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

T im LEGAL TITLE ASSURANCE COMPANY. (Provisionally Registered, January 17, 1849.) Capital, 2,000,00 C/., in 80,000 Shares, of 251. eadn. Preliminary Deposit, 2s. 6d. per Share, Prospe•tnses and Pall information may be obtained at the Tempo vary Offices of the Company, 12a, Cannon-row, Westminster, on ap plication t..) G. F. HOWE, Hon. See.. pro tern. New Burlington-street, June 27. MR. ELIOT'S NEW HISTORICAL WORK, THE LIBERTY OF ROME : a History, IS PUBLISHED THIS DAY. Orders should be forwarded to the Booksellers immediately, to se cure the delivery of this new work without delay. Richard Bentley, Put Usher in Ordinary to her Majesty. ST. JAMES'S T H E A T RE. FREXCII PLAYS and OPERA COMIQUE. Last Night but One. Tills EV ENINt., Tao Perftrniances will commence at ast Seven o'clock with LA DOUBLE ECHELLE To conclude with LE COMTE ORY. PRINCESS'S TIIEATRE. GERMAN' OPERA. Herr ROEDER, manager of the German Opera, has the honour to announce to the nobility, gentry, and the public that In consequence of the absolute necessity of a night rehearsal there will be No Per formance This Evening. TO-MORROW, Will be performed Meyerbeer's opera of ROBERT THE DEVIL, HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE. Signor PUZZI'S Benefit. TO-MORROW EVENING, Will be performed Donizette* celebrated Opera, DON PASQUALE. After which a grand Pas de la Couronne, by Mdlle. M. Taglioni and M. Dcr. To be followed by the Last Act of the celebrated Opera, IL GIURAMEN TO, n which Mdllo. Parodi and Signor Moriani will appear. To conclude with the Divertissement LA PRIMA BALLERINA. The principal parts by Mdlles. Petit Stephan, Marra, Thomassini, Julien, Aussundon, Lamoreux, and M. Paul Taglioni. Applications tor Boxes, Stalls, and Tickets to be made at tha Box-office of the Theatre, where Pit Tickets may be obtained as usual, price IN. 6d. each. Doors open at Seven ; and the Opera to commence at Half-past Feven o'clock. ROYAL ITALIAN OPERA, COVENT - GARDEN. TO-MORROW EVENING Will be performed LES HUGUENOTS. With the following powerful ensemble, viz.:— Madame Grisi, Mdlle. Angel, Signors Tamburini, Marini, Lavia, Rube, Soidi, Tagliatico, Polonini, Luigi Mei, Mario, and Mr. Sims Beeves. , Boxes from one guinea and a half; Stalls, 16s. ; Pit Tickets, 55., at CRAMER, P.EALE, and Co., 201, Regent-street. Composer, Director of the Music, and Conductor, Mr. Costa. HEATRE ROYAL, HAYMARKE'.e. {r. B. Webster, sale Lessee and Manager, Old Brompton. THIS EV F.N Itv > . Will be performed a new and original tragic Play, in Five Acts, entitled s T RATH AORE. Prin - dpal characters by Messrs. C. Kean, H. Vandenhoff, Buckstone, Howe, Stuart, Rogers; Mrs. C. Kean, Mrs. Fitzwilliam, ,v,d Miss Reynolds. After which THE MAID WITH THE MILKING-PAIL. To conclude with the Farce of LEND ME FIVE SHILLINGS. VIE A MR, ROYAL, ADELPIII. PeleStB. MISS WOOLGAR'S BENEFIT. THIS EVENING, Will be performed MARRIED LIFE. After which a new grand Extravaganza, entitled THE DEVIL'S VIO,IN AND THE REVOLT OF THE FLOWERS. To be followed by a novelty in the shape of A NIOST UNWAR ANTABLE INTRUSION, which will be committed by Mr. Wright the annoyance of Mr. Paul Bedford. To.conclude with JOHN JONES. ftr,YAL LYC.t. , UM TiIEATKE. . trader the rviranagemer.t of Madame Ve.strls. Sole Lessee, Mr. Charic Ni a' he As. THIS EVENING Will be performed AMATEURS AND ACTORS. After which a new Drama, called A ROMANTIC IDEA. To he followed by A WONI)ERFIIL WOMAN. To conclude with BOX AND COX. Ores .55.; Upper lsozev, as. ; Pit, 25.; Gallery, Is. No Stith-price to any part of the - house. The .'Sew DoI-oMce, No. 2, 'N'ellinltom street, is open to the Tul'l'e •v. lay , Ti•tt till dlz. ASTLEY'S ItOYAL AmiqiiTHEATicz. Proprietor, Mr. W. Batty. Under the Patronage of her INL4. - 2sty the Queen, his Royal Flighnass Prince &lbert, Ste. The following eminent artistes form the greatest amount of female equestrian talent ever engaged in this or any other establishment at one time : Mdlies. Adelaide Rinnie, Valentine, Louise Touirnaire, La Jeans Josephine ; Miss Woolford, Barrand, Davidson, Avery, and La Petite J eanette. In addition to the above Mr. Batty has great pleasure in a-mounc ing that he has engage I that peerless equestrian Marie Macarte, whose brilliant triumphs on the Continent ani in America have ac quired for her the appellation of the Equestrian Enchantress. THIS EVENING, The performance will commence with a Grand Military Equestrian Spectacle, entitled MOOLTAN and GOOJEKAT; or, the Conquest of the Seikhs. To be toilowed by an Inimitable display of SCENES IN TILE CIRCL , % in which Marie Macarte will appear, supported by the first Equestrian talent of the day. To conclude with a favourite Melodrama, entitled THE CROCK OF GOLD ; or, The Murder at the Hall. lion-ctlice open from Eleven till Four. 'tsve M , lnarnr, Mr. W. West. ROYAL SURREY ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS. Engagement of M. JULLIEN. First Week of the Army and Caledonian Quadrilles. IMMENSE AND UNPARALLELED SUCCESS. Cnder the patronage of her Mos: Gracious Majesty, her Majesty the Queen Dowager, his Royal Highness Prince Albert, &c. The Public Press has unanimously pronounced the Storming of Badajoz to be the most perf,ct and life-like exhibition. The Nobility, Gentry, and the Public are respectfully informed that this favourite place of fashionable re , ort is open every MONDAY, TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY, AND THURSDAY. Danson's gigantic modelled Panorama of the TOWN AND PORT OF BADAJOZ, pronounced by the voice of public opinion to be the most perfect and life-like exhibition ever presented—Splendid Menagerie--Judien's unrivalled Band—Vo cal and Instrumental Concert—Several Favourite Songs and Ballads by Miss Ellen Rowland and Mr. George Tedder— Bolos by Koenig, Richardson (Flute)—Violin and Violoncello by "nail and George Collins, varied alternately—and other at tractions, concluding with a vivid representation of the Storming of Badajoz, pourtraying the advance of the British army—bombard ment and attack—gallant defence—rush to the breach oy real troops —and final tableaux in honour of the " licro of a hundred fights." Doors open at Nine o'Clock, A. e. ; feeding of the animals at Five; Pelicans and White Bears half-past Five ; Concert at Six ; Storming of Badajoz, at Dusk.—Admission One Shilling. REFRESHMENTS.—The frequenters of these Gardens have long complained that Refreshments from the Confectionary-rooms only could b, procured. Arrangements have been effected, and a distinct portion of the Gardens set apart, where Refreshments may be had of the first quality, and at the usual Prices. THE WEATHER.—Stm OFFICE, JUNE 27. THERMOMETER, Lowest, 55; Highest, 66; Noon, 75. BAROMETER, 30.05. WIND W.—fine sunshiny weather. !IL , ' WATER AT LONDON lIRLDOE. Tma Dar —Morning, 53 min. after 6 I Evening, 18 min. after 7 To-MoaaoW 4onan,,, 44 min. after 7 ► Evening, 19 rain. after 8 • :.'. "- .1' .1. -11.... ' ...,Pirr,ie- : '4.