The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-30 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PAR L fAMEN T.

tliefeteglit to admit the My lords, it is surely an
injustice to deny to the electors the right of chobsing any
man not legally incapacitated. Now, I contend there
HOUSE OF LORDS--(YESTERDAY.) is no-legal incapacity in a Jew, and that if you deprive
The LORD CHANCELLOR•took his seat on the woolsack the electors of choosing any person they please, whether
at five o'clock.
a Jew or a Christian, to represent them in Parliament,
Lord,
SAYE and SELE presented petitions in favour you commit a decided injustice upon those electors.
of the Jewish Disabilities Bill. Then, it is always unwise in your Lordships, unless under
The Earl of ABERDEEN presented petitions from very extraordinary circumstances indeed, to oppose
South's nyton and other places to a similar effect. yourselves determinedly and obstinately to the voice of
The Earl of MALMESBURY presented petitions the House of Commons in a case which peculiarly touches
..rf"Yarmliamileanultp;shire against the admission of Jews into the constitution of that house. (Hear, hear.) Parlia-
also, from Whitehaven, against the onen- ment after Parliament has confirmed that decision of the
ing of the Crystal Palace on Sundays. - House of Commons on this subject. It is true that you
Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from places need not fear on this occasion the pressure of danger
nincrL,:eashire, praying for the extension of the county
from civil war. There is no fear; as I recollecthearing
urt jurisdiction. The noble lord proceeded to u the great duke* whom we have lost declare in this very
on the Government the propriety of. introducing somee Act
Measure to lessen the fees exacted from suitors in the place that he assented to the Catholic Emancipation
County courts, which now amounted to from fear of a civil war. Certainly there is no danger of
more than 25
Per cent. of the whole amount recovered. that kind. But although there is no danger of a civil
war, give me leave to say that there is a danger of a
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the Govern- serious collision. I say that if you go on year after year
meat in a
nt felt the n •
subject at resentp under their consideration.
necessity of such a. measure, and
Lord
nCAMPBELL expressed himself desirous of see- matter in which their own body and composition is
essentially concerned, you expose yourselves to a risk
1 gi.loeme measure passed to remedy this great abuse.
The Bishop of CHICHESTER presented petitions which I should be very sorry to see caarlntheodufguhrthyeoro. Now,may
against the Jewish Disabilities Bill. my lords, does any man suppose, .
Similar petitions were presented by Lord BERNERS, not have a pressure of that alarming kind to which
I have referred—does any man suppose that this ques-
the EarlLsWdehmetahnedr
of DERBY, Earl of S
noble lords. • . HAFTESBURY, and other tion can long remain without belinegusneattoliemd
if it be the progress of reason or t
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition from of Parliament, you will be compelled
the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Town Council in favour man to say-
of the other house
before long to deal with this question. I am the last
of the Jewish Disabilities Bill,also petitions from places
uot Sussex to the same out any measure which is sent
n you should not exercise the just prerogative
effect.
Similar petitions
were presented by the Marquis of you possess of throwing
Lansdowne, the Duke of Newcastle, and the Earl of up for your approval. You do well to exercise it if you
think proper • but in this question, which touches so
,Albemarle, from the Great St. John-street Synagogue.
Un the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the Crystal nearly the character and the composition of the other
house of Parliament, I do maintain, that although the
palace Companies Bill was read a third time and passed. constitution has vested in you a full and free exercise of
The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from
a Place • your prerogative, yet you.. would
.do well to be cautious
in Sussex, against the malt tax how far you persevere in its exercise, My lords, believ-
•
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL. ing as Ido that your lordships, in your inmost hearts,
dapThe Earl of ABERDEEN, are fully persuaded that this is merelya question of time,
for the in moving the order of the more or less, I do hope that we shall on this occasion
second reading of this bill, said—My lords, I
have now to move your lordships to ive a second- read- arrive at that stage at which we shall see the settlement
111 g to the bill for the relief her Majesty's subjects of this long pending question. Ido hope the time has
professing the J • now arrived at which we may cast to the winds this last
the subject- Jewish religion. (Hear, hear.) My lords,
attention,
has already so much engaged your lordships' rag of intolerance, and that we may. make our practice
conform to those principles of religious freedom which
o,_, . lon, and has been so fully discussed in this house we profess to hold. (Cheers.)
