Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1857-06-16 00:00:00

SAVINGS BANKS.

In reply to Mr. Collins,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he had
no objection, if the house desired, to append to the
Savings Banks' Bill the regulations prepared by him for the
suture management of such institutions, but he should
state that the regulations were prepared with a view to
banks not now in existence. In order to make the
measure work in practice, it would be necessary to give
to the government power to make alterations in those
regulations, which experience might prove expedient, or to
adjust them to the circumstances of existing banks. If
the house should be willing to agree to a clause of that
nature, he would introduce one into the bill before the
house, and if it met the views of hon. members, he woull
Suggest that the bill should go into committee pro
forma that night, and be reprinted with the amendment.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, replying to a
question, fixed the Report of Supply first thing for
Thursday.

ADMISSION Or SNWP TIM, PA RT,TAM7V7

The house went into committee on the Oaths Bill.
On the clause which provides the oath to be taken in
lieu of the oaths of supremacy and abjuration,

Mr. DEASY proposed, in page 2, line 11, to leave out
" ecclesiastical and spiritual," and to insert " temporal and
civil." He stated that the object which he had in view was
to put an end to the anomaly of Roman Catholics and
Protestants taking different oaths, and he considered that
the principle of his amendment was consiste It with the
principle of the noble lord's measure. With regard to
any argument that might arise from services rendered,
he contended that had it not been for the fidelity and
courage of the Roman Catholics, both in the army and
navy, in the late war, all the money of the Rothschilds
would have been as nothing.

Lord piti,
REESTON, without going into the merits of the
proposition of the hon. member, did not think that the
proper time had arrived for its consideration, and opposed
it on the broad ground that it would lead to the failure
of the Government measure.

Mr. Dc.ummoNo supported the amendment, contending
that over ecclesiastical and spiritual agencies they could
have no control, and therefore the words should be
omitted. He also thought that that was the time to
effect the alteration.
Mr. STAPLETON having offered some remarks,
Mr. WALPOLE opposed the amendment.

Mr. ROEBUCK objected to the present firm of oath, on
the ground that any man who swore according to it swore
to that which he believed to be a lie, it being unquestion
able that the Pope had power.

Sir F. TIIESIGER looked upon the question as one involv-
ing the supremacy of the Crown, and regretted that the
noble lord at the head of the Government had passed it
over so lightly.

Mr. B. Hope admitted the claims of the Jews as a ne-
cessity, and had hoped that in any measure for the purpose
some proposition would have been made to put an end to
questions of religions distinction.

Mr. MOORE c;nfessed that the separate oath for Roman
Catholics affected him but lightly, if the house in its wis-
dom declared that Jews and Catholics should be included
in one common formula, he accepted the difference as a
distinction, and only asked one thing in addition--that
Roman Catholics might be allowed to make their protesta-
tions upon the true faith of a Christian. (Cheers and
laugh ter. )
Mr. ROEBUCK appealed to Protestant and truth-loving
Members to remove the lie, to which he had referred, from
the oath, as a degradation to the house.
Mr. NAPIER said the Pope had no temporal power out of
his own kingdom, and the oath distinctly declared that he
had not, nor ought to have, any power or pre-eminence,
temporal or spiritual, in this kinghom.
The committee then divided. The numben were—
For the amendment
Against it

Majority 290
Itir• ROEBUCK proposed, after " spiritual" to insert "by
4w," his object being to declare that the Pope has no
power, ecclesiastical or spiritual, by law.
Upon this question the con!,mittee divided without any
discussion. The number, were—
For the
anisnoAment
Against it

68
. 243

Majority ..... . .. 175
SIR F. TRESIGER then moved to insert after realm—
"and I do make this Promise, renunciation, abjuration,
and declaration, heartily,
Wiggly and truly, on the true
faith of a Christian." tor
e remarked in commencing, that
the profession of faith which this bill proposed to alter
had been in use for the last 250
years without any objec-
tion being raised against it, and that it was incumbent

upon them to maintain the christian character of the
legislature. Tne proceedings of Parliament were opened
with prayer in the name of the Author of Christianity, and
they were compelled to observe certain festivals and fast
days of the Christian Church. The words "on the faith of
a christian," had been handed down in order to maintain
the christian character of that assembly, and he resisted
any attempt to remove them. Several arguments had been
proposed by those who thought that Jews should not be
exclnded—one was, that a Jew being a British born sub-
ject should be entitled to the previleges of other British
born subjects, but he maintained that they had no right
to that form which the legislature had prohibited them
It was also argued that they should bow t,) the decision of
so large a constituency as that of the City of
London—(hear, hear),—but he thought that the City
of London in electing a person prohibited from
taking his seat had not shown much respect to Parliament.
It would, in his opinion, have shown greater deference to
the institutions of the country if it had, instead of electing
a prohibited person, and endeavouring to force the legista-
ture to admit that person to its body, endeavoured first to
alter the constitution. He contended to acknowledge the
decision of the city of London would be to set a very bad
example to other constituences. It was said that the Jews,
being allowed the franchise, shoull also be allowed to sit
in Parliament, but he saw a great difference between hold-
ing an infinitisimal fraction of the right to send a represen-
tative to Parliament, and assisting in giving laws to the
country. It was also argued that the offices of lord mayor,
magistrate, and sheriff, being open to the Jews, it was
anomalous to exclude him from Parliament—(hear, hoar)

—but it was widely different to dispense law being bound
by it, and to make laws which are to bind others•
The Jews were a people separate from all others, and so

they must remain.
Mr. STANHOPE seconded the amendment, and Mr. KING'

LAKE opposed.
Mr. L. WIGELM thought that if the Jews were to be
admitted to Parliament, their entrance should be made by
a more legitimate method then die setting aside of the
greatest obliation of Christians.

