The Express. — London, England, 1847-12-17 00:00:00

their. ready manias saw to a pm the loa m which they e we tun, snit the pessliar elreamerreme a Ireland. govern "Cm& to tappet to FM& My lords, lobbyist diemaniag the meat might well Mato bindery Wei that indultam on I Xiiidhieribiniann 01846, witheat gelegionith ism e=o- tho thwwihurwirs www7, oaths knew wt largo. mbearee ea erne tapeworm was et was ea ) • beright se Merge egiest tb. Itish =g that meseme, nay he wameg eg pone eat '. Be:ame ar .. slab he body Meg am men of Bore le • nomarkable Ist the tore assn. reepeenkaW la lime, diameter, Me Meet and en an the press ememiso, we are expel* 'alley tepther is kora te the they were ; bat hie 'Palos k this ro an glee& l e sea to prairie • minty he Ike meet wee esailltioslowl mead underp • the:c a it, alter imbed state ef Imned. The gueenment tell us any will ' the arise whisk had bees glees by We nab (Lord maw Late se ether ingerleat brims mad ihe saes» Herawhistemikaiwldelloaledehli_kwed TerPollewhlw • rwonhor , whleh they offildaseasswary b the poreselles akb end of the be bail to be meet easslies a y = gememed ef. Th ep tell us that get meaty pewee were tam le ebb with senhga—kis tread use e.g 11 P I m i s e ss tY thii demob ef a pressing ernergemw; i t they c olt wont—hok acumen old welawrarwe thud INKY gm rik• us to s t“ than tkia power. But, my hubs how illalows l° assuaged the 4111.1111. W W I st entreat laa al " OM hem the ammo adagaad he !Ilia I. diaper, the pr- grated Ms ask they week by_iketeweelag wenn has the he Inas egameg by • Noi cei hem ehe aneos, ia whim altar to =mos end te delft. (ENO Road as stops be bee Henn, &awed the essamed arenters ta Ireland, and taken for le Mead he compelled to my that Wsthat it was oar dam te Ind • ',mod, for them. the shame whfr?"..sesoweemlaildet•hw hidirideolk would was the wane parewel 1 Was the measure embed Mtge while body. To the competition for land, sea. fa the samus p ion ef outage made, se this is, the Masi e , with the ialmnee of the priesthood, uthood, wto be eitai libil end pral mowers of the stele.? No, my bated thepereat eaketuast• modition of Ireland. Themes We. It wee in the early pert ef February that be amilaa the eaten the men was he convinced that the the l esseamandades was delivered begs the threw. and laseleable trademy ef malswisa gad absolution was bertfal he the nib se Marsh • measure brought kb yew lagaidps' to the mends a the people. The power which that religion hems wee seat Irma to the other house a paiensent. oaly knew, el ebeeketkin, was apeenlly dangerous. Any What fate did it meat with there ? At that time guesdoes mown to pet down eseen and absolution, of free trade were ender centideratbn—matters electing the %meow, mouth be worse than useless. Having teemmeose of the 'sentry were the principal awasariee of the deeeribed the mode in which priests in Ireland are Sea samsnme, important as they woe, wen in my paid foe mArtilere end christenings, the noble lord asked, Mises mein , say than that he the pestanion was it fitting that they Would continue to be p ayaa aid in such a 127 ' is sod Is ; and yet, ny lords, the bill diegraceful end kedeetat way ? He was aware that • great fa memos miech, andri sent down by your prejudice existed =rand against government payment, lwnmme eedthim la the monk of Bank was not fixed for a second but lie had never , nor ever would, to combat that maim ia the other home a parliament until late in the prejudice. Assume topic connected with this subject was Moth ef Jamie. Meer , hear.) I mast my, thermion, I the state dem relations with Rome. In his opinion nothing Mika it was gonewhet aiaseemary in the wale lord ma the could be mere ahead than that we should have no diplo men bench, I think he mead have acted mere wisely, more untie Miaow with • mart which exercised spiritual domi- dimessely, and more genmemiy,if he had followed the idea over six oullime of ear fellow-subjects. He did not tmonple of a right honourable tenant in soother regret the emeinioa elate curfew clauses an the present bill ; plass, and told A* hems at Ism that if repro- they um generally ihopsrative, and more particularly at the lin was due on the seem of the araspering of the bill present meement, Irma murders were contently committed a 1846, it had best be made net by uninination about In the epee day. He bad been told that there was a regular the past, but by arlopi es emspisee and ammelimeive mot- and wide-epread oonapirecy againetlandlorrls in Ireland. That mrei for the future. Vieth abeesiag.) I sew mine, my there wee a central committee sitting In Dublin, that persons lords, to the coati elf the measure itself, and upon were regularly tried and condemned, and that the names and this I shall oar but ahw ebesevelims. I consider it desire- pingo mesilog were generally known. However, from the that upon the gourmand should rest all the respond- Shimmied Warn informations, it was impossible to get at hility as to the &officious, er lasefficiency of this enactment. them. Fee Nine state of things there Will no remedy but • I should, however, be waging in duty to myself if I saspandlin dabs Habeas Corps., and the estab'ishment of awarded to its passing without expressing my belief that it trial by evert martial. Ile believed that in 1833 the mere is insufficient not way to meet the whole difficulty, but authorisation of those courts was sufficient, and tact his even to grapple with the principal part of the evil. noble friend, Lord Anglesey, did not find it necessary to air flow let us see what this bill proposes. Three or four point $ single one. The mere threat was sufficient. (Hear.) previsions of the bill give the Lord. Lieutenant the power of For the present bill, be looked upon it as a bill which meant proclaiing that in certain districts, first, the carry- but little, but meant that little well. He did not think it m mg of arms, and second, by a later proclamation, sufficiently stringent , but if the government thought it the possession of arms, 'bell be prohibited. Now, mffietent,lie was contented to let it pass on their responsibi 'appose you succeed in disarming the population—suppose Illy. With respect to remedial measures, he looked upon you are able by your second proclamation to call in and it so a violation of all the principles of sound policy and the obtain the arms—do you believe that by such a withdrawal dictates of common justice. Warms you frill succeed in putting down even the crime The house then went into committee. itself, but still more the incitement to crime ? (Hear, hear.) The bill went through committee without amendment, My lords, you may cripple the heads that execute, but _yon and the third reading was fixed for to-morrow (this day). cannot cripple the head, that plot. (Cheers.) Fire- PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND) BILL. arms are not the only convenient instruments of murder. The Earl of DEVON moved the amend reading of the There was a clause enacting that any person refusing to as- Public Works (Ireland) Bill. The noble earl at the mange Ist in the capture or to join in the pursuit of a impacted time gave notice that to-morrow (this day) he should move wean, should be subject to a specific penalty and to punish- the suspension of the standing orders, in order that the rte' ' meat as for a misdemeanor, lie wished he could think that maining stages of the bill might be gone through. this part of the law was likely to be effective, but if there Lord BON TEAGLE protested against the course taken was a general determination to shield or screen an by the noble earl. He thought it monstrous that a bill of Weeder, he did not see how it would be likely to such importance should be thus hurried through without operate usefully. lie remarked one cam where a due notice to the parties concerned. eatable being in pursuit of a culprit in Ireland, Earl ST. GERMANS, on the grounds of the urgency of tientroosied the whole village to join him, and in such • the case, vindicated thecouree taken by the noble earl (Devon.) wood did they do so, that the persoo pursued managed to After • few words from Lord Mowraeots, the bill was (mixed up with them, and thereby to escape detection. read a second time. Laughter.) Another lause, for which the government The house adjourned at 20 minutes to 11 o'clock. wore not responsible—it was introduced, he believed, by an independent member—awarded certain punishment to any convicted as an accessory after the fact. But what, ,crane like to knew, constituted an memory after the i bet? A warrant was oat. The criminal instantly became the object of general empathy. He was