that ft would be difficult for any one, and certainly im' The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said if anything could
Possible
ship, for me, to attempt to place it before your lord- add to the importance of this ,discussion, it would be
very inoallY new point of view. . But before I proceed that the noble earl who had just sat down, having for
tion, tn"urtly to remark on some of the principal objec- many years opposed these claims as a private individual,
efore
Support this measure, I will offer a few observations in had now become not only the supporter but the proA-
bring. b °1 the case which I have now undertaken to pounder of them as the first minister of the Crown.
he
tion
was Your lordships. My lords, when the ques- city that was set on a hill could not be hid, and
altbooot,last before your lordships two years ago, feared that many would follow the example of so high a
sion, °te3ting no part in the discussion on that occa- personage. The gravity of the noble earl and the known
lord, my vote was given against the measure. Now, my sincerity of his heart precluded him from making any
on
tg. :although
lam not aware that a change of opinion observation on the change, and he would only express a
thelels subject necessarily calls for any remark, never- hope, nay more, a belief, that the grounds on which he
char,: 'l„aln desirous of stating to the house that this reversed his vote this night were as solemn and true as
year be °' °Pinion on my part took place more than a those on which he formerly stood. He was astonished
year ago, In the month of January or February last to hear it said that the popular voice was in favour of
posit;Lerta inly before the accession of the noble earl op- this measure. Why, the popular voice, in the full
the 1"' °ffice—l communicated to my right hon. friend extent of the term, was neither on the one side nor the
oitresent Chancellor of the Exchequer, then, and now, other. There was upon the whole, a general apathy
au ber for the University of Oxford, my intention of on this question. Where any feeling was entertained, it
eePuP°ol•ting. the removal of the Jewish disabilities on the was deep and serious, but the feeliug did not pervade the
wa...,
,cca.sion when the subject should be brought for- whole of the community. It was argued that the Jews
toniuin.lll4t his house. I sdasequently made' the same com- had a constitutional right to sit in Parliament. He would
(the rion to my noble friend near me, the noble duke undertake to argue the question if he thought that they
eir Secretary for the Colonies.) I.‘wish to mention this really believed so • but by this bill, so far from stating
cunlstance, lest, by any possibility, it might. be sup- that, they stated' the very reverse. For one enabling
Posed th
th, at my change of opinion had any relation to clause they had a dozen disabling ones ; for one
a,..recent political combination, with - which, as far as I privilege that they gave there were eight or ten that
lil.,erjelleerned, it has had nothing to do. (Hear, hear.) they refused. (Hear, hear.) They enacted that no Jew
o„ ;I is less cause for remark upon a change of opinion should be Lord Chancellor, or Beeper of the Great
taken ch a question as this, because I apprehend it has Seal, or Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, or Lord High
aiv_ Place on the part of most of those of your lord- Commissioner of Scotland ; that Jews should not present
those
who are now favourable to the measure. Most of to benefices in right of office ; that if they advised the
a, time 9f Your lordships who now support it must recollect Crown as to presentation of benefices, they should be
foreL,,e when your feelings on this subject were in a dif- guilty of a high misdemeanour. If they had a constitu-
the 1' direction ; and it is natural that this should be tional right to a seat in Parliament, they had a consti-
xue..e,a!". look upon this as less the result of argu- tutional right to all the privileges and consequences of
~,u,r than of religious obligation, which when it is felt that right. When Jews were admitted to corporate
a.ni egarded, must be "stronger than all argument and offices, it was argued that they had given their sanction
Luf reasoning on this subject. I consider the existing to the admission of the Jews to legislative functions.
tr as a remnant of that feeling which formerly existed They replied that executive and legislative functions
,t,,7?ughout this country. In former times, no doubt were diametrically different, that they might be trusted
tb n much greater intensity, this prejudice against with one and not with the other. But they (the minis-
e Jews existed ; and it was turned to account by terialists) now reversed that order. They said the Jews
creel
~._ menen and atrocious tyrants for the purpose of might be trusted with legislative functions, but they
z'
rs ution and cruelty ; nevertheless, some of them excluded them from a large share of executive power.
