The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-16 00:00:00

JEWISII DISABILITIES BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of this bill, a crowd
of members rose to present petitions against it. Amongt
them were Mr. Parke, Sir F. Thesiger, Mr. Newdegate,
Sir J. TroHope, Mr. Christopher, Sir J. Y. Puller, and
ablut *.:O others sviann we did not reeoanise. Mo.. of the
peti;:eta are notL,d in the proper pike.-I,or+l Dudley
Stuart, Mr. Ccbden, Mr. IlindleT, and some ethers prc-
*anted petitions in favour of the bill.
Mr. C. BRUCE said he could not permit the thir 1 read-
ing to paw without entering his strong protest against it.

T u attempt to pass this measure had been made four times
in vain; the numbers opposed to it bad constantly in-
creased, and the majorities in its favour had constantly
dia.inished. On a former occasion the bill bad been op-
posed by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer,
whose opinions then, at all events, whatever they were
now, were in accordance with those of his coneti•uents.
The noble lord the member for 13ridgnorth had also
changed his opinion. These changes were to be regretted.
on account of the opinion which vies formed of the house
out of doors. The right hon. Secretary at War had e-olua-
leered a justification of these changes, so eloquent that
those who heard it might almost base imagined that con-
sistency was a vice, and inconsistency a virtue. (A laugh.)
Of Lord J. Russell it must be admitted that he had been
consistent, and hail held by the undiluted traditions of
whiggism, one of which was that no party but themselves
was fit to hold office. Sir \V. Moleswerth had also acted
in consistence with all his past professions as to religious
equality. The hon. member then proceeded to animadvert
at great length on the conduct pursued by the government
lon the Clergy Reserves (Canada) Bill, in doing which he
Was frequently interrupted by cries of " Order." were
the Duke of (Wellington now alive and amongst
them, they would not dare to play such base antics.
Ile disclaimed any feeling.' of intolerance towards the Jewish
people. As the aristocracy of races ho regarded that people
with respect, and as still the peculiar people of God he en-
I tertained for them even veneration. He said still the pccu-
liar people of God, because, though now tossed and scat-
tered by divine wrath, he believed that in the cud they
would be rertived into the divine favour. But let not that
house presumptuously accelerate tho period of their de-
liverance. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) Let cot
" fools rush in where angels fear to tread." That
WAS his view; and be put forward that view
not in the spirit of medireval persecution, hut in the spirit of
true humility. He would give to the Jews, as citizens,
every equality with Christians; but it should always be
remembered that, as Jews, they were disentitled to the ex-
ercise of the sovereign power which that house exercised.
After some airy general and familiar remarks, the hon.
gentleman concluded by meninx the amendment of which
he had given notice, that the bill be read a third time that
day six months.
Mr. J. KIRK entered into the scriptural and later his-
tory of the Jews at great length and with much minuteness
with a view to showing that, when favoured by Ged, those
who had wronged them were invariably punished ; and
that even when they came under Divine wrath, the nations
which had persecuted them had invariably been scattered
and destroyed. The moral of the narrative was, as he pre-
sented it, consequently against persecution now ; and ex-
clusion (coin parliament was a species of persecution. The
hon. member then proceeded to laud tho Jewish race. It
had produced the greatest men the worll hail ever seen.
He looked to both sides of the house, and to both sido; of
the other house, and he would search in vain for a lawgiver
like Moses, a ruler like Joshua. a poet and prophet like
Isaiah, or a statesman liko Daniel, who was •prime
minister under five successive monarchs. (Laughter.)
There was as much danger to Christianity from using the
Psalms of David as there would be from admitting Jewa
into parliament. The hon. member then quoted prophe-
cies in Am" Isaiah, and Jeremiah, with regard to the re-
storation of the Jewish nation to their own country. Tee
time was not, he thought, far distant when that restoration
would take place. Ile presumed not to prophecy, but there
were certain marks of the last times which seemed to cor-
roborate his view. For example, it had been predicted in
reference to those times, " Many shall run to and fro ;" and
it was only in 1931 that the railway from Manchester to
Liverpool was opened. By admitting the Jews they would
prepare them for legislating after their return to their own
land, when they would prove, he believed, the firmest
friends and allies of England. Setting aside the religious
questiou, public policy required that this hilt should be
passed.
Mr. WHITESIDE said ho had no sort of prejudice in
reference to the Jews, as a nation—on the contrary, he felt
the deepest interest in their welfare—neither had he any
prejudice against a gentleman who aspired to a seat in that
house : if the principles of the constitution entitled hint to
that privilege, tho claim ought to be conceded. His oppo-
sition rested on the ground, net that the admission of Jews
would he inconsistent with the words of an existing oath,
but that it was inconsistent to the deep and settled princi-
ples of the laws and constitution of this country.
(Hear, hear.) In the speech made by the Secretary-
at-War the other evening, there was one sen-
tence which was especially impressed on his mind ;
namely, " Here is an individual excluded accidentally, the
principles of the constitution being iu his favour." It the
hon. gee lemon could establish that, he (Mr. Whiteside)
would instantly vote for the removal of the accidental in-
justice. (Hear, hear.) There was, however, higher autho-
rity on this subject than that of the hon. gentleman. The
noble lord the member for the City of London, said the
argument against the bill was based on the ground that
Christianity was part and parcel of the constitution of
England, but that lie had never understood anything more
to lie meant by the phrase than this, that it' a man published
blasphemous publications he might be punished. It the
noble lord could establish that limitation, he would vote for
the bill ; at present, however, he maintained that not
merely the law, but the whole policy of' the state
was founded upon Christianity. That was the doctrine laid
down by Fortescue in his instiactions to Henry the Sixth,
that learned judge declaring that Christianity and the law
of the land were identical, and that if any particular law
contravened Christianity it could not be a part of the law of
England. So, also, with regard to the law of tenure. By
the old law a man could not devise away land from his heirs.
An exception, however, was made in favour of Christianity,
to the exclusion of every other system, under which one-
fourth might be devilled on certain religious conditions.
The parties were to pray for the dead—(ironical cries of
" Hear, hear ")—for the heirs of the devisor, their grand-
fathers, and so on. (Hear, hear.) When the Reformation
came the thing was still regarded, though, as Lord Coke
observed, it was done according to the new principles of the
established church. The same principle was to be found
running all through our system. To apply the argument.
If Baron Rothschild were to publish to-morrow that
" Christ was an imposter," and " the New Testament a
lie," the Attorney-General must indict him; and yet the
same gentleman demanded to be allowed to do that which
would be equivalent to what he bad just stated. (" No,
no.") Ile acquitted Baron Rothschild of the bad taste and
bad feeling which could lead him to use such Ismaili; but
his argument was that, by refusing to ho sworn as a
Christian, he proclaimed that Christianity was a fiction,
and did that indirectly which, if it were done directly,
would be punished as blasphemy. (Hear, hear, hear.)
But suppose this bill were allowed to pass, and it should so
happen that in the progress of events Baron Rothtchild be-
came the successor of the noble lord the member for the
City of London. If the Baron shout I then offer the Qacen
any advice about the church he would be liable to be in-
dicted under one section of the bill, while the fourth clause
excluded the Jew from sitting in an Ecclesiastical Court of
law. Now, why was this? Why, simply because it would
be absurd to place a Jew in a court, where affairs affecting

