The Express.
London, England, 1848-02-08 00:00:00

DUBLIN ELECTION PETITION.

Mr. C. ANSTEY moved to refer the petition of John
Rept°blr, Esq., M.P. (presented the 3rd of February), to
the select committee on the petition of Sir Willoughby
Jonee, relating to the Cheltenham election.
Sir G. GREY thought there had been already an oppor-
tunity for disputing any defect in the description of a party
entering into recegnisances, and if the hon. member looked
into the act he would find that the examiner's decision was
final against all parties.
Mr. REYNOLDS wished to date that throughout this
matter he had acted upon the advice of eminent legal autho-
rity. But as there appeared to be a doubt about the matter
he was prep►red to defer to the opinion of the house.
Mr. ANSTEY then withdrew the motion.
BODMIN ELECTION PETITION.
Mr. OSBORNE moved that the petition of James Wyld,
Esq., M.P. (presented 3d February), complaining of the re•
cognisance, entered into in respect of the petition against the
return for the borough of Bodmin, be referred to the com-
mittee appointed to inquire into the petition of Sir Wil-
loughby Jones.—itissed to.
LONGFORD ELECTION PETITION.

Mr. A.NBTint Moved that the petition of R. Fox,
Esq., bl.l' for Longford (presenttd 4th February), relating
to tile recognisance/ entered into in the ciae of the Longford
borough, be rettrred to the same committee. The lion.
member stated that in this case the objection was, that there
was nothing to show the solvency of the surety.—Motion
agreed to.
WALSALL ELECTION PETITION.

Mr. BAlNESe;sdea—;;iilar motion with reference to
the petition of the Hon. E. R. Littleton, hl P., and the
motion was aitreed to.
LORD-LIEUTENANCY OF GLOUCESTERSHIRE.
Mr. G. BERKELEY asked whether two petitions sent
from Gloucestershire to the office of the Home Secretary ior
presentation to the Queen had been received ?
Sir G. GREY ga.d petitions frequently came to the
Home.office of which the Secretary of State had no per-
sonal cognisance. He had inquired about those to which the
hon. member alluded, and he found that by an omission the
usualacknowledgment of the receipt had been neglected to be
sent.
DUBLIN CORPORATION AND LIVE CATTLE.
Mr. GROGAN placed is the Speaker's hands a motion
for a return, which was about to be read, when
Mr. J. REYNOLDS raid he had something to say.
The SPEAKER.—Perhapstbe hon. member bad better
bear the motion. It is for •' A return of the number of live
cattle." (Great laughter.)
Mr. J. REYNOLDS.—Oh I beg pardon, sir. I thought
it had something to do with the corporation of the city of
Dublin. (Shouts of laughter.)
The SPEAKER.—Does the hon member oppose the re-
turn 1 It so it cannot now be moved.

Mr. REYNOLDS.—I do, air.
IRELAND.
Mr. SCULLY, in the absence of Mr. J. O'Connell, asked,
pursuant to notice, " whether, considering the enormous and
every-day growing increase of destitution in many parts of
Ireland, the nearly total want of means among her small
farmers and agricultural labourers to purchase food and
maintain their families, and the inability of the poor law to
support the overwhelming pauperism of the country, the
government had not same measure ready for the providing
of relief by means of food or employment, and thus for pre-
venting the wholesale wasting and destruction of human life
among the poorer classes of Ireland ?"
Sir G. GREY called the attention of the house to the
inconvenience of putting such notices upon the paper—
(hear, hear) —notices containing a aeries of assumptions,
which must necessarily lead to a long debate. With re
terrace to the question, without entering into its preamble
or the inferences to be deduced from it, he had only to repeat
what he had add before—that the government were not pre-
pared to propose the resumption of the system of last year
fur the relief of the poor in Ireland, either by renewing pub-
lic works or by a general distribution of food. (Hear, hear.)
At the same time it was right that the hun. member and the
house should know that the necessities of the Irish poor
were not at the present time altogether neglected.
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.
