The Sun. — London, England, 1850-08-05 00:00:00

Vbitril 1:-,4Li)ttton: SUN OFFICE,' 'Seven o' Clock. TATTERSALL'S—THIS ENING. Suc VEO'CLOCK. BRIGHTON STAKES• 2 to 1 agst St. Rosalia 5 to 1 agst Fernhill 6 to 1 agst Beebee Bunnoo IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) ROUSE OF LORDS. ROYAL ASSENT. The Royal Assent was given ru-day, by commission, to 016 following seventeen public and private Bills: The Population. The Factories. The Metropolitan Interments. Municipal Corporations (Ireland). Higbway Rats. Au,sralian Colonies Government. Vestries and Vestry Clerks. The Trustoe Act (1850). Bills of Exchange. Gorbals Gravitation Water Company. Bridge across the River Clyde (opposite to South Port land-street, Lduriestou, Glasgow). Birmingham and rershore-read (Act to continue Act of 6th Geo. IV.) Peterborough Improvement, Police, and Cemetery (Amendment of existing Acts). Liverpool, Crosby, and Southport Railway (Deviations, Enlargement of Stations). Manchester. Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway. Chippindatl's Divorce, and Ashby Divorce. The Lords Commissioners were the LORD CHAN CELLOR, the Earl of MIND.), and the Earl of CARLISLE. Their Lordships adj,urned during pleasure. Their Lordships resumed shortly after Five o'clock. CRUELTY TO ANINIALS (SCO'rLAND) BILL. On the motion of the Earl of MINTO this Bill passed through Committee. PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND MUSEUMS BILL. This Bill passed throw: Committee. COMMONS. ENCLOSURE (No. 2) BILL. This Bill was read a second time on the motion of the Earl of CARLISLE. PETITIONS. Lord HARDWICKE presented a petition against the Rating of Small Tenements 1301 from Liverpool. The Marquis of SALISBURY presented a petition in favour of the 8111. CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL. Lord REsDESDALE presented a petition against this Bill, and hoed it would be withdrawn. Lord BROUGHAM most reluctantly withdrew the Bill. Lord STANLEY presented a petition against the Bill. He regretted that the Bill had not been brought in earlier, and brought in in that House, which it might have been, without intriogiug on the privileges of the other House; and while on, the subject of privilege, he would observe that he understood that the Bill for the suppression of outrage in Ireland, which had been intro duced in that House, had been dropped in the other House because it interfered with their privileges, and that another Bill had been introduced there which had been threatened to be defeated by delay. He considered that the Ministers were responsible for having intro duced a 8.11 into this House interfering with the pri vileges of the. other, and therefore they were responsible for any delay which might have taken place. After a few observettons from Lord LANGDALE and Lord WHAIINCLIFIE, the B•ll was withdrawn. STEAM COMMUNICATION WITH AUSTRALIA. ,Lord TALBOT presented petitions from Glasgow and from Plymouth praying for the establishment of a regu lar steam communication between this country and Australia. Divers sums had been voted by the legislatures of the different colonies to pro mote stem communication with the mother country, and already they could command with the amount of postage for letters to Australia, 40,0001. per annum •derived from those colonies for that purpose. Three routes had been proposed; one by Singapore i❑ con nexion with the Oriental Company, another by the Cape of Good Hope, and another by the Isthmus of Panama. Be considered the route by Singapore the easiest, but be understood there was some difficulty on the part of the East India Company; but he thought it was the duty of ihe Government to take some route, and if these' difficulties were insuperable, they should take the route either by the Cape of Good Hope or by Panama. It would be of great benefit to our South African colonies to open a route by the Cape of Good Hope and Mauritius, which would also promote ..emigration. The route by Panama would secure us against any impediment to the transmission of our mails in cons pence of an European war. On the whole he thought, perhaps, that the route of Panama was the best, as we had a line of steamers ready to take up the transit on the Pacific. Ile wished to im press upon the minds of their Lordships the fait im portance of this subject and the absolute necessity that existed for establishing some rapid steam communication with our Australien colonies. ---- Earl GREY said that Government were fully aware of the extr , mw importance of the subject to which the Noble Earl had drawn their Lordships attention, and could assure him that the Government were extremely arixionq to establish a rapid steam communication with Australia. Ile considered the route by Singapore the most desirable, and he thought the otter made by the Oriental Ciimpany an exceedingly fsir one, and most ben&ieiat to the public.—(Hear, hear.) The East India. Company considered that out of regard to their own c.41 - ieers they ought to oppose it. I He thought, however, that he might say that ere long a steam communication with the west cons: of Attica and the Cape tot Good Hope would be established, anti by that means with Australis, and also by a line from Sinpeore. _lle eatertameda sanguine hope that even tually both lines would be established, bet at present there were ditticultiiss which prevented the establish ment of h.! line by Singapore. Lie thought it extremely desirable teat the _matter solid be amicably settled with the East Itidia Cottiranv. - Lord..MONTEAGLE thought that if ever there was a a'ep taken by a gre , t company exercising almost Imperial ftp,etion?, lik•Ay to set them wrong with the people of this country, it was this opposition of the East India Company to steam communication with Australia. (LEFT SPEAKING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SrEAKER took the Chair shortly after Twelve o'clock. LORDS' AMENDMENTS. The Lords' t; m,ndments to tbw following Bills were con6ider , 4l and i,r( ei to: — East of Fife It ,ilway. West Cornwall Railwaye Clrenclish's (or HurctotlrCs) Estate. Sorterv:ile's; or Milt.' (Barford Rectory) Estate. Wts:apinstt , r Temporary Bridge. AMENDED BILLS. The following - Bdii, as amended, were considered and sgreed.to Bishop of London, (Saint Michael' Church, Chester . -rquare) Fatale. • London (City) Schools.fur Orphe.tse of Freemen. PETITIONS. Sir' R. H. INGLIS presented petitions from several rani r - if Oxfordshire against, the admission of Jews and other unbelteversinto Parliament. , NEW MEMBER. Mr. HZIGGINS took tho oaths and his seat for Mayo in the room of the late Mr. Dillon Browne. The Hon. Member WAS introduced by Mr. Hay ter and Mr. F. French. ROTHSCrfILD. Mr. J A. SMITH said, betera the . Honourable 'and Learned Attsrnay-Generalmoved his two resolutionq, he wished to, take the opportunity of asking the Speaker a question of some importance to the proceedings of the lients.` The 'ffeu,se rwouid. remember that when the iiottottrable -Member for :the city of London came Ai) the table to take the oaths• in' the form moat binding **peat nis conscience, and after he had done so be in -" 66rdint to the Act o* Parliament, signed a declaration " of having taken, the oaths, and lett it on the table. Now, he dirt not see that fact' mentioned on the, minutes, and he wisheit, therefore, to knew why it Wit.. omitted. The .*PEAREIi replied that it was-not entered On the• votes -becaiuse he considered it an informal and - Irregular proceeding..(Cheers,) The practice tf the House was this, atter anion. Membeehad taken the - 'three oaths he signed a-book propose* by tbo clerk, itt which he declared that he had duly tak en the oaths. • Now in this case' atter - thutier.'"Member for t h e c i ty of London had tali en the oaths. in his own manner h e signed a papa which was not, prepared by the clerk, and rz" the eJratents - odwhlch the desk was perfectlyjn or , u , = That paper was not fqrasally tendered to the H ouse , bat was merely left on - the table, and when he found, that it was a• declaration of the Honourable Member, stating-that .he had taken the oath, omitting, the words..:" - Upon the true faith of a Christian," be, conaidereti it to be an informal proceeding, and, - directed the clerk not to take any notice of it. Mr. Hill-114; wished to know then, if the precedent settsblished by Mr. Posse's cam bad been followed, and. the paper had been prepared by the clerk, the declara tions Wail have been allowed? Th,e "SPEAKER replied in the 'negative. In Mr, Tease's case the declaration was sanctioned and author-• ised by, the House. - The House came to no decision of that sort in Baron notbschild's case. He was only em powered-to rak-- Ili- oath in the form which he declared , to be most binding upon his conscience. t The minutes of the formerproceedings were then read, - after which The ATTORNEY-GENERAL. -rose Inmore the two resetutioni or whlun be - sari given notice, remarking tOistithey were distinct and separate, and the House &mid re j ect one and adopt the other, just as it , thought fit.-(Hear, hear.) It appeared to' him, how . ever, to be essential Wet the House should come to an ib l m e di s te decision upon the question. It appeared to, .11Y12, af.,er what had taken place, that their past proceedings would be nothing less than a mockery if the House did not determine now what _ • coursia should be adopted in the matter.--(Hear, bear.) What that decision should b© he had already expreased fii the former observations be ventured to address to the ' House, and he therefore did not propose to go over all the reasons which he hnd already m•v.:ed upon the House ' for the course he suggested just after the Baron appeared ,pt thetable.