The Sun. — London, England, 1849-06-27 00:00:00

STATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF BRITISH INDUSTRY AND CAPITAL. . . A public meeting of persOns connected with the agri `'' cultural, commercial, colonial, manufacturing, mining, and shipping interests, who are favourable to the prin ciple of moderate, jest, and equal protection to every interest of the state, was held yesterday in Drury-lane Theatre. The meeting was convened for twelve o'clock, but at that time there was but a very poor attendance indeed. The pit was partially filled, so was the centre of the second tier of boxes, and the front of the lower gallery, but the dress circle and other portions of this magnificent theatre presented a beggarly account of empty benches. A very showy platform, covered with crimson cloth, ornamented • with gold lace, was erected on the stage, while the noble personages who graced it with their presence were ac commodated with some of the gaudy property ch airs which one sees intryluced into the banquetting scenes of dra matic reptesentations. The platform was surrounded by a numerous body of farmer-looking individuals who did the applauding part of the business in right good ear nest, and were most vigilant in seizing upon every point that aold in favour of protection and high-priced corn. The whole scene, however, formed a somewhat damag ing contrast to the crowded and excited state of the 'masa that always characterised the meetings of the Anti-Corn-law League, though it must be admitted that the parties who made up the majority of the audience to-day carried with them $ more comfortable and well to-de appearance, indi cating anything but the ruin and distress which they allege that the successful efforts of their rivals have brought upon them. At one o'clock the Duke of Richmond, K.G., took the chair, amidst much applause, the meeting in the meanwhile having been considerably augmented, but still, though numerous and respectable, it scarcely did more than partially fill the theatre. Amongst the influential persons present were observed the Mar quis of Downshire, Lord Redesdale, the Earl of Malmes bury, the Earl of Eglinton, Earl Talbot, Earl. Stanhope, Sir John Tyrell, Bare, M.P., Major Beresfurd, M.P., R. Spooner, Esq., M.P., Alderman Sidney, M.P., the ilarquis of Grassy, and Hon. C. Cavendish, M.P. There were also aboa half-a-dozen ladies present, and two in dividuals in smock frocks were observed in the pit, but they looked more like dressed-up coalheavers than farm labourers. The CEAIRCtAN, in opening the business of the day, regretted that the chair was not filled by a more able man; Rho although he had been recently suffering from indisposition, he felt that he should have been wanti ng in his duty to his Sovereign and his country if he had neglected to attend, and given their opponents an opportunity of saying that he was luke warm in the cause.—(Cheers.) He did not ad vocate protection for one class only—he would have it extended to all, and he was glad to find that the operatives and industrious masses of tho country began to think that they were so tar interested in this reac tionary movement that it would restore to them labour which a ruinous policy had transferred to the foreigner. —(Cheers.) Having said thus much, it only remained for him to explain the objects of this meeting.—(Hear.) No doubt the majority of his hearers were aware that a large and influential meeting was held a short while ago in the Hall of Commerce, at which a report had been drawn up, and the present meeting had been convened to adopt• and approve of that report.—(Hear.) - The Secretary of the National Association for the Protection of British Industry and Capital, by whom the meeting had been called together, then read the report, but its length seemed to be too much for the strength of his lungs, and the voice and services of Air. Higgs, the well-known toastmaster, had to be called into requisition to put the meeting in possession of some of the information it contained. The report itself was a very voluminous affair, but as the intro duction disclosed the real objects of the association, it will be enough to give ifs spirit. It denounced free trade as a mockery, a delusion, and a snare, and ex plained that the eterticns of the association would be directed towards restoring a moderate system of pro tection. Already the movement had produced results far exceeding the Most sanguine expectations of the managing committee, tend they argued from this their la bours would be ultimately attended with complete success. To give effect to these:, objticte it was proposed to concentrate in the reetinpolig — ifie vast but scattered power of individuals resident in all parts of the United Kingdom and the British Colonies, connected with the-agricultural, colonial, commercial, manufacturing, trading, mining, and maritime interests, who are favourable to the principle of such protection To apply .the power so centraized, to dissemina ting sound information on the controverted ques tions of free trade and protection ' • and to opposing, by every constitution a l and legitimate means, the organized efforts of free-traders. A list of noblemen and gentlemen who had promised to support the movement was read and received with considerable manifestations of pleasure. The names of the Noble Chairman, Mr. Disraeli, and Lord Stanley in particular were greeted with tremendous cheers. The Earl of MALMESBURY then presented himself as the mover of the first resolution, adopting and ap proving the report. After adverting to the Pro tectionist pledges given by Sir Robert Peel, on taking office in 1841, the Noble Earl went on to re late the events which led to the dowufal of the corn. laws. Only three months before that cceurrence Sir R. Peel pledged himself to support these laws; so bad the young men whom he had tutored as politicians, and whom he lead raised to office, and yet those young men, in a brief space after their return to Parlia:n , mt to support protection, consented to a measure, while in Cabinet C )uncil assembled, wllich was to strike a disastrou s blow at one of the greatest interests of the nation, and destroy at one fell swoop the honour of public men. He did not blame spy man who refused to remain ever pledged to mtottrs of detail; but what he denounced Sir Robert Peel and' his party for was, for nol being obstinate on a question of principle.—(Cheers.) Everything theds-ite and others had predicted would re sult from tne repeal of the corn-laws had come to pass. The poor had sunk deeper into poverty; the farmer, who in one year sowed his wheat under one law, and reaped it under another, was c n the verge of ruin, and imminent and exam! distress had begun to exhibit itself amongst all classes of the community. In proof of this he need only mention one fact. The poor rates had increased this year 700,0001., and this too under a law which was to secure the country cheap bread. Tho cry of the free-traders was—" Drive everything down; make everything as cheap as possible;" but though that might be a good principle to go upon for a young republic, it was madness to apply it to an ancient monarchy with a fixed debt which required 28,000,0001. a year to pay the interest of. The practice of this country at one period was to make the foreigners pay as much as possible, and he still held that to be the best principle to go upon. Now, if the present syst em were continued, one of two things must be done ; either they must reduce the expenditure of the country 40 per cent., or the interest of the public creditor 20 per cent. Was there a man present, or in the country, who could lay his hand on his heart and say that reductions in the army or the navy could be safely made ? Do that, and depend upon it the streets of Eegli,h towns would not long be undisturbed by the jingling echoes of foreign spears and sabres ; while, on the other hand, reduce the interest of the public creditor, and what would became of the much-lauded English honour? An yet, with their West Indian colonies de stroyed; with the commercial navy of the country falling to decay,end the royal navy sinking in its supremacy, something must be defile to stop the presentdownward ten deuoy of the Governmee tof the country, or a nation which boasted of being greater oven than the Rennin empire itself, which was acknowledged to be the cradle of liberty, the palace of civilization, and the home of affluence and comfort, would become a ghastly spectacle of misery and starvati m.—(Cheers.) Major IiERE3iORD, in seconding the resolution, de clared himtelf to be the representative of the farmers of Essex, and he could assure the meeting that to a man they were suffering from the baneful effects of free trade. The time, therefore, had arrived when they must go to work in earnest. The shipping interest of the country had joined them; so had the West India colonists, and they had only to gain over th e commerc i a l and shop keeping interest to insure the recovery of regenerate England. —(Hear, hear.) The resolution was then put from the chair, and de clared to be carried unanimously, although some few hands were held up against it, and a voice complained that the meeting would cot hear any one speak against it. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE moved the second resolu tion as follows: " That the agriculturists of England and the labourers they employ are a t thi s moment involved in the greatest difficulty and distress, while in Ireland th e condition of the population been pulat caused in England ionisre.roltin to humanity ; that these evils has We t h he in discriminate admission of torte produce, t e also greatly aggravated the miseries and ' distresseshaosf Ireland; and that unless just protection be atan-aea against the competition of countries comparatively un taxed, the ruin of the present race of Euglish farmers, and the destitution of the agricultural labourers, are in evitable, nor will it be possible that Ireland can be re covered from her present deplorable condition." He had no sympathy, he said, for such men as Sir Ro bert Peel, nor had he ever taken of the Right Honour , able Baronet's " hell broth."—(Laughter.) Sir Robert Peel's conduct was too disgusting fur him to have pa tience to discuss it. His advice, however, was, at the next general election, to send the supporters of Sir Robert reel and the Whigs to the right-about.