The Press.
London, England, 1858-07-24 00:00:00

THE PRESS, JULY 24, 1858.

other house, to commit an absutdity itself, and to
insult those wilo were the objects it proposed to
relieve, the ingenuity of man could nit devise a
measure that would more fully auswer those pur.
poses.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE did not think the bill so despicable
as some deemed it, although it did come from the
Lords, for whom and for Llri Derby he suggested
some apology in this matter.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said :

The hon. and learned member for Sheffield said that
the House of Lords had written itself down an ass,
because that house has declared with reference to the
present, and with reference to various measures which
have from time to time been forced upon it, that they
were dangerous to the constitution of the country.
I hope that the hon. and learned gentleman will some
day state to the house what he understands to be the con•
stitution of this country, for I have sat in this house several
years with the hon. and learned gentleman, and heard him
defend many kinds of innovation as consistent with the con-
stitution of the country; and I hope we shall hear some
day the impression of the hon. and learned gentleman of
what the constitution of England is, and on some other
day what he thinks it ought to be. The hon. and learned
gentleman receives every concession with contumely, and
constantly complains that the House of Lords do not yield
to these arrogant demands in a spirit of sufficient humility.
I regard this measure as a concession wrung from the
Blouse of Lords contrary to their judgment, and be-
cause it is contrary to their judgment I think their
lordships ought. to have rejected it. (Cheers.) Therefore
Ido not defend the House of Lords ; neither do I defend
the conduct of Lord Derby, because I know that the mea-
sure is in principle contrary to his opinions, and that being
so, he ought to have appealed to the country. •The
intention of the framers of the bill is to give the country
time to reflect, which amounts to a tardy recognition of
the fact that the country ought to have been appealed
to. I do not consider it unworthy of the dignity and
wisdom of the House of Lords that, after having resisted
your assaults for years, they should now send down to
you the reasons for their resistance, ►which reasons, in
my opinion, are amply sufficient to have justified an
appeal to the country upon the subject. I can say nothing
in condemnation of the principle of this bill, as destruc-
tive of the Christian character of this house, that I have
not already ventured to state, but I will not sit silent by
and hear blame hespei upon Lord Derby, without stating
my knowledge of the difficulties to which he is exposed.
( Hear, hear.) IA ho is the main promoter on this side of
the house of this infraction of the Christian character of
Parliament? Why, sir, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
(Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of tie Exchequer, himself
of Jewish extraction, festers towards the Jewish race a feel-
ing of sympathy so ardent that you may trace it through-
out all his works of fiction, and especially will you find it
declared, honestly enough, in the chapter relating to the
Jews which he has interpolated in his " Biography of
Lord George Bentinck." (Hear, hear.) In that chapter
the right hon. gentleman claims as a right that the Jewish
race shall govern the other races of mankind; he claims
for them that supremacy whilst they remain in their pre-
sent state of rebellion against their own true King. The
right hon. gentleman in this chapter endeavours to recon-
cile Judaism with Christianity. He tells us plainly that
our blessed Lord came to expiate, but not to teach. He
declares that the doctrines of the New Testament are the
same as those of the old ; but he then proceeds on the false
assumption that Judaism is the true religion of the Old
Testament; and justifies the Crucifixion. Hear, hear.)
When I find seated in a leading position on the Ministerial
Bench amongst the members of the party who acknowledge
Lord Derby as their leader a right hon. gentleman who
holds such opinions as these, using all his influence to
carry them into effect, I will not allow Lord Derby's diffi-
culties on this question to be underrated. (Hear, hear.)
I have watched with the closest attention the progress of
this subject for years. One by one I have seen several
leading members of the Conservative party brought over
to the opinions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—
( Hear, hear)—and when the noble lord who is at the head
of the India Board seceded from his noble father's opinions
on the question, and adopted those of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, I felt that Lord Derby's position might
eventually become intolerable—that there was great danger
that the noble earl would eventually be forced to abandon
the proud position which he has held for so many years
as leader of that great party, whose pnde and honour it
is to be the defenders of the Christian character of Par
1 anent and of the State. (Hear, hear.) In my anger I
will have justice. I will not hear in silence the ditficul-
ties of Lord Derby undervalued. (Cheers.) The
house know that I am sincere upon this question—
( cheers )—and I thank them for the patience with
which they have listened to these observations.
Perhaps, hon. members will pardon we if, when
I see them urged forward in a course of which this
measure is only one of the steps, I address to them a few
words of warning. I know there are many gentlemen op-
posite who value as highly as I do the Protestant Chlistian
religion of this country, who value the freedom of our
Constitution, who are not willingly renegades from the
principles of the Revolution of 1688. Now I beg them to
consider that they have to contend with an element
which is now all-powerful throughout almost the whole of
continental Europe, which is making constant and steady
advances, and whose power is daily felt mon- and more
even within the charmed ci►cle of :he freedom of these
British isles. I allude to the Jesuit Confederation. I always
watch with interest the events which occur in Holland,
' our nearest Protestant neighbour on the Continent. Only
two years ago the Roman Catholic bishops of Holland, in
L their remonstrance against the doctrine of the Immacu-
late Conception, declared emphatically that that doctrine,