—(Heer,, hear.) There were three requi ettisiAo'fitzi - ohtserv . ed ukase-an. oath: - -Firstf the sub 'tame of the oath; secondly, the words or form in which THE SUN, the substance is to be expressed; and, thirdly, the man ner in which the oath is to be taken. He had already told the House that they had decided wisely in allowing the Baron to take the oaths in the manner which he de clisred to be most binding upon his conscience, but that they could not vary or sanction any omission in the words of the oath. Now the Ist of Geo. 1., chap. 13, sect. 16, provided that unless the oaths were taken in the form prescribed by law, a Member should not be entitled to sit and vote in the House. It appeared to him, therefore, if he was right in saying that Baron Rothschild had not already taken the oath of abjuration, it followed as a necessary consequence, from the 16th section, that he could not be entitled to vote in that House, or sit in it during any debate, until he should take that oath of abiuration in the form in which it was proposed to him. It then remained to be consi dered whether any further or ulterior proceedings should be taken in consequence of his not having taken that oath. He (the Attorney-General) was of opinion that no such further proceeding should be taken. In looking into the subject more carefully than he had been able to do previous to the last debate, he still retained the opi nion he then expressed with respect to the repeal of the statutes, yet he had come to the conclusion that the seat was by no means vacant in consequence of his not taking the oath—(Hear, hear)—and that there was no power legally in that House to order a new writ to be issued.—(Hear, hear.) A question was raised with respect to the statute 13 and 14 William 111. being in farce on this subject. His (the Attorney-General's) disposition undoubtedly was to consider that the penal ties under that Act were only cumulative, and that those penalties under that Act were still in force. On referring, however, to that Act, ho fund that the penalties which disabled any Member from sitting in the House arose from the circumstance of voting in the House—that was to say, that the penalties of dis ability to sit and vote in that House arose solely from a Member presuming to vote, in consequence of his not having taken the oath. Baron Rothschild had taken an oath, but not the oath, a course which the Honourable Gentleman's friends thought was sufficient, but he (the Attorney-General) thought it was not. It was well observed by the Hon. and Learned Member for Ox ford, that there was no Act of Parliacaent which made the seat of a Member of Parliament vacant by reason of his not taking the oath of abjuration, though there was with respect to the oaths of supremacy and allegi ance. By the law, therefore, as it at present stood, we had come to this singular state of things as a necessary consequence of the existing state of the law—that a gentleman possessing the Jewish persuasion being elected a Member to serve in Parliament, could not sit or vote in that House until he Should'take the oath of abjuration in a form in which no conscientious Jew could take that oath, yet that nevertheless the seat was not vacant. He did not find any case on the journals of the House ana logous to that of Baron Rothschild. There was no example cf any Member refusing to take the oath of abjuration. The state of the law which arose on this case was of a moat monstrous description.—(Hear, hear.) They bad a Member returned by the free choice of his constituents to serve them in Parliament, and yet by that 'most idle form of oath—(Hear)—he was not permitted to take his seat in that House. He was thus prevented from sitting in. Parliament, and his constitu ents were prevented from having the benefit of his ser vices. It was, therefore, incumbent on the Government to pledge that House that it would, at the very earliest possible opportunity, pass a law for the pur pose of altering that state of the law which was so monstrous in itself, and of which the results land ffects• were so absurd. It appeared to him that it was for the benefit of both Baron Rothschild and his friends and supporters that the conclusion which he (the Attor ney-General) asked the House to come to was not only consistent with law, .but most prudent for the House to adept; for if they came to an opposite decision the strongest possible argument would be given to the House of Lords to object to any Bill ' which the House of Commons might pass for the pur pose of remedying that evil. No lawyer in that House or out of it, earning 5001. a year by his profession, would advise that Baron Rothschild could take his seat without incurring the penalties under the Act of Geo. 1. One among others of the monstrous evils which might arise from the exiting state of the law was this—in the event of an action for penalties being brought against a Member for venturing to take his seat in the House, the defendant in that action might bring the question before the House of Lords in its judicial capacity, and it would have to decide whether or not this House had come to a fit and proper conclusion in point of law in permitting a Member to take his seat under such circumstrnces. Ho was, therefore, satisfied that nothing would be more injudicious on the part of the Baron himself, and those who pro fessed the same religion, than to press for the decision of the House, for the purpose tie enabling him to take his seat, because in that case a strong and over powering argument might be offered by his opponent:, via., that it was not necessary to pass any Bill to remove an anomalous state of the law which the House had by its decision declared did not exist. (Hear.) The Hon. Member for Montrose had suggested a resolution which in substance did not differ materially from those he intended to propose, with the exception that it proposed to postpone the decision of the House. Now that appeared only oee step less injurious to Baron Rothschild than the absolute vote of the House that he should take his seat. The disadvan tage of leaving the decision of the matter in suspense was this, that it would hold something in terrorum over another House of the Legisla•ure, a course which he submitted would be very undignified end improper on the part of this House, while it could have no effect on the House of Lords.—(Hear.) It had been suggested that a Bill of Indemnity should be passed to suit this particular case, but that would only be accom plishing an evd by a side wind which he thought ought to be done openly and fairly. The Hon. end Learned Gentleman said he could not conclude his observatienis without expressing his sense of the propriety and firmness, and moderation of the conduct of Baran Rothschild in all the steps which he had taken in this difficult and peculiarly unprecedented matter.—(Loud cheers.) He had acted au as to gain the esteem of all persons, and in a way which induced him to express that in which the whole House would concur that he felt great re gret that any system of law so monstrous and absurd as tho existing law, which he hoped would be repealed next session, should exclude from among them a gentleman whom he believed so calculated to add to the estimation with which this House was regarded by the people, and also materially to assist them in their future deliberations.—(Cheers.) The Hon. and Learned Gentleman concluded by moving the following re solutions : " Diet the Baron Lionel Nathan de Rothschild is not entitled to vote in this [louse, or to sit in this House during any debate, until he shall take the oath of abju ration in the form appointed by law. That this House will, at the earliest opportunity in the next session of Parliament, take into its serious con sideration the form of the oath of abjuration, with a view to relieve her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion." Mr. HUME was glad to find at least that one diffi culty had been removed in regard to the decision of this question. He always considered that the law as it stood gave the Baron the right to take the oaths in the Man ner most binding on his conscience, and having done so, he (ler. Hume) if he had been in the position of the Baron, would have taken his seat in the Howe, fearless and regardless et all penalties. There was, therefore, a proviso that any individnal pro fessing the Jewish persuasion should leave out that part of the oath; and it was further provided in the same sta tute that the words " on the true faith of a Christian" not only might in such a case, but should be left out. He elt bound, therefore, to consider that under that Act the Baron Rothschild had done all that was required by the Legislature.—(Hear, hear.) But if any doubt was entertained upon the subject, that doubt had been set at rest by the Ist and 2d Victoria, by which it was declared that it was not necessary for any party to take an oath which they considered against their conscience. Had he (Mr. Hume), been in the place of the Baron Rothschild he would have taken his seat, and tried the question in a court of law whether he was subject to the penalties or nut. He came now to that part of the case which the Honourable and Learned Gentleman the Attorney•lieneral called the monstrous state of the law. The city of London bad sent a cer tain gentleman to that House as one of its , Members, it had returned him no less than twice, and the House had refused to receive him unless he took a cer tain oath. Such was the preposterous state of things in which they at present were, acd such being the case, all he asked was that the question should not be pre judged.—(llear, hear.) He thought that the Attorney- General ought to have ventured to brieg forward a Bill on the subject, and be bad no doubt that if he had done ao, the House of Lords would not have prevented the Bill becoming law. He deprecated the course that had been . taken by the G overameu t ; they ought, instead of throwing the weight of their authority against the public, to have put their weight in their scale.—(Hear.) He wished that the state of the law, monstrous as it was, had not be prejudged . in, that House.