The Sun. — London, England, 1851-07-22 00:00:00

irt%* 'l4 ' - SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Cloch. ScutuonotlGH.—The election for this borough, which took place on Saturday last, will not pass without being called into question. The Protectionist triumph is likely to be short. A petition is in preparation ; and the in vestigation will show how the success of Mr. G. F. Young was accomplished. The intimidation and other corrupt practices whl:h prevailed at the election exceed all prece dent, and will be clearly exposed• THE GREAT EXHIBITION. (THIS DAY.) The numbers admitted to the Crystal Palace up to four o'clock were as follows :- 10 to 11 11 to 12 12 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 tO 4 . 19,533 . 22,088 . 12,325 . 6,047 . 5,616 . 2,968 Total . . 68,577 IMPERIAL PARLIAIUENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF LORDS. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. PETITIONS. The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented several peti tions in favour of the Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Bill. The Duke of NEWCASTLE presented one petition against the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. The Duke of ARGYLL presented 67 petitions from places in Lane ashire in favour of the Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Bill. Some privy to Bills were, on the motion of Lord REDESDALH, forwarded a stage. ECCLES' AS'.CICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION BILL- The Earl of WINCHILSEA rose to renew then d journed debate on this Bill, and in doing so he cld assure their Lordships that he had no intention, in what he said, of wounding the feelings of auy Noble Lord. Since the passing of the Raman Catholi c Relief Bill he had cautiously abstained from alluding to that subj e ct. In his opposition to that measure he ntid had no persona l feelings ; among the supporters of that measure were several of hisintimate friends, and to r e t a in their friendship. he would have made any sacrifice short of a sacrifice of principle; it was becaus , 3 be felt that the pr . inciple? of the Church of Rome w e re absolutely destructive of civil and religious liberty that he bad oppose d the Relief Bill. The object of the Church cf Rome was to obtain political power.— (Hear, hear.) He had then maintained that an equality of civil rights would never satisfy that Church, and that if the relief sought by that Bill were granted it would be made only the foundation for ag gression. lie hod at that time been scouted as a nar row-minded bigot; three and twenty years had since elapsed, and he now asked if he was not right? The . Roman Catholi cs h a d b een placed upon an equality with the Protestants in this country, and now they sought for more than equality. Rome never seceded f rom h er arrogan t pretensions of supremacy. Th ose pretens i ons m i g h t b e placed in abeyance at the time, but they were sure eventually to be renewed. He would not insist upon what had . been since d one , upon t h e sacr ifi ce o f our f a i t h, of the bishops of the Established Church in Ireland, upon the exclesion of the Scriptures from the national schools, upon the opposition of the Roman Catholic hierarchy to the Queen's Colleges. The fruits of all this truckling to Rome had been to invite this daring aggression. They had b een d e ceived with regard to the proportions of the Romish and Protestant population of Ireland, and he had no doubt but that if there were a cessation of the dreadful persecution to which the popu lation of Ireland was subjected by the priests, the people would by thousands embrace Protestantism, and the number of Protestants would equal the number of Romanists. Never had such an insult been offered to a nation as that which had been offered to the English nation by this aggression of the Pope. It should have been met with strong measures. The Roman Catholic Church enjoyed every liberty, and he denied that the appointments of bishops in , ordinary was necessary to the free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion•—(Hear.) The vicars-apostolic were sufficient. This appointment of bishops was therefore an aggression and an insult to our Sovereign and her people. (LEFT SPEAKING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The St. Andrew's and Quebec Railway Bill was con sidered and agreed to. PETITIONS. Several petitions were presected in favour of the con tinuauce of the Crystal Paldee. CASE OF ERNEST JONES. On the motion for receiving the report of the Com mittee of Ways and Means, Lord DUDLEY STUART called the attention of the House to the c Ise of Ernest Charles Jones, as st ated in his petition, presented to this House on 26th May last, and to move for copies of all rules and regulations which at any time, from the (year 1840 to the present, have been in force within the several prisons in Englan,d and Wales, so far as they may affect prisoners convicted of political offences. He owed no apology to the Rouse for bringing this subject forward, for it was the d uty of every Member to bring a case of injustice befor e the House whenever it came officially under his notice. He had been more than two LI onths attempting to get this motion on, but hitherto it e had beea unable to obtain an open day, and he had, there fore, no elternative but to introduce it as an amendment to a Government motion. Ernest Charles Joni s was a barrister-at-law, the son of a major in the army, and a gentleman of some literary fame. In 1848, he wa 1, com mitted to the Tothill-fields prison for a political offence, and what Mr. Jones complained of in his peti tion to the House was, the treatment hes re ceived while undergoing his imprisonment. M oat of the allegations in his petition were admitted by V,: ie au thorities of the gaol, and therefore no dispute could arise on that part of the question. Now these ;a 'lega tions were familiar to the House, and he need not re mind Hon. Members that the treatment Mr. Jone s had received was quite contrary to law. More thee, once he was kept in solitary confinement on bread and •water, because he refused to pick oakum; and he coal ended that the order of the visiting justices sane tioning that proceeding was totally at variance with the Act of Parliament. Once he was con fined hi that way for no less than four days, while the Act of Parliament provided that a prisoner should be kept in solitude on bread and water only. Two other miserable prisoners, whose names were , fami liar to the House, were put into solitary confiners ent on the same occasion, and for the same cause, and the result which followed that proceeding was a stai):k upon the criminal annuls of the country. They died of the cholera. Ernest Jones escaped that horrible fate, but the treatment so impaired his health that it was ex ceedingly doubtful whether he would ever thoroughly recover his lost strength. It was useless for the naedical officers of the prison to say that their prisoneirs did not suffer from ill health, because in their replies to the allegations of Mr. Jones they admitted that he suffered from chronic inflammation of the eyelids ; and on one occasion when he was placed in the refractory ward he lost upwards of a atone in his weight. The report of the governor charged the petitioner with having used violent language in the letter which he was allo reed to . write from the prison, and that was the reason why his permission to write was witheld. Now he (Lord Dudley Stuart) had looked through all the thirteen let ters which Mr. Jones wrote while in prison, and he had no hesitation in declaring that the report of the governor was utterly unfounded in truth. He denied that this treatment of Mr. Jones was at all warranted by law; he was treated not as a political but as an ordinary of fender, and that was contrary to all law and usage. Cobbett, Ramsbott om, and Lovel l , when thy were committed for sedition, ware treated in a very different manner. They were tOlowed full permission to see their friends, and one of them not only wrote a history of America while he was in, gaol, but was permitted to be married in prison. Hunt, the House would remember, was ill-treated while he was imprisoned, but lie afterwards recovered compensation from the governor o f the gaol, whil e the Government took upon themselves t he res ponsibility of discharging him for his misconduct. Fear gus O'Connor, Cooper, and O'Connell, when they were im prisoned, met with treatment which presented a ver y strung contrast t o th a t which had fallen to the lot of Mr. Ernest Jones, but then they were imprisoned un der a Co nservative and liberal Government, while Mr. Jones was imp r i soned b y a Whig and illiberal Adminis tration. I t was the basest and most stupid act for a Government to confound political offenders with ordinary criminals. That Was the opinion of many em inent statesmen a n d judge s thought that the pri boners on niggle udi to enjoy benn and w ° maintain tie well as t h e Government who imprisoned them. Henry Vincent ' s treatment, in being removed from a provincial gaol and placed in the Pe • nitennary, where he was compelled to wear the common dress of the prison, and forbidden to communicate wi t h his friendcalled forth till;condem nation of Mr. justice T but what would the Learned utourd and the Judge Hons.:, ; have said had tue 0 pick oakum, or p iss his time t pri soner, in addition to that re m aturnt, b een compehed to pick solitary confinement, living upon bread and water? allowee the use of a k n if e and , M oi r k . E. at a hi cnes wa l s not but w as compelled to devou r hi s food with hishan im ds ea lle a beast. What would the Learned Judge or the Marquis of .s, rman ey, who laid down rules for the treatment of Mr. O'Connor when he was imprisoned, have said of that ? Some time ago, the House had an assurance from the Government that thetyowouuffid introduce a Bill for regulating the tr . 