The Report of the Committee appointed to conduct the Application to Parliament, for the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts 1787-88

fols. 2-4. Printed copy of “The Report of the Committee appointed to conduct the Application to Parliament, for the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts,” submitted by Edward Jeffries at St. Thomas’s Hospital, Southwark, summarizing the activities of the Dissenters in 1787-88. 

Situated with this document is a printed letter addressed to the “Printer of the Manchester Chronicle,” signed “A Dissenter” (written by Edward Jeffries; at the top of the page is signed “Revd Mr Wood” in Wood’s hand).  The printed letter is undated, but with the letter are printed copies of the publications mentioned in “The Report”:  The Case of the Protestant Dissenters; the 16 April declarations of the London Committee, with the list of supporters in the House; and a printed transcript of the proceedings in the House of Commons from March 1788, when the first motion for repeal failed.

Edward Jeffries was chair at a meeting of the Deputies of the three Denominations of the Protestant Dissenters in or near London, at Dr. Williams’s Library, 4 May 1787.  He mentions that a group representing the Dissenters had met with William Pitt, First Lord of the Treasury, on 19 January 1787, and the members of that group were Jeffries, Mr. Towgood, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Fuller, Mr. Bogle French, Mr. Raymond, Mr. T. Boddington, and Mr. Yerbury.  “These Gentlemen were received by him [Pitt] in a very polite Manner, and he promised that he would take the Subject into serious Consideration, but he declared at the same Time that he could not give an immediate Opinion on an Affair of such Magnitude” (2).    The Committee then proceeded to bring in many more individuals to participate in this petition.  A pamphlet was composed entitled State of the Case of the Protestant Dissenters, in Reference to the Test and Corporation Acts, and copies were distributed in London and various parts of the country.  At a meeting of 2 February, the Committee decided to place a motion before the House, and that it should be presented by Henry Beaufoy:

“The Committee, having been informed of a Report that they had other Objects in View than those described in their printed Case, in which they only ask for a Restitution of their Civil Rights, and that they were secretly preparing for an Attack on the Privileges and Revenues of the established Church, resolved unanimously, that they neither have, nor ever had, any such Design, and that the Report is entirely without Foundation.  This Resolution was ordered to be printed and sent to the Members of Parliament.”

Bishop Sherlock’s pamphlet, Arguments against the Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, had just been republished, and the Committee, in rebuttal, had republished Bishop Hoadly’s Treatise in Favor of a Repeal. 

The motion was made by Beaufoy on 28 March 1787; he was seconded by Sir Henry Houghton, and further speeches in support were given by Lord Beauchamp, Mr. Fox, and Mr. William Smith.  After over seven hours of debate, the motion to consider repeal of the two Acts failed 178 to 100. A list of those who voted in its favor is provided (f. 3).  The writer then states,

“We are far from being discouraged by the Failure of this application, which has been principally owing to Causes that may probably not concur at a future Period.  There is Reason to believe, that many Gentlemen, who did not now divide with us, will see the Matter in a more favourable Light hereafter; our Cause requires only to be maturely considered and thoroughly understood to be finally successful.  A Claim, which stands upon such high Grounds of natural Right and political Wisdom, cannot fail, in the End, to dispel every Degree of Apprehension and Jealousy, and to triumph over all Opposition.  Conscious that the Protestant Dissenters have ever been ardent Friends to the legal Constitution and Government of this Country, zealous Adherents to the House of Hanover, and faithful Subjects to his present Majesty; conscious, at the same Time, that they solicit Nothing but what is just and reasonable to be asked, and what it would be safe and honourable for the Legislature to grant; the Committee unanimously and zealously recommend, that this great Object be pursued with a prudent but steady Assiduity, with a decent but manly Firmness and Fortitude, till the Redress sought for shall be obtained.” (f.2).

The Committee thus resolved to renew the application to Parliament again, either in 1788 or 1789 “at farthest” (f.4), and that the Committee “take all such Measures, as may appear to them best, for carrying the preceding Resolution into Execution” (f.4).   It had been noted during the debate in Parliament that the Dissenters were not united on this proposal, so the Committee now desired “the Concurrence of the several Congregations of our Brethren in every Part of England and Wales” and that that agreement be “expressly declared” (f.4).  The Committee was convinced that on this issue it was paramount that, despite their religious differences, the Dissenters needed “one and the same Wish” (f.4).   As the report makes clear, these men believed they were being “unjustly deprived of civil Privileges, and are equally sensible that what we claim is not a Favour but a Right” (f.4).  

The session for 1789 was chosen at a meeting of the Committee in London, 16 April 1788, as the time for the next appeal (f.4).