—(Hear, hear.) . It was nut for that House to interfere, t but the when the necess i ty of taking those oaths courts of law. lie was quite sure that the time be Parliamentrenaoved, to put t t &int, end'was must of was anxi ous that the House should rig th hi tiuletym. itself with th e pu bli c, and for that purpose be would move the amendment of which h e h a d g i ven notice. The Lionel dire Honourable Member concluded by moving-a" That the directed u by h the clerk of this House, ha oaths ving to Baron as proceeded Huse to administer the Rothschild, one of the Memb ers f or t h e city of I t .on al d o d n e upon the Old Testament, being the f orm which he declared to be most binding upon his conscience; and the Baron having so sworn. to the oath of abjuration, with the omission cf the words upon the true faith of a Chrisiian,' and doubts having arisen as to the legal effect of his so taking thu oath, it is expedient, at the 'commencement of the next session of Par liament, that a Bill should be introduced to de clare the law with reference to the due administra tion of that oath ; and further, that this House will then take into its serious consideration the subject of the oaths now administered to its Members with re ference to the changes which have taken place since they were first imposed by law." Mr. C. ANSTEY had a communication to make to tile House on the subiect of the amendment he had given notice of en Friday, " That the Baron Lionel Nathan de Rothschild, a Member duly elected for the city of London, be heard by himself, his counsel or agents, in support of his 'claim to sit and vote in this House." He had had that morning a conversation with Baron Rothschild, and he bad to inform the House that it was not his intention or wish to be heard at the bar by counsel. if the Hon. Member for Montrose pressed his amendment to a division he should support it. He should have wished that before the end of the session a declaratory Act should he passed, and the Baron admitted to his seat in the mean time. Mr. LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, Pease was admitted in that way by resolution, and an Act afterwards passed declaring not what the law was, but what it should be. That course ought to have been pursued here. The Baron should have been seated, and afterwards a declaratory Act passed and tendered to the other House, to enable them to confirm the decision. However, he was quite pre pared to take his Honourable Friend's amend ment as it stood, and he should certainly vote for it. But, with regard to the speech of his Hon. and Learned Friend the Attorney• General, he must confess that he was more than ever deeply involved in the mazes of astonishment and perplexity. How such a resolution as the first could have proceeded from the Hon. and Learned Gentleman he was at a loss to under stand, but being heralded by such a speech as they had heard from him was still more surprising. What did his Hon. and Learned Friend say ? The case, ho said, was unprecedented, and therefore the conclusion he bad come to was to disfranchise the Honourable Member for the city of London. The Hon. and Learneed Gentleman, however, was not always of opinion that a Jew was bound to prove his right to enjoy the privilege cf his fellow-subjects, for in 1847 the lion. and Learned Gentleman told the House of Com • moos that the onus of proof rested with those who denied the right. Now the opinion of a poor barrister like himself, whose professional income did not exceed 300/. a year, might be worth very little, but the decision he had come to was the result cf mature deliberation, anti though it might be erroneous it was sincere. His opi nion was that the Baron ought to be allowed the benefit of the doubt, and to take hie seat. But what, said the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. " Why," said he, "I am called upon to expound the law, and you must take it upon my exposition; but then I must tell you that the law which I so expound is monstrous and absurd." Now, suppose a client was consulting the Hon. and Learned Gentleman upon a point of law, and he gave such an opinion as that it struck him forcibly that the client would immediately seek another professional adviser. Now that was precisely the position in which the House was placed by the extraordinary speech of the Honour able and Learned Attorney-General, and they had to choose between the law laid down by him and that laid down by those who were called the friends of Baron Rothschild. Well, then, what did the latter say? Why, they said that there was no precedent like this case, and therefore they had no right to make one. They said Baron Rothschild was free, and therefore they had no right to disfranchise him. They- said it was at the best a doubtful point, and therefore let their own Member have the benefit of it. Now, which was the more reasonable course of the two ? He paused for a reply, but be thought the House would decide in favour of the Baron. His friend did not tell them that their law was mon strous and absurd, but said the Hon. and Learned At torney-General, if you pusue that course, you will lay the Baron open to heavy penalties; but no court of justice would venture to inflict any penalties upon him when they were told that he took his seat not only under the sanction of the House, but in obedience to an order of the House.—(Hear.) No court of justice would for a moment dream of ques tioning that decision ; but if there was any danger of that, would the House be more considerate lor Baron Rothschild than be would be for himself? Baron Rothschild said he was willing to take the risk. Did the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General) mean to say that' his mind was perfectly clear that the oath of abjuration could be tendered to any Member of that House at all without an alteration being made in the terms of it by the decision of that House? That was one of the points which he had to determine. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman quoted statutes which had no force—statutes of William 111. and George I.—but what did he say of the asatute of George 111., under which alone the oaths taken at the table could be administered to any Member ? Two important events bad happened since the oath of abjuration bad passed, which mate rially altered the case; the princely Stuarts were no more, and George the Third had long been gathered to his fathers. The aid of Parliament had therefore ceased to .be applicable, and the cath could not be administered at this day. Tho Hon. Gentleman concluded by stating, that whether the Hon. Member for Montro s e proceeded to a division or not, his vote should be given against the ' monstrous and unconstitutional resolutions which bad been proposed by her Majesty's Government. Mr. DISRAELI then rose and said—The previous discussion which has taken place this session respecting ' the seat of the Hon. Member for the city of London, and ,the deliberations upon it, appear to me to be of so strictly a legal character, that I have refrained obtruding myself on the attention of the House. But, Sir, the resolutions which have been placed on the table to-day have departed from that limited character which future resolutions proposed to our consideration have professed. The resolutions which the Learned Attorney-General has brought forward are, one of law and another of po licy. I therefore think the House will excuse me if, under these circumstances, I venture to make a few observations as to the position in which the Hon. Gentleman the Member for the city of London, who hss not taken his seat, finds himself, and also as to the posi tion occupied by the House. The course which has been pursued by the Member for the city of London, by the electors of the city of London, and by her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion, in their attempts to obtain an amelioration of the grievances which they feel, and the disabilities under which they are placed, this year differs from that course ahich they have hitherto pursued. I understand this arises from the impatience—he would say natural im patience—which the electors of London and her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion feel at the posi tion in which they now find themselves. But I - /vomit ask the House here to consider whether that position, grevious as they may feel it to be, is the consequence of having pursued a constitutional course to release them selves from those grievances, or whether it be in con sequence of having; deviated from that constitutional course which they had hitherto pursued? Now, Sir, with respect to Englishmen professing the Jewish religion, I am bound to say that no class of religionists in this country have less cause to complain of the spirit of the community, or of the temper of the Legislature, than Englishmen professing the Jew ish religion. When I remember, Sir, what was the position of such men a very brief period back— hardly a quarter of a century ago—when I contrast that position of social degredacion and political dis , ability with the position which they now oc cupy and enjoy, I am proud and gratified by the contrast; and I am bound to say that it is one which is far more favourable than that which any other body of her Majesty's subjects not professing the religion of the state could have relied upon in so brief a space of time. The Roman Catholics. for example, were for a much longer period disqualifiet foiethe possession of any offices and enjoyments and many more rights than the Jews were. Every class of Dis senters also had to undergo a more prolonged and more severe struggle than Englishmen professing the Jewish religion in order to obtain those rights which they now eujoy ; and, Sir, I think at a moment like the present when we admit the impatience and naturally the impatience evinced by the electors of London at not imme diately accomplishing the results which they desire. I say, Sir, I think it is expedient to take a calmer and more comprehensive view of the circumstances of the case ihan the electors of the city of London. and taking that more comprehensive and calmer view, I arrive myself at a result much more favourable to the enlightened spirit of the community, and temper and moderation of the Legislature of this country, than some opinions which have been expressed out of this House and in this House on the subject. But, Sir, if Englishmen professing the Jewish religion have little cause to complain of the bieotry of the country in which they live, or the want of toleration in the spirit of the ago in which they exist—have they a fair quarrel with the con duct of another branch of the Legislature, vvinoo conduct in these discussions has been eubji cted to some criticism which, on examination, I think will be deemed not only harsh but unjust. It is barely three years ago, when, after a prolonged discussion in this House in consequence of Baron liothschild,being elected for the city of London, a Bill was passed which rernovsd disabilities which prevented that Gentleman taking his seat. It received the solemn and deliberate consideration of the House of Lords, but it was not passed by that House A Bill was certainly proposed which made great altera tions ; that Bill received a full and temperate discussion, and it was objected to, not by a majority of a startling amount. The Government brought in another Bill, and it was discussed with mitigated hostility in the House cf Lords, and he wanted to know what had taken place in that House to cause the reprobation and the language that had been used with respect to it. —(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman, it was true,' had been returned again for the city of London by an over whelming majority, and if after such a demonstration the House of Lords had objected to the Bill, he admitted that it would have been to blame.