7 . tmen rem f aine e ct nderp, but up to this very day that g° Baronetat unfulfilled. Subse queerly the Right Hon. the head of the promised to give directions that political Home-effice offenders should be separated from ordinary cri minals; but he bad et to learn that the t promise had been kel ) • Certainly it had not in the case of Mr. Ernest Jones, and therefore he could not help thinking that it eves time the House insisted upon legislating upon this important subject. How could they hone to change the views9l.oth d opinions eh of a political offender by treating him_ w cruelty as was complained of in this case. lie so much cruelty then, that the next session would not be allowed to Valet without an effort being made to alter t he s y stem. la one instance which had come to hi s knowledge, a THE SUN, tONDON, prisoner had been refused the right of petitioning the House, which ho apprehended was a breach of the pri vileges of the House, for by the Bill of Rights Blackstone and all the legal writers which the country had pro duced held it to be the inherent, inalienable right of every Englishman, no matter in what situation he might find himself, to lay his grievances before the House of Com mons. Now the same right had been denied to Mr. E. Jones by the visiting magistrates, and he could not help feeling that the refusal involved a point of deep and serious importance to the House. He had, therefore, brought the case forward. Had it been earlier in the session he should have moved for a Committee of Inquiry, but it was too late to do that now, and he should con tent himself by giving notice that at the very earliest period next session he should move the appointment of such a Committee. Ernest Jones was the only political offender of the year 1848 who received no remission of his sentence whatever, but the Government made him endure his term of imprison ment up to the very last day. He had brought forward the case because he thought it one of gross injustice, and not because he agreed with the political views and and opinions of the petitioner. Having said so much, and apologizing to the House for having detained the House so long, he begged to sit down moving the mo tion of which he had given notice. Mr. W. WILLIAMS rose to second the motion. He considered it a disgrace to the country to imprison a man and treat him as a common felon merely for words spoken, and he fully the impalloblethised with the sentiments expressed by Lord who had introduced this subject. The treatment of Mr. Ernest Jones was most oppressive and most un just, but it was not to be attributed to the visiting ma gistrates, because the form of treatment was pre scribed by law, and they had no alternative but to see that the regulations providing for such harsh treatment were put in force. He was one of the visiting magistrates during a portion of the period when Mr. E. Jones was in prison, and he was happy to say that while he attended the prison not a single r equest which Mr. E. Jones made was refused. The visiting justices were placed in a position of great difficulty. They were often supposed to be acting very tyranically, when, in point of fact, they were only conscientiously carrying out the duties im posed upon them by law. One of the prison regula tions provided that if a prisoner in Mr. E. Jones's si tuation could pay ea. a week, he was exempt from the degrading occupation of picking oakum, and while he was a visiting justice Mr. Jones's friends regularly paid the weekly sum. Uufortunately, however, the two , other prisoners, Sharp and Williams, were unable to do so, and they were therefore sent amongst thieves, and felons, and pickpockets to pick oakum, but they re fused to perform the degrading labour, and the result was they were put into solitary confinement, where they died of cholera. He did not, however, blame the visiting justices in this, he blamed the law which imposed such I an unpleasant duty upon them, which he thought was alike a disgrace to the Legislature and the age in which they lived. He expressed his regret that the Noble Lord had brought forward the question at so late a period of the session. He was most anxious for inquiry, and if the inquiry were ultimately had he believed the visiting justices would be entirely acquitted of any inten tional harshness or injustice towards Mr. Ernest Jones. Mr. W. J. FOX said the Hon. Member for Lambeth had made an excuse for himself and his brother magis trates at the expense of the rules and regulations established by law. If that were so, the case of the Noble Lord was strengthened and the necessity for legislation became the more important. But three or four of the most important points con tained in Mr. E. Jones's petitions were points upon which the magistrates had an option ; but the Hon. Member for Lambeth had made no reference to them. He had said nothing about the de nial of permission to send a petition to the House. Now nothing could be more important to the subjects of these realms than the right ot petition. It was one of the safeguards of their liberties, and no power whatever ought to be enforced to prevent or interfere with it. These visiting magistrates had no right to pu nish the intellect of a prisoner, as they had attempted to do in the case of Mr. Ernest Jones by refusing him the use of writing materials. Such an exercise ot au thority was opposed to the corrective system of the country, and he hoped something would be done to prevent such an abuse of powers in future. Leigh Hun:, Montgomery, Daniel Whittle Harvey, and other eminent journalists, were once imprisoned for po litical offences, but they were not treated like Ernest Jones. They were allowed to supply their respective papers with leading articles, and ultimately they be came as they were now, ornaments to society. But that was under a Tory Government, who treated their political culprits with more humanity than the Whigs. The governor of the gaol refused to allow Mr. E. Jones the use of a list of books which he had before him, and which included Shakapere, the works of Sir Walter Scott, and the novels of Mr. Disraeli. Now, nothing could be more absurd than such a refusal as that, and he hoped, when next this question came before the House, measures would be taken to prevent a recurrence of the evils they had heard so much of to-day. Colonel THOMPSON said he was glad in having an opportunity of stating that, in his view, the persons al luded to were responsible for having by their own mis conduct lost or seriously damaged a great cause.— (Hear.) He, however, thought the Government had acted with extreme impolicy in making martyrs of men of whose political principles they did not approve. He knew well to what extent the effect produced by such prosecutions was felt in that House. The tendency of the course pursued by the Government would be to bring these men into the House of Commons ; they had already seen one of them, and would yet see more returned as Members of Parliament. He was ready to enter into a policy of assurance that Henry Vincent, one of the body, would be elected for the next Parliament, so certain was he of his being re turned.—(Laughter.) He hoped he would take his seat in the House, if it were only for the remarkable fact that he could pour out by the hour eloquence as correct as if taken from Blair's lectures.—(Laughter.) How he got so wonderful a faculty was best known to him who gave it, but this, at any rate, was certain, that he was origi nally a journeyman printer, and first made his appear ance in public at an election at Hull.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think it was policy to institute such prosecutions, and though not disposed to blame the Government, he hoped they would, in answer to the present appeal, give an assurance that the proceedings would, for the future, be conducted with more prudence and moderation. Mr. BOUVERIE rose for the purpose of bringing back the discussion to the real point before the House. That was the recent treatment of Mr. Jones, and not the broad question of prison discipline. Now with regard to the formal motion, ho had to state that there were no rules or regulations that re lated to political prisoners. The law recognised no distinction of that sort. The law made rules and regu lations for the treatment of persons convicted of misde meanour. The Act of Parliament imposed the duty of preparing those rules and regulations upon the visit ing magistrates, and afterwards they were ap proved of by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Now the rules efhich regu lated Mr. E. Jones's treatment were framed and esta blished in that way, and the visiting magistrates had nu alternative but to see that they were fully and pro perly enforced. There was no legal distinction between political and ordinary offences of felony, and, of course, there was no difference in their treatment, except the judge made an order that the prisoner should be treated as if he had been guilty of misdemeenour of the first class. The Judge who tried Mr. E. Jones made no such order, and therefore when he reached the prison he was dealt with in the same manner as other offenders. It would seem, from what had fallen from some Hon. Gentlemen, that they thought a poli tical prisoner was entitled to all the indulgences and com forts that they enjoyed before going to prison. Well, but if that ought to be so, of what use was it to send our of fenders to prison at all? Why did they send them there but to punish them, and if they were to treat them just as though they had merely changed the place of their resi dence, where would be the punishment of the incarce ration? Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON contended that none of the main allegations brought forward by Lord Dudley Stuart had been answered by the Hon. Member for Kit marnocte whose reply was wholly unsatisfactory. Ernest Jones was simply a victim of the excitement which prevailed at the period when he was consigned to prison ; and he hoped that if the present discussion had no good effect, in regard to the complaints of that gentleman, it would draw the attention of Members to the necessity of drawing some distinction between the punishment awarded for political offences and offences of a different character. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY considered that Ernest Jones bad been treated harshly and oppressively, and he was astor:i,hod that the visiting justices should have allowed an educated man to undergo such severe punishment and submit to such degrading labour, when he was not sentenced to hard labour. Sir DE LACY EVANS hoped the Government would consent to produce the papers to which the motion of the Noble Lord referred. Mr. HENLEY thought the papers before the House showed that Ernest Jones had been hardly treated, and had not had the benefit of those indulgences which a person in his position might have received. He was disposed to think that the complaints of this gentleman required some further inquiry. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ob served that it was impossible to carry the motion into effect, as no such returns existed, there being ne distinc tion made by the law between political and other per sons found guilty of misdemeanour. After some fu rt h er observat i ons f rom M r . Ch r i stop h er , Mr. Bright, Mr. W. and other Hon. Members, Lord DUDLEY STUART withdrew his motion on the understanding that a return should be presented with regard to a certain number of prisoners whom he should hereater select. The report on Ways and Means was then brought up and agreed to. The House then adjourned until Six o'clock. The House resumed at six o'clock. PETITIONS. Mr. M. ELLICE presented a petition from Leicester in favour of the retention cf the Crystal Palace. Mr. G. A. HAMILTON presented a petition signed by 1,600 clergymen of the Irish branch of the United Church of England and Ireland, in support of the Church Educational Society of Ireland. Mr. H. HERBERT presented a petition from cer tain ft.ur millers in Ireland, complaining of the free im portation of flour. (LEFT SITTING.) SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY. The number of passengers conveyed on this railway to and from the London-bridge terminus, on Saturday, was 15,735—namely, 7,983 to London, and 7,752 from London. MARKET INTELLIGENCE (From tho London New 1 -- rice Current, July 22.) SucAß.—To•day importers of West India Sugar were again desirous to realize, and accepted rates 6d per cwt under those of Friday; and grocers and refiners ope rated with caution. The purchases are 675 hhds, &c. including at auction 170 hhds 40 tierces and 63 barrels Bsrbadoes, which went off flatly, and a part only sold 6d below the terms of Friday last, low yellow went at 34s 6d to 355, middling 35s 6d to 36s 6d, good 37s to 38s, Ene 38s 6d, one lot superior 418 6d, low to fine brown 3ls 6d to 343 sd, middling and good grainy yellow 37s 6d to 39s ; 97 hhds Demerara, ordi nary and middling greyish 33s 6d to 34s 6d, and fair brown 32s 6d per cwt. There is stil a plentiful supply at market, more especially of ordinary and mid kinds. REFINED.—To - day Refined Sugar was operated in with caution for home trade purposes, but the supply being small, brown lumps were not to be obtained under 46s per cwt. For Crushed Sugar the export demand is limited with free sellers at former rates. --- MAIIRITIUS.—This afternoon Mauritius Sugar was operated in with much caution, and at auction 793 bags were only in part sold at rather lower rates, good yellow went at 36s 6d to 37s 6d, low to middling 34s to 365, and tine brown 33. to 33s 6d per cwt. There was little done privately in any sort. EAST INDIA.—This afternoon Madras Sugar met with a dull demand, and the rates taken were rather under those existing previously ; of 6,468 bags at auction a small part only sold, mid to fine soft yellow went at 32s to 365, inferior 29, 6d to 31. 6d, and low to fine brown 27a to 295. Bengal was held for full rates, but met with little attention ; at auction 1,279 bags were only in part sold, fine white Benares at 41, to 41s 6d, low to good 38. to 40s 6d, good to fine grainy white 44s to 475, and fair soft yellow 34. 6d. Of Penang 1,089 bags sold at easier rates, ord and mid greyish white went at 37s to 363 6d, low to good yellow like Mauritius 33. 6d to 36, 6d per cwt. FOREIGN.—To-day Foreign Sugar was offered rather under the rates of Friday, still the business concludad was of little moment. Privately operations are a cargo of yellow Havannah at 21s 3d for number 11, and oue of brown Pernambuco in bags at 17s 6d per cwt. At public sale to day only 10 hhds St. Croix were offered, and sold at 42s to 42s 6d for fine bright yellow. MoLAssEs.—Operations are upon a more extended scale in consequence of rather lower rates having been taken. Ot Porto Rico 25U casks old have been sold at 3s 6d, 200 puns West India Antigua 15* 6d, other sorts 13s to 14s 6d, Bengal and Mauritius in small parcels at lls 6d to 12s. At auction however 200 casks Porto Rico were taken in at 15s 6d for new. Honey is not much wanted, and there are sellers upon rather lower terms. CCCOA.—Several parcels have been disposed of pri vately, and fine red is in scanty supply. At auction 402 bags Trinidad were sold, mid grey at 383 to 395, and red at 43s to 44s per cwt. The value of Grenada is from 333 to 40s per cwt. Foreign continues to meet with little attention moderate as prices rule, Bahia and Para can be obtained at 26s to 27s and Guayaquil at 29s to 30s per cwt. COFFEE.—This afternoon a good demand prevailed for Plantation Ceylon Coffee, bat shippers were again the chief operators ; at public sale 356 casks and 150 bags were sold at full rates; sorts under the denomina tion of low mid, however, went rather cheaper, good to fine sold at 55s to 665, mid and good 513 to 545, low mid 48s to 50s, other sorts 42s to 475, and low 40s to 41s. In Native Ceylon there is still little doing, yet good ord is not offered under 37s 6d. Mocha continues to be wanted. TEA.—The demand bas diminished for ordinary and good common Congou for all purposes, and su pply b e i ng more plentiful prices declined id to id per lb; sales having been made at 9id to 10iil. In other kinds operations have also been upon a limited scale, and holders are disposed to sell medium to rather strong blackish leas at lld to ls, gocd to fine Is Oi-d . to is 7d. Oolong has been dealt in with caution at is to is 7d, and there is a fair supply. For Green the market has been in a dull state; large parcels have been brought forward, and rather lower rates are taken for good and fine, but no general reduc tion is apparent for inferior. Scented and Pekoe sorts can be obtained upon rather lower terms, yet few buyers are to be met with. At public sale 11,000 packages were offered, of which 4,400 Congou, 600 Souchung, 500 Oolong, 1,100 Scented Orange Pekoe, 900 Scented Caper, 550 Hyson, 1.550 Young Hysun, 166 Imperial, and 1,330 Gunpowder, of the total quantity 5,000 sold at and utter the sales. RICE.—To-day the private operations are trifling in East India Rice, and there are sellers at rather lower rates. None was offered at auction. Of Sago Flour 250 bgs went at 14s 6d to 15s per cwt. SincEs.—To-day at auction a sale of 8 brls and 166 bgs African Ginger sold at 25s 6d to 265, and damaged 17s 6d to 21s 6d; these are lower rates. Of Nutmegs 4 casks low Dutch limed were taken in at is 4d. SPlRlTS.—Demerara Rum of all kinds is offered rather under previous rates, still operations have been limited; 170 puns of good quality sold at 2s id to 2s 2d for 33 to 38 over, and small parcels other sorts at Is 9d to 2s for 30 to 32 over proof. Althogugh East India can be obtained at is 3d to is 3id proof, yet operations have been trifling and supply larger. Leeward Island has been operated in with caution at is 4id to is sd, and fine brown at is sid to is 6d. A good demand still „exists for fine Jamaica, for all pur poses, and the rates paid are from 3s 3d to 4s 6d for 35 to 38 per cent over proof. In other sorts there is still little „doing, and a desire is evinced to sell low to middling at 2s L 3d to 2s 7d for 30 to 33 over proof, good mid to good 2s Id to 3s 2d for 34 over proof. There are sellers of Cognac best brands of tee vintage of 1850 at 4s 4d to 4s 6d, 1849 ditto 4s 6d to 4s Bd, 1848 ditto 4s lld to 5s Id, older 5s 4d to 5s 7d, low to mid 2s 6d to 3s 6d, and Bordeaux at 2s 2d to 2s 3d per gallon. For British made Spirit the market was inac tive, still rates remain at 9s 5d to 9s 6d, and for Gin 2s 6d for shipping. Geneva at Is 7d to is 9d. and fine Is 9d to 2s per gallon. INDlGo.—Since the termination of the quarterly sales of East India exporters and home dealers have been pur chasers to a fair extent, and the parcels disposed of were at full rates; on the part of holders there is also firm ness. I❑ Spanish there is rather more business doing at the previous value, and supply is not so plentiful. The rates paid for Sobres are 3s 6d to 4s 9d, and Cortes is to 4s. Stock is now 2,312 serons, and last season 510. COCHINEAL.—There has been a better demand; supply is less plentitul, and prices have advanced Id per lb. At auction 130 bags were sold; Honduras silvers, low to mid at 3s to 3s 4d, ord black 3s 2d to 3s su. The rates privately for Mexican silvers have been 2s lld to 3s 9d, black 3s Id to 3s 4d ; Teneriffe from 3s 2d to 3s 9d ; Honduras silvers 3s to 3s 10d, and black 4s 3d to 4s 8d per lb. SALTPETRE.—The dullness in the market has in creased, and there being a plentiful supply prices have declined 6d to 9d per cwt, and few transactions are re ported privately for any purpose. At auction 1,780 bgs Calcutta were partly sold; good 3/ to 5/ refraction at 27s 6d, good mid 8/ to 11/ per cent 25s 6d per cwt. TALLOW.—There has been rather more demand for Russia❑ on the spot, and stiffer rates are paid ; fine yellow Candle selling at 37s 9d to 33s per cwt. For delivery a good business has been transacted, and the prices paid are 39s Od to 39s 3d for last three months of the year. Home melted sells more freely at 35s to 365, net cash, and melters are less disposed to realize. In other sorts of Tallow opera tions are upon a more extended scale at stiffer rates. At auction 211 casks Australian were sold—Beef at 34s 6d to 36s 9d; Sheep, 35s 6d to 37s 6d; 100 casks South American, fine 37s 6d per cwt. For public sale 900 casks &c. are declared. OILS.—For pale Seal Oil there has been an increased demand, and an advance has taken place; several par eels have been disposed of at 311 103 ta 321 per ton. Other sorts are operated in with more freedom at 291 lOs to 311, and supply remains limited. There are several buyers of parcels afloat rather under present rates. In Ced operations are upon a more extended scale of 361 lOs to 371, and holders have confidence. Southern is in improved request, and an advance has taken place for all sorts. At auction 60 tuns were sold, fine at 311 15s to 321 ss; low to mid 301 to 103. Privately several parcels have been dis posed of at similar rates. With Sperm the market has been more freely supplied; and buyers not being much disposed to operate rates are on the decline. At auction 47 tuns went at 811 to 831 15s for Colonial; and low American 721. For small parcels of Headmatter the rates paid are 901 to 931. Cocoa Nut continues in brisk request, and rates continue to advance; Cochin selling at 311 to 33/, Ceylon 301 to 32/, and other sorts 291 to 301 per cwt, there is also a further decrease of supply. Linseed Oil has met with little attention from exporters; there is, however, a fair home trade demand. THE LONDON GAZETTE. (THIS EVENING.) BUCKINGHAM PALACE, JULY 17, 1851. The Queen was this day pleased to confer the honour of knighthood upon Robert Walter Carden, Esq., sheriff of the city of London and county of Mid dlesex. The Queen was this day pleased to confer the honour of knighthood upon George Edmund Hodgkinson, Esq., sheriff of the city of London and county of Middlesex. FOREIGN-OFFICE, JULY 21. The Queen has been pleased to approve of Mr. George Wortmenn as Consul at Gibraltar for his Majesty the King of Bavaria. DOWNING-STREET, JULY 22. The Queen has been graciously pleased to give orders for tho appointment of Major- General George Bowles, late Master of her Majesty's Househould, and now Lieu tenant of her Majesty's Tower of London, to be an Or dinary Member of the Military Division of the Second Class or Knights Commanders of the Most Honourable Order of the Batb. WHITEHALL, JULY 19. The Queen has been pleased to present the Rev. John Gibson to the church and parish of Kirkhope, in t he presbytery of Selkirk. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Thomas Add( n brooke, of Stourbridge, in the county of Worcester, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. CROWN-OFFICE, JULY 22. MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT. Borough of Scarborough—George Frederick Young, of Walthamstow, in the county of Essex, and Lime house, in the county of Middlesex, merchant and ship owner, in the room of the Earl of Mulgrave, who has accepted the office of Comptroller of her Mjesty's Household. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, JULY 21. Corps of Royal Engineers—Lieutenant-Colonel Thos. Blanshard to be Colonel, vice Thomson, &ceased; Brevet Major Henry Powell Wulff to be Lieutenant-Colonel, vice Blanshard; Second Captain William George Ham ley to be First Lieutenant, vice Wulff; First Lieutenant Charles F:ui w De Second C:Ttain, vice Ilnrnloy; Second Lieutenant Arthur u'Court Fisher to be First Lieutenant, vice Sim, July 14. WHITEHALL, JUNE 30. The Right Honourable Sir John3Jorvis,' Knt., Lard Chief Justice of her Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, at Westminster, hes appointed Richard Toiler, of Lei cester, in the county of Leicester, Gentleman, to be one of the Perpetual Commissioners for taking the acknowledg ments of deeds to be executed by married women, under the Act passed for the abolition of fines and recoveries, and for the substitution of more simple modes of assur ance, in and for the county of Leicester. WHITEHALL, JULY 16. The Lord Chancellor has appointed James Benson, of Birmingham, in the county of Warwick, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 2 21 1851 BANKRUPTS. Sampson Clay Bcastall and William Mather, linen drapers, High-street, Kensington, to surrender July 28 and Aug. 28, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whit more, official assignee, Bwinghall-street; Hardwick, Davidson,and Bracibury,Weaver's Hall,Basinghall-street. Samuel Dixon, draper, Leeds, Aug. 1, at half-past one, and Sept. 4, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-street; Sole and Turner, Aldi-rmanbury; Blackburn, Leeds. Adolf Heilbronn and John Harrison, drysalters, Great St. Helen's, City. Aug. 1 and 29, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall street; Linklater. Charlotte row, Mansion-house; Cox, Pinners' Hall, Old Broad-street. Joseph Royce, currier, Nottingham, Aug. 1, and Aug. 29, at halt-p%st ten, at the Birmingham District Court. Bittleston, official assignee, Nottingham; Bowley, Not tingham; Hodgson, Birmingham. Joseph Mitchell, carpenter, Camden-street, Camden town, Aug 1, at half-past twelve, and Aug. 29, at Eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Canaan, official assignee, Birchiu-lane, Cornhill; Turner, Charles-street, City road. Zachariah Warren, Ardleigh, Essex, miller, July 30, at twelve, and Sept. 3, at one, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Stansfeld, official assignee; Wire and Child, Swithin's-lane; Barnes, Colchea,er. . George Edwin Deeley, ironfounder, Brunswick-ter race, Trinity-street, Dover-road, July 30, and Sept. 3, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee; Long, Gray's Inn-place. George Kempson, pork butcher, Clifton, Bedfordshire, July 30, at two, and Sept. 3, at half-past one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, official assignee; Trin der and Eyre ; ,hu-street, Bedford-row; Austin, Shet ford, Bedtords;_ire. _ _ _ Thomas Pointer, builder, Okehampton, Devonshire, Aug. 6 and 26, at eleven, at the Exeter District Court. Hir ofEci4l assignee. Exeter; Stogdon, Exezer; Fryer, St. Thome.l's,near Exeter. Sydeuham Vincent Burge, saddler, Taunton, Somer. setshire, Aug. 6 and 26, at eleven, at the Exeter District Court. iiirtzel, c fcial a signee, Exeter; Woodland, jun., Taunton; Stogdon, Exeter. William Pashley and Francis Pashley, table knife manufacturer. 3, Sheffield, Aug. 9 and 30, at ten, at the Leeds district Court. Freeman, official assignee, Sheffie=ld; Fernell, Sneffield. W lifted Mooney end Thomas Wilson, corn merchants, Liverpool, July 31 and Aug. 28, at eleven, at the Liver pool District Court. Turner, official assignee, Liverpool; Daly, Liverpool. Gordon John James Grant, tobacco broker, Liverpool, July 31 and Aug. 28, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Bird, official as6iguee, Liverpool; Wadesori and Co., London; Lace, Rigge, and Roscoe, Thomas Brown, ship owner, Sunderland, Durham, July 31, at one, and Aug. 26, at eleven, at the New castle-upon-Tyne District Court. Baker, official as• signee, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Moore, Sunderland; Crosby and Compton, Old Jewry. IN SOLVEN T DEBTORS. Edward Scriven, coach lining scourer, Winchester-street, Camden-town. Robert Yorston, accountant, Clifford's Inn. John Tinker Tidd, secretary to the Islington Cattle Market Company, Market-terrace, Kingland. Thomas Hughes, Bishopsgate-street Without. Henry L. Patterson, tailor, Ludgate-street, City. Henry Woolcott, fringe tassell manufazturer, New Oxford-street. Frederick Braithwaite, civil engineer, Gower-street. F. Teesdele, cattle dealer, Jockeys fields, Middle'ex. W. Russ, milkman, North-street, Manchester-square. Joseph Stammers, comedian, Church-street, Paddington. W. Jones, stationer, Harrison -street, Gray's Inn-road. George Brunaby, assistant to a car proprietor, Liverpool. Thomas Barrett, ship smith, Bootle, near Liverpool. Arthur Belcher, cattle salesman, Liverpool. John Davgers, dealer in milinery, Preston, Lancashire. Charles Edwards, farmer, 'for, Devonshire. Joshua Harris, builder, Salford, Lancashire. James Nuttall, beerseller, Bury, Lancashire. James Poole, farmer, Tiverton, Devonshire. Horace Syder, builder, Liverpool. Jesse Terrey, tiuman, Rowell, Northamptonshire. Thomas Wright, joiner, Salford, Lancashire. Matthew Wilkinson, shawl manufacturer, Laneshaw bridge, Lancashire. J. Spenceley, licensed 'victualler, Kingston-upon-Hull. W. H. Wild, grocer, Higher Ardwick, Manchester. Thomas Windlow, cabinet maker, South Shields. D. W Collyns, attorney-at-law, Swindon, Wiltshire. Joseph Atkinson, grocer, Rockcliffe, Cumberland. John Ratclitf, plumber, Stanstead, Essex. Bartrup Crump, omnibus driver, Dover. James Surnmerfield, farmer, Ardsweed, Cheshire. John Chapman, cloth manufacturer, Frome Selwood, Somersetshire. M. A. Clarke, out of business, Slough, Buckinghamshire. John Harding, appraiser, Deptford. Alexander Macdonell, grocer, Oldham. Samuel Clarke, grocer, Manchester. James Isted, beerseller, Northfleet. E. Parsons Lillicrap, East Stonehouse, Devonshire. W. Francis Macininn, provision merchant, Lllanwchllyn, Merien , -thshi re. Joseph Robinson, journeyman hairdresser, Manchester. Thomas Smith, carpenter, Woolwich. John Blackbrough, coal owner, Northowram, Yorkshire. David Byturd, band toaster, Chatham. COURSE Ok' EXCtii Ara., t ero atu • • • • • • • 11 I n p Ditto, three months .. 11 1 is . LNG-E.-(i11,1S DAY.) (4zeraltax•••• •• •• •• •• •• 30 40 tieaoa •• .• 25 40 siiian .• •• •••••• •• •• Venice.. •• ........ Naples .• .• •• •• •• •• •• 41 % 124 Me.sina •• •• e• •• •• •• •• 124 1 { •• •• 53S Janeiro • • •• , ;uerms Ayres Sow York,6odays'sight hiladelphia •••••• Rotterdam .• •••• • • • • 1 1 18 Antwerp •••••••• •• • • • • 25 22y, Brussels.. ••.•—• • • • • - 25 52yi flaraburgh .• •• • • M.B. 13 8 ...... • • • • • • Paris, 5 days'gight • 25 2% Ditto, 3 months .... 25 2 Marseilles •••••• • • .• • • 25 25 Bourde.4ux.. •••• • • • • rrankfort on 3 1,111 -va•• •• 8er1in................ Vienna, elec. do •••• •• 1 I 50 Trieste, ditto.. •••• • • • 11 52 Petersburgli, Itble•• 3734 Madrid • • .• •••• • • • • • • 49 Cadiz .. •• • • •• •• •• 5038 BareCiOlif. • •• •••• • •• PLICE6 •)l BULLION, PER OS, rorelg n Gold in 14ars.. L 3 17 9 Vortugal Gold Coin .. 0 0 0 ioanish Doubloons .. 0 0 0 New Dollars . 0 4 IN Silver in bars ........ 0 5 0% Tun LAW Or BURIAL.—Some months ago a memorial addressed to the archbishops and bishops of the provinces of Canterbury and York upon the present unsa tisfactory state of the law of burial, was extensively circu lated amongst the clergy. The result is that about 4,000 of this body have attached their signatures thereto, and the committee who were charged with the management of it have presented it to the archbishops and bishops. No offi cial re ly has yet been given, but it is understood that many of the right rev. prelates have signified their willingness to attend to the rEquisition, and have expressed their approba tion of its object. SALE OF BEER.—The Bill prepared and brought into the House of Commons to amend the laws relating to houses licensed for the sale of beer, by Sir J. Pakington, Mr. Deedes, Mr. Headlam, and Mr. Brotherton, has been printed. The principal objects proposed by the Bill are— to require proper certificates of the character of persons ap plying for licences—to restrict licences to sell beer to be drunk on the premises to real residents or occupiers, and to houses rated at not, less than 20/. per annum in cities, towns, &c., containing 10,000 inhabitants, 151. in places exceeding 2,5C0 inbahitants, and 101. a year elsewhere. Persons licensed before the passing of the Act may have licences granted to them whilst they occupy the same house, although it be below the qu'ilification. No debt for beer, &c., drunk on the p remises will be recoverable at law. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS,JuIy 21. Mr. REYNOLDS presented a petition from Knights• bridge in favour of the continuance of the Crysta' Palace. ALDERMAN SALO MONS' RENEWED ATTEMPT TO TAKE HIS SEAT. The SPEAKER stated that he had received a letter from David Salomons, Esq., relative to the entry of the proceed ings of the House on Friday last in his case, which he read, as follows: " Great Cumberland-place, July 21st, 1851. " Sir,—l take the liberty to call your attention to a very important omission in the record of the proceedings of the House of Commons on Friday last, of all notice of my de mand to subscribe the oath of abjuration, and to declare to my property qualification. " Immediately after I had taken the oaths I read from a paper which I held in my hand the following words, ' I have now taken the oaths, in the form and with the ceremonies that I declare to be binding on my conscience, in accord ance with the stat. 1 and 2 Vict. cap. 105, I now demand to subscribe the oath of abjuration, and to declare my property qualification.' "No notice has been taken, in the proceedings above re ferred to, of my having made this demand. You will there fore, I am sure, Sir, pardon me for drawing your attention to the subject, and respectfully requesting that the minutes of the proceedings of Friday last bs amended. With the ut most respect, 1 have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient and humble servant, " DAVID SALOMONS. " To the Right Honourable the Speaker." --- Whereupon the Speaker explained that the entry in the votes had been carefully consid,red; that the declara tion of Alderman &dolmans way made after he had been desired to withdraw, and therefore could not bo noticed as a proceeding of the House. Moat of that which the Hon. Member for Greenwich said was per fectly inaudible in this immtdiAe part of the House; but it appeared Distinctly to me that after the Hon. Gentleim had omitted the words " on the true faith of a Christian," and, the clerk at the table having reported that omission to me, I bad orthred the Hon. Gentleman to withdraw, it was the Hon. Gentkmau's duty there upon to withdraw—(Hear, hear)—and, not having so withdrawn, any statement eut36cquently made in the elouse by the Hon. Gentleman was not before the House, and had no claim to be placed on the records of the House. Sir B. HALL then rose, and addressing the Speaker said—Sir, it may be convenient to put the question Which my Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor Of the Exchequer,; on Friday evening, requested might be rope ?.trd this evening when t}.e isTob'e Lord e.t the head of the Government was present. It would be in the recollection of the House that before the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich with drew he occupied a seat where his Honourable Fri-.nd the Member for Southwark (Sir W. Moles worth) now sat [the front row below the gang way on the Ministerial side of the House], and that you repeated your desire ttiat the Hon. Gentleman should withdraw below the bar of the Howse. It will also be in the recollection of the House that after the Hon. Gentle man had so withdrawn I stated to the House that it was the anxious desire of the Hon. Gentleman to take such steps as might be necessary for carrying out not only the wishes of his constituents, but also to take such steps as might enable him to take his seat in this as sembly, and that the Hon. Gentleman did not desire to take any course which might be displeasing or inconvenient to the house, but that he was resolved, so far as lay in his power, to take his seat as a Member of the Legislature. I then asked my Right Hon. Friend whether, as the Hon. Gentleman hart certainly taken a seat within the bar of the House—whether, under such circum stances, if the Government may determine or may think he became amenable to the law, they intend to instruct the Attorney-General to prosecute, in order that this question may be fairly brought to an issue; and I intimated that if he did not think he had become amenable to the law, or that a prosecution would fairly lay, that the Honourable Gentleman would take the still further step of voting as a Member of the House, and thereby render himself per fectly amenable to any penalties which the statute directed. The question, therefore, which I put to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government is, whether he intends, or is prepared to authorise the prosecu tion, at the instance of the Attorney- General, against the Hon. Member for Greenwich? _ Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I think the Hon. Baronet is hardly justifit,cl is asking me what the Government in tend, or what they do not intend to do upon the question of prosecuting a Member of this House for taking his seat without taking the oaths. Ism ready to say, however, reserving to the Government the liberty of future action, that at present wo are not disposed to think that we ought to prosecute Mr. Alderman Salomons for so doing. Sir B. HALL—I wish now to state the course which I think the Hon. Member for Greenwich ought to pur sue. We are all agreed I think, that so far as the Hon. Gentleman has at present acted, he has aced with perfect fairness towards her Majesty's Go vernmont.—(Hear, hear.) He has not condescended to any subterfuge whatever, and in consequence of the answer which the Noble Lord has given to my question, I think the only course which the Hon. Member for Greenwich can pursue is to come within the bar of the House to take his seat in this House at once.—(Hear.) Mr. Alderman SALOMONS then descended from the seat which be bad occupied in the trout row of the Peers' gallery, and advancing up the floor of the House, took his seat on the front bench below the gangway on the Ministerial side of the House. This proceeding of his was saluted with loud cheers from his supporters, accompanied by demon strations of a contrary nature from his opponents, and at the moment he took the seat the uproar was so great that it was with difficulty that we could hear The SPEAKER, who said, I wish to call the atten tion of the House to the fact that there is present now a Member who has not taken the oath of abjura tion. I must, therefore, repeat my former request, and desire him at once to withdraw. This was followed by loud cries of " Withdraw" from the Opposition side of the House, accom panied by cheers from the immediate supporters of the Honourable Alderman. In the midst of the uproar Lord John Russell rose and attempted to address the Speaker, but his voice was ivauciible, and at, the same time Mr. Bernal Osborne rushed forward from the lower end of the House, forcing his way with difficulty through the excited Members who crowded the upper row of benches, bearing a paper in his hand, which ho handed to the Speaker, without at tempting to read it, amidst the noise and turmoil. The SPEAKER here said—A motion has been handed to me, but as the question before the House is a question of order it takes precedence of all others.—(Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL again rose, but was not able to address the Speaker, owing to the continued tumult which reigned, of which cries of " Withdraw," " Chair," " Order," were the most prominent features. During the whole of this scene Alderman Salomons continued to retain the seat in the body of the House which he had originally occupied, next to Sir W. Molesworth, undis turbed by the cries with which he was assailed. The SPEAKER then said—lf the Hen. Member per sists in refusing to obey my order to withdraw, I must appeal to the House to support me. That order can only be enforced by a vote of the House.—(Cheers, and cries of " Withdraw.") Lord J. RUSSELL then rose. He said—lt seems to me perfectly clear, and it is a matter which I shall not waste any time in discussing, that the House ought to support the Speaker.—(Loud cheers.) I do not believe that the Speaker has authority to enforce his order without a regular vote of the House, and I therefore now move that Mr. Alderman Salomons be ordered to withdraw.—(Cheers.) Mr. B. OSBORNE—I rise to move an amendmept, the purport of which I have already placed in your hands. I beg you. Sir, to read that amendment. Mr. C. ANSTEY seconded the amendment. The SPEAKER then, amid loud cries, put both the original motion for the withdre wal of Mr. Alderman Salomons, and the amendment, which was, that Mr. Alderman Salomons having been duly returned for the borough of Greenwich, and having take❑ the usual oaths—(No, no)—in the manner most binding on his conscience —(No, no)—is entitled to take his seat in this House. The reading of the amendment was followed by a re petition of uproar, which had ceased only when the Speaker had commenced. Loud cries of " Divide, di vide" now followed; in the midst of which Mr. Anstey rose, and was saluted with groans and cries of " Oh, oh." Mr. ANSTEY wished to give the House an opportu nity of answering the case which he was about to put to them.—(oh, oh.) It was said that Alderman Salo mon& had not taken the oaths prescribed by law; but he insisted that he had, for the oath of abjuration, which it was alleged the Hon. Member had not completed, was not prescribed by law. The Hun. and Learned Member was continuing his address, but the uproar was so great that it was impossible to hear what he said. At length, however, he abruptly resumed his seat, moving the ad journment of the debate. The galleries were accordingly cleared, and the House divided, when there appeared — For the adjournment ... 65 Against it ... ... 257 Majority against it ----192 On our return to the gallery we found Alderman Salomons still in his seat, and Mr. M. GIBSON on his legs asking a question. He said he understood the Speaker to say on Friday last that the Hon. Member for Greenwich must withdraw because he had not taken the oath in the sense in which the House understood the Act. Now, he wished to ask the Speaker whether he could refer him to any minute of their proceedings, in which would appear the sense in which the House un derstood the Act. He wished to proceed upon as much information as possible, and he should therefore be glad to know in what form, during the present session of Parliament, the sense of the House had been taken as to its understanding the Act.—(Hear, hear.) The SPEAKER said he made no references whatever to any decision of the House during the present session. He referred to a decision come to by the House last session under precisely similar circumstances. The Baron Lionel de Rothschild was returned for the City of London, and took the oaths in precisely the same way that th , y have been taken by Mr. David Salomons. The House, upon being made aware of the omisson from the oath. came to the resolution that the Baron Lionel de Rothschild was not entitled to sit, he not having taken the oath of abjuration required by law.—(Cheers.) Mr. M. GIBSON said he was not present then, and therefore he was not aware of that proceeding.