In reference to the petition ?reamed by Lord Palmerton,
from the University of Cambridge,
Mr. GOULBURN said that the noble viscount had been
misinformed on the point, for the petition agreed to by the
body in question had been presented by himself, lad was
against the bill. (A laugh.)
On the question that the bill be now read a second time,
Mr. STAFFORD proceeded to move, pursuant to
notice, that the bill be read a second time that day six
months. He contended that there was comparatively little
feeling out of the house on this subjrst, and that the propo-
sition was one which almost entirely ought to be discussed, as
an abstract principle. It was no question of religious perse-
cution, of religious toleration; that question had been set-
tled by the concession to the Jews of the civil liberties which
they already:enjoyed. Those liberties he had no denim to
recil, but while he was willing to admit the Jews to a full
participation in the benefits of our legislation as fellow-sub-
jects administered for, he conceived that it would be wholly
contrary to our duty and interests as Christians to admit
those who were the enduring antagonists of Christianity
to a share in the legislation itself. The hon. member don-
eluded by moving that the bill be read a second time that
day six months.
Lord BURGHLEY seconded the amendment, and said
that in hi• estimation the question before the house was one
of no small importance, for it was whether the house was or
was not to possess a ristian character. He regretted very
much that the very form of the words necessarily inscribed
on the oath " on the faith of a true Christian," did not suf-
ficiently show to the noble lord (J. Russell) that by proposing
to omit them from that oath he would inevitably offend a
vast number of the Christian community. But it would be
heard from the noble lord that when the form of oath now
' extant had been imposed during the reign of James, there
was no reference whatever contemplated to the @Rua-
, lion of the Jews. What he would say on that
/abject wet, that the oath had hitherto excluded Jews,

and what reason was there why it should now be altered ?
The answer was that a particular individual of that nation
could not take his seat unless the law was altered. If that
was done, the door of the house was opened at once to Turks,
Mussulmea, or indeed to whoever might peons money or
influenee enough to induce pasple to send them to that place.
He hoped it would not be considered that he was actuated
by a hostile spirit towards the Jews. He had net read their
history in any such spirit. and he trusted his opposition to
the hill would not be ascribed to a want of Christian charity.
lie begged leave to second the amendment.
Mr. P. WOOD said that he had come to the conclusion, as
! well on social grounds as on those of Christianity, and as a
member of the Church of England, that it was high time so
disgraceful a memento of iutelerance as the bill before
the house was framed for the purpose of removing, should
be !swept from the statute book. 1 wenty years same he bad
signed a petition for effecting that which the noble lord
(J. Russell) now proposed to the house to sanction. That
religion had nothing to do with polities, was an adage which,
though constantly cited, was not altogether true, for reli-
gious opinions, which ought neither to qualify nor disqualify
any one fur holding a political station, still did have that
effect. One of the arguments used spinet the bill was, that
Christianity was part and parcel of the common law of
England. He begged to deny that proposition, in
so far as the present question we, concerned. The
hon. and learned gentleman then took a review of the va-
rious statutes and decisions bearing upon the question, and
contended that, until the time of Cromwell, the
social and political condition of the Jews as such was a eassu
miasma both in respect to the common and the statute law.
The declaration "on the faith of a Christian " was intro-
duced merely as a protection against the Jesuits, who were
supposed, rightly or wrongly, to have been implicated in the
gunpowder plot. And yet it was on that de duration that
the Jews were at this day held excluded from the legislature.
(Hear, hear.) But to show the animus aad true meaning of
the declaration, he would remind the house that when in the
reign of William 111. an act was pared against unitarians,
it spoke of " any persons making protease' of Christianity
who should deny the doctrine of the holy Trinity." The
Jews never made profession of Christianity; and therefore
the very act which excluded the unitarians must he held as
admitting the Jews. (Hear, hear.) But since that
time there had been numerous cases in which the
Jews were relieved from making the declaratiou.