• -, ;;;' -,#), ' „- , ~. • -,,....,- '' , ~. •'' z , • .." ' i ' -' D / . - 4 r -.4 • • -,•• etioniug LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 1849. Scarcely has one company of comic players departed from the boards of Drury-lane Theatre than another makes its appearance—the humorous company of Protectionists. Taik as tine may about the decline of the British drama, it is impossible to deny that yesterday's performance was a thoroughly national one, inasmuch as the like of it could not by any chance be seen beyond the boundaries of England. Every one appears to have learnt his part to admira tion ; and certainly, as far as the antique and obsolete nature of their sentiments was concerned, may, with some show of truth, be described as dead-letter per fect. Besides, without wishing in any manner to de preciate the odd drollery of Mr. BUCKSTONE, or the unctious stupidity of Mr. KEELEY, or the volatile fun of Mr. CHARLES MATHEWS, we cannot but give the palm to the political actors who were yesterday morning crowded to gether before the footlights. Tragic in their allusions to our impending ruin—pastoral in their reference to our native agriculture—historic in the perversion of the great truths contained in our annals—comic, indescribably and superlatively comic, in their anti cipation of the restoration of the laws which have been abrogated in regard to food and naviga tion—they seem to us to be more than any other performers entitled to the paneg r ,i,, of POLONIUS :—" The best actors in the world, either for tragedy, comedy, history, pas toral, pastoral-comical, historical-pastoral, tragical historical, tragical-comical-historical-pastoral, scene individable, or poem unlimited : SENECA cannot be too heavy, nor PLAUTUS too light : for the law of writ, and the liberty, these are the only men." Cer tainly they are, and the only men, too, for the salva tion of the country from destruction, if we might take them at their own valuation. Such orators, too ! with the lungs of STENTOR ! and the fury of EAGLE ! and long-winded and facete garrulity of FADDLEDEEN ! In one of their organs, an abbreviated report of their proceedings extending over upwards of fourteen closely printed columns of brevier ! In spite of the pomp of the whole exhibition, in spite of the grandiose eloquence of the speakers, and of the up roarious cheering of the two thousand " Britishers" assembled in the theatre, it was quite imposssible not to recognise from one very significant circumstance—the absence of the Leaders !—that the whole was an ex travagant sham, that it was net ilfiching that it did net signify Mischief, but that it was a so lemn farce, got up for the assuagement of the wounded vanity of a minority, and delivered in terms as inflated as those of BOMBASTES FIIRIOSO, or of CIIRONONHOTONTHOLOGOS ! The Duke of RICH MOND, it is true, was chairman ; and the Earl of MALMESBURY was the mover of the first resolution ; and there, were Peers and Farmers, and Miners (s ee DooKEtt) and Majors (see BERESFORD), and there were Members of the Houie of Lords and Members of the House of Commons—but there was no Lord STANLEY, and there was no Mr. DISRAELI. It was the play of Hamlet not only without the character of 11.1341..F.T, but even without that of HORATIO. Such as the meeting was, however, the gentlemen on the platform, or rather on the stage, endeavoured to make the most of it; and the mobocracy in the pit, after the fashion of the Greek Chorus, interpolated be tween the harangues their explanatory acclamations. By their noise, as much as by their unanimity, they reminded one, while plodding on the path of Protec tion (a path, by the way, lately posted up "No Thoroughfare")—of the Cavaliers renowned in the verse of ROBERT BROWNING : "Marching along, fifty score strong, " Great. hearted gentlemen singing one song." And certainly they do sing one song with a ven geance, each successive speech being a mere repetition of its predecessor. PAGANINI'S performance on one string was nothing to it. Here are fifty political PAGANINIS with one, string for them all ! As for anything in the shape of argument, you might as well hope to find logic in the chaunt of a dancing Dervish, as argument in the vituperations of a Protectionist. One nobleman yesterday talked of " the hell-broth mixed for them by the late Premier," and one of the com moners, in a similar strain of eloquence, declaring that " the British lion is a loyal lion, but he is a bold one ; and when you do set him on his legs he may be easy to put up, but he is an awkward animal to deal with when he is awake." We should rather surmise that this said British lion is just now awake, and pretty wide awake too, if only from sheer astonishment at being spoken of in such irreverent terms. Mr. BOSANQUET, to whom the glory of this allegorical metaphor is wholly due, was not, however, the only orator of the class to enlighten the public yesterday as to the policy requisite for good legislation. There were " enough of them and," certainly, "to spare." If we might attempt to extricate out of the absur dity of this farce, and out of the verbosity of this decla mation, the precise purport of the assemblage yester. day in Drury-lane Theatre, we should say that that purpose was as follows :—To maintain that with free trade the British empire was fast going to the dogs, especially now that the navigation-laws have been re pealed, and that our only chance of redemption is in an immediate return to the blessed and time-honoured prieciplee of Protection. Why the Young-Englanders were nothing to this ! A game of skittles between Viscount MARMADUKE PLANTAGENET and GAFFER CHAWDACON would be weak in comparison ! A pas de deux between landlord and tenant en costume a la mode Charles IL, a mere event of every• day occur rence ! Yet wild and impossible as is the notion of the return of the Legislature to the dear, old, hum drum doctrines of Monopoly, these good souls are san guise enough to imagine, and not only to imagine, but actually to believe in, ies feasibility. They have drunk of its intoxicating draughts as those from the effects of which the tinker SLY woke up to find himself arrayed in the illusive magnificence of a Prince. They have imbibed the inebriating eloquence of the two great masters of rhetoric who have condescended to become their leaders, and they wake up to fancy themselves the arbiters of the destinies of England. The most amusing part of the joke is, however, the circumstance that the speakers yester lay laid it down as an incontrovertible fact that with free trade things have been all going wrong, and that but for free trade things would have been all going right. Not a word about bad harvests ! Not a syllable about the potato disease ! Not a whisper as to the agitation of public feeling in Ireland ! Not a sentence about the revolutions which have convulsed Europe, and of the wars which have followed those revolutions, among all the great nations of the European continent ! although those bad harvests have led. to scarcity in England—although that disease of the po tatoes has produced famine in Ireland although that proximity of rebellion has distracted the attention of the Legislature—although those wars and revolutions have resulted of course in the dimi nution of the number of our customers, and have con. sequently conduced to the partial cessation of labour in our manufacturing districts ! So much for the honesty, the logic, the veracity, and the rational consistency of the Protectionists. It is much to be regretted that the inquiry asked for by I..otei IQVGIEMT on Eridi — ty evening was in conceded by the House of Commons. The sum to be provided for the maintenance and relief of the poor, and the other charges incidental thereto, amount in round terms to no less than 8,000,0004 sterling per annum, and it is unfortunately but too notorious that the burden presses most heavily on the poorer districts, while the wealthier districts pay compara. tively trifling sums in proportion to their resources. Those who are themselves but little removed from a state of pauperism—the inhabitants of cheap and humble abodes in the most crowded and unwholesome localities, are crushed by the enormous sums which they are compelled to contribute towards the support of those who are still more distressed than themselves, often amounting to ss. or even 10s. in the pound on the value of their holdings ; while the possessors of lordly palaces or wide-spread domains, in the enjoy- i meat of every comfort and luxury that wealth can I afford, escape comparatively scatheless, and the for itunate inhabitants of " extra parochial " places are exempted from any liability whatsoever. If it could be asserted that the lower assessments were owing to the care and attention bestowed on the poor, that their condition had been