fol. 37. Another version of the resolutions from the 14 October meeting at Birmingham, along with a report of their meeting on 26 December 1789, and a copy of the letter sent by the Nottingham committee to the committee at Leicester on 9 December 1789 by George Walker.

[William Russell writes in a circular letter from the Birmingham Hotel, 15 October 1789, to the various county committees about the current committee of the Central, or Midland, District comprising the counties of Derby, Salop, Stafford, Worcester, Warwick, Northampton, Leicester, Rutland, Lincoln and Nottingham, which he agrees is considerably larger than most of the other committees.  He wishes to know if the others approve of that committee as it is, or desire that they break into smaller groups.  He would prefer it remain as it is.  He desires that they get back to him soon on this, for “it is uncertain how soon Parliament may be called together, and there is much previous business to be done (exclusive of the general meeting) for each District, after they are respectively formed.” The whole plan is very democratic, with each congregation electing delegates, who meet in a larger body, so that all are represented.  Some small congregations may band together and agree to send one delegate to represent them all, and he has no problem with that; “but it is earnestly wished that each congregation would at least send one Deputy, by whom they will be considered as fully and justly represented (and will be admitted to the same vote) as the different congregations in Birmingham, who have each of them sent seven” [so the Birmingham group is well represented].

A Committee of Correspondence for the Midlands Committee reported at the meeting in Birmingham on 26 December 1789, that the proposed Plan of Union should be activated immediately.  “It is with real pleasure, Gentlemen, that your Committee proceed to report, that your next proposition for forming an union of the Dissenters throughout the whole kingdom, by a regular gradation from your present congregational character of deputies, to a district or provincial meeting, for the purpose of nominating delegates to form a national meeting in the metropolis, and to be summoned together as future circumstances shall direct, proves so extensively acceptable to the dissenters in the country – that your Committee cannot but regret that it had not an earlier circulation among Dissenters in general, who in many instances had concerted such measures as the present application to parliament seemed to invite, previous to the publication of this your proposal for establishing a permanent plan or regular and effective union through the whole body of Dissenters.” They go on to say that, “should the present application to parliament by any means whatever be defeated, that defeat would probably present an aera so congenial to your wishes for establishing your primary objects, that they cannot but wish you to keep in contemplation the measures necessary to that end; in order that you may be prepared to renew your active endeavours for promoting and establishing this general, regular and permanent union of the whole body of Dissenters through the kingdom; an event of such magnitude and importance in their estimation, as to be even more desirable than the repeal of the test laws themselves.” The committee notes that communications with the London Committee about the Plan of Union have already met with approval and they have announced that they will cooperate with such a plan, and thus, the committee adds, “a foundation is already laid for that permanent union you are so anxiously and so wisely endeavouring to establish, and in which you will assuredly find yourselves attended with the good wishes of every consistent Dissenter, when he is fully informed of the solid advantages which the whole body may promise itself from a well-digested union formed upon just principles, and settled upon a wise and permanent basis.”

What follows next is a description of the proposed Plan in five parts:

I.  “The union originates in congregational meetings, which invite and are accessible to every member of the individual congregations.  II.  The plan contemplates the union, or association, of a number of congregations in a town or coounty, which shall be formed and carried on by a meeting of deputies (chiefly of the laity) from each of the congregations within the town or county.  These meetings may with propriety be denominated Town, or County, Meetings.  III.  Out of these county meetings the plan proposes to form a larger association by deputies from such a number of town or county meetings, as from their situation or other circumstances can conveniently be united.  These may be called Provincial Meetings.  IV.  The plan contemplates and recommends the last and highest association, by deputies from each provincial meeting, or, where no provincial meetings are established, froom the town and county meetings, and that the meetings of these deputies be held in London, in which a true representation of the whole body of Dissenters will be found.  These will be denominated National Meetings.  V.  The plan has in view no other than the religious interests of the body, which are common to all Dissenters of every name and faith, whose interests which are not committed to the civil magistrate, which are deposited with themselves, which interfere with no civil duty, and which they mean to preserve unmixed with every civil concern, both as a right inherent in themselves, and as a duty which they owe to the civil government of their country.   

        This is the outline of the plan, in which it is proper to observe, that the spirit of it consists in providing against promiscuous and tumultuous meetings, accessible to every individual, except in the first instance.  But as no inconvenience can arise from the access of all persons to congregational meetings, so these congregational meetings are absolutely necessary; as from them the whole does and ought to originate, and in them every individual freely commits himself to the delegates which issue from them. 

        Wherever therefore, and for whatever reasons, provincial meetings are omitted, though they are exceedingly desirable where they can be established; yet as the acting by delegates is still provided for, and from town or county meetings delegates may equally be commissioned to the national meeting, the spirit and essence of the plan will be sufficiently preserved.”

Russell says the congregations in Birmingham have each sent seven delegates to the meeting.  He also writes that the Birmingham committee’s idea of  “dividing the kingdom into Districts, and for forming a regular, firm, and permanent union of the Dissenters throughout the kingdom, proceeding by a connected gradation from Congregational Assemblies, to Provincial Meetings, and from them to a National Meeting in the metropolis or other convenient place; to be summoned only when the interest of the general body shall require” should be adopted by all the committees.  Attached to these resolutions is a printed description in detail of the Birmingham Committee’s proposed “Plan of Union.” Committees would begin in “Town or County Meetings,” then delegates would be sent to a larger “provincial meeting,” and then delegates from that group be sent to a “national meeting,” preferably in London. 

In an attached printed letter sent to the Leicester meeting, dated 8 December 1789, George Walker of Nottingham explains the benefits of this proposal.  A major one is that “by this means the Dissenters will be sure to appear in all their proceedings with a good sense, a collected and guarded wisdom, as well as a dignity which can never be expected from individual and independent movements.” This kind of unity and meetings of this nature will present the Dissenters “in a respectable view to the legislature, and to the whole community.”  He believes that had the Dissenters “been earlier united, and been earlier employed and stimulated in the cause of our just rights, we had obtained the redress of our grievances ere this period.” He concludes, “No reason can be well suggested why this mode should not be adopted.  It presents nothing, it meditates nothing which ought to give alarm.  It has nothing tumultuous and factious in its contemplation, but rather is happily designed and calculated to prevent all rude, undisciplined, and violent proceedings. We aim at nothing therein which is hostile; we aim only to collect, in the most decent and dignified form, the sense of the whole body of Dissenters, and to present this sense in this decent and dignified form to the legislature of our country.”

The date that was proposed for the first District meeting of the Midlands Committee was 13 January, 1790.