So late as the year 1831, his late Majesty sanc-
tioned an act of the Jamaica legislature, admit-
ting the Jews to all privileges of citizenship, and in
1837 they were in like manner relieved from all civil dis-
abilities in Canada. Those colonial acts were all received
sub :dente" by the imperial parliament, and there was no
alarm about unchristiauesbig Canada or Jamaica. (Hear,
hear.) We had no tear of admitting Jews into colonial
legislatures, while we refused to admit two or three gentle-
men of that pennation into the home parliament. Ile
considered that there was a vast fallacy in the phrase,
" We are a Christian people, and aught to have a Christian
legislature." Our parliament could never be looked upon
as • Christian parliament in the exclusive sense of the
term. (Hear,beer.) From the reign of Edward I.
down to that of Charles ii. the English might
have been called an exclusively Christian people, but
from that time, having admitted the Jews to live and
settle among us, we hail no right to treat them otherwise
than as natural born citizens—that was to say, on the
Christian principle, "Do as you would be done unto."
(Hear, hear.) He was not one of those who contended
that between Jew and Christian there was no difference.
There was a wide difference ; but, as it had pleased the
Almighty to throw for the present a veil over the Jew's
heart, while the language of his own writers gave promise
el a brighter future, let not the British parliament continue
those mists by a narrow and exclusive legislation. One
word inure. It had been said that, if we admitted the Jews,
the next step would be the admission of Mahomedans and
Hiadoos. He saw no reason why not. (Ironical cheers
tram the opposition.) It might appear absurd in this
country ; but transfer the question to India, and if a local
legislature were about to be established, could fhlindoos or
Mahoms dens t• excluded ? ( Hear, hear.) We had tried
exclusion long enough with the Roman catholic., and be
would ask whethir the lung period of exclusion had con-
verted one member of that penuseion ? He believed the
principle of exclusion to be an unchristian principle, and
th iiefire he called uaon tl e house as a Christian parliament,
"Er. Itec°4llT'Auzl'ltewr ocUdianeravertioamitit theaatrellenVanity
was not part and parcel of the law of the land. The
house had been congratulated on the apathy with which
the present bill had been received ; but he looked epee
this as • very terrible sign of the times. The bon. member
concluded by salting his intention to oppose the bill.
Mr. MILS ES, in supporting the bill, denied that its ad-
vocates were indifferent to Christianity. Ile thoueht it was
poseihle—indeed the case of severel distinguished men hen
proved the fact, that it was possible—to reconcile very des p
rligious feeling with liberality in this matter. (Hear, hear.)
He should regret it the passing of the bill proved r. pugnant
to the feelings of the people ; but he would appeal to what
had lately occurred, tied ask a hether they had shown fair
active hostility to the measure ? (Hear, hear.) Times were
greatly changed within the tut 20 years, and he thought the
house would be acting wisely is legislating in the spirit of
the age. He did not think that the form of prayer with
which they began their proceedings in that house should
be spoken lightly o: ; and when they prayed that they
might not be actuated by private feelings he considered that
they would be carrying out that feeling and acting in the
true character of a Christian legislature by passing this mea-
sure. lie agreed with the bun, gentleman who spoke last
that great benefit might be derived from endeavouring to
emalgamate the Hebrew race with the rest of the nation.
The decision of that house would have a great effect upon
foreign nations. The Jews in other countries were not in
that position which they ought to cccupy. They were re-
cently admitted to many offices of the Prussian Diet, and
were excluded from legislative honours only by a majority of
three. It they, then, came to that conclusion at which he
hoped they would arrive, it might have a most beneficial
effect on other nations with respect to the Jews. (Year.)