"La •Y have thought by so acting they were doing They were told that this demand ought to be granted
God service. My lords, I do not now speak of perse- in accordance with the principles 'of civil and religious
be11.,j9°,13, for I know that those who oppose the claims made liberty. If by civil liberty was meant that every man
good the Jewish people entertain and express feelings of should be free in mind, body, and estate, he believed they
off will and kindness towards them. Nevertheless it all, Jew and Gentile, were free enough in that particular.
aot pvapinrioentibat this feeling of opposition is a remnant But as to religious liberty, if this bill passed, the Jew
ring persuasion which in former times would have his religious liberty, but he did see how
existed so strongly in every country in Europe. (Hear.) Christians would have theirs. If it were a principle of
MY lords,
they
they no,
of a crime
are,
look upon the Jewish nation, scattered as civil liberty that a man should be tried by his peers; he
imprecated on their
. o inconceivable;, as a people lie under the commission held it to be an equal principle of religious liberty that
as the consequence of that •
magnitude, and who have none but Christians should be allowed to make laws that
as hiteadwserteehnemceu.rse which was to ensue should bind Christian churches. Theo pponents of the
made ourselves, We have insensibly bill respected the Jews, they saw them under a cloud,
wrath--we have taken , accessories in the Divine but they acknowledged them as hereafter to be the sove-
upon ourselves, more or less, to reign family of the human race ; they wished them well,
give effect to the decree of the Most High, and to carry they could not be harsh to them, either in language or
mto operation the vengeance of the Almighty ; but when even in thought ; but when they heard their advocates
'Are recollect that "
140t,i_for.us " to repay," we
is not ours," and that it is declare, that for the purposes of legislation, all religions
. . we should view the Jewish people were alike, then they said emphatically—No ; and they
.1,414% pity, and exhibit towards them fellow-feelings of said it upon what they believed to be the " true faith of
tielosr. My lords, this country, at least in recent a Christian." (Hear, hear.) His lordship then moved
opine' has proclaimed an absolute freedom of religious that the bill bo read a second time that .day six months.
ligioolB. We have declared that religious truth, or re- The Earl of A LBEMARLE would ask the house, as
Civil ° error, shall not be the test of any qualification for they had lately done a great act of justice to their Cana-
Per%orightS (Cheers.) My lords, the Jew is the only than fellow subjects to do a similar act towards the
Cot: who is excluded from rights and immunities, in Jews. He asked this the more confidently, because a
able,clliellee,of his religious belief. (Hear. hear.) Hor- great 'statesman had on that evening; for the first time,
()U li-nil(lunchristion as those laws were which persecuted spoken in defence of the rights of their Hebrew fell.owt-
foukOtan Catholic fellow-subjects, still they were not countrymen. That. fact alone ought to have weight
4:l4.ni'L ec much on• their religious creed,.
.but
.were upon those of their lordships who were not decided in
aII(11-1 adopted as a compendious test of political belief, their minds upon this question. It was now 200 years
Were • •
Politic , not incorrectly chosen li. h
as indicating that since Oliver Cromwell sought to relieve. t.l3e. Jews of
beea,, ai faith. (Hear.) But, my lords, the Jew, simply England from the operation of these disabilities w lc
clenblse he entertains a religious belief which we un- effected them atnltihgahttepneeridotr
hTiheattigreaatoPrwotaeestannott
es - Ledly ' be most erroneous, is the only prince was. too e
-Lae ~,,o, -, can prove to
.ago—in 1793—a
consequence successful in his attempt. A century
of u° in the present day is proscribed in
d both houses
Nye
arreliglous opinions ; and with regard to him alone bill was brought in somewhat similar in its nature to
sal Dtme uot acting on the principle which has been fully. the attempt of CromwelLThthisebirlolypaalssaessent ;
4-- since the abolition of the Test and Corporation of Parliament and received but so
obje,4"l; °(I the Roman Catholic Relief Bill. (Hear.) Thee powerful a clamour was raised against the mea-
eztePe to extending to the Jews the same principle we sure that it was necessary to repeal it the same
11.0:' to all other persuasions, however they may differ year. The tones were at that time upon the oppo-
sive, ourselves is founded mainly, I think almost exclu- sition side of the house, and a general election being
P ariln'_llePoU this feeling, that we are doing something at at hand sought to obtain power by an appeal to the
4.,„_, c with the Christian character of the country.religious.
heard cries of " no mass-houses, '
It prejudices of their several constituents. At
pli"..u_,L. very easy to understand how this argument is ap- the hustings there were,
to ; The existence of the Jews in this country is, pro "no conventicles?' and ‘.‘ no synagogues." Since that
cella' an unchristianising of the nation. The only period the provisions aTghaeinst s-houses and conventi-
oble earl asked the house by
foi try that is consistent is Spain. No doubt you might des were abolished. .
