The Sun. — London, England, 1830-05-18 00:00:00

"That the Bill be read a second time this day six months" - '' • • Lord BELGRAVE .regretted that he could not remain silent on the present occasion, for the opinions he was about to utter, were, lie feared, different from those of Hon:Triends with. whom it gave him pleasure in general to c oncur. First of ail, he must complain of the manner in which this question had been introduced. It had been said that all whO had voted for Catholic emancipation were upoe principle pledged to support the present Bill ; he must complain that such a banner had been unfurled ; he had fought under it long, but be never could admit that there was a coincidence between the two cases, or that those who had to the utmost extent supported the one question, might not with perfect consistency resist the other.--(Hear, hear.)—The claims of the Roman Cathoe lies were founded upon every principle which could animate the breasts of freemen ; they rested upon reason, justice, and truth—upon reason and justice, because it was right to admit to a participation of the civil rights of the Constitution, men who had in times of trial never failed to embark in its support ; and upon truth, because it was, lie believed, an universal axiom, that difference of religious principles alone ought not to curtail the perfect enjoyment of civil privileges. But what was the nature of the present question, which he would beg leave to view in two distinct points: first, the Jews stood forward as a distinct nation, not on ac count of certain religious tenets, for there lie would wish to make a distinction, but because, through the medium of their religion, they claimed to be always considered a distinct people, and by so doing had incapacitated them selves from that amalgamation of civil rights which they had now rather inconsistently sought. Wherever the Jews appeared over the surface of the world, to this dis tinctive mark of being a separate nation they bad always most rigidly adhered.—(Hear, hear.) —They were natives of England, of Russia, Prussia,—to be ,net with in the various countries of the east, in Africa, and in America, — but in each and all of these countries they preclaimed themselves, wherever born, to be a distinct and separate peei e e ,_( Hear, hear. )—Did the Jew in England, whether he sehl clothes in Monmouth-street, or negociated loans on the Exchange, ever think of identifying himself with the great inetitutiens of this country? In fact, he could not have any community of association ; the glories of British histety had no charms for him ; they were not wound up in his sympathies, or interwoven with his aff ctions ; they could not, in fact; for the moment lie could embody in his mind the kindred feelings of an Englishman he would cease to be a Jew.—(Hear.) —lt had been asked, however, whether the Jew was not likely to be more formidable while stimulated by a grievance, than when bound by gratitude for a confidence reposed in the fidelity of his civil principles : whether it would not be well to turn the stream of his wealth into British channels, by identifying the Jews with the na tional prosperity, rather than allow it to be diverted by foreign inducements. He really must say that he could not concur in this kind of reasoning ; whether given power, or excluded from it, the Jew would, in his opinion, continue to lend his money to the safest and highest bidder, and England a&rded the best market for such transactions. — He freely admitted that power was to a certain degree allied to wealth, and that wealth might be made an instrument of mischief,—open irritamenta malorum; but the Jews, who had, as a nation, built their prospects upon a different foundation, were unlikely to disturb their ordinary opera thins by such projects as were implied in these apprehen sions. They bad other glories in the perspective of their future condition ; they were inhabitants of another climate, and patriots of a different land, to which their eyes were directed with unvarying intenseness. Impregnated with these sentiments, the Jew was disqualified from devoting his mind to the cultivation of the duties and affections which civil obligations required for the maintenance of the British Constitution, —he could never be inspired with an Englishman's love of country—(Hear, hear) —and had, therefore, disentitled himself from an equal participation its the privileges which grew out of such sentiments. He deeply lamented to be under the necessity of differing front his friends on this occasion, with whom he was in the habit of acting; but impressed with the conscientious conviction that this motion ought not to be carried, he claimed for himself that freedom of opinion which he willingly yielded to those who differed from him on the present oceas ion .—( flea r. ) The Earl of DARLINGTON also opposed the Bill, and upon similar grounds. He was aware that the elo quence of the Hon. Member who was the mover of it had succeeded on a former night in obtaining a majority for the introduction of this Bill ; but considering the numbers at that time in attendance, he could not take a decision so obtained as binding upon the House. Perhaps there would have been little opposition to the extension of minor privileges to the Jews, were the application so restricted ; but when it extended to their admission to Parliament, it was a time to make a stand, or at once prepare to surrender to Jews, and Turks, and infidels, an equal eligibility of privilege in a Christian legidature.—( Hear, hear. )--To this he never could consent ; nor could they who thought with him, upon the principles which were interwoven with the British Constitution. Indeed he saw no reason why this question should have been brought forward in this imposing manner ; and he could not use better words to express his opinion upon it, than he found in the speech of the Right Hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Huskisson) when he opposed the repeal of the Test and CorporatianActs. He feared, however, that it would be his misfortune to be, in this discussion, in the same situation in which he wits iu the debate two years ago, namely, giving votes at oppo site sides. However, the Right Hon. Gentleman has! said respecting the Test Acts, that " he doubted whether the motion was calculated or directed to remove or to repress any urgent grievance." So he (Lord Darlington) said of the present motion, and should therefore oppose it. He had, indeed, been somewhat astonished at the comparison attempted to be made between this question acid that of the Roman Catholics, than which no two points could in his view he more free from any analogy. The Catholic& were allied with their brethren of a different religion in this country, in the desire to cherish the glorious achieve ments of their common ancestors, and to preserve those memorials which were the best incentive to patriotism ; but what identity of sentiment could the Jews ever be ex pected to have in such ennobling recollections ? He had been lately asked whether, if he voted against this Bill, he could ever hope to borrow money among the Jews.