Lord MAHON said, that in stating his reasons tor voting
against the measure before the house, he trusted that not a
word would escape from him disrespectful to the members
of the Jewish reli;ion. Ile was ready to admit the private
worth and extensive charity of many of that body; but these
were not sufficient grounds to induce them to abrogate their
Christian constitution. (Hear, hear.) If they were to admit
the Jews within the w.. 111 of parliament, they could not
stop there. They would be obliged to admit persons of any
religion or no religion. Give the Jews the liberty of ob-
taining seats in that house, and on what grounds could they
refuse admission to the Mahomsdan, the Hinders, or the
professed Deist. The noble lord, indeed, declared that reli-
gious belief should be no bar to any person's taking a seat in
that house; but he heard many of the supporters of the mea-
sure say in private, that though they were willing to make
this concession to the Jews from respect to their character,
they were not prepared to go farther. He begged to tell
those gentlemen, that if they gave way now they must give
way to the whole extent. It had been said that the question of
creed should be left between the constituency and the member
they choose to elect. Such an argument was not conforma-
ble to the system of the constitution. In the case of qualifi-
cation, for instance, it might with equal justice be said that it
was for the electors to consider whether they would have a
rich or a poor member. But the principle of the constitu-
tion was otherwise, for it imposed a certain qual.fication as
indispensable. He might also instance the oath of allegiance
for the same purpose. And in this consisted the answer to
the argument which had been put forward in a recent
pamphlet by the Archbishop of Dublin, who said
that this measure ought not to be considered as
one entitling certain persons to become members
of parliament, but as one removing a disqualification
which prevented Christians from electing certain persons ;
and that it was a great scandal to think the exclusion of
Jews necessary for the security of Christianity, because, if
the principle of the constitution was acknowledged in the
case of the qualification of members end the oats of allegi-
ance, why should it be inconsistent to acknowledge it in
the case of a solemn recognition of the Christian faith ?
(Hear, hear.) Then it was said that the numbers of Jews
who could obtain mats in the legislature must necessarily IN
so small that the privilege of admitting them could do no harm.
He was not quite perettde.l that the number in the legisla-
ture must be so very small, because, though few is number,
their wealth gave them gr at influence. But, admitting the
fact for the sake of argument, that was no reason why they
should violate a principle. If they were to look to imme
diate consequences, and not to wide principles, there was no
act which might not be successfully defended. Pascal, in his
" Provincial Letters," showed that the worst crimes might
be defended on this principle. A principle, therefore,
was to be maintained because it was principle, and should
not be violated bevies* some in.tances might be adduced in
which its viola'ion might do no harm. (Hear, hear.) Mach
stress had been Laid on the case of Gibbon, as pruviag that
their forma were of no as-ail to exclude persons the most hos-
tile to Christianity. On the same ground it might be
argued, when there were pretenders to the crown, that the
oath of allegiance was of no use because the jaeobites
had taken it. But the oath was of this value, that neither
honourable jacobitis or honourable infidels would take it.
(Hear, hear.) And if they took it, they must at least hide
their infidelity, and would not be able to propagate
it, u Condorcet, who held similar opinions to Gib-
bon, was able to do in the French assembly. At present,
if a member of that house spoke disrespectfully of the Re-
deemer, the Speaker would be justified in interfering ; but if
the oath were withdrawn he would have co power of doing so;
and the inevitable consequence would be to lower the tone of
debate in that house. (Hear.) He had voted for the admis-
sion of Jews into corporate offices; but that was quite consist-
ent with his resistance to the present measure, as there was
a wide difference hetween an alderman end a minister of
state. Another ground on which he resisted the measure wu
that it would tend to make the public believe that they were
indifferent to religion in that house. This consideration
ought net to influence them if the Jews were entitled to
what they claimed; but if they were not so entitled it was
a very grave consideration, and should make them pause
before they consented to the measure. (Hear, hear.) For
the reasons he had stated he would give his vete against it.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH said that there was one part of
the question which had been entirely overlooked by previous
speakers, and which required those who would reject the
measure of the noble lord to propose somethiag in its stead,
for the law could not remain in its present anomalous state.