—(oh.) He wished to ask the Speaker whether the resolution of last session, relating to another person, was binding upon them now?—(Heir, hear.) He also wished to ask whether the words of the resolu tion pointed out the form of taking the oaths as re quired by law, so as to point to the conclusion that the form in which Alderman Salomons proposed to take them was not the forni required by law.—(Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL rose to order. It was not corn peteut for a Member to draw the Speaker into a debate upon what the House had already none.—(Hear.) He found by the minutes of their proceedings, that there was a resolution come to last year that the " Baron Lionel de Rothschild is not entitled to vote in this Rouse or to sit in the House during any debate until be Las taken the oath of abjuration in the form ap pointed by law." Now the Speaker went upon the au thority of that resolution, and he (Lord John Russell) believed the Speaker had a perfect right to do so. Mr. NI ILN ER GIBSON apologised to the Speaker for having troubled him a second timo with the question, but he was not in the House towards the close of last session, and was, therefore, not fully aware of what then passed.—(Ohl oh!) Mr. ANS rEY then p roc eeded to address the H o u se, and was received with cries of "Sp, ke, spoke ;" but he informed Hon. ilemeera who were interrupting him that he had not yet sp iken to the o ri g inal q uestion, and he was allowed to proceed. T he q uestion before them, as raised by the Hon. Member for Manchester, related to Alderman Salomons, and not to Baron Rothschild. No decision had yet been come to in the Alderman's case. The House would remember that last year the result of a similar inquiry to this was a resolution, pledging itself to take the matter into its serious eonsi deration in the then next session of Parliament, but up to this very hour that pledge remained Tdhe oaths had b een t a k en by yet they refu se d t o l et t h em 5 u nfulfilled. Only look at the inconsistency they were lulling into. They acknowledged Baron Rothschild a nd Alderman Salomons to be the sitting Membe rs f or Lon don alindollneoGaurrr'eaebhnleweircidh): and yet for Greenwich in the firm prescribed by the Ist and 2d Vi c t or i a . Th e wor d s w hi c h he had omitted were not required to be taken by law. — (Hear, hear.) The Act (:f Parliament to which be re ferred was a declaratory Act, and it provided that in all cases where oaths were required to be taken they should be administered in the form which the party taking them deemed to be most binding on his conscience.--..(Hear, hear.) It was with the authority of that Act that Alderman &demons omitted the words "cn the trio f a i th of a Christian ;" and ho contended that the law fully entitled him to do so.—(Hear, hear.) He considered not that the Hon. Member had not sworn according to the Act of Parliament, but that he had sworn too mueh.-(Laughter.) Since the death of George 111. the oath of abjuration had ceased to be a lawful oath. It died with the dynasty h- which it w be imposed stow. site, ro ten u te, 111. the lino of the Stuarts was still in existence, and therefore at that time the oath had its appropriate mean ing. The oath originated in the reign of William 111., and it was intended to quench for ever the claims which, on the death of James 11. abroad, descended on his son. After the abdication of James 11., and during the remainder of his lifetime, the oath oabjuration was not so much as thought of ; it was therefore not directed against James 11., but against his descendants, and as often as the claim descended from father to son, there was a reason for maintaining the oath. Now. however, all claims of the descendants of James 11. were extinguished by death—the last sur vivor of the Stuart line having died—and consequently there were no grounds fit administering such an oath as the oath of abjuration. He contended that the liberties of the people of the country were older than thirty years, which time had been alleged by the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russel ) as sufficient for a precedent, and he consequently gave it as his opinion that his Hon. Friend Alderman Salomons should be allowed the privilege of taking the oath according to his conscience. Again, in case his Hun. Friend the Member for Greenwich acted in such a manner as to iveur a penalty, it was not for the House of Commons to decide, but it should be left to the judgment of the courts of common law. He then argued that it was unjust and unfair for that House to take upon it rights and privileges which solely belonged to those courts of justice. He strongly reprobated the prece dent that the Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) wished to lay down by his opposition to his Hon. Friend's taking the oaths according to his conscience, and also his seat for the borough of Greenwich. He should at the same time say that he felt fully convinced that the courts of law would have no effect in the present case; because freedom of speech and of debate which were enjoyed by the Members of that House within it, could not be in any way impeached in a court of law. However, the case of his Honourable Friend (Mr. Alderman Salomons) was one which, if not rectified by a requisition of the House, he would at least wish that any opinion should be suspended till the decision of a court of law was known. He could quote several eminent authorities in sustentation of the case of all freedom and privtlege being allowed to the Jews as well as to Roman Catholics, but would confine himself to one great anthority. Blaekstone decided that Jews and monks have an equal right to hold land, and he was prepared to prove that the Jews bought and sold, reeeived and gave land, from the time of Edward 111., thus showing that under the feudal system the Jews enjoyed the same rights and pri vileges as any other sect of subjects. He would also refer to the large subsidy that bad been given to Henry 111. by the community of the Jews, who were then privileged to sit with the nobles and the clergy, and also to exercise similar privi leges. Again, by the 13th William 111., Roman Catholics were not precluded from sitting in Parliament, because the oath to be taken was not adverse to their consciences no more than the Jews; and he should here remark, that the abjuration oath was never framed against the Jewish per suasion. It was intended to bind the subjects of this realm to an allegiance to the Crown, in opposition• to the exiled family of the Stuarts; and, so far did his Hon. Friend bind himself, for he took not only the oath of allegiance, but he also swore that her Majesty the Queen was the highest eccle siastical authority in this realm. These oaths were, in his opi nion, legal oaths, and beyond them he could not conscientiously go ; and he thought a high-minded man such as he merited the esteem of society in general. He should next refer to another place where the decision of this House had been re cently frustrated ; and he asked, was it net the duty of the House of Commons to preserve its rights and privileges, and not to be overpowered by that other place ?—(Laughter, and cries of " Divide, divide.") He should next refer to the case of Mr. Pease, who took his seat in the House without hav ing taken any of the three oaths, while his Hon. Friend took two of them, and the third he refused, because it was not consistent with his conscience —Hear, hear.) He con sidered that it was the duty of the House of Commons to frame an oath to suit the consciences of all sects, such as is done in the law courts. The Quaker is not asked to swear —the Jew is not asked to swear on " the true faith of a Christian." In fact, the oath shoukd be administered in that House as in the courts of law. He then referred to Lord Brougham, who, in the case of a Mahommedan or Chinese witness, adopted the oath most binding on the consciences of each. He therefore contended that the Hon. Member for Greenwich having taken the oath in the form which he con sidered binding on his conscience, was entitled to retain his seat as a Member of that House. There being now loud calls for a division, strangers were ordered to withdraw; but in a few minutes the gallery was again opened, no division having taken place. On our re turn to the gallery, Mr. OSBORNE was claiming his right to reply, on the ground that be had moved the substantive motion, although by mistake the Speaker had put it as an amendment. This gave rise to loud cries of" Order, order," and "Chair, chair," and resulted in The SPEAKER stating that the motion before the House was made by the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern ment. To that motion the Hon. Member for Middlesex (Mr. Osborne) had moved an amendment, and upon that amendment, according to the forms of the House, he had no right to reply.—(Cheers.) Mr. HOBHOUSE said he was given to understand that no motion was made previous to the Hon. Member for Mid dlesex moving his amendment, and that being the case, that Hon. Member had a full right to reply.—(Loud cries of " Order, order.") The SPEAKER—The Hon. Member is wrong in supposing that no motion was made. The Noble Lord the Member for the city of London made the motion now before the House, and it was to that motion that the Hon. Member for Mid dlesex moved his amendment--(Cheers.) Mr. HOBHOUSE said the judgment of the Chair being indisputable in that House, he would at once bow to it. He believed, however, that he was entitled to address the House, and he would shortly state his reasons why the Hon. Member who had just taken his seat for Greenwich should not with draw. On a former occasion he had heard the present Solicitor-General express himself with the greatest zeal in favour of the principle which those who thought with him now sought to establish, in so far as the admission of Jews into Parliament was concerned; and he now hoped that be fore the House divided on the question now beeire it, some of those Honourable and Learned Gentlemen who occupied seats on the Treasury Bench would state their opinions upon the subject.