— (A laugh.) When he replied, that he had no doubt, where he ever under such a necessity, it was at his security, and not at Isis vote, the Jew would fix his eye— (Hear, hear) —and he quoted to his friend the dialogue between Shyloch and .Antonio— ' . " Shy. Signior Antonio, many a time and oft, " In the Rialto you have rated me " About my monies, and my usances ; " Still have I borne it with a patient shrug • " For sufferance is the badge of all our tribe " You call me—misbeliever, cut-throat dog, " And spit upon my Jewish gabardine, " And all for use of that which is mine • own. • • • • • " Ant. I am as like to call thee so again, " To spit on thee again, to spurn thee too. " If thou wilt lend this money, lend it not " As to thy friends jfor when did friendship take ", A breed for barren metal of his friend ?) " But lend it rather to thine enemy ; d' Who if he break, thou snay'st with better face " Exact the penalty." The security once tendered, the money would be forth coming with the seal upon the bond. He concluded by declaring his decided opposition to this motion. Mr. MILDMAY said, he rose for the purpose of re ? Sling the charge brought against the supporters of the present measure, of being enetnine to the church esta- Ideehment. They were accused of being only anxious to trample upon that glorious institution ; but lie denied the justice of the charge. He would yield to no titan in an anxious desire to see the atirch of England supported in all its present strength and purity, believing that her doc trines would best conduce to the welfare of people in this world, and pave the way to their happiness in the next. --(Hear, hear. )—During the discussion ma the measure before the House, he lead Listened anxiously to hear its opponents offer something in the shape of an argument in support of their views ; but, so help hies Heaven, he had heard nothing to shale the opinion he entertained, on first entering the House, of the propriety of the present mea sure. It had been observed by a Noble Lord that the Jews • would not amalgamate with the English people, though at die same time he admitted that they had united with, the Prussians, the Russians, and the Turks.—(Cries of " No, no.")—What was the cause of this, he asked? The very Constitution itself, which forced on the Jews the burdens of citizens without allowing them a vote in the imposition of those burdens.—(Hear, hear.)—He would quote from the same authority, which had already been appealed to, and say, " You have scorned their a: 3 - tion, you have cooled their friends and heated their ene snies, and yet you have not the justice to make them repa ration and give them the rights of cifeeens."—(Hear.) Lord BRLGRAVE explained. Sir E. DERING, while aehnitting that na disadvan tage might arise from Jews being allowed to fill .certain corporate offices, would yet lie extreenely unwilling to see them occupy seats within the walls of that House. lie wondered how the two religions, the Jewish aud Chris tian, could be said to harmonize together, when .the pr - feered object of the o ne was to trlt4ople on the Diviu% author of the oth er . Ithad been said that the Jews had I always been an injured people, and never a persecuting • one ; but it should be recollected, that for eighteen een euriee they hail not possessed the means cif persecution. J - Ie hoped-the House would not be led away by .love fur innovation to adopt a measure pregnant with danger to the best interests of this country.—( Hear, hear.) Sir R. WILSON said, that the Jews, who possessed civil rights and exercised political liberty in the Nether lands and France, were as useful members of the state as the professors of any other religion. Did the Noble Lord, who said the Jews would not amalmagate with the people of this country, mean to sty that the country ought to be exclusively Christian ?—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.)—Such an opinion could not be entertained ex cept by those who now cheered, and who appeared to be under the influence of feelings which controlled their better ' judgments. A gallant General had asked, was there to be a union of sects in that House? He replied, that he should be glad to see the Jew, the Unitarian, and the Church of England-man all sitting together. He made that remark because he saw sitting before him a member of the Unitarian community (Mr. W. Smith, we believe), distinguished forhis humanity and intelligence.—(Hear. ) At Southwark, the Jews were allowed by the tolerance of their Christian brother electors, to vote at elections for Members of Parliament. Still that right was liable to be denied them, and therefore he called upon the House to go into Committee, if not to grant the Jews seats in Parlia ment, at least to confirm to them the other rights of citizens. The state had no right to prescribe a religion, or proscribe a reli g ion, unless its principles were obnoxious to the safety of the country; but he had had great ace quaintance with Jews in different parts of the world, and, though suffering under the most grievous oppression, he had always found them generous and humane.—(Hear.) — There was now an individual in this country belonging to that sect who was at the head of seven-and-twenty Christian charities, many of which were for the purpose of promulgating the Christian religion. Those charities he supported, because, though not believing in the Christian religion himself, he still thought it was one cal culated to improve the morals of the country.—(Hear.)— Such was the conduct of one of that race to which the House was called upon to render justice by the present measure, which, he was happy to say, met with his most hearty concurrence. Mr. O'CONNELL was proud of the opportunity afforded of supporting the present measure on principle and sympathy. He remembered the time when the cry raised in the House, instead of being the cry of " Christianity," was the cry of " Protestantism." It was said that the Catholics were higotted, and if let into Par liament would net permit liberty of conscience. Who were now, lie would like to know, the advocates of bigotry?—( Hear, hear. )—Who were the parties now be fore the House? Not foreigners, but English-born Jews. A Noble Lord had called them unbelievers, and asked whether the House would allow unbelievers to enter ? Let it be remembered that the Jews were excluded from Parliament merely because they were conscientious per sons, and would not swear an oath which they dis believed ; while the House had no security against the entrance of Atheists and Deists. There had been some talk about a divided interest. It had been said that Eng lish Jews had a fellow-feeling with the Jews abroad, This was nothing else but a translation of the divided allegiance of the last Session.—(Laughter.)—What was the condition of the Jews in Prance? It might, perhaps, be said, that the French Legislature was not a Christian one. It had not, to be sure, the essential of a Christian Legislature, the presence of boroughmongers.—(Laughter.) Members could not there go from the cote gauche to the cote droit with ten or eleven borough-owners at their teil.--(Great laughter.)—But the Jews were emanci pated both in France and the Netherlands; they wet e ad mitted to high judicial stations, and to seats in the Legis lature, and proved themselves impartial and zealous magis trates. .A. Gallant General had said that those who op posed the Catholic Relief Bill ought in consistency to op pose the present measure. He denied the justice of the conclusion. The Catholics were numerous and prosely tising perhaps ; but the Jews were not so numerous as the Catholic., and were far from being a proseletieing stet. He supported the measure on the principle of uni versal toleration, and on the right of every person to worship God according to the dictates of his own con science.—(Hear, hear.)