They must adopt one of two alternatives—either adopt the
measure of the noble lord, or pass a law &slaying all elections
of persons who did not profess the Christian religion void. As
the law stood at present every person was eligible to be a mem-
ber of parliament who was not subject to certain restrictions and
disqualifications—those restrictions and dliqualifications de-1
pending on the law and custom of parliament. The belief
is the Jewish religion was not one of those restrictions, and
Baron Rothschild was therefore legally bound to serve in
parliament. By the statute for the trial of election petitions,
every member appointed on these committees was obliged to
serve, and Baron Rothschild's name was on an election
panel. 800ffir or later the* ha would arum that he would I

be appointed to serve on a committee, and .t he did me
attend ha would be taken into custody by the iserjeut.iy,
arms. Of the three oaths required t he taken by mumbeea
he might and would take the oath of allegianee
"uprernacy according to the Jewish form, but he would net
take the oath of abjuration because he was required to dos'
"on the true faith of a Christian." The house, bow
had no power to declare his seat vacant for refusing to take
the oath of abjuration, and he might sit in the house dung
the debate, the act of the 6 Geo. 111., c. 63, attaching tag
penalty not to sitting in the house hut to voting in it. Theu
was no law or custom of parliament by which he could be
expelled on account of his religion. And if he were so ea.
pelted there was nothing to prevent the citizen. of Lenies
from re-electing him. Here therefore was a dilemma from
which they could nut escape, except by passing the mea,
sure of the noble lord, or making void, by act of yaw
Bement, all elections of persons not professing Chrieisatte,
The plea under which this measure was opposed was the
lest remnant of intolerance. But the time was emu whoa
England must set the example of liberality to the world.
Mr. 11. 8. WALPOLE thought that the reasons for ad.
mining the Jews to parliament did not predominate over the
arguments against the measure. The problem they hod now
to solve was, whether a country ought or ouebt not to be
governed by thou who profe.aed its national religion.
Christianity was a fundemen!al law is the constitution of
our state ; and it that were so, such a law never should bo
I altered, except at the desire of a very large majority of the
I people, and unless their own wisdom deliberately approved
the change. Had religion nothing to do with the affair" of
a legislature? Why the very writ under which they wire
summoned desired their attendence to advise her Mansty eg
the religion of the realm. How could a Jew legislate Ise
that relgion, when a sincere adherence to his own fro*
necessarily debarred him from blending his opinions with
the religion of the county)? But was it established that the
majority of the people desired the change? Historically
they nev r had desir:d that the Jews should take a part is
public affairs, and whatever society you went into now you
would find the same feeling still prevailing. And thie
brought him back to his find proposition, that sufficiently
preponderating reseals' had not been given for the alters.
lion. It wee said that they had gone so tar that they mud
inevitably ge one step further. But the distinction between
duce who made laws and those who were to execute them
when made, was broad and well defined. The executors of
We laws had only to carry out the intent of tee law mem..
but the makers of the laws were guided by their own feelings-
The executor of the laws need not be a christian--
it sufficed that he should he a good citizen ; but not m
with the law maker. But then it was urged that, inasmack
as you admitted a Jew to be one of the electors, why not
allow him to be one of the elected ? But that argument
proceeded on the assumption that the qualification fora
franchise and the qualification for an office were the same.
But the qualification of the franchise belonged to every man
as a subject, but the office was a m-tter of trust not to he
held by right for the benefit of the individual, but to be
held by sufferance for the benefit of the nation. (lieu, hairy
But the noble lord opposite had urged one farther
argument—that all who bore the burdens of a state ought It
share its honours and its privil, gee. The best answer to
this was this very case. If all who bore the burdens of a
state were entitled to share its honours, why exclude the
Jew from the office of Lord Chancellor or Lord Lieutenant
Why, there were a thousand tests of exclusion from
parliament even at the present time—the tests of
age, of sex, of property, of office, or of country.
Age was not always a disqualification. Mr. Fox sat for the
borough he (the hon. member) represented before be was
20. It another Mr. Fox were to arise "how hard," they
might say, "to exclude him !" Property! How many men
there were competent to legislate in this country who had
not sottUent estate to quality them for a s at in that house.
Then take the case of a naturalised alien : that individual
was exyludi d, under the law., from a seat in parliament, and
yet they proposed to admit a Jew, who, so far from being
their own countryman, either by birth tr by law, was a native
of no country, had no land r xcept that whereunto he looked
with hope that God in his own good time would restore his.