ameliorated and remunerative employment provided for them, there would, at least, be something to allege in favour of a system that had produced such results. But such is unfortunately not the case. The comparative exemption is not ascribable to any such meritorious and praise worthy exertions. It is not because the labouring poor are encouraged in these wealthy unions, or because there is an anxious desire to in crease their comforts, and to enable them to earn their own support by their own toil, and to eat the bread of honest industry ; but because they are driven from the districts where suitable houses can not be obtained, and where the erection of a labourer's cottage is regarded as a crime of the highest magnitude. "Procul, 0 procul este profani 1" appears to be the motto of those vigilant guardians of their own purses. They do not seek to eradicate distress and destitution from the land, but merely endeavour to banish it from their own parishes, and they claim credit for the admirable management that enables them to transfer the burdens from their own shoulders to others less capable of sustaining it. Even the labourers who cultivate the lands of these parties, who expend health and strength in their service, have in many instances no claim for assistance in the hour of distress, but must be supported in sickness or old age by the less prosperous unions in which, by a forced migration, they were obliged to reside. From the last Parliamentary return on the subject [ (No. 375), it appears that there are at p resen t, i n zugland an d W a l es , 1,650 par i s h es an d towns hi ps rated. f or the relief of the poor, at sums varying from is. 4d. to 6.1. 1,,,,, the pound, 3,372 from 6d. to Is., 8,380 from ls. t o 4e , , had 2 B2 from 4s. t o 14 s . Th ere ar e also no less than 538 exte,...o,rochial places, which are not subject to any liability whoever. It will afford but little comfort to those compelled to pay from 60 to 70 per cent. on the value of their holdi ng , to be told that many others contribute from one eighth to one-fourth per cent. only on similar pro perty. Surely the existence of a state of facts so inequitable and unjust imperatively demands a searching investigation into the causes that have led to such strange anomalies, and would have more than justified the House of Commons in assenting to a motion for a "Committee to inquire info the prac ticability of better providing for the maintenance of the indigent poor of England and Wales, by an equal and general apportionment of the burden of the same." But it is not merely the correction of this glaring inequality that is required, the oppressive and tyran nical I.Aw of settlement should also be repealed—a law which operates so injuriously to the humbler classes, who are thereby prevented from carrying their only capital—their labour—into the best and most eligible markets. Under the- present system a labourer is debarred from seeking employment where it might easily be obtained, and where his services would be really useful to the owners and occupiers of land. However high his character and meritorious his con duct, he will not be allowed to obtain a footing in a different parish if there is any possibility of his sub• sequently becoming a burden on its resources. Lie is regarded with suspicion and distrust from the very moment of his arrival, and woe to the farmer who has the hardihood to afford him a single day's employ ment. He is driven from place to place, and perhaps ultimately passed, at a heavy expense, to his original place of settlement, there to become a permanent charge upon the rates, in place of being allowed to earn a livelihood by his own ex ertions. ADAM SMITH has doubted " whether any poor man has ever reached the age of forty without experiencing hardship and injustice from the law of settlement," and adds, "that it is monstrous for a poor man to be confined as to his residence, his labour, or his rights, within the narrow limits of a parish or a township." The great Phi losopher was perfectly right, but unfortunately the injury is inflicted on those who do not possess the elective franchise, who are wholly unrepresented in Parliament, and who consequently have no means of bringing their grievances prominently before the Legislature. These grievances, however, will not be forgotten, but will sink deep into the minds of those who have no legitimate mode of giving expression to their desires. A timely concession, a due attention to the wants and wishes of "the many," may avert evils the full extent of which it is impossible to calculate. NEW WRIT FOR THE CITY Of LONDON.—It will be observed in our Parliamentary report this day that, on the motion of Mr. John Abel Smith, a new writ has been directed to issue for the election of a Mem ber for the city of London, in the stead of Baron Rothschild, who has accepted the Stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds. This would seem to be the ne cessary and unavoidable result of the di►ision in the House of Lords last night on the Parliamentary Oaths Bill ; and at this late period of the session the citi- MS of London will be again involved in the turmoil of an election. Whether it be a contested one, and who shall be the competitors for the vacant seat, the next twelve hours will determine. It would appear highly improbable that Baron Rothschild will again offer himself as a candidate at present, seeing that if he were re-elected he would be precluded from taking his seat in the House of Commons ; in the absence of all positive information, however, on this point, we can at present but speculate upon it. Should the Baron present himself again to the electors, it can scarcely admit cf doubt that his return would be certain, unless the partiality of the citizens of London towards him were over•ridden by the consideration of his inability to sit in the House in the event of his reelection. MONEY and COMMERCIAL NEWS. CITY, QUARTER TO THREE. The sales of Cotton at Liverpool yesterday were esti mated at 8,000 bales, nearly one-half being taken on speculation. The market was firm at fully previous rates.—ln Railway Shares a fair business was done at rather higher prices. The continental news is favourable again to-day, in ❑early all that concerns monetary and mercantile affairs. At Amsterdam, on the 25th instant, the Dutch Two and-a-Half per Cents. did not quite support the pre vious rise, but a fair business was done. Spanish Bonds were firm. Very little was done in Russian, Austrian, or French securities, but Brazilian were rising. At Berlin, on the 23d instant, the funds were rising, and business was becoming more .active every day. Rsilway and other shares were iu request at Vienna on the 22d instant. The funds were in request. There was also a demand for foreign bills, principally on London, Paris, and Amsterdam. Port Philip accounts to the 6th of March, and Sydney to the 3d have been received this morning. The new Constitution was expected to be in operation within a short time, and even the basis was said to be agreed upon. One measure was expected to be adapted to all the colonies. There is, it is stated, to be one mixed Legislature, the district councils are to be con tinued, and municipal institutions for all the cities and towns are likely to be granted. The Sydney accounts state that the want of rain was much felt in the interior, although there had been a slight fall in the town. At a small wool sale, fleece realised 10d., and fair samples 9d. per lb. A number of the pre-emptive claims made under the 16th clause of the regulations of March 29, had been approved by the Governor, and several of the Port Philip settlers had applied to purchase portions of their runs. In consequence of the rejection of the Jews' Bill by the House of Lords, a notice has been very promptly issued this morning by the Central and District Com mittees of the Liberal electors of the City of London, convening a meeting to take place to-morrow evening at the Hall of Commerce, to receive and consider a communication from Baron Lionel Rothschild, M.P., with reference to the Parliamentary Oaths Bill. It has been jestingly observed by a member of the Hebrew although his co-religionists have done many a large bill for members of the aristocracy, they cannot now get a small one done in return. The Corn Trade in Mark-lane is not quite so active this morning, but prices are about the same. There is a very quiet, but at the same time an ex tremely firm market for Public Securities. Consols are 92 to and New Three-and-a-Quarter per Cents. 