The Sun. — London, England, 1853-02-25 00:00:00

ing passed away—the imports into that settlement amounted to 248,000/. the exports to 464,000 1 ., and the popula tion to 28,000. ' In 1851, only 6 years afterwards, the im ports had arisen to 1,056,0001., the exports had risen to 1,423,0001., and the figures of the. population were re versed—for instead of being 2 8, 000 it had increased, to 82,000.. This was the rapid increase of the _colony. of Vic - toria, which Lord Glenelg and the Earl of .Aberdeen— and_ he was willing to admit that, had he been in their po sition, he should probably have arrived at the same deci sion as they did—were unwilling to consent to establish. He now called the attention of the house to what had been the immediate effect of the discoveries of gold upon the material prosperity of this colony. He asked leave to compare the revenue of Victoria for the quarter ending June 30, 1851, with the corresponding quarter of 1852. For the quarter ending June 30, 1851, the revenue of Victoria amounted to 35,994/. ; that was the general revenue. For the same quarter in 1852 the general revenue had increased to 98,4561., being an increase of . 62,4621. The Crown revenue in the same quarter of 1851 amounted to 87,8741. ; in the corresponding quarter of 1852 it was ]86,5791., showing an increase of 98 , 7051 ., and a total in crease of 161,1671. In a few months the population ' which in 1851 was 82,00 0 , had risen to 120 ,000—a result of the enormous influx of immigrants. This would show the house the extraordinary progress of the colony of Victoria, and would show that the state of those colonies was such as to require the consideration of the late Government. What had been the amount of emigration (luring the last few years? In 1849 the emigration from this country to Australia amounted to 32;191 persons ; in 1850, 16,037 ; in 1851, 21,532 ; while last year (1852) it was not less than 87,434. In considering what ought to be the policy of the Government towards these colonies, the late Government considered themselves bound to meet them in a confiding, trusting, and liberal spirit. They thought that the Go vernment, living at a distance, could not judge of their affairs and their expenditure so well as the colonists them selves ; and that they ought to place that confidence in them which, as Englishmen, accustomed to the institu tions of this country, they were so well entitled to possess. The late Government was strengthened in this determina tion by that honourable development of the national cha racter which had taken place under such extraordinary circumstances. He should not do his duty if he did not point out to the attention of Parliament the most creditable and honourable manner in which the thousands engaged in mining in Australia had conducted themselves up to the pre sent time. So sudden was the change that the local Exe cutive were unprepared with the means of maintaining order, but both in the gold fields of New'South Wales and Victoria the general conduct of the people had been most orderly and creditably. Notwithstanding the temptations around them, the Sunday had been rigidly and properly observed, and Divine worship had not been neglected. - Up to last autumn the Government of Victoria had no troops, except 50 soldiers belonging to a regiment of the line. They had no barracks ; they were billeted in the town of Melbourne ; yet it was a fact highly honourable to the British army that up to the time when he (Sir J. Faking ton) left office he had not heard of a single instance of de sertion among the handful of men thus employed near these boundless fields of exertion. (Hear, hear.) In June last, considering the expense to which the local Govern ment must necessarily be placed by the discovery of the Victoria goldfields, the late Government determined to place at the disposal of the local Government the revenue arising from the gold discoveries. Accordingly, in June, he sent out a dispatch, in which he announced that the revenue derived from tho gold was to be regulated by the local Legislature, and expended by them. Just after the dispatch in question went out a petition arrived from New South Wales which attracted great attention, and which was presented to the House of Lords by the Duke of Argyll. .The petition was a recapitulation. of what the colonists conceived to be their rights, and the demands they were entitled to make. In June, 1851, the then ex piring Legislature, of New South Wales in their last ses sion had adopted this declaration and remonstrance. They were answered by Lord Grey, who refused every one of the prayers of the petition. In June, 1852, just before Lord X. Russell went out of office, and within a week of the refusal of Earl Grey, the new Legislature, elected under the law of 1850, adopted the same declaration. The complaints might be stated under five heads. Ihe first was a complaint of the civil list. The second demanded that- the lands should be placed under the control of the local authorities, instead of the Imperial Government. The third prayed for a reform in the Customs. The fourth required that the appointment to Government offices should be left in the hands of the local authorities ; and the fifth prayed that all legislation upon local subjects should be finally disposed of by and in the colony. Taking these topics in their reverse order, he had to remark that the noble lord (J. Russell) thought it would be possible to draw a line between those matters which might be banded over to the final legislation of the local Government and' those which required the assent of the Crown. The aoble lord (Lord J. Russell), in his speech in February, 1852, said : " Another scheme which has been proposed is that a cer tain description of laws adopted by the Colonial Legislatures should require the assent of the imperial authority, but that with re g ard generally to the acts of the Col on i a l L eg i s l a t ures, no sucsanction should be requisite ; and that a line should be drawn between those laws which require the assent of the Crown and those which should be enforced without such as sent. Now, Sir, Ido not believe that. it is possible to draw any such distinction." The noble lord then adduced an instance, and said : " But I mention this as an instance of the difficulty there would' be in drawing a precise line, and to show that any at tempt to draw such a line would be most likely to raise dis putes as to whether a particular law came within or shood without that line. I believe that any man acquainted with the administration of the colonies will come to the conclusion that it is only in rare cases that the authority of the Crown ought to be interposed, and that with respect to local affairs the executive and legislative authorities are the best judges." , Now he (Sir J. Pakington) concurred in these expressiOns, and as with the noble lord that it would not be possible to draw such a line. He concurred with Lord Grey also in thinking that any interference on tho part of the Govern ment in disallowing the local acts ought to be of rare occur rence ; but if the attempt were made to draw the line be tween local and imperial legislation, he thought it would fail. He should be glad to see, however, some such dis tinction established as existed in Parliament between private and public bills. At present ho thought that no real hard ship existed under this head. With regard to the claim that the patronage should be confined to the colonies, the late Goiernment thought that, for the sake of the colonies themselves, it would not be for their benefit to exclude the introduction of persons from this country who might be appointed by the Crown to offices of trust and emolument. The general rule was for the Governor to select persons among the colonists for poblic employments, and he agreed with Lord Grey, th a t it was impossible for the Govern ment to recognise any monopoly of a right to such situa tions on the part of the inhabitants of New South Wales as to preclude them from being bestowed on others of her Majesty's subjects. With respect to the Customs, Lord Grey had in a great degree met the wishes of the colonists, and the Customs were now placed on very much the same footing ac at home. The civil list was in New South Wales a great grievance. It anNounted to 70,0001. a-year. Before the civil list was secured by the act of 1850, the Government called upon the colonial legislature provide a c i v il li st, g i v i ng adequate salaries to th princi pal officials in that colony, and, the Legislature having met the wishes of the Government, they were allowed to regu late the other salaries subject to existing interests. He saw in his place the hon. member for Kidderminster (Mr. Lowe) who was more conversant than almost any other gentleman with the land question in these colonies. He believed that the hen. member, while he was a member of the Colonial Legislature, was a party to the very able cor respondence carried on upon both sides between the Legis lature of New South Wales and the colonial authorities of this country with regard to the maintenance or repeal of tide Land Sales Act. This was a subject of the greatest in terest in the colony. The Government of the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) refused the requests of the colonists with regard to the management of the land. The colonists had demanded the management of the land as a right. Upon this subject Lord Grey said "It is my duty not to withhold the expression of my de cided dissent from the doctrine that the waste lands in New F,outh Wales, or the revenue derived from them, are in any reasonable sense the exclusive property of the inhabitants, or that their representatives ought to have, as of right, the control and disposal of that revenue." The late Government agreed in these opinions of Lord Grey, and felt that it would be impossible to admit as a matter of. right that which, if admitted, would belong as folly to the 40,000 inhabitants of Western Australia as to the 200,000 inhabitants of New South Wales, and which - would indeed have equally belonged to the first few families whiCh - settled in a corner of New Zealand. The right to the waste lands was, in the opinion of the late Government, vr,sted in the Crown. Lord Grey admitted that it might Le desirable to transfer the control of the waste lands of a colony to its local Legislatare • but he thought the ti me had not yet come. H ere i n he differed from Lord Grey. The late Government:thought. the time had arrived when the control 9f the waste la n d s might be transferred to th e local Legisture. Having made similar concessions to Canada and New Zealand, they had determined to give up the management of the land to the colony. Parliament, considering it desirable to secure the means of emigration to the colony, had determined that half the proceeds of the land sales should be applied to emigration. That arrange iner_t had worked well during the last few years. But in tilt - , present state of the colony, considering its rapid increase in population and wealth, it seemed no longer desirable to continue this allotment; and the late Govern ment thought it might, be safely left to the Legislature to decide at what rate the land should be sold, and to what Purposes the revenue should be applied. On these grounds the late Government decided upon making the concession to the colonies ; but the concession was accompanied with certain conditions which were not set forth in the dispatch announcing it. It appeared to the late Government that, irrespective of recent events, the Australian colonies had outgrown their original constitution of a single Legislative Chamber, while their recent rapid advance in material prosperity made the establishment of a second chamber more than ever desirable. Seeing that the colonies hall now the entire control of their own lands, and considering the large revenues they derived from their bold—the gold licenses issued in the colony of Vic toria produced last year 80,006/. the late Govern ment were of opinion that the check of a second chamber would operate advantageously for th e i nterests of the colo nists. The proposition for a second chamber was brought forward in 1850 by the late Secretary for the Home De partment, and defeated by the then Government. It was a second time advanced, and unsuccessfully, by the right