concealed, guarded, and curtained. Suppose this man was found, tried and ac quitted. Would the party concealing him be considered an I offender? Lord LANSDOWNE—No. Lord STANLEY—Why not? There must be a series el facts is order te bring him before a jury ? His ob jection to the bill wee that it fell altogether short of the evils it was intended to remedy. By no part of the bill was that monster evil of a desire to oppose and obstruct, in- Mead of support, the law attempted to be remedied. Earl GREY could not differ from the noble lord opposite, who stated the social disease in Ireland to be attributable to sympathy for the offender, and not for those who suf- I fired by the offence ; but he felt it to be equally true that I Nat social diocese could not be remedied b a mere measure for the suppression of crime. Un it the ex. Ming hostile disposition to the law in that men try was removed, and the population made friendly to is administration, he quite agreed with the noble lord that no effectual remedy could be applied. They could not by legislation create new minds and hearts in men who enter. tamed such perverted notions as te oppose and obstruct the administration of the law instead of supporting it ; and this bill aimed at no such object. It was intended only to sup press the outward manifestation, of the evil, and to punish offences when committed. To make the people understand the folly sad wickedness of what they were doing, to gain their sentence to the law, and iaduce them to respect it, could only be the work of time and of other more gradual improvements. He trusted, however, that this bill would contribute to that result. He believed that by increas. lag the powers of the executive government to sup press crime, by arresting and bringing to justice the offenders, the sound part of the population would be encouraged to amist in that endeavour ; for, as the noble I .rd (Stanley) observed, • great part of the evil consisted in the intimidation, which now prevented them from doing so. (Hear, hear.) The bill, however, contained provisions which he hoped would have a considerable effect in that re spect ; and to that object it was principally directed. He quite agreed with the noble earl (Fitxwilliam) that the two Objects should be separated ; that it would be highly inju• dicious to mix up with this measure any other for improving the social condition of the people ; and that the first step should he to restore security, the want of which was utterly fatal to the investment of capital and to the general improve ment of the country (Hear, hear.) He had listened attentively to the speeches of noble lords, but he had heard no suggestions which, if adopted, would, In his opinion, render the bill before them more effective for the object it had in view ; and certainly the moral effect of it depended in no elitht degree on the manner in which it was passed. Therefore it was that be rejoiced at so unanimous an assent to it. Some noble lords, however, seemed to underrate the ex tant of thirteen given under it. Fault, for instance, was found with the deans about arms. Now, according to the first damp, the smut a district wee pro claimed it became ille gal% daffy some at all, while the Lord-Lieutenant by ano ther ashes could oblige all those who were not authorised to comp sties to deliver them up on • certain day : It would be *sot to make the posseaion of arms a crime without &be main, and alYed al the means of delivering them up. The reel object et MB part of the bill was to facili tate the ezessain of the law by preventing the combs ef arms, and he thought it would have that sib% Bat whet would have still goatee effect was the minimise empowering the Lord-Lieutenant to increase the polite to any same and charge the disturbed district to which that increase was sent with the expense thereof. (Eger bitaz.) 01 the subject of licenses the noble lord to think itinisfficiouri to change the power Prom the • ErONiansteiparilas appointed by the Lord-Lieutenant be r astatted diming the di sa rm ing would be general, end Bowes= would be the aneaptions, sat the rule. That =ha ems, it teemed men Mirka& that the power be lodged in the heads a the county inspector or other high • ellen el the genstabulery. With re gard to essemeries Am the bet, they were only plated on In gem haft as esemeories before the bet, the the Pakkarent of wheat an act bad bees pima •hw rue age he* for ltagland and Ireland. Upon the maiden et juin k• knew not what his noble friend would have. His noble friend had admitted that on the whole juries in Ireland performed their duties effectively, and he (Earl Grey) felt considerable confidence, with the additional *elegem& which would be given to witnesses, and the facilities which would be afforded for bringing criminate to justice, that it would neither be necessary nor desirable to make any provision based upon the idea that juries would not be brought to convict. His noble friend (Lord Semimoot)—whose speech did him infinite credit— (hear, hear)—had asked whether the clause companion par ties to give information against criminals would apply to Roman catholic priests, in respect to matters coming to their knowledge by confession ? lie would at one say that the dame could not possibly bear any such construction. (Hear.) Another noble friend had suggested that strangers travelling in the disturbed districts should be provided with passports. He believed that the establishment of the system of passports would be found as ineffective in .Ireland as it had been in Belgium, where it had been abolished. If strangers were found in the proclaimed districts armed they would lie liable to be apprehended and punished, and with regard te all strangers in such localities an effectve watch would be kept on their movements by the police; but he objected to give an arbitrary power to the police to arrest strangers, be lieving that ruche power would be liable to great abuse. as to what had been said in reference to the omission of the curfew clause for the same reason he bad urged spinet that clause in the bill of 1546, viz., that it would - be an improper interference with the ordinary industry and occupation of the people—that it would enforce a degree of wetraint which it would be utterly imposeble to keep up ! and that it would be open to abuse, he Objected to introduce Into the prevent message. (Hear.) Though many remarks had been made as to the inefficiency of the bill, he had heard no practical suggestion for he improvement In his opinion, taking all circumstances into account, it would not have been possible to propose a measure more eakulated to effect its object than the one under their lordships' conaideration. Lord BROUGHAM observed that noble lords who had expreesed doubt as to the effect of this measure, were not to be called upon to take on themselves the burden of making wiggeetions for its improvement, but being anxious that it a lsonld ge to behind cm the responsibility of the government, beet bed by as general a emettrrenee of feeling on the part of the legislature as poselble they had stated how faint was their expectation that it wtisild be effectual for its purpose, and that they would rather bare given their assent to a mea sles t'f a more stringent nature. He differed with his noble Mend, Lord Farnham, as to the blame attaching to govern ment on the ground that as prosecution had been instituted %ph* them persons who, abasing their sacred office, had dencreassed aim to be murdered. A preliminary question to sob prosecution was, what evidence mould be broug ht maim them anelledeett to insure ' HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TmuRsoAr, DEC. 16. The SPISAILER took the chair at four o'clock, when three members took the oaths. REGISTRATION (IRELAND). Lord J. RUSSELL, said in reply Mr. Scully it was the intention of her Migesey's government to bring in a Regis tration Bill for Ireland, but he could not say at present at what period of the 8.16,00. SMALL DEBTS (IRELAND.) Mr. J. O'CONNELL asked if it was intended by the government to bring in a bill to extend the bill in this country for the recovery of small debts to Ireland ? Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the question was under the consideration of the government, but he could not pledge himself as to the time when it would be brought in. