nscience of
Baxter would not suffer him to qualify, till he had put on record an
explanation of the sense in which he understood every proposition which
seemed to him to admit of misconstruction. The instrument delivered by
him to the Court before which he took the oaths is still extant,
and contains two passages of peculiar interest. He declared that his
approbation of the Athanasian Creed was confined to that part which was
properly a Creed, and that he did not mean to express any assent to
the damnatory clauses. He also declared that he did not, by signing the
article which anathematizes all who maintain that there is any other
salvation than through Christ, mean to condemn those who entertain a
hope that sincere and virtuous unbelievers may be admitted to partake
in the benefits of Redemption. Many of the dissenting clergy of London
expressed their concurrence in these charitable sentiments. [85]

The history of the Comprehension Bill presents a remarkable contrast to
the history of the Toleration Bill. The two bills had a common origin,
and, to a great extent, a common object. They were framed at the same
time, and laid aside at the same time: they sank together into oblivion;
and they were, after the lapse of several years, again brought together
before the world. Both were laid by the same peer on the table of the
Upper House; and both were referred to the same select committee. But
it soon began to appear that they would have widely different fates.
The Comprehension Bill was indeed a neater specimen of legislative
workmanship than the Toleration Bill, but was not, like the Toleration
Bill, adapted to the wants, the feelings, and the prejudices of the
existing generation. Accordingly, while the Toleration Bill found
support in all quarters, the Comprehension Bill was attacked from all
quarters, and was at last coldly and languidly defended even by those
who had introduced it. About the same time at which the Toleration bill
became law with the general concurrence of public men, the Comprehension
Bill was, with a concurrence not less general, suffered to drop. The
Toleration Bill still ranks among those great statutes which are epochs
in our constitutional history. The Comprehension Bill is forgotten. No
collector of antiquities has thought it worth preserving. A single copy,
the same which Nottingham presented to the peers, is still among our
parliamentary records, but has been seen by only two or three persons