Head Tavern, will discuss the following subjects. To commence on Sunday evening, Dec. 20, 1807, at six o'clock.

1. Does the New Testament directly or indirectly sanction the order of men called Preachers, or are they not repugnant to, and subversive of, the Christian religion?

2. Do the scriptures or reason sanction the belief in an order of celestial beings, called Angels?

3. Was the New Testament written by authority of Jesus, divine inspiration, or as a rule for Christians in all ages, and the means of handing down the doctrines of Christianity?

4. Did Jesus institute an ordinance called the Lord's Supper?

5. Was Baptism by water, an ordinance appointed by Jesus? 6. Is the doctrine of a Millenium taught in the Scrip-. tures? if it is, what passages evidently relate to that period? 7. An inquiry into the doctrine of Necessity.

8. An examination into the Authenticity of the two first chapters of Matthew and Luke.

9. Is the doctrine of the Trinity sanctioned by the Scrip

tures?

10. An inquiry into the doctrine of Atonement.

11. An inquiry into the doctrine of Original Sin.

12. Do the Scriptures authorise us to believe Jesus to have been more than a man?'

This mode of printing the subjects is not novel amongst either Dissenters or Churchmen, and therefore ought not to have given offence, if it did but most probably, the offence which was taken, arose rather from the subjects themselves, and the numbers who attended to hear them examined. Whatever it might be, there was a something which appears to have excited ecclesiastical attention; for, shortly after we had removed to Cateaton Street, a gentleman, in the Bishop of London's name, made enquiries concerning us of the proprietor of the house, and on Friday, the 5th of February, the City Marshal requested our attendance at the Mansion House; and, on the next Day, five of the members waited on the Lord Mayor, and were politely honoured with a private audience. His lordship, after taking down four of their names and places of abode, asked, where is your clergyman? To which we replied, that we had none; but met together mutually to instruct each other, on a plan not much unlike the Quakers, only without expecting supernatural assistance. His lordship then requested to know our religious opinions. We answered, that this was a theological question, that would come with more propriety from the bishop than from his lordship; that we said not this from disrespect, nor from being ashamed of our opinions; for that the Scriptures alone were our guides in religion. His lordship said, he did not ask for

information, as he had our opinions in his pocket, taking out a letter, which enclosed the above printed list; and assured us, that he would not admit within his jurisdiction any religious meetings which held opinions contrary to the established religion, or in unconsecrated places; and that he should see the Bishop of London within an hour. We answered, if this was really his lordship's determination, he must shut up every dissenting meeting in London; but this would be contrary to the toleration act; that as for ourselves, we did not interfere with the Church of England particularly, for we did not consider. it as a Christian church, but merely as a political institution ; and that, not having any thing to do with politics, we of course did not trouble ourselves about that church. That the effects of persecution always aided the cause of the persecuted, and that it could not be grateful to his lordship's feelings to have his name united to those who were religious persecutors. His lordship replied, that such observations would not terrify him; that we should not meet again in public, but would recommend нs to meet in private, as he must do his duty. We intreated his lordship not to act too precipitately, as our not meeting on the next day might make some disturbance, as those who attended us, being ignorant of the cause, would very naturally be much disappointed, and that it was impossible for us to get either ourselves or the place certified on that day. To which Mr. Nalder, the City Marshal, replied, that there was no occasion to license ourselves, but the place, as that act licensed the speakHis lordship then said, we should not meet again unless the place was registered, which would put it out of his jurisdiction. In answer, we requested his lordship not to consider our conduct personal to himself, or disrespectful to the civil authority, if we should act contrary to his wishes, but that we must do our duty, although we did not court persecution, and therefore should certainly meet on the next day; that the fear of fine, imprisonment, or death, should not prevent our acting up to the dictates of our consciences; that if the tendency of our opinions or practices could be shewn to create disorder, or unloose the restraints of morality and virtue, they would be readily given up by every man among us. We then presented his lordship with a book of our laws, as an evidence of our regard for order, and also with the trial of Mr. Elwal, for denying the trinity; at the same time assuring him that though our sentiments were partly changed since the publication of our laws, yet those laws would evince that we were a peaceable and inoffensive society of Christians.

ers.

At eleven on the next morning we went as usual to our room, but found that the City Marshal had been there on the evening preceding; as also that the Lord Mayor had written a letter, commanding the person to whom the house belonged, not to

open the door under the pain of having the penalties inflicted, for permitting religious meetings in an uncertified place. Circumstanced as we were, we could not consider this as an act of persecution; we, as Christians, were bound "not to neglect the assembling of ourselves together." The Lord Mayor was equally bound by heavy penalties, upon information, "not to admit our assembling ourselves together in private, or in an uncertified place." We therefore hoped, that the Lord Mayor saw and felt for the rights of conscience, and thought it most kind to prevent, by an exertion of authority, the persecutions that would have necessarily followed the breach of this law, rather than be compelled to become the unwilling instrument of informers and persecutors. As for ourselves we had no alternative, and therefore affixed a paper upon the door to acquaint such as might come, that the assembly was deferred until the 21st of February.

