1

was again enacted and extended to Scot-
land.

After these two folemn acts of the nation,
it fhould feem, that nothing was left to be
done, in order to give permanency and vigor
to the principles, upon which the revolution
was effected. "It rarely happens to a

party to have the opportunity of a clear, au-
thentic, recorded declaration of their political
tenets upon the fubject of a great confti-
tutional event, like that of the revoluțion.
The whigs had that opportunity, or, to speak
more properly, they made it. The impeach-
ment of Dr. Sacheverel was undertaken by
a whig ministry, and a whig houfe of com-
mons, and carried on before a prevalent
and steady majority of whig peers. It was
carried on for the exprefs purpose of ftating
the true grounds and principles of the revo-
lution, what the commons emphatically called
their foundation. It was carried on for the
purpofe of condemning the principles, on
which the revolution was firft opposed, and
afterwards calumniated, in order, by a ju-
ridical fentence of the highest authority, to
confirm and fix whig principles, as they had
operated both in the refiftance to king James,

Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs, p. 54, 55.
and

N 4

Sachererel's
for the direct
nifefting the
true fpirit of the

trial inftituted

purpofe of ma

revolution.

and in the fubfequent fettlement; and to fix them in the extent, and with the limitations, with which it was meant they should be understood by posterity." Without going into the particulars of the trial of Doctor Sacheverel, we shall find fufficient in the preamble to the articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the commons, to enable us to form a complete judgment upon the general intent and defign of bringing on this trial. Such confidence and fuch glory did our ancestors place in these principles, that inftead of drawing a veil over them, they feemed to have adopted, by bringing on this trial, the most effectual method poffible of fubmitting them to the feverest ordeal of minute and public investigation.

After reciting that the revolution had actually taken place, to the great happiness of the realm, and that the faid glorious enterprize had fince been approved by several acts of parliament, the preamble fets forth

*

more

* Viz. by an act made in the first year of the reign of king William and queen Mary, intituled, An at declaring the rights and liberties of the subject, and settling the fucceffion of the crown; and also by one other act made in the fame year, intituled, An act for preventing vexatious fuits against fuch as acted, in order to the bringing in their majefties, or for their fervice; and alfo by one other

act

more particularly the happy and bleffed confequences of the revolution; and that, notwithstanding, Dr. Sacheverel had, in two sermons, which he preached and published, attempted, by a "wicked, malicious, and feditious intention, to undermine and fubvert her majesty's government, and the protestant fucceffion, as by law established, to defame her majesty's administration, to asperse the memory of his late majefty, to traduce and condemn the late happy revolution, to contradict and arraign the refolutions of both houses of parliament, to create jealoufies and divifions amongst her majefty's fubjects, and to incite them to fedition and rebellion." The folemn judgment of the house of peers against Dr. Sacheverel muft, in my opinion, make it abfolutely unlawful for any British fubject, in future, openly to deny or difapprove of the revolution principles, or publicly to maintain thofe, which are commonly

called the tory principles.

In the line of morality or policy, no action can be justified that is not reducible to fome

act made in the fame year, intituled, An act for appropriating certain duties for paying the fates general of the united provinces their charges for his majesty's expedition into this kingdom, and for other uses; and the actings of the faid well-affected subjects in aid and pursuance of the faid

enterprize.

true

The judgment cheverel makes

against Dr. Sa

it unlawful to

maintain pubciples.

licly tory prin

The right and obligation of individuals, and of the commu

nity, to adopt what they think the true religion.

true principle; I have, therefore, endeavoured to fhew, upon what principles the revolution was effected, and upon what principles its confequences are ftill cherished and maintained. But as in all political difquifitions, this memorable event is conftantly reforted to by all parties, even for the most oppofite purposes, I fhall attempt to delineate its naked portrait, without the incumbrance or disguise of the flighteft drapery. The nearer we approach to truth, the more our ideas become fimplified. Although it be true, that the aft of the majority of a community muft ever conclude and bind the whole; yet it is not to be fuppofed, that even the unexceptionable and univerfal affent or act of any fociety of human beings, is neceffarily free from the effects of thofe paffions, to fome of which each one of the community is liable. When I fpeak of the binding effect or coercive obligation of thefe acts, I fpeak only of fuch moral or indifferent acts, as each individual would, independently of the community, be at liberty to perform.

Wherever the end is lawful, the neceffary means to attain that end are alfo lawful, As each individual has not only the tranfcendent and indefeafible right, but also the ftriaeft moral obligation of adopting that

form

upon

form of religious worship, which he thinks
most agreeable to his creator, fo have the
community collectively, both the fame right
and the fame obligation; and whenever the
majority of the community fhall have fo con-
curred in the adoption of a religion, the
maintenance and preservation of it stand
the fame principles of right and obligation.
At the time of the revolution, the majority
of the community did, as at this day they do,
hold the free enjoyment of the protestant
religion, as their first and most important
liberty: they knew themselves to be under
a Roman catholic fovereign; and their rooted
dislike to that religion made them look upon
every imprudent exertion, as well as illegal
stretch of the prerogative, as a direct

attempt

to introduce and establish what they called popery, upon the destruction and ruin of the proteftant religion. Whether this judgment of our ancestors were true or juftifiable, it matters little for me to examine; it certainly was the judginent of the majority, and, therefore, if any individuals did not chuse to submit to its effects, they had the liberty to quit the fociety, but not to refift or oppose the act of the majority.

Black. Com. b. i. c. 3.

The idea,”

fays