92i at which rates they have remained • all the morning. Bank Stock has been steady at 194. Exchequer-bills have been rather better, viz., 425. to 465. premium, and India Bonds 693. to 71s. premium. The Foreign Securities are still buoyant. Spanish Three per Cents. are 341, and the Five per Cents. 17-1- to k. Brazil Bonds are 80i; Buenos Ayres, 43 to 44; Grenada, 16; and Peruvian, 52. Mexican Stock has been at 304 with, and at 28 'sithout the coupons. Rus sian Bonds have been 1031. French Five per Cents. have been quoted 86 25, with the exchange at 25 45. Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cents. are 51i Railway Shares are very well supported generally, though the rise in North-Western has brought forward a few sellers. Great Western are again higher, and South-Ea•tern look well. ONE CLOSING PRICES OF BRITISH FUNDS O'CLOCK. PRICES Bank Stock 194 194 3 der Cent. Reduced Arms ...... Year 3 1 4 per Cent. Ann5.... Long Anna. to expire Jan.lß6o Ditto, 30 years, Oct. 10, 1859 India Bond*, 1,0001. - Ditto under 1,000/... ...... Consols for Account 92 92 1 /B Exchequer Bills. I%d. & 2d. 1,0001. June 42 46 p 46 p ' 500/. June Small. June 42 46 p 46 p rnicEs OF FOREIGN FUNDS ONE CLOSING O'CLOCK. PRICES. Brazilian Bonds Buenos Ayres Bonds, 6 ner Cent. 43 44 44 Grenada Boads, 1 per Cent. l6 15 3 / 4 Mexican, 5 per Cent.lB46, with Coupons 30;4 30 1 4 Ditto, Ex Coupons Peruvian Bonds, 6 per Cents — - Ditto, 4 per Cont. Active 52 Ditto Deferred 14 % 3A Portuguese 5 per Cents... -- Ditto, 4 per Cent — Russian Bonds ..... 103 1 4 Spanish 5 per Cont. 18.0..... l 7 l / 2 1A Ditto, Passive Ditto, 3 per Cent .. 34% Dividends on the above payable in London. French Rentes, 5 per Cent. Exchange 2sf. 45c. 25f. 45c. Dutch 2 1 ,4, per Cent., 12 Guild 51% % 51% Ditto. 4 per Cent. Certificates 77% 78 78 PRICES OF PAID. BUSINESS DONE 'CLOSING RAILWAY SHARES. AT ONE O'CLOCK. PRICES. Aberdeen 5O — Do. Preference Birmingham and Ox ford Junct., calls duly paid, or with a guaran. 20 Caledonian .. Chester and Holyhead... 50 Eastern Counties... ..... 20 ...... 8 1 / 2 Ditto, Extension, 5 per Cent., No. 1 61.135. 4d.... Ditto ditto, No. 2...61. 13s. 4d... % p Do. North. & Eastern, 6 per Cent. Ditto. 5 per Cent.... 50 Ditto, 1 A Shares Eastern Union, Class A (late E. U. Shares) 25 ..... _... .. _. . 71 p 9248 62 14% 28 1 4 103 1 A 174 33 / 4 34:y4 - VA 25 27 17 1 4 814 - % P Ditto, Class C, ditto.. - . 22%....• East Lincolnshire ...... 25 Exeter,Yeovil, & Dorch. 2% l% G a r rpt i s a ao : ttito N SE: o xi, : tit th heensw. ern a:iindi West. 2 : 0 4% ... ...... .... .1 3 04 ll4 10U % (Ireland) .. • ......... ...... . .. .. 8 1 4 11/2 Great North of England.loo .. Great w ea t ern Ditto IA 5f,.,... Ditto,,/ Sha - ic. 12 ... ...... 11 Ditto, New 171.. 4171 6 34 : 3 1 ................ 48 1_7 0 6 3 : Hull and Selby Ditto, Half Shares ... 25 ..7 : :—... ' • 9B Lancashire & Yorkshire 93 — ' 49 Do. Fifths.... ....... .... 10 London &Blackwall l 2 l /2 4 l /2 London, Brighton, and 41, i South C0a5t....... 50 ...... 37% 3714 LondonandGreenwich 12/15s 4d... 9%... London and N. Western 100 ......133% 132% 132 133 Ditto, New Quarters.. 7 Ditto,Fifthi ..... .. .. 2 •••••• 7 % .. 7% Load. &S. Western ..... 50 Manchester,Buston,and Matlock.... 4%,,.• 3/1 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire...loo ...... Do. New 101. Pref..... 10 ..... --11% Midland 10 :1 ...••• 69M4 70 7O Do., do., 501. Shares 25 ... .. .. ....... • •••• 13% Norfolk ...,. . 100 - ...........- Do. Guaranteed 5 p ct. 20 North British ........ ... 25 Ditto Preference gorth Staffordshire l 7 l /2 Reading, Guildford, and Reigate 1.5 Shrewsbury and Birm... 11 Ditto ditto. Class B. 7 16 , 4 974 2Oth Ditto, New Guaranteed 8 South Ea9terl. .. 333k 2l. 2056 South Wales 3B ....„ York, Newcastle, and Berwick. .... ... Do. Newcastle Exten. 20 ...... 14% 14% Do. G.N.E.Preference 8 ..... 4th %%... York and North. Midland 50 33% Ti .. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JUNE 27, 1819. FOREIGN RAILWAYS. Boulogne and Amiens... 20 Central of France (Or- Vierzon) East Indian .. Namur and Liege Northern of France— 13 ...... Orleans and Bordeaux.. 7 Tours and Nantes ll ..... MINES. Australian 8 Brazilian Imperial Do. St. John Del Rey 15 ...... 10 1 / ex.div 10 1 hs x.d JOINT STOCK BANKS. _ _ 1..... 25 ..•••• ..... :".... ••• well Colonial SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE RACES.-TIIESDAY, The Tyro Stakes of 10 sovs. each, p p, with 50 added; the second to save his stake; for two-year old colts, Bst 71b; fillies, Bst 41bs. T.Y.C. (12 Subs.) Mr. J. Scott's Mulgrave ..• ...(Holmes) 1 Mr. Merry's Brennus ..• ...(Marlow) 2 Mr. Binnie's Luxury ••• .. • ... (Halli well) 3 Mr. Rickabv's fby Touchstone (G. Abdale) 4 Mr. Foster's Osbaldwick (Templeman) 5 6 to 4 agst Brennus, 3 to 1 agst Mulgrave, 3 to 1 agst Lady Emily filly, and 4 to 1 agst Luxury. Won by a length. The Produce Stakes of 50 sots. each, h ft, for three.years old; colts Bst 71b., fillies Bst 41b, &e. Two miles. (12 Subs.) Lord Eglinton's Belus, Bst 21b ..,(Marlow) 1 Mr. M. Dawson's Priestess, Bst 11b ...(Cartwright) 2 10 to 4en Belus. Won easy by three lengths. The Northumberland Plate of 200 sots., added to Handicap of 25 sovs. each, 10 ft, and 5 only if de clared; the second to receive 501, and the third to save his stake. Two miles. (72 Subs,, 22 of whom declared.) Mr. B. Eddison's John Cosser, 4 yrs, 7st (Charlton) 1 Mr. H. Stebbings's Mallon, 4 yrs, 7st ... (Fenn) 2 Mr. Meiklam's Snowstorm, 3 yrs. sst ... (Arnold) 3 Mr. Merry's Miss Ann, 3 yrs, 4st I lib (Hiatt) 4 The following also started, but were not placed:— Captain Cookson's Camphine, 4 yrs, 6st 131 b (J. Coates); Mr. S. L. Fox's Executor, 5 yrs, 7st 111 b (Marlow); Lord Stanley's Legerdemain, 3 yrs, 4“ 81b (Harrison); Mr. Dawson's Cocktail, 3 yrs, 4st 71b (Marwood); Mr. B. Green's Shylock, 4 yrs, 7st 81b (Wintringhato); Lord Glasgow's b c, by Don John, out of Impertinence, 4 yrs, Est 51b (Dobkeray, jun.); Mr. Ryan nd Tow Tit, 5 yrs, Est 81b (G. Oates), and Mr. Humphries's Escape, 4 yrs, 6st 10lb (Long.teff). Betting-7 to 4 agst Mel ton, 7 to 2 agst Executor, 11 to 2 agst John Custer, 10 to 1 agst Tom 'lit, 10 to 1 agst Miss Ann, 12 to 1 agst Legerdemain, end 12 to 1 agst Icpertinence colt. Miss Ann went in front soon after the start, and made play to the Coal Pit Turn, where John Cosser passed her, was never after headed, and won cleverly by two lengths. Her Majesty's Plate of 100 guineas. Three miles. Mr. B. Green's Athelstane, 9st 21b ...(Wintringham) 1 Mr. Anson's The Sikh, 6 yrs, lOst 51b (Templeman) 2 sto 1 on Athelstane. Won easily. BETTING AT MANCHESTER.—TUESDAY. THE NORTHUMBERLAND PLATE.-3 to 1 agst Malton (t freely)-3 to 1 agst Executor, (t freely)-5 to 1 agst Legerdemain, (t and att. offered)-8 to 1 agst John Cosser, (t and aft offered)-12 to 1 agst Miss Ann (0-100 to 7 agst Escape (t). THE LIVERPOOL Cup.-9 to 1 agst Keleshea, (take 10 to 1). GOODWOOD STARES.-9 to 1 agst Plaudit, (t)-10 to 1 agst Fernhiil , (t)-12 to 1 agst Tophana-12 to 1 agst Clermont-100 to 6 agst liemembrancer-100 to 6 agst Fire-eater -16 to agst Giselle, (take 20 to 1.) MARKET NEWS.