—(Cheers.) Mr. JOHN ELLMAN, of Lendpert, Lewes, Sussex, seconded the resolution, and said Government would be made aware of the prevailing distress in his part of the country, when they attempted to collect the hop duties. In his pert of the country 12,0001. was invested in a farm just prior to the repeal of the corn-la as, and upon the faith of Sir Robert Peel's pledges in 1841 and 1842 which hadlteen depreciated by the free -t ra d e policy One third, as at the present moment the farm would not fetch 8,0001. It was ridiculous to tall him, as the Duke of E4ford had told ono of his tenants, that the landlord would take the fermi off the purchaser's hands at the ori4ical pries. The man who made use of such subter fuge s as that to support free trade was unworthy of respect, for it was uttt rly impassible that he cou h ld restore Lis tenant to tile Position he held on entering ‘ Captain HYRAX supported the reslutons, a i nd rarm ridi culed the idea that anythin g like a wise or a sound po - licy could be expected from th e Manchester who had had the hardihood to stig mat i se the British school, farmertish k sailor as a fool, and denounce the Britishh b ai o l i o lo r d as a awash d and degraded sot. His very bloo d land and ploulighe-aerr,obfweatrbeh.n3 he heard the tiller of the e boundless waves vilified in this way,—( Too often had he seen the British sailor battling against the elements and shedding his blood in defence othhis country, and he had no hesitation in giviiig the lie to those who dared to call him a drunken and degraded sot. The Legislature, who ought to be their protectors entertained but a very low opinion of the yeomanry of the country. L4i1.713:i and the eke. tric telegraph, however, had proved to that yeomanry that there was such a place a 4 London, and such a river as the Thames, studded with its miriads of vessels, and they had sworn by the God of their fathers that these ships shall continue to be built by British artizans on British ground and with British oak, and that before one plank shall be struck from the wooden walls of Old England, they shall make one struggle that shall shake the island from end to end like the throes of a coming earthquake.—(Cheers The resolution was then put and carried unanimously. The Cuanteweehen announced that the next resolu tion would be moved by Sir Allan M'Nab, a man who had risked his own life in defence of peace and order during the revolutionary war in Canada. e Sir ALLAN M`Nan was then introduced to the meeting. He announced himself not to be an En glishman or a Scotchman, but a Canadian, the son of an old Scotch soldier who had more than once wielded his sword against the enemies of his country. He was a native of Upper Canada, which, previous to the repeal of the corn-laws, was in a most flourishing condition, but since free trade had been adopted in this country its trade had fallen into the hands of the Americans. lie concluded by moving a re solution, " That the application of the priuciph s cf free trade to British colonial policy has produced the most disastrous effects in colonial interests, ruining in the West Indies the proprietors of estates, while it has stirauleted. the slave trade and aggravated its horrors, and in the North American colonies causing discontent, which, ripened into disaffection, may endanger the con nexion with the mother country." Mr. BOSANQUET seconded the resolution, and having recently returned from the West Indies, he could bear testimony to the fact that tree trade had almost destroyed those colonies, while it had increased slavery and the slave-trade. The resolution was then put and carried unanimously. Mr. G. F. YOUNG moved the fourth resolution, as follows: — That the shipping interest, together with many important branches of British commerce and manu factures, are at present in a state of extreme depression, which can only be removed and pros perity be permanently restored by a return to the principles of protection to British industry and capital, and that this meeting deeply regrets, that, pursuing the principles of free trade, her Majesty's Government have succeeded in forcing through Parliament, contrary to the express wishes of the p ople, the Bill for the Repeal of the Navigition-laws, convinced that in this sweeping extension of those principles to navigation, British mari time commerce wilt be severely injured, and the national defences be consequently endangered." He at ributed much of the success of free trade to the name which it bad hypocritically and falsely assumed. Free trade was based upon the principle that if we take American cotton, which the soil of this country cannot produce, free of duty, America should accept our main. factures free of duty in return. Under these circum stances, the policy which the country was now pursuing was the greatest delusion that had ever been palmed off on a credulous people.—(Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's Ministers bad too long played and trifled with the great interests of the country—they had too long merle ducks and drakes of them; but he would tell her Majesty's Ministers that there was a limit even to endurance, and they had very nearly reached that limit. —(Cheers.) He might be looked upon as a thoughtless speaker, considering the present state of affairs in Europe; but he had lived long enough in this country to become convinced that no political change could be produced in it without peaceful agitation, and his last wards to the farmers were—agitate, agitate, agitate. Mr. JOSIAH BOOKER came befove the meeting to se cond the resolution as a miner, a mill-owner, and a ma nufacturer, and gave it as his opinion that unless the present political policy of the country were re versed it would ultimately degenerate, it not entirely overthrow the institutions of the country.—(Cheers.). Every trade was suffering from its effects, particularly iron manufactures. There were 679 furnaces in this country connected with the latter trade, of which at least a third were standing idle, while, as regarded the tin trade, the manufacturers had been compelled to re duce their prices 20 per cent., which had reduced his annual returns 20,0001.—(Hear, hear.) He had the honour last year of filling the office of Hth Sheriff of the county to which he belonged, and during his term of oillce he had to sign warrants of c xecution fur halt a mil. lion of money—a fact which clearly demonstrated the distress and suffering of the districe—(flear, hear.) He would leave the hatter, the glover, and the other do mestic manufacturers, to tell their own tales—it was enough for him to relate his (win ; but he had no doubt that if the truth were known they were suffering as much as bimself.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") 'The resolution was then put tram the chair, and car ried, like the others, amidst much applau'e. Mr. SPARKHALL, printer, of Cheapside, on rising to propose the fifth resolution, read the following state ment " There are, as may be easily proved, no more than about ten in every thousand of the labouring population, who can be benefited by free trade. Mr. Spackman, an authority that will not be questioned, states, in page 147 of his • Analysis of the Occupation of the People,' that about 800,000 (being, as nearly as it is necessary to calculate, thirty in every thousand of the popu lation) are emplofed in our factories ; that is to say, in the silk, cotton, woollen and flax factories, which produce the staple manufactures of the kingdom; and from which' alone it would be possible to increase our exports to any considerable amount. In these fac tories the average of wages is only about Bs. 3d. per sm lc; and of the 47 millions of our exports last year, 33 millions were the produce of these departments_of facture, according to the Go i4riament returns, which are 1 as follow: Cotton manufactures ~ yarn ... ••• Linen manufactures £l6 770,868 ... .5,927 956 ... 2,802 823 ~. 489,878 ~. 585,033 .. 5,740 634 .. 776,175 „ Jaqi Silk manut actures Wuullea manu:acture3 ~ yarn .Z 33,093,367 This is about one third of the whole amount produced in those factories: therefore only one-third, or not more than ten in every thousand of the labouring population can be benefited by the increase of our exports, even supposing a free trade would increase the number em ployed in our factories ; which, however, I deny would ever be the effect of free trade, or of a free im portation of corn ; but we will suppose our ex port trade to be increased to double the amount of the , exports of last year —suppose it to extend to ninety four instead of forty seven millions and that it neces sarily, required double the number of hands to produce that amount., What would or could this amount to after all, but employing ten persons, at the most, in every thousand, more than are at present employed? Whilst, on the other hand, there are 118 in every thousand employed upcn the lands (page 144 same book), who must suffer from a reduction in their wages to meet the foreign competition." The Hon. Gstutleman concluded by moving the following resolution : " That the gen3ral adoption of the principles of free trade must lower wages and depress the labouring, classes of this country to the level of the lowest class in com pc tipg countries." - Mr: APPLEING, an operative weaver, seconded the re solution; which, like the others, was carried unanimously. Mr. FRESEFIELD then proposed. and Mr. BALL se conded, the following resolution :—" That from the pecu liar circumstances attending the last general election, and the strong reaction since produced by clear-bought experience on the public mind, the present House of Commons does not, in supporting the ruinous policy of free trade, faithfully represent the sentiments of the people; and that considering the urgent necessity for a change of system—for the preservation of all the best interests of the State—it be strongly recommended to all constituencies immediately to address the Queen, praying that her Majesty will be pleated to dissolve the Parliament and appeal to her people." This re.,olutiou having been carried, thanks were voted to the Nuble Chairman, and the meeting, which had considerably thinned, broke up shortly after six o'clock. MARKET INTELLIGENCE. (From the London New Price Current, June 26.) Suaan.