On the Monday week following, being the 15th of February, six of us met at the Quarter Sessions at Guildhall, being the court in which the Lord Mayor usually presided. We demanded that the oaths be administered to us according to the act of 1 William, c. 18 and 19. Geo. III. c. 44. Either there had been some previous intimation given, or the court had not been much used to such applications, for they appeared at a loss how to act; until one of the Sheriffs, being spoke to by one of the friends, obligingly told him, that if he would but procure the act of parliament, and write out their demand, it would much expedite the business. Upon this information he went, and wrote out the oaths of allegiance, and the oath against popery, and the declaration concerning the scriptures containing the revealed will of God; and having procured the statutes, he returned; but whilst absent, the court had obtained the act; and on his return, he observed Mr. Alderman Combe, who sat for the Lord Mayor, reading the act, and as he commented upon it, with the Recorder, and the Clerk of the Peace, he told them, the act was compulsatory; it did not leave an option; ifrequired, the request must be granted. The oaths and declaration that were written, being presented, the alderman read them with attention, and again spake to the Clerk of the Peace, who informed him, that the claim being admitted, if the parties came to his office, the whole business should be done. Mr. Alderman Combe having asked him if he knew what those gentlemen desired, and being answered in the affirmative, desired him to take care that the whole was done properly. Upon being asked where ?-the Clerk of the Peace appointed his office, at the Sessions House, Old Bailey, early on the Thursday morning following, not later than twelve.

own

On the Thursday morning, about ten, we attended his office according to the appointment, and were, after waiting some time, introduced into his private office, where, to our surprize, we met the Recorder, who asked if we belonged to a society who called themselves Freethinking Christians; we replied, 'we did. He then asked for our names, places of abode, and occupations; which being wrote down for him, he took a letter which contained a written copy of the printed list of questions; and reading the first question, he asked, Have you discussed that? The same by the 2d, 3d, and 4th questions. We then told him we confessed the word discussion was liable to be construed debating, and we wished that we had substituted another word; but that this at present was not of any consequence, as we came there as Dissenters to take the oaths, and have certificates of our having done so, agreeable to the wish of the Lord Mayor, and the order of Mr. Alderman Combe. The Recorder replied he did not feel himself justified in administering the oaths. We answered, that we believed the scriptures commonly received by Protestants did contain the revealed will of God, and that they were, as they ought to be, the rule of our doctrine and practice, and that we assembled together according to the description given of a primitive church in 1 Cor. xiv. where every one might speak, but only one by one, so that all things might be done in order, and for edification. He then endeavoured to make us confess to be a debating society. We assured him that we were not, and that we did not admit promiscuous speaking by strangers; but that we were Christians, believers in the death and resurrection of Jesus, and of a resurrection and future judgment by him; therefore we ought not to be refused the rights of Christians, and Englishmen, of assembling together for the purpose of mutual and public instruction, according to the dictates of our consciences, seeing that we could, with the strictest truth, make the declaration that the scriptures did contain the revealed will of God, and were the rule of our doctrine and practice. To this the Recorder replied, we had said enough to convince him, that our request ought not to be granted; that he could not feel himself justified in administering the oaths, and would not do so unless we came into the open court at the Old Bailey, which was the proper place; and added, if our cause was good, we should not hesitate. We assured him, although we thought it an affront to Mr. Alderman Combe, and unjust to ourselves, being confident, however, in the goodness of our cause, we would chearfully comply. We then asked, when? and after a few seconds consultation with the Clerk of the Peace, the Recorder said, on Saturday afternoon at five o'clock; the Clerk of the Peace then said, to be at his office a

little before five o'clock; and again he repeated his request, that we would not be later.

On the Saturday, a little before five, we attended at the office of the Clerk of the Peace, who treated us very unhandsomely, telling us he had not appointed us to call upon him, but to be in open court, to appear and make our demand; we replied, it was his own appointment, and could carry with it no other meaning, than that he would himself introduce us into the court. We however ended the altercation, by going into the court, and making our demand, stating how grievously we had been treated; and reminding the Lord Mayor, that we had only acted according to his lordship's wishes; that we had applied at the Quarter Sessions at Guildhall, where Mr. Alderman Combe, acting for his lordship, had ordered us to be sworn and certified; but that notwithstanding his orders to the Clerk of the Peace, the Recorder had refused to administer the oaths, unless we applied in open court, which had occasioned us to trouble his lordship with our demand, to be sworn and certified as the act of Geo. 1II. c. 44. directs. In answer to this, the Recorder and the Clerk of the Peace insisted that we were not sent by Mr. Alderman Combe to the office of the Clerk of the Peace, but to the Old Bailey, and that it was not to licence our persons, but the place. To this we replied, we did not apply for any licence, for we did not want any; but to have the oaths administered to us; and as for the place, we had already certified it in the Bishop's Court; at the same time producing the certificate at this they seemed astonished, and ordered an exact copy of it to be taken before it was returned to us. We were then told we must attend another time, as they could not interrupt the business of the court: we asked when we should attend, and the Recorder said, Any morning before twelve o'clock. We represented, how vexatious this whole business had been: the Recorder then said, the oaths could not be administered that night, you must come any morning before twelve. On which, addressing the Lord Mayor, we answered that the act said not any thing about time, but that upon being demanded, the oaths were to be administered-that his lordship sat there to do justice, and it would be unjust to put us off. His lordship replied, if we would come on Monday morning at ten, the business should be done, as he would make a court on purpose. We said we would

attend, depending on the word of the Lord Mayor, and relying on his sacred honor, that it would be kept. His lordship then said, we must not address him alone, but the whole court; when we replied that if the court said it should be done, we would depend on their sacred honor it would be sacredly performed.

Upon which, Mr. Counsellor Gurney observed