—(Hear.) It ought to be remembered that the late triumphant return of the Baron Rothschild had not been brought forward as a data in the House of Lords, and if it had, he had very little doubt different results would have taken place.—(Hear, hear.) It the second election of the Baron Rothschild was, as he admitted it would be, a sig nificant demonstration of public opinion on the subject, was not that an additional reason that the Bill should have been again brought forward, and the opinion of the /louse of Lords taken upon the subject?—(Hear, hear.) He thought the natural impatience felt by the city of London had no foundation against the community or the House of Lords; but that if any persons were responsi ble for the situation in which the city of London was t t h h e ot H ig o h u t s t e he of course placed, it was h er M a j es ty's Government.—(H ear , hear.) He had thought it his duty to make thete observations upon the Position which Lords this hadupi occupied been n th p e u question,pursued h because he branch of the Legislature had not been looked upon in • a just light.— (Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to the reselu doss that had been proposed by the Attorney-Ge neral, he felt bound to make a few observations. The first re s oluti on w as declaratory f the law, not, felt hound pro ceeding.—(Hear.) The other res o l u ti on was a resolu tion pledging the House on a subsequent occasion and in a subsequent session; that, certainly, to say the least of it, was not a very politic proceedin e e—(llear, hear) — and was one that ought not to be adopted except in a case of extreme necessity.—(Rear, hear.) Now, • where, ho would ask, did the necessity for such a pro ceeding exist?—(Hear, hear.) Where was the neces sity for the House to take such a course? He would venture to say it was not to be found in the community —that it was not the temper of the community that had been the great impediment, nor was it the temper , of the House of Lords—(Hear, hear) that House had considered the subject to the test of their abilities, and they had come to that d'eci,ien which they considered just. The case was clear to them, they had a novel and important proposition before them, to which they gave an impartial and solemn consideration on two instances, and although they rejected the measure they never rejected it by an overwhelaining or an overbearing majority, but upon the last occasion by a majority diminished in numbers. —(Hear, hear.) So far as the temper and community of the Legislature was concerned, there was nothing to discourage those who believed they were pressing a just claim, nor was there anything to justify the impatience which had been naturally shown by the electors of Len don.—(Hear, hear.) Then they came to the fact which no one could deny, that it was the conduct of the Go vernment which had brought the House of Com mons to a proposition that was made as if it were the opinion of the Government that there was no other means of extricating them from the difficulties and embarrassments in which they now found themselves.—(Hear, hear.) The House of Com mons then was to take the most unu sua l— no t to s a y a most unconstitutional course, and one which none but the gravest circumstances could vindicate or justify. —(Hear, hear.) And new for myself (centinued the Hon. Gentleman), speaking only for rnyeelf, especially upon this question, I decline to take that course ; I shall not vote for either of these reso lutions. ( Cheers. ) I leave the law as I find it, and if there be any necessity to change the law I call upon the Government, who have expressed on more than one occasion an unt quivocal opinion upon this subject as regards a matter of policy, to remedy the grievance which they have acknowledged.—(Cheers.) I want to know what excuse can be made for Govern ment for not having the moment Parliament met introduced a Bill upon this subject. if it was desir • able in 1848 er 1849, it was much more desirable in 1850, after the recent election for the city of London. —(Cheers.) If the first election produced such an effect as to induce the Ministry to believe the city was ripe for legislation merely, the second election for the city of London renders that course much more imperative and clear, and onel abort which not a moment ought to have been lest.—(Cheers.) I may be told that there was a Com mittee formed to inquire into the nature of the oaths taken by Members of Parliament, and that Government, until they received the result of the labours of that ComraitTe, were incompetent to advise Parliament upon the ques tion.—(Hear, hear.). Does the Government mean to say, then, that they have been acting upon imperfect infor• mation upon a subject of such importance, of such peculiar delicacy and interest. Have they rushed into the House of Commons without duo deliberation and research, and counselled the Legislature on the subject.? —(Hear, bear.) Is that the policy of the Government? I am in the correction of the gentlemen learned in the law, from. Mr. Attorney-General to the Hon. ani Learned Gentleman who had been so frank upon the extent of his practice this morning—(A laugh)—and even in the presence of all these learned gentlemen, and of all these gentlemen of the long robe, I venture to say that however extensive may have been their researches—however profound might have been the investigations of the Committee over which the Honour able and Learned Gentleman the Member for Oxford presided, they did not succeed in producing a new fact, or in eliciting any new result to those which had been arrived at by those who had given any previous study or investigation to the subject.—(Loud cheers.) Well, then, Sir, I consider it a mere mockery on the _ part of the Government to pretend their project of legislation was - retarded: because they waited the results of the investigation of the Com mittee on oaths. I shall use no violent language upon the subject; but I say, the Government having brought themselves into this condition, we ought not to do any thing to extricate them from the consequences of their own misconduct, or the consequences of their unfounded clamour; against the constitutional proceedings of another branch of the Legis lature a clamour, not only unfounded, but absolutely most unjust, and one which It believe the candid, and just, and generous people of this country will never countenance, and never approve (Cheers.) I have taken the liberty of making these few observa • sions. I have, as the House will perhaps con descend to remember when the question of the removal of the disabilities of Englishmen pro fessieg the Jewish religion has ever been brought before the House—l have recorded my vote in favour of their removal.—(Hear, hear.) I have been accused sometimes of not accompanying the exercise of the suffrage with any observations on the subject itself. I remember the Noble Lord the First Minister, not very courteously, and certainly not in a hearty manly way, reminded me last year that my vote was a silent one. Now, if I thought anything I could say could accomplish what is so dear to my heart and c,,nvictions my vote would not have been a silent one, but, inasmu c h as I believe my opinions upon the subject were not shared by a single Member on either side of the House, I thought it was but good sense and good taste that, alter having unequivocally expressed the grounds upon which my vote was given, I should have taken retuge in si lence, which at least could not offend the opinions or prejudices of any gentleman.—(Cheers.) Those opinions, however, I now retain; they are un changed, and if it were not presumption to speak of human opinion being unchangeable, I would express my belief that they never will be changed.—(Cheers.) If this were a Pagan country, I can easily conceive and comprehend how the claims of Englishmen being Jews should be politically resisted, and to a certain degree with a show of reason opposed.—(Hear, hear.) But, Sir, it is a Christian country, and because like every other ChriAtan country, it owes its Chris tianity to the agency and influence of the House of Israel, I cannot believe that the course which is pur sued at present by the Legislature of Englafid is a just or wise one—(Cheers)—end though I may abstain some times from dilating upon feelings arid views which may not be prevalent or popular in this House, I will never retract them, and even now shrinking from offending the feelings of any one, I will express my hope that full and complete justice will speedily be done to the descendants of a race which we acknowledge to ho sacred, and the professors of a religion which we admit to he divine. Sir R H. INGLIS did not think it necessary to follow the Hun. Gentleman the Member for Buekinghamshire in his elaborate defence of the House of Lords, or his briefer attack upon the Government; but his Hon. Friend must forgive him for saying that, like himself, his opinions upon this subject were unchanged, and es far as human opinions could be, unchangeable. These opinions he had entertained ever since be had held a seat in the House. It mattered I n t to him from whence these resolutions came, he should I treat them as he found tbem.