-(THIS DAY CORN - EXCHANGE-WEDNESDAY Since Monday tho arrivals of English Wheat for our market, coastwise as well as by land carriage and sample, have been on a very limited scale. To-day scarcely any fresh quantities were on offer, yet the demand was far from active at prices about equal to those obtained on last market day. The imports of Foreign Wheat have been on a fair average scale, viz., 4,340 quarters. Really fine parcels moved off steadily at extreme rates; but the middling and inferior kinds met a slow inquiry. Float. ing cargoes were neglected. Grinding Barley sold freely at full prices. Malting and distilling sorts were dull. Malt, the supply of which was on the increase, sold slowly at unaltered currencies. The show of Oats was on the increase, especially foreign qualities. Prime samples were quite as dear as on Monday. Beans, Peas, Indian Corn, and Flour, as last advised. ARRIVALS THIS WEEK. Wheat. I Barley. Oats. 1 1 590 qrs. I -- qrs. I I Flour. ,880 qrs. --ski, English ...... Scotch .. •• • . 1ri5h......... Foreign •• •• •. —__ 4,340 I 4,450 I 12,570 I Malt, -- qrs. 80/LOUGEE BOP 1 1 / 4 111.1LET. Although the duty is called only 80,0001. to 90,000 Z, and the plantation accounts are considered unfavourable, the demand for all kinds of Hops is in a sluggish state at our quotations:—Sussex pockets, 65s to 86s; Weald of Kent ditto, 72s to 90s; and Mid and East Kent ditto, 84s to 140 s per cwt. WEIITECEILPEL. 12 1 4 7 1 , s 10% 3 , 4 3% Our market today was but moderately supplied with each kind of meat, the demand for which was in a sluggish state on the following terms :—Beef, from 2s 21 to 3s 4d; Mutton. 2s 6d to 3s 8d; Lamb, 4s 64 to os na; - veal, 31 441 to 3S- 8,1; and - Pon, 3s 4d to 4s 4d per 81bi by the carcase. Miss WooLGAR's BENEFIT.—The benefit of this charming, talented, and versatile artiste, takes place this evening at the Adelphi theatre, and we have no doubt but that the house will be a bumper. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat yesterday, and concluded the hearing of an appeal (part heard), Wilson v. Wilson, from the Court of Arches. An appeal from New South Wales, " The Marchioness of Bute v. Mason," was commenced. GR1311398Y, JUNE 26.—The Kate smack, at anchor on Burnham Ridge, this morning, was run into by the Her. cules sloop, of Rochester, and received considerable damage. The Hercules proceeded. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, June 26. 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, as connected with the administration of the criminal law, and he would then take the opportunity of 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 sensige that he laboured under a source of much discouragement, as, with reference to one of the most important a tmight claus es spareof t h the himßill,h ttehe necessityopinionof of going Lordships was taken last session of P ar li ament, an d g i ven against it. 'tha t 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 Jews, 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 t o su b st i tute i n i ts 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. It was quite clear that the 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 them, 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 biro, 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 ship's table, and at that of the other House of Parlia ment, were not exempt from this disparagement. He felt at all 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 ing to the phrases in the oath of allegiance relating to the Pretender, the Princess Sophia, and to a family which had disappeared from the face of the earth.—(Cries of " 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 vtaignoeetdo t t h h a e t i r those Lordshipsw ords and wereth e o c p o p u o n s t o r d y , t o who h werethe t r, o t c h o . — n d (Hear, hear.) Lord Clancarty, nobleman whose o ad ministration ministration of the poor-law in Ireland had been f the most distinguished character, had refused to t a ke h ou a ld su b f e .. oath,taken plainhe believed sense. t h atrrhe These ficient ground for altering the oaths administered to the Christian Members of ei ther House of Parliament. But h m e ai c n ou a l n d d nesostenctoinacleoahl object t om of tthheeiruiLllowrdasshitpoi admittha the ae J rf e g w tuh s me e into s ra P edd a d r ug l Parliament.—(Hear, i du e n n idn t — 00e : wo e sh a i it r ei , ohn h , e t h a ha r e . t ) reasons es e wor ds formed s wouldprti He o was s vi i t prop osition h n awareh th a e d been resisted, and if he believed in the validity of the Bill 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 tion. 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 Bth, 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 pensing justice, and practising at the bar—(Hear, hear) —when they saw them acting as high sheriffs, justices of the peace, aldermen, and mayors, he thought that 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 seats 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 been any direct legislation to exclude them, but it was by an indirect 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 barricades, and cry "To your tents, 0 Israel."—(A laugh.) He would not have the bad taste to menace their Lordships with any evil consequences from their rejection of this measure; but he would cay, that looking at the pro gressive liberality of our past legislation, at the deter mination of the parties who had taken up the question, and the feeling of the people at large, he could not but think that it would be wise for their Lordships not to embitter this contest by protracting a struggle which must be ultimately unavailing.—(Hear, hear.) He would not detain the Houae either by expatiating upon the high respectability 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 kiwi hearted. ness which he knew animated their Lordships, he felt that it was specially on that ground they felt a difficulty in agreeing to the measure.—(Hear, hear.) It was not as Church of England men they refused assent, but because 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 cf arguinte a religious ques tion in the presence of the spiritual Peers. But when he was aware of the resistance of the religious scruple, ho trusted ha 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 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.—(Lend cheers.) He was thankful that the tierce and undisguised persecution which, acting upon the contrary principle, had been applied to the Jews in for mer ages, was now extinct, but he feared that, congra tulating ourselves upon this circumstance, we might in a more refined mode, still gratify that persecuting spirit, fer persecution it essentially was, when any body of men were excluded from the rights of citizens on account of religious opinions.—(Hear, hear.) Looking at any possible mischief that might arise from their introduction into the Legislature, he would ask if they were more likely to be infected with the doctrines of Radicalism, Republicanism, or Socialism than other classes? Ile 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 from no class of the community was that less to be appre hended. With reference to the statement that this was and ought to continue to be a Christian Legislature, he conceived that the introduction of a few members of the Hebrew persuasion into Parliament would no more, unchristlanise the Legislature than the fact of the exist ence of a small body of Jewish fellow-citizens destroyed the existence of the natioa as a Christian nation.-- (Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelates, and their clergy in their pulpits, urged with eloquence, learnine, 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 with Christian habits and feelings, and that was to bring others from the outer fuld 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 powerful as again to cause them to say— " See how these Christians love oneanother."