Editing Joseph Priestley (section)

===Defender of Dissenters and political philosopher===
{{further|Joseph Priestley and Dissent}}

[[File:PriestleyFirstPrinciples.jpg|thumb|upright|His ''[[Essay on the First Principles of Government]]'' (1768) influenced early 19th-century political philosophers, including [[Jeremy Bentham]].<ref>Schofield (1997), 207.</ref>|alt=Page reads: "An Essay on the First Principles of Government, and on the Nature of Political, Civil, and Religious Liberty, including Remarks on Dr. Brown's Code of Education, and on Br. Balguy's Sermon on Church Authority. The Second Edition, corrected and enlarged, by Joseph Priestley, LL.D. F.R.S. London: Printed for J. Dodsley, in Pall-Mall; T. Cadell, (successor to Mr. Millar) in the Strand; and J. Johnson, No. 72 in St. Paul's Church-Yard. MDCCLXXI."]]

Many of Priestley's political writings supported the repeal of the [[Test Act|Test]] and [[Corporation Act 1661|Corporation Acts]], which restricted the rights of Dissenters. They could not hold political office, serve in the armed forces, or attend Oxford and Cambridge unless they subscribed to the [[Thirty-nine Articles]] of the Church of England. Dissenters repeatedly petitioned Parliament to repeal the Acts, arguing that they were being treated as second-class citizens.<ref>Schofield (1997), 202–05; Holt, 56–64.</ref>

Priestley's friends, particularly other Rational Dissenters, urged him to publish a work on the injustices experienced by Dissenters; the result was his ''[[Essay on the First Principles of Government]]'' (1768).<ref>Priestley, Joseph. ''[[Essay on the First Principles of Government]]; and on the nature of political, civil, and religious liberty''. London: Printed for J. Dodsley; T. Cadell; and J. Johnson, 1768.</ref> An early work of [[Liberalism|modern liberal political theory]] and Priestley's most thorough treatment of the subject, it—unusually for the time—distinguished political rights from civil rights with precision and argued for expansive civil rights. Priestley identified separate private and public spheres, contending that the government should have control only over the public sphere. Education and religion, in particular, he maintained, were matters of private conscience and should not be administered by the state. Priestley's later [[Radicals (UK)|radicalism]] emerged from his belief that the British government was infringing upon these individual freedoms.<ref>Gibbs, 39–43; Uglow, 169; Garrett, 17; Tapper, 315; Holt, 34–37; Philip (1985); Miller, xiv.</ref>

Priestley also defended the rights of Dissenters against the attacks of [[William Blackstone]], an eminent legal theorist, whose ''[[Commentaries on the Laws of England]]'' (1765–69) had become the standard legal guide. Blackstone's book stated that dissent from the Church of England was a crime and that Dissenters could not be loyal subjects. Furious, Priestley lashed out with his ''Remarks on Dr. Blackstone's Commentaries'' (1769), correcting Blackstone's interpretation of the law, his grammar (a highly politicised subject at the time), and history.<ref>Priestley, Joseph. ''Remarks on some paragraphs in the fourth volume of Dr. Blackstone's Commentaries on the laws of England, relating to the Dissenters''. London: Printed for J. Johnson and J. Payne, 1769.</ref> Blackstone, chastened, altered subsequent editions of his ''Commentaries'': he rephrased the offending passages and removed the sections claiming that Dissenters could not be loyal subjects, but he retained his description of Dissent as a crime.<ref>Schofield (1997), 214–16; Gibbs, 43; Holt, 48–49.</ref>