There was another hon. member who had addressed the
howl., the hon. member for Elgin, but the whole of his
speech was ad's seed to the Clergy Reserves Bill. lie re-
minded him of an ancestor of his who was prisoner in the
Tower of London. and who watched a spider :Attempting to
gain the oiling, erten failing but at length sueereding, and
that put courage into his mind. The hon. gent:e men seemed
to follow in the lessen of perseverance, but. .:alike the
spider, he hail not got the thread, and therefere could not
succeed. }Laughter.)
Mr. CIL LD concurred in many of the senti• ,ants uttered
by the noble lord in introducing this bill, but thought they
constituted no reason why cave member o: that house
shoul I not be called on to declare his belief in Christianity.
The noble lord 'poke of their being few iu number, and
that therefore they could not detract from the Christianity
of the assembly, hut he (Mr. Child) thought that was an
argument estaiii-t their admission. To his mind itlooked
more like an apology. The noble lord seemed to scorn an
utility of oaths, and said an oath would not Jac. pout a man
I who paid no respect to it. In tho same way milts and bar
did not always keep out burglars, but was that a reason why
they should not have bolts and bars Ile was uawilling to
confide the government of the church to th • e who coml.
dared it a blasphemous institution : and occ caons might
arise, when parries were nearly balanced, whin the votes
of two or three Jews might decide a question w th reference
to the government of the church. Ho protested against a
measure which by allowing the repreeentatives el the people
to cost off the outward silos of their faith, made that as-
sembly repudiate it. Christian character.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said this subject bad oc-
cupied the house tor so many years that it was scarcely pos-
sible to found a new argument upon it. From this, how-
ever, he must except the speech of the hon. ae.l learned
member for Enniskillen, who used arguments which, if
they had not much law about them, had some inhenuity.
The hon. and learned gentleman, in the first place, relied
upon the pneiiion that Christianity was part and parcel of
the law of the land ; and he illustrated his tegument by
historical statement of the law of marriage ue a religions
ceremony, end altogether denying its validity in this ceou-
tgy es regarded civil contracts. Why they all knew per-
fectly well that such an argument might he addressed
to that portion of our history when Roman catholicism was
the dominant religion in this country, and when the state
and the church were in that reap cat altogether one, and
therefore the lew of the church was at that time the law of
the state. Indeed all the arguments they had heard from
the hon. and learned gentleman related to Itoinau catholic
times, when that church was predominant in this country.
By the common law of Encland every natural tern subject of
the realm was entitled to all the privileges that could attach
to a Gee-born people. Then the inquiry was, was a Jew a
natural born subject, end as such entitled as much as any
other man ? li the Jew was a natural born enhieet, they
were bound to show some reason which was consistent with
religion and with true policy why they ought to exclude
him ; because from the tune when the Romen aesthetic re-
ligion ceased to ho dominant iu this country, and when the
principles of toleration were introduced, religion had been
no diequalificetien of any individual who w IS a natural
born subject of the country, save only as it haul been intro-
duced by some uaricular statute on the ground of some
particular policy. The Roman catholic' leaned to a foreign
potentate, which was sufficient to deprive them-of political
power, and the dissenter was excluded on the ground so
often stated, that the constitution of the ceuntry was identified
with religion. All these reasons were political reasons.
The religious reasons had been entirely abrogated.
The onus clearly lay with the opponents of the bill,
because not only did the existing law deprive the Dotard
born subjects of the realm of their civil rights, but this de-
privation existed in the face of laws permitting them to
exercise many important civil mid judicial funetiont. He
trusted, therefore, that feelings of justice and of political
propriety would induce the house to assent to t!,e measure,
not more than a ii nee that some retribution was due to the
Jews for that long-continutd series of persecutions of which
they had must unjustly end most undeservedly been the ob-
jects. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion he hoped that this lest
remaining erejudice agaiust the Jews would lie rooted out.
and thee th bill would be teeepted in the is due and for
the'sake of Christianity itself. (Cheers.)
Mr. GOULBURN opposed the measure, in the belief
that even in the administration of civil affairs persons
imbued with the Christian faith were better quaff-
fied to administer it. But they had not only to
deal with civil affairs; every set of the legisla-
ture was ece impaled with a religious ace' ire. They
joined in prayer on their meeting every day. In seasons of
calamity they went in a body to supelicate delivcrenee, and
in moments of triumph and victory the two house, offered
up their united thanksgivings. (Rear, hear.) What would
it be but a mocks ry to sec half :a-dozen Jews kneeling in
company with a body of Chris:lens, and affecting to adore
that name which it WAS known they despised i• It would
be worse that, a solemn tarce—it would be hypocrisy and
profanation. (Loud cheers from the opposition.) He had
ho prejudice egeiuet the Jews; he would give them every
advantage they could enjoy without injurin; our own
Christian form of government; and he would go as far as
the last speaker in his aline to enlighten their minds, and
bring then, to a knowledge of the truth. If this bill were
passed it would produce is most injurious effect as regarded
the opinion el:dere:Med of that house by the country at
large. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. It. MOORE protested against this measure, because
on religious grounds it was indefensible, perilous, and un-
called-tor in a political point of view, and as compromising
the British parliament, for when Jews were admitted into
' that house it ceased to be an exclusively Christian legisla-
ture.
Mr. BRIGHT said that, although this question had been
diseue.ail in every session during which he had been in
parliament, lie had never before troubled the house with
any observations upon it, and hoping, most unfeignedly,
that this would be the last occasion in which it would be
necessary fur the house to discuss it, he begged their atten-
tion for a few minutes while Restated the opinions he en-
tertained on the subject. lie was once asked by an hon.
member, on the other side of the house, why be had sot
ripoken on the Jew Bill. lie gave him a candid answer.
Ile told him that he had never heurd aaythin;: an the shspe
of a fact or an argument from the opponents of the measure,
.which, like facto and arguments relating to many questions
that came before them, could be fairly grappled with, and
which a man could lay hold of to answer. (" Hear, hear,"
and slough.) It appeared to him that the opponents of the
measure were actuated many of them, and he hoped
honestly, more by a sentiment than anything else, and the
gentleman to whom Le had alluded, not the least distin-
guished among gentlemen opposite, said that ho (Mr.
Bright) was quite right, and he admitted that they were
actuated more by a eentiment than anything else, and it
was very difficult is argue against a sentiment. That sen-
timent had now sank down into a phrase. It se tow un-
derstooi what was meant when they said that they were
going to unchristianiso the H :use of Commons. (Hear.)
He had endeavoured to trace whence that a xpression,
that you were not to unchristianise the House of Commons,
came, and he could trace it back through all the changes in
the law by which successive --- • e and sects and sections
- -

