I HAVE observed it to be the Track of many a little Scribbler, who steps into a News-Paper, to usher in his Production with a pompous Account of what he is. In your Hand-Bill of the 28th of last September, communicated to us with the Pennsylvania Chronicle, you have avoided this Fault, and informed us what you are not; you would be original in this as well as your other Plans —You say, You have not the Honour of a Seat in the Lower House of Assembly. You might have spared yourself this Trouble, no one could have suspected it; there cannot be a Set of Freeholders upon Earth so ignorant as to choose a Man for their Representative, who is capable of disclosing such weak Sentiments to the Publick, and insulting the representative Body of a Province, by giving Advice unworthy the lowest Circle of a Tippling-House.

Your chief Complaint lies, That the Clergy ride you like Asses; I will venture to say, that the Parson who rides you has a very dull Beast under him. You may think per­haps that I am angry with you; far otherwise. I was never better pleased. I am pleased with you for writing against the Clergy, because you have done it so weakly, that you have advanced their Interests rather than impaired them, have proved their Advocate rather than their Opponent, and by a feeble and impotent Attack have confirmed the Establishment you endeavoured to overthrow.

To give Advice even to a Friend is a delicate Matter; it implies a Kind of Supe­riority which Men unwillingly acknowledge. It is a good Maxim never to give Ad­vice until it is asked; had you stayed until you had been asked, you would have been silent for ever.—But when an Individual presumes to instruct the Representatives of a Country, the greatest Caution is necessary not to give Offence: But this seems below your Concern; you not only inform the Assembly what their Duty is, but you plainly tell them they have neglected their Duty, and insult the Body from whom you expect Redress. You talk of Grievances and Burdens, but One in particular which THEY have had in their Power to have relieved you of ever since the first Rise of it, and that is, in Regard of the Clergy, who now ride you like Asses, and think it out of your Power to relieve yourselves. How far the Assembly could effect your Relief of themselves, the [Page 4] Nature of the Constitution must determine; but had the Burden been so pressing, I dare say they would have used their best Endeavours to have prevented your being rode to Death.

You proceed to tell us, That at the Time of the first settling of the Province, ‘there was an absolute Necessity to encourage the Clergy to settle amongst us in a WILDERNESS COUNTRY; but why so much larger Encouragement was given to them than our neighbouring Provinces gave you cannot conceive.’—The Necessity to encourage the Clergy to con­tinue amongst us is as absolute and evident as it was first to settle them in this Wilderness Country.—As the Establishment of a national Religion, ought to be One of the first and principal Acts of Civilization, so it ought to be the last Act that ceases, and only to expire with the Constitution. Men are prone to slide back into a Savage State when left without Instruction, and the Precepts of Religion are as ne­cessary to our Children now, as they were formerly to our Fathers.

[Before I proceed further with our Planter's Remarks, I shall beg Leave to lay before the Publick, a brief Account of the Origin of that Establishment the Church at present enjoys, extracted from authentic Papers.

The Charter of the Province recites Two Reasons which induced the then Lord Baltimore to ask, and the Crown to grant it: The First was for the Propagation of the Christian Religion in a Country partly occupied by Savages, who had no Knowledge of the divine Being; and the Second was for the extending of the British Dominions.

As to the First declared Intent of the Crown in the Charter, the Propagation of the Christian Faith, it happened that for above Sixty Years after the Grant, no Attempt was made for establishing a Protestant Church or Clergy in this Province, but, the Government of Maryland devolving at the Revolution into the Hands of his late Majesty King William, then it was that under Governors appointed by his Majesty, some Acts of Assembly were proposed, and indeed passed here, for settling the religious Worship of the Church of England amongst his Majesty's Protestant Subjects in this Colony.

But as the Province abounded with Papists, Quakers, and other Dissenters, who had then a great Influence in our Assemblies, none of those Acts which they prepared and passed among themselves were made effectual, but they were all from Time to Time repealed in England, on Account of several Defects therein.

The Acts prepared and passed in Maryland for establishing Religion, just now mentioned, were repealed and declared void by Order of his Majesty's Council of the [...] January 1695, and the 30th November 1699.

The next Act for the Establishment of Religion which was prepared in Maryland, was passed the 26th of April 1700, and that being transmitted to the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations, their Lordships, with the Assistance of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Bishop of London, and also of the principal Officers of the Crown named in their Commission, took that Act into Consideration, and judged it liable to many material Objections, and accordingly represented the same to his late Majesty King William in Council.

His Majesty had so much at Heart the Establishment of religious Worship here according to the Church of England, and the Maintenance of Ministers, that there­upon, [Page 5] by Order in Council of the 13th of February, 1701, he declared his Dislike of that Act, and directed the Lords Commissioners for Trade and Plantations to prepare a new Draught of an Act for that Purpose, with such Alterations from the former Act as were proper to those Ends, and agreeable to the Toleration allowed in England to Protestant Dissenters.

The Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations having prepared a Draught of an Act accordingly, and laid it before his Majesty in Council, some of the People called Quakers, in Behalf of their Brethren in Maryland, petitioned his Majesty in Council against that Draught, on the 22d of May, 1701, as appears by Order of Council of that Date. His Majesty was pleased to hear them and their Counsel against it, as well as to hear the Reasons offered for it; and after due Consideration of the whole, by Order of Council of the 5th of June, 1701, directed that Draught to be sent to the Governor and Council in Maryland, to be by them proposed to the Assembly here at their next Meeting, in order to be passed into a Law. That Draught was sent, was proposed, and was passed into an Act here accordingly, upon the 25th of March, 1702, and was transmitted from hence, and again referred to the Examination of the Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, and by them re­ported for the royal Sanction and Approbation, on the 18th of January, 1702. And, by Order of Council of the same Day, reciting that the Governor, Council, and Assembly of Maryland had Authority to ordain Laws, which were to con­tinue and be in Force until the royal Pleasure should be signified to the contrary, that Act, so solemnly devised, prepared and considered in England, and passed in Maryland, was approved, confirmed, finally ratified and established.

The First Innovation that I find to have been made in this Establishment was, by an Act passed in 1715, C. 24. now in Force, whereby Five per Cent. is to be deducted and paid by the Clergy to the Sheriff for his Collection, although the forementioned Act had enacted, that the Sheriff should collect the Forty per Poll in the same Manner he did the Publick and County Levies, which County Levies were paid for by the County, and given to the several Officers, without deducting any Thing for Collection.—To this the Clergy submitted, being from their small Income then and low Circumstances unable at a great Expence to seek Relief at Home.

The next Attempt was of a more important Nature, and tended more effectually to reduce the Maintenance provided and established by the royal Authority for the Clergy of this Province. An Act was passed in 1728, C. 2. entitled, ‘An Act for the amending the Staple of Tobacco," which enacted, That, for the Ease of the People, and for the discharging all parochial and other Charges payable in Tobacco, and assessed and levied on the People, all Persons may pay the whole or any Part thereof at Ten Shillings Currency per Cent. at or before the 10th of April Yearly, or 3-4th Parts thereof in Tobacco in Specie, in full Discharge and Satisfaction of the whole, at the Choice of the Debtor; and that the Sheriffs shall have until the last of June Yearly to return and make up the Accounts of the publick Allowances and other Tobacco Demands; and that all Persons paying Money in Discharge of Tobacco or 3-4ths in Tobacco, shall be as good as a Tender of the whole.’

Against this Act the Reverend Mr. Henderson, with Six Clergymen, put in a Petition into the Upper House of Assembly, in Behalf of themselves and absent Brethren, which [Page 6] was unsuccessful. Upon the Act passing in Maryland on the 3d of October, 1728, Mr. Henderson went over to England to petition the Crown against it; and on the 17th of December, 1729, being the Day appointed for the Hearing by the Committee of the Lords of his Majesty's most honourable Privy Council, to whom his Majesty had referred it to consider and report what was fit for his Majesty to do therein, on that Day the late Lord Baltimore sent for Mr. Henderson, and assured him if he would withdraw his Petition from before the Council, he would dissent to the Act; and promised upon his Honour that he would give positive Instructions to his Governors never to presume to pass an Act of that Nature for the future.—However the se­veral Inspection Laws in 1747, 1753, and 1763, stripped the Clergy in the same Manner of One Fourth of their original Stipends; and the Bill now depending, which has passed the Lower House of Assembly, and waits the Concurrence of the Council and Governor, gives an Option to the People to pay off the Clergy 30 lb of Tobacco per Poll, instead of 40 lb per Poll, if paid in Specie by the 10th Day of June Yearly, or 30 lb per Poll at the Rate of 12 s. 6 d. Currency per Hundred in Money, if not paid in Tobacco by that Time, and subjects the Clergy to the very same Inconveniences the Act of 1728 would have laid them under, had it not been dis­sented to at that Time. If Tobacco be a Drug, the Planter will pay off in Tobac­co; if it be worth more than 12 s. 6 d. he will pay off in Money, because he is al­lowed until the 10th of August for his Money Payment; and then he pays but for 30 lb instead of 40 lb of Tobacco allowed by the old Act, so that the Planter not only gains One Fourth in the Quantity, but may, if Tobacco bears the Price it has done for Three Years past, be a Gainer of 100 or 150 per Cent. in the Price, rating his Payment at 12 s. 6 d. per Hundred.

The Assessment of the 40 lb per Poll for the Clergy was designed in Lieu and in Nature of Tythes, and was formerly paid as such in Kind; by which the Clergy had the same Chance and Benefit as other Persons, either as to the Rise or Fall of the Commodity, as they have in their Tythes in Kind in England. Now by this Act all that Advantage is taken from them, let it rise or fall they must still be Sufferers, they will lose in any Case, and have no Possibility of gaining.

Hence it appears how far these several Acts have tended virtually and in Substance to repeal the Act so solemnly enacted and ratified by the royal Authority, and how greatly the Maintenance thereby provided and established for the Clergy has been re­duced and diminished. And this Consideration may have Weight to make the As­sembly cautious how they act with respect to the Clergy, who, upon this Principle, can never fail of Redress, when they are driven to the Necessity of applying Home.