—To-day there was much inquiry after West India of all descriptions for home trade purposes, but holders asking prices 6d above those of Friday checked the demand. A public sale of 150 hhds and 19 trcs Bar badoes went briskly at an advance of 6d per cwt ; fine yellow realized 42s 6d, and middling to good 39s to 418 per cwt. The market closes with firmness for all sorts of Raw Sugar. REFINED.—To-day the market was firm for Refined Sugar, and there was a good home demand; low brown Lumps were not to be purchased under 51s pr cwt, and Lair grocery 52 5 . B onded Crushed Sugar met with a au "t demand at former rates. In the value of Loaves there i 7 u n r="-- at excellent demand, and went at an advance of 6d realised 39s 6d to Ti"nili.es aftetrhneo.on Mauritius Sugar was in i,rpouwblic sales of 8,474 bags mid 33s to 3 ,1 . ,, t0 d and fine yellow 37s to 37s 6J, good 35, 6d to 36, 61, low ' fine b"" 34s 6d, and ord to fine grey 37a to 40s per cwt. EAST EAST INDIA.—This afternoon the public sales o f Bengal Sugar, consisting of 2,550 bags 56 hhds, went off at full prices—good mid and good white Benares at 41s 61 to 421 6d, low to mid 39s to 41s, and fair brown 34s to 34s 6d; a small parcel of mid white China fetched 40a 61. FOREIGN.—To-day there was no public sale of Foreign Sugar, and by private treaty little business was con cluded; but full rates were obtained fur all descriptions. MOLASSES.—There has been more activity in the market, and on the part of hollers there is firmness. About 300 puns have been disposed of ; Cuba at 20s, fine 223, and Antigua 21s 64 per cwt. Fur Bengal Treacle there has been a fair demand at 17s to I7s 6d per cwt, and the market as a firm ,appearance. COFFEE.—This afternoon there was an active demand for -- s•ive Ceylon Coffee. 2.879 bags at pnblic sale wrre all sold at an advance un former rates of 6(1 per cwt; low ordinary went at :313, good ordinary 35: to 353 6d, real ;cod ordinary 363 to 36; 6d, and damaged 28. to 34 i 6.1. ()t Mysore 282 bags were talc, nin at 323 to 333 for ordinary quality, which are full rates. CocoA.—Prices have been supported fur West India, and the demand has been more active, but the supply continues to gct upon a larger scale; at public sale 734 bags 27 barrels Trinidad were for the most part sold. There are few buyers of Foreign, and 27s to 294 per cwt is tho value. None ha: been offered at public sale. TEA.—There is no disposition evinced on the part of holders of green to accept lower rates, still the business concluded in good and fine sorts has been limited, but town and country orders continue to get upon a larger scale for the lower sorts. The value of Gunpowder Canton is is 2d to is 63, Hyson E'' ) it is 7d to 4s 4d, luspirial Canto lid to 1$ 4d Hyson sort is 5d to 2s 10d, young Hyson Canton 8d to Is, better sort is 2d to 33 3d, Hyson ord good ord lld to is 2d, better sort Is 3d to 3s 3d, Hyson skin low to good 8d to is 4d, Twankay ordinary 5d to 6J, better sort 8d to Is. For scented Tea the demand is more active, and stiffer rates are obtained. A good demand has been experienced for Congou of tho medium and finer sorts, whilst sales to a fair extent have been made in the lower sorts. Former rates are well kept up, and holders dis played firmness. RICE.—To-day East India Rice met with less atten tion, and at public sale 7,700 bags Bengal were only partly disposed of at previous quotations—ord white 8s 6d to 9s, mid and good 9s 6d to 103 6d, and damaged 6a 6d to 9s per cwt. SPICES.—To-day Pimento was in excellent request, and at public auction 150 bags sold at stiffer rates— good fetching 4d, mid and good mid 3id to 3.4- 1, and damaged 314 to 33d. Of East India Ginger 1,976 bags went at lower rates—ord rough Malabar 21s 6d to 225, Bengal do 22s to 235, Bombay 20s to 225; and 4 pkgs Mace, mid at 2s 4d to 2s 5d per lb. SPIRITS.—For Demerara Rum rather higher rates have been obtained, whilst the purchases amount to 300 puns at 2s to 2s Id for 32 to 38 per cent over proof - . Leeward Island—The sales amount to 350 puns at Is 4d to is 5d proof, but chi( by at Is 4id to is Si. East India has Leen dealt in with more readiness at is 3d prof); and holders evince more firmness. For Jamaica former rate 4 are well supported. We quote 20 to 29 per cent over proof at 2s 2d to 2s 4d, 30 to 36 over 2s 5d to 35 4d, and favourite marks at 3s 7d to 4s per gallon. Brandy, Cognac best brands of the vintage of 1848 has been sel ing at 3s 7d to 3s 9d, 1847 ditto 4s 3d to 4s sd, 1846 ditto 5s 3d to 5s 51, 1845 5s Sd to 5s 10d, inferior sorts 2s 2d to 3s 6d, and Bordeaux 2s to 2s 2d. Geneva finds a more ready sale; ord at is 9d to Is 103, and fine for duty 2s 3d to 3s 3d. COCHINEAL.—To-day Cochineal met with a limited demand, and at a public sale of 211 bags Honduras a small part only sold at 3s 10d to 4s 6d for ord to fine silvers, which are former rates. INDIGO.—For auction the quantity of East India de clared has been increased to 13,242 chests. For Spanish the prices obtained are equal to those current on Tues day last, and the demand is better. TALLOW.—Prices have still a downward tendency for Russian, and the trade continues to operate with caution. There is a desire evinced to sell fine P. Y. Candle at 38s to 385 3d per cwt on the spot. Only small pun chases have been made for delivery in last three months of the year, although 38s 6d to 385 91 have been accepted. Home made has been only in limited request, and there are sellers at the low rates of 36s to 37s nett cash. Other sorts of Tallow must be quoted rather cheaper on account of the extensive supply. At auction 255 casks, 830 boxes, and 134 serons South American nearly all found buyers at from 33s to 36i 6d for low to fine quality; very ord 30s to 31s; 307 casks of Austra lian. 33s 6d to 37s 3d; and 57 pkgs of Cape 36s 6d to 39s 61 per cwt. For auction 900 casks are declared. Rough Fat is quoted at 2s Id per stone of Sibs, and is in plentiful supply. OlLS.—Prices have fallen considerably for Cocoa Nut Oil, the market having been plentifully supplied. Oi 400 casks at auction, a part only sold at 33s for Ceylon, and at 26s to 27s 3d per cwt for Sydney. Palm, at auction, a part only of 113 casks found buyers: fine at 29s 61 to 303, and inferior 24s to 28s 6d, but lower rates are not expected to prevail. Rapeseed Oil finds a more ready sale, and the market is firm; brown at 36; 61 to 375, pale 37s to 37s 6d, and Foreign at 38s to 39s 9 For Linseed Oil the demand continues to get brisker both for home consumption and exportation, and prices are still on the advance, whilst the supply is on the de- creas , -. On the spot the rates paid are 26s to 26s 3d, and for delivery 263 61 to 265 91 per cwt; the market has also a firm aspect. Olive has been only in limited rtquest, still holders displayed firmness, .and obtain 411 to 411 101 per tun for Gallipoli, and 391 to 40/ lOs for other sorts. For Sperm the demand has been better, and holders evince more firmness : the supply is also less plentiful. Sales of fine quality have been male at 711 to 721 per ton. A much better sale exists for all sorts of Southern, whilst hi;her rates are obtained ; low to good quality at 261 to 281, and fine 291 to 301. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 26. Their Lordships met at Five o'clock. Tho Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition from the Lord Miyor and Corporation of the city of London, in favour of the Parliamentary Oaths Bill. INCUMBERED ESTATES (IRELAND) BILL. The report on this Bill was brought up, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time on Thursday. COUNTY CESS (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of the Marquis of CLANRICARDE, this Bill was read a second time. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILL. Lord REDESDALE presented a petition from certain shareholders, praying to be heard before Committee against this Bill. PETITIONS. The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition praying for an alteration in the poor.laws. The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented several peti tions against the admission of Jews to Parliament, and agiinst any endowment to Roman Catholic. BIRMINGHAM BOROUGH EXEMPTION FROM COUNTY RATES BILL. Lord WHARNCLIFFE, moved the second reading of this Bill. The borough of Birmingham had its own Recorder its own court, and its own jurisdiction un d er ewe eeeetesparcorporations act. Its own borough rate defrayed the whole expenses of its own judiciel esta blishments. It was entirely separated from the county of Warwick in that respect. Nevertheless, it had been assessed to the expenses of the adminis . ration of justice in the county of Warwick, and the Court of Queen's Bench had decided that such assessment was legal. Now, seeing that Birmingham defrayed the expenses of its own gaol and its own lunatic asylum, and derived no benefit from the gaols and asp lums of tho county of Warwick; and as the county of Warwick had assessed Birmingham fur the purpose of rebuilding the Warwick county gaol, this Bill had been introduced in order to relieve the borough of Birmingham from this charge, an important charge, inasmuch as Birmingham derived no advantage from the county buildings. ROYAL COMMISSION. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said, that having received notice that her Majesty's Royal Assent was about to be given by Commission to certain Bills, he moved that their Lordship s s h ou ld a dj ourn to robe.— Agreed to. After the laps© of a few minutes, the Royal Commis sioners, the Earl of Shaftesbury, the Earl of Minto, and Lord Campbell, entered the House robed, and took their seats at the foot of the Throne. The Usher of the Black Rod was then ordered to sum • mon the Commons to the bar of their Lordships' House, and shortly after the Speaker, accompanied by several Members, attended at the bar, when the Royal Assent was given by commission to the following Bills: Apprehension of Deserters (Portugal). Defects in Leases. Greenwich Markets Regulation. Navigation. Sheep Stealers (Ireland). Account of Turnpike Trusts and Bridges (Scotland). Transportation for Treason (Ireland). Grand Jury Cess (Ireland). The Bury St. Edmunds Gas Company. Scottish Amicable Life Assurance Society (Incorporating and Conferring Powers;. The Tay Navigation and Perth Harbour Acts Amend ment. Ransonmoor or Doddington Fifth District Drainage Act Amendment (to amend and extend the powers, to annex other lands, to borrow money, and to levy rates and taxes). Hartlepool Gas and Waterworks. Macclesfield Borough Waterworks, Markets, &a. Universal Railway Casualty Compensation Company. Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway (Branch to London and South-Western Railway—No. 2). The River Dun Navigation (Purchase of Stainforth and Keadby Canal). Kirkaldy Harbour, Docks, Ferry, and Petty Customs. Sunderland Dock Act, and River Wear Commissioners' Act Amendment. Chester and Holyhead Railway (Increase of Capital, with Powers to the London and North-Western Rail way Company to subscribe thereto). London and South-Western Railway (Extension of Time for the Purchase of Lands and Completion of Works on the Basingstoke and Salisbury and Farnham and Alton Lines). Division of the Living of Richmond and Kingston-upon- Thames. Ashton-under-Lyne Police, Market, and Improvement Acts (Extension and Amendment, and Transference of Gas and Waterworks, and other Properties, to the Corporation). Staffordshire Potteries Waterworks (Extension and Amendment of Act). London Gas Light Company (Amendment of Act). Cockermouth and Workington Railway (Branch to Bridgefoot, Amendment of Act and Power to Lease to Whitehaven Junction). Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway, and Edinburgh and Glasgow Union Canal (Amalgamation or Salo or Lease of the Union Canal to the Railway Company). Windsor Extension of the Windsor, Staines, and South- T t h o i r s s u k b subscribe), power 'Richmond to to and Wi s n o d u s t o h r . ) W l e i s a t i e l r w n ay nai ( l w w i a t y h Railway (power to guarantee interest seY, St. Andrew Union Leeds C o mpan y dad on certain Shares, &c.) Whittlesey, St. Mary, and Whittles of Parishes, and for Improving the Town of Whit t ! tlesey. Society for the Prosecution of Felons' Distribution of Funds. Abdy's Estate, William's Estate, and James' Divorce. Their Lordships then resumed. The Earl of WARWICK opposed the second reading of this Bill, and be did so in accordance with the unanimous reso'ution of the magistrates of the county of Warwick in Qearter Sessions assembled. The Bill was contrary to the general policy of Par liament. It' Birmingham were allowed to pass this Bill, they would have every incorporated borough claiming exemption from county rates. Ile therefore opposed the Bill on public grounds, and would move that the Bill be r ea d a secon d time that day six months. Lord CAMPBELL considered the Bill a most just Bill, and could hardly think their Lordships would throw it out without further inquiry. By the Municipal Corporation Act Birmingham vies entirely separated from the county of Warwick for these pur poses. It had, at the expense of 100,0001., erected for itself a new goal and a new lunatic asylum, and it brought no burden either from lunatics or , prisoners upon th e c ounty of Warwick, and was it 6a, therefore, he would ask, that Birmingham _ should be called upon to contribute one-third of the ex pense for the erection of a new gaol and a new lunatic asylum for tho county of Warwick, from which it coati derive no benefit? He trusted their Lordehips would permit the Bill to be read a second time. Lord REDESDALE opposed the Bill, becaL se it was a private Bill brought in to get rid of public taxation. The Earl of CHICHESTER would have preferred that this grievance should have been remedied by a general Act, but it was so great that he felt bound t do all in his power to remedy it, and therefore he should support the Bill. The Marquis of SALISBURY moved that the debate be adjourned until Thursday, as he hoped a short delay would enable the various parties to come to some uader standing. Lord WHARNCLIFFE opposed the motion for delay. There could be no hope of accommodation, inasmuch as the Warwickshire magistrates would listen to no terms. Lord LYTTELTON thought that if the Bill were thrown out a public Bill would be immediately intro duced. Lord HATIIERTON supported the Bill, and said the Gov, rnment had opposed it while the question was pond in; in a court of law, but when the qeestion had been decided he had supported the Bill as a measure intended to remedy a monstrous injustice. Lord BEAUMONT believed that Birmingham had a good case, but the principle in dispute was whether they would permit persons by a private Bill to defeat a public Act, a principle which he believed to be pregnaet with danger. If the case of Birmingham were as strong as stated, there could be no hardship in rejecting, this Bill, because there would be ample time to intro duce a public measure to remedy the grievance. The Marquis of SALISBURY withdrew his amend ment for the adjournment of the debate. Sn - angers were then ordered to withhraw, and their Lordships divided, when there appeared— Contents for the second reading) Not-contents (against it) ••• Majority against the Bill ... The Bill was consequently lost. PRISON DISCIPLINE. Lord BROUGHAM gave notice that on that day week he would present a petition from Dr. Rice and others, on the subject of prison discipline, es connected with the administration of the criminal law, and he would then take the opportunity of calling their Lordships' at tention to the important subject. PARLIAMENTARY OATHS BILL. On the order of the day for the second reading of the Parliamentary Oaths Bill, The Earl of CARLISLE said that, in asking their Lordships to give a second reading to this Bill, he could not but be sensible that he laboured under a source of much discouragement, as, with reference to one of the most important clauses of the Bill, the opinion of their Lordships was taken last session of Parliament, and given against it. That might spare him the necessity of going into all the antecedent circumstances of the Bill, which he must have done if it had been brought now, for the first time, before their Lordships' notice. Although there were some things to damp the efforts in favour of this Bill, yet the general spirit of their legislation tended to favour the object contemplated. It would also be peceived that the Bill now before their Lordships was not identical with the Bill of last year, but sought to ex tend its remedies and its scope further. The Bill of last year dealt exclusively with Jevva, whereas the present Bill proposed to extend its provisions to certain classes of Christians. At present the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and abjuration, were taken by all Members of Parliament. It was proposed to substitute in its stead a compendious and simple form of oath, which should contain all that was pertinent and necessary in these oaths. It might be said that this involved an inquiry into the propriety of dispensing with oaths entirely. I t was quite clear th a t t h e Noble Lords he was addressing having taken these oaths, must have been persuaded of the lawfulness of taking them. But at the same time some of their Lordships had manifested a wish to be exempt from thtm, and were not equally convinced of their lawfulness. But whatever difference of opinion might exist on this head, he was convinced that they would all agree with him, that when an oath was admi nistered it ought to be made as binding, as specific, and as reverential as possible.—(Hear). There ought to be nothing superfluous or unnecessary in them, and he felt compelled to state that the oaths taken at their Lord• shilfa table, and at that of the other House of Parlia ment, were not exempt from this disparagement. He felt at a'l times disposed to regard with reverence the ad ministration of an oath, but he confessed he never was less disposed to spontaneous reverence than when listen leg to the phrases in the oath of allegiance relating to the Pretend er , t h e P r i ncess S op hi a, and to a family which had di sappeare d f rom t h e f ace o f the earth.—(Cri es o f " Hear, hear.") In the oath of supremacy the power of any foreign potentate what ever in these realms was abjured. Now, whatever might be the licence of interpretation put upon language, it was well known that there were peers who had a here- ' ditary right to sit in that House, and who were capable of taking a part in their deliberations with great advan tage to their Lordships and the country, who were con vinced that those words were opposed to the truth.— (Hear, hear.) Lord Clancarty, a nobleman whose ad ministration of the poor law in Ireland had been of the most distinguished character, had refused t o t a k e t h e oath, because h e b e li e ved that these words should be taken in their plain sense. 'These reasons formed a suf fieient ground for altering the oaths administered to the Chris:iun Members of either Home of Parliament. But he could not conceal from their Lordships that the main and essential object of the Bill wets to admit the Jews into Perliamena—(Bear, hear.) He was aware ...i ea. race .41 5p.....ar.a on w hiala that proposition had been resisted, a'sd if he believed in the validity of the arguments adduced in opposition, he would wish the 811 to be defeated. But he laid down, as the cardinal principle by which they ought to be guided, that unless in case of proved and irresistible necessity, religious opinions should not form a cause for civil disqualifica ti n. That had been acted upon to a large extent by the Legislature of late years. Within his own par liamentary experience, they had admitted Roman Catho lics to Parliament; they had removed many disabilities from various classes of Dissenters ; and, in the case of the Jews themselves, there had been a successive series of relaxations by the Sth, 9th, and 10th of Victoria; their schools and synagogues were placed on a footing of equality with all other Dissenters.—(Hear, hear.) When they saw the Jews exercising the elective franchise, dis peneing justice, and practising at the bar—(heal., hear) —when they saw them acting as high sheriffs, justices of the peace, aldermen, and mayo rs , h e th oug h t t h at the principle of exclusion was almost given up.—(Hear, hear.) Indeed, the Jews were the only class of her Ma jesty's subjects to which these exclusions and disabilities now applied. In their case, exclusion from se its in Parliament was the only one now remaining. He could not see any possible evil to arise from their introduction into the Legislature. He believed that it had been ably proved there had never ben any direct legislation to exclude them, but it was by an i n di rect and inferential application of words in Acts passed for other purposes they were so.—(Hear, hear.) He did not believe that their Lordships would refuse their assent to this Bill, because the Jews were a peaceable people, who would not descend into the streets, raise barricad. , s, and cry "To your tents, 0 Israel."