hon. baronet the member for Southwark, w h o had long taken - so much interest in colonial matters that it had caused him Mr J. Pakington) some surprise to see the right hon. baronet intrusted with the care of parks and gardens, and he regretted also to find that the right hon. baronet was not present on this occasion. [Lord J. Russell —" He is ill."' Then, he regretted the cause of his absence more than the absence itself. At that time the general feeling appeared to be in favour of the establishment of a second chamber. However, the measure was recommended to the colonies by the late Government, and it afforded him great satisfaction to learn that the Legislature of New South Wales had themselves undertaken to devise a con stitution, and that a dispatch was on the road to the Go vernment containing a plan for a double chamber, not dif fering in any essential respect from that which the late Governinent sent out and urged them to adopt. (Hear, hear.) The next point upon which be would venture to addrty3s a row words to the house was the subject of trans- PeAf.tion. The present Government had announced, thr,elgh 'the noble lord opposite and the noble duke at the to head of the Colonial Department, their intention to adhere the decision of their predecessors in favour of the cessa tion of transportation to all the Australian colonies. The !tep taken by the late, and confirmed by the present Go erernent, was an important one, and the reasons which induced it hat Pressed been explained. Lord Campbell, he observed, ad e ton' of-trans his disapproval of the aboli portati-on and a similar view of the subject Nms taken by the most eminent judges in giving evidence I;efore Parliaments rY d take committee in 1847. In the de n place on the subject in that house he, also, had ventured to express a strong opinion in favour of transportation, as a .most valuable .secondary punishment. Nevertheless, he felt bound, in conjunction with his colleagues in th e late Government, to defer to the determined and all but unanimous feeling of the colonies. (Hear.) All the Australian colonies, with the exception of Van Diemen's Leila; unanimously resolved to use every legitimate means'in'their power to prevent convicts from being landed on their shores. .In Van Diemen's Land the employers of labour—suffering from the effiux of popula tion consequent on the gold discoveries—were anxious that transportation should be continued, but the great majority of the inhabitants of that colony were as much opposed to it as the inhabitants of the other colonies. - Under these circumstances the late Government determined to put a stop to the - system, and he believed the house would be of opinion that they had determined wisely, They might have embarked in a struggle with the colonies—they might have succeeded by force of arms--but the success would have been disastrous. For the sake of moral considera tions at home it was impossible that we could longer look to transportation as an efficient secondary punishment. There could be no doubt of the fact that offences were now committed solely for the purpose of securing to the offen ders transportation to Australia. The house would consi der this of itself a sufficient reason why the late Govern. ment adopted the policy of abolishing transportation, and he was glad to find that the present Government intended to pursue the same course. He must, however, express. his earnest hope that the noble lord at the Home-office would net allow a long time to elapse before he explained to the house the views of the Government on the subject of secondary punishments. (Hear.) He had strong opinions on that subject, and when the proper time arrived he would probobly take the opportunity of stating what the views of the late Government were regarding it. If he understood the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) aright, there wore to be no convicts sent to Van Diemen's Land after the ships now engaged. He was happy to find, however, that the noble lord still intended to send convicts to Western Australia. The objections to sending convicts to Van Diemen's Land did not apply to Western Australia, which was 1,400 or 1,500 miles from the nearest of our settlements, while the intervening distance consisted of an almost impassable desert. He hoped, however, that the Government would not send any large portion of convicts. (Hear, hear.) With reference to the secondary punishments, the noble lord and the house must feel that it would be a serious evil if the country were kept in a state of uncertainty and suspense as to whatthey were to consist of, and therefore he trusted no unnecessary delay would take place in announcing them to the house. He had now stated his views at length on the important colonial questions to which he had adverted. The noble lord was aware that the colonists prayed for concessions which were refused by him when last in office, but which had been conceded by the late Government, and he was therefore entitled to ask what were the views entertained upon these questions by the present Government. With reference to one important point affecting Canada, the noble lord had stated that it was the intention to revert to the policy 'of Lord Grey. But he hoped the noble lord Would not revert to the refusal which in 1852 he gave to certain important concessions, but was resolved in a gene ions spirit to meet the wishes of the colonists. He would here make a short quototion from the speech delivered by the noble lord on the subject of our colonial policy in 1850. Tho noble lord said : " As to governing our colonies, I think we cannot do bet ter than refer to those maxims of policy by which our ances eors were guided upon this subject. It appears to me that in providing that wherever Englishmen went they should enjoy Piglish freedom and have English institutions they acted justly and wisely. They adopted a course which was calcu lated to promote a harmonious feeling between the mother country and the colonies, and which enabled those who went out of those distant possessions to sow the seeds of corn- Munities of which England may always be proud." Ile had never heard language that he thought more worthy of the high position of the noble lord than this. When in dffice he (Sir J. Pakington) had endeavoured to act on the Principles there laid down, and it was on these principles lie made the concessions to which he had already adverted. (Hear, hear.) The late Government felt that there were thro courses which might have been pursued. They Alight, resting on the strong arm of imperial power, have refused these concessions, but they felt that there was another and a wiser policy, viz., to win the confidence of the colonists by conciliating their affections, and thereby holonging their attachment to th e mo th er coun t ry. (H ear, oar.) It was on this principle that they endeavoured to meet the great crisis that occurred in Australia ; and he hoped to hear from the noble lord that the present Govern nient were resolved to carry out the same principle to its utmost. The right hon. gentleman then moved for copies of the dispatch from Sir J. Pakington to the governors of Now South Wales, Victoria, and South • Australia, dated the 14th of December, 1852, and his dispatch to the Lieu tenant-Governor of Van Diemen's Land, . Dated the 14th of December, 1852. Mr. F. PEEL entirely concurred in the opening observa tions of the right hon. gentleman, that he was under no necessity of apologising for drawing the attention of the house to the situation of the Australian colonies. They constituted a group of dependencies of which the house had just reason to feel proud. They exhibited in a remark blo degree the capaCity of the English race to take root in the soil of foreign countries, and there plant communities which, in an incredibly short space of time, appeared ahnost to rival the ancient countries of Europe. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman had not in any way over sthted the results of British industry and enterprise in those countries. He (Mr. Peel) fully endorsed the tribute he had paid to the fidelity of the troops which were sta tioned at Victoria, and could say quite as much for the rd,giment placed in New South Wales. (Cheers) The right hon. gentleman had made a speech, to which ho had listened with all the attention duo to so high an authority, and he must say the statements of the right hon. gentleman were interesting, and abounded with great and reliable in formation. If he were to find any fault with the speech, it would be as to the proportion of the relations between it and the practical purpose which he had in view. The speech was not needed as a vindication of his own policy. No one had impugned that policy, and he believed there was no one who was not disposed to bear testimony in a general way to the credit that was due to the right hon. gentleman's colonial administration. (Hear.) The spon taneous communications which were made by the noble lord the leader of the house, and by the noble duke at the head of the Colonial Department in another place, had antici pated one half of his motion, and superseded the necessity for the inquiry which had been made by the right hon. gentleman. He seemed to think that because they had re verted to the policy of the Government which preceded his own with respect to the clergy reserves in Canada there wits, therefore, some possibility of their disturbing all the changes that hatireaently taken place. The right hon. gdntleman remembered that the Government was not pre pared to follow up his views with reference to the Canadian clergy reserves, and he was instantly filled with solicitude lest his instructions with regard to some other matters should meet the same treatment at their hands. He would, hOwever, endeavour to dispel the fears of the right hon. gentleman. The dispatch to which the right hon. gentleman referred was addressed by him about a week before he quitted office in answer to a communication from the Go vernor of New South Wales received six weeks previously. That communication contained the petition of the Legisla tive Council on which the right hon. gentleman had so largely commented ; and in the reference which he had made to it the right hon. gentleman noticed certain matters that had been long in controversy between ourselves and the colony of New South Wales, and which were there re garded as grievances. He had referred to our interference with the Customs' establishments of that colony, to the exercise of the veto power of the Crown, • and to the manner in which the patronage of the Colonial-office had been exercised. Now, with regard to the Customs' esta blishments he might.observe that this country had ceased to have any interest in the appointment of officers of Customs in the colony, and before this petition came they had transferred that establishment over to the colonists, and it was placed on the same footing with every other de partment. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the disposal of patronage, he believed that any complaint on that head was unreasonable and unfounded. During his long tenure of office Lord Grey gave as full a recognition to the claims of colonial talent as it could venture to advance. With few exceptions, every 'nomination to office in those colonies was made on the recommendation of the executive Government of the colony. It had been contended that it would-be of advanAage to have a stringent regulation by which a mono poly should be secured to the monopolists of all the offices of trust and emolument in that country. Ho believed that any regulation of that kind would be attended with great inconvenience to the public service. Cases would fre quently arise where they required that special knowledge which could not be procured within the narrow limits of a colony. An instance of this had occurred only a fortnight ago, the Senate of the University of Sydney having w r itt en letters to Sir J. Herschel' and other gentlemen, requesting that they would select gentlemen to fill certain professor ships, on the express ground that it was impossible to pro cure properly qualified persons in the colony. Then, with regard to the veto, it was well known that the Crown was a constituent part of every colonial legislature. It was ad mitted, he believed, that ,the disallowing power of the Crown was more grievous in theory than in practice, and that, in fact, few ordinances were ever disallowed. But the Legislature of New South Wales had suggested that it might be possible • to make a distinction between matters that might be considered of a local or municipal character only and those which were of an imperial interest, or ap peared to touch the prerogatives of the Crown—(hear)-- and that, with regard to local affairs, there could be no ob jection to give the governors power to act in behalf of the Crown. With regard to that proposition, he would only say, that if it was possible to draw a line of demarcation distinguishing what were local and what were imperial sub jects, and without restricting the powers of the Crown as to imperial questions, there could be no objection to consi der the propriety of establishing such a restriction.. 