The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-18 00:00:00

them to be a
I tendon ? p

pun*. sr**, how did that bear upon the
they awe allegiance to any other power
? Was there any evidence or argu-
e that they would not continue good
atirens of this country after their admission into par-
liament ? (Hear.) With regard to the question of
principle, it was an undisputed fact that the words in the
oath bad been introdimed with no other view than to bind
the party taking it to its subject-matter by an obligation
binding on his nonscience. The words amounted to a de-
aeration not of the faith of the individual, but of the
nation. Had the principle so stoutly contended for been
wesmired ? Did it exist in the case of tho quaker*, the
Nomvians, and the separatists ? It did not. What then
became of the principle ? The house had been relaxing
oathsin most respects wisely. They had allowed members
to enter the House of Commons who had taken the oath
containing the words in question. The principle bad,
therefore, utterly failed in point of fact. (Hear, hear.) It
had been said that a great shock would be given to the
moral feeling of the country if the present bill were passed ;
but why had not that shock been given when the Jews
were made eligible for election to municipal offices ? Again,
it had been said that this was a new bill, but how could it
be called new when the House of Commons had, year after
year, been sending it up to their lordships' house ? Every
time it mado its appearance it came with renewed claims
to their consideration. With respect to the right
rev. prelate on his right (the Bishop of Oxford) he
could only say that that right rev. prelate had opposed the
Jew bill hut session in a very powerful and argumentative
speech, hut on this occasion, though he had risen before
him (the Lord Chancellor) to address the house, he had
lost the opportunity of delivering any address whatever, as
the reply was now made. (Loud laughter.) He would not
further occupy their time, but would call upon them at
once to proceed to the division.
Both sides of the house were for some seconds literally

convulsed with laughter when the Lord Chancellor con-
eluded at finding the Bishop of Oxford quite prepared,
with a pile of documents before him, to deliver himself of
what apparently would have been a lengthened, and no
doubt an eloquent oration, against the bill, but being pre-
cluded from saying even a word by the rules of the house,
and the adroitness with which the Lord Chancellor suc-
ceeded in following the Earl of Galloway, and delivering
the reply. The bishop seemed to bear the unexpected disap-
pointment with the utmost good temper, even though the
Lord Chancellor joined heartily in the laughter raised at
his expense.
Their lordships divided—
Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were—

Proxies
Non-contents—Present B2
Proxies
Majority against the second reading 36
Their lordships then, at a quarter past ten, adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMNIONS.—TIIVILSDAT, JULY 17.
The Sramthit took the chair at a quarter before four
o'clock.

NEW MEMBER.
The Right Hon. E. STlit:rr took the oaths and his seat
for the borough of Arundel, in the room of the Earl
of Arundel and Surrey, who accepted the Chiltern Hun-
dreds.