Mr. S.—But, Mr. Churchman, how should you like to be compelled to pay a rate every year to our Meeting? You could not pay to it as a Dissenter, and you would not like to pay to it as a Churchman. Mr. C.—If a law should be passed to-morrow, charging my house in common with those of my neighbours, with the repair, &c., of your meeting, I should pay the charge, I hope, as a Christian, submitting “to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake” (1 Peter, i. 13). Mr. S.—But would it not be an act of oppression to levy an annual payment on property, which had always before been bought or rented free from such a charge? Mr. C.—Though I could not but regard it as very different to a Church-rate, which has existed from time immemorial, and subject to which all property is purchased or rented; and though I might also consider it unreasonable to pay to one sect of Dissenters rather than another; yet, I hope I should be one of the last men in the world to resist a charge made by the law of the land, though made unjustly, “For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully” (1 Pet. ii. 19). Mr. S.—Perhaps such conduct might be a proof of the sincerity of your Christian principles, though I can hardly admit that it would. Mr. C.—If it be a part of true religion to tread as far as we can in the steps of our Divine Redeemer, I would ask, has he not, in this very particular, set us an example which it is our duty to follow? Mr. S.—In whatever Christ has set us an example, I admit that we should follow his steps; but I do not remember the instance to which you allude. Mr. C.—Do you not recollect that our Saviour, though he had proved that he and his disciples were “free” from paying the tribute, the Church-rate {7a} demanded for the support of the Jewish temple, yet wrought a miracle for the payment of it, lest they should offend by refusing it? (Matt. xvii. 24, 27). Mr. S.—What reason have you for calling the tribute paid by our Saviour, the Church-rate? Mr. C.—Because, “the tribute demanded was not any civil payment to the Roman powers—that was strictly exacted by the publicans; but the Church dues, the half-shekel, about fifteen pence, which was required of _every_ person for the service of the temple, and the defraying of the expenses of the worship there: and which our Lord paid, notwithstanding his ‘Father’s house was become a house of merchandize, and a den of thieves.’”—_M. Henry_. Mr. S.—I own, that if an ancient and annual charge on property was to change with the religious opinions, first of one occupier, and then of another, there would be great confusion, and every rogue would cry out “I am a Dissenter.” Yet, still, I think, that some respect should be shown to the principle of Dissent.