'He now came to the more important part of the - petition, which stated that.if they gave to the, Legislative Council the exclusive control of the entire revenue, territorial as well as general, and assisted them in exercising the powers conferred upon them by the ordinances of 1850 to amend the constitution, they, on their part, would be ready not only to defray the whole cost of their civil expenses, but also to defray the expense of military protection ; and, as a testimony of the sincerity of their assurances of loyalty and devotion to the Crown, they were ready to vote to her Majesty. an ample civil list in substitution for the sums ap propriated in the schedules to the act of the 13th and 14th of Victoria. (Hear, hear.) Now, he believed that a per manent provision, not liable to be capriciously altered by the Legislature, and which did not come under its annual review, was necessary in order to secure the services of able and efficient men to act in that country. He believed that the local Legislatures took the Fiume view, and.part of their complaint was that Parliament, by its sole authority, and without their concurrence, had, as they contended, if not in contravention of the letter, yet hardly inconformity with the spirit of the declaratory act of 1778, by which Parliament renounced the power of levying taxes on the Queen's subjects in the colonies, appropriated part of the revenue raised by t axes imposed by themselves. On con si*lering, this question, he was disposed to admit that the preponderance of argument in the controversy rested with the colonial Legislatures, and therefore he believed that the Government were quite prepared to assert the civil list vosed by a colony in substitution for the civil list which Parliament had voted. He anticipated that there would he no occasion to repent having taken that course, or to regret the confidence reposed in the good sense of the people in the colonies. (Hear, hear.) He had recently seen the draught of a measure granting provision for this object to her Majesty, which had been prepared by a committee of • the Legislative Council in New South Wales, and 'he found that the sum proposed to be reserved very con siderably exceeded the sum which Parliament devoted to the purpose. The sum which Parliament appropriated to the civil list amounted to 73,0001., and the amount appro priated by the Legislative Council of New South Wales was 88,0001. It was impossible at this distance to determine what was the amount required for carrying on the public business. In the colony of Victoria we had taken a re served sum of 20,000/. for the chief civil department of the Government. ,Now, one might imagine that that sum bore some proportion to the ordinary revenue of the colony, so that in the event of the unfortunate contingency of the Legislative Council refusing to vote a supply, the Govern ment might still be carried on without their concurrence. But the fact was that the estimated revenue for the colony of Victoria for the next year amounted to less a sum than 1,750,0001., compared with which the sum of 20,0001. was as nothing at all. Again, we had reserved 2,0001. for the department of the Colonial Secretary of Van Diemen's Land; but, looking to the estimate of the sum required for carrying on that department for next year, he found that in consequence of the enormous rise in the rate of wages and the price of provisions, the sum asked for was just 11,0001. Therefore it was quite clear that Parliament could not do better than allow them to vote their own civil list, in the perfect confidence that they would provide suffi ciently for the public service. (Hear, hear.) Then, with regard to the question of the unappropriated waste lands, the Crown was proprietor of them as trustee, not for the benefit of the inhabitants of any particular colony, but for the good of the people of the empire at large. Here again an intervention of Parliament took place, regulating the price the land should be sold at, the manner in which un sold land should be occupied, and in which the produce of the land sales should be disposed of. The right hon. gen tleman had not stated that the Legislative Council of New South Wales had declared the Land Sales Act to be a perni cious and impolitic enactment..He was quite prepared to dis pute thejustice of that description, for he believed that the manner in which the Crown had exercised its trust had been of the greatest advantage. The right hon. gentleman was not quit correct in his description of the object of that act. Is was not passed with a view of raising an emigration fund. In 1838 and 1839 as much was raised from the sale of land as had been raised in any year subsequent to the passing of the act. He would not undertake to say whe ther or not in that Land Sales Act we stopped in the ascending scale of price at the point most to the interest of the colony ; but of this he was sure, that the two lead ing principles—first, that the land should be sold, and next, that the price should be a fixed price—were sound and just principles. With reference to the system of free grants of land, the right hon. gentleman would recollect that in British North America under that system enormous grants 'of land were squandered on persons without capital to carry on cultivation or procure a supply of labour. If they wanted an illustration of the effects of the two sys tems, let them take Western Australia and Victoria. The first was ruined by the system of free grants, while Vic toria, on the contrary, where land was sold at a high price, 'was the most prosperous, and had been all along, of any colony, acknowledging the supremacy of the British Crown. (Hear, hear.) But he was prepared to admit that there were considerations, having a political complexion, which overbalanced the economical advantages of the present management of this matter. They were told by colonial governors that there was a settled and wide-spread opinion, extending to the most loyal and respectable of the popu lation of these colonies, that this was a subject which should be transferred to the consideration of the respective Legislatures, as belonging to their functions to dispose of ; and the present Government were not unprepared to carry out the intentions of the last Government with respect to this point. (Hear, hear.) It had been observed that we admitted a single chamber in New South Wales in 1850, because that was in unison with the wishes of the colony ; but that statement was not accurate, because the object of the proceeding of 1850 was simply to separate the district of Victoria from New South Wales, and the Legislative Council of the latter was left exactly as before. He understood that the Legislative Council was considering the propriety of amending its constitution, and a bill had been brought in for the purpose of transforming the exist ing single chamber into two chambers; and in no long time the reception by the Government of the ordinances for that purpose might be expected. - Under these circum stances, the Government intended, before bringing in any measure with respect to the Land Sales Act, to - wait and see what was the permanent basis on which the Legisla ture of New South Wales was to be fixed. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to advert to the question of transpor tation, and he concurred very much in the right hon. gen tleman's remarks. Whatever might have been the past collision of interests between this country and our penal dependencies, we had now arrived at a conjuncture when the interests of this country and its dependencies were brought to coincide. The object they had contemplated in selecting transportation as the chief kind of , secondary punishment was to have a punishment which, by the terror it inspired, should deter from the commission of crime, and should operate with a beneficial and reformatory tend ency on the habits and moral character of those who were subjected to that legal penalty of crime. The 'object had been most effectually accomplished by transportation. The removal of offenders to the antipodes, and the infrequency at that time of communication with that part of the world, tended to invest transportation with a sort of vague and undefined apprehension in the mind ; and, with respect to the beneficial effects of transportation on the convicts, he might cite the testimony of all those who had been to Van Diemen's Land. But since the discovery of gold all that had been entirely changed, and removal to the antipodes was no longer regarded with terror. On the contrary, the office of the Emigration Commissioners was last summer crowded with multitudes of persons isking for nothing more than to be sent to that colony. With respect to the effect likely to be produced in, the discipline of the convicts, he need not remind the house' that the gold fields of Victoria were in close Proximity to our penal settlements in Van Diemen's Land, and therefore the temptation to escape, with the prospect of making large gains, would in all probability overpower the apprehension of being recaptured. He must also remind the house of theimmense increase of the expense of living there, and that it would be impossible to retain the services of the officers of the penal establishmentunless their remuneration were increased about threefold. The main consideration, however, for putting an end to transportation there was the feeling which prevailed in those colonies, and the fact that the Legislative Council in each and all of them had petitioned her Majesty, and passed resolutions condemn ing in strong language the system, and asking this country to put an immediate stop to it. With respect to Western Aus tralia, however, the hon. gentleman concluded by observing, as we understood, that communications which had passed between the different departments had satisfied the Govern ment that all the convicts of the present year might be re moved there. Mr. ADDERLEY said, it must be satisfactory to those gentlemen who a fewyears back combined together to direct the attention of the countrythe to proper colo nialprinciples government to find in the course of theprinciples of two speeches just delivered that almost every suggestion of theirs with the ob ject of carrying out the entire localisation of the functions of the Government had been carried out. It appeared from a paper which had been put into his hand, drawn up by a gen tleman who had visited Canada, that the progress of that country since it had the' entire manegement of its own affairs was most remarkable, and fully proved the benefit resulting from localising the functions of the Govern ment. He expressed his approval of the - concessions which had been made by both sides in respect to the control of the colonial civil list, and, in reference to the feelingexpressed land sales, he was glad that the strong feelin by the leading colonies of Australia had at last made an impression on this country, The cost of sending that a t need re en haveue was exactly fifty per r t the , em gr i e g a zn r ts than by unauatehrottitesf feud, t t h h e i s cost c country uwntr y been—thatpme managed the t aa ll y e , e w m ilil igr e at t io h n e greater, charged on the local revenue, thanas 50 other moans of sending out emi r , nts.' The that of any emi grants sent out was also not such as was desired °assof colony. He believed it was not the intention ofby the t. the pre sent Government to carry out the pro • hon. gentleman, but he was certain it proposition O o n l l of the