J:°,,,sw the example of Spain, and you might expel the their vote on tohoisoccasionanetroo
but 4_fv:lla your dominions. That would be consistent ; upon the list.. looking placess to ththeebesnycnhagor bishops
to to sa"3 onfer privileges, rights, honours on Jews, and yet he
ewßasisrheominded by the presence of a right rev. prelate
Bishop of Norwich) that it was the Bishop of Nor-
tianisT that their admission to Parliament is unchns- (th.
elearlTg d th t the bishop would. hold
the nation, is such an argument I cannot wick who, at that. time, incurred the greatest amount of
vee:prehend. It is true tha.t Chriatianity part oblocey. lodeed it was saa a
al
rParcel of' the law of the land, but your lordships an ordination upon. th. Saturdays for Jews and upon
Ch;. eat, so far as Parliament is concerned, it is not the Sundays for Christians. He trusted that the right
bi3tianity alone that has been the law, but the Esta- rev. prelate opposite would be equally forward in sup-
hrecl Church has been the law of Parliament. You port of the Jews.. An advance had certainly been made
'e• :le excluded various sects; by means of acts of indem- in public feeling since the last century.
had
de
been City
li Y.You.have contrived to introduce' Dissenters into the of London, for instance. A centuryago Tthaakte
hie
Commons, but the principle has been to exclude the head-quarters of the opposition to the Jews. Now
tb, who do not belong to the Established Church of that city, numbering 20,000 inhabitants, had returned a
a: country. That state of things no longer exists. I Jew as their representative. During the debate upon
istlirehettd that in no sense will be said that Parliament this subject in another place a distinguished. member of
exclusively—in the sense in which it is used—a Chris- the legal profession had urged in opposition to
athios_btihlle,
LiaoLe Parliament ; that is to say, there are modes of be- the inconvenience which would arise fromac 11 1
day the
1,.., persons entertaining peculiar opinions, admitted into house being made upon a Friday,-up
Parliament, those opinions being so.erroneous as almost Jewish Sabbath had commenced. He whichhad however,
a "posed to Christian. belief. Now if we extend been assured by a Jewish friend that no ' inconvenience
errtoission to Parliament to persons holding opinions so would arise in such a case. The prejudice which. existed
eipie . , grievous, so monstrous, °"leous so I think the prin- against the Jews was the effect of their legal disabilities.
fq . falls us entirely of looking to Parliament as an ex- Prejudices, if not fostered by legal enactments, surely
-ollst lve body of any Christian persuasion. But you have died away in the course of tithe. Every one could re-
only admitted to Parliament persons entertaining collect the prejudice which had existed against Scotch-
these Peculiar opinions, but you have actually, although men, and how the poetry of Churchill and the prose of
?°ll have not unchristianised Parliament, unchristian- Macklin were levelled at them. When John Earl of
i!ed other legislative bodies. You have by act of Par- Bute was First Minister the complaints were not levelled
Lament admitted Jews into the Legislatures of the Ca- so much against his incapacity as at his country. A
--",, as and of Jamaica, and why by so doing you would Scotchman was now upon the Treasury bench who had
them those bodies any more than by admitting shown that he would not hesitate to do justice to the
i'eril into the Imperial Parliament you would unchris• Jews. • As to the objection that the JeWs were merely
I,allise it, I cannot understand. The truth is, you un- sojourning in this country he believed that they could
,°uristianise neither the one nor the other. Whether make out a longer term than many others. For in-
?tall-a-dozen Jews be in the Assembly of Canada or in stances—those who came to this country after the Edict
fr British House of Commons makes no difference to of Nantes, and those who, like his (the Earl of -Albe-
e Christian character of the Assembly. But, after all, made's) ancestor, came to this country with William
this exclusiveness, as your lordships are perfectly well
111. Spain and
aware, rests only on an accident. There is no law at this 'Portugal were often referred to upon
the questions of religious disabilities, and the condition
Tolnent to exclude the Jews from a seat in Parliament. of those countries was not to be envied by this. Upon
,ilLere is an oath, the whole of which they are not able to the other hand, in Holland, the most Protestant of c0un-
t,,....7e, an oath which I must say is one of the most unne- tries, for 250 years the Jews have enjoyed a perfect
rary and useless oaths. But they are ready to take equality of rights with those of other' citizens. Every
nis oath of abjuration in its substance and essential cha- one knew the material prosperity of Holland, and this
Meter ; all that they cannot take is an assertion that adds surely ought to be an argument of some weight with a
'lathing whatever to the substance of the oath, but nation of shopkeepers. In conclusion, he trusted that
Merely giving an additional asseveration at the close to
their lordships would show by their vote that they were
tit which they have already sworn. Now this, in many not unmindful of the rights of their Jewish fellow-
instances you have dispensed with. By many acts of Par- subjects.