—(Fiear, hear.) The British Legislature bad never sat except under Christian sand tion. The question in th e case o f t h e; Q ua k ers was a ques tion of difference of Ch r i st i an i ty. . B ut t h e ques tion was different now. If the House admitted Jews tlwould admit those to legislate fair our our Christian Church who themselves u feel it a g r , at a ff ront to b e d escr ib e d as [t r ( ) Christian its assembly,would ould countryfteh members of our Church and our Christian Government. —(Hear, hear.) He (Si r R. I ngl i s) woul d rem i nd every Member in that House, that on his single vote might depend that constitution whi c h h a d never sat except under Christian sanction, and the question whether that constitution should continue to be bound by Christian sanction. Believing as h e this nation, and that they should (Sir Robert Inglis) did of our common Christianity would net undervalue it,— asthat t w h a a s t t h t e h the birthright pro fes s profession not lighly . sell that .birthright fur any such advantage,— and)le Baron Rothschild might furnish what,l theyAttorney-General) torn. e vv y er .G e e t n o e pay ra i) for in that expressing advantage ev h e j e t whi c h il e t ( h S e ir n lt o . n l o n a g r l; to their deliberations, still when he (Sir le. Inglis) considered Friend rasi ( n t e regret that some delay should be could not agree with his Honourable and Learned opposed to the a d m i ssion of such a man. He would oppose an y t hi ng which should have the effect of making that H ouse anythin g but what i t was now, a Christian Legiel auture, of which every Member must profess himself a Christian, or -else be unable to take his :eat. Under these circumstances he should feel bound to oppose the proposition which was laid on the table. Mr. ROEBUCK: said that he was pretty well con vinced that whatever might be said the question was now settled.—(Hear, hear.) Though ho had come to that conclusion, and was pets) well satisfied as to the result, he could not say that the mode which they would arrive at those results would reflect much credit on the House. The qnestion before them was no longer a mere legal question—it was a question of policy, and he must protest against the mode in which that policy was sought to he ca rr i e d out. The Horse was no longer sitting in a judicial capacity, but they were deliberating on a voluntary proposition on the part of the Administration. It was a proceeding on the part of the Administration. It was no longer a Bill pro pounded by the Member for the City, b u t a re _ solution propounded by the head of her Majesty's Gavernment; and they could not, with common honour, fail now to pursue the proposition of the Attorney-General. It must be propound e d i n t hi s House in the shape of a Bill; it must lee carried through that House, and carried through the House of Lords successfully, or the honour of the Ministry would be forfeited. When Baron Rothschild was first return e d for London, feeling a great interest in the.eettlement • f the question he (Mr. Roebuck) had pressed to bring it to a speedy issue. The answer was that the matter was in the hands of his colleague the Noble Lord at the head cif the Government. Well, a Bill was brought in, but the Bill did not pass. Woll, the matter was delayed, and the answer he always got to his remonstrances was that the Bill was coming in time, and he was told not to be im patient and in a hurry. But at the time he prophesied chat the Bill would not come, and bade them mark his words at the time. He knew that the Government would never dare a difficulty.—(Hear, hear.) When a question was important, and i excited immediate and grea t interest, it became an open question in the Cabinet ; b u t when matters swam smoothly it remained a Ministerial question. It was the duty of the Noble Lord to have propounded that Bill, and t o : have g one th rough they eluded the and with it. Member for Oxford's Com took it quite as a God-send. whenßinui t t t as e s t long h I%e, als proposed, n s theyand Learnedtuhl d ( y ,question; Will, then, after the required precedents were found, and the report was laid on the tab l e of the House , what, was the conduct of the Noble Lo rd ? Promi ses were made , and those promises had been broken,—(Hear, hear.) At last, when the House was tired of a ll legislation , and bu siness of all sorts had b een p ost p oned until a future sees on, wh a t did the Learned At t orn e y - Gen eral t a ke upon himself to do? He said there was a monstrous state of law, and that, mind, was not the.d there was description which th e y gav e b u t which he gave — he sta a monstrous state of law, and the sooner they got rid of it the b e tt er . H e would ask the Hon. and Learned Gentleman whether he believed that that House was a fit tribunal to decide upon a question of law? And would task whether, as a matter of policy, there was no w other course open to him than the one he had taken? It admitted th a t there were doubts on the correctness of the conclusions which had been come to, but there were no doubts as to the facts; and yet he asked them to assume to be what they were not fit to be, judges of AUG UST 5, 1850. the law. Let them look at the thing in its present posi tion, and he would ask if that House was the place where this proposition was to be met. The Attorney- General, throughout the whole of his speech had placed the House of Lords in a very invidious position. He considered them to be persons of so idle a character, and so easily impressed by considerations 'so beneath the character of kgislators, that wat was true and right was of no consideration placed by the side of personal vanity. If they left the matter as it was then, he told them, the House of Lords, would say why did not you pass some resolution on the subject:" but for his part he (Mr. Roebuck) could not see how they could possibly arrive at that conclusion. The whole of the argument of the Attorney-General was that if they did not ac knowledge that Baron Rothschild had no right to sit in the House without taking the oath, they would have no chance of carrying a Bill through the House of Lords. Despite of the assertion of the Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Inglis). He believed that at this moment there was a very strange feeling in the country on that subject; but the reason was that a great question lay under this. They might pretend to say that there was a large majority of persons in this coun try ready to stand up for the Protestant religion; the majority of. persons in this country were not to be caught by cobwebs like that. And then to say that they always met with prayer and religious observances; how ceuld that bind such a man as Bolingbroke for instance? He would have taken not nine nor nineteen, but nine teen hundred oaths, if they made them. They could not bind such a man. Whom did they bind? None but the most conscientious men in the House, who least needed it. When he heard the Hon. Member for the City of London repeat the oath after the clerk, and only omit the last few words, which were not binding on his conscience, ho asked himself whether there was a man in the House who really did not believe that all the purposes of the oath had been answered . (Cht era.) This was said to be a Christian assembly, but he thought that no really pious body of persons would allow words of holy import to be applied in so mischievous a manner on grave and serious, matters. Now if they maintained, these oaths for the purpose of excluding certain Members, why should they not say so at once? Let there -be no side-wind in securing such an object ; let the House propound at once its desire, and then pass a resolution that from this day henceforward no Jew should have a seat in the House. —(Hear.) At the time when the oaths were first con cocted the Jews could not have been in the contempla tion of any parties. Improvement, however, marched rapidly, and he was not, like the Hon. Member for Buck inghamshire, surprised at the advance which the ques tion had made within the last quarter of a century. We were very different to what our ancestors were, and if we were desirous to understand clearly the difference between the past and the present we had nothing to do but to refer to the history of those oaths. A more painful part of our history could not be concealed. —(Hear.) From their first instt2ution they were cha racterised by bigotry and hate, but they were gradually improued, and we were now endeavouring to do away with the last wretched remnant of bigotry which still remained. Ho hoped the House would not only rid of that, but would go still farther and grappel with the whole question in a fair and honest spirit. The course proposed by the Attorney-General was not generous, safe,' or candic. He had no right to assume to him self the privilege of stating what the law was; he acknowledged that he was not infallible, and that this House was a bad tribunal, but he could not deny that there was another course to adopt which would meet all difficulties, and prove—which his resolution would not do—acceptable to a large body of conscientious men in this country, and at the same time attain every end which he _said he wished to attain, viz., doing away with this most monstrous state of the law, which he acknosv ledged was a disgrace to the country, and which might at once subject the Honourable Member for the city of London to all those pains and penalties which the Attorney- General kindly and considerately begged and entreated the House not to in flict upon him. Now, could. not Baron Rothschild take care of himself—(Hear)—could they not let him run the same risk as Mr. Pease, whose case be understood the Attorney-General to say was attended with the same difficulties.—(Hear.) If tha House had no power to alter the oath for Mr. Pease, as stated by the Attorney- General, why, as he was now living, he might any day be called upon to pay all these fines and penalties. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said he should vote against the proposition of the Government, believing it to be not only unsuited to the circumstances of the case, but also unjust and reprehensible.--(Hear.) Mr. REYNOLDS rose amidst loud cries of divide, and finding himself unable to proceed, said ho would either go on or move the adjournment of the debate.