right that which they must ultimately do. In hisyollsiLemag right hon. gentleman had proved very considerably the e su periority of his policy to that which he understood to be the policy proposed by the present Government, by giving up the land revenue to the colony. The giving up of the gold to the colony was and b the most statesmanlike things he had ever known, and by taking that course the right hon. gentleman had gained for himself great credit. He had done fn time that which he would ultimately have been obliged to do, and thereby had gained for himself that grace and those thanks which would have been lost if the conc ession had been made f rom necessity. Upon the sub ject of giving up the control of the land revenue to the colony, the most able arguments had been those of the hon. gentleman the Secretary of the Board of Control (Mr. Lowe). The full conviction he himself entertained upon the subject was mainly to be" attributed to the able argu ments of that hon. gentleman. (Hear.) There was an other point. The thing most pressed in 1850, in the discus sion upon the Australian colonies, was that the best Govern consti- - ment did not take the best mode of gg the tution to the colonies ; and it was said that, either they might be given the best Bonstitution, according to them the idea of this country, by tw o chambers, or by giving an the whole efficient constituent a ssembl y , representing colony, to form a constitution. The bill in fact, did neither the one thing nor the other. It was stated avow and edly thana t the constitution would n ot be a perfect one, must be altered ; but then it was said that the power of altering it should be left to the colonists. The consequence, however, had been in practice that which was predicated, —namely, that the Government here had been obligedgiven them under the 36th clause, and the G ov ernment were at obliged to attach privilege s to those who actednot u willing to on th clause, without which it appeared they were do so. There were only two or three things more that were necessary to give the Australian constitution a that British form. Both the chambers ought to be elec tive. He hoped that would be the case, and also that the veto of the Crown on local legislation would be distinctly given up. It was so in New Zealand, or, rather, was limited to two months, which was practically .gg it up; but why in the one case it should be restricted to two years, he could not see. So completely did such a s is ystem of reference to this country restrict and impede local leg lation, that it was the main cause why the colonies had not advanced as rapidly as the United States. The right hon. gentleman had said the colonies had advanced, ular and course that showed how little could th e result of any partic be foreseen. The colonies certainly had advanced lon rapidlies y, but, if they had had the f oresi g ht to take from the co those difficulties which rested on them, but which did not rest on the United States, they might have seen the Anglo- Saxon race advancing in them with the same rapidity with which the United States had risen to become no of the first nations of the world. (Hear, hear.) He would add but one word on the subject transporta tion. That was a point which had been pressed on their attention from time to time, and which the force of cir cumstances had compelled them to consider. He could conceive nothing more injurious to the interests or honour of England than the course of sustained prevarication, breach of faith, and perpetual infraction of promises, which had attended the long course of experiments that had been adopted to keep up the most anomalous and vicious system of penal transportation. It had been said that criminals by transportation frequently became honest men ; but did it never occur to those who used that argument that the im provement of those criminals arose from their having greater space and being afforded the means of occupation ? And he would ask the house whether it nd occ wouldupation before not be better to use those corrective means of space a crime was committed than aftertvards ? They were pledged upon this subject, but from what the hon. gentleman tho Under -Secretary of the Colonies had said he thought the hon. gentleman did not bear in mind the pledge, as he (Mr. Adderley) hoped ho would h a ve done, nor did titheth s e hon. gen tleman seem to condem n as fully as he d fed this country ystem f transportation, as a selfish system adop by in consideration of its own interests, and not those of the colonies. The unforeseen and wonderful discovery of gold in Australia had rendered the system of transportation thither a perfect farce as a punishment ; and the colonists had shown higher feelings in regard to this subject than the English Government had done ; for, under the present pressure of circumstances, while labour at any cost was of value to the colony, it would have been excusable if the colonists had sacrificed the point of conscience to self-in terest, and had accepted, as a matter of urgent necessity, THE . SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 25, 1853. to take our seats. I have stated my opinion that the oath to be taken ought to be but one, and that one simple in its character, applicable to persons of all religions, not entan gled with provisions affecting the various professions cif religious persuasions, and that it should not be necessary for Protestants to avow one thing and Roman Catholics another, and for both to affirm certain propositions with respect to a person calling himself the successor of James 11., with regard to whom the house need trouble itself but very little indeed. (Hear, hear.) But lam aware of the fact—and the discussions of yesterday and the previous day have convinced me more strongly of the fact—that I could hardly propose to alter the law with regard to the oaths of Roman Catholics without raising a discussion with respect to the Established Church and the intentions of Roman Catholic members, and thus producing a great deal of heat and personality upon a question which is not immediately the one which I propose at this time to bring before the house. What I propose to myself by this separate measure is so far to complete the edifice of religious liberty as to allow to the Jewish subjects of her Majesty the enjoyment of the same rights and privileges of British subjects which are at present enjoyed by Protestant dissenters and Roman Catholics. I am aware that in bringing forward this question I must labour under great disadvantages. I know perfectly well that those who aro opposed to me have to say that the Jews, w i n s ti , ü b e e n i n e e g t n h o l t very .oug c h u r t s h i d e e r considerable y n n , u h nLb e e r n , o n t o r t h p e o w m e e r f a n u s l of inducing their opponents to concede their claims which others who have urged similar claims have possessed. I know it may be asked, " Where are the meetings threa tening the tranquillity of the country? Where are the menaces against the Government, against the houses of Parliament, which induced us to agree to the concession of the Roman Catholic claims ? Where is that political in fluence—that influence in the elections of cities and boroughs for members of this house—which made it neces sary for us to concede the claims of tho Protestant Dissen ters, and to repeal the Test and Corporation Acts ?" "You have," I may be told, "nothing to propose, but merely reason justice, and charity in your proposal. (Hear, hear.) And is it to be imagined that those who so long used the same arguments on behalf of the Roman Catholics, and resisted them so long, although enforced by the most powerful eloquence, and by the authority of the greatest statesmen in this house, and who so long obliged the Protestant Dissenters to wear the galling chains of the Test and Corporation Acts, will yield now, when it is a mere question of granting rights to men inconsiderable in number, and who have no means of terrifying the house into a concession of the demands which they make?" I trust, however, although my opponent may urge these considerations, that the generosity of this house will per ceive that if these claims are founded in justice—that if the great principles of religious liberty which we have adopted enforce these claims—it will be satisfied with these claims of justice and arguments of reason, and show that it is willing to grant such claims with due fairness and impartiality, and, and uninfluenced by any of those extrinsic reasons which it may be stated are wanting in the present instance. (Hear, hear.) lam the more per suaded that the house will adopt this course because I be lieve that the principles of religious liberty are generally entertained by the people of this country, and that being so entertained it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that that the Jewish subjects of her Majesty ought to have the benefit of them. (Hoar, hear.) It will not do to say that " there is a prejudice against the Jews, that the name is unpopular, and we choose to indulge that prejudice, and will not listen to what you have to say in their behalf," because it will not redound to the character of this house if it should appear that reason and justice were in• their favour, but prejudice was against them. ( Hear, hear.) The first proposition which I have to make is, that in no time of the history of this country since legislative disabilities have been imposed have those disabilities been grounded upon differences of religious faith. I speak not of those times when Roman Catholics, such as Sir Thomas Moore ; or Protestants, such as Bishop Latimer, were fully satisfied in their consciences with con demning and inflicting capital punishment upon those who differed from them in religious belief; but I refer to times when, in order to enable persons to hold certain offices and seats in this house, oaths were first required to be taken. On former occasions when I have brought forward this subject, I have stated that the insertion of the words— " on the true faith of a Christian," in the oath of abjura tion, and which are the only words which prevent Jews from taking their seats in this house, were introduced with a view to no such purpose, but for the purpose of exclud in.. certain Roman Catholics, who at that time it was thought necessary to distinguish from other persons of the same religion, one sect being intent on dethroning the sovereign Elizabeth and James 1., and the other being loyal to the Crown and to the institutions of the country. I endeavoured to prove this from the history of the time ; but there has lately appeared a remarkable confirmation of that opinion in the judgment delivered by Baron Alderson in the Court of Exchequer, in the case of Mr. Salomons, who was sued for penalties for taking his seat in this house. Baron Alderson said—" It is a curious fact only lately brought to light by the publication of a MS. from the Bodleian Library at Oxford, by Mr. Jardine, that one of the main proofs used by Lord Coke, when he laid that case (the case of the Gunpowder Plot), before the jury, was the production of a little book found in the chamber of Francis Tresham, one of the conspirators mentioned in the act, called A Treatise on Equivocation.' " The writer of the treatise went on to discuss the question how far a person called upon, as he thinks, unjustly to make a declaration or promise, or to depose or swear to a fact within his per sonal knowledge, may lawfully equivocate, by using am biguous words or mental reservation, without incurring the sin of lying or the guilt of perjury ; and among other pro positions, it was affirmed that he might lawfully do this, even if he be required by the form of oath tendered in terms to swear "without equivocation- or mental reservation." There was one exception to this, and that was in cases where his adherence to his faith was involved, and if he was called upon to make a promise upon his faith, that then, and in that case only, was he bound to keep his promise. It appears, as Baron Alderson stated, that one year after that case of the Gunpowder Plot an act was introduced into the house in which the oath was introduced for the first time with the words "on the true faith of a Chris tian." Baron .Alderson concluded from this, and very justly so, that the oath was framed for the purpose