I shall now return to our Church of England Planter, who, though he writes to the Vulgar, and writes like one of the Vulgar, may serve to show the Clergy what they are to expect, if they once lose Sight of their fundamental Law.

If indeed, Sir, your Allegations be true, ‘That those Gentlemen (the Cler­gy) have vaunted over Government, Vestry, and Laity, bidding Defiance to the whole, as, you urge, it is notoriously known they have done ever since the Year 1702, until the First Inspecting Law on Tobacco passed which you date in 1751:’ If this be true, that the Clergy, instead of recommending Obedience to Govern­ment, [Page 7] have bid Defiance to the whole; instead of cultivating the Good-Will and Con­fidence of their Vestry and Parishioners, have notoriously insulted and abused them, and have become Ramping Lions, as you elegantly express it in another Place, instead of Meek Lambs, I wonder they had not been chained down in their Dens long since, and that the Assembly, ‘in whose Power (you say) it was to have corrected these Enormities, should have let them pass unnoticed from the Year 1702, until the First Inspecting Law on Tobacco;’ but as we hear no more of them since, and your Complaints of these Violences terminate then, it is hoped that Law worked a thorough Cure, and the Wisdom of the Legislature could not be too much ad­mired, that under One Act reformed the Clergy and the Tobacco.

You wonder ‘why the Clergy had a larger Encouragement here, than in our neighbouring Provinces;’ you may as well wonder why they had any Encourage at all, since in many of our neighbouring Provinces they have none; which are thereby deprived of the inestimable Benefit of religious Union, and for Want of a national Church, are by the Equality of all Sectaries, torn and convulsed by con­tinual Struggles between them for Superiority and Pre-eminence, whilst their Ministers feel all the Miseries of a precarious Dependance often on involuntary Contributions, and are exposed to Contempt, the never failing Attendant on Poverty.

You rest your whole Plan of Reform, upon a Presumption that the Act of 1701-2, for the Establishment of the Protestant Church, and the Maintenance of Ministers in this Province, is not in Force: Now, if it appear that this Act is in full Force, and has all the Marks of legal Authority a Law can have, the pretty Structure you have been erecting, falls (like the baseless Fabric of a Vision) to the Ground in an Instant.

It appears then that after passing the General Assembly, it was assented to by a Gover­nor acting under a Royal Commission, that was ratified by Queen Anne in Council, Jan. 18, 1702, that it was excepted, with only one Act more, out of the general Repeal in 1704, that it was made the Basis of many subsequent Acts, and that it has been acknow­ledged by the Legislature here, and admitted by the People for nearly 70 Years. You urge, ‘that this Act of Assembly was INTENDED to be made in our Sovereign King William's Time, but the King was dead at that Time, altho' not known here, as he died on the 8th Day of March 1701-2, and the Session began on the 16th of the same Month, so that he could not give his Assent to it, by which Means it became void.’ That a dead King could not give his Assent to an Act, is a Discovery for which you shall have Credit; but tho' he could not, his Governor acting under his Commission could; and the dead King could no more dissent than assent. In Judgment of Law, the King in his political Capacity dieth not▪ he is not dead in Law at least, until publick Proclamation of his Successor in those Dominions wher in his Deputies reside.—All his Gover­nors must necessarily continue in Commission until formaly superseded by his Suc­cessor, and if the Assent of his Governor to a Law in his Majesty's Name, before the Knowledge of his De [...]ease, be not valid in Law, the British foreign Dominions must ever be exposed to Anarchy and Confusion: No governmental Act would be legal, and the Judge who condemns a Criminal may be arraigned for Murder. And this continuing Power upon the Demise of a King is so essential to good Government; [Page 8] that it is extended by Act of Assembly to the Officers of the Lord Proprietary.^*— You say, he (the King) could not give his Assent to it, by which the Act became void; I never heard that the Assent of the King or the Lord Proprietary himself, not personally present, was necessary to the Validity of a Law here; the Power of Dissent indeed lies at home, but the Assent of the Governor, as the King's or Proprietor's Representative, and one Branch of the Legislature, gives an Act full and competent Authority, until the Dissent arrives. By an Act, 1638, C. 1, for establishing the House of Assembly, all Acts assented to and approved by the said House, or major Part thereof, and afterwards assented to by the Lieutenant-Governor, in the Name of the Lord Proprietary, are adjudged and established for Laws ^†. And by the Order of Council before recited, of the 18th of January 1702, it was declared, ‘that the Governor, Council, and Assembly of Maryland, had Authority to ordain Laws, which were to continue and be in Force, until the Royal Pleasure should be signified to the contrary.’—If there be any Doubts concerning the Legality of the original Law of 1701-2, the Exception out of the general Repeal in 1704 would serve to remove them; if the Authority of the Law and of the Exception could be objected to, the several Acts dependant upon it, by which it is interwove into, and become Part of, the Constitution, would in Return prop, support and confirm it.—I will take them in order, and quote the References acknowledging the Validity of the Act of 1701-2.