—(Cheers ) Our language ought to be—" Come among us; see more of us." We boasted o f h av i ng i m bib ed 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 poets prophets, and the highest aspi• rations of legislators. It was our duty to act in accord ance with these lessons. They ought to discard all un worthy fears regarding the admission of Jews 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 not addressed himself to this high theme in a presumptuous or unworthy spirit. The Christianity which they professed and regarded needed not any bulwark or guarantee, and they should bear 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 their 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 aihiembly when lee onaled on them to admit the low pee scented 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 all the woes and wrongs of the the past. In conclusion the Noble Earl moved the second reading of the Bill. The Earl of EGLINTON said that the present mea sure, though it was brought forward under another name, and though it proposed to deal with the whole Parliamentay oath, was to all 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 was 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. He objected to the Bill principally on religious grounds, and also for political reasons. The constituency of London had chosen a gentleman, however worthy in private character and worldly position, they knew could not sit in Parliament. He could not but look on the Bill as a retrospective measure, and he did not deem it expedient to go into ex pestfacto 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 materially 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 had 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 thought it a case of g rea t h ar d s hi p and in justice that after te 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 bo 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 i n c i rcums t an c e s 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 thought 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 of 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 monopol6ing civil privi leges. It was not lawful for them to keep up th se 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 t 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.) He thought there was no such danger to be apprehended, and should, therefore, give his hearty support to the Bill. The Bishop of EXE I'ER 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 wound so far forget the condition upon which they were entitled to a .eat within those walls as openly to avow their intention to injure the Church or State.—(Hear.) Those very oaths, which were so quietly disposed of, were the condition upon which Wilburn and Mary came to the throne. After making the declaration of rights, the Bill pro ceeded to recite these oaths. Having reed 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 distinction of the constitution as then agreed to. It had been contended in the other House of Parliament, that the oath of supremacy was unnecessary, because 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 differ: nt ways, for the Jews did not hold any alle giance to the Pepe. 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 repudi ite allegiance to the Popo, and affirm allegiance to the Sovereign of the realm at the same time. Passing by these pointe, 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 he 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 unchristianise 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 Chrisdan 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 bad a faith in ono 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 considerei this mea sure mere as a political than a religious ore, 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.) lie must, however, point out what appeared to 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 Raman 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 violation of his oaths.—(Bear.) So that the Jew would be more trusted than the Catholic. It was not in a spirit of hostility to the Church Establishment that he pointed out the faults of this measure, but in order to force on their Lordships the consideration of the propriety of removing all invidious distinctions, and of making but one law for all. So strongly did he feel on this subject, that if the Bill went into Committee, which he strongly hoped it would, he should move an amendment to that effect. It was sufficient to justify him in that course, to show that the meaning of the Roman Catholic oath was contested and doubtful. On the one hand, it was con tended that they were restricted from taking part in any question affecting the temporalities of the Church, while another party held that no such restriction ex isted.—(Hear, hear.) He desired to remove this anomaly, and to place the Roman Catholics upon an equality with the Quakers, the Dissenters, and the Jews. He thought it was unbecoming their Lordships' dignity to maintain such an inequality, and if they passed the Bill in its present shape, he should believe the Roman Catholic oath was for ever fixed in a restricted sense, in which case he should feel that they were placed in far too un ema honnilinting a position ; and ho for ono should feel that he had no right there, as being placed in a situation incompatible with the free exercise of his duty as a legislator.—(Hear, hear.) The Earl of WINCHILSEA said if any one had doubted as to the infidel spirit which had for many years characterised our legislation, that doubt must be re moved by the Bill on the table. It was an insult to a Christian people, and to the Almighty, whose Son had come down from heaven to give us that religion which had bestowed upon our country so many blessings. It was an interference with the rights and permanence of the Crown—with the rights of that House of which he was an humble Member, and of the Lower House of Parliament. What was the crime of that very people to which this Bill referred, and which brought down the judgment of the Almighty upon them, but a warning to us that all who rejected or despised the Saviour would be visited with the same calamities and the same signal manifestation of the displeasure of the Creator? Towards the Jewish people God was his witness he bore no ill will. Hardness of heart and judicial blindness had caused them to reject the God whom we worshipped. They were once the favoured people of God, but that re jection had brought down his judgments upon them. His earnest prayer was that they might be again re stored to the fold, but he could not consent to imitate them in their judicial blindness, and repudiate the die tinctive character of a Christian. This would be a fatal measure for England's greatness, should their Lordships be deluded into passing such a Bill as that upon their table. National sins brought national punishments; and if turmoils, tempests, and revolutions had visited other countries, while ours was the only firm spot amid the chaos, it was not because of our own merits, but by the mercy of that God whose worship, with all our back sliding, we still maintained. It had been stated by the Right Reverend Prelate, that this was not a religious measure, and the Noble Earl had said that if it inter fered with any religious principle be would rather it did not pass. Why, the Lord himself had declared that the people who honoured him he would honour; and he would ask in what way they could better honour him than by upholding in all its integrity his worship and religion. _ _ The Duke of ARGYLE regretted to have heard the Noble Earl who last addressed the House, s tating that a measure supported by a large number of their Lordships, and by distinguished Fathers of the Church, was founded on a spirit of Christian infidelity. While he made that ad mission, he confessed he could not concur in some of the grounds on which that measure had been defended, and, among