. ~ , ....—e successive parties
w e
Christianity ould have to be demo sed of ; but this exclu- of the people of this country had in the last fifty years been
sion proved the very principle for which he was contend- admitted to participate in the rights of citizenship. The
ing. The law of the country was opposed to the profession same feeling operated when you excluded the Roman
of Jewdism, and a Jew could not be admitted to a seat in catholic, from parliament ; the same feeling operated when
parliament, if the laws and customs of the lend were to be the unitarians were subjected to the oppressions of statutes
continued. He might be told that the Jew was already against them ; the same feeling operated, howeeer it might
admitted to the office of magistrates ' • but there was a have been attempted to disguise it, previously to the repeal
wide difference between permitting the Jew to ad- of the Test and Corporation Acts, which excluded dissenters
minister the law, and converting him into a law from municipal cud other offices. It all seemed to him to
maker. (Hear, hear.) The law distinctly provided that be derived from tee same appetite for eupre-
none but those who consented to take the Christian oath macy ; springing from tho fact that we had a
should be permitted to sit in parliament, and, though it powerful and ruling church connected with the
might be hard to enforce the law in this case, he yet could powerful and dominant class; and it was step by step
not consent to find a remedy for it at the expense of the that the people wrested from that church and that class the
constitution. The country had become great and the rights of citizenship which they claimed and now enjoy.
people happy, though upholding the principle of Chris- What could be less marvellous that the same men should
tianity. Christianity had been the animating principle of make doctrinal differences of religion the test of political
all oar public off sirs, and the basis of our institutions for rights ? Doctrinal differences had always existed, and
Centuries past. While under its influence we had been would probably last far ever ; but if they were made the
enabled to reclaim the mistime and free the slave, and would test apolitical right., it would be to admit the fatal prin-
alter a system which bad produced such vast results ciplo that sewed and political distinctions must he eternal,
simply for the sake of admitting the Jew into paella- and could to Ter he eradicated. The hon. baronet the
ment. (Cheers.) member for the University of Oxford had been as consistent
Mr. Serjeant MURPHY had no reason to complain of an opponent of this measure as any one. He would ask the
the spirit in which the last speaker had approached this hon. baronet if there was any difference between Min and
question. His object seemed to have been to divest it of a Baron Rothschild—(t hear," and laughter)—in any matter
polemical character, and to view it as being opposed to the which could affect the rights of citizenship—(hear, hear)—
political dogmas which laid down that Christianity was part or anything relating to the duties of cilium., or auy-
and parcel of the law. The hon. and learned gentleman thing whatever of which the law of the country could
gave his own interpretation of that rule, but be (Serjeant take cognisance as relating to the actions of any
Murphy) having, from the nature of his profession, had oc- subject of the crown ? lie watched the course
onion to look closely into the subject was more disposed to pursued by the hon. baronet for many years with ad-
opts with the interpretation which the noble lord miration ; not on account of his principles, but for the
the member for the city of London bad given of the law. manner in which he always maintained them. If all men
That interpretation was this—Christianity being closely who held what he (Mr. Bright) believed to be sound prin-
identified with the system of our constitution, the law ciples would mike the hon. baronet their model, things
treated as blasphemous all writings that wilfully reflected wield march on faster than they did. Looking at the
upon the professors of that religion, or called fa question its morality of his politics, it would be found that the hon.
truth, but, on the other hand, it refrained from interfering baronet drew all his opinions from the same source as Baron
with religious opinions and objections which were held on Rothschild did his. (' Hear, hear," and a laugh.) Take
oonsciontious grounds; but in discussing this branch of the the subject of capital punishment. When it was before the
subject, they must first ascertain what was Chritianity, and house, the hen. baronet rose with that bland dignity width
in the nest place, what was the common law of England. The so well became him, and (noted most triumphantly a pas-
common law was not the fixed, immutable, unchangeable sage from the fth chapter of Genesis. lie (Mr.
thing which the hon. and learned gentleman opposite had Bright) ksd a strong belief that the notions of the
attempted to represent, but accommodated itself to eircum- hon. baronet with regard to the priesthood were
stances from time to time, as occasion required. If that taken Irons the book of Exodus. When the ques-
were not so, how could the judges have decided that it was tion of marriage with a deceased wife's sister was
not inconsistent with the rule which said, Christianity was before the house, the hon. baronet referred them to Le-
part and parcel of the law, to allow the Jew to swear in the 1 viticus ; and he believed that the hon. baronet would not
manner that was most binding upon his conscience ? (Hear, I dispute th st his opinions on the law of tithes, were derived
hear.) The Lollards and the Wickliffe, were executed from the same book. (" hear," and laughter.) If it was
as heretics under the common law, because they 1 a question of the administration of oaths, although it had
held the opinion which the reformation afterwards esta- 1 been said by the highest authority—" It has been said by
blished, but the common law had changed since then, note them of old time, thou shalt perform the oath thou bast
withstanding that Christianity still formed part and parcel • made unto the le,,rd thy God ; but I say unto you swear
of it. So much, then, for that argument, and new for that part ! not at all "—the practices in that respect, which the hon.
of the hon. and learned gentleman's speech which related to I baronet advocated, were precisely the same as thaw which
the holding of a judicial office by a Jew. The Jew was al- existed iu the time of the Old Testament; and if the hoe.
lowed to fill the office of sheriff, which was the represent.), I baronet did no' defend the practice of war, )et he (Mr.
ties of in ijesty itself; and why should not he, upon the Bright) knew writers who professed the same faith as the
same principle, be admissible to the judicial bench / He hon. baronet, who have defended the practice of war, be-
would only have to administer the law as he found it, and 1 cause they said it was, if nor inculcated, at least permitted
not in such a manner as to gratify hie own religious feel- !in the Old Testament. It' the hon. baronet took his
lugs, The constitution placed him within such limits that political morality from tee:, hooks, and if Baron
he could not do that; while, like the Roman catholic, Rothschild did the same; and if the rights of citizenship
his mind would be so free from bias, that in matters it. ct- did not depend on doctrinal questions, but on the due W-
ing the church his interpretation of the law would be the formance of duty to the state, he (Mr. Bright) could not
more impartial. (Hear, hear.) But the hon. and learned see why the hon. baronet should have sat for forty years is
gentleman objects to the admission of Jews into perliament that house, and yet that Baron Rothschild, who had been
because the religious opinione of the Jew would prevent ! elected ::)• the lire constituency in the country, should not
his attending the house on S iturday., and otherwise die. -be allowed the same privilege. (Hear, bear.) It seemed
charging the duties that would devolve upon him. If they 'to him to be as easy for a man to quarrel with his own sha-
were to argue in this strain they might as well say at once 1 dow as for the hon. baranet to towel with Baron Rothe-
that Baron I: el. whil,l ,sou' Ihe precluded by conscience-tee . child on t`: .te greurle. (" Heir, hear," and le•tehe'e /
scruples foots voting on the navy estimates, becalm part of • Its what s lu•lierma position was the home place' They
Mashed used in the navy was not recognised by his religion. I had had net only Baron Rothschild but another member of
(A laugh) The one areunit nt was just as goad as the Ibis persuasion at the bar of the house, who was permitted
other, but the fact w.,. n• ither of them ought to .to take all the oaths on the Old Testament till he came to
I have any weight with' the house. (Rear, hear.) : had words "on Cue true lane of il christien." ii lee oath

