The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-01 00:00:00

mercial communities of London and Bristol, and also to those
from Portsmouth, Devonport, and other places. It was 1.1
question of principle—a question not involving any insensi.
bility to a religious belief, as his Hon. Fricnd would fair
prove, but invlitig. the principle that civil and religious
functions were eentialtv different in their nature. I.
was urged by his Ilan. Friend that the Jews believed them
selves a nation, and dal not look upon themselves as ot
any people among whom they resided. Did that maks
any difference to them in the amount of the King's taxe,
_did the collector abate a shilling for that cause—were the
exempt from the consequences of high treason for it—were
they not, in fact, equally liable to all the burdens of the State
as their Christian fellow-subjects? Why then should
they be debarred a participation in the rights and pri-
vileges claimed and enjoyed by- them ? If they were alien
in feeling to country, who made them so ? Who but our-
selves and our barbarous statutes? But the public had long
since decided in favour of the question of removing the civil
disabilities of the Jewish people. His motion was more to
release the Christians from disgrace, than the Jews from dis-
abilities. The Jews worshipped the same God as we did—
from their scriptures we derives! cur holy writ. To exclude
them from civil rights, %%Mild he to assume the function's of the
Deity. We had no hesitation in associating with- Jews—in
dealing with them—on occasion we contested their good offices,
and wished to stand well in their favour. Why, then, oppose
their being made equal with us in civil privileges? He trusted
the House would allow him to bring in the 13111 which he
meant to move for. It was precisely the same as that intro-
duced by Sir R. Grant, neither more nor less. It was the
question whether, haying removed front the statute-hook all re-
ligious disabilities except this, would the Leeislature leave
that one spot as a mark of the foul cancer which has so long
gnawed and defaced our Constitution ?—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. ESTCOURT said the proposition of Right Hon.
Friend was an insidious way of undermining all religious dis-
tinCtions. If it were not., why was a Jew to be preferred to a
Mahometan ? The Hon. Member concluded by protesting
against the introduction of such an important question at such
alate period of the night to such empty benches.
Mr. ROBINSON should always support any proposition
for doing away with any species of civil disability on account •
of religious opinions. He believed that the Christian religion
had never derived any support from that intolerant statute
which it was proposed to repeal ; but on the contrary, it had
suffered the greatest disgrace and injury in every country
where it had been adopted.
Colonel P. THOMPSON did not know when intolerance
had begun to be insisted on as an essential attribute of Christi-
;lefty, but certainly it could net be made in any way to harmo-
nize with the doctrine of " Do unto others as you would they
should do unto you." He could hot compliment Hon. Gen-
tle Men opposite (who possessed the same faith and creed as
himself) on the consistency of their practice—it appeared to
be anything but Christian. For his part, he looked upon the
political doctrine advocated by them—that they were to legis-
late for their fellow-subjects not with regard to their rights as
citizens, but with regard to the accidents of their faith, as
monstrous.
Mr. PLUM PTRE was glad the Hon. Member for Oxford
had taken his'stand against this Bill, and believed the great
bony of the people would be sorry that the Chancellor of the
Ex-choquer had thought it necessary to bring in such a mea-
sure. He would not have lent himself to such a Bill if he had
looked as be ought to. Him by whom kings reign and by whom
princes diqtente justice.—( Cries of" Oh, oh 1") He did not
know how thm, could hope for a blessing on their labours if
they gave their aoent to a measure that went to introduce into
that House a people who said that the great Head of the
Church was a blasphemer ,nd impostor.—( Oh land laughter.)
Mr. O'CONNELL exclaked—Yes ; injustice had its re-
ward—iniquity had its reward—there was a blessing attending
the imposition of the burthens of the State on the shoulders
of the Jews, but there was no blessing attending the doing
them justice. He denied that lion, Gentlemen opposite who up-
held the principle of persecution were aettorted by Christian
principles, and he wished to know by what right Ow), dared to
assume to themselves as legislators the principle a infallibi-
lity Hear.) He declared that the debate was itlisgrAceful
to the country.—(Loud cheers,) He could not refrain from
the expression of his abhorrence of the odious and unchristian
avowals of the opposers of this Bill. 174,i lion. Baronet who
led that opposition had been driven from one poition to ano-
'Aber, and, failing in exciting their bad passions agiiips the
Jews as heretics, he had denounced them as worthy f
o excin,
sion as infidels, But the House had no way of keeping out
heretics. It was, indeed, an ugly word, awl might be retorted
Laughter.) He wished the Noble Lord ofiggft.o would
speak up, and not keep contradicting him in that tone, per,
haps be could tell him what htsretic was. Perhaps he would
. define it—any body who was hot It Member of an Orange
Lodge. —( Laughter. )
Col. PERC b; VAL did not think it neeeswv to justify the
speech of his Right Hon, Friends, or to defend thorn from the
coarse attacks with which the Hon. Member for Kilkenoy took
every opportunity of assailing them, and vilifying their motives.