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGIOUS ORDERS. Mr. C. ANSTEY begged to ask the right hon. gentlemen the Homo Secretary whether it was his intention during the reeve to take into consideration the actual Mate of this km with regard to the religious orders of the Imes mrilkellie church within these maims, and the provisional &easten Catholic Relief Bill respecting the same? Sir G. GREY was not able to Gay that he would give his especial attention to the subeirt. DEFENCES O P THE COUNTRY. Viscount INOESTRE said that there was a letter going the round of the papers purporting to come from his Grace the Commander-in Chief, relative to the defences of the country, and which had created great interest. Lord J. RUSSELL said he was ignorant of any such cor respondence as bad appeared in the papers. With regard to conmennications from the noble duke, the Commander-in- Chief on the subject of the defences of the country, soon after lye (Lord J. Rumen) came into office, he bad written a letter to the noble duke on the subject, and had received from him a very fall answer, and since then he had been in frequent communication with him on the same matter, SLAVE TRADE.—THE BRAZILS. Mr. THORNELY, in the absence of Mr. W. Brown, begged to ask the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether any, and what, steps had been taken since the arriesl of the lately appointed English minister at the wart of Rio Jambe, m the negotiation of a new treaty of esoniateros between this country and the empire of Brasil—whether it be true, es had been publicly stated, that the government of Brazil had refused to enter on any each negotiation until the Slave Trade Act be repealed. Viscount PALMERSTON said Lord Bowden had re ceived instructions to negotiate with the government of I Brazil for a commercial treaty, but up to the last amount 1 1 which bad been received no commencement of those mega tiatiows had been made, and there had been no commentate. Mon from the government of Brazil as to the nature of the treaty which they would prefer. It was true the govern ment of Brasil felt an objection te the act which passed two years ago, but the government had no intention of proposing the repeal of that eat, unless the government of the Betel% consented to a satisfactory treaty for the suppression of the slave trade, and would adopt a similar course to that which had been followed by Portugal ; and if they consented to a treaty of the same description, the government would pro pose to take such steps with regard to the act relating to the Brazilian slave trade, u had. been adopted by the late go vernment with rega rd te Portugal. CHURCH RATES. Col. SALWEY begged to uk the government whe ther it was their intention to introduce into the present session of parliament any measure for the relief of that por tion of her Majesty's subjects who cowrientiously dissent from the rites and doctrines of the established church, from payment of church rates? Lard J. RUSSELL said it was not the intention of her Melmity's government to introduce any such measure. (" Helm, hur," and cheers.)_ IMPORT DUTIES IN SPAIN. Mr. 0. BANKEB begged to ark the noble lord the Secre tary for Foreign Affairs, if the government had received intelligence with regard to the augmentation of the import duties levied in Spain on articles the produce of this coun try ? and if his answer was in the negative, he begged to ask if he had received any intimation of such an intention on the pert of the Spanish government? Viscount PALMERSTON said lathe hon. gentleman bad not given him notice of hie question, he was not prepared to say if there had been any change in the tariff in Spain, but he would inform himself on the subject, and let the hon. gentleman know to-morrow (this day). TREATIES WITH BRAZIL. Mr. H. BAILLIE said that with reference to what had been stated by the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs as to the intentions of the government to enter into • new treaty with Brazil, he begged to ask if the Brazilian government had adhered to the treaties already existing, and if he thought that the new treaty would be ad hered to ? Viscount PALMERSTON (who was indistinctly heard) said facts were one thing and opinions another, and the hon. gentleman was as competent as he (Lord Palmerston) was to judge as to what was likely to be the conduct of the Brazilian government under • new treaty. But the hon. gentleman must be aware that that treaty might be terminated by the Brazilian government by virtue of a sti pulation or a preceding treaty. Its effect did not depend on the good faith of the Brazilian government, but it gave cer. tain powers to the British cruisers and to the mixed com miasions; and, if the Brazilian government consented by the new treaty to give the same powers to the British cruisers and the mixed commissions, the government of this country would think that n sufficient reason for agreeing to that treaty. MINISTERS' MONEY (IRELAND), Mr. 3. O'BRIEN begged to inquire of the right hon. gentleman the Secretary for Ireland if it was the Intention of her Majesty's government to take into consideration the expediency of relieving certain towns and cities in Ireland from the payment of ministers' money, maintaining at the same time vested rights, and indemnifying the present inrumbente Sir W. SOMERVILLE said the enbject was one of great importance and difficulty. It was under the consideration of the government, but he could not pledge himself as to the course they would pursue. THE REV. MR. M'DERIKOTT. Sir B. HALL said that he wished to put a question to the right hon. gentleman the Secretary for Ireland, with reference to the cue of the Rev. Mr. M'Dermott. A por tion of a letter from that gentleman had been read by the hon. member for the city of Limerick, in which he rid : " I have now to usure the public by the most solemn asseve rations a clergyman can utter, that the late Major Mahon was never denounced, nor even his name mentioned from any chapel altar in Strokestown, or within twenty miles of Strokestown in app- direction, on any Sunday before his death." He (Sir B. Hall) had received a letter yesterday from a friend in Dublin, stating that the denunciation was made en Monday. (Hear.) A letter had appeared lathe Times of that day, eigned " An Irish Peer," and which he believed was written by an Irish peer, and which contained this paragraph The rev. priest is quite right as to the word ' Sunday.' The late Major Mahon was denounced from tho altar on the ' Monday' previous to his assassination ; that Monday was a saints' day, on which the Roman catholic Population attend MA aa regularly, and in as wrest num. THE 'RIZES, FRIDAY He begged to ask whether inhemation had been veceived by the authorities in Ireland with regard to the denuncia te= of Melo Mahon, and whether it occurred on Sunday or Monday ; and if so, whether it was the intention of the authorities to institute proceedings against that rev. gen. tleman ? (Loud cheers.) Sir W. SOMERVILLE said it was impossible for him to say what information had been received by the Lod-Lieute nant in Dublin with reference to the subject of the question of the hest baronet, and he was not in • contlitioa to give the information which the hon. baronet required. That hang is, the hon, baronet would see it was impossible for Isla Oe =ewer his second question. (" Oh, oh," and murmurs.) Mr. J. 'CONNELL said that as the hon. baronet had quoted some of the words of Mr. M'Dermote he ought to have quoted them all, for in another part of his letter he denied that on any mocarion bad that denunciation occurred. There was some quibbling about the word Sunday. (" Oho The SPEAKER reminded the hon. gentleman that there was no question before the house. and he was irregular in addressing it. JEWISH DISABILITIES. Lord J. RUSSELL rose end ssid—As I understand my hon. friend the member for the University of Oxford means to oppose the motion for the house resolving itself into a com mittee of the whole house to take into consideration the dis abilities affecting her Majesty's Jewish subjects, I feel myself compelled, before making that motion, to state to the house the general grounds on which I propose to proceed. I un derstand, also, from my hon. friend, theta the majority of the house should agree to go into committee on that subject, he does not mean to carry his opposition to the point of refusing the formal resolutions necessary for the introduction of the bill. That being the case, it will be more convenient to take the disculaion at this stage, than to reserve it (as had been done en former occa sifts) until the house resolved itself into committee. (Hear, hear.) In bringing forward this subject, I cannot avail myself of many of those topics which those who have pro posed the removal of disabilities on account of religious opi nions on former occasions have been able to avail them selves of, for the purpose of inducing the house to