the Common Prayer.  Nor can you content other men’s conscience, real or pretended, by any concessions:  follow your own; seek peace and ensue it.  You have no symptoms of discontent in the people to their Establishment.  The churches are too small for their congregations.  The livings are too few for their candidates.  The spirit of religious controversy has slackened by the nature of things:  by act you may revive it.  I will not enter into the question, how much truth is preferable to peace.  Perhaps truth may be far better.  But as we have scarcely ever the same certainty in the one that we have in the other, I would, unless the truth were evident indeed, hold fast to peace, which has in her company charity, the highest of the virtues.

This business appears in two points of view:  1st, Whether it is a matter of grievance; 2nd, Whether it is within our province to redress it with propriety and prudence.  Whether it comes properly before us on a petition upon matter of grievance I would not inquire too curiously.  I know, technically speaking, that nothing agreeable to law can be considered as a grievance.  But an over-attention to the rules of any act does sometimes defeat the ends of it; and I think it does so in this Parliamentary act, as much at least as in any other.  I know many gentlemen think that the very essence of liberty consists in being governed according to law, as if grievances had nothing real and intrinsic; but I cannot be of that opinion.  Grievances may subsist by law.  Nay, I do not know whether any grievance can be considered as intolerable, until it is established and sanctified by law.  If the Act of Toleration were not perfect, if there were a complaint of it, I would gladly consent to amend it.  But when I heard a complaint of a pressure on religious liberty, to my astonishment I find that there was no complaint whatsoever of the insufficiency of the act of King William, nor any attempt to make it more sufficient.  The matter, therefore, does not concern toleration, but establishment; and it is not the rights of private conscience that are in question, but the propriety of the terms which are proposed by law as a title to public emoluments:  so that the complaint is not, that there is not toleration of diversity in opinion, but that diversity in opinion is not rewarded by bishoprics, rectories, and collegiate stalls.  When gentlemen complain of the subscription as matter of grievance, the complaint arises from confounding private judgment, whose rights are anterior to law, and the qualifications which the law creates for its own magistracies, whether civil or religious.  To take away from men their lives, their liberty, or their property, those things for the protection of which society was introduced, is great hardship and intolerable tyranny; but to annex any condition you please to benefits artificially created is the most just, natural, and proper thing in the world.  When e nova you form an arbitrary benefit, an