—(A laugh.) He `scald not have the bad taste to menace their Lordships with any evil constqu, flees from their rejection of this measure; but he would say, that looking at the pro rreadee liberality of our past 1, gilation, at the det e r• a - • minetion of the parties who had taken up the question, end the feeling of the people at large, he could not but think that it would be wise for their Lordships not to embitte r this contest by, protracting a struggle which must be ultimately unavailing.—(Hear, hear.) He would not detain the Howie either by expatiating upon the high reseectability and unsullied morality of the Jews, or the praiseworthy manner in which they discharged all their duties of citizens. With respect to the particular views it was not necessary to advert to them at any length, were it not that with all the generosity and kind hearted ness which he knew animated their Lordships, he felt that it was specially on that gr oun d t h ey f e l t a d i ff i culty e' in agreeing to the measure.—(Hear, h ear .) I t was not as Church of England men they refused asse n t, b u t b ecause he thought that by giving a fresh mark of honour to the Jews they were in fact swerving from the allegiance they owed to the Redeemer they worshipped. He was well aware of the difficulty of arguing a religious ques tion in the presence of the spiritual Peers. But when he was aware of the resistance of the religious scruple, he trusted ho might without irreverence to advert slightly to it, though it was by no means that point of view on which he most strongly rested his advocacy of this measure. The past calamities and captivities of the Jews, and their present dispersion were attributed by their own prophets and sacred writers to their disobedi ence to the Almighty; yet even in these writings a re cognition of the sacredness of the nation itself was re- ... 31 ... 58 ... -27 corded. It was the like tree stricken with lightning, the ruins of which were yet hallowed. The question was what was the line of conduct marked out for us at the present time ? Whatever might be the censure cf events, that would bring about the fulfilment of prophecy, it was no part of our duty to anticipate it. —(Hear, hear.) It was our duty humbly to fulfil the letter of the law of Christian love, and leave to the Crea tor the accomplishment of his own purposes in his own time.—(Loud cheers.) He was thankful that the fierce and undisguised persecution which, acting upon the contrary principle, had been applied to the Jews in for- . . .. mer ages, was now extinct, bat he feared that, congra tulating ourselves upon this circumstance, we might in a u more refined mode, still gratify that persecuting bodytingspiriotf, f r persecution it essentially was, when men were excluded from the rights of citizens Looking at any possible on account of re b li i g e io m u i s som o e p f in tb io a n( t s. ro — ig their introduction into the Legislature, be would ask if Fl h might ear ar i s e h f e r a o r m . ) they were more likely to be infected . wi . th the doctrines of Radicalism, Republicanism, or Socsalism sesnLttoe th gbt a ihes ti alatt o ut t h h rei r classes? He believed not, but the very contrary; and as far as any interference with the spiritual or temporal powers of the Church was concerned, he was convinced that appre hended.wf r a om an no ( class oul vg f o tb f t theo continue referencecnot i m ii u m e u t n ot i at be y twasabe Christians tthatstatement m c he conceived that the introduction of a few members of the Hebrew persuasion into Parliament would no more unehristLnise the Legislature than the fact of the exist ence of a small body of Jewish fellow -citizens destroyed the existence of the nation as a Christian nation.— (Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelates, and their clergy in their pulpits, urged with eloquence, learning, and in an evangelical spirit, the great truth of our reli gion. This was one mode of making a Christian nation; but there was, perhaps, even a more effective one of impregnating, as it were, the whole atmosphere around us pith Christian habits and feelings, and thht was to bring others from the outer fold into associa tion, or at least approximation with us, by the active exercise of piety and brotherly love. The open exhibi tion of that spirit of Christian charity, which was so powerful, and which, properly followed out by them, would be so pnwerful as again to cause them to say— " See 110 1 th 0 quistian3 love one auother,"—(Cheers ) Our language ought to be—" Come among us; see more of us." We boasted of having imbibed the lessons of a sublimer piety and of a purer morality than were ever taught by any other than the Divine Founder of our religion, and which, if carried into practice, would realise all the dreams of pocte, prophets, and the highest aspi rations of legislators. It was our duty to act in accord ance with these lessons. They ought to discard ell un worthy fears regarding the admission of Jeats to Parlia ment. In dealing with this subject he felt the utmost distrust of his judgment. He was conscious that to a certain extent he might be liable to error, but he had nut addresoed himself to this high there in a presumptuous or unworthy spirit. Tne Christianity which they professed and regarded needed not any bulwark or guarantee, and they should Lear in mind that truly Christian doctrine of doing unto others as they would be done by others. He felt that he was not pro posing and urging on ther adoption a measure unworthy of their Lordships, either as Peers of Parliament or as fathers of the Church. He felt that he was not offend ing against any of the most honoured associations of that assembly when he called on them to admit the low per secuted race of Jews to the sign and substance of equa lity, by removing the disability which now prevented their sitting in Parliament; and to crown the great mea sure of retribution for al! the woes and wrongs of the the past. Li conclusion the Noble Earl moved the second reading of the Bill. The Earl of EGLIN fON said that the present mea sure, though it was brought fore and under another name, and though it proposed to deal with the whole Parliamentay oath, was to ell intents and purposes the same Bill that their Lordships did themselves so much honour by rejecting last session by a majority very different indeed from the majorities which they had lately seen in that House. The Bill alas nothing more nor less than a Bill for the purpose of re lieving Jewish disabilities, and enabling Baron Roths child to sit in the other house of Parliament. Ho objected to the Bill principally on religious grounds, and also for political reasons. Tho constituency of London had chosen a gentleman, however worthy in private character and worldly pcsition, they knew could not sit in Parliament. He could not but lock on the Bill as a retrospective measure, and he did not deem it expedient to go into ex pest facto legislation to legalise the election of a Member disqualified from sitting in Parliament. He also objected to the Bill because the Jews were, and called themselves, a separate nation. They had no patriotic or family ties in this country. They were es sentially citizens of the world, and if they admitted Jews he did not see why they should not admit aliens of all descriptions. Admit the Jew, and you would have the Mahomedan demanding to be sworn on the Koran, and the infidel demanding that the words " in the name of God should be erased from the oath." The consequence would be that they would have the table covered with a list of oaths for Members to select, as they would their coats or their walking sticks. The Noble Earl having argued that the admission of Jews would inaaerially tend to lower the character of their Lordships' House, con cluded by moving, as an amendment, that the Bill should be read a second time that day three months. The Duke of CLEVELAND supported the Bill. He did not wish to give a silent vote now, because, when a somewhat similar measure was brought forward in 1830, he had voted against its adoption on three strong grounds. Firstly, because Jews did not embrace the Christian faith, an objection which still existed, but in a mitigated form; secondly, because there were several other classes of British born subjects not admitted into Parliament, who bad stronger claims to admission than the Jews put forward; thirdly, an apprehension that by the influence of money they might force their way into Parliament against the wishes of the independent por tion of the constituency. The two latter objections had been entirely removed, and the first had been consi• derably mitigated. Quakers, who, at that time were debarred from sitting in Parliament, had been since ad mitted. He thouglst it a case of great hardship and in justice that after the admission of the Quaker the Jew should be excluded. He was not aware that they had done anything which caused them to be stigmatised as bad citizens; and, believing them to be an industrious, harmless, money-making class, he did not see why their disability should not be removed. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said that, having last year given his reasons for voting against this Bill, and no change having taken place in circumstances since then, no change had taken place in his opinion. The principle of the Bill was to lower the distinctive charac of our legislators, by rendering it unimportant whether they were Christians or not. This was a very unoppor tune moment to attempt such a change. England pre sented a great contrast to the broken and disordered state of other nations. They stood secure against the storms of anarchy. That other nations attributed to the Chris tianity which distinguished the country. In India, and throughout the world, most important mercies had been vouchsafed to us. The Divine favour had been specially granted to us in the conduct of our national affairs, and this was not the time to disown the national Christia nity.