—(Cheers.) His own opinion was, that the Honourable Member who had just been elected for Green wich was entitled to his seat ; and as to the penalties he might incur by taking it, that ought to be put off for after consideration. There could be no doubt that several minors had occupied seats in that House; and that was just as much, and a great deal more so, against the law than was the admission of Jews into that House. In the time of Charles the Second several minors had seats in the House of Commons ; and later than that, Charles James Fox was elected a member of that House while he was a minor. But besides that it had already been decided in the case of the sheriffs. that the House had no power to inflict penalties; and that being the case, he did not see why they should not allow the Hon. Member for Greenwich to take his seat. The electors of every borough and county in the country had a right to return any person to Parliament whom they pleased, and the electors of Greenwich having returned the Hon. Member whose case was now under consideration, he con sidered that that Hon. Gentleman had as much right to his seat as the Speaker himself had, and he was happy in having an opportunity of supporting his right to it.—(Hear, hear, and cries of "Oh, oh!" and "Question, question.") That was the question. The question before the House was a Jewish question, it was not whether Hon. Members should get to dinner or not.— (Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") The opinion he had come to on that question was, that the Hon. Member h .d a perfect right to his seat, and he was de termined to support him in maintaining that right. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he did not concur in the opinion that any Honourable Member had a right to take his seat in that House without taking the prescribed oaths, and vote, under the threat of being subjected to penal ties. The House, in such a case as the present, had a duty to perform.— (Hear.) The Act of Parliament appointed cer tain oaths to be taken by Members before they were entitled to take a seat in that House, and nothing could be plainer, that no one without taking these oaths could take their seat in that House. The Act of Parliament was express, that no person should be admitted to sit and vote in that House who had not taken the oath of abjuration, and the question then was, would the House allow any one to sit and vote in it who refused to take such oath? In his opinion it was the duty of the House, not only to obey the law, but also to enforce it when it had the power to do so, and the House having last year, while discussing this same question, decided that it was requisite to contorm to the forms of the House, with re spect to oaths, before Members took their seats, he saw no reason now to disturb that decision—at the same time he felt bound to say that no one would be more ready than he into Parliament. be to admit members of the Jewish persuasion Parliament. He thought it was by a mere accident in the d he wording of the Act that they were excluded , but as_th law het at present stood he would not be doing his duty id insist that the oaths which Honourable Members were to take, before beirez admitted to seats in th e a e. t r_) House, should in all respects be complied with.—(Hear, h Mr. M. GIBSON considered that the House was placed in considerable difficulty in respect of the difference of opi nion which prevailed amongst the most eminent lawyers in that House upon the subject. One L earned Gentleman, the Attorney-General under a former Government, had told them that swearing on the Old Testament was altogether illegal, and that the New Testament was a sine qua non on taking any oath. The present Attorney-General told them, on the other hand. that a party was at liberty to swear upon the Old Testament provided they aid so upon the true faith of a Uhristian."—(Hear, hear.) While the present Solicitor- General had. on a former occasion, laid it down that even if a party swore on the Old Testament and omitted the words " on the true faith of a Christian, , ! he would be taking a good and valid oath."—( Hear, hear.) Now such being the diver sity of opinion amongst the legal Members of the House, he thought they ought to consider Well before they came to a decision on the subject. It appeared to him that if they con sidered the words "on the true faith of a Christian" essential , what was the use of allowing them to be sworn on the Old Testament? When there was such diversity of opinion, they should act with great caution before compelling the Hon. Member for Greenwich to withdraw. Without the slightest wish to shrink from supporting the authority of the Crown, he mast, nevertheless, vote against the motion of the Noble Lord. The SOLICITOR -GENERAL said he took upon himself the whole responsibility of advising Baron Rothschild, last session, not to take his seat. Ile was far from saying that the law was clear upon the point at issue, and his own opi nion of what was the law remained the same a 3 it was last year. The House bad, however, c ome to a different conclu sion in the case o f B aron Rothschild, and that decision was, in fact, a judgment in which he did not agree, but which he thought they were bound to recognise and obey. Under these circumstances he thought no course was left him but to support the motion, that Mr. Alderman Salomons be di rected to withdraw. It was their imperative duty to up hold the decision of the House. Not only was there a clause in the Act which imposed penalties, on the conduct the Hon. Gentleman had pursued, but another Act, in exp-ess and mandatory terms, directed that no person should sit or vote in that House without taking the oaths prescribed according to law. It followed, therefore, as a matter of course, that until these decisions were reversed, they had no other course to pursue but to support the Itoble Lord's motion. Mr. CLAY thought the question was virtually settled, for they had amongst them, sitting and voting with them, one of the most amiable and intelligent of an amiable and in telligent race.--(Hear, hear.) The tide of religion never flowed back in this country, and they might rely upon it that those of his (Alderman Salomon's) religion would cer tainly follow through the door he had opened with the loss of a little more or less of dignity on the part of the House, according to the length to which the struggle might be pro tracted.— (Hear, hear.) The majority of that House had over and over again decided on admitting Jews to Par -1 ament, but they were defeated in their intentions by the Lords. The mistake, however, they (the Commons) made, was in consulting any person on the subject but them selves.—(Hear, hear.) 1 hey should have asserted their own right to alter the mode of admission, in their own House to suit the consciences of the Jews, just as they him done in the case of the Quaker and the Moravian. It would have been a better course to declare that they had the power and the will to admit the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Alderman SAlomons) to those rights which his constituents .1- •;!nr-P h ,;. Mr. CHARLES VILLIERS wished to know, if there wail a member of the Stuart family now living, and if the Hon. Member far ms Greenwich were to take his part against the reigning ly, whether the law officers of the Crown would or would not think him, after the oath he had now sworn, amenable to an indictment. for perjuryi ? That was • the whole question, and he wished to have an answer to t from the Learned Attorney or Solicitor-General. He thouGgn ht that a mistake es to the decision which the Ri g ht Hon. tleman (the Speaker) had given. The S pea ker bad not in terpreted the law. He merely stated to the House, its was his duty, the resolution adopted in Baron R othschild case last session by the House. That rest:dation unde: he (Mr. Villiers), however, contended left the question cided. It was not satissactory in its results , a nd it seemedto him that they might rescind it. The oath of abjuration, in all its essentials, he contended had been taken by the lion; Member for Greenwich, and that having been done, that they had no right to persevere further in endeavouring t keep Mr. Alderman Salomons, because of his Jewish perstur sion, out of the House If they persisted in continued exhi: bition of hate and hostility to those whom they bad Prose cuted, they would have cast upon them all the scorn and c° tempt they deserved.—( LordJOHN RUSSELL said, Cheers.) he did not thin k his il t en• Friend the Member for Wolverhampton had atten ded to the question before the House. The Honourable Member Greenwich having appeared at the tab le, and Bit) much of the oath of abjuration as bad bee n taken Ion) Rothschild, the question was asked him (L ord John it srsaeb whether it would be right to prosecute the Hol e Member for the penalties he had incurred under the o. ,'; ‘ , Parliament. His reply was, that he thought not; u .o s t_ th il a d t , was about to move a resolution in the same words which had been adopted in the case of Baron Rooth bill, which in order that the whole question would h tbe the House, and that they might either confirm or raver _ ow , decision of last year; but before he could move thatdrnirea tion the Hon. Baronet the Member for Marylebone into the that the Hen. Member for Greenwich should co thea House, Speaker,e , t akeh a i s s seat, be b a had done b v e o t l e a . st yTehaer,Raingah t ao li j o t n i : a G sT ee h n b ill e tl ru o ali t o l i to do, asked the Hon. Member to withdraw. 11) w as Member did not comply, and he (Lord John Ensseht Hold n. then compelled to ask the House to support the OA Gentleman, by agreeing to the resolution that he,r w he.. withdraw. The question before the House was sinTY st v est his not or not the House, having adopted a resolutionf t that Baron Rothschild should withdraw, because 0 taking the oath of abjuration according to law , tf' s se at Member for Gremwich should come there and take_noron and vote. Considering the decision of the House w hich Rothschild's cave, aid looking a t the grounds oo nstr o he was ordered to withdraw, it did seem to Jahn a 11 13 Of th e thing, while that resolution remained on the journs old be per House that the lion. Member for Greenwich 3 h ° u o se ifb ° mitted to retain his seat. It did even ap maintained that that decision was erroneous an d c° • ol2 of th s law, might say "llst respect be shown toPesarretsh:itutituntr'irit° to th e House," He thought that there was no other cow: m e i:4r Of House now to take than to decide that the ion. m s hould Greenwich should withdraw. - (Hear.) what thesl The proceed to do after that decision was another Inat!teio from Hon. Member had placed himself in a different P n r s ra tios that taken by Baron Rothschild, in consequence of if f er eirce seat and voting. It was a grave question volet'„o R ° s. they should make between his case and that of Pa,r",, Jeol child.