bail been taken with the addition of those words on the
Old Testament it could not have been a legal oath. It
it was ueeessary for a man who took an oath in a
court of law to be • Christian, no jadgu woukl
aloe an oath to be taken on the OA Testament ; but would
require it to be taken on the New Testament, heeausa the
to must be the symbol of the faith by which he affirmed.
The Louse had used a resolution that the seat for the City
of London was full; and they hail pat theasselv.,a rut of
court with regard to the inning of a iicw writ. It • man was
milieus, and was elected by • constituency, it was coapetent
to the houeetto appoint &committee to inquire into any petition
teer,:itte him with being an alien; and, if it was proved,
be woult be excluded from the house, and a new writ would
list. Here there was no means of appointing a committee
ler the purpose of interr•getiag Baron Rothschild as to
whether be was a Jew or a Christian. He took 000 oath
an I part of another. The house declared that the . at was
feel:, int th .t a new writ for the City of London could
set be issued • and then they excluded the member who
was eketed trim his seat. (Neer) Those facts led him to the
cjasideration of a seems.; question of as great importance
a, the original question, which they were now discussing.
lots question hail levee awl divided upon within •
la;, ten si some (mincer. times. Whether the house was
par or thin—e bother it wa. before or after dinner—whate
ever were we ekenu,,,a,,,,, there was always a large Noss
',nil in favour of the hill, varying from twenty-six at the
losi..t to isor: thou a hundred at the highest. Ile would
ask hoe. gentler', n ooposite if they thought that after the
liou.e of e tom os had divided fourteen time+ In fav,:ur of
the eindidate who had been elected by the City of London,
it was constitutional ; he would ask them as members of
that house, it after ouch incessant and uninterrupted en-1
prNsivas of n, inborn Ly the emettituenciee, it w. s constitn.
lions! that t'.ls ipustim shout I remain soy longer'
unsettled? Ile noial ask the noble lord (J. Ites-elt)
whether there seas any remedy in the constitutios
for the .-ate (if thing,. There were two measures
wheal might ee adapted. Ore was, the creation of
new rte.. Ihnet let the house imagine that be
recommended it—(" r, hear," and laughter)—the remedy
atieht prevo worse than the disease. But that was one
mac ly wheel. the constitution offered to the crown, pro.
(tided the ewe was of suftieient magnitude. It was well
hues Saar in not day it was, if not adopted, threatened,
and CA suet as. (fear, hear.) There was also another
remedy. He presumed that is was so, when ;tenth...ma
said, "How could you expect the Lnds to ;toes eh, ail%
whi.c, there le no ferment in the country 1" Ile (Mr.
Brit ht) though! thee the atinnaphere of the 1101387. of Lords
was so serene—ilie•orbeil, perhaps, occasionally by the
weeaginia of prclates—(laughter)—and the contention of
;any •Ts.-bat s I'l he eheuld have thought that it was, r f
all where, tie i.'are where the wicked ceased from trouleinir,
lad the weary were at rest. (Laughter.) They were t3ld
that there was no ferment in the country. They
hail all, soil he (Mr. Bright) had seen a fer-
niest in the country. Ile did net admire It,
some good may have come of it, hut there was muck evil
in it. lie would rather see the irmots of legislature take
up questions in a brood and Renee or. spirit, awl discuss
them in • brood end 7,nernits epirit, instead of waiting till
teem erae• ferment in the country approaching to cons
fanen, awl then, with a cowardice which was ha
mitaeng, giving up that:which they should have yielded
with the gratitude and upplauee of their countrymen.
But the Jew. were not numerous ; and it was UMW: a that
there would he no ferment before which they would quail.
(Ironical cheers) Aye, but they would quail soon enough
if there was a fer.aent. (Oh, oh, order, ender.) Weil,
if the• was tt.ilbtell. he would ruler the sceptics to the his-
tory • f this country for the last 2 i years. (lieer.) He,
however, wanted no ferment ; he want; d parliament to act
upon wand principles and in • wise and philosophic spirit,
and not to wait for what took place out of doers. (Hear,
bear) And wider the circumstances in which the
House of Commons was now placed, he would make an
appeal to the noble turd, who on this question might be re-
garded as the head of the government. The noble lord had
permuted the house to abdicate the power which it pos.
se seal, by precedent, of admitting Jews on a mere easedu.
ton of its own. Tito noble lord had recommended the
strictly constitutional course. Well, the e institutional
course was a very good mime, if it swceedcd. (" Oh,
oh," and great laughter.) But the time had now come far
the nible lord to make up his mind that unless this
bill parsed this session, he would treat Re re-rejection
by the House of Lords as he would treat au
import rat defeat in the House of Commons—(loud cries of
" hear, hear")—in other word., that he would stake the
further existence of his government on the question.
(Chun.) He, for his par!, would have been glad it the
noble toed had not, in this bill, re-affirmed many old Iti:TiC-
-111011. most of whieo there was no sort of pretence whatso-
ever for re-enacting if the house adopted the general prin-
ciple on which the measure stood. (Hear, hear.) He
should have been eled, iadeed, if the noble lord, with that
great Uhl just intlueuce which he exercised in that hens",
had endeavoured, during this discussion, to per-
suade the house to get rid of the whole system
of oaths, and to substitute, if anything were
accroary, same declaration which every honest man could
have taken in an honest and conscientious spirit. (Hear,
hear.) These oaths were of no use, Every man knew they
were of no use. (Oh, oh.) Every man who took the oaths
at the table—which be (Hr. Bright) was happy to say he
bad never taken—knew, a-. the time, that he was piing
through • ludicrous farce. (" Oh, oh," and laughter.) Why,
art linty, they affirmed that they would not do ;measles
which it was utterly impossible for them to do; and they
wcold be ashamed to allow the people of England to crowd
round them and see them, in groups, taking these
ridiculous oaths. (" Order, order," and laughter.)
Such a substitution as he had alluded to would, he believed+
have been the wisest course for the, house to pursue in this
matter; but it the house thought otherwise, then let them
at least get rid of this question, which had been before
them year after year, acid which, after such probotion
might surely now at last be allowed to pass through thai
gateway through which in succeed:At so many other
premed sections of the community had already travelled;
and then at last they would be attic to
that " this horns of the Commons of En=
is free and open to all the Commons of England,"
and that " every man, be his creed in religion what it may,
if elected by a csestitueney of his countrymen, may sit here,
and have voice and vote with us in the government of the
United Kingdom." (Loud cheers.)
Mr. WALPOLE did not suppose that the noble heel
would follow the advice of the hen. member for Manehnes
ter. (Cheers and laughter.) But whether he did or set,
it would be improper for the House of Commons to page
over unnoticed the extraordinary constitutional doctrines,/
that hon. gentleman. According to the hon. gentle:mesa
when the House of Lords did net agree with the House of
Commons, the Rouse of Lords must be got rid of, (Cheers.)
In other words, whea the ministers were opposed by the
House of Lords, and sustained by the House of
Commons, it would be the duty of the ministers
to create an artificial majority in the upper houses,
(Cheers.) Doctrines like this were surely not to be endured.
(Cheers.) The hon. gentleman would make this house
supreme; but he might remember that only once in Mee
history had the (louse of Commons declared itself suprasee
by resolution ; and then that resolution was followed up
two other resolutions; one of which declared that the bench
of bishops was useless, and the other that the monarchy
was unnecessary. (Loud cheers.) There was, however,
one point in which he agreed with the honourable
gentleman, namely the honourable gentleman's opinion,
that if the honourable baronet (Sir R. Inglis)
was more generally regarded as • model of sound principles, '
if they would not march much quicker than they do, would
at any rate be maintained much longer than they are.
(lieu, hear.) The hon. gentleman complained that the
opposents of this bill presented him with no facts to grapple
with. Now the difference between the friends and the
opponents of the measure was that the one proceeded is
a Emory and the other based their resistancff us a tact.
(Cheers.) The fact was that this nation had been
until now a Christian nation in such a seem sad
to such an extent that noboby except • Christie
was ever allowed either to rule over us or to legislate foe as.
(Hear, hear.) The theory was that this was an accident;
and the argument turned upon that question. In order to
clear the ground, he would concede to the Solicitot+Ocneral
that religious liberty was the principle on which the affairs
of this country must be conducted; but he denied alto-
gether that religious liberty was involved in this questioo,
icassunch Si the admission demanded for the Jews did not
affect the rights of private judgment, but related to
the qualifications for an office of trust. (Hear, bear.)
He repudiated the sammeetioas of the Solicitor-General that
thore men 1101110•1 Intallentacc in the opposition to the
bill. Theft was, ea He aasbary, everything in the history
of the Jews he lessee isensenti but in that history wee to be
found the arming sant lie ; fee from that history
he could bet fail to ism this imPortant political axiom,—
that patios, like fadieidnals hew their religious reepassi-
hiLties. (Cheers.) He asked the house to remember
that this bill was not forced upon them by soy paramount
necessity, and bad not in its favour any strong political
expediency. He pat it to them, whether any measure was
ever before propounded to parliament with respect to
which the advantages to be gained were so miserably
disproportionate to the sacrifices to be incurred. (Hear,
bear.) What were the advantages, and what the sacri-
fices ? They were partly personal and partly national.
The pereseal advantage was, that they. would certainly
give to a few individuals the gratification of associating
with them ; but it was to be remembered that, nomerF
ally, If the whole populatien were divided by their nuns.
hers, they would not be entitle to • single seat. The per-
scut sacrifice we., that they would indict a wound—
(laughter)—upon thousands, and teas of thouaattdrt,
et their Christian fellow-subjects, who now
confidence in them, because they formed part of
a Christian legislature, and who would no longer do so
when they had ceased to possess that character. The na-
tional advantage—putting the argument in the fairest we
to the hon. member for Dianchester--was, that they sie

Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. baronet had no doubt
a right to utter his conscientious convictions on this ques-
tion to whichever side those convictions might lead him,
yet he hoped he would reflect that it was hardly generous
in him to give a vote for excluding Baron Rothschild from
sitting in that house, and at the same time to make personal
attacks on him. (Loud cheers.) Let Baron Rothschild
sit in that house, as he trusted and believed he would, and
then let the hon. baronet direct any attack against him,
and he would venture to say that Baron Rothschild would
vindicate his character in the estimation of that house. The
light hon. member for Midhunt had argued with very great
ability against the passing of this measure, but he thought
that the principles the right hon. gentleman had laid down,
could hardly be much longer maintained by him. The
right hoe. gentleman said a Jew could not connect himself
with the institutions of a Christian country ; and in another
Lan of his speech he said let them strike their tents and
part, for they did not belong to this country.
Mr. WALPOLE made an observation anion the table
which did not reach the gallery.
Lord J. RUSSELL—That was very near:y the sense of
what he understood. Let them take their tents and depart
and no vestige of them would remain. Why, one would
suppose by this that these persons were entire strangers to
the land, that they had struck no root in the soil, and that
they were cot connected with the institutions of the coun-
try; but the fan was that they held many important offices
—that a Jew might hold the office of magistrate or of
sheriff, erbe a member of a municipal corporation, and in
that way became closely connected with the institutions of
the country. And as to striking their tents, he believed If
the right hon. gentleman asked his right bin. friend the
member for Bucks, he would find that they were not merely
tents, but that they were fixed in the ground. (Cheers.)
They had beard that this ought to be a Christian parlia-
ment. He asked, was this a Christian country, or was it
not ? If they told him it Was, then he said that if Jews
wens admitted this would still be a Christian parliament.
If they told him it was not a Christian country, he said, let
the parliament be like the country; let it consist of Chris-
tians generally, with seine addition of Jews, and then it
would represent the country. He did not sec bow it could
he represented, if this were a Christian countty having
Jews' and yet that Jews were not in parliamcat. ';'hen the
right hoe. gentleman said parliament had a right to .;osliose
these qualifications and conditions as to the right of sating
in that house. No doubt it had a right to impose cc edi-
tions, but they should be reasonable conditions. It was a
reasonable condition that a man should be of a certain
and should not be a pauper, and that he should not he ral
alien. It was not a reasonable condition that Chester or
that Wales should not be represented. There were
unreasonable conditions and were abrogated by parliament.
He said there was not a reasonable condition because these
was no reason why a Jew should not be a member of par-
liament. Belonging to this country, performing all the
duties of this country, he had &prima fade right, And they
could not tell him that because persons us,der a
certain age and paupers were excluded is' was
reasonable that he should be excluded. It was no
part of his view to carry this question by ds.mi-
nishing the constitutional authority of the other hous °'
(Opposition cheers.) Ills belief was that, as many other
questions of the same nature as the present—by
the influence of the people at largo, and of that
house, as the representatives of the people—had
been carried, so this question would be carried,
and that before long. There was another course proposed,
namely, that the ministry should declare that they would
stand or fall by this question. Now he thought that every
ministry must judge for themselves—(opposition cries of
" Oh ! ')—of the measures upon which they would place
the fate of their government. With regard to this question
he had already said in the City of London, what he bad re-
peated in that house, namely, that if they could show the
generally prevailing 'sense of the country to be that this
question ,houl J. be carried, and if the erun:ry would nd
a great nuijority in favour of the bill, they niiAt .!,
upon it that they would not long have a great resistance
'to it in the House of Lords. lie saw in the last
vete that the noble lord, the son of the late Prime
I ](mister, had given net only the weight of his vete,

