directed, shall in pursuance of such power turn out or remove such Minister, that in case the said Sir Nathaniel Johuson shall at any time within six days after notice of such order of the said Commissioners, or the major part of them thereof, signifying his Dissent by a writing or instrument under his hand and seal, that then such order of the said Commissioners for that time to be of no force or effect. And that this power and trust reposed in the said Sir Nathaniel Johnson, shall continue during his being Governor of this Province and no longer."

When this Act passed in the Commons House of Assembly, a motion was made, "that any member may have liberty to enter his Dissent against a vote or proceedings made in this House." Upon which it was "Resolved, that no member shall have leave to enter his Dissent."

Considerable irritation was produced by these extraordinary measures.* All parties complained of the arbitrary tone of the Acts. Those who dissented from the Church of England justly complained, that their exclusion from the rights enjoyed by their fellow subjects, was an infringement of the 18th art. of the Royal Charter granting liberty of conscience to Dissenters. And Churchmen, while they doubted whether a difference in religious opinions, justified a difference in political privileges, complained of the appointment of a Lay Commission, for the trial of ecclesiastical causes. They declared it to be an invasion of the Bishop's spiritual jurisdiction, and an interference with matters over which the Assembly had no legal control. The American Colonies formed a part of the Diocess of the Bishop of London, and the courts for the trial of ecclesiastical causes could be legally held only in his name, and by his officials. But these Lay-Commissioners were authorized to sit in the judgement-seat of spiritual Officers, and thus to wrest the ecclesiastical authority out of the hands of the Bishop of London.

It does not appear that the proceedings of the General Assembly had much influence on Mr. Marston's

*Hewatt's Hist. So. Ca. i. 169-178. Ramsay's So. Ca. ii. 3. 4.

Conduct. He was again arraigned before the House of Commons Feb. 5th, 1704-5, for having spoken falsely to the prejudice of Major Charles Colleton, a member of the House; and it was Resolved, that he had been guilty of a high breach of privilege, and that his assertions were false and malicious. A motion was made, Feb. 8th, to bring in a Bill to displace him "for his imprudent behaviour in general, and his reflection on the Honor and Justice of this House, since his last censure by the General Assembly." This motion was lost, and a vote of Censure passed. In 1705, he was arraigned, before the Board of LayCommissioners, and removed from his Living.

In a Letter to Dean Stanhope, Mr. Marston says that, the Assembly "made some very odd and unjustifiable laws, which have occasioned great feuds and animosities here." And in his representation to the Lords Proprietors, he says, most of the late members of the Assembly have been constant absenters from the Holy Sacrament; so it is no wonder they have inserted an absurd Oath in a late Act." &c. And again he says, "I cannot think it will be much for the credit and service of the Church of England here, that such Provisions should be made for admitting the most loose and profligate Persons to sit and vote in the making of our laws, who will but take the Oath appointed by the late Act." Remarking upon the appointment of the Lay-Commissioners he says, "Eleven of the twenty were never known to receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper."*

It is evident from Mr. Marston's conduct that, although he was removed from Office, by a Power having no canonical control over ecclesiastical affairs, yet he owed it more to his imprudent and litigious disposition than to his having visited Landgrave Smith, a Dissenter, while he was in custody of the Messenger

* Anon. Hist. British Empire in America, i. 484.

of the Commons House of Assembly. This, however, was asserted by Mr. Marston and his friends.†

Many persons suspected at the time, that this religious dispute was excited to draw off public attention from an unsuccessful expedition against St. Augustine. Be that as it may, the Dissenters felt themselves aggrieved, and sent over Joseph Boone, as their Agent, to represent their case to the British government. Early in 1706, their memorial was presented to the House of Lords. It set forth, "That when the Province of Carolina was granted to the Proprietors, for the better peopling of it, express provision was made in the charter for a toleration and indulgence of all Christians in the free exercise of their religion; that, in the Fundamental Constitutions, agreed to be the form of government by the Proprietors, there was also express provision made, that no person should be disturbed for any speculative opinion in religion, and that no person should, on account of religion, be excluded from being a member of the General Assembly, or from any other office in the civil administration: That the said charter, being given soon after the happy restoration of King Charles II, and re-establishment of the Church of England by the Act of Uniformity, many of the subjects of the kingdom, who were so unhappy as to have some scruples about conforming to the rites of the said Church, did transplant themselves and families into Carolina; by means whereof the greatest part of the inhabitants there were Protestant Dissenters from the Church of England, and through the equality and freedom of the said Fundamental Constitutions, all the inhabitants of the Colony lived in peace, and even the Ministers of the Church of England had support from the Protestant Dissenters, and the number of inhabitants and the trade of the

See Journals of the House, Oct. 18th, 1704. Report of the Committee. Hist. Brit. Emp. in Am. i. 485.

colony daily increased, to the great improvement of her majesty's customs, and the manifest advantage of the merchants and manufactures of the kingdom.

“But that, in the year 1703, when a new Assembly was to be chosen, which, by the constitution, is chosen once in two years, the election was managed with very great partiality and injustice, and all sorts of people, even aliens, Jews, servants, common sailors and negroes were admitted to vote at elections: That, in the said Assembly, an Act was passed to incapacitate every person from being a member of any General Assembly that should be chosen for the time to come, unless he had taken the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Church of England; whereby all Protestant Dissenters are made incapable of being in the said Assembly; and yet, by the same Act, all persons who shall take an Oath that they have not received the Sacrament in any Dissenting congregation for one year past, though they have not received it in the Church of England, are made capable of sitting in the said Assembly: That this Act was passed in an illegal manner, by the Governor calling the Assembly to meet the 26th of April, when it then stood prorogued to the 10th of May following: That it hath been ratified by the Lord's Proprietors in England, who refused to hear what could be offered against it, and contrary to the petition of 170 of the chief inhabitants of the Colony, and of several eminent merchants trading hither, though the Commons of the same Assembly quickly after passed another bill to repeal it, which the upper House rejected, and the Governor dissolved the House.

"That the Ecclesiastical government of the Colony is under the Bishop of London; but the Governor and his adherents have at last done what the latter often threatened to do, totally abolished it for the same Assembly have passed an act, whereby twenty laypersons therein named, are made a corporation for the

K

of the Commons House of Assembly. This, howe was asserted by Mr. Marston and his friends.†

Many persons suspected at the time, that this gious dispute was excited to draw off public atter from an unsuccessful expedition against St. Augus Be that as it may, the Dissenters felt thems aggrieved, and sent over Joseph Boone, as: Agent, to represent their case to the British gov ment. Early in 1706, their memorial was prese to the House of Lords. It set forth, "That whe Province of Carolina was granted to the Propric for the better peopling of it, express provision made in the charter for a toleration and indulgen all Christians in the free exercise of their religion: in the Fundamental Constitutions, agreed to b form of government by the Proprietors, there wa express provision made, that no person shou disturbed for any speculative opinion in religion that no person should, on account of religion, I cluded from being a member of the General Asse or from any other office in the civil administr That the said charter, being given soon after the restoration of King Charles II, and re-establishm the Church of England by the Act of Unifo many of the subjects of the kingdom, who w unhappy as to have some scruples about conforn the rites of the said Church, did transplant then and families into Carolina; by means where greatest part of the inhabitants there were Pro Dissenters from the Church of England, and t the equality and freedom of the said Funda Constitutions, all the inhabitants of the Colon in peace, and even the Ministers of the Chu England had support from the Protestant Diss and the number of inhabitants and the trade

+ See Journals of the House, Oct. 18th, 1704. Report of the Cor Hist. Brit. Emp. in Am. i. 485.