—(Hear.) Those who were for the adinie'°-03i0g itbout . tig ht into Parliament were not bound to do so vo B e toe some declaratory Act for the urpose•—( ll°4l 7lle ) Tb th e that the state of the law was P most defective. -- v,i. iir :•on -e found that, in this case of the Quaker, the wor"„,, true faith of a Christian" were omitted, and he , er- jetts w ; ; i 5110 0 to make his affirmaion ;” but in the case of th' than 1 oath was required, to be taken more in shh. r st t uc ta e ke form, and as the oath now stood, should the Je",,,, 00 1 .; would subject hi al to pains and penalties ter t u " w ere 'I; sion of perjury.— (Hear.) It was said tha t there,,ihiliCh eeptions to the ad ministration of the law, disting" the oP ti from the general rule, and it was urge d that i 0 00, should merely be administered in form, as it Well ioc° l3s ;it of law. He must say that nothing could be more 00 tent in the proceedings of the Hou-e than to hav,l/„P- A la r books a law, such as that now under cons derat'e-nd-seeei, which called on the Jew to violate his conscience,,a; be IL "on the true faith of a Christian ;" but until ths' ' B , o old tered, he believed that the House of Commons law+ anti ready to set an example of obedience to L „ ' e or 91 0 that no consideration would induce them to violate tt i e slob up against Hear, and cheers, amidst which SSP Lord resumed his seat.) „ t o Mr. BETHELIs could not give a silent voten"! he ject. He was very sorry that he could not ag i r e a tht t iot Noble Lord in all that he had expressed, and %I s " - fie d could induce the Noble Lord to - agree with hin 3 , • 000 , " t sif dissent from the opinions given by severa l v that t he Learned Members on this question, and roust ,7 1 ,' h,sOY oath of abjuration had beeh well and legally “Th ell it Hon. Member for Greenwich, and that he Was no w o * -1 tially the Member for that bcrough, and entitled °roil hat House.. -(Hear, and cheers.) The Hon. ` Me sea tit s e ar) rented himself at the table of the House, and ta,'l.4 sr, to in the mane er most binding on his conscienee --- h k - 0 0 e gbt —and that eras the true sense in which the oat.' id not - administered) to him.—(Hear, hear.) They sh ° , l , l o o , lli t e.o l a form of law contradictory to the spirit OW So binding on the conscience of the person to ite„ s " -- th s s ts . i dered au oath. - (Hear.) He could show the o', e , - pr e sdt? l „ 0 1 , owls of abjuration had been from time to time a". Tied i e n 'dios tote, according to the circumst'nces which • en - the Deb alteration._ The 10th of George 1., which recites'. it heSl 3 ,o George 1., cap. 4, had the express provision, tlia:bitafe:lol, any member of the Jewish religion should pr'ese„ril be , ir e take the said oath of abjuration, the oath shoo os e ; t s nistered to him in the form most binding on cow ,„ 8 " and in the manner in which he was sworn ". Georreol law.—(Hear, hear.) Now that was the 10th 01,0000, and the preamble of that Act laid down, that " ;,1 a ll O l e would be :read yto come to the aid of the Jews tb d ters re atimg to their right of citizenship, and the to 09 - 6tll fore laid (lessen that no course should be take ° , Th e ps asi, unfairly against the Jews as citizens —ale st ) ;;, George the 'Third did not make a new . oath, 'e s t io s that the oath of abjuration should be taken iti„..'",; manner vi most binding on the conscience of the oe„'•' copti It an indemn di i m ty tht t ha o tot se bs c ee u ivn re to him the rights ° I ssO elel lO the pp Jew,red to ab h e g ral tb A e ct s s ta p t r e ov b id f e t l i t e li c, ,!:„ o l o o : o :t; for impress upon the House that they could not Pr w ith e :oi on the trine faith of a Christian," on the Jet r ; ,.; tel" op' inconsistency; and that, should they p rsevere," - la the Jew so to take the oath, they ilt e d be 1 4° ' -t stP• science, and acting in opposition to the spirit of theoskot There were . many instances of alterations in th° f°r ofO r po l law; and, in point of fact, there was not a Pe tt l, sossif any court of law, or part of the kingdom, r - t he P"ht , at liberty to administer the oath to the Jew . ' II ner in which. he desired to take it, as most bin'? 14 0 1/ 13 t i ,s conscience, handing to him the Old Testantes" o t hei r h it to swear. 41.nd here, in the House of Coint t r„ l ll g og. dered to hint the Old restament, as most ioss i , -- ira t) t o- S ts p conscience, and as the form which they wished ',lme to by, and yet it was proposed to him at the v ss io r a ittt i4 ;4 4 an oath which he could not take without science. If the House would be consistent , _ i a t'fi s teths_ til l°. nister the oath to the Jew presenting Inins,"":` ta red %ell` in the mannser and form in which it was atirain ie .„,;et t° the o r em. - bo a sn e o;o o , in courts of law, and under the sanction of judges; and in that spirit he considered the,' administer the oath to him. - (Hear, h ) Their bi should be bound by reference, in relation to th e : t 0 13 11 1 % %4 0 1° tecedents; :and with reference to any form er theirs in rel talon to any other party, there wag --t e t. 17 sidered, any thing to b.nd them with respect to the / who had that evening presented himself at the ts-acjelsfs House to take the oaths most binding Oil bi l e 0 0 13 7,0 6 0 01 (Hear.) .H:e would no longer trespass on th "S il ioin sof to say that he believed the Hon. Member (Ar• w foo l ) to be as mush a Member of the House,by law, as anf ot elist who at that moment sat within its walls.- Loud eodj Sir F. THESIGER—The Hon. and Learned, ioo seemed to have laid down t he p rinci p le, that thos Ater not agree with him in his view of the law were not 'd o ,i O L, informed either in the common or eta ute la edi t S t) much as he did not agree with the Hon. and Lear n abei ber, he tell within that description. (Hear, and Isll,lo to 8 He agreed that the House had brought itself into inconsistency, by allowing two out of three oaLson h t mititanht,h:ebaoering taken by the Honourable Gentleman. He had °t w o - d to resist that, feeling that the course was sorong' h - stld, to qualify a man to be a Member of the House ": 3 06 '0! take the three oaths, including that " p.O th e 1 0 4 ,09 . h L r e i Friend s g t i i s a la n t . l had endeavoured I n ay d d e o e a fi a r tt ; she o el u h f r w e s e a oh d r rb . dtw)os shown ,oti l a u t - impress 'tilbuolon°011:::0 oursl P r Jt. s,, ve d s i a : , ion that o t L b f e a a t r a n tb ed C e taken at the table of the °• el° ration jeo H bu e b a u r r , ,j h b e i r e r. the trtie 0 0 0 s a a ll C o 'll w r e lvs d t: to take it.— report on which his 11( in courts of law the ,_, t bS it * was not in itself ' dra quite satisfactor, and his 0 0 °. ° 0 - istii ° 0 10 Learned Friend must have known Act that the „ vi 0 01, report referred was )andßLuteahrentehdourenhciloreeer4 but a '‘ temporary" Act ; it said that the Jew might take the oath of attin r ; Vieir ting the words" on the true fai hof a Christian, t o t h ,/ The,' iger) must say that his Honourable and be s c rri o rre c 9 appeared to him not to have read the . ..e t stsl i tio s , (Hear „„ r , hear.) The question before the lio n the . Alderman Salomons should withdraw frohl the Or Re thought the Noble Lord coul are., d not adopt ,7,, r for s' ht than he had done. On Friday last the .Meal"h Oges" with had been ordered to withdraw, and he " 0 " e presence now within their walls contuttla c '?,,t P"A - bo' hear.) It was open to move that he be taken sow o to tody of the Sergeant-at-Arms, but a milder cou,r'-teptied"poO followed towards him. He had intimated an : /3- bat ;elle move the seat vacant, and to move for new Wr i "tbe 1 710 consideration he had made up his • a folloW mind to sa tion of the Noble Lord, which was the mildest, concurrence. oPt Mr. BETHELL explained. t he sti? never Mr. AGLIONBY sa id h e wou ld disobey t he of the Speaker, but in v o ti ng f or th e motion at t tion thzio ber for Green x ich s h ou ld not w i t hd raw , hem fi eta 14/3 :01 0 ,.1 spect to the Sp ea k er. H e wou ld as k t he nict this could b e cons id ere d a j u di c i a l d ec i s i on ? Vas - .Doe thing... He th oug ht th e M em b er for G ree nwic' d he,',lo a Member as any other man in that House, el l ; ir se +- support him in the manly and straightforward et : ' 0 0 11 0 ‘ d take Sin. r th e tr rR. INGLIS rose to support the authority 0. a l3° sid in a course w hich had been adopted last session ill t be tti case, in no way different from this, except itutiO li t t t„ ° of the individual. The Speaker had declar'7 oag a V A Honourable Member should withdraw, and t 33l ;eor,r, be enforced by the Sergeant-at-Arms. Last ibeWtP.J.. Rothschild took an oath, but not the oath Pr u r" ai se he would put it to the common sence of the -"„- 11: 3 ` . ,h f'a could be considered a raking of the oath. It W ,7h t imponentis was the thing to be considered, an d ",:f e th e to be taken in the plain and grammatical sense of the oath. 6 0° Mr. Bltl'3HT said the Noble Lord spoke se, t. f o r itt o 4 no question before the House, but that the Metp u toerP„T with should withdraw, whereas there was er i , - t ioll '40 3 ,1 which was tantamount to a repeal of the rem is sav" erA l ( 1 11 year, and thereby brought the entire question tive form before the House. The Sulicitor-t"enroe-rdi have acted with more consistency, if he had same course in this case as he had taken with e ° .,;;.; in Di " tit • ) ", to himselfh:st year. There era two points of vi e ago this question might be regarded. The one wa s A ft p - rn,. • ; of law, and the other the question of precedent. 1 00'0,1' contradictory vicsys taken of the case by 03 , ° „ 0 t soft Pt e ' would appear they were in the dark. He lonic' ","ioe ° :to„v i thing upon that point. With regard to the tl e— r OP or f cedent, it was said that the resolution of last Yee t we e t. ll a precedent for the present occasion. WhY n : es tedA, Dl gg d one a few years further back. which was 5 ' 45- Iterljon case of Mr. Pease, when the oath was materially at e the words omitted upon the authority et o * ii t id t d b e tli eis ' t alone; and if they did that in 1832, why should P:„ e ePet i4 cl have power to do as much now ? (Hear, near) - V AS A Vi referred to the declaration which he noiv , of the sect to which he belonged took 9 P' s. showed that it was the same as that Which V e Mr. Pease before the law was altered to elle ohie e st e ' member of the Society of Friends, to take at the House on taking his seat as the Member for 7 3 t be `OO l He would ask what was the difference betw ee g detif° of Baron de Rothschild and Alderman Salellollo of Mr. Pease. He confessed they were ill =al