By an Act passed in 1704, C. 34, § 5, the Vestrymen are directed, where there is no Minister resident in the Parish, to keep a fair Account of the 40 per Poll, levied in their Parish, according to an Act, entitled, An Act for the Establishment of religious Worship, &c. and also of the 10 per Poll to be raised and levied in Virtue of that Act, and transmit it to the Governor and Council.—By an Act in 1715, C. 24, the Defects of the Act of 1701-2 are remedied, and the 40 per Poll during a Vacancy, not before provided for, was therein directed to be laid out by the Vestry, in repairing or building Churches, or in purchasing or stocking a Glebe: By the last Section of this Act, the Sheriff, who had no Allowance for his Trouble under the original Act, was allowed to deduct 5 per Cent for collecting the 40 per Poll, and paying the same either to the Incumbent or Vestry.

An Act in 1715, C. 30, repeals a Clause in an Act of Assembly, entitled, An Act for establishing religious Worship in this Province, &c. requiring that all Vestrymen should subscribe the Association, and directs that they shall take the Oaths of Ad­juration. An Act in 1716, C. 5, directs, that nothing therein contained, shall extend, or be construed to extend, to alter any Directions given by the Act for the Establishment of religious Worship within this Province, as to the Manner of administering the Oaths required. In 1730, C. 23, an Act passed, entitled, A SUPPLEMEN­TARY Act, to an Act, entitled, An Act for the Establishment of religious Worship in this Province, according to the Church of England, &c. wherein the Defects of that Act were remedied. By an Act in 1733, it was enacted, that the Bills of Credit, then emitted, should pass in Payment within this Province for Current Money, and all and any of the Inhabitants were enabled to discharge all Lawyers Fees and Levies [Page 9] therewith (the 40 per Poll and all Tobacco directed by an Act of Assembly of this Province to be levied and applied to the building or repairing any Church or Churches excepted.) An Act in 1747^*, C. 1, recites, that in Regard it is the general Expectation, that by Means of this Act, Tobacco will be meliorated, the Quantity undoubtedly lessened, and the Mode of Payment much facilitated, and thereby the Stipends of the Clergy made more valuable than at present, and that it is deemed but highly reasonable, that in Regard this Province will be at an Expence in carrying this Act into Execution, in which the Clergy ought to bear a Part; be it enacted, that during the Continuance of this Act, the County Courts shall levy on the taxable Inhabitants of the respective Parishes, or Part of Parishes, within their Counties, no more than Thirty Pounds of Tobacco per Poll, instead of 40 lb of Tobacco per Poll by a former Act directed, notwithstanding any thing in the said former Act contained. The Acts of 1753^*, and 1763^* C. 18, § 23, make the same Reference in the same Words to the former Act, and the latter Act continued in Force until the Day of October 1770.

To these Acts I may add one in 1715, and another in 1749, empowering the Ministers, Vestry and Churchwardens, to summon and admonish Fornicators and Adulterers; as well as several other Acts respecting Parochial Libraries, respecting Glebes, respecting the various Offices of Churchwardens and Vestrymen, who owe their very Existence to the Act of 1701-2 alone, all which confirm and establish the Validity of that Law.—If so uniform, so uninterrupted an Acknowledgment of the Legislature, thro' such a Series of Years, if their Faith so solemnly and so repeatedly pledged to the Clergy in such a Variety of Acts, will not weigh against the Objection arising from King William's Demise, there is a Salvo for that too— nothing more nor less than a plain, positive declaratory Act of Parliament, which will put the Validity of the Law of 1701-2 beyond the Possibility of a Doubt, and render it of general Acceptation.

By the Statute made in the 7th Year of King William the 3d, C. 27, entitled, An Act for the better Security of his Majesty's Royal Person and Government, it was enacted in § 21, ‘that no Commission, either Civil or Military, shall cease, determine or be void, by Reason of the Death or Demise of his present Majesty, or of any of his Heirs or Successors, Kings or Queens of this Realm, but that every such Com­mission shall be, continue and remain in full Force and Virtue, for the Space of Six Months after such Death or Demise, unless in the mean Time superseded, &c.’

Some Doubts arose concerning the Extent of the above Clause, whether by the Word Commission therein, a Patent or Grant of any Office or Employment should cease, determine or be void by the Death or Demise of King William, and whether that Clause extended to his Majesty's foreign Dominions; to explain which, the Statute of the 1st of Anne, C. 8, was made, which recited the above Clause of the 7th William the 3d, and enacts, ‘that no Patent or Grant of any Office or Employment, either Civil or Military, shall be taken, construed, or judged to cease, determine, or be void, by Reason of the Death or Demise of his said late Majesty, but that every such Patent or Grant, shall be, continue, and remain in full Force and Virtue, from and after the 7th Day of March, in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and One, for the Space of Six Months then next ensuing, unless in the mean Time superseded, &c.’ and the 6th Section enacts, ‘that all and singular [Page 10] the Provisions, Clauses, Matters, and Things whatsoever, contained in this Act, and of that Part of the Act made in the 7th Year of the late King, which is recited in this present Act, shall extend, and be construed to extend to the Kingdom of Ireland, to the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey, and to all his MAJESTY'S DOMINIONS in AMERICA and ELSEWHERE: And the last Clause enacts, that this present Act, and all other Acts to which the Royal Assent shall be given after the 8th Day of March 1701, and before the End of this present Session of Parliament, shall com­mence and begin, and be taken, construed, and adjudged in Law to commence and begin upon the said 8th Day of March 1701, unless in such Acts, some other Time for Commencement thereof be specially limited and appointed ^*.’