(Cheirs.) But the next great argument was, that this par-
fitment was an expansive parliament; that at one time it
was exclusively church of England, but that dissenters had
been admitted, Roman catholic' had been admived, and
why not Jews ? True it was that they were, in a religious
point of view, a divi•led people, but they were up to the present
time at least a Christian people. Theirdifferences were in no
respect analogous to the .venial differences betwe, n
deism and Christianity, and he thougat it well worth con-
sidering whether a unity was not given them by the mode of
life prescribed u ,der the New Testament, which It was
desirable at any sacrifice of feeling to preserve. He would
willingly here conclude, but as others .had introduced
not merely questions of texpediency and principle, but
matter of feeling, he could not retrain from one word upon
Chet point also. It there were one people more than another
to whom he would extend indulgence, that people were the
Jewish people; and it was not until he had considered the
subject well Mat he felt it incumbent to rote as lie proposed
to vote. When he reflected on their peculiar history—on all
they had been, and on all they were,—rich in recollections
of the past, and rich also in their anticipations of
the future—and when he bore in mind, as he
was bound to bear in mind, that this people
had, as it were, the promise that at some period they would
again be the fa, • tied people of God : when he considered
these things, he owned thst he felt Inc the Jews so deep a
sympathy, that he would ext, nd for them every indulgence
that a Christian member of a Christian legislature could con-
scientiously extend. (Cheers.) But believing as be did
that Christianity was so interwoven with the principles of the
state, that they caul- ; not be 'separated the one from the
other:—and fearing, as he did, the detrimental effect of
such a measure as that which was proposed, he would not
consent to destroy or weaken that national character, based
as it was upon Christian precept. which had an greatly con-
tributed to the moral and political elevation of the nation.
The hon. and learned member concluded with expreseing
his conviction that es our national prosperity lay deep sunk
in our national religion, any blow struck at our national re-
ligion would shake the pillars of our national prosperity.
Mr. SHELL said that had the hon. and learned gen-
tleman been a member of the parliament in which the
right hon. member fur Tamworth brought forward his
measure for ca..holic emancipation, the speech he had just
delivered would have been almost en apposite on that as on
this occasion. The hon. and learned gentleman, with all
his habits of forensic discrimination, could scarcely point

out any arguments in hs speech which might not haie 'been
urged, with equal effect, on either occasion. ( Hear, hear.)
The hon. and learned gentleman had referred to that part of
the writ calling them together, which bore especial re-
ference to the Anglican church. He would ask whether this
point was not as applicable to the unitarians, to the baptist',
to the independents, to the Roman catholic'.' (Hear,
hear.) A great part of the hon. and learned gentleman's
speech, indeed, might have been used with equal force
against Lord Lyndburot'e proposition for tte municipal en-
franchisement of the Jews. The question fir the house,
however, was whether, having gone so far, they ought
not to go further, and efface from the statute book
the remnant of intolerance which still disgraced it in rela-
tion to our Jewish fellow-subjects. It appeared to him that
from the liability to duties the enjoyment of rights ought
not to be dissociated, and that as every Jew born in Eng-
' land was bound to every duty appertaining to a British sub-
ject, he was of right entitled to every privilege that a British
subject enjoyed. (Hear, hear.) lie was aware that the
disabilities imposed on Jews were simply coiled privrions,
but all privations resolved themselves into the character
of penalties, and to cite mind of the Jew the priva-
tion now sought to be removed presented itself in
the harshest aspect. He could speak as a quasi witness
in the matter. Often, ere the act of "29 was conceded,
he had sat under the gallery of St. Stephen's Chapel,
and witnessed the agonies under which the great soul
whose energies had effected Catholic emancipation writhed,
until that emancipation was obtained. O'Connell, the
champion of truth and reason, was morally at the head of
millions, writhing, like himself, under injustice. The Jews
of tkis country numbered not their millions; their force eon-
I slated solely in the arguments of truth and reason ; but
with an assembly, representing, as that kouse did, not merely
the intellect, but the great-mindedness also of the nation,
those arguments could not hut avail. What was the mean-
ing, of this Hebrew-phobia ? (" Hear, hear," and
a laugh.) Did they tremble for the church
The church might, indeed, have some reason for
fear in our eight millions of Ramos catholic', our three mil-
lieu' of methodists, our million and a half of new catholice ;
she might have something to fear from sectarianism assailing
her without, and from spurious popery and mutiny within
—(hear, hear)—but from the neutral, apathetic, tranquil,
unproulytising synagigue, be assured she had nothing to
fear. (Hear, bur.) It was said that the introduction of
Jews into the house would unchristianise the house. In his
opinion, the Christianity of the house depended on the
Christianity of the country. (Hear, hear.) The Christianity
of the country— he meant by Christianity the belief in
Christ risen from the dead—was fixed ia, and inseparably
intertwined with, the affections of the people. He
considered the Christianity of these islands to he as
stable as the Wanda themselves (hear, Year) end
that so long as the constitution of England lasted, so
long as parliament itself endured, so long would the house
—the burnished and unbroken mirror of the national mind
—reflect the religious feeling of the nation. (Hear, bear.)