comply with their request. I cannot now say, es I did when I pre posed the repeal of the Test and Corporation Act, that these are 3,000,000 of her Majesty's subjects engaged in all the industrious employments of our cities and towns, to= most important portion of the oommuaity, and distin for their loyalty to the house of Brunswick and to the prin ciples which led to the introduction of that house to the throne of these realms, who suffer under disabilities: nor can I now, as did the great orator who introduced the question of R oman catholic disabilities, refer to the state of &s neighbouring country as a potent motive to induce the homes to remove that source of continued discontent. lat aa he did, of the indignation felt by the whale psepY for the degradation they were suffering. I cannot ask the house, u it values the peace anti future welfare of the country, to agree to the motion I am about to submit ; for I feel that this is a question which does not affect by any mesas so large a union of the people, and which does not, either by the acceptance or rejection of the motion, involve such momentous considerations is those to which I have alluded. lam about to address the house on behalf of the cause rather of principle than one which involves any poli tical matter—a cause involving the religious liberties of this country as they concern some thirty thousand at forty thousand persons, forming • community which is not disposed, nor indeed able if it were disposed, to excite amour or tumult, to agitate the country by public meetings, or to threaten the nation with convulsions if their demands are not ace ded to. But feeling that I cannot appeal to such topics, I would at the same time take the liberty to advise the house that there may be dangers not affecting the safety of the country, but affecting the character and credit of parliament, if these claims are continually to be refused. (Hear, hear.) It may be said that parliament remained unwilling to concede religious freedom—that it had never yet adopted those great principles of equality which ought to be allowed to all the subjects of the realm ; but that where there were vast holies of men, im portant from their burdens and wealth, all threatening disaffection, parliament then yielded a reluctant assent to their demands in order to insure the peace of the country. (Rear, hear.) There is danger to the credit and character of the legislature, if it should be said now that it has an op portunity without danger or the prospect of any great incon venience, to adopt the principle of religious freedom, it ad. here, to the principle of religious persecution, and that they are determined now to show that it was not front any wil lingness that it had adopted large and liberal principles on former occasions when it yielded to the petitions of the peo ple. (Hear, hear.) Such, I venture to ray, wonld be • result very injurious to the character of the house. There is now no danger to arise from the adoption of those principles. There was one danger stated many years ago—in 1830 when my hon. friend (Sir R. H. Inglis) took upon him sed the character of a prophet, when he said :- -. 1 Derail upon it, if you admit the Jews to civil ealies and to the council of the nation, it will be sure W. fellow that in lees than seven years afterwards we shall Wee a reform of parliament." Such was the prediction that reform was to follow the admission of the Jews into this house. But without the admission of the Jews—without that precursor of reform—the very event has happened ; and in two yeses after the time my hon. friend thus spoke, reform of parliament was adopted by the legislature. (Hear, hear.) I now proceed to state that I place this question on the simple, but as I think the solid ground, that every !Wellman entitled to all the honours and advantages the British constitution gives—(hear, hear)—and I Sate further, that religious opinions ought to be no disquali fied= to the enjoyment of those rights, honours, end al mateges. (Cheers) I may throw myself upon the de. claretron made in the house, " that the laws if Mewl are the birthright of every British born =Wear ma on the declaration once made in the House of la= " no greater hardship could be inflicted upon an Eog than to be deprived of the power of serving his prince ee the country, unless some aims had been proved against him." On these grounds I say, that unless something can be proved against the Jews, they stand in the position of persons born in this country—bearing all the burdens impued upon them —ready to serve their sovereign and their country, end therefore are entitled to all the rights and privileges which other subjects of the crown enjoy. I state this with confi dence, and I will not attempt to ask the favour of the hones as to any merits which I might urge on behalf of the Jon= subjects of her Majesty. I think it is not smatter of favour, but that unless some strong ground of disqualification reeved, it is a matter of right to them. (Hew, hear.) will not ask it, even on the ground that who have opposed the Jewish claims have admitted their peeneble and social character as =biota ; that there are =Ms them men distinguished for talents; that in the ANS% Idled they are now admissible, they have *horn esemetless arable as magistrates, and In various other caps dies; that they are ardent in the pursuit of science and =f, end have exhibited an intelligence equal to any office or charge to which they may aspire —(Hear, hear)—l will not urge these topio, bemuse it may make this appear as a matter of favour on account of the peculiar merits of the Jews, when I contend that, being subject to the burdened the state, being born in this country, and being ready to submit to all those duties which the state shall impose span then., they have a claim of justice to be admitted to all its konours and rewards. (Cheers.) Without urging any of these peculiar reasons, I come now at once to consider the objections that have been urged and that are still urged in bar of their admission to the rig hts which I claim 'a their behalf. In the very front of these objections, it is said that it was proposed to unchristianise it= nation — , (hear hsar)—to take away the christian char/weer of the country, by admitting, not only Jews but kind of infidel to offim. of state, and to seats in the Now, far be itfrom me treaty, in answer tomtits& action, that the 'edition of a man Is wholly apart from the busi ness of his life--on the contrary, I think that in priests concerns—in his daily occupation—in all those trades and professions which men exercise, religion should have an influence and control. (Hear, hear. I say, therefore, when 'peaking of the legislature of the county(, that in the legislature which has to dispose of and control the various interests of the country, reugion ought to influence and con trol Its deciaions—(hear, hear)—and hence I do not put this lgori t t o: as holding that civil employment and sesta in the re are matters totally apart from religion ; but whatl do wound is, that it is a mistake to 'awes, that by words In an act of parliament, by a postaipt to a form of oath, or by words added to the fag end of a declaration, y on ems new, religious motives and obligations. (Hear, hear.) I believe that I can prove that by the declaration you do not gain that security which you pretend to obtain—that you do aut out men who are conscientious and deserving, ar.d who would execute the duties of their office, and exercise the functions of legislation with a due regard to their oblige tion, but you do not shut out those whom you pretend to be afraid to admit on account of their want of religion, and be cause you consider they would not feel bound to fulfil any of its duties. As opposd to that doctrine, I say it must depend on the general opinion of the country—on the state of feeling —upon education, and upon the various religious soft existing in the country, whether or not you will hare • christian legislature. ( H est, hair.) For the sake of illustration, I will take two different periods in the history of the country. In the reigns of Charles the First and of James the First there was a very strong religious fee ling Cred the land—men were divided into different recta, t v itthing was more remarkable than that this religious fervour wasbound by Christian obligations. Suppose in the legislature at that time were assembled such me n u F a lk. land, Hobbes, and Boyle—men all considering themsel ves bound by religious obligations—all professing to bold the doctrines of Christianity—would it have afforded one bit more security to the nation at that time, if