The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-17 00:00:00

LONDON, THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 1853.

We do not regret the Parliamentary time de-1
voted to the Jews. Their numerical and political!
insignificance constitute the glory of the debate.
There might be but little of high and pure prin-1
ciple in demanding the political emancipation of
nearly one-third of the inhabitants of Great
tain and Ireland, but it can be nothing, but the
purest and most intelligent zeal for civil and re-
ligious liberty which can so pertinaciously insist
on bestowing the full rights of British citizens on
the politically unimportant denomination of the
Jews. In this point of view both the Liberal
majority of the city of London and that of the
HouSe of Commons are entitled to the highest
credit. Sir FREDERICK THESIGER, it seems, is
the last leading counsel in the great cause of
bigotry and exclusiveness, versus religious liberty.
No doubt, he did his best ; and no doubt few, if
any, could have done better with such a case.
We think, however, he would himself agree that
the whole of his speech, but its close, was the
merest special pleading which in his extensive
practice he ever attempted. He was obliged to
concede to Baron ALDERSON and to history, that
the clause in the oath which keeps out the Jew
was made to keep out the Papist—that hence we
are in the curious position that we have ad-
mitted those whom it was meant to keep
out, but keep out those to whom it had no
reference at all. He pleaded that our admis-
sion of Jews to the elective franchise had too
small, "too infinitesimal" an influence on our
legislation to require us in consistency to admit
them to Parliament, if that franchise sent them
to its doors ; but he forgot that, as representa-
tives, their number would always be quite as
" infinitesimal." If their vote could ever, as
suggested, be a casting vote, it must be when 656
Christians, or thereabouts, were equally divided
on a question ; the question, besides, must always
be a political one, since it were morally impos-
sible that Jewish theology and circumcision could
ever come to actual conflict in the House of
Commons with Christian theology and baptism.
The Sabbath of the Jews was even brought in
against them. Possibly a Jewish Member might
be ballotted on an Election Committee. These
committees enjoy the enviable privilege of sitting
on the seventh day of the week. Would the
House accept the excuse of the Jewish Member ?
We may reply, that the chance is indeed an " in-
finitesimal" one in favour of the Jewish Mem-
ber ; and Sir FREDERICK must allow the " infini-
tesimal" to be pleaded for Jews as well as against
them. If asked how likely he thought the event
to happen, or the House to make any difficulty
about it if it did, Sir FREDERICK would doubtless
have replied, with one of those inimitable looks which
troubled the opposing counsel so much in. the AcEnu
case, " If the sky fall, we shall catch larks."
Sir FREDERICK even quoted some unknown pamph-
leteer to prove that if they could, 100,000
Jews would take sail at once for Syria 1 How
infinitesimal,in that case, their influence must be
e q forgot ; it would soon open up the ques-
tion, not of their admission to Parliament here,
but of " Priest and High Priest Reserves" in the
Syrian colonies.
We leave, however, all Sir FREDERICK'S in-
genuities with as much' commendation of their
forensic skill
as the Noble and Learned Member
can wish. The gZtaZel.n question, as he himself and
all the junior
the case so strongly
asserted, is the religious
Parlia-
ment,clst he says, is now
auchrii7. Our
an Legislature.
It takes an oath in which it professes
Frridstianityd.
It observes Christmas-day, Good
Sunday, and therefore consists of good. ay, an
Unfortunately, as to the oath, Mr. smil.my
HER-
BERT challenged any one to find a declaration, by
implication or otherwise, of being a Christian, in
the oath for Catholics. The Chiristianity of Pres-
byterians and Nonconformists must lie at a very
low ebb if we estimate it by their respect for
Christmas-day and Good Friday ; indeed, we fear
that a very large proportion of the House adopt
as their creed respecting all Saints' Days, the sen-
timents of the witty author of " The History and
Mystery of Good Friday." Our Sabbatarian friends
will doubtless thank him for making Sabbath
observance a test of Christianity. It was a little
more to the purpose when Sir FREDERICK observed
that our lalr3 were made with a reference to the
Christian standard (doubtless our Courts Christian
think so), and he was afraid to lower that stan-
dard. But it may be justly asked, would the
standard be lowered ? It is not the morality but
the theology of Christianity that Jews impugn.
Their morality is ours in the bud. Their Ten
(.% mmandments oftener adorn our altars than the