This Act of Parliament first explains the Word Commission, to include any Patent or Grant, Civil or Military; next extends all the Powers contained under the former Act to all her Majesty's Dominions in America and elsewhere; and lastly, has a retrospective View with respect to Time, and to prevent a Moment's Lapse or Interregnum, commences on the 8th of March, the Day of the King's Death, which must certainly cover the whole Time of the Session here, from the 16th to the 25th of that Month. And here the Ignorance of our Planter appears notorious, he picked up his little Knowledge from Bacon's Laws, and presumed, because the King was dead, the Commission of the Governor ceased and determined, and from hence formed this curious Conclusion, that upon dropping of the Inspecting Law, the Clergy will be left destitute of any Act in their Favour: An Opinion in which I think now he stands alone. I wish as much as he, that the Clergy may be precluded the Occasion of their returning to their old Claim of 40 per Poll, but by endeavouring to invali­date the Act itself, he not only interests the Bishops' Influence with the Proprietor in their Favour, (of which, he says, he is apprehensive) but perhaps the Crown itself, which cannot tamely see an Act passed, and so solemnly confirmed by the Royal Authority, so wantonly trampled under Foot, or permit the Church of England, so long and so well established in this Province, to be stript of its whole Support by a pitiful Cavil; but I dare say that the Wisdom and Policy of the Le­gislature here, will make such an Application needless, and that they will equally despise his Plans and Apprehensions: The Clergy, if they are wise, will be very cautious how they apply Home for Redress, and the Assembly will be too just, as well as too politic, to drive them to that Extremity.

The Clergy are intitled under the Act of 1701-2, to the full Compliment of 40 lb of Tobacco per Poll; the Sheriff is therein obliged to collect it in the same Manner, and by the same Authority as the Publick and County Levies^‡ are collected, and to pay it to the Incumbent of each Parish. It was not until the Year 1715 that an Act passed, allowing the Sheriff to deduct 5 per Cent. for his Trouble. On making the First Inspection-Law in 1747, (not as you say in 1751, for you are as bad at Chronology as Legislation) it was thought proper as the Value of the Staple would increase by the Regulation, that there should be a Fifth deducted in all Tobacco Payments; the Clergy were included under this Act; One Fifth deducted would reduce the 40 per Poll to 32 lb; 10 per Cent. was also allowed for Con­veniency [Page 11] on Payments in Tobacco made to all but the Clergy [...] extended to them, would have reduced their Claim to 29 lb [...] Commodity.

However, the Law passed to pay them 30 per Poll in Tobacco [...] which they acquiesced, upon the Presumption which has since [...] founded, that the real Increase upon the Value of Tobacco by [...] [...]n­spection, would balance the nominal Loss: Thus the Law stood [...] when it was deemed proper, that Persons not making Tobacco, might, [...] Cer­tificates, pay the Clergy at the Rate of 12s6 per Hundred. The 10 per Cent. allow­ed for Conveniency in Tobacco Payments, ought to have been made up in the Money Payments, but was overlooked then, because the Clergy received 30 lb instead of 29 lb in Tobacco, in which the greatest Proportion of their Salary being paid, they did not think the additional 2 lb at Three Halfpence per lb an Object worthy their Attention; but now the 10 per Cent. and Conveniency ceasing with the Law, the Clergy are, even upon the Principle of the Inspection-Law, intitled to 32 lb of Tobacco, as it would be unjust to make them pay for a Conveniency they no longer enjoy, or to Four Shillings in Money, at the Rate of 12s6 per Hundred.

The Tobacco and Money Payments, we may presume, were at that Time (Anno 1753) justly proportioned, and 12s6 looked on nearly as an average Price for One Hundred Pounds of publick Tobacco: The Benefit of the Inspection-Law to the Province is hence notorious, that 12s6 is become scarcely Two Thirds, and of late not One Half of the Worth of that Quantity of Tobacco: but if the Tobacco be increased in Value, the Planter has no Reason to complain in Fact, because he only pays his old Proportion of 30 per Poll; it would be uncharitable to suppose, that he grudges the Minister those Returns he receives himself in so much greater Propor­tion. His Complaint lies only on the Comparison. The Farmer, whose Lands, now cleared and fitted for Cultivation, produce vast Crops of Grain, for which he finds an immediate and liberal Market, compounds at the Rate of 12s6; and here the Comparison strikes. There can be no good Reason given, why in publick Taxa­tions, one Man should pay double or treble the Proportion of another, for the same Services; and if there appears a Necessity for easing the Planter, there may be Room to lay a little Addition on the Farmer, the Merchant, and the Gentleman, so that the Loss may not be so severely felt by the publick Officer, the Lawyer, or the Minister.