osttblith a theory which looked upon the.goventmeit of the
country as a soiritlfts, soulless machine, entirely subser-
vient to their temporal wants and interests ; while the na-
tional sacrifice which they would make was the sacrifice of
the principle which regarded the state as partaking somewhat
of & divine character, as acting under divine obligations, as
comprehending within its range all the objects of humanly,
and as necessarily including among those objects the
spiritual nature, the moral reaponsihilities, the eternal des.
!Mho of man. (Cheers.) If the government were right,
the bill did not go so far as it ought to do; they ought to
lay down the broad proposition of the hon. member fur
)I)n:hater, that every person, whatever might be his
deed, had a right to be elected to a seat in that house. It
appeared to him, however, that the bill went much too far;
le erre it uniermiuo.! tlie very foundations spin which
e6ostltution of the e ,uoiry had been raised, I..esuse it
&Lied that the natiun, as a nation, wee bound to profess a
aatimal faith, and because it destroyed that distinctive
tht.raeter of their common Christianity which he believed
awl watt:Meted so mach to their temporal prosperity, as

he was sure it had to their moral elevation. (Loud option- ; but of his distinguished name and remarkable talents,
ton cheer,.) in favour of this question ; and he augured from
Sir It. PEEL said he had that day been reading a volume . that circumstance that the question was making progress.
of the t' Memoirs of Toni Moore, edited by Lord J ,hn (Hear.) He found others who had formerly opposed the
Russell. (Laughter.) lie there found a pia:icicleu in hill were also now ready to vote for it ; and he could not
France speaking of the absurdity of a minority eeothiciiog hut confider that when the question should have been car-
te oppose a majority, upon which Teen Moore wisely b• tied, it would be, as he had already said, the completion of
served—" Just as if the country would forget the that system of religious liberty for which already so much
force of that opposition." That remark applied, he thonotit, ! had been done. (Cheers.)
to the present ease. They (the opponents) kuew The house then divided—
they were a minority there, bat that did not prevent Item For the third reading 2BB
from representing a majority in the country. (Hear, hear.) i Against it 230-58
The noble lord the member for the City et London, said be The bill was then passed.
had exhausted the subject. He believed the noble lord hail •
NEW BILLS.
exhausted his own arguments, but theirs rested on a hitter
foundation. Alter all, however, what were arguments The LOUD ADVOCATE elOssined leave to bring in the
fallowing hills: To abolish the salary attached to the <Alice
whit opposed to publicblc opinion—(laughter)—tha`public et Keener of the Privy Seal fur Sea land, and to enable her
opinion which they pposition) reprioentsa ? Majesty, her heirs and successors, to rominate a chairman
vitolity had been asquiret by this eutoect through the debate of the General Board of Directors of Prisons in Scotland ;
on the Canada Clergy It-srves Bill. In that dilute, • and to extend the benefits of the act 11 and 12 Vic. for the
member of the government had tison from the amendmeet of the Law of Entail in Seetland.
rutty bench, and declared that he gloried in
being a radical, the inference being that
Mr. WILSON deferred his statement on the Customs till
Aberdeen, in the decline of his life, did the same. .I
pal r una Lord J. RUSSELL fixed the committee on the Pilotage
(L tughter.) Not content with that, the right hon. gentle- .
ay.
man went on to etigrnatise a dignitary of the church ■• •
he house adjourned at 10 minutes after 1 o'clock.
w pest to society ;" and it was for honest churchmen, as t
well as honest politicians, to cousider whether they would
support a government whose members thus stigmotis el the
recognised authorities of the church of England. (Hear.)
Now, it was said the opponents ,to this measure 'ft re want-
ing in charity, but those who threw out that imputation '
might be a hole more charitable themselves. They set a
very bad example, by hest charging them with wanting in
charity, and in the same breath imputing to them motives
which he entirely rejected and denied. (Hear, hear.) lie
hail not authority to 'peck far others who sat around him,
bat he hail no ,touit he should give expres-ion to the sen-
timents of many, when ho said, that, for hie own port, he
was a friend to civil ..nd religious libertv, and would not
give protection, but secure freedom, to ill classes of the
community in the ezireist of their religious tenets. (Ii qtr,
hear.) Ile did not wish to retain a single statute which
in any way restricted the enjoyment of religious freedom,
and entertaining those aentiments ho utterly rejected and
despised the taunts which had been thrown out against him,
because he would debar those from a seat in the
house who denied Cue fundamental principles of Chris-
tianity. Yes, he would debar the Jew from mo-
cking Christian functions in a Christian parliament,
because be believed in his conscience that such
a concession would be dangerous to the hest interest* of the
land, and yet he was told the other night by a inoinher of
the government that he came down to the louse with
liberty on his lips but with restriction in his heart. (Herr,
hear.) But he was quite sure those who mord wish him
were quite ready to make every allow rare ter these expres-
sions, since they rime from the audacious and immune
member for Middlesex. (Laughter.) lie wan, however,
surprised that the hon. geutotome should have 'mooted such
motives to him, because the hon. member well knew that the
opinions which he (Sir R. Peel) held on these sutiets once
coincided with his own, but the hon. oentleinau veined to
have laid his former °pinholes upon taking posseeeion of his
comfortable berth at the Admiralty. (A laugh.) He
kept back something, it was true, but he would take
the present opportunity of stating what he did kuow.
This he knew then, that if it had not been for the indi-
vidual exertions of Baron ltmhschiid, Middl sex itself
might not have been represented by ita present members—
(a laugh)—and therefore when ti,e hon. geatlem m talked
about members !wing actuated by impure motives, it would
be as well for him first to look at home and see if he was
quite free from such an imputation. (Hear, hear.) Of this,
however, he was quite certain that the ennrse of time would
prove that he was tar less liable to be acted upon by exter-
nal political causes than the honourable and gantlet mem-
ber himself. Bat to return to the question of the
bill. The institutions of the Jews still continuo the same
as they were 1,800 years ego, their fundamental prMegoes
were the same, and u spirit of hostility to the Christian
faith still animated sod guided them. And yet the noble
lord proposed to extend to them the advantages
and power of complete political emancipation. (Rear.)
This was the leading principle on which he p! aced his
opposition to this measure ; and, as long as he had the
power of speech and the facility of expressing himself—
(cheers and laughter)—well, sac long as hu had the power
of speech, he would nut say the facility of expressing him-
self, ho would not hesitate to oppose this measure as antago-
nistic to the notional feeling and sentiment. He was told
in a newspaper that the part he was taking was unworthy
of the great nano be bore; but he was quite sure that
when he was giving expression to his true senti-
ments, he was not open to that accusation. lie found
it disagreeable to him to be placed in opposition to those he
respected, but he had the independence to adhere to his own
convictions rather thin yield to any other enusideration.
The hon. member for Manchester had alluded to another
place where they might be unable to bring them to a stole
of their responsibility. Whatever the hon. member for
Manchester might say he knew that in the limes enter
twined with respect to that house, the real excellence of the
British constitution lay, because in those hopes they recog-
nised the mutual check which either house of legislature was
enabled to exercise on the other. They might be uuahle both
here mid there to restrain and control opinion, but at all
events whatever might he the result, the y would have the
satisfaction of knowing that they had reiterated their ob-
jections with %lacewing seal, that they had faith in their
convictions, but be had nu liesitetion instating his firm be-
lief that if this bill was passed both that house and the
other house of parliament, and the crown, should it receive
the sanction of the crown, was doing that which would tend
to shake that confidence and loyalty which bail been
hitherto felt in the authority of the crown as defender of
the faith. (Cheers.)
Mr. FITZROY, who rose amid loud cries of "Divide,"
and all kinds of interruption, said he was not ping to enter
into the merits of the question, but he had a right to get up
and ask the house whether the last speech was parlia-
mentary—whether it was consistent with the spigot of the
house—(cheer,)—whether it was decent ? (Hubbub, and
loud cries of "Oh, oh.") He asked whether it was
decent to apply those terms which had been applied
by the honourable baronet to the noble lord the
member for London? Ho knew not what might be
the signilkation of the terms whale he bad used,
when he said no family had contributed so much
as that family to gag the liberty of the press. The boo.
baronet had no right to say that the election of the hon.
gentleman bad cast a slut upon the election of the noble
lord. He defied him to point to any dishonourable act
either in the public or private life of any member of that
family, which Was universally respected in Europe. Ile
believed that the noble lord the member for Landon might
well be contented to rest under the imputations of the hon.
baronet when he could put against them the flattering
and distinguished marks of confidence of his fellow-