713

and its enunciation from the Papal Chair, were the work
of the Jesuits, who are all-powerful at Rome. I adduce
that .as evidence of the existence of the Order ; for,
strangely enough, I have heard hon. members say,—
" Jesuits ! there is no such Order in existence." Upon
the authority of the Roman Catholic bishops of Holland,
I assert that it exists, that it is dominant at Rome.
(Hear, hear.) Some gentlemen are disposed to believe
that the Jesuit never professes liberality. Now, I ask
them not to believe me, but to believe the ablest advocates
of the Order—to believe be I.ammenaie, Le Maistre, and
Montalembert. The latter expressly states that about two
hundred years ago the Jesuits made a great change in
their policy towards this country. In his work, " L'Avenir
d'Aogleterre "—the future political history of England—
Count Montalembert tells us that this experiment was first
tried in our then colony of Maryland in 1632 ; and we
have the evidence that it was also tried in England in the
proclamation of James 11. in 1687, which the seven
bishops refused to read, and fur refusing to read which
they were sent to the Tower, an act which was followed
by the expulsion of James 1;. and the family of the Stuart..
(Hear, beat.) Now, what was that proclamation? What
was that experiment? It was precisely in the spirit and
sense in which you now legislate for this country. ( Hear,
hear.) It was to abrogate every religious test—to declare
that, practically, religion has nothing to do with civil ad-
ministration—that men of all creeds are equally fitted for
legislation and for the service of the State. That procla-
mation was issued at the instance of Jesuit councillors.
Trace the whole course of that Order in free countries.
You will find of late years that its frequent practice is to
exaggerate liberty into license, thus to break down every
safeguard for freedom, whether civil or rdigious, knowing
full well that their own wonderful organization, if brought
to operate against undefended freedom, must ultimately
work its destruction. (Cheers.) Count Montalembert,
writing two years ago, seems literally to dictate the course
which Roman Catholics pursue at the present day. They
loin the Liberal party—they declaim against every safe-
guard of true liberty—they claim civil and religious
equality ; and, under tile influence of this organization,
;;punt Montalembert implies that eventually this free
country will be subjugated to the despotism of Rome.
( Hear, hear.) I have heard hon. members of the modern
school of Liberalism declare every safeguard against that
despotism an absurdity. I trust the house will forgive me
if I warn Liberals to beware that their own principles may
be—nay, are—used against th a very freedom of which they
justly boast. It is my firm belief that by this fatal measure
you are taking the first step in a coarse which the
Jesuit has marked out for your pursuit. Some few
Jews may obtain seats in this house, but what yon now
do is playing the gime of the Jesuits against the freedom
of England ; you are adopting the principles which were
so nobly and successtully resisted by our ancestors in the
Revolution of 1688. (Hear, hear.) I will not further
detain the house. I thank the Liberal members of the
house for having allowed me to appeal to many, who are
my superiors in intellect and attainments, in the hape
that they will consider seriously whether by the policy
which they enforce they arc not breaking down the bul-
warks of the Constitution, and do not imperil the inestima•
ble blessing of English freedom. (Loud chem.)