I calculate that One Half of the Parishes of Maryland do not consist of above 1200 Taxables; several of them fall short of that Number. You think ‘10 per Poll would be sufficient to maintain a much greater Number of the Clergy than we have now, in a very genteel Way.’ I suppose you would choose to assess the 10 per Poll at 12s6 per Hun­dred; the Salary then on 1200 Taxables would amount to £ 75. Currency, that is £ 45. Sterling per Annum, which, Commission and Insolvences deducted, will hardly neat £ 40. per Annum. You recommend, ‘that the Salary of each Clergyman should be fixed Yearly by the Vestry of each Parish, as they will be the Neighbours of the Clergy of each Parish, they will be the best Judges what it will take to support their Clergyman and Family in a genteel Manner, and can either add or diminish as they shall see Cause.’ How can you add? What, by voluntary Contribution? Precarious Dependance! How could you find in your Heart to diminish? Suppose your Parson has a Wife and but [Page 12] Three Children, it would come but to £ 8. Sterling a Head, which is not equal to the Hire of a Negro Boy of 12 Years of Age. We must allow you are an excellent Judge what will maintain a Clergyman and his Family in a genteel Manner! You refer us for Example to the PROVINCES of Virginia, (old and new Virginia I presume) in the First the Salary of the Clergy, so far from being left to the Discretion of a Vestry, is fixed by Law to 16 Hogsheads of Crop Tobacco, with an Allowance of 4 per Cent. for Shrinkage, and a good House, Barn, &c. together with a Glebe of at least 200 Acres of Land, are directed to be provided for the Minister of each Pa­rish at the publick Expence.

The Clergy of Virginia, who were before allured into this Province, and filled the Parishes here, when those in Virginia were left destitute, will now be no longer desirous of changing their Situation, since, at the Rate of 12s6 per Hundred, One Half of the Parishes of Maryland will fall short of the Virginia Stipend, considered together with the Conveniency of their Glebes. As for new Virginia, which is yet in Embryo, there cannot be so proper a Person to draw up a Code of Laws for its internal Police, if Maryland can spare him, as the Church of England Planter; and as there is not yet any Form of Ecclesiastical Discipline in the Provinces of Virginia, whatever he may think to the contrary, there may be a further Latitude for his Le­gislative Abilities, since his Plan for Maryland would do Honour to a Solon or a Lycurgus. We must have it in his own Words, for his Style is as compleat as his Projects.

"I would further recommend that there should be a Clause in that Act to impower the Vestry of each Parish to call before them, by Way of Summons, the Clergyman of their Parish, for Neg­lect of Duty, or any Misconduct, when of their own Knowledge, or on the Complaint of any Two or Three reputable Parishioners, that they shall fix a Day and send their Summons to their Clergyman, and that they shall also set up an Advertisement at the Church Door at least Ten Days before the Time of meeting, signifying that their Clergyman is to appear on such a Day before the Vestry—and if any of his Parishioners have any Complaint to make against him, they may attend on that Day, and then if they of THEIR OWN KNOWLEDGE, or upon the Oath of Two or more creditable Witnesses, have Reason to condemn him for Neglect of Duty or Misconduct, that they shall reprimand him for the first and second Time, and for the third dis­charge him."—A very summary Way of Proceeding, indeed! Why, Sir, you would erect a Court worse than the old Scottish Presbytery, worse than the High Commission, worse than the Inquisition. Your Vestry is at once Judge, Jury and Evidence; they may proceed to Sentence of their own Knowledge, without Process, without Form, without Precedent, without Law, common, civil or ecclesiastical; and, to crown the whole, without Appeal too. Hatred or Interest may produce an Accusation, Suspicion be received as Proof, and Passion pronounce Judgment.

Do you exclaim against the Admiralty Courts, which proceed by the known Rules of the Civil Law? Do you shudder at the Introduction of an Ecclesiastical Court? and yet adopt a Plan a Thousand Times more tyrannical! View but the Compa­rison!

[Page 13] ^* In all Causes of Deprivation by the Ecclesiastical Law of a Person actually pos­sessed of a Benefice, the following Things must concur. First, a Monition or Cita­tion of the Party to appear; Second, a Charge given, to which he is to answer, called a Libel; Third, a competent Time assigned for the Proofs and Answers; Fourth, a Liberty of Counsel, and to except against the Proofs and Witnesses; Fifth, a so­lemn Sentence after the hearing the Proofs and Answers.—And if these Things are not complied with, there is just Cause of Appeal, and he may have a Remedy by a superior Court—All which is agreeable to common Justice and the Reason of Mankind—because a Liberty of Defence is allowed and a Right of Appeal.—A Cler­gyman who has spent his Youth in severe Studies, and expended a Fortune, which, if laid out in Trade, or the Study of any other Profession, would have procured him an handsome Livelihood, is not to be turned out like a discarded Footman from a ca­pricious Master.

