is this fliaping the application pro- 

 perly ? Inftead of a repeal, fliOuki they not have ap- 

 plied for an explanation of it? Does it, on a legitimate 

 conftriiftion, really extend to Scotch Prefbyterians ? 

 Nay, is there not reafon to doubt, whether, at the 

 union, it was underftood, or meant to do fo ? 

 . If it extends to us, it muft do fo in one of three 

 ways, either, \jt. At common law, unlefs we can ihel- 

 ter ourfelves under any fpecial exception in the articles 

 of union ; or idly, Becaofe its extenfion to us is ex- 

 prefsly provided for in the articles of union ; or, Tjdlyt 

 implied in them. 



I. Suppofing then the articles totally filent on the 

 fubject, and viewing it on the principles of legal inter- 

 pretation, does it extend to Prefbyterian communi- 

 cants ? 



We mufl begin by diftinguifhing certain offices, as 

 thofe in the Common Pleas, King's Bench, Magiftra- 

 cies of burghs, &.c. &:c. all properly Engli/h ,• as are 

 others, again, properly Scotch. A Scotchman, therefore, 

 who offers bimfelf for any of the former defcription, 

 cannot reafonably complain of being fubjefted to the 

 teft. But with refpeft to offices in the army, navy, 

 Wvenue, offices neither Englifh. nor Scotch, but Britilh- 