Mr. Lefroy, Mr. Collins, Mr. Griffith, Admiral
Walcott, and Colonol Freestun continued the dis-
cussion, and upon a divisien the amendment was
negatived by 129 to 35.
The bill sas then read a third time and passed.
On the order fur the consideration of the Lords'
reasons for insisting on their amendments to the
Oaths Bill,
Lord J. RuSSEII. moved tho following resolu-
tion t

That this house does not consider it necessary to
Examine the reasons offered by the. Lords for insisting
upon the exclusion of Jews from Parliament, as by a bill
of the present session their lordships have provided for
the admission of persona professing the Jewish religion
to seats in the Legislature.
- -

Exceptions were taken to the wording of the reso-
lution, but the only alteration adopted was the inser.
tion, at the suggestion of Sir J. GRAIikX, of the word
" means," after " provided."
Mr. SroosEn moved to add, at the end of the re.
solution :
The bill being in direct contravention of the clear and
cogent reasons assigned by their lordships against the
enactments of snob bill.

This amendment was negatived, and the resolution
we% agreed to.
Lard JOHN RUSSELL then moved a further resolu-
tion :

That this house doth not insist upon their disagreement
with the Lords in their amendments to the said bill.

This resolution was agreed to without opposition.
The Marriages (Moscow, (U.) Bill, and the County
Court Districts Bill, were read a third ti►ae and passed.

The house, after some further business, adjourned
at four o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS-THURSDAY.
INDIA.

The Earl of MALMESB—lTRYannouneed that a tele-
gram bad been received from India with the news
that the forces under Sir Hugh Rose took Gwalior,
after a severe titzilt of four hours, on the 20th of
June. His lordship also informed the house that
on the 20th of May the forts at the mouth of the
Peiho, mounting 13R guns, had been gallantly taken
by the English and French gunboats.

•

714

/Web!

liofl rl,

HOUSE OF OOl[UONS.—Tuoasn.►x.

-ft 0

:;

The Earl of-DERBY, in reply to the Duke of New-
castle. said that some alterations agreed upon in
various clauses in the Government of ludia• Bill
should be attended to in due time.
The following bills were then read a third time
and passed: Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction (Continuance)
Bill, Charitable Trusts Acts (Continuance) Bill,
Turnpike Trusts Arrangement* Bill, Copyhold and
Enclosure Commission,:, &c., Bill, Indemnity Bill,
Administration of Oaths by Committees Bill, and
Army Service Bill.
The Copyhold Acts Amendment Bill went through
committee.
The Local Government Bill also went through
committee.

Act Amendment Bill was read a

The Art Unions
second time. mi.
The Titles to Llititj (Scotland) Bill went through
committee.
1.
The amendments liit,the Sale and Transfer of Land
(Ireland) Bill were agreed to.
The Universities (Scotland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The County Property Conveyance Bill was read a
second time.

The Stipendiary Magistrates Bill was road a third
time and passed.
Ths following bi'ls went through committee :
Enclosure of Lands Bill, Legitimacy Declaration
Bill, Sheep, Sic., Contagious Diseases Prevention
Bill, Turnpike Acta Continuance Bill, Public Health
Bill, and Vaccination (Ireland) Bill.
The Chelsea-Midge Act Amendment Bill was read
a second tithe.

The Returns to Secretary of State Bill and the
Detached Parts or Counties Bill were also read a
second thin.

ei;lhitiseoir'clloorcik'iAlourneft at twenty minutes before