— (Loud cries of "No" and " Go on." The motion for the adjournment having been put by the SPEAKER, Lord J. RUSSELL said, as it was now past 3 o'clock, it would be advisable to adjourn if the House thought the debate should be. continued; but if the House was ready to divide, of course he had no objection to that course.—(Lou d cries of " Divide." Mr. REYNOLDS then withdrew his motion. He re joiced that though the Hon. Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford had spent twenty years of his po litical life in fighting and speaking against his (Mr. Reynolds's) faith, yet that the middle and trading classes of Oxford, who returned his Learned Friend behind him (Mr. Page Wood) were far more advanced than the magnates of the University. The Hon. Member for Warwickshire had the other night protested against Mr. Berkley making any attack on the Yeomanry of England from the other side of the House. Now, in the same spirit he protested against the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford, occupying a seat on this side of the House.—(Cries et " Hear, and question.") Lord J. RUSSELL said that the Right Hon. Gentle man bad already made the greater part of his speech. Mr. REYNOLDS denied that the grounds taken by ;ho Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire were correct that the House of Lords was not to blame.— ( Hear,_ hear.) He begged to remind Honourable • Gentleman over the way that they were playing a des perate game, and all that he would ask was, would they be . ithe rootstoal of another place?—(Cries of "Order.") Because if they would, they might depend upon it the people would ask the sigoificant question, was the House of Lords never to be reformed.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. P. WOOD rose amid loud cries of " Ad journ." It was impossible for him to allow the debate to conclude without saying a few words. They had asserted that the seat was full, the House had asserted that the seat wai va cant, because Baron Rothschild had not taken the oath. On that side of the House they contended that he had, and he denied that any of the arguments that had been put forward on behalf of Baron Rothschild had been answered. He protested as much as the Attorney-General against its being supposed that the House bad a . dispensing power, it certainly had no such thing.—(Hear, hear.) It was said it was dangerous to tamper with an oath; no one more fully accorded with that doctrine than himself, but what he asserted was that that which was proposed to the Baron Rothschild was no oath at all to him, and therefore in leaving out the words he had done hetaro pered with no oat h at all. He thought that the course the House had adopted was of the most inconsistent nature—they had decided that the Baron Rothschild should take the oath on the Old Testament, and yet they would not permit him to take the only oath which he considered binding on his conscience. —(Hear, bear ) He considered that the Baron Rothschild had taken all the oaths that could be required of him, and that the House ought to allow him to take his seat. In a much weaker case than this the House had necided favourably to the. Mewcer claiming his seat; and at the instigation too, of men, not like himself, of small expe rience in the laws and usages of the House, but fully versed in the privileges and practice of Parliament. That man was no other than the Honourable Member for the county of Montgomery, who would have come down to support him ou this occasion had he not been prevented from doing so by illness.—(Cheers,) At that time he would say no more. .He had simply attempted to vindicate the law of England, which recognised in the highest degree the principle of common sense, and which in the highest degree respects the liberties of the subject. The law held that no British subject could differ from another British subject without an express statute could be produced to support the difference. The moment the black man put his foot upon this country he became free, and it was the same law which recognised no difference between the Jew and the Christian as a British subject, and therefore he contended that, by common law, the Member for the city of London was entitled to take his seat.—(Cheers.) The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was, anxious to say a few words to justify and explain the vote he was about to give. He regretted that ho could not arrive at the same conclusion as his Hon. and Learned Friend the Member for Oxford. This was a ques tion, however, upon which every man ought to speak out according to his own conscientious convictions. They .were called upon not to pass a law, but simply to. expOund the law as it already exists; and speaking, therefore, as a lawyer, it seemed to him to be impossible to come to ,any other conclu sion than that the words on the truth faith of a Christian" formed substantially part of the oath. — (Cheers.) Those words were introduced as an essential part of the oath for the purpose of binding Catholics; and aliough as in courts of Justice they might permit par ties to take the oath in the manner which they declared to be most binding on their consciences, they still bad no . power, without an Aot of Parliament, to, vary or alter the substance or form of the oath.—(Hear.) In a court of justice, a man was sworn to tell the : " truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," and although he might take the oath by touching or .kissing the book, he could not change the words. Now the Act which established this oath was passed to meet the cases of Roman Catholics who professed Je suitical principles, and felt that in taking an' oath they could make mental reservations.— (Hear.) Suppose, then, a Catholic refused to make ese of these words, on the ground the ground that they were not binding on his conscience. he apprehended that he would not be permitted to take his seat. He apprehended that is as clear and indisputable law. With regard toMr l'ease's case, es far as it went, it certainly was a prece dent; but it did not go far enough to justify them in seating the Member for the city of London.—(Herr.) He must say, looking to the general intentions of the Legislature in passing those various Aets, and looking to those sp=cial Acts of Parliament made in the case of the Jaws, it admitted of no doubt that those words were of the very substance and essence of the oath; and he for'one could not permit Baron Rothschild to use words which were not in the form of the oath. Baron Rothschild had defined to take one of the caths—(Hear, hear)—in the form prescrioed by the Act of Parliament, and what had been done? Had he been admitted to take his seat? No ; Mr. Speaker directed him to withdraw. The ques tion then was --would the House allow him to take his seat, or would they not ? The House was in a false po sition. If Baron Rothsehild was prepared to take his seat, would the House allow him to take it? He (the So licitor-General) contended the words which had been omitted by Baron Rothschild were not intended to exclude the Jews, and it appeared to him (the Solicitor-General) that the House ought to take a fair and manly course of either admitting or excluding him.—(Hear.) Mr. BRIG 11T—(Amidst loud cries of " Divide ") said he had observed from the commencement of the discussion on this question, that the case of Mr. Pease had been alluded to by gentlemen opposing the introduction of Baron Rothschild, and the case had been treated as one of extreme difficulty. He (Mr. Bright) thought he should show that the whole argument which the Hon. Gentleman, the Solicitotegeneral, had made, had no foundation whatever. What did the House do in the case of Mr. Pease? He (Mr. Bright) came into that House and took his seat by vir tue of the declaration which Mr. Pease himself had made when he was admitted into the House. Mr. Pease re fused to take the whole of the three oaths; and the question was, what did he take? The House did not even ask Mr. Pease to take the substance of those oaths.—(Hear, hear, hoar.) He did not take the oath, of fidelity ; Le did not even affirm it. With respect to the wall of supremacy, Mr. Pease did not affirm or siveer that in any shape what ever.—(Hear, beer) Then he came to the oath of ab juration. Mr. Pease did not affirm the substance of that oath.—(Hear, hear.) In the affirmation which Mr. Pease and he (Mr. Bright) made at the table of the House, there was not a single word about "defending the Queen," the words " will defend" were entirely omitted. He would ask the House if those words were or were not a portion of the substance of the oath? Mr. Pease was also allowed to affirm without declaring in the words of the oath that he would "defend the succession." He (Mr. Btiget) understood thm.e words to be of the form and substance of the oath.—(Elear. hear.) . With tegard to the words " on the true faith of a Christian " they were not put to Mr. Pease or himself at all.—(Hear, hear.) Was the House, then, asked to do in this case one-tenth part of so grave a thing as the House of Commons by an unanimous vote permitted Mr. Pease, the Member for South Durham to do in 1832. He (Mr. Bright) was of opinion that the House was not allowing anything to be done half so serious as was done then. He was in clined to think that the Home did right in the case of Mr. Pease, It might be a stretch of the orders of this House to allow Mr. Pease to take his seat; the House was asked now to do a much lighter thing, when leave was asked for Baron Rothschild to enter his seat. The Houses of Lords and Commons passed the Bill for admitting Mr. Pease. He (Mr. Bright) said, that being so, it would be scandalous indeed of him who sat there by right of that which the House of Commons had done on that occasion, if he did not give in every way in his power the greatest support be could to the proposition that Baron Rothschild should be admitted to take his seat. After a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For Mr. Hume's amendment lOl Against it 163 Majority against the amendment -62 On our reiurn to the gallery we found Mr. ANSTEY protesting against the assumption taken by the Attorney-General, that the words "on the true faith of a Christian" formed part of the main question. The gallery was again cleared, and the House divided on the Attorney-General's first resolution, when there appeared— For the resolution Against it ... Majority ... ... 