—(Cheers.) Let them not endeavour to commit that solecism in legislation of endeavouring to lower their principles to their practice. They should rather endeavour to raise the standard of their practice to their principles. These were the grounds upon which he should entreat their Lordships not to sanction this measure, The Archbishop of DUBLIN said the question was whether the electors should exercise their own judgment. or whether the Legislature should tie them down to select from any particular class their representatives. He thouala the electors should have a free choice on that subject, unless some great public advantage could be derived from pursuing a contrary course. He saw no advantage from depriving them or this privilege. It was contrary to Christianity to impose any disabilities, civil or otherwise, upon those who differed with them in religious opinion. That was contrary to the wishes of the Founder of Christianity, who declared that his kingdom was not of this world.—(Cheers.) They ought then to have no idea of monopolising civil privi leges. It was not lawful fur them to keep up these civil penalties for belief in Christianity. But it was said that this was a question of principle, and that the doing away with these distinctions would do dishour to Chris tianity. He admitted that it was a question of prin ciple, but differed with those who asserted this as to what was doing dishonour to Christianity. It was said that those who supported this Bill were latitudinarians and lukewarm Christians. He could not concur.in these views. He felt no indifference to the society to which he belonged; but if those who were not members of the Church —nay, open and avowed assailants of the Church—were admitted within those walls, they ought either to go forward or backward. Would they feel inclined to retrace their steps? He thought not. Then they should go forward and remove this last disability. —(Cheers.) He thought if they did not proceed they might be charged with indifference. They should re move this last barrier. As to the propriety of the Jew being elected, unless there was some imminent evil of danger to the Church or State, the electors ought not to have their hands tied.—(Hear, hear.) Ho thought there was no such danger to be apprehends d, and should, therefore, give his he arty support to the Bill. The Bishop of EXETER said he did not like the arguments that had just been used in favour of this Bill. This case stood on clear ground. The Jew stood on a different footing from the Christian. He did not agree that any of those now in Parliament would so far forget the c , nditioa upon which they were entitled to a seat within those walls as op?nly to avow their intention to injure the Church or State.—(liear.) These very oaths, which were so quietly disposed of, were the conditio❑ upon which Wiltiam and Mary came to the throne. After making the declaration of rights, the Bill pro ceeded to recite these oaths. Having read them, the Right Rev. Prelate continued—lt was upon that condition and solemn engagement that the King and Queen ac cepted the royal crown and dignity, and their Lordships were brought into such a condition that night that they might unanimously put the finishing stroke to the dietinctiori of the constitution as then agreed to. It had been contended in the other House of Parliament, that the oath of supremacy was unnecessary, becatr e the oath of allegiance contained all that was required. But if that was the case, the oath of allegiance must be c , nstrued in two different ways, for the Jews did not hold any alle giance to the Pope. If their Lordships passed the Bill. they would stultify themselves by giving a two-fold and opposite construction to the words `• true allegiance," by which they would be made to repudiate allegiance to the Pope, and affirm allegiance to the Sovereign of the realm at the same time. Passing by these points, however, he would now come to the principle on which the Noble Earl (Carlisle) grounded the Bill, namely, the equal right of all citizens to all civil rights, irrespective of religious opinions. He admitted that principle as applied to a republic, but it was not so in a monarchy. In a mo narchy these franchises and rights were granted to those who were considered most likely to defend the monarchy and serve it most faithfully. Our monarchy was based upon a contract. It was based upon the con dition that we would uphold the laws of God and the Constitution as established, and, therefore, no one had an indefeasible right to constitutional privileges. They were enjoyed as of grace under the original con ditions, the principal of which was to faithfully serve the monarch, and uphold the institutions in Church and State. Now could a Jew give good faithful counsel to the Sovereign, who, by virtue of her position, was the head of the Church? He thought not ; and it was in this way he conceived that they would be abandoning the distinctive Christianity of our constitution.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Earl (Carlisle) said that the admis sion of a few Jews would no more unchristianiss the Legislature than the existence of a few thousands of Jewish fellow-citizens unchristianised the nation. But Parliament differed from the nation. It was a selected body, upon certain conditions. It was a Christian body only so long as it acted upon Chrisian principles and feelings. It was argued further, as a reason for agreeing to this measure, that great relaxations had already been made. But, though the ancient constitution had been broken in upon, they still had a faith in one common Re deemer, and they should still retain that distinctive mark. He would conclude by earnestly imploring their Lordships to reject this Bill, as a dangerous innovation, and one totally unjustified by the arguments adduced in its favour. The Earl of SHREWSBURY considered this mea sure more as a political than a religious one, and in these days of growing liberalism of opinion and popular discontent, he thought they were bound to concede every practicable privilege to the people at large.—(Hear.) He must, however, point out what appeared ;O him the short comings of the Bill before their Lordships. By the preamble it appeared that the Bill was intended for the emancipation of the Jews and the restriction of the Roman Catholics. To carry out this view, he would ob serve that the Protestant, who now takes the oath in its most literal sense, is by this Bill relieved from all diffi culty. The Quakers were by it still further freed from any existing restriction or difficulty : the Jew was, he trusted, also about to be released from his disabilities, but the Catholic was still fettered, and in some important Parliamentary questions prevented from taking part, or if he did so, it was at the risk of being taunted with a violatiou of his oaths.—(Hear.) So that the Jew would be more trusted than the Catholic. It was not in a spirit one who made no such attacks, because he cared nothing ot hostility to the Church Baabliahment that he painted aauut ( Hear, hear.) lie be Hayed hat they could cut the faults of this measure, but in order to force n o t iailiet upon our Jewish fall.av-subj,es a greater in on their Lorchnips the coasideratien of the propriety of jury than by admitting them into Parliament, under the removing ztil limas distinctians, and makieg but impression that to us all religions were equally inlffer one law furl:;,. So sroeg'y did ho feel n ot this subjeat, eta. Why Tata: it that we were able to give them a re that if the went into Com ait;, e, which he str aagly fuge and assure tla in of safety and security for their hoped it would, he should move an ametaireent to that property? Beaause our Christianity had made us a t tract. It was sufficient to justify him in that course, to strong and powerful nation, and if they passed this Bill show that the meaning of the R man Catholic oath was they would injure and destroy that religion which had contested and doubtful. On the one hand, it was con- made us a refuge fir scattered nations.—(Cheers.) tended that they we re restricted from te.rktua pars in any The Duke of CLEVELAND explained. question affactieg the temporalities of the Church, Lard BROUGHAM said the debate was sufficiently chile another party geld that no such restriction ex- exhausted, and he had on former occasions so fully ex ia:ted.—( [Lai-, h sr.) Ha desired to remove this anetnaly, planed his views, that he should have refrained from and ta place the Rieman Cathalica upon an equality with addressing their Lordships, bad not the arguments of the Quakers, the Dissenters, and the Jews. lie thought the Right Rev. Prelate been of so extraordinary a cha it was unbecoming their Lordships' dignity to maintain meter. Attar hearing the tpecch of the Noble Earl such an inequality, and if they passed the Bill in its who introduced the Bill, the Right Rev. Prelate said present shape, ho should believe the Boman Catholic that his arguments were inconsistent. We had ad oath was for ever fixed in a rastrieted sense, in which witted the Jews to mount, not only the petty, but the case he should f e el th a t th e y w e re placed in far too un high seats of justice, where they held power over the equal and humiliati ng a po s iti e n ; a n d he for one should lives and property of our fellow-subjects. But all this, feel that he had no right there, as being placed in a said the Right Rev. Prelate, was nothing; they were situation incompatible with the free exercise or his ditty merely administrators of the law. hut it was a very as a legisl Ltor.—(Hear, Lear.) d i fferent thing to be aI, gislator. Oh, that he had sat The Earl (.f . %VINCI-Hi-SEA said it an y one had with them that mousing.—(Lettahter.) Oh, that he sat doubted as to the infidel spirit which had for many years in nisi prius, or in a court of equity, and he would soon eharac'erised our legieation, that d o ubt must be re- ti scover h ow f ar hi s innocent imaginiegs were wide of moved by the Bill on the table. It wag an inset to a the truth.—(clear, hear.) How little a judge was a Christian people, and to the Almighty, whose Son had mere instrument, and to what an extent the lives, and come down from heav e n to gi ve us t h a t re li g i on wh i ch limbs, and properties were at the discretion of judges. had bestowed upon our country so many leessiags. It But not only hod we admitted the Jew to the judge's n was an interference with th e ri g h ts an d permaaeco of s eat, h u t we h a d a d mitte d h i m to the legislative office of the Crown—with the rights of that House of which he a a elector.