others, that religious opinions and religious faith should not form the ground of political disability. The great preponderance of argument, however, was vour of the measure. The question before their Lord ships was, whether in the existing circumstances of the country, those political disabilities were justifiable or not? It was said that they were a Christian people, and a Christian Parliament. Were they a Chrisjan people then, and in what sense were all the people of that country Christians, either in reality or in name? Were all the Members of both Houses of Parliament Christians, in the high sense of the term? Could they think of se curing their Christianity by the continuance of religious or political disabilities? He contended they could not. It appeared to him, that if they could not effect the ob ject for which the disability was professedly kept up, they ought to remove it. It appeared to him to be most unjust towards those who were now the only party ex cluded, that that exclusion should be continued. There fore he supported the Bill, but not, he admitted, with out reluctance and some regret. They could not secure the Christianity of Parliament by the imposition of such oaths as the tJew objected conscientiously to take, and the sooner, therefore, it was altered the better. Lord NELSON opposed the Bill, and in doing so re peated almost all the arguments that have been ad vanced over and over again by the opponents of the measure, both in this and the other House of Parliament. He laid peculiar stress on its tendency to unchristianise the character of the Legi s l a t ure, and gave it as his opi nion that the Dissenters evinced their anxiety for the success of the measure simply because they believed it would lead to the separation of Church and State. The Earl of WICKLOW said that none of the argu ments he bad heard urged against the Bill were suffi ciently strong to alter the impression left on his mind by the able speech of the Noble Lord who had moved the second reading of the Bill. He should give his support to the measur e , b u t i t was not as a Jewish Bill that he desired it to be considered. Ho looked at the title of the Bill, which was one for altering the Parlia mentary oaths, and there was only one clause in it which related to professors of the Jewish religion. While he was anxious for th e remova l of the d i sa bili ty which prevented Jews sitting in Parliament, he was still more desirous that the other portion of the Bill should be carried into effect. It was quite competent for those who objected to th e a d m i ss i on o f J e ws into Parliament to support the sec on d rea di ng , an d move the rejection in i o n r Committee of th e c l ause affecting that body. He had long been anxi ous t o see a measure introduced into Par liaMent for the a lteration of the Parliamentary h he felt that in many respects it required alteration and modification. EariTiESART said he would venture to say, in a few worth, what he conceived to be the substance of the Bill. It was simply that principle which their Lordships year. He should b e g l ad to rec ive the Jews rejected as fellow countrymen and fellow-citizzns, Lut not last year. as fellow-legislators. A seat in Parliament was conferr e d for the benefit of the nation, and not of individuals. Tl•re were strong and ample reasons why their Lordships should at once reject th e pr i nciple of the Bill. If they denied admission to Parliament to a man not stiffi&iently interested in the welfare of the country, from the small amount of property he possessed, how much more should it be refused to men who had no permanent interest in any single country, but were mere citizens of the world? How could these men legislate properly on subjects con nected with the Christian Church? The Jew c ,nsiders us as idolaters. There was af, cling among the best part of the community against the Bill. They might receive the Jews as guests and as friends but they might go no further. The Bishop of OXFORD said that, he had no idea of. troubling their Lordships at any 'length ; indeed he knew not that he should have troubled their Lordships. unless an almost personal allusion had been made to , him. They had been told by the Noble Duke that the arguments of the Noble Earl who had moved the second reading had, been entirely ungrappled with. His first and weightiest argument was, that as we had already ad mitted the Jew to a community of civil privileges, we ought to go further and admit him to equal rights and privileges with his fellow-citizens. Now it seemed to; him that the position of a legislator or law-maker was entirely different from that of a law-administrator. This. was not calling upon them to do a thing in degree, as alleged,. for the privilege sought for was different in kind. The office of legislator was one given for the nation's good,. for the state's good, and for the good of the Church, and, not for the delectation of any individual. Was it con sidered an injury to the lower clergy to exclude them from the Commons' House of Parliament? Certainly not.- That exclusion was justified upon various grounds. Why' should a Jew sit in Parliament. Was there any Jewish. constituencies in England? How, then could they fully' represent the Christian tendencies of their constituent's.. How otherwise would they be elected but by the money power which they represented? How could the State be administered on Christian principles by Jews? As soon. as Christian principles could be brought into legislative,. Christians were bound to introduce them. And now,. having been introduced, were they prepared to abolish them? The Most Rev. Prelate told them for the honour of Christianity, and in order to prevent the early Chris tians from being considered deceivers, he would carry the principle out and exclude no one whatever. The' Noble Lord, in moving the Bill, said that there was no' direct law against the Jew being admitted to Perlia mew!, and only by recent legislation they were so ex eluded. Why, the Noble Earl might as well argue that; because at one time there was no law against parricide.. that therefore no law should ever have been enacted. against it. Why the possibility of Jews being admitted! into Parliament was at one time never thought of, their personal safety was not even protected. As to the argu ment that there was no danger from their admission, he , throught there was great danger, looking to the money' power, and the influence of that power upon many of the' constituencies. 'When they considered the relations of the Jews to affairs on the Continent, there might be a. strong !nterest on their part to secure a powerful party' in Parliament, and where there was both a strong into rest and a great money power, it was evident that the: danger was by no means theoretical or imaginary. He) objected altogether to their admitting that money power,, apart from general character and principles, was to give! the right to admission to Parliament.--(Hear, hear.); They could not deal with motive?, but they could with . . professed principles. There might be many in bothi Houses of Parliament who cared nothing for religion„ some who did not believe in it; but they did not come ilk on a profession of their unbelief—(Hear, hear)—and they could be prevented from acting upon that profession; but; if they lowered !down the necessary profession, they, lowered down at the same time the character and profes sion of the body.—(Hear, hear.) If they passed this: Bill they indeed professed unbelief, and if there was this; danger, it should surely be the last time they should' seek to lower the character of that Christian assembly, by admitting those who rejected those principles whicha alone could raise them as a religious people. The indoor mitable obstinacy and perseverance of the Jews wass one reason why he would exclude them. It was because, he believed they had the will and the power to act upoat these principles, that he felt, without any disrespect tee them, they had no right to seats as legislators for es Christian nation. If the opposite view was maintained, it must be on the ground that the Hebrew persuasio n were losing the firm faith which had been transmitted ter them, and thus the dogmas of Judaism were held in le: Is respect than before. If such was argued, he would st those were not men who should be made legislators.