After their Clergyman is discharged and paid, in Proportion to his Yearly Salary, for the Time he has served (that is, turned out with his Family, only on Ten Days Notice, to shift for himself) they (meaning the Vestry I suppose) are to get a Reader to supply his Place until they can suit themselves with a Clergyman.—Do you, Sir, accuse the Clergy of vaunting over Government, and make so direct an Attack upon his Lordship's Right of Patronage?—Would you invalidate the Charter that confers that Right, as well as the Act of 1701-2? Would you insinuate that the King had no Power to grant the one, as you assert his Governor had no Power to assent to the other? Would you, on the one Hand, advise the Lower House of Assembly forcibly to wrest out of his Lordship's Hands a Power so solemnly conferred on him by the royal Authority, and, on the other, to deprive a Clergyman of Part of the Property his Lordship has invested him with, by dividing his Parish without his consent?— And would you instruct them to violate the Faith pledged by their Ancestors, and recommend it to the Makers of Laws to be the first to infringe them?—With a Disposition to overturn all Government—to set aside all Law, and to throw the Pro­vince into general Confusion, how happy it is that your Abilities only tend to render your Designs contemptible!

A good deal of Pains has been taken to induce the People to look upon the Free­holds of the Clergy in a different Light from others, as conditional Freeholds, and that tho' absolute Freeholds require a due Course of Law, conditional do not; so that if a Man be deprived of his Office, his Benefice is gone: This is an old Objection, which has thus been answered long ago.

^* ‘That all Fees are conditional, that none are absolute with respect to the Law, otherwise they could never be forfeited.—A great Lawyer says, That all in Eng­land are fiduciary, that is—conditional Freeholders, except the King—for that all Fees imply Fealty, the Non-performance of which is Felony, that is, in the origi­nal Signification of the Word, a Breach of Trust towards the Lord of the Soil. It ought to be shewn that Magna Charta, or the ancient Laws, make such a Dif­ference between Ecclesiastical Freeholds and others, which is not even pretended; and therefore such a Distinction is not to be allowed, especially as there is a posi­tive Act of Parliament, 14 Edward III. C. 3. which says that Clergymen shall [Page 14] not be ejected out of their Temporalties, but for a true and just Cause, according to the Law of the Land, and Judgment thereupon given.’

The Revenues of the Clergy, wherever they have become any ways considerable, have always been the Subject of popular Conversation, and often been made a Topic fit for the Purpose of factious and designing Men to raise publick Discontent. But violent Changes have seldom proved for the better, and Innovations in religious Matters have ever been of dangerous Consequence to a State—as we read in the English History, Four different Changes in Religion took Place during the Course of a few Years, by the Authority of the Sovereign alone.—If the Act of 1701-2 be not in Force, we have no established Church of England—for no Church is deemed a settled and established Church, unless a certain Income or Revenue is provided for its Ministers. There is no Restraint on Marriages, either in respect of the Person so­lemnizing, or those joined in Marriage; there is no Vestryman or Churchwarden; nay, no Edifice properly called a Church; the Building itself may be turned into a Barn by the Propietor of the Soil.—And further—the Act of Toleration, extended to Protestant Dissenters and Quakers here by that Act, ceases, and they are liable to all the Pains and Penalties of former Statutes.

If the Act of 1701-2 were a real Grievance to the People; if the Tax of 40 per Poll were too heavy for their Circumstances to bear; if they were really oppressed and rode by the Clergy, there is not a Man in the Province that would be more ready with Heart and Hand to give a Lift to overturn the Act than myself: But this is far from being the Case.—

The 40 per Poll is reckoned not a 20th Part of the Increase of that One Commo­dity, and if the Inspection-Law had been continued, which would have been much to the Clergy's Content, the 30 per Poll▪ therein assessed was One Fourth less, and the Composition at 12s.6 d. may be computed, for the Reasons before assigned, scarcely One Hundredth Part of the Farmer's Increase.

In England the Farmer pays One Tenth Part of the Produce of his Lands, which, his Labour inclusive, is nearly One Fifth of the Returns, either to the Church or the Im­propriator who claims under the same Title: yet he has no Reason to complain. If he received the Land by Descent from his Ancestors, it was with this Reservation; if he purchases it with his Money, or rents it of another, a proportionable Deduc­tion is made. What is not a Man's by Inheritance, or Purchase, or Contract, can­not properly be his own. The Tithes in England and the 40 per Poll in Maryland stand upon the same Principle, to wit, the Law of the Land; and Law is the Foun­tain of Property: Remove the Land-mark and the Field lies in common—and I speak of Property as inviolable, at least until the Time comes, when inter Arma silent Leges. If then the Freeholder in England has no just Cause of Complaint, how much less has the Inhabitant of Maryland, who contributes so much less to the Maintenance and Support of an established Clergy, which certainly tends to the Peace and civilizing of any Country, and conduces as well to the temporal as to the eternal Welfare of a People.