—The spirit of persecution and exclusion ve,ss abhorrent from the tolerant and benevolent principles of genuieee Christianity, and in accordance with the precept to do as you would be done by, he conceived that he teas only fulfilling a portion of that duty which the Christian religion imposed upon him, in giving his sup port to this measure._(Hear.) Mr. TRANT was determined to give every opposition in his power to this measure. He was the more inclined to oppose the Bill when he found Mr. Robert Owen—an individual who had openly, at a public meeting, declared that Christianity wee an imposture—coming forward to petition in its favour. Let the Hon. and Learned Member who had introduced the measure attempt to gloss and var nish as he might, it could not be concealed that this Bill went to destroy that principle of Christianity upon which the institutions of this country had been hitherto founded. He would contend with Blackstone that Christianity was the law of the land ; and he weed(' maintain, in opposition to the assertion of the Hon. and Learned Member in intro ducing this Bill, that the Jews could not be considered as Christians, and that they were not entitled to the same privileges as Christians in a Christian state. The people of England were strongly opposed to this measure. Who were they for whose relief this measure was intended ? They were the descendants of those who crucified Jesus Christ, and who exclaireade--" His blood be upon us and upon our children." They were the descendants of those who persecuted the founder of our faith, and who would do so again were it in their power.—(lnterruption.)—Hon. Members might groan at these sentiments; but he would tell them that these sentiments were not confined to so ig norant and stupid a person as himself, hut that they were the sentiments of the people of England, who would have sent forward numerous petitions against this Bill if they supposed that there .eould be the least possibility of its pass ing. It was not persettneion to prevent the Jews from sitting in that House ; then let the House look to the con sequences that would result from a Jew witting in the seat of justice and administering the law of the land in a case of an action for blasphemy. The thing was a perfect ale, surdity : he should oppose time Bill because it went to de stroy the established church of this country. Lord 3, RUSSELL would certainly admit that this Bill, whether viewed in point of policy or of expediency, did nut appear to mesh either that attention or that oppo sition which it had met in that House. In point of expe diency, the edtnission of some 30,4500 or 40,000 Jews to the privileges of the Constitution was not a matter of much consequence, and undoubeedly never could be atteeded by those dangers of which some lion. Members had spoken; neither was there any danger resulting from their exclu sion which would in itself justify such a measure as this. ft was on principle en)y, then, that this measure could be supported,--upon that pripciple to which the House had last Session, and the preceding Session, given its full assent, in the instances of the Catholics and of the Dis senters, namely, that religious opinions should not interfere with civil privileges—that this Bill was: founded; and it was upon such grounds it should have his—(fiord John Hussell's)—cordial &ippon. When the Legislature had once decided that it was not necessary to be attached to the church of England to be eligible to seats in Parlia ment and the other privileges of the state, t o lte exclusion of the Jews was no longer defensible upon prineiele. He would maintain that religious opinions no longer formed a question with regard to the ad.nission to a share in the ' public privileges of the state. That had been finally set at rest by the decision of that House. The Jew contri buted to all the burdens of the state, and while obedience to the laws, and loyalty to the King, characterized his conduct, he ought not to be exclude(' from the privileges of that Constitution under which he lived.—(Hear, hear.) --It was said that the Jews forme-e . t.a distinct and separate nation in themselves, but that was the effect of the laws; and if time present measure passed„ r s hJews would in the course of a few years become perfecay amalgamated with ourselves. The emancipation of time Jews was now alone required to complete the great pringiple which Parliament had asserted in the two last Sessions, aged by rejecting ' this Bill the House would be, in effect, revoking that principle which it had then asserted by large majorities, He should give his warm support to the measure. Mr, G. BANKES would resist the Bill, and support the atue4altnent. The Hon. Member for Clare had said that Mahomedane, Deists, and Atheists, were, under the existing law, eligible to seats in that House, and lie had asked " why, therefore, alone .exclude the Jews?" But the lion. Member was mistaken as to !iialtomedans and Deists, for the oath which it was necessary to take opposed an insuperable bar to their admission there. With respect to Atheists, it wee erne that an Atheist, by taking the pre sent oaths, might obtain admission to the House; but he (Mr. Banks) would tell the Hue.. end Learned Member that in case get Atheist obtained a seat in Ghat manner by taking the oaths, and declaring that he believeei that which he really did not bol o ieye, there would lee a moral feeling in that House which would ptrip him of all power end influence whatever. It was said' tbae they allowed the c lews to acquire all that power which resulted from their posse: inn of wealth and property, and that they should not continue to exclude them from that one thing more which they now sought. But that one thing more was the legislative power, whir/a was, according to Mr. Locke, the supreme power of the State, and there was,tho ii therefor e , no .consistency on their part in xc;u Jews from a share in the supreme power in this country. After dwelling on tie dangers which, he contended, would attend the permitting Jews to legislate for the established church and religion of the country, the Hon. Member concluded by repeating his determination to vote for the amendment. Sir J. WROTTESLEY explained. Mr. HUSKISSON commenced by adverting to some observations which had fallen from his Gallant Friend (General Gascoyne), and from other Hon. Members, in reference to the petition which he (Mr. Huskisson) had presented on a former evening, from the town of Liver pool, in favour of this Bill. It had been asserted, that that petition, which, as was admitted on all hands, was most numerously and respectably signed by the leading ' merchants, bankers, and inhabitants of Liverpool, had been got up principally through the great influencg pos sessed by the Jews in Liverpool. He (Mr. Huskisson) knew something of Liverpool, and he could state that there was scarcely a part of the country in which the Jews possessed less influence. They were chiefly retail traders in Liverpool, and were therefore less likely to possess great influence in that town. The petition in question spoke the genuine sentiments of the Christians of Liverpool, in favour of that great principle which had been asserted by the House, in the instance of the Catho lics and of the Dissenters. His Gallant Friend had re ferred to his (Mr. Huskisson's) opposition to the Bill for the emancipation of the Dissenters ; but he would remind his Gallant Friend that lie (Mr. Huskisson) on that occa sion did not resist the Bill for the relief of the Dissenters on principle, but because he fe ired that the passing of that measure abstractedly and apart from the great treasure for the emancipation of the Catholics, might be injurious to the success of the latter and greater question. It was upon that conviction—an erroneous one he would ad mit—that he (Mr. Huskisson) at the time opposed the Bill for the relief of the Dissenters. The arguments which he had beard this night