- (Hear, hear.) What they wanted above all things was earnestness of character, and he would rather have a n earnest Christian in Parliament attacking the Churc b, because he was conscientiously opposed to it, the al one who made no such attacks, because he cared nothii tg about it.—(Hear, hear.) He believed that they covld not inflict upon our Jewish fellow-subjects a greater fin jury than by admitting them into Parliament, under the impression that to us all religions were equally indiffer ent. Why was it that we were able to give them a re fuge and assure them of safety and security for the ir property? Because our Christianity had made us et strong and powerful nation, and if they passed this Pill they would injure and destroy that religion which bad made us a refuge for scattered nations.—(Cheers.) The Duke of CLEVELAND explained. Lord BROUGHANI said the debate was sufficiently exhausted, and he had on former occasions so fully oz . * plained his views, that he should have refrained from addressing their Lordships, bad not the arguments of the Right Rev. Prelate been of so extraordinary a etre meter. After hearing the speech of the Noble Earl who introduced the Bill, the Right Rev. Prelate Laid that his arguments were inconsistent. We had ad mitted the Jews to mount, not only tho petty, but i;he high seats of justice, where they held power over the lives and property of our fellow-subjects. But all this, said the Right Rev. Prelate, was nothing; they were merely administrators of the law. But it was a very different thing to be a legislator. Oh, that he had sat with them that morning. —(Laughter.) Oh, that he sat in nisi prius, or in a court of equity, and he would soon discover how far his innocent imaginings were wide of the truth.—(Hear, hear.) How little a judge was a mere instrument, and to what an extent the lives, and limbs, and properties were at the discretion of judges , But not only. had we admitted the Jew to the judge's; seat, but we had admitted him to the legislative office of an elector.—(Hear, bear.) And then the Right Reverend Prelate talks d of the influence of money upon the electors. That argument was in favour of the Bill, and much more powerful than any he could have used. The Jew was an elector and used his money for the furtherance of his views now. The Right Reverend Prelate drew an impassable line between all other offices and that of a legislator.---(Hear, hear.) It was only necessary to state the argument in order to show its ab surdity; it was not necessary to pull it in pieces, because the Legislature was, as all admitted, influenced by public opinion; and Jews, infidels, and atheists, all united in returning Members to Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) The words " on the true faith of a Christian" might prevent persons of a tender conscience, but persons who had ne such scruples were not excluded by them. They really' meant nothing.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Rev. Prelate had given a very uncomfortable and singular account elf the Jewish faith, and one which he confessed struck him as by no means a correct one. As to the idea that two or three Jews getting into Parliament and unhing-- ing the whole Christian system, it was one of the most ridiculous and extravagant chimeras he had evert heard, and he really had no patience to waste words upon it. Why, how could two or three Jews do whet fifty or sixty Roman Catholics, whom they had already' admitted, had not attempted to do ?—(Hear, hear-) But then the Right Reverend Prelate said he would rather see earnest Christian men attacking the Church. God forbid he should agree with him, even though he was a Bishop of that Church.—(Laughter.) But if the Right Reverend Prelate had any fears of the Jews doing this, why not introduce in Committee a similar pledgee as that introduced with reference to Roman Catholics into the Act of 1629. With respect to what made a Christian Parliament and a Christian nation, he utterly denied that the words " on the truo faith of a Christian," constituted the foundation of either. The oaths of abjuration, supremacy, and allegiance, were merely pro fessions of political faith, and obedience, which were made "on the true faith of a Christian," by those who held that faith. But the Jew in this House, using these words, gave no guarantee of that political fealty; and, if he could get that allegiance by a form of words which would be solemnly binding upon his conscience, he would do so.—(Hear, hear.) liefusing to allow the Jews seats in Parliament was withholding an important privilege under the false pretext of religious disability. It was taking advantage of a phrase introduced into an oath for a different purpose, to exclude a certain sect. The proposed measure was, in point of fact, tearing the last leat out of the bock of intolerance, and restoring it to its original and pristine purity. It was absurd to state that Parliament was in danger of ceasing to be a Christian Legislature if they removed the disabilities under which the Jews now laboured. The admission of the Dissenters and Roman Catholics to Parliament had not proved dangerous to the Protestant religion or to the Established Church; but if there had been any danger from the wealth, activity, and zeal of these sects exasperated to the pitch of bigotry, it surely would have been exhibited in Dissenters and Roman Catholics being admitted to the full and entire privilege, of exercising the rights and privileges of British electors and British representatives. Having gone so far tbey must go farther, to be correct with them:elv ex es ci a u n a d ed ext:n e d b th e e ca p u e s r e mi i s t sio w n a t s o w th i e se Jer u s s . t, T a h n e d y ad h m onno i o t d t ua e rr d nedb e t C e s bxoe t c h cl : u i ud i s c ee s it was good policy, and good for the empire, and_ _b honour able for themselves ; but, if they Jews, it would only ' be because they ok t them whwhileeh didthey t c h a e s obweah lessnd a harm u than on th dide r past duct,discredit to the British Legislature. The Earl of CARLIS LE replied, but in so l ow a tone, and speaking with his back to the g a ll ery, as to bo almost inau4ible. He was understood, ho wever, to state that, with regard to the present form o f t h e C atholic oath, he would hail with pleasure every opportunity of placing the Roman Catholics on a perfect level of equality with their Protestant fellow -countrymen.—(Hear.) Their Lordships then divided. For the second reading Contents _ Non - contents ... 95 Majority against the second rea di ng The Bill was, consequently, lost. Their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock. -25 HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 26. POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) Sir A. BROOKE, am id st l ou d cr i es of " Divide," rose to support the amendment. He thought that as soon as the 53. rate was exhausted the Consolidated Fund would be attacked. He was not opposed to a maximum rate, but he thought that a ss. rate was not high; 7s. was not either, and he would have voted for a 105. rate if he could have got it. He concluded by calling upon the House to vote for the 7s. rate. The galleries were then cleared, t ni the Rouse divided. On the original questiBn that the words " five" be introduced, the numbt rs were— For the question ... Against the question Majority for the question —77 The araencluieni was consequently rejsoied. ... 125 ... 48 -')'