two great Commandments of CHRIST,' anal those
two Commands the DIVINE AUTHOR of our faith
himself declared were but the chummary of the law
and the prophets. Indeed, borrowed their
very words from the Pentateuch. There is, then,
no moral ground for excluding the Jew ; it must
run up to the ceremonial and theological ground
only—just the ground on which Sir FREDERICK
declared his reluctance to fight the battle ! He
felt strongly enough, that to enter upon that ground
would be to deliver • the Jews much as they
were saved on one occasion in their history,
by ail the contending sects rising up to destroy
one another, The apostolically baptised would
I deny the Christianity Ofthose who had been
the
I merely sprinkled by " =authorise, teachers,
erangelicaLs would denounce the Puseyiteo"
as
cc le, ang immortal souls to hell ;" the Spoonerites
would cast °IL+. the Catholics as "idolaters and oath-
breakers" while all of them would, with the tone
of excommunicatiai7 affirm that " Socinians were
no better than Infidels," and that both mt be
Well
treated as " Heathen men and. Publicans."us
n the House.
may theology be a tabooed theme
We want no more BAREBONES' Parliaments, nor
QUEEN MARY'S Parliaments either.
Our Legislature has long lost the distinc-
tion of an Episcopal Church, or even an Esta-
blished Church, Legislature. All sects, but
the one under discussion, find easy admis-
sion into it ; while the Atheist would certainly
not be deterred, by oaths which he regards as
mummery, and a WILKES found them no bar to
his entrance. A man who seriously violates the
moral precepts of Christianity, is surely, by uni-
versal consent, a greater foe to its interests, than
a Jew who keeps his own law. The advocates of
a Christian Legislature (in their technical sense)
ouglit, therefore, to have election committees to
try the question of the moral character of their
members, aid to examine whether it was consis-
tent with the oath in which they professed Chris-
tianity. Woe, then, to the frequenters of Epsom,
Ascot, and Newmarket, if the Evangelicals hap-
pened to be a majority on title tribunal Our
Creed on the subject is very short. Let a man's
Christianity show itself in conduct which induces
his fellow-men to trust him as their representa-
tive ; nothing more is needed. Real Christisinity
needs no oath to bind it, and false Christianity
will be bound by none. If the social and moral
conduct of the Jew equals or surpasses that of the
Christian, he is as worthy of confidence as the
Christian ; and it can be nothing but religious per-
secution to visit him with pOlitical disqualifica-
tions, because he differs from you in religion only.
We have again, with pleasure, to commend the
language, as well as the course of Government,
on this occasion. The speech of Mr. SIDNEY
HERRERT was masterly and thoroughgoing, and
Lord JOHN was quite worthy of his life-long right-
mindedness on the question of religious liberty.
Should he, however, fail to carry his measure
through the Lords, we shall be obliged to censure
his want of generalship ; since we maintain that
the House of Commons is quite competent to
settle the question by a simple resolution of its
own. It ought not to submit to the dictation of
the Upper House, as to the indulgence needed by
the consciences of its members.

