He who argues in defence of a law in force, not antiquated or obsolete, but lately enacted, is certainly on the safer side, and may be allowed to point out the dangers he conceives to foresee in the abrogation of it.

For if the consequences of repealing this clause, should at some time or other enable the Presbyterians to work themselves up into the National Church; instead of uniting Protestants, it would sow eternal divisions among them.  First, their own sects, which now lie dormant, would be soon at cuffs again with each other about power and preferment; and the dissenting Episcopals, perhaps discontented to such a degree, as upon some fair unhappy occasion, would be able to shake the firmest loyalty, which none can deny theirs to be.

Neither is it very difficult to conjecture from some late proceedings, at what a rate this faction is likely to drive wherever it gets the whip and the seat.  They have already set up courts of spiritual judicature in open contempt of the laws:  They send missionaries everywhere, without being invited, in order to convert the Church of England folks to Christianity.  They are as vigilant as I know who, to attend persons on their death-beds, and for purposes much alike.  And what practices such principles as these (with many other that might be invidious to mention) may spawn when they are laid out to the sun, you may determine at leisure.

Lastly, Whether we are so entirely sure of their loyalty upon the present foot of government as you may imagine, their detractors make a question, which however, does, I think, by no means affect the body of dissenters; but the instance produced is, of some among their leading teachers in the north, who having refused the Abjuration Oath, yet continue their preaching, and have abundance of followers.  The particulars are out of my head, but the fact is notorious enough, and I believe has been published; I think it a pity, it has not been remedied.

Thus, I have fairly given you, Sir, my own opinion, as well as that of a great majority in both Houses here, relating to this weighty affair, upon which I am confident you may securely reckon.  I will leave you to make what use of it you please.

I am, with great respect, Sir,

Yours, &c.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

THE PRESBYTERIANS’ PLEA OF MERIT.

NOTE.

THE reference casually made by Swift, in his “Letter on the Sacramental Test,” to his grandfather and the “malignant Church,” probably points to one of the causes for his persistent dislike towards the Protestant dissenters.  His attitude displays a profound disgust both for their teaching and their conduct; and he found, very early, occasion to ridicule them, as may be seen in his description of Jack, Martin, and Peter in “A Tale of a Tub” (see vol. i. of this edition).  In spite, however, of this attitude, Swift seems to have remained silent on the question of the repeal of the Test Act for a period of more than twenty years.  He had published his “Letter from a Member of the House of Commons in Ireland” in 1708; but it was not until 1731 that he again took up his pen against Dissent.