—(llear, hear.) And then the Right was an humble Member, and of the Lower House of Reverend Prelate talk. d of the influence of money Parliament. What was the crim e of that very people upon the electors. That argument was in favour of the to which this Bill referred, and which brought down the Bill, and much more powerful than any he could have judgment of the Almighty upon them, but a warning to used. The Jew was an elector and used his money for us that all who rejected or despised the Saviour would the furtherance of his views now. The Right Reverend be visited with the Fame calamities and the same signal Prelate drew an impassable line between all other offices manifestation of the displeasure of the Creator? Towards and that of a legislator.—(Hear, hear.) It was only the Jewish people God was his witness he bore no ill necessary to state the argument in order to show its air will. Hardness of heart and judicial blindness had surdity; it was not necessary to pull it in pieces, because caused them to reject the God whom we worshipped. the Legislature was, as all admitt e d, influenced by public They were once th e f avoure d peop l e of God, b ut that re• opinion; and Jews, infid e l s , and atheists, all united in jection had brought down his judgments upon them. returning Members to Parliament.--(He a r , hear.) The His earnest prayer was that they might be again re- words "on the true faith of a Christian" might prevent stored to the fold, hut he could not consent to imitate persons of a tender conscience, but persons who had no them in their judicial blindness, and repudiate the dis- such scruples were not excluded by them. They really tinctive character of a Christia n . Thi s wou ld b e a f ata l meant nothing.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelete measure for England's greatness, should their Lordships had given a very uncomfortable and singular account of be deluded into passing such a Bill as that upon their the Jewish faith, and one which he confessed struck table. National sins brought national punishments; and him as by no means a correct one. As to the idea that it turmoils, tempests, and revolutions had visited other two or three Jews getting into Parliament and unhing countries, while ours was the only firm spot amid the ing the whole Christian system, it was one of the most chaos, it was not because of our own merits, but by the r idi cu l ous and extravagant chimeras he had - ever mercy of that God whose worship, with all our back heard, and he really had no patience to waste words sliding, we still maintained. It had bean stated by the upon it. Why, how could two or three Jews do what Right Reverend Prelate, that this was not a religious fifty or si x ty R oman C at h o li cs, whom they had alrea dy measure, and the Nable E ar l h a d sa id t h at if it inter- admitted, had not attempted to do ?—(Hear, hear.) fered with any religious principle he wou ld ra th er i t did But then the Right Reverend Prelate said he would not pass. Why, th Lord hims e lf h a d declared that the rather see earliest Christian men attacking the Church. people who hono ure d hi m h e wou ld honour; and he God forbid he should agree with him even though be would ask in what way they could better honour him was a Bishop of that Church.—(Laughler.) But if the than by upholding in all its integrity his worship and Right Reverend Prelate bad any fears of the Jews doing religion. this, why not introduce in C omm i ttee a s i m il ar pledge The Duke of ARGYLE regretted to h ave h ear d the as that introduced with ref erence t o R oman C a tholics Noble Earl who last addressed House, stating that a i n t o the Act of 1829. With respect to what made _a measure supported by a lar ge num b er o f t h e i r L or d s hi ps, Christian Parliament and a Christian nation, he utterly and by distinguished Fath ers o f th e Ch urc h , was f oun d ed denied that the words " on the true faith of a Christian," on a spirit of Christian i n fid e li t y. Whil e h e ma d e t h at a d - constituted the foundation of either. The oaths o f mission, he confessed he could not concur in some of the abjuration, supremacy, and allegiance, were merely pro grounds on which that measure had been defended, and, fessions of political faith, and obedience, which were among others, that religious opinions and religieue faith made "on the true faith of a Christian," by those who sheuld not form the ground of political disability. The held that faith. But the Jew in this House, using great preponderance of argument, however, was in fa- these words, gave no guarantee of that political fealty; your ot the measure. The question before their Lord- and, if he could get that allegiance by a form of words ships was, whether in the existing circumstances of the which would be solemnly binding upon his conscience, country, those political disabilities were justifiable or he would da so.—(Hear, hear.) Refusing to alla llow not? It was said that they were a Christian people, and th e J ews seats in Parliament was withholding . a Christian Parliament. Were th e y a Christian people en important privilege u nd er th e f a l se pretext of then, and in what cease were all the people of that religious disability. It was taking advantage of a phrase country Christia ns , either in reality or in name? Were all i n t ro d uce d i n t o an oat h f or a diff erent purpose, to exc lude the Members of both Houses of Parliament Christians, a certain sect. The proposed measure was, in polut e in the high s ense o f t h e term ? C ou l d they th i n k of se- fact, tearing the last leaf out of the book of into lerance, curing their Christianity by the continuance of religious and restoring it to its or i g i na l an d pri st i ne purity- It or political di sa biliti es ? H e conten d e d t h ey could not. was absurd to state that P ar li ament was in danger of It appeared to hi m , th a t if they could not effect the ob- ceas i ng t o b e a Ch r i st i an L eg i s l ature if t h ey removed the ject for which the di sa bili ty was pro f sse dl y k ept up, disabilities under which the Jews now laboured._at hlics The they o : they ought to re m o ve ir. It appeared to him to be most a d m i ss i on o f th e Di ssen t ers an d R oman C unjust towards those who were now the only party ex- Parliament had not proved dangerous to the Protestant hadstaiit eluded, that that e xc l us i on s h ou ld b e cont i nued. T here - religion or to the Established Church; but if there fore he supported tee Bill, but not, he admitted, with- been any danger from the wealth, activity, and .t zealeere of out reluctance and some regret. They could not secure these sects exasperated to the pitch of bigotry,e Roman the Christianity of Parliament by the imposition of such would have been exhibited in Dissenters . a d oaths as the Jew objected conscienti ous ly to take, and Catholics being admitted to the full and er.t . u . e h p e r l i e v e il t e o g r e a the sooner, therefore, it was altered the better. of exerciAng the rights and privileges of Britt far they Lard NELSON opposed the Bill, and in doing so re- and British representatives. Having peated almost all the arguments that have been tid e must go farther, to be correct with them g se o l n v e es s an c d s vanced over and over again by the opponents of the the permission to the Jews. They admitted t h e _ because measure, both in this and the other House of Parliament. because it was wise, just, and honourab l e—beca use He laid peculiar stress on its tendency to unchristianise it was good policy, and good for the empire, the character of the Legislature, and gave it as his opi- able for themselves ; but, if they no d w ar e e excluded to exclude nion that the Dissenters evinced their anxiety for the Jews, it would only be bscause n t o h k e pas t con success of the measure simply because they believed it them while they cast behind a Y on their would lead to the separation of Church and State. The Earl of WICKLOW said that none of the argu- to the British Legislature. replied, but in so low a meats he had heard urged against the Bill were soils The Earl of CARLISLE extend duct, which did the Jews less harm than it d a i c d nelud— d d i he s do c n re o d tuh i r t ; ciently strong to alter th e i m p ress i on l e ft on hi s m i n d tone, an d spea ki ng w i t h his back - to the state be by the able speech of th e N o bl e L or d w h o h a d move d almost inau,!ible. lie was understood, however, the second reading of the Bill. He should give his that, with regard to the present form of oftheCathol o ic f support to the measure, but it was not as a J ew i s h Bill oath, he would hail with pleasure e that he desired it t o be cons id ere d. H e l oo k e d a t t h e p l an i ng th e R oman C at h o l ics on aperfeeen._ t l opportunityev(leicalofr.erality title of the Bill, which was one for altering the Parlia- with their Protestant fellow-countrymen.—(Hear.) mentary oaths, and ther e was on l y ono c l ause i n i t w hi c h Th e i r L or d s hip s then divided. F or thesecond reading— related to professor s o f th e J ew i s h re li g i on . Whil e h e Contents . was anxious tor the removal of Aho Majority against the second reading The Bill was, consequently, lost. Their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock. ..e, _sty which prey. nted Jews sitting in Parliament, he wits still more desirous that the other portion of the Bill should be carried into effect. It was quite competent for those who objected to the admission of Jews into Parliament to support the second reading, and move the rejection in Committee of the clause affecting that body. He had HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 26. long been anxious to see a measure introduced into Poe- POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. lir.uient for the alteration of the Parliamentary oath, for (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) he felt that in many respects it required alteration and Mr. E. B. ROCHE felt convinced it any attempt wag modification. made to diminish the area of taxation, encouragement Earl DESART said he would venture to say, in a few would be given to unprincipled landlords to exterminate words what he conceived to be the sub s t ance o f th e the people of Ireland. Bill. It was simply that principle which their L or d s hi ps Mr. BLACKALL said when the country was in dis rejected lest year. He should be glad to ree, eve, th e tress and difficulty they gave it an extended law, but Jews as fellow•countrymen and fellow-citizens, hut not that extended law had entirely failed. If the maximum as fellow-legislators. A seat in Parliament was conferred rate which was proposed would eventually do great in fer the benefit of the nation, and not of individuals. jury to Ireland, they ought not to pass it simply because There were strong and emplereasons why their Lordships it would give some temporary advantage. To do Ire should at once reject the principle of the Bil'. If they land any wholesome good, and improve its social relit. denied admission to Parliament to a man not sufficiently Liens, they must look to the occupiers, and not interested in the welfare of the country, from the small to the landlords.