against the emancipation of the Jews, were precisely the same, pintails mutand is, which he had been in the habit of hearing urged for the last 30 years against the emancipation of the Catholics. The dangers to he apprehended to the Constitution and to the Church formed the constant theme with the opposers of Catholic emancipation ; and yet that great measure had been passed. Catholics had been admitted to Parliament, and it was now acknowledged by his Right Hon. Friend (Sir R. Peel) that no measure that had been passed during the last century had contributed more to add to the strength and resources of the empire. The arguments which had been adduced again , t the present Bill were, in fact, the exploded arguments which hail been unsuccessfully urged last Session against the emancipation of the Catholics, lie should support the expediency of this Bill, not only on the score of justice, but on principle ; but he assured the Hon. Gentleman that if lie was successful in per suading the majority of the House not to admit Jews to a seat in Parliament, however much he - (Mr. Huskisson_ ) might regret that circumstance, be should not be one of those who thought the Bill ought not on that account to be persevered in. This was a measure of justice to per sons suffering oppression, and he trusted that the Bill would he suffered to he read a second time. In the Com mittee he should exert himself to support it in its present state, but he should not abandon it if the alteration was adopted. This All had attracted a considerable degree of notice ; and they had been told that those Members who supported it would regret that support when they met their constienenes. But he (Mr. Huskisson) on that question, as well as on the Catholic question, had go verned himself by uo other principle than a regard to pub lic: duty ; and he, for one, was not afraid that on either question his constituents would differ from him, when they considered those questions with reference to public utility. He gave his hearty support to this Bill, and thought that it would be the consummation of measures which would immortalise the present Parliament. Sir ROBERT PEEL.—I shall endeavour to condense into the shortest possible compass what I have to say on the present occasion. As I had not the advantage of being here on the former discussion, I hope the House will bear with me should I trouble them with anything that they might have heard before. I must set out by saying that I cannot support this Bill. Ido not admit the principle of the Bill, nor can I help objecting to the mode in which it is sought to establish that principle. The Bill professes to limit itself to giving relief from all civil disabilities to all the Jewish subjects of his Majesty; but that is not the sole object to which the Bill is limited. I will not say that it is a Bill for unchristianising the Legislature, but will say that one of the unavoidable consequences of this measure will be, that every one of the forms and ceremonies which give us assurance of Christianity must be abolished. I take that that fellows as a legitimate consequence of this measure—that every man, to whatever sect or persuasion he may belong, will be entitled to prescribe the form of affirmation, by which he may give assurance to the state. The Session before the last we were called on to give our support to a measure for the relief of the Protestant Dissen ters, and last Session we passed a Bill for the relief of his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects; therefore it is said that we are bound, in consistency, to follow up these measures by adopting the present. I hear this with regret, because I hear it for the first time. In the dis cussions respecting either the Catholics or the Protestant Dissenters, nothing of the sort was ever intimated— it was never stated to us that because we admitted our fellow Christiana to a participation of power, that therefore, as an unavoidable and necessary consequence, we were bound to admit to all the privileges of the Constitution men who reject Christianity altogether. Some most forcible appeals were made to us on the ground of the common Christianity of the parties applying for re lief. In the speeches of Burke, and in his recorded senti ments, as contained in his writings, we learn that he rested his strongest arguments upon the Christianity of the Ro man Catholics; so of Mr. Grattan, of Mr Canning, and of all the great and eminent advocates of that cause ; even my Right Hon. Friend on my left, in pressing their claims upon the attention of the House last Session, ob served, that when serving with Protestants in the army they entered together the same breach, they fought toge ther in the same field, reposed together in the same grave, and rested their hope of future happiness on the merits of a common Redeemer—those appeals were forcibly m ide, and successfully made, for it was not to be denied that Pt otestanta and Catholics admitted the same great doc trines of Christianity, But if this Bill pass, though it may apparently be limited to the Jews, and though con fining our views solely to this Bill, it does not go beyond that class ; yet we shall, if this be agreed to, have to pass other Bills roost objectionable in my views of the Consti tution. It is perfectly obvious that from this it follows as a necessary consequence that every form of oath which re quiresea profession of the Christian faith must be aban doned. Now this is a most important alteration in the usages of this country. Before Catholics and Pro testant Dissenters were excluded, there was still a ne cessity for all public functionaries to profess Christianity; from the earliest period a belief in Christianity was re quired as necessary to official appointments or to seats in Parliament. Nu person who rejected Christianity could obtain office; therefore, from the first, our Constitution was, to say the least of it, Christian. Here, then, we have yidcnt and palpable departure from the principles of the Constitution . as admitted and recognised in the ear liest periods; and where is the ufgency of this vast change? What is it that requires this departure from the first prin ciples of our Constitution ? What is the case made out respecting the Jews ? It would seem—l take my infore maeion from a book which, I understand, is written by a very respectable Jew, and is considered a work of autho rity—that there are resident in the United Kingdom about 27,000 Jews, natural born subjects of his Majesty, of whom 20,000 are resident in London, 7,000 Jews in the other parts of the Kingdom ; and for these seven and twenty or thirty thousand individuals I am invited to de part frohn the principle which has been acted on from the earliest period of thp Constitution. lam told the Jew is degraded by his exclusion—he is not excluded in the same manner that the Catholic and the Dissenter were—lie is not excluded by anything in the nature of a taunt upon his firm or profession of faith. The Jew is excluded merely becTise the L eg i s l ature requ ires, as the great principle of Civil Government, that all persons admitted to office should ac . kno r w a l Tt e i r! ei g er e jr t ee li ,ar findamental truths of the Christian reli colfrilieids usagesb e cause or he b w ab i i l t l e n i o i t n a o d e eg ii r t, :i i t i l t ed of su a l i i i je a c i t ien o — f t b h e e i S s State, h gl e on is , . not .he graegnisartdee regarded with a n i s ° r i e n i g n a e n r y The . history . of the Jews, their domestic usages, their marriage, and in a variety of institutions respecting other points, we find enough to account for the prejudice which exists