166 ... ... ... 92 ... ... -74 On our return to the gallery we found Mr. V. SMITH addressing the House, and suggest. ing that tha resolution should embrace an inquiry into the whole oaths ,administered to Members of .Parlia ment. Lord J. RUSSELL said as the House had sat so late it would be the most convenient course to continue sitting until the Royal Commission, which sat at a quarter to five o'clock, and then adjourn after the Com mission for two hours. In answer to the Right Honourable Gentleman (Mr. V. Smith) he bad to state that though these bud brought more prominently under v;ew the real difficulties which stood in the way of gentlemen taking the oaths at the table beink deemed' Members of the House, yet, as the only point on which an obstacle had arisen to Baron Rothschild taking his seat, and which the House bad just .declared he could not get over, had reference to the last few words of the oath of allegiance, it was de sirable that that question should be brought by itself under the consideration of the House. He should be sorry to injure Baron Rothschild and the constituent body of England by mixing it up with other questions. Mr. GOULBURN said as the subject would un doubtedly come under the consideration of the House next session, whether the resolution was passed or not, when every Member would have an opportunity of ex pressing his individual opinions, he should content him self on the present occasion with entering his protest against the resolution, not simply with reference to the admission of Jews into Parliament, but because he objected to the principle of the House pledging in one session what it would do in the next. Ile thought it was most impolitic and injudicious to make any pledge of that kind. The Hon. Gentleman concluded by protesting against the alteration of the law with regard to the ad mission of Jews. Mr. BRIGHT concurred in the propriety of passing such a resolution, because it gave persons of the Jewish persuasion and the constituency of London a hold on the Government and the House, that this qnestion would be brought forward next session. He unde:stood the Government as a Government, intended to take up the question and would stand or fall by the issue of it.—(Cheers and laughter). He would not give a single snap of the fingers for the resolution unless the public end the Noble Lord (Lord .1. Russell) understood it in that sense.—(Chcers, and continued laughter.) Mr. FIUME observed that the Attorney-General's re solution Only reterred to the form of the oath, whilst his related to the substance.—(Hear.) Mr. AGLIONBY suggested that the word "sub stance" should be inserted instead of "form." 'Eno SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought he had clearly stated that he intended the inquiry to extend to the substance, to the form of the words, and to the man ner in which it was taken. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House dividei, when there appeared— For the second resolution Against it ... Majority for the resolution .. The resolution was consf quently carried. ROYAL ASSENT. , ... 142 ... 106 -36 Mr. Pulman, the Deputy Usher of the Black Rod, appeared at the table, and summoned the House to the House of Peers, to hear the Royal Assent given to se veral public and private Bills. O❑ the Speaker's return he read over the titles of the Bills, for which see our Lord's report. The !louse then adjourned at Twenty Minutes; pas Five. ROBBERY OF 1201. BELONGING TO THE FILESMITHS' SOCIETY. The funds of the filesmiths' society were a few days ago robbed of the large sum of 1201. by an executive member of the trade. The delinquent is Samuel Paley, a file forger in, the employ of Messrs. Blake and Parkin, of Meadow-street, under contract. He has absconded, leaving a wife and four helpless children, and has taken With him an abandoned woman of the town. Paley was a member of the tilesmiths' committee, and as such he attended at the society's rooms, Coalpit lane, on the evening of Tuesday in last week. A good deal of money was turned over in the office during the evening, and Paley assisted in counting it. The sum of 1201. in coin, and a like sum in Bank of England and local notes were deposited in the iron safe, a receptacle provided with three locks, one of the keys of which he carried. The notes, rolled up together, were in an open case some thing like a pocket-bouk. The coin was in a bag. To wards nine o'clock in the evening, when the officers were about to leave the place, a payment of a couple of sovereigns that had been received late remained upon the table. Paley remarked that it ought to he put into the safe, in the bag with the other cash; and, taking out of his pocket his key, asked for the other two keys, in order that he might open the safe.for that purpose. The keys were given to him, and he knelt down and un locked the safe. It, was then dusk, and his movements could not be` distinctly observed, but no one present thought it necessary at that time to watch him very closely. A hard substance was heard to drop in the bag. and then the safe was again locked and the three keys distributed as before. Almost immediately after wards the parties separated, and the office was duly secured as usual by Mr. Warren, one of the secretaries, who resides on the premises. On the following Thurs day evening the members of the executive met by ap pointment ; and Paley, whose term of office had expired, ought to have come forward and given up .his key to his successor. He did not come; however, and hence arose a suspicion as to the safety of the money. Inquiry heightened the suspicion into alarm. On Friday morning the safe was forced open, and it was then found that all the bank-notes, valuell2o/., had been abstracted. The locks had evidently not been tampered with, and the safe appeared precisely as it was when left on the Tuesday evening. The con clusion naturally come to then was, that Paley while depositing the oddment of money, had taken the Dotes oat of the open case, squeezed them• to gether in his hand—he had a large band—and held them there unobserved till he found a convenient opportunity for depositing them in his pocket. The other money put into the safe along with the notes, was all right, ex cept one sovereign, and it is supposed that Paley had kept back one of the two sovereigns that he took off the table under the pretence of, putting them into the bag. On inquiry it .was ascertained that the traitor bad ab sconded from the neighbourhood, in company with a prostitute as already stated. Doubtless he had pre viously taken the precaution to convert the notes into gold. On Friday afternoon Mr. Warren set off to Liverpool and searched the Cambria steamer at the mo ment she was about to sail for America, but the fugitive was not there. Mr. Kirk, the other secretary, went to Hull by train on Saturday evening, that being considered a probable port for the delinquent to embark at. Aided by a policeman Mr. Kirk found that a man slid woman, under the name of Mr. and Mrs. Smith, in many important particulars corresponding to Paley and his female companion, had been staying a day or two at a lodging-house near the railway station, and that they had sailed by the Queen of Scotland steamer, on Saturday evening, for Hamburgh. Believing that/these were the parties he was inquiring after, Mr. Kirk abandoned the search and forthwith returned to Sheffield. The trade were called together on Monday morning, and in pursuance of a resolution come to, Mr. Warren was forthwith dispatched to Hamburgh, on the track of the thief. Messrs. Blake and Parkin and several other par tpiaerstikeismilnlythfuernciistbye d of Mr.ia ----- ---------- t 0 him in furthering the object of ibis visit to that city l' to appears that the manufacture of files is carrie, meg. some extent in Hamburgh, and also std city co°l mb W ur a ; d . burg, about 200 miles further into the country honesty, hope is entertaired that at one of thoses plse a O f will be found. Consideringinsuffieienal to England, hrenw likelyith refereuee :0 the extreme . . _, d i e , our criminal law with ription of • respect to this deo wog to be Service .r. we fear that no adequate means booun back hire will be found in the eyelet of his being gh s t . o _ ia stiffer the mortification of being dragged back to Shen'',.',, before the face of those of his fellow craftsla; but at any rate it is right hat be DA whose confidence be has so perfidious l y punishment that he will dread probably' more than r 5.1. leg thst might befall him in a country of strange Sheffield Ti . mes .---------------- It UNIT SUMMER TIME IN 'TOWN AND CO . 1 . (From Eliza Cook's Journal) oie r, " The Season" of the Fa,hiOnahle World is now lie and all, who can get away, are off to the countrp ell. betraYe d an : great houses in Belgravia are dismantled and pat The last barouche, all hung round with travelliugrovio left town this morning, and is St this Mom h enlidoor of along the broad beech avenue up to l b, ~al_• ie Verson Manor, where a group of tall foo tmen oet i o e. waiting to usher the family into their Pater ra re oar A few disconsolate Members of Parliament 1 .5,_. 5 , of sionally dribbling into the v, eather-boarded .ti_ u re m s ed Commons;, where they vote the estimates s D u o ; hot everything else which keeps them in town at _. bond. season, when the twelfth of August is so close • W' .s o f a You may even catch sight of the retiring Wil d ghe lord, at the Government-ogices in Whitehall; egoeby old Duke may still be seen riding up to the reer!„ e set. oil his accustomed cob. But, to all intents sod Pl" ., g od " the season" is at an end: Altnacks is el . or ni . 