men coming into the legislature had been required to declare, " on the tree' faith of a Christian ?" Would that have added in the slightest degree to the security that those men were Christian if at the end of the declarationthey had repeated those words? Take another period when similar events occurred Sup pose towards the end of the last century, a legislature meet ing in France bad amongst its members aristocracy who were disciples of Voltaire, and others who were disciples of Rousseau, and that it contained also Mirabeau, Condoroet, e i rch b"P an ien assem e. and bly7co e ul o d f that not sort. h goEvevrnerledbe"dbyy sees he s that ob- ligation, of religious truth ; but would it have been any security for any one of these men to have taken oath " on the true faith of a Christian ?" Certainly not. I will take another instance from what has actually happened in our own country. A complaint is now nude that the Jews are the revilers of Christianity, that they mock the Christianbeliever, that they hold Christ to have been an impostor ; and yet was there ever a man who more sneered at Chrietiartity—was there ever a Jew in the last century who need such language to depreciate the doctrines of Christianity, or to take away its belief from the minds of the people, as Mr. Gibbon? And Mr. Gibbon took your declaration, with the words " on -es faith of a Christian," when he 1--" ', 184' ...Rine. ...As; I ;ham feted the reign of that maestri'. Again, take Mr. Home, secretary this and, as charg lo e ssa wasam , held t eac h j the honoureble members the university of Oxford otltaiugofGeorgeb"naeTmerimmithaeMen*e'itdrd at the court of Pans. Can (Sir E. Inglis) Jew', either in the last ee present century who have written essays se calculated to aiimine all belief is religion as Kr. Hume, and yet he would have taken your declaration with a smile; and thus your vaunted security soar struck at the root.? (Hear, hear.) I hold that it is not by declarations of the kind you can ob tain any security. You say that the legislature is to be a Christian legis lature—that parliament is to he • Christian parliament; but do you not also say that this nation is a Christian nation, and that the British people are a Christian people ? In the same sense as you my that we are a nation of Christians, although we have 30,000 Jews among_ our fel low-subjects, you may say that the parliament is a Christian parliament, although among the 668 members there might be some six orseven who professed the Jewish belief. (Hear.) The general character of parliament must depend on the sentiments of the people at large and of those who represent them, and it is not by the mechanical contrivance of putting in seven words in an set of parliament, and haying it duly engrossed by the clerk, that you secure religious obligations. (Hear, hear.) But I have heard it said that, although there might have been such mil instance as that of Mr. Gibbon sitting in this house and ineb:l mitring himself to your deetaratioo, yet that this parliament has from time immemorial been a Christian parliament, and that Chriatianity is acknowledged to be part and parcel of the law of the land. On that subject it appears to me that great mistakes are made by those who thus refer to the tory of our country. In our early history,e Jews were persecuted in every mode and by every oontriranze of cruelty and degradation. At one time they were forced to sur render all their property ; at another they were sent to prison •at another th ey were tortured; and at last they were binished the realm. Such was the treatment ef the Jews ; but witk respect to the theory the law adopted, it was not that every person should bee Christian, bat that every member of the sommilt d y should belong to the church then universal in the ki om, via., the Roman ca tholic church. It is stated by lackstone, that the statute heretico eorrsburendo is es old as the common law itself; and what was the definition given by an ancient writer 'of the word " heretic" ? Why that every man was • heretic who did not adhere to the Roman catholic faith, or who de parted from it in any particular. Such, then, was the law of the land—not in favour of Christianity, but in favour of the particular religion then established in the realm. But in the course of time the reformation came, and various sects arose. The reformatiee was triumphant, and the Church of zur land was established, but still heretics continued to tes punished, and in the reign of Elizabeth they were sent te the flames and burnt on account of their heresy. But about that time there arose new distinctions, founded not on roll pions but very much on political differences. The Roman catholic of that day, thinking that they had no chance of supremacy front Elizabeth, entered into repeated conspiracies to change the succession to the British throne, and in conse quence, for the first time, the words "on the true faith of a Christian," were introduced in the act of Elizabeth. These words were imposed not with reference to the Jews who were then a dispersed and neglected race, but they were intended to bind all the subjects of the realm who eojeyed offices. The statute 3 James 1., c. 4, was passed immediately after the discovery of the Gunpowder Plot, and was intituled " An Act for the Utter Discovery and Punishment of Popish Recusants," and it contained the words in question. This act was followed by 7 James 1., which recites the former act and required the same oath to be taken by all the knights, citi zens, burgesses, and barons of the Cinque Ports returned to parliament. This showed clearly what was the intention when there was inserted in the declaration the words " on the true faith of a Christian." It was intended to be put to those Roman catholic who bore true allegiance to the crown as distinguished from those who were disaffected. It was not designed with a view to exclude Jews. I have stated thus much for the peeper* of showing that the intro duction of these words, and the establishment of any exclu sion, restriction ' and disqualification, were founded upon what were supposed then to be political disqualifications. The same reasons prevailed—the mane grounds existed in the time of James 11., when on political and not religions reasons these exclusions were continued. But there is another class, the protestant dissenters: were they excluded on the ground of difference in religion ? By no means. The ground of their exclurion is most ably stated by Bishop Jewell, in a pamphlet which he wrote when he was a young man, in defence of the Corporation and Test Acts. He declares that " every person holding office io the executive government, every member of the houses of parliament, ought to be well affected towards the ecclesi astical constitution of these realms." (Hear, hear.) It war not enough that he be well affected to the political and civil constitution. but he ought likewise to be well affected to the ecclesiastical constitution. (Hear, hear.) Those were the grounds then upon which these religions disqualifications were placed. They were never placed by the most able and intelligent of their supporters on the ground that religious opinion was a reason for disqualification. (Hear, bear.) In earlier times a difference of religious opinion from the one church established in the realm was a ground, not for disqua lification, but for that which, if you take the ground of persecution, is much the better means of enforc ing conformity—namely capital punishment. (Cheers.) But when the ground of 'political disqualification was taken, when persons were excluded from parliament and from offies, it was on the ground that as Roman catholic* they owed an allegiance inconsistent with their allegiance to the king of these realms ; or, if they were dissenters, that they were so averse, so disaffected, if I may say so, to the ecclesiastical constitution of these realms that the church could not be secure unless they were excluded from office and from parlia ment. But, sir, whatever those reasons might be, in the years 1828 and 1829, we removed all those (Hear, hear.) Parliament declared in its wisdom that the oatholica were no longer to be subject to the imputation that their allegiance was divided, but that they were as well qualified, with the exception of some offices connected with our ecclesiastical constitution, as any other persons to sit in parliament and to hold office. They declared likewise that protestant dissenters should not be subject to the disqualifica tion which excluded them from corporations and from offices (they had before been admitted to parliament) because their old disaffection to the church establishmen t was ere sufficient mend for depriving them of the honours and rewards which belonged by right to the subjects of these realms. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, sir , if that is the ease , I submit to the house that this which is called the Christian character of our constitution, if it has any existence at all, has only an existence from the year 1829. Previous to that year, the constitution excluded certain persoas, but excluded them on the ground of their political and civil in ability to perform the duties of good subjects and good citi zens. Those disqualifications being removed, there remain only certain words which are in the oath of abjuration, and in the oath with respect to taking offices in corporations. Now, I should submit, with regard to the words in the oath of abjuration, as with regard to the words which I quoted front the act of James the First, that they were introduced, not for the purpose of exclusion, but for the purpose of giving a superior an to th at declaration. (Hear, hear.) If it had been intended expressly to aloha& the Jews—if it had been said by parliament—" Their religious faith is so erronemm thot I deprives them of the right* of British subjects,"—thse asathedld have had something like the declaration against Izensiiistentistion, some declaration of belief in the New Teldthlemt, or some direct words implying their elniWillge lartrd of that, you have only, as I have shoe* Odl e tb pitheript to a declaration that pa make chit itshardos s tho true faith of a Chrfatian; you have no din Vila of eselasion, and that exclaim left to be inbreed oar ht the way . I have stated. (CY= Now, sir, it fa again that Christianity is part and of the law of the hand. I have always understood that site edsration to men, as I have seen it interpreted by Sot ham& jadat s th at if any writing or wee Wei re viling art ming the Christian IMO I ea Ahem asalost Lona the land; that the were gen of the laws of this country, that they formed part and of the law of the land, and that therefore no such man' or blaspheming language should escape without punishment. But I never understood it to mean anything beyond that ; aid I think it would be quite a new interpre tation of that doctrine to hold, that because Ch • ie part of the law of the land, therefore every person Wile Milos in the state must make a declaration that he tam that declaration on the tree faith of a Christian. (Sur, hear.) I think now, therefore, I have shows that there is nothing in the laws of this ormatry which was directly intended, and which mama to exclude Chat, as e u m fo rr r o e m ecti tti di ng egin in fld Par thi lilme hora nt Wil ls 1"11. to you have no security whateur—(hear, Out 4111. aeration, which the scruples of theism him to re- fuse, is taken at once by the man who utterly disbelieves in that faith which is adduced to give a higher sanction to this declaration. (Hear, hear.) If such be the case, then, let us see further whether there Is any reason net founded in our constitution, not founded in the laws of the country, which should m ake you continue to exclude the Jew from parliament and from office. One such ground bee been stated : it is, that the Jews are a separate nation—that they are aliens. But the Jews themselves utterly deny this alle gation ; they deny that they are a separate nation ; they my that they belo w , to this country. (Cheers.) They say that as the Jews in France belong to France, those In England belong to England ; that they are ready to perform the duty' of good subjects against all nations with which this country may be at war; and they ask you, therefore, on what grounds you treat them as aliens ? (Cheers.) But, again, I say, if they are aliens, to what country do they belong? When you exclude men from certain distinctions because they are aliens what you mean thereby is this-- that there is another country, another , king, another com monwealth, to which his allegiance is owing ; that y ou can not accept his divided allegiance, and therefore reject him as an alien. (Hear, hear.) But who are these Jews—born in England, whose families have lived for a century or a ' century and a half in England—who have their property, their family ties, their lands, their connexions, everything that is dear to them, in England—to what country, king, or commonwealth, have they to resort, in order that. their allegiance may be due thereto ? To none whatever. (Cheers.) It is obvious to all the world that their attach ment is to England, and that no foreign country has the power of commanding that allegiance, or seeking from them that support, which they are ready to give to us. (Hear, hear.) But then we are told--and told in what I must say " Co a t:b l e u :m* B" T tot say, l sa w y k , ' a ‘ t Y th ou eir ne w v n e; di is ti raler As an th in e sul ia t t. than iar. But is there not a see a Jew employed in retail trades, or adopting any of the venal trades whic iiiy.n. h uhd C : h ltdi ri t stis ? r sa ea f l o i thi r at in , th b Y eLJ ur ow; w sh D n o i al l d a d w yo s be u ? d r ((C ease i.qh7 n airL fo il r ed th D is ivoid ; • in many cities, even in the City a London, ,prevent • VII erorririncr retail trader rhwore What .;she norogort:withrediyoulliloy.,, P ea have not been entrusted with the occupation of land, use have been able to direct your industry into retail trades ?" Is that Julies ? Is that an argument which can fairly be used =time affected Wit ? (Cheers.) Bat, sir, there are eiedvise where the Jews have bow .adwittaid to ell SW 406 elmatire subjects. They.hewe hem sielleted is fewee. I believe, to all the hewesere, ollera, sod mewls i mop which IM state has to give ; and it la the *Yammer mows el the met enlightened men in Frenos—Depse sod other•—that *ay have acquired all the feelings ot . native eral ia is rikeUraititthatthethriegyhtstohotoldthane d um ex e erawe att.c toz e o n tdeu t to the eilewl, the same industry in the pursuit ot 1 trade,as yea flail from any others to whom such edvenapillit Mege (Hear.) Do not therefore, I beg =we ups me her disqualifications, upon your preeeripshos, mid theme argue that, if those (Nue ' Mations end psereiplione were taken away, you would not find the Jew es reedy to adopt any of the arta of industry or the oecupatione attends to which their neighbours would resort in a similar situation. (Cheers.) But, sir, against this other arguments have been used ; and on former mut lions we have been told, in awful language, that not only were the Jews, on grounds of policy and of Christianity, to be excluded, but that there were solemn denunciations in prophecy which should prevent us from ever granting them these privileged'. Now it is obvious that if such is the meaning of prophecy, it is not for us to decide what shall be done. Providence will accomplish its own purposes —(hear, hear), and it is not for us to help and eke out the designs of the Almighty, which will doubtless work their own fulfilment. (Cheers.) But, sir, I would ask, where is it that those who use this argument would draw the line ? Those Jews who live in France hold all the rights of citi zens; they are admitted into the chambers. I believe more than one member of the Jewish persuasion bag had a seat in the Chamber of Deputies. In this country we have very much relaxed the restriction. Of late years, a Jew has been a megidrate ; a Jew has been • sheriff. (Hear, hear.) By a late law, proposed by the right hon. gentleman opposite, the member for Tamworth, when he was in office, the Jews can now hold calm in corporations; and it wu but the other day, that, by the consent of his fellow-citizens, a Jew was raised to the office of alderman in the City of London. (Cheers.) Now, I ask, what right have you to interpret prophecy so as to draw that line between an alderman and a member of the legislature—between the right to hold her Majesty's commission as a justice of the peace, and the right to had a seat in parliament su a member of the legislature ? (Hear.) Who enabled or authorised you to say th at that was the line intended by prophecy, and that you can take upon your 'elves to define it, sod to limit the line which the Almighty has intended to be drawn? (Cheers.) That indeed would be to— " strike from Almighty hands the avenging rod; Prejudge 'injustice; be the god of God." (Cheers.) I trust, sir, that no such presumption will fall le our lot ; but that we shall do that which we think our duty to our fellow-countrymen, that which we think is best forth. gauntry, according to our imperfect notions, and that we shall rest in pious, bumble confidence that the Almighty will