The Sun.
London, England, 1849-06-12 00:00:00

sidered on any ground of personal fitness, but upon prin-
ciple. The question was, he thought, whether a person
not professing Christianity ought to be admitted into
Parliament. The Bill of this session contained provi-
sions which, though he did not intend to dwell upon
them at any length, were worthy of serious attention.
'Fhe Noble Lord was careful to omit the words, "on the
true faith of a Christian," in the case of a Jew seeking
admission to Parliament, but yet a Deist was refused
that benefit. Upon what ground of justice or common
sense that distinction proceeded he was quite at a loss
to ascertain. It was the toleration and liberality of the
English Constitution, founded upon the Holy Scripture,
which formed the bulwark of their liberty, and to which
Kieg, Lords, and Commons owed their obedience.—
(Hear, hear.) This was not a question of persecution,
but a question of power. He objected to this Bill be-
cause it was frittering away all distinctions between
truth and falsehood—between those who obeyed the dic-
tates of Christianity, and those who regulated their con-
duct by other rules. He found the Noble Lord destroy-
ing the great basis of their constitution in this respect,
and he, therefore, should oppose the Bill which was in-
tended to do this.

Mr. P. WOOD said that he hailed this Bill as a great
step towards breaking down that spirit of religious per-
secution and intolerance, which ought not to form any
feature in, or character of, the present age. Ph this
feeling he should certainly support the motion. If they
could only depend upon oaths of this sort to secure the
proper discharge of public duties they had but a very
insecure test. It was quite absurd to suppose that these
oaths were necessary in all the cases in which they were
applied. Ile found, however, from a roll deposited in
the Court of Queen's Bench, that the following persons
were required to take an oath to the effect that they
would not use the influence of their office to subvert the
Established Church. After enumerating Admirals and
bishops, he found the list to contain the names of the
Master of the King's Bench, and the Conductor—
(Laughter)—the housekeeper of llsmpton Court Palace,
the heralds, State pages, the King's porter, trumpeter,
waterman, swankeeper, topacier (he did not know what
officer that could be), and, last of all, though not least,
came his Majesty'ssty's rat-killer.—(Great laughter.) It
was recorded that his Majesty's chimner'sweeper also
presented himself to take the oath, but that in his case
it was dispensed with. These were not laws to do good
to the Church, and, feeling so, he should give his earnest
support to the measure.

After a few words from Mr. PLUMTRE against the
Bill,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied. Before the House
proceeded to a division, he wished to take notice of some
of the objections which had been urged against the Bill.
First, one which was not concerned with admission of
the Jews was argued by the Right Elon. Gentleman the
Member for the University of Cambridge, that if the
Bill passed Roman Catholics would take advantage of
that portion of the Bill which allowed Roman Catholics
to take the Protestant oath. He could not believe that;
because if that were attempted they would be subjected
to the loss of their seats. The pith of the arguments
against the Bill had reference to that clause of the Bill
by which Jews were to be admitted. As those argu-
ments, however strongly urged, had very little in them,
different from that which they contained before, he did
not propose to offer any observations in answer to them.
There was a great objection that the personal religion
of Members of that House • would not be secured.
The personal religion of the House was, he be-
lieved, sufficiently well secured, and placed beyond the
reach of danger from this quarter. -Un'ess this measure
of toleration was agreed to, they would have all classes
and sects of men clamouring for the privilege of admis-
sion, and a general legislation would be necessary.—
(Hear.) In former days, when they had not so great
a security for the personal religion of that House as they
had at present, the introduction of this measure might
be attended with considerable danger in this respect; but
at the present day it was an objection which could not
be entertained seriously. They were a Christian House
of Parliament, and for that reason should do away with
all religious disabilities. Fur those reasons, he should
call upon the House to give the Bill a third reading. lie
could not answer for the course of the Bill in the other
House of Parliament; but it was perfectly true, as stated
by the Hon. Member for Kerry, that there was a large
number of persons, many of them his own (Lord John
Russell's) constituents, who felt a deep interest in this
subject, not as being connected with that of the admis
sion of the Jews, but because they felt that this was a
question of religious liberty, and that the character of
the country was concerned in making the objects of this
legislation free. On those grounds he called on the
'louse to give its supjeort to the Bill.—(Hear.)
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the third reading
• Againstit ......................
Majority ---66
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheering.
The Silver Coinage Bill was read a third timo and
Vassed•
miTtthee.
eCounty Cess (Ireland) Bill went through Com-
The Newgate Gaol (Dublin) Bill was read a second
time.