against them. We find them in the ;mole, and in the United pos session of political Privileg , l in France, in the Nether es of Aroe4ca—in the last during a periodof forty years, a n d i n the two farmer during the last fiftee4 YeaP, and only two have been ad mitted to political offices.,-(Rear, ) I think I understand that cheer. I underst an d i t t o mean , that since so few have been admitted, there is no danger in ad that if the Jews expect to political power. Now the j e n g .ie e its ,fr i o st,o m the removal of disabilities, the t.hem must be ;eery small ; and only i en derive i ng :s c o e t t : c l Il l; ldEle:eanna.g.,d'llfivi English advantage for such a tribe are we to depart from w h at f or cen turies has formed the fundamental principles of the British Con stitution. Does the House suppose thet the people of England are indifferent because no p e ti t i ons h ave been laid upon the table of this House ? On the contrary, I will venture to affirm that the sense of the people of kinglaad is ovosed to concessions of this 4ature, and I will venture to predict that the result I prove that ffi armation to be well founded. If you prepared to lay it down as a principle that Deists, Atheists, and other infidels may hold the highest offices of the State, and possess seats in the Legislature, then you must be pre pared to revolt the feelings of the country. For fifteen years in France and the Netherlands have they been entitled to all privileges, and during forty years b. ve they possessed those advantages in the United States; yet during the entire of these periods not one of them has obtained a seat in the Legislature of those countries, only one has been appointed to a 1 - .'ll situation at Amsterdam, and one has been made Mayor of Now York ; and that convinces me that the exclusior.N9f Jews does not arise from their political incapacities, Pot from their own peculiar institutions and usages. So rnoch for the principle of the measure. The mode in which- it is proposed to carry it into effect I look upon as equally objectionable. Its advocates propose to abolish all disabilities on account of religious opinions. The Hon. Member for Clare would have every man allowed to worship God as ire might think proper : but if the present Bill be passed, it will not be necessary for a man to worship God at all. The Deist and the avowed Infidel are admitted under this 13111. From its provisions this principle necessarily flows, that political power is, and ought to be, unconnected with religious belief—that I take it is the legitimate conse quence. Now if that be intended, why not avow it at once and for all ? Does any man in this House suppose that this is the last Bill which will be passed upon this matter of religious freedom, as it is called? There are at the present moment three great classes of his Majesty's sub jects eligible to high political office and to seats in Parlia ment ; but they were all required to be Christians; these were the Protestant Dissenters, the Roman Catholics, and the members of the Church of England—and now we are called on to admit the Jews ; but are there no Christians excluded ? What becomes of the Quakers ? Why is not a Bill brought in for their admission ? bear.)—l again hail those cheers—if the 'Jew be admitted, there is no doubt that the Quaker is equally well entitled. Why not one as well as the other ? Are you afraid of the consequences?—(No, no,)—Observe the admission—if this Bill be allowed to pass, other Bills a fortiori must pass. Is it wise then to disturb yearly the religious feelings of the people of . this country by separate Bills for the relief of the several classes of his Majesty's subjects from the disabilities which from the earliest period the Constitution imposed upon them. If the measure be right, establish it free and for all, and let us not have a Bill one year for one set of men, and another year for an other. I know of no tenet of Quakerism which ought to exclude them from the enjoyment of political power if the Jews are to be admitted. It is said that the relief of the Catholics placed the Jews in u worse situation than before -that the more the space was narrowed the greater was the suffering—to speak inalliematically, the intensity of the suffering varied inversely with the space operated QM But I reveat, that if the Jews are entitled to this relief, so are the Quakers—so are the Separatists. On these grounds, then, Sir, I am not prepared to admit the principle, and I object to the mode of giving effect to the Bill ; and I confess I do so with much regret. There is nothing in the conduct of the Jews themselves which ought to create the slightest prejodiee against them. The upper classes are eminent for charity and sympathy with the sufferings of their fellow men, and the lower classes are not marked by any vices beyond what is common amongst [vens in that rank of life. I, therefore, cannot but feel the necessity of opposition as most painful, so fir as landed estates are concerned. I see no objection to the Jews being empowered to hold them ; my own opinion is that they can do so already; but in that I, of course, submit to authority; but my own opinion is, that it requires no new law to enable them to hold estates in land. The late Lord Ellenborough contested himself with such a title as a Jew could make to land, and after that I think we need have little doubt that Jews may hold land and make good titles. But, with respect to the present Bill, I think it cannot be so amended as to meet my views, and therefore I say, uabesitatingly, that I must oppose it: foreseeing its consequences, I cannot give it my support. Mr. BROUGHAM regretted that he differed altogether from the Right Hon. Gentleman. He should not stop to refute the extraordinary doctrines which had been laid clown by some Hon. Members; amongst whom the Hon. and Gallant General (Gascoyne) had put a strange gloss on one of the great principles of Christianity,—that what soever you would that another should do to you, do like wise to him; which the Hon. and Gallant General had interpreted, "Do unto another what he would do unto you."Z . He had referred to the history of the Jews, and had said, "Do you recollect how they acted towards you ?" He (Mr. Brougham) was not sure that he re collected to have often heard speeches less distingui.hed for good sense and the principles of Christian charity than those which had on the present occa sion received the applause of the House—the loud, and he might say clamorous, applause bestowed upon the very worst opinions. He had heard propositions so received, which, in respect for the House, induced him to believe that their tendency and import could not have been rightly understood. The Right Hon. Gentleman, however, had not argued in that way. He had not ap pealed to the passions, as others had done on this subject But he was compelled to differ from the Right Hon. Gen tleman. He said that this Bill tended to abolish Chris tianity ; that from the earliest period tests were employed to make us all Christians, and to exclude those who did not profess the Christian religion. Is this the fact? Where was it to be found in history or in law? No man who hail read history or the Acts of Parliament could believe it. The language of the oath plainly showed the contrary. He would beg the Right Hon. Baronet to ob serve that the present measure was not advocated on the same grounds as the Bills for the relief of Protestant Dis senters and Roman Catholics. The Bill before the House was advocated on the grounds of justice, and justice only. The objects of the measure were a body of men distin guished for their transactions