Mr. Evers maintained that every subject of the realm
had a right to the privileges enjoyed by his fellow-subjects
unless some disqualification was shown, which in this
case the mover had failed to do, with regard to the
Jews.

Mr. WARREN believed that the admission of the Jews
to Parliament was contrary to the feelings of the country,
and he appealed to the house whether those should have
seats in that assembly who looked upon the Redeemer as
a crucified impostor. The effect of the bill, as it stood,
would be to unchristianise the legislature, and he believed
that the effect of such a step would be to lose the favour
of God.

Sir JOHN PAEINGTON had carefully considered the ques-
tion, both as a religious and as a political question, and
he had at length come to the conclusion that he ought not
to vote as he had formeriy done for the exclusion of Jews
from Parliament. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to
combat the arguments of the supporters of the amend-
ment ; and with regard to unchristianising the house,
he contended that if the admission of Jews would have
that effect the legislature was already unchristiauised by
numbering Unitarians amongst its members. He did not
approve altogether of the course taken by the Govern-
ment
in omitting the words "on the true faith of a
christian," but would have preferred a proposition for the
removal of Jewish disabilites by a special measure
Mr, NAPIER referred to the opening of the day's
business in Parliament with christian prayers, and the
acknowledgement of festivals and fast days of the
Christian Church, contending that Jews could not be ad-
mitted without destroying these evidences of christianity.
Mr. HORMAN in replying to the speeches in favour
of the amendment, alluded to the religious basis which
had been given by the speakers to the constitution, and
warned the house against sanctioning the principle that
they should punish abstract opinions. The words, "on
the true, &c.," were, in his opinion, inserted in the oath
for the protection of one Christian from another, and it
was unjust to exclude the Jews from the privileges of
other British subjects ny woruo wutu:.
to apply to them. The exclusion of Jews was merely the
result of accident, therefore, and he did not think it con-
sistent with the character of the parliament to take advan-
tage of such an accident, to the prejudice of their fellow-
subjects.

Mr. WHITESIDE supported the amendment upon the
ground that the law of the country was founded upon
principles of Christianity, and the exclusion of every ele-
ment antagonistic to it. The principle of parliament w..s
legis'ation for the benefit of Christian consti-
tuencies by their representatives, but that could
not take place in the case of a Jewish
member, and he would be of no benefit to his
country, to his constituents, or to parliament. Baron
Rothschild came down to triumph over their ancient
religion, sanctioned by the usage of centuries ; and in after
days, if this bill passed, what would become of those
sublime words, "on the true faith of a Christian." The
hon. member's speech was characterised throughout by
powerful and effective eloquence, and at its close was long
and loudly cheered.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL argued that the words, "on the
true faith of a Christian," were never intended to exclude
Jews from Parliament, and that those words which did not
occur in the oaths of allegiance or supremacy might,
without the abandonment of a principle, be struck
out of the oath of abjuragation. He did not believe that
the Christian religion was to be maintained by a system of
exclusicn, but, that admitting the Jew to the same pre-
vileges as the christian, they should rely upon the measures
now employed to spread christianity throughout the
land.

Mr. NEWDEGATZ opposed the principle of the Jewish
disabilities, on the ground, that it was an irreligious and
awful principle.
Lord PALUERSTON offered his tribute to the right hon.
baronet for Droitwich, upon the honourable and courageous
course which he had pursued. (Cheers.) He could
understand the arguments of those who opposed any
alteration in the forms of oaths, on the ground that they
became sacred from antiquity, but he was at a loss to
understand why persons with such opinions supportitg
an amendment, the object of which was to eFtablish a
perfectly new principle, that the condition of the words
"on the true, &c.," had for their object the exclu-
sion of Jews from parliament. Under the circum-
stances he asked the house to declare in the
division their determination to support the principles o"
civil and religious liberty, and free institutions.
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it

Majority l4O

- -
Mr. WALPOLE wished to know whether it was intended
to introduce a clause restraining Jews from holding officee
which Roman Catholics could not hold ?
Lord PALMERSTON said the Government had no intention
of making any alteration in the bill as it stood (Cheers.)
Mr. DRUMMOND asked whether it was intended that Jews
should have the distribution of bishoprics ? (Loud
cheers.)
Lord R. CECIL moved that the chairman report progress.
Lord PALMERSTON opposed.
The committee having divided, the numbers were—

For reporting progress . 142
Ag iinst it 278

Majority .
After some further discussion, clause one was agreed to.
The remaining clauses were also agreed to.

MISCELLANEOUS BILLS.

The Sound Duesiill76;;ni; Cess (Ireland) Bill, and
Militia (Ireland) Act, 1856, Amendment Bills, were read a
third time and passed.
The house adjourned at half past one.

PORTSMOUTH, Juue 14.—The Archduke Maximillian of
Austria, arrived at Spithead this morning, in the Austrian
paddle sloop Empress Elisabeth.
MADRID, June 12—General O'Donnel, as soon as he
obtains permission, will visit France. The Mexican
question is farifrom being settled.

THE
MERSEY CONSERVANCY
AND DOCKS BILL.