Patus.—Mr. C. W. Grenfcll paired off on Thursday
eveniog with Col. Knox.—Mr. Bass paired in favour of the
lowa, Mr. Coles against.—Tats a on Knowledge : Sir De
Lary Evans fur, Mr. Mangles against.
Tire lion. C. liatibury was reported in yesterday's paper
u having paired off ou Mr. Gibson 's reiolutions. Mr. Ilan.
bury seas present, and voted in the three divisions.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISI03:

MOUSE OF COMMONS-APRIL 14.
ADVERTISEMENT TAX.
Mitring made, and Canton pi op awe, "[tut the i,dvertisancnt duty
ought to be ropealc-t." Whereupon the previous goestien put,
.1h at twit quesaire be now put." The house disidol-Ayes rue,
Nue& .09.
MAJORITY-AYES 260.
.Idilerley C. F rarklyn, G. W. Newerk, Viscount
A et ek, fliocoss Yr Arer , Sir W. A. Oakes, J. 11. P.
Ale...ander. J. Freweu, C. 11. ()linen, Patrick
Aorta-, n, sir Jima Gollwry, Sir W. P. o'llahirty, A.
A rawright, G. Gardner, It. Otway, Arthur John
Stage, W. George, John Pakenham, E.
bailey, bit J. Grow, 0. • Vakingtom sir J.
inane, Crowehay Graham, Loud K. W. Pareeke, G. X. W.
way, .1. J. Greene, John Palma, Sir G.
Baird, James Carson, &inert Peel, Sir Robert
P4l. Eduard Caviar, tyl. Felton, Apalg
L mite., G. Orogen, E. Percy, J.
I itsrue-, 'faunas Ova n, IkArel Phillimore, J.
1 B,rriuguni, Viscount Hadfield, (Kora Piano/ton, James
Ram. M. T. Hall, Sr Benjamin Poll ad-Urquhart, W.
Rawson, Thomas lliusey, T. Potter R. S
Bell, James Ilmidlion, Lord C. Pugh, D. ..
Bennet, Philip liamlimo, Geo. A. lUeord i J. C.
. erg lock, Geo. P. Houbury, lion. C. Itiesetern it .P.
Beanies, Craven F. ILireourt, Cot. 14,1 r, P.
Tern .ril, Vnicoula /tote, Alt zanier Smiled., J.
Steps, d i Aims Ileiekeo:e, (Aiwa U. Sado., O.
iiimkett, J. F. 13. Herbert, sir Thomas Scrodelield, W.
Bland, L. Heyworth, V. Scully, Francis
South, Sir It. Hadley, Charles Stellar°, Lord
lawyer, George Hume, J. hleyn er. H. K.
Brag, J. Hume, W. F. Seymour, W. D.
lir einrblee, R. a °lliac, Slalh'. 0. H. Sts I ey, sir J. V.
Inright, John Keating, Robert Smith, John Ike).
Basso, M. ,grove lielly, Sir F. Smith, Wiliam X.
Prier, C L. Ken :all, Kieholas swirl), It. J.
Bulaeley. Sir It. B. Kennedy, Tristram irea,ti,. J. 0.
Berke, Sir T. King, 1'..1. Stafford, A.
'Mired, ,irC. M. Kniectibult, WM. F. Stanhope, J. 11.
Bober, thorns Knight, V. W. Stanley, Lord
butt, G. Y. hens, W. S. Stirling, W idiom
Cairns, H. &I'Cailmout Lavin, Sir E. Strickland, Sir G.
Chalks, Alderman Lakin, R.M. Stuart, Lord D.
enc.:than, John Lssatt, %Mum Talbot, C. R. M.
Chelsea, Viscount Lenses, Le rd A. F. Thompson, Aid.
Chill, book LesSe, C. P. Th. edger, Nr F.
Christopher, R. A. Liddell, 11. 0. Thoniproo. George
Clay, re Wm. Lockhart, W. Trellope, Sir J.
Clinton, Led C. P. Lure,. F. Tudway, IL C.
Cobtrett, J. M. Ma .ortsicy, O. Turner. C.
Cobden, Retinal Mookennie, W. P. Tyler. Sir O.
Curbaiii, M. F. Macgregor, James Tyrell, Sir J. T.
cotton, W. 11. /4•Gregor, John Vonce, J.
Cowan, Chola Id-Mahon, P. Vane, Lord .1.
Cask, J. Maguire, J. F. Vanattart, G. H.
Crumisy, Fronk • Manes, Richard Verner, tier W.
Cubist,Mr. Ald. Mandyvilk-, Viscount Wakot, Adm.
' rishwond, Sir G. IL Maxwell, nun. J.l'. wairgsfey. Sir J.
Davison. R. Meagher, 3 homes Warner, toward
Di•itaell, Benjamin Miail, Edward Welly, Sir G.
Data, C. Ilden, IV. Whalley, C 11.
tlu can, G. blildgun, Robert Whiteside, Junes
Danemobe, T. liPeheL W. 'Whitmore, !fairy
Dancombe, lion. A. Montgomery, U. Wilkinen, W. A.
I soon, CoL Moore, G.ll. Wilcox, IL
Duran, W. Moore, R. S. Widiams, W.
Vedlen, M. Moreta, Lord Wyndham, lien.
Valowcs, Edward Morrow, Ocarina Wynn, Herbert W.
Ferguson, Joseph Morgan, C. Rodney Wynne, Wm. W. E.
Foyer. J. Monts, G. Frederick
Email, W. Murrough, .1. P. TILLFIR.
Forster C. Kar, Lord Gibson, T. M.
Da, W. J. Napier, Joseph Ewa; William
111%01:ITT-NOES, 169.
Adair. liagh E. Goldord, Ambrose L. Moody, C. A.
A baton. Wm. Goodman. Sir G. Mosgo, E. M.
Banes, M. T. Gordon, Admiral Nor reys, Lord
Ball, John Ooulbnrn, Henry O'Brien, Cornelius
Ltanog, H. B. Graham, Sir James Osborne. Ralph
Baring, sir F. Grey. Sir 0. Paget, Lord Alfred
Baring, Francis Grosvenor, Lord R. Palmerston, Via:oust
Beaumont, W. B. Grosvenor, Furl Parker, It. Townley
Berkeley, Admiral Harmer, Sir J. reel, Frederick
Berkeley, C. la Hardinge, Charles S. Phillip., J. 11.
Ridilulpti, R. M. Illostin, Archibald Philaim re, R.I.
WM... us-Carter, John Hayes, Sir Edmund Plain, T.
Bouyrrie, E. Headiam, T. E. Portal, Melville
Bretherton, Joseph Heard, J. I. rower, N.
Brown, V. Hearin:oat, John Fritebard, J.
(truce, Lord Ernest ilwoihrteie. Sir G. Ricardo, 0.
Bruce, H. A. Ilineage, Geo. IL Warta, T. J. A.
Burrouglies,llensTN. lionnege, 0. F. Ruehout, Captain
*lfni. 0. 11. Clarks Herbert, IL A. Russell, Lord).
Campbell, Sir A. Herbert, Sidney Russell, Y. C.
Cardwell, Hon. E. Hersey, Lord Alfred Rowell, F. W.
' Cavendish, 0. Howard, C. W. G. gawk. C. B. 0.
, Chamber., Montego H mord, Lord E. Seobell, Ciwt.
Chambers, T. liu„vhes, W. B. Bernour, H. D.
Chopin, W. J. Ingham. R. Sham, R. D.
Courtrai, F. arils, Mr B. IL Shelburn^, Earl
Christy, Samuel Jsrogn, Earl Smith, John A.
Caton, Lord Johnstone, James Smith, B. V.
• Chekburn, Sir A. Jandrow, Sir J. !Macron, T. H. S.
Dr.ks, Thomas S. Eingimite, It. N. F. Spoenor, Richard
Collo, Walter liianald, A. F. Stafford, Marquis
Compton. H. Combs Kirk, Wm. Stanley, Hon. W. 0.
Cowper, W. F. Laing, 8. Stapleton, John
Cranford, E. H. J. leageton. J. IL Otrutt, Right lion. E.
' laltymple, Vire. Langton, U. G. lancred, It. W.
' Denbon, 3. E. Lela, G. C. Towline, G.
Drumlanrig, The. Lewis, Fir T. P. Twill. G.
Doff, George Liodeay, Col. Token, IL
Duff', James Lockhart, A. E. Tynte, Col. C. J. K.
Duneombe, Hon. 0. Lowden, P. Vane, Lord H.
[Modem, F. Lowe, R. Vernon, G. E. U.
Egerton, W. Luce, T. Vivian, J. H.
Egerton, R. larraggert, Mr J. Vivian, H. 11.
Enloe Right Ran. E. Megan, W. H. Wells, W.
Elliot, John Martin, John West, P. E.
Evros, William Namey, W. N. Wkatha. EL W.
I Farrar. James liamsears, John Wilma, J.
Fergus, J. UIA/Mlll. A. Wilmington, Bir T.
Femur" W. Marbossa. sir I. Wood, Sir C.
Fergunn, Sir Robert lligh.ClL Wortley, J. 8.
Fitzgerald. J. D. leibash W. M. E. Wyndham, William
Fitzroy, M 8.% IL IL Wyvill, M.
' Fitrwilliamil7. W. MAIM.% Young, Sir J.
' Forster, K. llsbrawank Mr W.
' Fortesaus. Chisbedit Millith. TIMM* TELLIIIIL
Pretoria*, Colonel Talons Ho r, W. G.
G.sdetorie, Captain lisamll. Igu*inve, Earl
Glyn, George Care likniummqh Mr O.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL ON THE INDE-
PENDENCE OF TURKEY.