of ex cluding persons of the Roman Catholic persuasion who were not true to the Crown, and who would refuse to take the oath in which those words were introduced. "I do not," says Baron Alderson, "therefore, call this properly an oath intended as a test of Christianity, which it was not, nor as a mere test of obedience, but an oath intended as a test of allegiance, and framed so as to be a test against all equivocation also." The oath was therefore intended to be an oath of allegiance, which should bind all persons who took it, and the words "on the true faith of a Chris tian" were not introduced with any contemplation of ex cluding Jews, but for a totally different purpose. This was now apparent, because in the time of the Common wealth an oath was tendered wherein persons declared their adherence to the Old and New Testament, declared them selves Christians, and renounced Popery and Prelacy= thus intending the oath as a test of religious faith. But upon the Restoration of monarchy that oath was laid r i a n si t d ro e d , u a ee nd d religious faith. In the reign of Charles 11. , when it was f w o nt h t thhaet viewe to o f t h m e a pent k n e s git n a o n o e a x t h p r h e B a s s i o b n e e o n f s a o g l a el n y proposed the e to g r o exclude f t t he he R p o o n l i t t a i li Ca e a I cl tho oe tr l n c s e , s it whichwa s were supposed to be connected with the faith of the Roman Catholics and which made them adverse to the establish ment in this kingdom of a Protestant king and Protestant institutions, that the oath against transubstantiation was introduced. It was the same thing with respect to the dissenters. Protestant dissenters were held up to odium, as persons who had lately overthrown the monarchy and established republicanism ; and it was said that society would never be safe if dissenters, who had thus over thrown both the Church and the Throne, were admitted to political power. Hence the Test and Corporation Acts by which they were for so many years oppressed. Dean Sher lock used the same argument some years after, when he said it was impossible they could believe that Protestant dissenters would not endeavour to overthrow their insti tutions in Church and • State, and therefore that they could not be admitted to political power. We find, also, that throughout the reign of William 111., and the first etaroralsclerguhip:eile, princes of the house of Hanover, the same ear was mani fested with respect to the danger arising from the political doctrines of the Roman Catholics. We find it even in the arguments used when the great question of Catholic Eman cipation was brought before Parliament in 1805 and in 1829. Mr. Perceval, and others who argued against the Roman Catholics, scarcely ever alleged that the religion of the Roman Catholics was alone a sufficient ground for their disqualification ; but they said that persons who belonged to that faith did not pay a perfect and undivided allegiance to the Sovereign, that they would be likely to overthrow our political establishments, and for that reason they were not to be trusted either with seats in this house, or with the duties of public offices. Thus, it appears that, from the be ginning of these disqualifications in 1605 to their abolition in 1829, the argument has always been that persons bo belonging to certain religions, whether dissenters from the Church of England as Protestants, or dissenters from the Church of England as Roman Catholics, had connected with their faith certain political doctrines which made them unfit depositaries of power--faith and religion alone were never made grounds of disqualification. (Hear, hear.) It was not till 1830 that this special ground of religious faith was maintained in this house. Those who' had seen the disabilities of the Roman Catholics and of Protestant dissenters removed, thought that the time had come for removing the disabilities from the Jews, and in April 1830, a lamented statesman (Sir Robert Grant) with great power and ability argued. in favour of their removal, and contended that religious differences were not sufficient grounds for depriving a man of the priviliges of a British subject. (Hear, hear.) And that is the question which we have now to decide, (Hear, hear.) All those temporary dis qualifications, founded upon special grounds, of Roman Catholics and dissenters have been swept away. With regard to the Jews, no such dangers, no such inconve niences, and no such obstacles can ever be pretended. (Hear, hear.) Are they, then, on account of their religious faith, to be disqualified, or are they not ? (Hear, hear.) Can you, or can you not, maintain that because a man believes in the Old Testament, and does not believe in the New Testament--for that is really the question—that this is a sufficient ground for depriving him of the political powers and civil privileges of a British subject ? hear.) Now I contend that that difference of religious opinion —that that complete error in faith, is no ground whatever for de priving a man of the right to serve the Crown, and to have a seat in this house. (Hear.) The men who hold those opi eajthesetyfu—ll nions are British subjects, who hold land, who are in the courseey to u deprive her p M s possession of property, who exercise many civil privileges connected with local affairs, who hold offices in corpora tions,who discharge duties for their fellow-citizepnitys,poolainseod,fpbteihe form them faithfully and honestly—they are men who are ruepaodny whom,at al i f; alleged l t e o g e(i them , h ie o s u th t do sw ub share of the burden of taxation, and you h.ave, there fore,may no ho w, right ever to b be a privileges and rewards which your station as British subjects against ‘W the entitles you to enjoy.", (Hoar.) Some special gebunds I own that they have been so thoroughly dispos e d of, on former occasions when they have been alleged, that I shall only allude to them very briefly. In the first place, it is alleged alleged that the Jews are no t British subjects like s our selves, that they aro a separate nation, and as such, w e cannot give to them the privil eges o f B rl But what is the fact ? They are not aliens, subjects. ens, and if they were they could neith er t a k e their seats in this house, nor hold office ; they are therefore British • force of the proposition. If you subjects by the very have descended from persons selesl4ln37 that indeed they that therefore they cannot hold offi other nations, and maintain that which will ap 1 to ce this country, you admit without scruple. If many others whom you grounds of national characteris tics— of put the question on the Marlines in other countries, then th their connection with this country to whom your distinctionere are many families in ap ply. I may refer to those who would equally cation of the edict of Nantes, came o over here at the revs cation from other countries, herefo driven by religious per secu ti ons, or who settled even convict labour ; but they had been proof against it, and had unanimously asked for the system to be given up. It must, as he understood, be still carried out to a certain extent. He was sorry for it, because, although Western Australia might be looked on almost as a different country, yet, as South Australia, which was more guarded than any other colony from this infliction, had suffered from the im migration of convicts, and recollecting that this was a mat ter of feeling and sensitiveness on the part of the colo nists towards this country, he was convinced that it would be impossible to maintain very long a system of transporta tion to Western Australia. So long, however, as it was made a depot for the worst criminals from this country, in order to prevent the recurrence of those crimes which were so gross as to be thought unmentionable, but which had ex isted under the same system, he would propose that they should grant an annual vote to send out the very lowest out casts of the women of this country, who might perhaps be suitable wives to such persons as were transported to Western Australia. He would only add his hope that the noble lord would carry out and realise those high expecta tions which his opening speech at the assemblingiof Par liament had raised, and that, as transportation had failed and broken down, the Government would deal with the whole question of secondary punishments. They had the power to do so, and he hoped they would do it without delay, One of the principal subjects, however, for their consideration was, whether a better system for the treat ment of juvenile offenders could not be adopted, Lord J. RUSSELL—The right hon. gentleman who brought this subject forward having, as I think, been jus tified in calling the attention of the house to the present state of circumstances relating to these colonies, and hav ing stated what the preceding Government intended as to those colonies, I should have hardly thought it necessary to trouble the house at all, had not the hon. gentleman who has just spoken made, as I think, some extraordinary mis takes upon this question which it would not be right to leave uncorrected. Now, the colony of New South Wales was founded, not as many of our colonies have been by emigrants, but for the purpose of transporting thither con victs from this country. In 1786 it was formed in that way, with a despotic Government, differing very little from the Government of that day. In 1837, when my right hon. friend, now the Chief Commissioner of the Board of Works, that wise whose absence this evening I regret, pressed for a committee of this house on the subject of transportation, a committee was appointed, and. all the evidence taken before that committee, and the general opinion of that committee, an dbut unblessedconfirm popula tion. is The most dreadful crimes were found to result from w p i l s a e n o t p wi ini t o h n th of e that system of transportation. Some three years later, being then Secretary for the Colonies, I procured an order in Council by which transportation to New South Wales was to cea se , an d f rom th a t ti me th e c h arac t er o f .the colony was changed, and it became, from having been a large prison, a colony which was thenceforward to run the same career which our free and noble colonies have run. In 1842 Lord Derby, being Secre tary for the Colonies, introduced measures which I think had been partly considered by his predecessors, being measures for the sale of land at certain fixed prices, and by which a Legislative Council in those colonies was to be formed, to consist not entirely of no minees of the Crown, but to be partly elective. At a later period Lord Grey proposed to extend the representa tive principle to Van Diemen's Land, South Australia, and Western Australia. He proposed also to divide Victoria from New South Wales. It was on that occasion that the debates arose to which the hon. gentleman has referred, but I don't think in a very accurate manner. The ques tion at that time was 'vh ether we were at once to change the whole constitution of that colony by Parliamentary authority, or whether we were to continue the existing constitution of that colony, leaving it to the colonists to frame institutions fitted, it might be, for their government better than anything we could frame in this country. The latter view was what the Government took, and an act was passed accordingly. The proposition certainly was made of a constituent assembly for those colonies, and that pro position was not approved by the house. Tho question now raised has done so within the last year ; and perhaps the right hon. gentleman the late Secretary of State for the Colonies will recollect that when he first came into office I took the liberty of informing him that he would find the subject of transportation most deserving of his attention, and that the question of the constitution of New South Wales and of Van Diemen's Land was worthy of his con sideration. I must say that I think the late Government acted wisely, according to the circumstance of the time, in the resolution to which they came. They gave it as their opinion that the Land Sales Act should be altered, and that the colonies themselves should have the power of control ling the sales of land, and the distribution of the proceeds. The hon. gentleman seems to think that the present Govern ment have rather restricted the resolution come to by the late