Herein he viewed the true security of the Christian faith
of England, aril not in a formal test, at which, indeed, the
honest man w' pause, but which the sardonic sceptic
would contemptuously overleap. (Hear, hear.)
ference had been made to the illustrious name of Gibbon a
still higher name might have been adduced in illustration,
that of Bolingbroke, a man who, rich in external accom-
plishment, full to overflowing of intellectual endowment,
trod down in scorn the test which would have ex-
cluded the Jew, and made of that house the
stopping-atone to the pinnaile of power. There was no war-
rant in Scripture far this imposition of a temporal penalty
with the view of propagating divine truth; there was no
such dogma found in the mouth of Him who laid
dun his life for mankind, and whose last words
were an invocation of mercy on thou who had
saerific.d Him, seeing that " they knew net what they did."
But alas for frail and fragile human nature, no sooner bad
the professors of Christianity become associated with tem-
poral authority, than they turned the severities which they
themselves had suffered agaiut their Jewish brethren. The
reformation did nothing for the Jews, all were still
against them—Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, Protestants,
all whe had torn to pieces the seamless garment
of the Saviour had alike terribly sinned in
this regard. But it was some consolation to a
Roman catholic to know that in Roman catholic countries
at exception was now made in their favour. In Belgium
and in Francs all distinction between Christian and Jew bad
bean abolished. (Hear.) He trusted tat protestant Eng-
land would follow that bright example. (Hear, hear.) A
great deal of the prejudice which had existed at one time in
this country was beginning to disperse. London had made
a noble manifestation of its feeling. Was the house prepared
to throw back the Jew on London, in radar that London

might throw back the Jew on the house ? (Cheers.) Not
only was the disqualification of the Jew inconsistent with the
spirit of th• Christian religion, but those very disabilities im-
peded the progress of Christianity, prevented the soarer
doe of the Jews, and produced effects diametrically the
reverse of Came which they were intended to ptoduee.
The disabilities imposed upon the Jew were not sufficiently
onerous to be compulsory ; but they were sufficiently vexa-
tious to make conversion a synonome for spost•ey, and to
affix a stigma to uninterested conformity with the este-
blßhed religion. (Cheers.) We had struck off the master
fitter, with which the Jew had been bound by the neck and
the foot ; but the fetters which remained, though appa-
rently were strong enough to fasten the Jew to his
faith, and to make it a matter of discredit to him should he I
desert his creed. (Hear.) Nothing effectual would be
done in this country towards the extinction of Judaism until
a restitution of his birthright an an Englishman was made to
every one, no matter what religion he professed. Some en- ,
Weaned the idea that there was 140 such thing as an English,
a Spanish, or an Italian Jew ; they held that a Jew was
• Jew, and nothing else ; they supposed that his
nationality was engrossed by the country of his Pepe.