accomplish him purposes by . means best known to himself. (Cheers.) But, sir, there is that which I can hardly call an argument, but that which operates more against thou whose cause I have undertaken, than perhaps any other considera tion : there is a popular prejudice against the name of the Jews, founded upon Tenets' circumstances which I need not now enumerate,—founded partly, I think, upon a mistaken view of their afflictions, and partly upon the dislike which there is in many persons for men of a different form of reli gion from their own. But, air, that popular prejudice, which induced the administration of 17d3, after passing an act for the naturalisation of the Jews, to come down in a hurry the next year and propose its repeal—thatprejudice, as I believe, has verygreatly subsided. (Cheers.) Thee it has subsided in this metropolis, I bad with my own eyes a proof; because a gentleman of the Jewish persuasion in the City a i London, well known by his extensive transactions, known likewise by his charity and liberality, was elected for that city by nearly 7,000 vote at the last general election. (Cheers.) I quote this as a proof that the house would not be safe in laying, " Such is our opinion—we are liberal, and intend well to our Jewish fellow-subjects ; but there is such a prejudice amongst the people against them that it will not be safe to legislate in their favour." I warn hon. gentlemen not to rely upon that feeling. (Hea r , hear.) I believe that the people are to the full sa en l ' hteued as the members of this house. (Hear, home) I lieve that the general opinion—the right and the true opinion, as I conceive it to be—is, that religious opinion ought not to bring with it any penalty or any punishment. (Cheers.) I believe that that glen and tree opinion is fast overbearing and extinguishing any prejudice that may have existed heretofore. (Cheers.) Sir, I have now stated the reasons why I think that the ob jections which have been made against the admission of the Jews are futile and unfounded. If I ant raked what are the prevailing reasons for the motion which I propose, I appeal, in the first place, to the constitution et these realms. (Hear, hear.) I appeal to that constitu tion which is Intended to give a man those re wards, that honour, and that estimation to which his chuicter and his talents may entitle him. (Cheers) I appeal to that constitution which is the enemy of restriction and disqualification (hear, hear) —to that constitution which, by the abrogation of laws existing a few years ego, 1 has put an end even to there cases of exception which our ancestors thought, upon grounds of imminent danger to the state and the church, they were justified in imposing. (Cheers.) I ask you, in the name of that constitution, to take away this last remnant of religious persecution— (sheen)—to show that you are not influenced by the num bers, or the terror, which might make that which was an act of political justice, an act of political necessity. (Hear.) I ask you, in the name of this constitution, to admit the Jews to all the privileges, to all the rights, o f ? which the rest of her Majesty's subjects are so justly proud. (Hear.) And let me tell you that you cannot judge of the feelings of those who are excluded by the number of those who with for seats in parliament, or who aspire to offices under the crown. Many a man who would not seek either, who would be con tent to pan his days in obscurity, and who seeks no other advantages than those of private life, feels, nevertheless, the galling degradation—(hear, hear)—the brand that is impend upon - him when he is told that men of all other classes —members of the established thumb, protestant dissenter, Roman catholice—may all enter within these walls—may all enjoy those advantages—but that he belongs to a sect whom by the law acd the constitution you proscribe and degrade. (Cheers.) But, sir, I would make a still further appeal ; I would make an appeal to the principles of that Christianity which we all profess. (Cheers.) I appeal to you, then, in the name of that religion, as a religion of love and of chanty, " to do unto others as ye would that they should do unto you." (Hear.) I ask you why it is that, when we are taught by example and by parable, how it is that we ought to lore our neighbour, it is not the priest or the Lente who is singled out as the instance for our approbation and admi ration; but it is one of a despised and proscribed sect—one who belonged to what was then the refuse of all nations. I ask you why is this, but to teach us that all men are brethren, and that there is co portion of the human race, however divided from us by treed or by 'colour, who ought to be se parate from us : but that they all belong to the family of man, and ought all to be regarded as brethren. (Loud cheers.) I ask you, therefore, in the name of that magi tenon, which is a constitution of freedom, of liberty, and of justice : I ask you in the name of that religion which is a religion of peace and goodwill towards men, to agree to the motion which I have now the honour to submit. (Loud Ind prolonged cheers.) Sir R. INGLIS, after alluding to the talent with which ibe subject had been brought before the house, and the im ps/twos of the question, said he should be content, at this eller ,to take one division. lithe sense of the house should he eel the Speaker do leave the chair, he would give the Uwe now no further trouble ; but it was the fixed intention el himself and others to give the measure, in its future stages, every possible opposition. Since 1830, he bad always ibit it his duty, on such questions as this to take the sense of the house at the earliest period. He had not done in in reference to the Roman catholic Relief Bill ; but on this question, which was entirel y . one of principle, the opposition would be as readily stated In its first stage as afterwards. Never had this question been prow nted to the legislature so advantageously as on this occasion, under the auspices of the =minister ; and it might be expected to be much more in consequence. Still, the noble lord had not ventured le introduce the measure as one which her Majesty, with the ailment of her council, recommended to parliament. Nor did he think it was the measure of the united cabinet ; he hoped it was nothing more than what was called " an open i question." (lieu.) The noble lord had first adverted to the personal merits of the Jews, which he (Sir R. Inglis) was far from denying. He thought them men of great charity and liberality, and perhaps exemplary in all the relations of social life. But men were not on that account to be placed the shipping :t bsr LogiA u l t ,I , te tde i n i i r v lo ton: : : ' y : t . I). member of theo)3: inquiret ht b e : o oexiv petition, n. l ' in parliament. How many exemplary and respectable men did not possess the borough qualification of 3001., or the county qualification of 6001. a year ? The right to sit in par liament was only such as it was defined by the constitution ; therefore, to speak of the injustice of the privation of this washt mere declamation. lf, am Mr. Macaulay lied said, was a punishment, he would ask were th e millions whom the elective franchise was withheld punished ? Nei awe were the Jews punished by being excluded from 'parliament; for the right must be de fi ned and limited in some way. This was no question between Jewsuad Chris. liens, but between Christians and non-Christisas—be twins Christians and hinssulmep, Hindoos s Penns, Hottentots, and all others. If the noble lord's were admitted, that this was a remnant et the door of parliament would be opened to tbateillpeinlielpleir tisman whom they bad seen under the gallery kw. inwelay-- t u ga tz i oce , w w o h u o l d . 7:: d . thj door o t i o ooo th i s a Te o preelan a tl a v d e tir , f i wealth ; they were subjects of the same soweelipa ; and hjii n twh d ::: th ishwt:j.wh e peoe.rilierinc o hre t c h t: itund were certainly entitled to representation. Why should not principle i b iblreat snynb be noble had 1 implied Eaid lordo applied r f W East, be represented here, if the door of parliament was had presented, it teemed to be implied that election con e opened degraded I: bouts electors? the u.d. W 7 if a bankrupt were returned ? Would it be contended that had truly represented the dec isi on of the " sweet voices " of degradation, how many classes of our fellow-subjects were in a pamphlet, entitled, " Ought Baron Rothwhild to sit in Parliament ?"