in commerce, and esteemed for the honour and probity of their dealings, as the un precedented number of petitions which had been presented in their favour testified. It was true they had not threatened the Government, because they could not do so : they had not been urgent in pre-sing their case upon the attention of Government, because their numbers and weight were too limited. In his opinion those were circumstances which should operate favourably in the consideration of their case. It could not be said that concession to them was the result of fears excited by the conduct of associated demagogues and agitators. The cause of the Jews came before the House devoid of any extrinsic aid derived from adventitious circumstances. They stood only upon the justice of their case, and ap pealed to the favourable consideration of Christian feeling. Was that placing their cause on low grounds? No! It was placing it on the highest. How useless was the test which the opponents of the measure wished to apply,— " upon the faith of a Christian !" That test was, he sup posed, intended to exclude bad persons. But would a bad person be excluded by it ? Provided a Jew could make up his mind to add to all the other terms of contempt which were showered upon him, such as " infidel," &c., that of hypocrite, by making the declaration " upon the faith of a Christian," he might then fill all the offices of state, and make laws fur the government of a Christian people.— (Hear.)—lf a Jew would only do that, he was certain of coining into that House, and they were incapable of shut ting the door in his face, notwithstanding the Christian, orthodox, and charitable chorus of the gentlemen he had the honour to sit amongst, whom he heard that night cheer, roar, and, he might say, bawl, so vigorously. But his Hon. and Learned Friend opposite (Mr. Bankes) had informed the House that if any man should make the de claration " upon the faith of a Christian," who was know❑ to disbelieve in the tenets of Christianity, he would possess no sort of weight or authority in that House. He'should like to know front his Hon. and Learned Friend how far that de claration had acted upon Mr. Gibbon. That individual made the necessary declarations against idolatry, after having once tasted of it ; but when he abjured the errors of the Catholic religion, he abjured Ch r istianity at the same time. He, however, took the necessary oaths te entitle him to sit in the House of Commons. He abjured transubstantiation and the Pretender, swore all " on the true faith of a Christian," and held the office of a Lord of Trade just as orthodoxly, and received his salary as punctually, as his Learned Friend opposite ! He could not do it more so.— (Cheers and laughter.)--,llnt his Hon. and Learned Friend might say that Mr. Gibbon ezercised no great weight in the deliberations of the House. This, of purse, was owing to his having committed such a breach of pagan morality, as to pretend to be more of a Christian than he really was.—(A laugh.)—l•le probably felt that if he, who was known to be an infidel, but had obtained his seat by pledging the faith of a Christian, had risen, there would have been a cry of " spoke, spoke," and other noises, which not unfrequently addressed themselves to the ears of Members of that House, and therefore, partly from the apprehension of noise, and partly from the moral effect of his situation, he was incapable of dis playing his talents. Thus far it might seem that the case of Mr. Gibbon was an illustration of ..he correctness of the argument advanced by his Hon. and Learned Friend. F - put what would he say to the example of Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke He would remind the House [ that Bolingbroke hid; dutipg the whole of his life, f been known by his writings and conveiiations be a [ scoffer. Nevertheless, he, "on the true faith of a Christian," abjured the ac6tiztomed number of stags maa, and madeNthe re - qnisite number of promises, and took his seat in the House. Bolingbroke was, beyond all question, one of the most powerful orators that ever opened his mouth in that assembly.— One of the severest, justest, and hest of critics, and a man the most difficult to be deceived, had described his elo quence as all but perfect and superhuman. A conversa tion once occurred in a company where Pitt was present respecting the lost literary treasures. Each person men tioned the works he would like to have recovered. One said he would wish to see some fresh books of Livy,—an other some more of the ancient comedies. When it came to Pitt's turn to speak, he said he would desire to see a fresh speech of Lord Bolingbroke. So highly did Pitt estimate Bolingbroke's extraordinary talent, learning, and eloquence; and he was no mean judge on such a subject. The effect which Bolingbroke produced was only propor tionate to his merit. He filled the office of Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and he (Mr. Brougham) might say that he was as brilliant an orator as Lord Aberdeen.—(A laugh.)—He might not, perhaps, he so good a Christian as the present Noble Secretary, but as to his weight in debate in councils, or as to manner in which he sustained the dignity of the country in negociations with foreign powers, it would be only laughing at Lord Aberdeen if he attempted to insinuate a comparison between them.—(A )--He might quote a number of instances of the same nature, but he had done enough to show that the argument of his Hon. and Learned Friend was not to he taken without exceptions. The Right Hon. Secretary had attempted to work on the fears of the House by telling them that if the pre sent measure should be carried it would only be preliminary to the introduction of a similar measure in favour of the Quakers. Now, really, if the Right Hon. Secretary and himself, instead of being at hostility in that House, were sitting over a table, he doubted whether he would have ventured upon such an argument. The Right Honourable Secretary, with uplifted hands and a look of horror, ex claimed, " Beware : if you admit the Jews, you must let in the Quakers." He would reply, " God speed them." There was no sect more deserving the support and con fidence of Government.—(Hear, hear.) That the Right Hon. Secretary had himself been always ready to acknow ledge, both in public and private.—(Hear.) It was some what surprising to hear persons who professed to be guided by the directions of Scripture advocate so strenuously the taking of oaths. There was one passage which forbad the taking of oaths, " Swear not at all : neither by heaven for it is his throne, nor by the earth for it is his footstool, nor by Jerusalem for it is the seat of the great King." For his part he disapproved of the taking of oaths, but, finding the practice existing in society, he, like a good citizen, bowed to the law. After noticing that Jews were permitted to serve on Juries in England, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman proceeded to observe that, by a statute passed in the reign of George 11. it was enacted that all Jews who had resided for seven years in any of the British colonies, as British subjects, be came ipso facto natural-born subjects of his Majesty, to all intents and purposes, the same as if they had been born in England. He denied that this was a religious question. Religion had nothing to do with it. He begged leave to advert to the opinion of Dr. Paley, who, not withstanding he was the most powerful, able, and effectual advocate of religion and the government that could have adorned the bench of Bishops, was allowed to sink un mitred to the grave. Dr. Paley said, " that all connec tion between the Church and State, whether the former acted as handmaiden or even as ally, was utterly incon sistent with the principle of religion and sound policy, and tended to corrupt both." With respect to tests, he said that they should only be applied where they were made to determine political and civil delinquency,—that Popery had been excluded not as Popery, but because it was con nected with Jacobitism,—that the moment that connection ceased, it was an act of intolerable injustice to apply a religious test for the purpose of exclusion. If, for 16 or 17 centuries, the Jews were treated as outcasts,—if they were, (hiring that period, viewed rather as demons than men,—if they were persecuted and oppressed—was it fit ting now to reproach them as having no home, no place of refuge, no nation ?