and recollections, and that the house of Jacob must
remain for ever in • state of isolation and restraint. It was
not wonderful, when the Jews were oppressed, irritated, and
branded, that they should have felt, on the banks of the
Seine and the Thami s. as their forefathers felt when weep-
ing by the waters of Babylon ; it wa- not wonderful that
the psalm of exile should have been found the language of '
their hearts. (Hear, hear.) But what hail been already
done had produced • most signal alteration. In proportion 11
as tie limo against the Jew had been mitigated the love of
country had been
his heart, and nothing but perfect justice was required for
its full development. (Hear.) Let the Jew be emancipated,
let all distinctions between him and the Christian be abo-
lished, and his hear; would be tilled with perfect attachment
to bat country; his exultations and his sorrows would be
the same as ours—his heart would beat with the seine pelpi-
lotion at the news of British victory—and, if ever there should
be need, his life-blood would he poured i.ut for his country
with the same prodigality as our own. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. NEW DEGAT E, who addressed the house amidst great
confusion, was ui derstood to say that he could not conceive
how the doors of the house could be opened to the Jew, who
repudiated Christianity, without the legislature repudiating
Christianity itself. Since the subject was last before the
house it had come to his knowledge that individuals
had been employed to obtain signatures to the
petition in favour of the ministerial measure in the
suburbs of London—first, at Is. 6.1. the hundred lig- '
natures, then, when that was found insufficient, at 3s. •
hundred, and, at list, ss. a hundred was given. So much
for the value of these expressions of popular opinion. (Hear.)
He considered that to break. down the Christian character
of the house would bo nothing less than insult to the
Christian people at large. Had it ben known before the
hue election that this question would be amongst the first
to he submitted to the sew house a very different expression
of the national will would have been given. H. did not
believe that toe opinion of the great majority of
the people was favourable to this measure. The
bon. member concluded by reading a porii.n of Hook, is
" Ecclesiastical Polity," wherein that divine expresses his
conviction that the church and state are coequal and
coexistent, and consequently that the admission of
a Jew witt.in the legislature would be • fatal
departure from the constitution of the state.
Mr. C. PEARSON moved the adjournment of the de-
bate, which was agreed to.
SUGAR COLONIES. _ .

On the motion of Lord G. BENTIVCK, the following
members were appointed a select cousenittee to inquire into
the present condition and prospects of the interests connected
with and dependent on cigar and coffee planting in her
Majesty's East and W. st Indian posses-ions and the Mauri-
tius; and to consider whether any and what measures can
ba adopted by parliament for their nib f : Lord G Bentinck,
Mr. Lahouchere. Mr. Goulhurn, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr.
Cardwell, Sir T. Birch, Mr. 11. Rope, Mr. C. Villiers, Mr.
P. Miles, Mr. J. Wilson, Lord G. Menders, Mr. Ewart, Sir
John Pakington, Mr. J. Matheson, and Sir E. N. Buxton.
The house adjourned at 2.1 minutes to one o'clock.

Zit, erpregg.

MAILS

The mails for British North Amens,, Bermatta, and the UMW
Pates. will be made up on the evening of the I Ida February.
The West lode Mails, excluding Bermuda, Nassau, Ravenna,
Ronduras, New Orta•atea, Vera Cour, Tampico, and Forte Rico, and
Including those for Madeira, Jaemel, Carthagena, sane Martha,
Chagres, Panama, West Coast of Pouth .talericii, and Kt. Juan-de-
Nicaragua, wilt be made Up on the moraine of the 17th February.
The malls for Vino, i apnea°, Liao ma, Madeira, 011117., and (inmates/
will be mode up on the mornine of the 17th February.
The merle.' reed- t.to Gibralratt Maltn,Ureree, the lonian bland.
Lent, Aden, al lam, India, Mono-hour, and Chinn, ran Southampton
wlll be made up on the morning ot the loth Vehruei7.
The m ails Far New South Waters Van thenten's leant, and New
Zealand will be made up on the evening of the _Nth February.
—.. . .

Ihe overland cfovedinails, no Marseilles, to tho Mediterranean
Egypt, Aden, Ceylon, lochs, !long Kong, sec., will Do made up on the
evening of the 24th February.
The midst's. the West Onst of Africa and Madeira will be made
up on the evening of the 29th February.
The mails for the Brasile, the Ricer Plate, Monte Video, Pernam-
buco, Bahia Madeira, and Bueues Ayres, will be made up on the
evening of the ith March.