Government in that respect ; but, in fact, they have not restricted it, and if they have altered it, they have rather enlarged the scope of the resolution. What the late Government stated was, that they wished a constitution to be framed in which there should be a legislative council appointed by the Crown, and a popular assembly representing the people, and that a constitution being so framed, without respect to the particular number of members in the legislative council or in the representative assembly, the Government intended to introduce a bill giv ing power to the colonial Government and Legislature to dispose of the waste lands. The present Secretary of State for tho Colonies, the Duke of Newcastle, has said that if a proposal should reach this country for a change of constitu- Mon,-he should consider that proposition, and. that there would be introduced a measure giving certain powers to the colonies. The difference between the two measures is not much, and the proposition of the present Government is not less liberal than that of the former. With respect to that great question of transportation, I hardly can deal with it at present, but the hon, gentleman has scarcely in this re spect either fairly representedthe conduct of mynoble friend (Lord Grey) when he was Secretary of State for the Colonies. What he proposed soon after entering office was, that per sons convicted in this country should continue to be sent to Van Diemen's Land, but should not be sent in the character of convicts, but in that of exiles. There would, according to this plan, be about the same number sent to Van Diemen's Land—only under a different name—that there would have been sent before under the name of transported convicts. So far from it being a benefit to the colony that they should bear the character of exiles, it was thought better that the authorities of the colony should have the power over them which they would have over men who had been guilty of crime. The system was adopted of tickets of leave. That was the change made. Two circumstances,however,occurred worthy of notice. One was, that Sir W. Denison, who is an able and efficient governor, unfortunately mistook the instructions, and gave intimation to the Assembly that transportation was about to be abandoned, instead of ex plaining that the same number, or about the same number, would go to the colony under a different name. The House Of Lords resolved to inquire into the subject, and the im pression produced was unfavourable to the punishment of transportation. It is obvious; from the circumstances stated by the right hon. gentleman, that the late Govern ment had resolved at the end of last year that, as soon as possible, they would discontinue transportation. That de termination having been deliberately adopted, there arises here a most important question with respect to the substi tution of a secondary punishment. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman the late Secretary of State for the Colonies, asked us what was our decision on that point, and what was our opinion • but at the same time no one is more ;com petent than Ire is to see of how great importance a , decision on this subject is, and that the Government ought to take full time for deliberation before their- deci sion is pronounced. I only ask that the Government may be allowed that time to consider this important subject. No unnecessary delay will occur; and as soon as we decide on the substitute that is most efficient for the purpose, we shall lose no time in laying a measure before Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME expressed his satisfaction at observing the concurrence on both sides of the house in the propositions and principles which the hon. member for North Staflbrd shire, and others had attempted to impress on her Ma jesty's Government. Recollecting the early attempts he (Mr. Hume) made to impress on the Government the pro priety of leaving the colonies free from the trammels im posed by Downing-street, and recollecting that he had been called a rebel because he advocated reform in Canada, he had the greater satisfaction in perceiving how matters had come round, and would say " Let bygones be bygones." Sir W. Denison made his statement on the 24th of July, 1847 ; but last year a sum was voted to take out convicts ; and the thanks of the Colonial Assembly had been given to him (Mr. Hume) for having pointed out what were their wishes to the people of England, ineffective as his opposi tion had proved. No man in this house had more clearly expressed the principles on which our colonial policy ought to be conducted than Lord J. Russell, especially in the dispatch written by the noble lord when Mr. P. Thomson was appointed to the government of Canada; and when the constitution for the Cape came under discussion last year, the noble lord, in an excellent speech, laid down the prin ciples which he (Mr. Hume) had always thought might be most beneficially applied to the colonies, as to this country. What he complained of was, that the noble lord had not been consistent ; one year suspending the Canadian constitu tion, another year resor ti ng t o coerc i on . B u t h e (M r . H ume ) should bury in oblivion what was past if the noble lord con tinued to act on the principles he had laid down. There was reason to complain of the vacillating policy that from time to time had interfered with emigration—the best remedy for the evils arising from reduction of wages and other causes in England. He did not see the brother of Sir W. Denison in the house, but he must say that no man stood more in opposition to the feelings of the people in Van Diemen's Land than Sir W. Denison. The Govern ment ought to have people there who had the talent for conciliating and making their counsels and feelings accord with the wishes of the inhabitants. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies, who had to-night made an admirable ex position, and with whom he differed on a few points, would learn from experience that when colonists in meeting after meeting, and Legislature after Legislature, persisted in asserting their views, the best course was to remove the ; causes of agitation. Whenever there was a colony with whom the Governor could not act in harmony, one might depend upon it there was something wrong. He hoped the present Government would be in advance of the late Government, and he should rejoice if every one of our colonies were allowed to manage its own affairs. The motion was then agreed to. JEWISH DISABILITIES. On the order of the day being read for the house going into committee, for the purpose of taking into considera tion the civil disabilities affecting the Jews, Lord J. RUSSELL said that he trusted the hon. baronet the member for the University of Oxford (Sir R. Inglis) would not object to going into a committee of the whole house, for the purpose of affording him the opportunity of stating his views on the subject of the civil disabilities of tho Jews, such a course being similar to that adopted by the house in 1830, when Sir Richard Grant brought for ward a motion of a similar character. Sir R. INGLIS, in reply to the appeal made to him, ex pressed himself strongly opposed to such a course, because he felt it to be a concession of the first step, and he was not prepared to allow the noble lord to advance that step in a course which be believed detrimental alike to the religi ous interests and feelings of the people of the country and to the civil rights of the house. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL then said—Tho hon. baronet having objected to my taking tho course allowed to be taken more than twenty years since, it is necessary that I should state the nature of the proposition I wish to make before the house resolves itself into a committee. In so doing, I shall state, in the first place, that it would have been more agreeable to m e if, acting according to the view which 11 explained to my cons tit uen t s , I could have brought for ward at this time a p ro p os el w ith regard to the mode in which we take the oaths in this house before being entitled . , , purposes of trade, and whose descendants enjoy all the country, because one-fourth or one-sixth of her 3111 V/ cs/ privileged of other British subjects. Take, for instance, subjects were Roman Catholics. In resisting this proposal,. one great family which came over here in the time of N . Piril- then, he felt, under all the circumstances, that he was not Liam 111. ; the head of that family has a seat in the House resisting a claim of right. He was satisfied, of Lords—l allude to the Duke of Portland—some part of resisting it, he had with him an immense rajthon? his family is still settled in Holland, and the representa- fellow-eountrymen. He felt also that he was doing anin. tive of Holland in this country is at present a member of tice.to no man ; for he was consultingihu beat • ~__l that family. Then, a 1 is said—and the argument is one the Church and the people of England. (Hear , t 1. 7 ...... last remainoia which I hardly dared to touch—that the Jews are doomed The noble lord said, again, ' wipe away this _ , __ ill . ty th o. L a c t ,h_ i;; to be divided and separated from all other nations, and persecution—this last remaining badge of 'religw e ns„,, that they must remain so till prophecy is accomplished. I tolerance." He contended that there was neither p I' S ' have always said in this house that that is an argument tion nor intolerance in retaining the Christian character aa ef with which it is impossible to deal, and that it is not for the Legislature, and he opposed the proposition, not i." 7... us to carry out the decrees of Providence. (Hear, hear.) cause he hated Judaism, but because he loved Chria,altwianaiiklYes What we know is, that the Jews established in different Those who resisted the proposition did so, not countries are in many of those countries, such as France, and Gibbon might have done from their 'nature, bußtutfrdorld Holland, and others, admitted to all the privileges which deliberate principle and conscientious conviction. other native-born subjects of these countries enjoy, and Gibbon ever blaspheme Christianity when he entered the that it is not because more or less of these privileges are ' house? Did Wilkes ? No. If it were true thatl i ?YP c .sra ; granted, still less because the number of the privileges crisy was the homage that vice paid to virtue, ll ( , , 0 which are granted to them in this country are withheld equally true that the profession of Christianity, an,!...7 0 there, that you will either promote or frustrate the de- respect which they externally paid to it, bad as it an ' signs of Almighty Power. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, compared with real religion, was better than one,nt a a but what doubt is there with regard to the behaviour of avowed blasphemy. (Hear, hear.) But he believer the the Jews if they are admitted to Parliament ? (Hear.) this would not be considered, as the noble lord said, ~„ We have had arguments with regard to the Roman Catho- last remnant of persecution. Other cases were rera lF'n lies, and we have had arguments with regard to Protestant which, if the principle were extended, would outcome '4 l dissenters, intended to show that they would not ful- degrees. Some would say, " the British dominions 4, ill all the duties ydu wish from them in maintaining your India contain vast numbers of Hindoos and Mah° ll r o „ constitution in Church and State ; but with reaard to Jews duns." (Hear, hear.) That cheer showed there were,__ 4 „ , hardly any person would venture to deny that they would. members in the house who would extend the prin,t:„.. In the first place, their numbers would be so exceedingly But what then became of the great principle of the theufc:sa few as to make it utterly wild in them to attempt to over- tian religion being the highest privilege as well as l "were throw your constitution—(hear)—and, in the next place, sacred trust? (Hear.) If the admission of the Jews an d, it is well known that the Jews are perfectly satisfied with conceded, other claims would be made as entitled to toles maintaining their own religious faith without attempting which, he believed, the country would never tow"' either to convert others, or to gain any supremacy in Chris- • The country would never tolerate the avowed heathen tian nations. (Hoar.) It is well known that, maintaining ' the avowed Mahommedan ; but to be consistent they, ° c . most rigidly their own religion, they do not attempt to be prepared to destroy, not merely the Protestant c • flar ta make that religion powerful ; and that the last thing they ter of the house (that, indeed, was gone already), nr d so would think of would be entering into combination for the I destroy the Christian character of the Legislature ; and purpose purpose of injuring either your civil or your religious li- 1 far as lay in their power, to destroy also the Christiana ia , berty. (Hear.) With regard, then, to the last question, 1 raster of the depositaries of power. For these reason s for no man can deny that although the Jews are not man should resist the motion which the noble lord had now, bo among us—some 30,000 or 40,000—yet they are known in the sixth time proposed to the house • and, under ,a_ht our social relations as men o f grea t charity, as men always blessing df God, he trusted that this fatal measure 11116 ready to help when any act of charity is to be performed. yet be averted. It is well known that there are no people who more quietly Sir R. PEEL reminded the house that various functlt s . and more unostentatiously perform their civil duties to all had been opened to the Jews within the last few Yr their neighbours, and to th e State in which they live. The executive functions of the country were openeli' aea (Hear.) What, are the argumen t s — w h a t, th en , ar e them ;, ; they might fill the position of magistmates, ! T ao the reasons—why you should not admit them to the full that of chief magistrate of the metropolis—they mighu raie privileges of British subjects? I really believe there is no chairmen of quarter sessions—the exercise of the elecaa a conclusive argument, and that there is no satisfactory rea- franchise was of course open to them—and they were:lilt son why they should not be admitted; and that there re- lowed the free exercise of their religious opinions. P I , mains nothing but prejudice—(hear) —nothing but the pre- was now argued that to complete the edifice of religta judice and the notion that, you are a Christian nation and liberty in this country it was necessary that they shc a r e a Christian Legislature, and that yo u d egra d e th e na ti on b e e mancipated fr om th e disabilities they laboured 1 11 !"_`„a and the Legislature by the admission of J ews . If th e na - with reference to a seat in this house and the noble p,-.. tion is a Christian nation, as it is, it will rema i n a Chris- had told them that the last badge of i ntolerancetang tian nation after Jews are admitted to this house—(hear) men of other than the Protestant faith should now be al , and if the great majority—nearly all—of the members of once and for ever removed. Now he could not agree this house be Christians after this law has b een passe d , th e th a t v i ew o f th e case . H e a d m itt e d th a t , if it were agree, name of a Christian Legislature can hardly p ass away .. th ere never was a fitt er oppor t un it y f or mar ki ng their (Hear.) Greatly, indeed, were it to be wished th a t th a t h es i on t o th e principles of civil and religious liberty tn,,i; Christianity which we pray for according to the b eau tif u l a t th e p resen t momen t, w h en everyw h ere a b roa d they ',", ;0 form of the Church of England—that "we should h o ld the spi r it of bi go t r y an d i n t o l erance p reva il. It was on this the faith in the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of p eace , accoun t—h av i ng b een engage d f or some years i n the diP4 ig and'in righteousness of life"—was the prayer, that it might matic profession, and knowing the good results that sP r . l , be accomplished for all the members of this Legislature. from a manly and straightforward expression of opill, (Hear.) I have always said it is no matter of indifference and from the tendering of honest advice, no matter the whether the Christian character should or should not pre- ther the Government to which you tendered it was of a a e Tail in your houses of Parliament. I have always said first order, or whether it was so insignificant as scarc ia e Ja e r that religion has no business apart from the business affect the balance of Europe—that he ventured tO "f a d. of life ; certainly it has none apart or separate from to the noble lord his thanks far the high-spirited and at a , the business of Legislation. When I say this, I mean mirably-composed dispatch which he had addressed to a.... that spirit of union to which I have referred. (Hear, Minister at Florence on the persecution of the Mad tal o hear.) But, when, i ns t ea d o f "the unity of the Spirit" (hea r )— an d if h e h a d no t been accidentally debarredi from you . have diversity of doctrine • when, instead of attending the house on Thursday night last, he w ould vi - ho " the bond of p eace ," you have nothing but contention; replied t o th e hog, member for Meath (Mr. Lucas), 1 ,4 and when, in pl ace o f " righteousness of life," you have had attempted to justify the Tuscan persecution by Y t r a 7 o ., such men as Wilkes introduced into this house, I ask, he called the e x t erm i na ti on o f th e J esu it s from Swl 0 what are the be ne fit s o f your oa th , an d i n w h a t wa y does land. He wou ld h ave t o ld hi m th a t th e no bl e lord " do that oath secure that you are a Christian Legislature? was then at the head of Foreign Affairs had nothing t e ar , (Hear.) Let us then not attempt to found our Christianity with the expulsion of the Jesuits—that the British _ rs , upon so flimsy and so worthless a foundation. (Cheers.) vernment did not support the members of the Confet o If, as I trust is the case, the Christian character prevails tion against the Bund of the Catholic cantons on relig. l . o o more now than it did a century ago—if it prevails more grounds only—and that although we took different Y l ,: aa , in the nation, if it prevails more in the legislature, it is of that question from the Governments of Ausu& not because you maintain this oath. It is because of Prussia, and France, yet that events had shown 1 ,', 10 greater attention to religious duties, and from a better in- wisdom and the justice of the course which the ncv s . culcation of Christian doctrine. (Hear.) Rely upon this, lord then took. This, however, was only by way of Pl o s that though*You may have two or three persons of the thesis—(hear, hear)—but he must say that the introdna o Jewish faith in yo ur H ouse o f C ommons , this house will of the Jews to Parliament had nothing to do wit h t a bear the characte r o f a Ch r i s ti an l eg i s lature far more truly question of civil and r e li g i ous lib er t y . H e f oun d tha to than it did when Gibbon was one of its ornaments. And, member of the present Government, who pretenden ao . if that is the cas e , I as k you t o d o a w a y with this remain- know accurately and di s ti nc tl y th e v i ews o f th e Gecl:01 ing persecution—l ask you to do away with this remaining ment on political questions, had deliberately stated thaa_aa disqualification—and say that your doors shall be open to who opposed the admission of the Jews into _as P a rliaal7 o , men of the Jewi s h f a ith—B r itish subjects—men upon ought never to pronounce the sacred words, "civil an ° whose loyalty y ou can re ly— men o f whose co-operation ligious liberty. ' (Hear, hear.) He considered that _ a s you will be glad. (H ear , h ear .) So doing, you can then use of such an expression was altogether erroneous ; 00 , with a clear cons c i ence sa y, " Wh a t ever o ther nations may malicious. (Hear, hear, and crie s o f " name .") The a be do, we hold aloft the principle of religious liberty, and we gentleman to whom he referred was one whom a Pu b e grant that liberty to men who differ from us in religious journal had very aptly called "the Jew member for .Ayfi, opinion." (Cheers.) Si r , I ask the house to agree to go bury"—(hear, hear)—and who n ow by acc id en t found h t a ea into committee upon this subj e ct. I as k you to take away self Solicitor-General. (Lau g ht er .) H e h a d no d o ubt tn 4 this disqualification, and then you may say with truth, would be told that nothing was intended by these eiP a r a v t a "Having for wise political reasons done away with other sions, and that as as the hustings at Carlisle re-echoed l': s a disqualifications, we have done away with this disqualifi- expressions of sympathy for forty millions of slaves,, as cation solely upon the grounds of truth and justice ; " and as the Odd Fellows' Hall at Halifax resounded witn_.. a . that you had no other grounds to go upon ; for upon that precations on the Emperor of the French—(hear, / 10 :, 1 10 . truth and justice you have founded your truly Christian though nothing was intended by these expressions, s° tot character. (Cheers.) The noble lord concluded by moving bably the learned Solicitor-General would tell thena,,,,.. 0 for " a committee of the whole house to take into consi- he did not mean anything by his expression that, till; deration certain civil disabilities affecting the Jews." who opposed the admission of the Jews ought never to1 1 0 '; 0 _ The question having been put, nounce the words " civil and religious liberty." SuPP ta a Sir R. INGLIS said that before r eplyin g to the observa- he wore to say—he being in favour of vote by be e il l° ,,,a (cheers)—that all who were opposed to that measur . d tions of the noble lord i n p ro p os i ng thi s mo ti on, h e wou ld actuated by improper feelings ; and as the Government , red state why he object e d t o th a t speec h b e i ng a dd ressed to Mr. progress which they now had contained men who oPPIId Wilson Patton in committee. The noble lord, from the tone and men a who approved of the ballot -such as the rt o t of his first observations, seemed to imply, as he (Sir Robt, hon. members or Carlisle and Southwark--would h e 0 0 Inglis) fully anticipated, that he regarded it as an advan- have a right to say that this Government of progres o ,s ian a, tago to have g a i ne d thi s one step i n the progress of the nentitled to the c o nfid ence of t h e peop l e of gatg measure ; but he (Si r R. I ng li s ) wou ld not take off his hat (Cheers.) He did n o t thi n k t h e Jews felt dissatisfied ca 2a being excluded from Parliament. (Oh, and l au ghte , a and open the gate to enable the noble lord to get into that They knew perfectly well that they enjoyed oh more sore d, ho regarded as a sacred enclosure. Let the noble liberty here than they had in any otherpirtof the ar°,, s a r ' - ' lord break down the barriers if he could—God forbid that and therefore he would not consent that laws whic h -- a vt he should—still it should not be through any act of his if been in existence since the Revolution of 1668 should no his course were made easier than it was. The noble lord be abrogated in their favour. Probably, circurast,n e wa . asked, " Why should that be refused which was granted to might require that their oaths should be revised. l' ae aa Sir Robert Grant in 1830?" Possibly the house was wrong true that there was no longer a Stuart in existence to the in having at that time conceded the step which Sir Robert test the legitimate claim of the House of Hanover to co . Grant was prepared to take; but if the house had done throne of these realms ; but surely that was no reasol ra , wrong then, it was responsible on l y if it continued to do doing away w ith th e wor d s "on the true faith of a C aa t wrong now. His impression was, that the very courseii tian." He believed that these words represented A F i ; it which he was prepared to take to-night was the principle. He believed that he was expressing—fai n ' l abs took five years ago, in 1847, when the noble lordeeroeeosecel might be, and imperfectly, but at any rate fairly ad ' the very motion he had now submitted to the house' for public opinion, when he said that, denying as the , T W° „ a ir he felt it his duty, without meaning any disrespect to re- the fundamental principles of Christianity, it was in c° i , ar fuse, so far as his own individual vote was concerned, the tent with their dignity and character as a Christian 00, permission which it asked. The course which the noble liament to open to them the attainment of every cu'ila lord invited the house to take he believed to be really hos- and the exercise of the highest functions of the stateaaaa, tile to the civil and religious liberty of the country, and thought the present measure was unwise and unnecenP to the ordinary proceedings of the house. The noble lord a eh n a d ra t e h te e r re f f o o r re res i p m ee p t o a li b t i i li c. ty (Hear, er ew , that he alone assumed, by a convenient ,petitio principii was the advocate of truth and justice, an ' d that who was ready to admit that their gene eh ra einar l . g b o l o ill 7c o o aa n t d tw u y e l i s aa f° o l° r: ' opposed him were the bigoted disciples of an obsolete all Inglis's) position was dist' lete etYhee. matter for consideration, but he did not think they of tem. But his (Sir R. entitled to all the encomiums which were in the 119 ; a es eontrary. It was also assumed by the noble tertly that being passed upon them ; for he found it stated in eviu s ias power was the inherent right of man, and that thel , who before a select committee of the house which sat to in% ia resisted the grant of power to any individual werei3l;atuhnitsl into juvenile offences, that the chief instigators to cr im ma iss to show sufficient grounds for such resistance. (Sir R. Inglis's) argument in this instance, as it had been this metropolis were Jews (great laughter - -1 ,?