—(Hear, hear.)—Were they not pre vented by those who thus spoke of them from asserting the right of pesaea.sing either the one or the other ? But it was said, that by this measure the apostate Jews would have a resting-place, that they would cease to be a scattered people, and that this proceeding was op posed to scriptural truth. For this argument he cared If the Jews were still to be scattered over the face of the earth, the enactment of that House could not alter the Almighty decree. The great principle of religion was to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with their Maker ; and he hoped that, in dealing with the Jews, they would not lose sight of these solemn feelings.— (Loud cries of " Question.")—He could assure those Gentlemen who took this way of declaring their opinon— a mode doubtless the most convenient to themselves, but which he could wish they would exchange for one not more audible, but more tangible,—for one more fitting to the subject—he could assure them, that though they thus appeared to throw aside all reason, that though they were thus desirous of stifling all the facts connected with this great question—if, indeed, they had any knowledge of them—yet they must in the end triumph.—(Hear, hear.) —He, who was as much fatigued in addressing them as they were in listening to him, wished to say that, in voting for the second reading of this Bill, he wished to secure the extension of relief of some kind to his Majesty's Jew ish subjects. He had stated what, in his view of the sub ject, that relief ought to be. If the House agreed with him, such modifications as were necessary might be made in the Committee. It appeared from what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Newark, and other Hon. ALmbers, that they only wished to prevent the Jews from entering Parlia ment, and that they were desirous of keeping them out of some high offices. He said, in answer to this, let the Bill go to a Committee ; and he asked of those whom lie ad dressed, whether it was right, as honourable men, that they, conceding 9-10ths of what was asked, should refuse all relief because they could not grant the 10th point?— (Hear, hear.)—Under these feelings he would vote for the whole relief which the Bill contemplated, leaving it for the Committee to amend it as might appear most proper to them.—(Hear.) Mr. PERCEVAL made one or two observations, which were perfectly inaudible in the gallery. The gallery was then cleared far a division. The numbers were : For the second reading 165 Against it 228 Majority 63 WATCHING, &c., PARISHES BILL. Mr. PORTMAN moved the third reading of the parishes (England and Wales) Lighting and Watching Bill. Mr. B. CARTER proposed as an amendment, that the Bill he read a third time this day (Tuesday), in order to admit of a proper discussion of it. The House divided, when there appeared, For the amendment For the original motion 5O Majority —232 The Bill was read a third time and passed SALE OF BEER BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER fixed Friday, at ten o'clock, for going into a Committee on this Bill. Mr. BULLER moved for a return of the number of Stamps issued for London Newspapers from the year 1825 to 1829 inclusive ; and of the Stamps issued for Irish Newspapers (luring the same period. The remaining orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at a Quarter to Three o'clock. It will be seen by our report that the second read ing of the " Jews' Relief Bill" was last night moved by Mr. ROBERT GRANT in the House of Commons ; on which a lengthened and rather animated debate took place. The lateness of the hour, however, at which they divided on the subject, prevents us from doing more than refer to the speeches of those Hon. Gentlemen who spoke both for and against the question. Among the former were Mr. O'CoNNNT.L, Mr. BROUGHAM, and Mr. HUSKISSON j and among the latter Sir ROBE R T PEERING, Lord BELGRAVE, Lord DARLINGTON, and Mr. PEEL. The result was pot such as might have been expected, from a comparison of the eloquence or arguments applied on either side, the ma jority being 63 against the motion. The numbers were 165 for, and 228 against it ; from which it will be seen that there was a very full assemblage of the Members in the House, besides a great number of strangers who were interested in the question.—Morning Herald. TURN-OUT AT ROCHDALE.—We regret to state that a general turn-out of the flannel weavers of Roch dale took place on Monday week. It will be recollected that a considerable reduction in the prices of flannel weav ing took place some time ago. Since that time, various efforts have keen made by the weavers to procure a return to what is called the " list prices." All these attempts being hitherto found to be unsuccessful, it was unani mously agreed at a meeting of the weavers, held lately at Cronkeyshaw, that a general turn-out should take place, and this r esolution Was accordingly carried into effect on Monday week. We understand that there are from six to seven thousand persons in Rochdale and its vicinity thus 1 out of employ►nent,.- ..Halifax Chronicle., • -. 1 ", THE KING'S HEALTH. • (From the Court Circular.) The state of his AlAJEsxv's, health during the last few days has been favourable, more especially yesterday. The symptoms of the KING'S complaint are in every respect considerably alleviated. Sir ROBERT PEEL had an audience of his MAJESTY on Sunday afternoon, and was occupied with the Kix* a considerable time. Sir MATTHEW TIERNEY left the Palace at an early hour yesterday morning, for London, and would not, it was expected, return to the Palace to resume his profes sional attendance on his MAJESTY till night. The following was the Bulletin issued yesterday : " Windsor Castle, May 17. " The KING has passed a good night. His MAJESTY'S symptoms are alleviated. (Signed) " HENRY HALFORD. " M. J. TIERNEY." Viscount LAKE, as Lord in Waiting, and Mr. HOPE, as Groom in Waiting, were in attendance at the King's Palace, St. James's, and showed the Bulletin to the Nobility and Gentry who came to learn the state of his MAJESTY. Among the inquirers were— Ambassadors and Ministers.—Russian, Netherlands, Prussian, American, Hanse Towns. Charge d'Affaires.—Swedish. Princess —LIEVEN. Dukes.—GORDON, Sr. ALBAN'S, PORTLAND. Duchesses.—GOßDON, ST. ALBANS. Marquisses.—CAMDEN, ELY, WINCHESTER, ORMONDI, SALISBURY. Mar chionesses. •,SA !ASBURY, ELY, WINCHESTER, CIIANDOS, WESTMEATH, ORMONDE. Earls.---.ELDoN, BELFAST, FITZWILLIAM • Countesses.—AßlNGDON, GLENCALL, BELFAST. Viscount. •••••VALLETORT. Lords. ••••DELA ME RE, CLEVI NA, ONC LET, SKELSIERS. DALE, A. HILL, DUNROYNE, W. RUSSELL, KlLmAnOtt F. GOWER, G. BENTINCE. Ladies.—A. BULLER, FREEMANTLE, M. HILL, KE RISON, CHESTER, ONGLEY, (2) BUTLER, WARBURTON , (2) BERTIE, M. COOTE. Honourables.—Lady COCKBURN, Miss WELLEsLEY. Sirs.