00 dowagers and their daughters have vanished il'reseet whirl of London life for a time -the fornier tooeturtheie the success of their plans-the latter to dream; 0 ot os conquests. The young bloods have taken r , 3 0 0 ; om eele of buck-shot, sundry canisters of "No. ' a ,. leoorise ninon enough to see them = well throughst%orosi campaign. Lieutenant Scarlet, of the Cold trr_ o ged is still be seen in the Square at St. James's, t_ll..s, be, t oo, the hazardous enterprise of relieving guard; round," b e de' is contemplating a move to his sporting elates " tbe town is deserted," vows tho park ' 0 tri toirsi i i testable," and protests that he is the " hot W a l 00 W On Monday next, go down to the Square, o°l I t stritr, sea the Lieutenant is off. There is only Ptitnol st ride glen, and he has to be content with an °co- ell anuper at the Star and Garter at Itichol,Tld.., defer ( d bo " the last man" has left, and the Ole' l e 00,. Not quite! About two millions of souls.reer-fdar, even the gay " world" is scarcely missed. ' l 7 s ° web greetP of city lite still rolls on; the roar of London,i t he 0 , yet; the streets, the roads, the river, e s' eog of I, a tiv g O i)e 0 dee , thoroughfare, are multitudinous with the t ut t ied. The capital of the world is not so easily enled gash' twenty or thirty thousand lords, ladies, land w eo re,'2 o with their followers, hangersean, and servsf;o'ffeorfew;,, have left town, were but visitors: the pel; i 0 " °T e st -they whose homes are there-are all so ' Thef T oir e and these are a little nation' in themselvl theft cleett, enjoy their summer as they can; en d e l w illet e t t eat carry themselves out to the countrytoe/ore "„ e!e; endeavour to bring the country into t° o f toee o eh the Londoner is ever tired of the deligbt. toed 5 cote fil l , r ' the country is stale, flat, and unprofitable oewsP OW it. There are the coffee -shops, with theirlog I for crowded as ever. There are the shePs it tehi u6 °II 1114 street, the Strand , all over the city, eir, e o i r warq o ' 0 of miles together, still overflowing with t'''', ‘ $ es° fo r 0 still attractive to purchasers. We a"t tbs t . 4 be, shopkeepers:" N a e l a have to e " - p eon m y web r ior sneer: but it was a compliment 01 ' w, ine of o ar n d our prouder than if he had called us a " nsi"ships, 6 4 . 0 00f Our shops, and our Steam-engines, (ju e r tit io• into spinniug-jennies, have made London scP a u berbs 1- v irg shopkeepers running their far-spreadieg cad, °l'd 113-ee r " country, throwing railways over the ,18 , 0 , 5 110P 1 ' 0 Of e a v re en desert places musical with life• v to be Pr ° no mean civilizers; they have roe s° their shops. • issae-s.-•••••''''""'"".."..e." ."'''''''. 0. • -- --- -----------; clepesC POLICE IN TELLit-I''. oir EB o. l°' ' h • w olf 0 t 0 0 broker, residing at 9, Watertin Mr. William Bakhin, who describecle,"oloooeoo,4 charged with having wilfully se . the l w r, 00. ell area the lights • in three lamps belonging 03 f w aiee e ol .d Light and Coke Company, for es° 4 ll s) e be het - or ).- (under the 4th of George IV., chaP* -1 cl . g '-' 11 1 in himself amenable to a penalty n ot coo co mp than 40s. tof t he c • Mr. Richardson, chief superintendeo se. , ete cic la alluded to, attended to prosecute the c a o s ale% OP; Cooper, a police-constable, said, `hat bu p Vi ele ede a t the morning he saw the deleudaet 0 1 ° V, O OO, 4 6 , whose house he had been at a posts at Haverstock-hill and turn off a go' SI 0 0 0 01105 °f ''.- 0° epos then went into the nurser • y•gr . tad oa I 01 " 110 $ he came out again and put out a lie 11 , - „ t O i l. which witness took him into custodP, ir, 11 " a A - his hat, and wanted to go end far e a 1 00' pefo" would not allow him. Defendant offer ed d it' e „ r fag vereign to settle the matter, but Pr " -e . C° ll3. dent was 1 'stil t " Oa . per ectly sober. he 0 01 of e Os Mr - . Richardson, in addressing 1- „os tO d for • mented upon the wanton and toiscbtev- do rde jog , peir e u"ing lamps, by which facility ° l/9 plaed?rilial, ‘ breaking openof houses as well as wo uld t u teasers. Ile hoped i trate al ye the wag's - set be highest penalty. el ll6 of I big co° 0 e „eta The defendunt, as , se for P .-- 5 I- 1 15 p W 5 t he OE was a little ins briate a d n . e- A cu lade', or b of 0 0t is le s e e party at Mr. Sinton's; dared him to p i e w e Ott • v j and in consequence of what she O ld A 11 18°. ¢0 0. ° O O road without his be d ~ f - .et, could only say hat add extiegne so OP A , f eo• extremely sorry fur having alt bribe t he f 0 0 0 foolishly. As for attempting ea 01 ee t c o. It_ be Part Wienriliegiwrlisl Oc es . i ss that under the exeitetriegUe sflerteld meet he was uf course desirous of g e e , go k ''.' , sb a ola his intention to have lighted the l e e u) bee e' u t - e te fi- i discharge my bad convinced the lady that he ba u - ma n all' . him he durst not do. He bored ti le • stoold breat be lenient. b 0 I l 0 I° o c' ll Mr. BROUGHTON-If I were to ee 11 0 pe- ° t oo- Y e e situution there is no excuse svbatever'ioes, a n c ebe alli s IV duty to the public. Fa Tlie I' d / 0 01 ,9. give for your conduct is utterly ridice very reP4 Ova ) tempt to bribe the constable was 1 S he 00 , Is 'on , of eb e d fi A i s }eau have expressed your contrit! ett 00 .. 4 0 ft? oor, : e, t ntthh u e ere p eat; (penalties months. u y ur o e u w .i t l h l e p f aL a y l e l 3tpl this h ri i6 a s4 l . t : :edr b . :: oa f os ° : ` ,; ,_ ll ./ v ioe cov i : t toe l:, , , ol l I"; in default of your doing so Y uti „ a CO ° • JO / ' id led The penalties were speedily P a ' d ' - Or liberatei. o er al se 3 ---------"___-----fjL"' be e de aiee a es O ° . 0 FiliGinrui, OCCURRENCE; , i r t , be, o t , le y. o BRlDSE.—Testerday (Sunday) alternoo : ell fr0p030,60, two o'clock, a gentlernanly.dressed nise,' . 0 01 0 or f O O e a ts P, east side of the bridge. The skull of P' e e e eirk v eilepiervi master, came in N iolent contact with the st,.°P 'for t i v i g, t ot iier 0 pier head, which, no doubt, stunned „ii l T e rt ii o mti o at sr el he sank, and never rose again. Mr e ,' . .„ t ber e,„ tlie ,p immediately dispatched his le-ciogs e' v b tl , ,te the pier men with the life-boat ails e, i 0 Wh e l v ed P•ote v e order, if possible, to rescue the deceeee" th ey t ° o settene P i , unsuccessful; but whilst fishing for the de eo ol s , l fid 14 of another man, and which ,001 11 the ctsY .k, v c d i t se vera l panyot etc was in, must have been in the watpr de ep , e ap e e 0 who fell from the bridge was dressed in e. it 0 00 i c e ri o , parently was not above 22 years of ( !g dea th ' be po, is 1 00 these who'were on the bridge that his p re t 0 600 A of accident.. The account those parties g OO tii_ o cio,,, that they saw the gentleman standiqvgop.,evertY „v river, when his hat blew off, a nd ill hl° - 0 f r ieY 0 1 second recess looking at the boats passe e pea' e on, it he overbalanced himself and fell ..,, t . ll o bio, n e t l i f His Excellency Chevalier pup :t ' ef 'd° ° s'i g ! :ir g, e 4 Mininister at this Court, left London g eve lleO c tbe t i 0 0 the baths of Kreuznach, at which his f- 4 `, e het . 09 0 ' ' , f , to reside for some weeks. Count l'erPele c luti 0 1 1 !, 0 of Legation, has arrived• to assum e t the ffr d'Affaires.l t ° t / 0 0111 1) 54 ` 1 0 ' Ugliness-an advantageous 6of th e , 10 )0 that it may make up for the deficiencies e ei c lef goo 'lops`, ~iO, Cook's Journal. so c the ~.:,„g r o for IA On Saturday the Speaker °' ,b e oe''ele,e off 10 mons gave his usual official dinner to;viee. i :,P e 6400 , of the House prior to the close of thViiisin 1feV,;,440 Rowland, Jones; gentlemen were present :- Woo. 1 • sl/10 1 ,,,G 1 6t 0 0 Dorrington, Chalmers, Haw° Geclge' ' Diebsl°ll°l' Booth, Nay, Samuel Smith, V a eon , ' e a sr' '•e,,5 the Rev. Mr. Gamier, the chaPlsin; 5 ndl :11 "0 r i'l I . P lio ( 1/€ Speaker's secretary. __.A.bont sesrdled le e ti li LORD W ' P Am. s eICTURES. • Vr a 1 11•\ti e collected in I - Italy and elsewhere bYtiolebe c• 00 of placed in the great room of the r'gYP helttsc .Cl' id Lord Charles'llussell coo I/ _ait it is Lord Ward's intention to in t ja i d 0 , a l: PO 0 4 publie.-Beilder. ii„..--r a7 to def f " 10 1 l III ( PITY THE POOR GAS STOEK",". 90, N e ss e 4 police luxuriating idly in the Par"aeerb otI; 00 C 4 0 4 swell-mobility doing what they li k e ° . ' 0 - 00 o f c re ,,e 0 . 1 ,1,1 on the first day of the week, as A .1, tyP e - 0 pre 'e ness," in caricature of the seventh, t _ mo t, t .0 0 0 , I . -bet the police are likely, in sober art,; o uro t o pr o ' ; rls what heavy addition to their Stodaafrie l i e vi eseeef t , e r example of the Sheffield gas stoker e we al v et i '; .4 VI contagious. They complain, 0 t are the I ' o o'o r. , : o f t he ta, o pid i ,,, e ,, 00 .4, only exactive Sunday customers e o teer _ a d ° i ptC l t church lamps, and the lamps of thos he ge e 1.; eile i t at o ;Po to less spiritual observances-thet, must be made on Sunday and fittleeld bee o'leinvtek,',Jsel that they cannot t ssee:L thoerdsillogi,„, , a 3 t , o c i l l ,k ifroi t'l letter-carriers ot e i behalf of the sofeel'olleceife orSeeeioli light of the community, on the e,e•Y ier eets l' os t. l) fore, virtually threaten to place t . ca t 'e re plest the churches also, as well as the g ill , r of that day. -- Builder. if -- - - - - WIWI , ' iv i‘lf*. 'CI" oF A , n s l e of P r 0 i iv . I On the 30th ult., Mrs. Nr. . 1 ' u c ' bor h' N (Jug , otts. the lad of t he try I, At Uncolu, on.the 31st ult., ol d, f Pretyman. 0 0 - OW / 0' r) A v 0111 ' 0 5 or or A On the Ist inst., at Sussex-lodre'. fife of ti) d :Well, the wife of J. Wotberspoon, Ps r l o s o il li ee On the let inst at Mount-ple°a' ee l. $ ll, , t a itle l 9irrOc6 l, Ward, chaplain to the London gospt "tliStitraiiliew's' a 5 0 fl ) e l) On the Ist inst., at St. ---e leeloeLooeseeeee roughton, second son of the 'sa x o2e". of Y 01 of the Friars, Winchelsea, Sn e r_ e , l ;tt, ''"'-'' 'file eldest daughter of Bora& Pee fia til 9 14 Staffordshire. Wi l 9.00)• ed 44 ' De AO w ith, s g IZ O J 7 On the ,30th tilt., at Aberystdsbite. so , C. 0J A Son, Esq., of Kintn, Heret"ard'e°l3-A1 ee l li' On the 31st ult., at St. Leor e - _ o g ed -.Jt, cep) e late of the Madras Civil Servi !,iodge,."ioj3o . alt' On the Ist inst., at. Cudll - s a g e' 4 . 11 De Horne Christy, Esq., ela a 03 , o'_, . 6 iry 9 t y 0 cudba of Aper fiehLEL__--- irt-indge, - - --101/s9o°e*eae No. 112, Strand, Printer, S he 01e London: Printed and Publisbet ; j' ' s° , 0 31 ogufi P Strand. in the Precinct oft 5 , ISP V. ' - raiddlesoT; felondaY. A-