A few days since we gave a long report of a
meeting at Newcastle, when the question discussed was the
Independence of Turkey. It will be remembered that a
memorial was adopted by the meeting. To this document
Lord John Russell has made the following reply, addressed
to the Mayor of Newcastle :
" Sir,-1 have had the honour of ree' lying an address
signed by you on behalf of a meeting of the inhabitants of
Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
" I am happy to find that this meeting concurs with me
in opinion that this country ought to be anxious to main-
tain the independence of Turkey.
" That independence could not be subverted without a
great change in the territorial circumscription of Euro •
pe,
derangement of the distribution of power sanctioned by
treaties, and more especially a violation of the engagements
contracted h theeat powers in 1841.
" That independence could not be subverted without a
danger of the aggrandisement of Bodes already sufficiently
formidable, and a disturbance of the balance of power in
Europe.
" That independence could not be subverted without a
great diminution of British commerce, now fostered by the
moderate tariff of the Turkish empire.
" You may rely upon the constant vigilance of her Ma-
jesty's government being employed to prevent such misfor-
tunes; upon the sense of justice and good faith which ani-
mates the principal States of Europe ; and upon the
weight of the British parliament, which will be ever ready
to defend the rights and the independence of her Majesty's
allies.

" I beg you to thank the inhabitants of Newcastle in
my name for the distinguished honour they have done me,
and remain, sir, with great respect, your obedient Fervent,
Chesham-place, April 11, 18.53." " J. Russzi.h.

TUE STALLS IN TOTTENHAM-COURT-ROAD.—Last
nigh t a meeting of tradesmen carrying on business in Tot-
teoha m-court-road was held to receive the report of a de-
putation which had waited on Sir Richard Mayne, in favour
of the stallkeepers in tat thoroughfare who are under
terror of expulsion from their standings. The deputation
said that Sir R. Mayne had received them courteously and
said that the police should not act executively in the matter,
bat if called to aid the Paving Commissioners, who were the
t Tel authorities on this question, they must do so. For his
0,-vn part, he was in favour of a gradual and natural abate-
mt nt of the obstruction, by death or removal of stallkeeptrs
teise se places should not he filled up. This statement was
meet, ed with satisfaction by the meeting, 'specially as .1
cominh' after the expression of Mr. Binghata's opinion on
the sam,, side, and it was agreed to canvass the shopkeepers I
on the $O, bjcet, in the hope of making ar impression on the
Paving B•.`ard-
ItEcewr STAMl.S.—Yesterday a return to the
House of Com:nons was printed, showing that .;iv the year
ending the bth of January, PM, there were 4,7 '5,.10
re-
ceipt shops issue.ii -5,171,546 in the fillowiws 3 *.r.
in the y, a ceding the •sth of January la-t.
avenue in the last yen.• was 191,0881. 93. 9d. Ths expeftSr
of distributing the stan.is of the last year at 2 per cent.
was 389/. l•ss. 4d., and the discount allowed to purchasers .
13,41:4:. Hs. 31

Eh, ervre,so.

TO CORRI SFOMHENiS.
Ed•tlon The Expreee,'' eove;Linir 'he name *noire.
“C.rette,"ts pallehrl every Ttee.dey Lai Yrtday ttcht, to time
pe^t.
rov.itiver.rev:vtavende,'. !cc "The V sprov,.Lertv'mh v.vening payer,
Metnt the Off Ice, lb, bourerve-exoet, by Ina 0'0.34 on tbc
Say of publication.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
hilt DAT -.l(l)Ttillir. N. 3501„. .Attx moon, 7•.
for.aoasew—alon.aar. Altbraoon, 85. 8=

as free access to Parliament as the members of

LONDON, SATURDAY, APRIL 16.

THE Squires still look with an eye of disfavour
upon tho progress of the Jews. They can't forget
the times when they drew the teeth and roasted the
ribs of their money lenders, instead of advertising
lor a " loan upon mortgage!' They arc as jealous ut
admitting LIONEL ItornscnlLD into the kill of legis-
lation as their ancestors were of letting Isaac of
York look on upon the lists at Ashby. The times
are similar too, in another respect. Then, as now,
Wamha the Fool was tho most successful defender
of the men of acres. Sl. nsi hie partisans have given
up the contest long ago. They are ashamed to make
a declaratory enactment that Jews are not fit to legis-
late, but they arc content to keep them out of the
Legislature by an act which was never intended
to apply to them, but only to a class of brother-
Christians.

any other denomination. It then this tendency
to give up exclusive rights has manifested itself so
constantly and so strongly in the course of our his-
tory—if the lesson we derive from this history is
that the stream of nationality is ever widening, re-
ceiving contributions from sources which at ono time
never reached it, do the opponents of Jewish email.
cipation suppose that they can dam up one little source
for their own special delectation? The thing is im-
possible. These men, in their bigotted assertion of
the rights of Christians, are the great blasphemers of
Chriettauity. Tiny declare that a religion which has
stood for nearly two thousand years, has triumphed
in every direction, and has civilized a great portion
of the world, is in danger from the few scattered
professors of a faith which it superseded end de-
veloped. Their success, let us hope, will be on u per
with their wisdom. They tray delay the good
cause, but tncy will net be able to arrest it. Coils-
tianity, which had not been honoured in their
advocacy, will have nothing to fear from their defeat.
So thought the Reuse of Commons, lust night,
by the decision it came to on the third reading of
the Jewish Disabilities Hill, when 288 members
voted for toleration and 230 against it. The bill is
now, therefore, safe through the House by a majo-
ritp of 58.

The Jews, however, true to their character as F.
still•necked race, refuse to submit to be deprived of
their rights by a chance phrase, and they are per-
petually knocking at the door of the House and cont-
►'elliug the members to show cause why the exclusion
should be maintained. This is perplexing. A man
may cover a piece of bad logic with a sneer or alittle
buffoonery once or twice, but he cannot go on doing
su for ever. Wamba's Hitch of bacon would not
have had so much resent,- lauce to a syllogism next
year, and had he repeated it continually the chance
is that he would have been hissed at last. Thus it is
in the House. Members are ashamed, session after
session, to utter the same platitudes. Lord GEORGE
BENTINCK refused to row in the same boat with
" the men of acres," wko stick up for the oid perse-
cution, and Mr. BALL parts company with his fi Muds
on the same question. The fact is that the argument
is exhausted. The debate last night exhibited She
same outrageous assertions on the part of the oppo-
nents of Emancipation and the same refutations on
the part of its defenders. There appeared a chance
at one time that a little absurdity would be sprinkled
through the debate as an enlivener. Members
smiled when Mr. C. BRUCE, who thought that the
Jews would be delivered some day, begged the House
o.rnestly not to " presumptuously accelerate the
period of their deliverance." And Mr. J.
Klee, who spoke in favour of tho Bill, brought a
little novelty into the debate by stating it
as his opinion that it would be as well to ad-
mit the Jews as early as possible, in order that they
might be prepared fur legislation when they got
back to Jerusalem. The period when this event
would take place could not, he imagined, be far die.
taut, as it had been predicted in reference to the
time of their restoration, that " Many shall run to
and fro." Now in 1831, said the honourable Member
triumphantly, the railway from Manchester to Li-
verpool was opened ! Any amusement that might
have been anticipated from a debate opening so
promisingly was put a stop to by the
dreary expositions of Mr. WRITEBTuE, who
harped' upon Sir ROBERT INGLIs'S old string
of " unchristianising, the Legislature." As Mr.
Bus., in the letter he addressed the other day
to his Protectionist constituents to apologise for his
desertion from the ranks of intolerance, devoted the
great portion of his attention to this argument, we
may presume that it meets with considerable favour
in the eyes of the enemies of Emancipation. It will
be worth while, then, to examine what many of its
admirers think it means, and what we ought chari-
tably to suppose those who employ it mean.
Mr. BALL considers that the only ground upon
which it can be attempted to justify the withholding
a seat in the House of Commons from the Jews, is
that held by Sir Roamer Nous, that " if we admi-
a Jew, wo unchristiauise the House." Of course, if