—W. FREEMANTLE, A. BROOKE, R. CHESTER, R. VIVIAN, E. KERRISON, T. ACLAND, H. BAKER, C. FLOWER, F. BAKER, F. SIDNEY, W. DUNDAS, R. Bo- ROUGH, F. FRASER, H. PEYTON. Serjeant..--AItABIN. Rev. Doctor.—VIVIAN. Rev. Messieurs.—J. PEEN, GILBERT, G. WARD. Alderman.—SMlTH, M.P. Colonels..--MoRPHEIV, BULLER, O'REILLY, FREDS• RICK. Messieurs.—PALLMEß, M.P., FELIX, BOOTH, N. KNOWLYS, BRENT, LEGH, T. BOUND, A. ADAIR, MGS. GRAVE, WHY HUNTER, FROST, BETHELL, F. BULLER, HASLEY. MiStreSteS.-COLQUHOUN, PALL3IER, BRENT, Roca- FORT, GRANGE, RAIKES, Oitßr HUNTER, BETHELL, HALSEY. Misses.—CocKsußN, BRODERICK. The Duke of CUNIBERLAND came to town yesterday' 7rom his residence at Kew. The Princess AUGUSTA, the Duchess of GLOUCESTER, and the Princess Soma, took an airing together yesterday in the Parks. The French and Russian Ambassadors had an interview with the Earl of ABERDEEN yesterday, at the Foreign office. The Austrian Ambassador, the Earl of ABERDEEN, the CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. BERRIES, W . CROKER, and the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, visited the Mike of WELLINGTON yesterday, at the Treasury. The Duke of WELLINGTON and the CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER visited Sir ROBERT PEEL yesterday. Despatches from Sir JAMES LYON, the Governor of Barbadoes, were received yesterday at the Colonial-office. (From the 11Iorning Chronicle.) We may at length venture to congratulate our readers on the favourable turn which his MAJESTY'S ilhaeSS has taken. It is now confidently affirmed, that the KING may, for the present at least, be considered out of danger. Our readers will see that the last Bulletin is very fa vourable. So many reports have been circulated, many of them, it appears, without any foundation, that the public have justly become sceptical regarding statements of the KING'S health ; and we have on that account deemed it prudent to confine ourselves, for some time back, to the language of the Bulletins. We may re mark that more frith is due to the latter when they speak of positive amendment, than when they describe his MA JESTY as in the same state. In the latter case it is na turally concluded that delicacy and prudence withhold the mil state from the public. But the Physicians would hardly raise the hopes of the people, if a progress were not made towards convalescence. FASHIONABLE INTELLIGA*O*, ARRIVALS. The Earl and Countess of Sefton and the Ladies Molyneux, at their house in Arlington-street, from their seat, Stoke Farm, near Windsor; Lord Southampton, at the St. James's Hotel, Jermyn-street, from his seat in Northamptonshire ; Sir Timothy awl Lady Shelley, and family, at the Pulteney Hotel, Albe marle-street, from their seat, Field Place, Sussex; Lord and Lady Carberry, at Fenton's Hotel, St. 'James's street, from Castle Freke ; the Marquis of Downshire, at Long's Hotel, Clif ford-street, from Berkshire; Sir Philip Durham, at Bryant'. Hotel, Conduit-street; ;Mrs. Storer and family, in Berkeley square, from Burley Park. DEPARTURES. T.ord Melbourne and Sir Frederick Lamb, Bart. for Melbourne Hall, Derbyshire; Viscount Sandon, for Lichfield; Sir George Fetherston, Bart, from Symmons's Hotel, St. James's-street ; John Taylor, Esq. from ditto, for his seat in Worcestershire; Mr. and Mrs. R. Forster, from Gould's Hotel, Jermyn-street,for Tunbridge Wells • the Misses Dunlop, from ditto, for Glasgow; Win. Murray, Esq. from Ellis's Hotel, St. James's-street, for Brighton. PARLIAMENTARY PAPER. SPIRITS. Account of the Quantity of Corn Spirits of the Distilla tion of the United Kingdom, and of Rum, in Impe rial Measure, at Proof, that paid Duty for Home Con sumption in England, in the Four Years ending Jan. 5, 1826 and 1830, and showing the Average for each Four Years, and the Increase or Decrease between the Years ending Jan, a i, 182 9 and 1830. CORN SPIRITS. RUM. Years ending Jan. 5. Imperial - 77ma Imperial Annual Gallons. Average Gallons. Average —,-- -----..—.. 1823 14,r94,055 2 , 100,925 1824 13,803,312 2,222,923 1825 '4,392 61' . „ 1826 3,719,037! ,152,253 21:1142:820707 2,177,965 1827 7,407,204 0 3,992,053 1828 6,671,56 ~ 2 7 ,, 6 04 3,080,152 3,332, 301 1829 7,750,687 ,••"' , 3,664,856 1830 7,700,766 t 3,202,143 —....... -- Increase in the Year ended Jan. 5, 1830, compared with 1829. Decrease 58,921 ___... * This was the first year after the duty was reduced from 12s. 7 2-sd. to ss. &l. per Imperial gallon. This reduction of duty being known six months before it was to take place at sth January, the dealers allowed themselves to get quite out of stocks, both of Rum and also of Gin ; and as there was plenty of Rum to be got at once, a great deal was taken out of bond immediately after sth January, 1826, while the stocks of Corn Spirits to make Gin was small at sth January, 1P26, and could only be supplied as the distillers could manufacture them. This, in House of Commons Paper, No. 211, of this Session , is 3,302,143 gallons, from which statements have already been made, making the increase of this year 237,287 over the pre ceding. The name of PENN has long been identified with true benevolence, and is associated with some of the most pleasing recollections of English history. The pre sent representative of that amiable family—the descendant of the founder of Pennsylvania—has given a valuable proof of the interest he takes in the cause of humanity, by ten dering the use of his beautiful grounds at Spring-gardens to the Ladies, Friends of the Charing..cross Hospital, for the Bazaar which they are about to have to-morrow and following days, for that institution. Mr. PENN is One of its Vice-Presidents and kindest supporters. TRADE.—At the Bradford market, on Thurs day, the brisk trade of last week was continued. The advance in price, we are happy to say, was more generally confirmed ; and we know, from unqiie , tionable authority, that considerable orders were refused by the manufac turers, at old prices. This is the most cheering fact we have vet had to record, in reference to the trade of the district. Still, we atT, not over sanguine, but look with anxiety for sonic improycmcnt in wageQ. At our market, on Saturday last, (though not so numerously attended by buyers,) considerable business was done. In some articles an improvement in price was obtained, but others remained stationary. From Huddersfield, however, our accounts are not so flattering. The market, on Tuesday, did not realise the anticipations which had been formed from the improvement of former weeks. The business of the retail dealers is at the lowest ebb. One correspondent says--• t , The situation of the shopkeepers generally, is beyond precedent disheartening, whatever may be said to the con trary by those who profit by promulgating glowing de seiiptioni of returning prosperity." Nothing can be fur ther from the truth, and the enterprising spirit of cur townsmen is broken by the protracted gloom which darkens the commercial horizon,—//abfax Chronicle. ice_ 'D dankerl' Per e i r t t , t4 t l' err o CC , rll e d .sle l eCt l a Ittt Cent, ' 4 'nk L. Ar h Dote 30 yea Ditto 50 e; - adia Stock 9...___ , I tto'Bond , 'Niers o Austrian B Buenos Iti Colombian Ditto, ISA idarli.q ..., G reek 13,,,, Ditto, 182 Guatimala ht ex wan I Ditto, In! ......______ PAR Brazilian] Ditto N, Ditto St Mining Co Provincial ?Slut ST. Ps 13E 1w ocx AMbal Mornin g t -IR S Lalf; vii variety c paper; N Which ea Without is due to Country, of Satur Order and at tl It --______. We Eulleti ing. that the tortsid( and ex The " Th JISTY'S Thi cordin last, Ai Come Lions whit: Clow tiona th e , _ . Havi bass/ Ptrli Kati aritl ()rode for t 4241 new Pete by t hal 1 frigi