—that tkis was not • Christian country. Now, if this was authority, might they not expect the Baron Rothschild to reiterate these news, and do his best to carry them out? With the fact, that the Jews regarded our Saviour, God, as a crucified impostor—this was language he did not wish to use—but, with the knowledge of that fact, when a Jew wrote such a pamphlet as that to which he had referred, would he be likely to be so gentle to his Christian brethren, as to render it desirable to pass as act to admit hint iota parliament ? The argument he used was, .. , . .. by a person of the Jewish persuasion, said character of the English constitution bad 1829. He contended that at no period a instanos from the reign of Alfred to this t bad ever been taken except oa some i (Hear, hear.) The elder Edward swore h was said, was " holy in the sight of God. been excluded from parliament become b guarantee/ that be would discharge hi, faith of • Christian." There certainly David Hume and Edward Ultdion, to who had alluded, but they 7ereinfideh and duo morality—there was also Sir Francis Dash of the Exchet t uer, of the same opinions ; could ind such men, who had bees state, or had sat in that house, we I out the declaration that the members of tl mons should perform their duties as Chr they could only admit the Jews by stril "upon the true faith of a Christian." A had presented that evening said very t solemn engagement of the house was the end he need not add, that a Jew could blaspkem7 on the one hand, or deliber other, join in the prayer —" Christ ha God have mercy upon us." Then ages abandon their Christian character to m so small • number of persons as his nob the Jews in this country to be—nnmt more than from thirty to forty thousand of his noble friend would g o altogether oaths, which were the main security o noble friend said he hoped parliameut religious persecution, but he (Sir R. H. lie privation in this case was not persecutioi some security that the person you elects the state and therefore property qualific being a Christian, had been hitherto reqi as important, in hie opinion, as the ode] noble friend had stated, were a separate n for a moment say, who knew anything of rature of the Jews, that they were now prophecy might predict as to their future came into this country deep by drop, witl beginning at about theyear 1668, for th and ought the laws to be altered for them asked for protection, and they had obtain now insult them ? They lived in 'plea envy them ? He called upon the house, tion of duty and interest—he called up their common Christianity—to pause be the admission of Jews into parliament. Mr.W. J. FOX could not conceive the or the constitution of this country had e characteristic feature. Christianity, of s most capable of amalgamation with pot great moral principles, which were the g were more comprehensive than any of had ever been inculcated on the oonacie great law which had guided the noels I, the government in proposing this men unto others as you would they should dc them to bear in mind the civil duties " of their Jewish fellow-subjects. (He which they imposed upon them, the co-o required of them in works of peace an the adoption of that great law ; and sus minority, and living under their domia 'tiredly look for rights oommensura ties. We were, therefore, taught law to treat them in the same be ace in the constitution of this ' tore of exclusiveness that could be Christianity. What had been the who Lion in this country ? It had been cons pale of the constitution—to include one There had scarcely been an instance, for a half, where exclusion had been the d rate legislation. (Hear, hear.) At one of Elisabeth, the religion established is religion held by the great body of its inl tided; but this was found to be impra neat arrangement, and the attempt to the civil were in the reign of Charles the Matters were aga in patched up, but it toleration was the principle by which England must be guided. The Toler' for ever to the unity of religion in tl bear.) The Society of Friends oblige concede civil privileges to them, and oaths. The penal code against the cad to time relaxed and softened in its en dissenters were admitted within the pal and at length unitarians and all other a; within the boundaries of toleration by • and corporation acts, which at once thr that had kept dissenters out of civil offi, were they to find the constitution of 0 not in the characteristic features of ast aniastasents ? The noble lord at the he bad very justly said that we had not a i was not to be found in a set of cut an, but it must be sought for in the great gradually and surely unfolded theme' of legislation. (Hear.) In the histo country they saw the principle of re equality developing itself, and declarit tIM ildosipies of the constitution. (H lie sessabor for the University of Geo elusion was not punishment. There in sons with reference to whom this doctri but it was scarcely applicable to al telligence enough to conceive, and peeciate, the rights and duties of Whenever any body of men arrived at it a wrong to have nothing to do watt them. (Hear, hear.) The argument not he traced into detail without boo hon. baronet himself, for the purpose been obliged to allow the Christianity c under other circumstances,he would ha less ceremony. (Hear, and a laugh.) now stood was by no means one whit religious opinions as civil rights. It al lilies of the people of this country as Jews. The motion of the noble lord w Christian disability from the constituet The real question was the partial du i City of London. (Hear, hear.) Hs freely to choose the person or persons trust with the defence of their inter had they no such right ? (Hear, hew.) had not its fair share during the peel amount of representation awarded to it the country. They had, by the condo volved it io as much punishment as if t enactment, proceeded against it in a bi ties. And though this diminution of legs of the constitution bad continu time, was it to be supposed that the C confess itself in error, retract its proceed Baron de Rothschild the honour which him? He did not understand the Cii did any such thing. He believed that only stimulate it to re-elect him ; well the spirit and temper of that hour would be afraid to enter into collision don, or any other constituency, he b that in the cue of the Middlesex el electoral body had not then such a E uphold, that they showed a determinai proved very embarrassing ; and be ceedings of the house in that matte from its journals. (Hear, hear.) Th. moult had been in the oast of which returned the late Mr. O'Co hoped that a prudential foresight was giving oocasion to stirring up an agitat of the electoral body were so much in, of the Jews was one of religion and of Indelible brand upon him. But a Jers must remain. He could not un-Jew I rid of the bar to the honour of a • could no more un-Jew himself than the corpses of his forefathers. (Lug ing of difference' of race. He knew clear than the declaration of Mr. Van which he wrote ea thissubject. (The quoted a passage from the pemphle protested against the word " natio Jews.) There was no such thing as which had long since ceased to mut. for Infuse' f, end on the part of all them ish religion in England, he acknow than England as his nation, and the tie world entertained the same nth countries in which they lived. Amu that was to be found in the hundreds ranks of the Prussian army a their exclusion from civil privi commended by the man in who If they were to commence instead experiment of toleration, sod were would work, he did not know any el be so safely tried. (Hear, hear.) Th icing sett; they could not come into taunt church ; they were men of lof peace. They had no secret societi who might be supposed capable of du bourhood of those amongst whom I caly the representatives of wise, WA rirs, and could boast so high an a hamemparison, those amongst them MO ham the Normans, or those Its =Tto the Catos and the Cesar sar.) Their bible was our andent saints and patriarchs were e cited where the Jewish law of mot., tirread it, not in temples or is of that law which was placed churches. (Cheers.) These were might first and foremast, instead of 1 the boundaries of the British c Instead of hazarding the Christian c by such a movement, they would a which that religion blended itself their country. (Hear, hear.) It v coent of opinions, it wast the I it was not even in the magnificent ' proselytism, but it was in knocki slave, in respecting the rights of poi measures which, by stimulating ate different notions, bound them Paged it was not by exclusion, but be cap they would, as the poet maid, vindia land " to teach the nations how to more they would do by removing tb these pains and penalties against the them all, in the true Christian soiri • i [~`• i ~ y