Sir ROBERT meant merely to assert that when we
admit Jews, we give up the principle that in a House
which is to make laws for the nation, it is necessary
that every legislator should be a Christian—if
this is all that is meant, then Sir ltueeter need
not have troubled himself to utter so trite a
truism. Mr. BALL, however, strangely supposes
that Sir ROBERT meant to insinuate that the
entrance of a Jew would unchristianise the
members themselves—that a ROTHSCHILD or a
S %1.0310 NS would bring in a virulent infection with
them, and that the effects of the disorder would show
themselves in the solemn abjuration of Christianity
by the united Legislature. The consequences of a
catastrophe of this kind would be sufficiently serious.
The new converts in the Lower House woad be able
easily to prevail upon her MAJESTY to create a
Jewish Peer. One creation would be quite ample,
fur on taking the oaths, the newly made nobleman
would communicate the infection to all his brother
Peen, the bench of Bishops would sicken, and, on
their recovery, find themselves believers only in
what Mr. DISRAELI calls the "first part of the
Christian religion." Mr. BALL, in contemplating
and repudiating such changes as these, very properly
exclaims—" Now, I contend that no man can
either make or unmake a Christian ; it is
the work of a Supreme Being ; nor will
the admission of an individual who is not
a Christian unchristianise a Christian Assem-
bly." Very true, Mr. BALL ; and you might
have added that if such a process of unchristianistng
were possible, there is no reason why it should not
take place just as well outside the Howie as in it, and
that a walk into the Stock Exchange, or down
Duke's-place, would be attended with most extraor-
dinary effects to gentlemen who now make declara-
tions " upon the true faith of a Christian."
The strange mistake of Mr. BALL will, it is to be
hoped, have the effect of preventing Sir ROBERT
from making use of such high-sounding phrases
another time. In the meantime, as the member for
Oxford still adheres to the sense which he himself
attaches to the phrase " unehristianising the legisla-
ture," it would be well that he should examine what
warrant History affords to the correctness of the
views which he entertains of the duties of the state
towards individuals whose opinions differ from those
of the majority on the subject of religion.
In the first place, Sir R. INGLIS, and those of his
friends in both houses who are adverse to the Jewish
claims, are supposed to entertain a mitigated horror
for Roman Catholics. If now they will take the
trouble to inquire, they will find out that the Roman
Catholics form the only CAurch of modern history
which has ever for any period of time been enabled
to assert its right to be co-extensive with the State.
Under the Papacy only, was it that none were ad-
mitted to the rights of citizenship but those who
belonged to the ruling religion. In England, when
the supremacy of the POPE was denied, there was an
end for ever of making citizenship depend upon
churchmanship. It is true that the TUDOR sove-
reigns endeavoured to concentrate under their own
governments the rights which the Popes had lost;
but the attempts were never successful. The
STUARTS were able to accomplish even less than the
Tuvous ; and, after an abortive effort on the part of
the most rigid of the Puritans to follow in the foot-
steps of conscience-compelling menarche, the whole
principle was given gip at the passing of the
Toleration Act, under CHARLES 11. Having aban-
doned so much, the Church has acted at
least as if it were logically bound to give up more.
One by ono have all the privileges of citizenship
been handed over to dissentients from the doc-
trine and discipline of the Church. Society has re-
cognised dissenters of all classes as definite elements
of the natio:l, and no longer withholds from them
any of the peiv,;leges which members of the nation,
in full possessiot: of their rights, can claim. Test
and Corporation At-ts, Catholic Emancipation Bills—
all bear witness to the fact that the tendency of
Rublic legislation is absorb into the body of the
State all the scattered eleklen tit which cannot be proved
to bear within them seeds of damage to the Consti-
tution. Once it was contensled that the whole na-
tion must belong to the Churci:. We receded from
that ground, and insisted that Olc radiomen! at ,
least chouid consist of churchmen. Bcatt-'l, flew
that, wo fought boldly for the exchigion of cer-
tain forms of religion. Even this we save been I
obliged to yield; the Roman Catholics lute

THE answer given by Lord PALMERSTON last
night to the questions put to him by the hon. mem-
ber for Leicester, will b read with no little interest
by the public generally, and with cuusiderable sur-
prise by those who perused the extraordinary
statement relative to M. KOSsUTII, which ap-
peared in the Times yesterday morning. In sub-
stance, the statement amounted to nothing less than
that the SECRETARY for the DoME DEPARTMENT
had issued a warrant, under the authority of which
I the police had proceeded to search a house belonging
to M. KOssUTII, and had found therein a large
amount of urns and ammunition, such as amply to
verify the suspicions previously entertained of the
possessor's intention to levy war upon our humane
and enlightened ally the Emperor of AUSTRIA. /low
the information which had led to such a proceeding
had been obtained our contemporary did not say ;
I and its readers were consequently lett in doubt whe-
ther it was derived from sources of foreign espionage
er from the revelations of domestic spies—from
treachery in the Austrian post-office, or violation of
confidence in that of St, Martin's-le-Grand. Un-
pleasant recollections associated with the names of
the DANDIER' might naturally suggest discretion as
to such disclosures to the organ of Lord AISEIt-
LEEN. Be that as it may, however, no paius
were spared to invest the announcement with the
character of circumstantiality; to glorify the pro-
phetic wisdom of those who had unscrupulously
vilified thellungarianchief, and foretold his eventual
detection as a pirate and impostor; above all, to heap
upon Lord PALMEittiToN reproachful praises for his
discovery, though late, of the duty which he owes to
foreign sovereigns us a Minister of the QUEEN of
ENGLAND.
Lord PALMERSTON, to do him justice, seems to
have been not at all ambitious to remain longer that
was unavoidable under the fatal load of such lauda-
tions. In his place in the House of Commons last
night he did nut hesitate to deny the accuracy of the
tale of which he had been made the supposititious
hero. With remorseless ingratitude he not only ex-
plained that the military stores which the police
had placed under detention had not been found at the
residence of M. liossunt, but at a distance of
some miles from it, and that he was in possession of
no information which would justify him in asserting
that they had been purchased or placed where they
were found with the cul.able cognisance of that
gentleman. But Lord Faun:risme did not stop
there. In answer to a second question, his Lordship
declared he was nut aware of any undertaking
having been given by her Majesty's Government
that they would perform the duties of surveillance
over the political refugees resident in this country.
The Noble Viscount has too long played the distin-
guished part of Foreign Minister to u free people
to sit easy under the imputation of turning head
policeman in his old age, or principal spy to
tho despots on whose cruelty he was once the
check and in whose cars his name is still
a sound of terror. lord PALMERSTON'S position as
member of the Cabinet, constituted as the present is ,
must be as intolerable to him individually as disre-
putable to the character of our public men, if it im-
plied such self-abandonment as that on which, with
sinister emphasis, his implacable enemy the Times
affects to congratulate him. For the honour of
British statesmanship, wo rejoice to think that,
true to the principles of 1830, Lord PALMERSTON
disdains to be " the Minister of Austria." Lower
and more degraded still he would be if, upon any
suggestion conveyed through the foreign office, from
Vienna, or upon any information furnished by spies
and informers, or supplied by equally. infamous
means, the 1103ta SECRETARY were to violate the
sanctity of political hospitality, or to harass an un-
fortunate exile who had eought the shelter of our
shore, by instituting against him proceedings in the
nature of a State prosecution, as the Times eagerly
recommends, unless he were really guilty of an
offence against the laws of the country which affords
him a secure asylum.
The duty of a Secretary of State in regard to
Foreign Governments with whom we are at peace is
simple and plain. Whenever authentic and legiti-
Mate information shall be given him of warlike pre-
parations being made within our confines of a nature
calculated to excite just suspicion as to their object,
!leis manifestly bound to interpose, in eider to pre-
vent any infraction of international rights being com-
mitted under the tacit sanction of our name.
If arms or ammunition be found secreted, or
in such quantities as cannot be reasonably or satis-
factorily accounted for, it is the duty of Government
to seize and detain such stores, and to hold all per-
sons, whether natives or foreigners, in whose posses-
sion they may have been found, responsible when
legally called upon for their peaceful conduct and in-
tentions. But there the duty of a British Minister
ends. Whatever may be said or insinuated to the
contrary, it is no part of his business to act as one of
a foreign gendarmerie, to play the part of a letter-
opener, a detective, or a spy, or to prostitute the
power and authority which belong to the executive
of a free nation in political prosecutions, to appease
the baffled fury of despotic Governments abroad.