`" 4 , - 0 1e11 they afforded exclusive facilities for the disposal oi - ill in twenty other cases, was that power was a trust which ooo London,goods. ( i C t o m n i t g in h u t ed equ l ai au ly ghte be r. s l o i lf n m t a ha ne t he w st a: r, th L e ivear a „ l o i the State-might delegate to those it thought fit—the ciao of the suffrage for example—but that it was inhe-exer Birmingham, Glasgow, and other large coneentratt ee l'a64 rent right of no man. In the same manner property was a trust and a privilege, and not exclusively a right. Power population. However, this question, after all, r es° i• the in this country was not ' to be exercised as a mere question itself into a consideration of the personal position ° t the and pence, which appeared noble lord opposite. He had the honour to repres c° ; ,ll o , of pounds, shillings, city of London in company witb. a Jew, and he was ,Thulti summunt bonun of some men. H a e eno w roduii . ndgrteomind to be habit brin t o h f e givinga pledge to his constituents that he ^aa that they were called together,a Oa i g question of the emancipation of the Jo v a lor" the Crown, " upon certain arduous affairs t the writ from ally before the house. Now this protege of the nobO aa 01l touching the in- Baron Rothschild, was a wealthy man - but it w as , aaja-tiolf, tercets of the Church and nation of Englad () ; What was account of his wealth that he was entitled to consianaltil, the first estate of the realm? The first estate of the realm because the house was no doubt aware how his grew' 1,10" was the Church ; the first interest of the coirry was its wa s amassed. (Oh, oh.) He read in a newspaper O n TI J e go' religion ;the first duty of every min was to act in reference to that religion, Having reminded tiate a loan for the Government of Athens, with con;eojl him of this, he - would ask the noble o lo u r r d L w or h d et a her he consi deredwas that the Jews, who regarded to admit that the noble lord's colleague Pe was a tor, were fit persons to sit in that house 7 H e e a a a sk i e n d. P t es. noble lord whether he, who regarded the gospel as a tissuehe —he had not the pleasure of his acquaintance ; but f - caar of fables, was a person who, in a Christian country, should much had been said by the President of the Board e via be 'admitted to make laws for the government of a Chris- trod respecting the press of France and of Belg,in ta vl or 9 tian people ? Was he who disbelieved in the last day of gagged, it was but right to say that nobody had del i i . ? i a, , l4 judgment, which was revealed to us in the gospel, a person to gag liberty in Europe than the family of Rothsl o eig li a w 000.1.0 00 who could safely be permitted to legislate for the highest means of the loans which they had advanced to nag intereses of this Church and nation ? But the noble lord despots,of being But admitting that he was in every w a 'YThis l'i' without alluding to these subjects, alleged that the forthe in this house, he would still number of the Jews was few. This was one of the argumentsatla question which ought at presentto as e k ng w a h g e e th t e h r;s„ o ite s euu; admission of the Roman Catholics into Parliament,who our a , was the noble lord so encouraged by the success of that eat tion ? Now that the leaders of the faction - "ao °,, a the last Government were united in thepresen t, ! c" - periment, as to repeat it upon any scale, large or small x ; ~.ir 1 0 a , pected to have received from them e i — '". Let him (Sir R. Inglis) tell hon. members who were fully . some rn a 0 oa 0 nearly connected with the material well-being of t' by th try than this. In 1851 and 1852 they were told 12 ,00 0 _, prepared—with one honourable exception, which would noble lord of the absolute necessity there was fora "'lloo' not name—to vote for this new instance p tifelln e h t ty, that Bill • but now that he had become the leader of t l l o ia a ci r . they, at least, were not disinterested o every measure which might be brought forward ; for in of dommons, that measure was almost indeffn a l c atl e ' house against the laighost interests and duties of in that journed. At. Carlisle, at Sout . , marten, and in theil gro'' tian people, and certainly against the tempor a l • a Chri"- London, they had hake ii.....ng else than Of al elec ia , wh ur et te he r r es the of scenes of bribery which took place at the last tha, Church, they would find in the Jews, gett er e riga f u o iv n e dly . imagi . ned, hon. gentleman were only two or three, as the noble lord y tion. He did not know whether the noble lord and the the' or whether, as he believed, unless a very. aace of Ant should take place, many more ca rae in the sa e m P spoke from personal experlya eat"' i a rengmraennforraer matters, but he did not think that the electors gob ice mareh an un s i t t h as some calling themselves Christi , had laid themselves, open to those imputations wla rea 01 in lately—they would swella esmen had come so p o ro f miscuously heaped upon them. But_ what ea.tniooa which was already upon the the number of that band t , united and powerful— the other house of Parliament would be firm fate the measure miht be in this house, he trust!dos - for union, they were told, - w in the ari a for however, was a low view of the rength. (Hear.) , This, which they had already more than onceexpressed, ev• sure wa s, the feeling which reallyrii his determined he could only say, that he would w ri, 0 v . , e th: s ne a u o gh s t . land on this question. Christianity to be the d they wish the profesion of • opposition, as he believed our it ins titut l noble lord in profession with danger to the Christian pro on of the Legislatures The of• af wanted, the first instance, (Hear, hear.) d l i ne of the oath under which to alter the terms who ha tiro Lord MONCK said the honourable member view of enabli th members were admitted, with thenal m atter. ~,,alr f ng e Jew - down said this measure sat altering the terra sto enter ; but now, without sof that oath, ho noble lord the member for the city of London. the 0 some measure under hi his proposed to bring inlord a a for ta considering that the noble .3 for tion of the city of Londonwhich colleague in the representa- thirty years b name of the __ assu re _ t boo 0 1 noble lord could not dotiimsit,lir:hboe introduced. But the extersion of ei : j e l n an cr r n e tcte o d us zi b t e h rt eve t r h y er ni e u cat o ; 010 . 0,1 of the characteristic which it had eat depriving the house higher compliment paid him gl than to say y that th is F orst / years. The worde " nand th t njoyed for a thousand of the last badge of intolerance and bigotry was a see ln :;,il contained in theoath, n eru hinderedf ble romans ns and Baron Rothschild f Alderman Sa- told them that this question had nothing to cle h i a a fi'_.,°h were introduced, the noble lord said ,taking their seats, and religious liberty ; but he must pard°l2 to d° tl3° he (Sir R. Inglis), admitted the historical in the year 1606. If Houck) for saying that his speech had still less d w ith aa . noble lord's statement, he accuracy of the the question at issue. (Hear, hear.) He ag ree ° a t inf ar elusion. He defied the n must absoluteldeny his con- honourable baronet that reli •of ars ' nl-u • 5'- 1 pest glen was p aal , oble lord to contradict him in • rzoposition—that whether these in the oath before 1606 ese words did or did not exist dividual point of view and that was one of the this le ,no Jew r d of L o tio n trodueed to take his seat would ever have been in- arguments in his mind for the pressing forward tefaP.das the New Testament. Therexcept on taking an oath upon tion, that no man might be under any political what Las oath could have been t k e never was a time when the to conceal or to deny his religious convictions. live iil i a j Whether the noble aen by . a Hebrew Jew. (A laugh.) it but persecution, if they allowed the Jews to cras ` l o‘l lord was right but I any other man would deny this or not, neither he nor country, and to amass money in the country , as deal some Christian emblem or other h propnsitioa, that l upon their noblest aspirations, and regarded then!. w h a t , e a rha invariably upon the open Gospel), ( e behe n ve o d a g w ev a e s r a t iz c i e s n t subjects. (Hear, hear.) It reminded him 01 ..tste in ,° f by which any judicial or civil ofic w e a o e f a any kin I read somewhere about the labourers on an " Those 17 ,4. c or any he believed in Elizabeth. _ _. O admission to power of the very lowest degre ' feinted ginia, the time of A the IL la, without some such Christian sanction. It e lial been icerztures petitioned their master to be all?` seti la w o al said that the Jews were no more a separate nation. But saL :iff education on on the ground that they . ha d bro gtik ok. the more pious Jews contended that they were, and ever discourteous—nthe reply they received was ratn a l „ ace !' ( 1 - 1 1 0 of must be a separate nation. You could not destroy their hear)He" D — n your souls, grow tan' ro tas 'n e e. trusted the house would accent tilT wales' . inherent and absolutely essential character of' being a the noble . distinct and separate nation. They had been separate _ ea lord, and destroy the last badge °' 00 5 i. (H r hear I for 1800 years ; they had been separate for more than It 'N- t intens° 000 r. AFTER was unable, after the most , e 0 ai r 1800 years —aye, for a time which no man could calcu- deration t give his mea sure ‘a deist'l of late ; and certainly they were separate, so far as their lord. , 0 admit o,,ai highest aspirations, and their return to their own land, atheist Was the noble lord prepared to aa,„; true fi a ioll: were concerned. The noble lord said, tho admission of a t ?He apprehended he was not. I° ,_ an op ba o Christian was a revelation, and no t merely they . a five or six Jews would not destroy the Christian character Ta 0 though t a del_ a of the house. But what said their own writers. There e Jews denied it, and therefore h atheist or a forl'' was a person of the name of Van Owen, who, from But rg e more title to be admitted thanan N a aaco oto ol name, he had reason to hope was not an Englishman. But hate mbers of that house, whether Catholics, to ether in 5 , c - 0 7 . 01; this person wrote in England, and four or five years ago he ,or Episcopali ans , could join - -- A___ , bear./ o af a published a pamphlet, in which he stated that this count prayer to their Saviour and God. ( e'," _ so to P_ tji I was not a Christian nation. And what was the ground rY they ask a Jew, when he entered that hon 90 y , were r ye denied d ot . . te a upon which he asserted that we were not a Chriatian na- that Saviour whom he conscientiously tiereee , a l ot 0 Lion ? Because Jews were admitted to certain offices. He then to abolish prayer, remove all c 9 y t . .witflto b would just remind the house that this was not a Protestant Jews, and call that religious liberty ' a ina ist l7 the Jew had every other privilege. AB