Among the multitude of books which continu-
ally come under our notice, it is long since we
have met with one more interesting than a work
bearing a perhaps not very attractive title,*
written by the late Inspector of Prisons. We
earnestly commend it to the careful perusal of all
concerned—and who is not concerned ?—in the
well-being of the community of which they form
a part. Mr. HILL's opinions are worthy of
attention, because they are not the wild
speculations of a theorist, but have been
subjected to the tests of actual experi-
ence. He prefaces his remarks with a prudent
caution to the eager philanthropist against undue
expectations formed with regard to any indvidual
reform. Each improvement, good in itself, is
chiefly valuable as part of a general system. This
fact cannot be too much impressed upon the atten-
tion of those rival benefactors of society who,
each believing that universal happiness must
be the result of some infalliable scheme of their
own, will suffer no co-operation with their endea-
vours, but wage war against all who would do
good by any other means. The field is wide
enough, Heaven knows, for us all. Every reli-
gious denomination, every political creed, may
here find enough occupation for all its members
apart from sectarian differences. When the enemy
knocks at the gates of the citadel, all good citi-
zens, no matter what their municipal misunder-
standings, form into rank and march together
against the foe. One common danger annihilates
immaterial differences, and the bond of brotherhood
is at once recognised. The force of that example
makes itself very palpable to us when contem-
plating this large volume by our side, containing
hundreds of pages, and all filled with the records
of Crime ! This enemy—this common enemy—is
within our gates, consuming the vitals of our pros-
perity, but before we can combine to repel his
advances, Politicians pause to decide about the
colours they must carry, and Christians wait to
arrange the order of their precedence 1
Gloomy as the records of these pages are,
it is nevertheless satisfactory to find testimony
borne by one so well competent to give it as to
the diminution of crime of latter years, com-
paratively. How much yet exists to sadden the
hearts of the thoughtful, and to bewilder the
combinations of the statesman, may be seen from
a very cursory glance at the facts here collected.
The object of this work is threefold. It sets
forth the Amount, the Causes, and the Remedies
of Crime. Of Causes Mr. HILL enumerates
six :

1. Bad Training and Ignorance.
2. Drunkenness and other kinds of profligacy.
3. Poverty.
4. Habits of violating the laws engendered by
the creation of artificial offences.

5. Other measures of legislation, interfering
unnecessarily in • private actions, or presenting
examples of injustice.
6. Temptations to crime, caused by the proba-
bility either of entire escape or of subjection to an
insufficient punishment.

The advocates of popular education will here
find abundant corroboration to their arguments.
In one account, among the prisoners of one year,
we find that less than one in three could read
well, not one in thirteen could write well, and
only one in fifty had learnt more than mere reading
and writing. We shall take another opportunity
of considering Mr. HILL'S suggestions on the
all-important matter of Education, in one very
significant portion of which he reminds us of
the efficacy of good parental training, by showing
that a large part of the inmates of prisons are
orphans, or have lost one parent. So widely ex-
tended is the subject-matter of this work, that our
only intention in these remarks is to direct to it
the attention of our readers, reserving a further
consideration of its " Remedies" for another time.

* Crime : its Amount, Causes, and Remedies. By
Frederick Hill, barrister-at-lavt, ate Inspector of Pri-
sons. John Murray.

FRENCH PLAYS.—MIIe. Luther took her benefit last
night at this theatre, on the last night but one of her
engagement. She appeared in four pieces, one of which,
Marriage au Miroir, was new to us. She played with
her usual spirit and vivacity, and was loudly applauded
at the end of each piece. The house was filled with the
usual fashionable audience, and her Majesty and Prince
Albert also honoured Le performance with their
presence.

HAYMARKET THEATRE.-Mr. B. Webster took his
final leave of the
hllaymarket stage, in his managerial
capacity, last nigThe pieces in which he appeared
were The Lion,Roused. and The Pretty Girls of Stiberg,
in which latter heave his celebrated and striking repre-
sentation of the
delivered a farewellpaezre Napoleon I. After this he
pardonable pride and satisfsasc, iin which he alluded with
ton to the success of his
management, and to the great improvements rovements which he
had effected in the " little theatre."
that his success had placed him,The announcement
pecuniary point of
view, independent of the world in
wasa received. with loud
cheering, as was also his further
puhannouncement that he
should continue to cater for the atc the Adelphi
Theatre. The house was filled to the ceiling with a
numerous and fashionable audience ; and re
warm
-la and
1
reception which they gave
t o
even enthusiastic
Webster must have been highly gratifying to Ms feelings..