rapritio The Earl of DARNLEY, in voting against this mea-
iiarnent you have allowed Jews to take the oath of abju-
sure, wished to state to the house that he did so solely
11,,expressly omitting this asseveration at its close.
That is the mode in which you have extended the power 1 upon religious motives. It had been
lature already numbered among said, that the legi
of admission to your Colonial Legislature. It is the mode !
and Unitarians. That might be *s-
tits members Socinians
IP' which you have over and over again admitted Jews to !
attempted plainly to recognise theruaen;tib-Cuht
anti-Christian
os
spiritnow
stance
an oath in this country. This oath, in its sub-
of eDUBLIN said he did not like
't'ualce and essentials they will take, except this addi-
'en, which is not binding on their conscience, and I i i n iThee Legislature.Arciibisbop
t hwork legislation : relieving Quakers one time,
,euld ask any one of your lordships if you would ven-
pßaorne an Catholics another, Dissenters another, and then
ture to enact it at this moment. I think I recollect on a
He would prefer a comprehensive bill, to do at
former occasion that a noble earl opposite, who is fore- ,
Most in ever ood ksaid he took this as he found Jews'.
once what had to be done in the end. (Hear, hear.)
it, and that y g work
' introducesuch
Before he sat down, he wished to say one word with a C • • he would not be prepared to
condition. If so, what becomes of the objection to the
respect to an evil which might but of this bill, if it
arise •
admission of the Jews 3 If my noble friend would hesi-
were proffered and passed as a triumph of Christianity.
make enact such an exclusion, surely he ought not to
The proper way to consider it was as a triumph of Chris-
also_their exclusion dependent on an accident. It has
tianity—(hear, hear) —and he asked their lordships to
. a boeen said that these persons are in truth not belong-
support the bill, not because it was a measure in favour
rig to our nation, that they are aliens, that they are a ,
Cil Ind people, and therefore have nothing in common of the Jews but because it was a measure in support of
with us, and ought to be excluded from legislature. Christianity. (Cheers.)
But, my our
lords, that they are in one sense a
distinct The Bishop of SALISBURY said he saw no weight
People, and will continue so until their mysterious des- hi,
the argument
tiny is fulfilled, I admit ; but that they are in any other au of the most -rev. prelate who had last
addressed lordships, that the words "on the true
s.,.en_sne anything but Englishmen and as good Enishmen
a y other, I utterly deny You impose faith of a Christian" did not act as a protection to Chris-
under that ,
on
burdens of Englishmen *
rights them the
and you ought to confer the ' the legislature. Because the bar was not quite
tianity, since nominal Christians might,.
enter.
gilts of Englishmen ' 1 was it to be thrown down altogether ? Both,
to be a notion which is
them. I hold, therefore, this
• effectual
as a member of their lordships' house, and in
foundation. A right r
sevuetterly untenable and without therefore,..
bishop of the Church, he should give
1:11 T rend friend of mine, on a for- his capacity as a
, - occasion made a forcible observation in his against the bill.
elect that ex- vote•
, mg the Jews from Parli ' of ST. DAVID'S agreed with the most
re"altY on Christian Parliament you in effect inflict a The Bi lop , -
3ered, and electors, that it is they who are in- rev.prelate (Whately), that it was to be regretted that
_
__ that it is not from a love to the title of this bill was such a misnomer, and that it' was
"gall to the privileges of Chris
reliefhad'
Christians, he argued; that not called a bill for the of electors, He never