—(Hear.) The principle he wished to amount of property he possessed, how much more should see adopted was to reduce the area of taxation, and thus it be refused to men wh o h a d no p ermanent i nterest i n t o crea t e a l oca l i n t eres t, an d to secure l oca l s upervision any single country, but were mere citizens of the world? with respect to the support of the poor. He would ra: How could these men legislate properly on subjects con- ther that this were a temporary measure, for he objected! fleeted with the Christian Church? The Jew considers to any permanent alteration in the poor-law at us as idolaters. There was a ft eling among the best the fag end of the session, when there was no, part of the community ag a in s t the Bill. Th ey m i g h t ti me t or d e lib era ti on , an d w h en man y m easures of receive the Jews as guests and as friends but they might immediate importance were waiting to be discussed and go no further. decided. The Bishop of OXFORD said that ho had no idea of Mr. SCULLY gavo his support to the measure of the troubling their Lordships at any length; indeed he Government. knew not that he should have troubled their Lordships After a few observations from Mr. P. SCROPE, unless an almost personal allusion had been made to Mr. CLEMENTS advocated the 7s. in preterence to him. They hut been told by the Noble Duke that the the ss. rate. But the first step to a national rate would arguments of the Noble Earl who had moved the second be to impose an uniform rate of 2s. upon every union. reading had been entirely ungrappled with. His first Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT supported the amendment and weightiest argument was, that as we hay] already ad- on the ground, that if they conceded to the proposition witted the Jew to a community of civil privileges, we of the Government, they would be acting upon erroneous ought to go further and admit him to equal rights a nd principles. In England :he principle adopted was to privileges with his fellow-citizens. Now it seemed to matte every district responsible for its own poor, but this idol that the position of a legislator or law- mater was measure proposed that one district should support the entirely different from that of a law-administrator. This poor of another district, that in fact the liability of the wasnotcalling upon thorn todo a thingindegre e , as alle ge d, responsible person should be transferred to the person for the privilege sought for was different in kind. The who was not responsible. That principle was foreign to office of legislator was one given for the nation's good, the English poor-law, and was less applicable to Ireland for the state's good, and for the good of the Church, and than to England, because in the latter country self not for the delectation of an y i n di v id ua l. W as i t con - government had been so long known that a greate r ex t e nt sidered an injury to the lower clergy to exclude them of area might be adopted with less mischief and less advantage to society than it could be i n I re l an d . Th e ir from the Commons' House of Parliament? Certainly not. That exclusion was justified upon various grounds. Why great object cught to be to force home responsibility to should a Jew sit in Parliament. Was there any Jewish every man's door, end not to impoverish others who had con s titu e ncies in England? How, then could they fully used every effort to support their own po or by placing repr e sent the Christian tendencies of their constituents. additional burdens upon their t h ou i s k es . How otherwise would they be elected but by the money After a few words from Sir J. YOUNG, power which they represented? How could the State be Mr. SHEIL said he represented a borough in which administered on Christian principles by Jews? As soon there was much poverty, owing to an influx of poor as Christian principles couid be brought into legislati o n, from the agricultu ra l di s t r i cts; an he, therefore, thought Christians were bound to introduce them. And now, that those districts which had thus been cleared of their having been introduced, were they prepared to abolish poor ought to be called upon to contribute to the maxi" them? The Most Rev. Prelate told them for the honour mum rate. This was a case, in fact, of town against of Christianity, and in order to prevent the early Chris- country. If the amendment were carried, the land from tians from being considered deceivers, he would carry which the poor had been expelled] would bo when,' the principle out and exclude no one whatever. The exempt from contributing to the wants of the poor, and Noble Lord, in movinc , the Bill, said that there was no the whole burden would be thrown upon the towns. He direct law against the Jew being admitt e d t o p al le t - had as much experience as any man of town and country ment, and only by recent legislation they were so ex- in Ireland, and if he spoke for hours he could not state eluded. Why, the Noble Earl might as well argue that the case more truly. because at one time there was no law against parricide, After a few words from Sir J. YOUNG, that therefore no law should ever have been enacted Mr. MONSELL could not conceive upon what prin against it. Why the possibility of Jews being admitted ciple a maximum rate could be recommended, because, into Parliament was at one time never thought of, their instead of producing confidence among landlords, as had personal safety was not oven protected. As to the argu. been alleged, he thought it would remove all interest in went that there was no dang er f rom t h e i r admission, he the reduction of poverty in the different districts. throught there was great danger, looking to the money Mr. CALLAGHAN thought that the measure of the power, and the influence of that power upon many of the Government would be of great use in the present dig" constituencies. When they considered the relations of tressed condition of the country. the Jews to affairs on the Continent, there might be a Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD opposed the propo o a landlord's strong interest on their part to secure a powerful party sition of the lion. Member on the same ground that in Parliament, and where there was both a strong inte- he opposed every proposition for a rate in aid. If re rest and a great money power, it was evident that the lief was given by union rates a national rate must fol danger was by no means theoretical or imaginary. He low, which would lead to b t e he utter e.en fdestruction of all objected altogether to their admitting that money power, property. This ought to .e spoken k apart from general character and principles, was to That House ought to h relerence to the right to admission to Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) adopt such a course w landlord to landlord and tenant They could not deal with motives, but they could with as would compel the . give proper remunera professed principles. There might be many in both occupier of the 7 s 'mei. rate' e o k n s E t N o L t h E e Y o s u ai l said maximum that give question more than an it occupier lion to the soil. He should vote for the those gentlemen who had Houses of Parliament who cared nothing for religion, rate were placed in a difficult some who did not believe in it; but they did not come in position.nwouni have to put up with a union rate disapprovedyt. of, or a 7s. rate, which would on a pro'ession of their unbeliet—(Bear, hear)—and they could be prevented from acting upon that profession; but would relieve the distress. He should vote, if they lowered idown the necessary profession, they i itieb e be tshu effiy T cie h n e t lowered down at the same time the character and prote however, for skin' of the body.—(llear, hear.) If they passed thisos principle Bill they indeed protessed unbelief, and if there was this a that he would take as much as he could get. danger, it should surely be the last time . they should _Pauperism could only be kept down by the employment seek to lower the character of that Christian assembl of the people, and the occupiers of the land only could those prieciples which do so, and by admitting those who rejected , if they had not the pcwer all classes would alone could raise them as a religious people. The indo- be e a t en. mitable obstinacy and persever ance of the Jews was Si r A. BROOKE, amidst loud cries of " Divide, " rose one reason why he would exclude e m. It was bec ause t o support the amendment. He thought that as soon as he believed they had the w ill amid the power to act u p on t h e ss. rate was exhausted the Consolidated Fund would these principles, that he felt, without any disrespect to he attacked. He was not opposed to a maximum rate, them, they had no right to seats as legislators for a but he thought that a sa. rate was not high; 7s.was not Christian nation. It the opposite view was main tamed, either, and he would have vote I ioif he fora !. rate it must he on the ground that the Hebrew persu as i on could have got it. He concluded by calling u pon the were losing the fires faith which had been t ransm i tted to House to vote for the 7s. rate. them, and thus the dogmas of Judaism were held . 1 The in less galleries were then cleared, En I the Douse divided. respect than before. If such was argued, he would say On the original question that ill words " eve" be made th ose were not men who sho u ld be • • legislators.— Introduced, the numbers were— (Hear, hear.) What they wanted above all things was F ... ear nestness of characte r , an d he would rather have an or the question ... ... 125 ea rnest Christian in P ar li ament attacking the Church Against the question ... ... 48 because he was coniitatiously 0- d • h ' Majority for the question ... ---77 doe to • lt, t - tiu ThQ un e usjuielL was Lpas:t i ti.utly rcjeo:eJ, -25 i ENING, JUNE 27, !1i49 , I