The Right of Patronage is one of the richest Plumes in the Proprietor's Cap—but as this falls to the Ground entirely with the Act of 1701-2 (for what is a Right of Patronage worth without an Endowment?) so the splitting of Parishes into small Por­tions [Page 15] is a great Diminution of the Value of that Right; it deprives him of the Power of rewarding Merit, and cuts off, in great Measure, the generous Emulation of ex­celling among the Clergy; the Hopes of Rewards being the human Means for en­couraging Virtue, and recommending Learning amongst Mankind. This minute Division is not only incompatible with the infant State of any Country, where the Inhabitants lie thinly scattered over a vast Tract of Land, unless an additional Burden be laid on each Individual to maintain so numerous a Clergy, but is highly impolitic in the back Parts of this Province, where Three Fourths of the Inhabitants are Foreigners, invincibly attached to their own Religion, Language and Manners, amongst whom no Clergyman of the Church of England can hope for any more Respect than his Hu­manity entitles him to or his Income commands.

The Clergy are at present divided in their political Character—those possessed of good Livings and secured by the Laws of the Province, unsolicitous of further Pro­motion, have a natural Desire to promote the Happiness and secure the Liberties of the People by whom they are maintained, and thus become Friends of the Publick. The expectant Clergy, who are in waiting for Preferment, which flows from Go­vernment, will naturally fall in with, at least not openly oppose, the Views and De­signs of those Persons from whom they are to receive Promotion.—Power always follows Property—a Balance of Power can only be preserved by a Balance of Pro­perty—but this Balance had like to have been destroyed by a Bill in the Year 1768, establishing a Commission Court for Ecclesiastical Matters—which would have united and blended together the Property and Influence of the whole Body of the Clergy with that of the Government; for he that can punish, will command and must be obeyed too. It will always be an Object worthy the Policy and Wisdom of the Lower House of Assembly, to keep the Punishment of the Clergy out of the Hands of the Government, lest by inculcating into the Minds of their Hearers that passive Obe­dience to which they are subjected, the Contagion spread to the Laity too; and the Government, if they are wise, will keep the Punishment as well as Promotion of the Clergy out of the Hands of the People, lest they prove, as they do in Virginia, a dead Weight against Government; and thus balanced will they become an excellent Barrier, either when the Government would break through that sacred Compact which makes the Interests of the governing and the governed reciprocal, or the Peo­ple would throw off all Obedience to Government, by which they are protected in their Persons and Properties.

I should never have thought the Church of England Planter worth answering, had I not found that the Idea of the Invalidity of the Law of 1701-2 had been mentioned in a respectable Meeting, and had become popular under the Sanction (by what Au­thority I know not) of one of the most considerable Men in the Province. There cannot therefore be the least Doubt but that the Church is in Danger.—To neglect to provide for Self-defence at any Time is to sleep in a Siege—but to neglect it now is to sleep on an Attack.—The Conscience as well as the Interest of the Clergy is concerned in this Debate; the Preservation of the purest Church on Earth is intrusted to their Care, and they never will be able to answer it either here or hereafter, if they neglect so sacred a Deposit.—That the Notion of the Invalidity of the Act of 1701-2 is a mere Fiction, calculated to raise an Alarm, there is not the least Doubt: [Page 16] But the Clergy, if they are not dead to every Sense of their Duty as well as their In­terest, will, upon the first Attack upon any Individual, join their Purse, Heart and Hand, to defend his and their own Rights against all Opposition. The Church of England has at present the Right, and will be supported, doubtless, by the Power both of the Proprietor and the King, if such Interposition be necessary. The Church tolerates all other Persuasions, but should the Sectaries obtain the Possession of the Loaves and Fishes, it would hardly meet even with Toleration itself. Our Planter, ignorant and illiterate as he is, shews the Design in Agitation.—Our Colleges in North-America have not been useless to us, and that we can get Readers from them, and marry, &c. by the OTHER Clergy. And again he recommends—not to let them at Home force their Clergy on us, as they have done their Revenue Officers. Ignorant that it was ex­pressly to encourage faithful and able Ministers to COME and RESIDE in this Province, that the 40 per Poll was given—and now they are come, have left their Country, Friends and Connexions at Home, under the Security of Laws, under the Faith of the Le­gislature, under the most solemn Engagements of Protection and Support, they are to be deprived of their Freeholds without legal Process, plundered of their Property by Chicane and Violence, and turned out with their Families and their Religion to shift for themselves, and to seek for Refuge in some other Wilderness Country.

Heu Pietas! Heu prisca Fides!

May the Divine Being, who is the GOD of Order and not of Confusion, inspire the Government with Inclination to support the Establishment of our Holy Church, the Clergy with Resolution to defend its Rights, and the People with Submission to its Divine Ordinances, which teach to render to All their Dues—Tribute to whom Tribute is due, Custom to whom Custom, Fear to whom Fear, Honour to whom Honour.