They, and he (Col. Perceval) also, had understood 'the scope
of the motion to be that henceforth Jews, infidels, Mahome-
tans, via heretics, would he welcome there I—(Lobel orfes
of
‘• Hear. hear," from Mr. O'Connell and his friends.) Thus,
Sir (said col, perceval), we have it now openly and shame-
lessly avowed that it is indifferent whether the Christian reli-
gion be any longer characteristic of this Houte:.,,whether it is
or is not to be received as part and parcel of the law pf the
land.—(" Hear, hear," from the? Ministerial Benches.) The
Hon. Member for Kilkenny had declared that there was no way
of preventing heretic; entering that House; but he (Col. Per-
ceval) insisted there was, for when a new Member presented
himself at the table he rnu3t declare himself a Christian.

Mr. O'CONNELL—No, no.
Colonel PE ficE VAL said that if the Bath was read, they
would find that it was essential to the character of a legislator
of that House that he should be a Christian.
Mr. B.CA RLE TT said that jt appeared to him that the
nation already suffered .considerable Inconvenience from the
introduction of toe many classes of citizens into its legislation.
_(l,aughter.) Other States had similarly oared. He
had as great a respect for the Jews as he had for Mahozneflaus,
but he believed they had not a sufficient respect tor the Eng,
lish nation to entitle them to seats In its Legislature. They
were so distinct a people that they would ucver amalgamate
with Christians. They would always have a JewiA party in
the House as they had a itoman Catholic party, and' ho be-
lieved they did not find that very tensenient or agreeable.
The House then divided, when there 3ppcared—
For the Maim)
Against it
Majority „ ,' _nsl
The Bill then Went through Committee, and some clauses
were agreed to.
The House then resumed,
An lion. MEtnnEtt begged to ask the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer if he expected to develope his views respecting the
Stamp Duties on Friday ; and if it were in contemplation to
allow a further extension of time to provide for the proposed
alteration of the dies of newspaper stamps.?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
expect the details of the Stamp Duty Bill would come before
the House on Friday, as it would be probably occupied till a
late hour in a discussion that was expected. to arise on the
subject of a proposed reduction on soap versus newspapers ;
but the time necessary for the alteration of the dies would be
provided for.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee on the
bringing up of the report of miscellaneous estimates ordered
the previous evening.
The Report Wkifi then agreed to, and on the motion of
Mr. BROTHERTON, the House adjourned at half-past
One o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS, lihr 31.
The Loan CUANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack
shortly after five o'clock.
The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from Wick-
low for the better observance of the Sabbath.
Mr. Crafer, from the Treasury, presented papers.
Lord GLENELG moved the second reading of the
Jamaica Slave Act Indemnity Bill. The. Act had be-
come necessary in consequence of the non-existence of
the Act of Aid, by which the Negro population were
deprived of that protection which it was intended by Parlia-
ment to give them by the Colonial Legislature. The Act
contained nothing criminatory of the Legislative Council in
not having reserved the Act In Aid, but that course not havin7.
been pursued by that Assembly, it had become the duty a
Parliament to interfere, for, in the Act for the abolition of.
ginvery the Parliament of this country had laid itself under a'
great ohli,gatlon to the slaVes which it was bound to perform.
The Earl of ABERDEEN tfid not intend to offer any op-
position to the Bill, believina• it to be desirable, if not neces-
sary; but he thought the House should know the principles
upon which it was legislating, It was a matter of great re-
gret that. the House should,be driven to this arbitrary interpo-
sition, When it might have taken place in a legal and constitu-
tional manner.
After some observations from Lord GLENELG, in expla-
nation, the Bill was read a second bane, and ordered to be
committed.
Sir A. L. HAY, and others from the House of Commons,
brought up the Leith Harbour Bill.
The Orkney and Shetland Seamens' Fund Bill was read a
third time anti pulsed.
TURNPIKE TRUSTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The Earl of ROSEI3ERY moved that the House go into
Committee on the Turnpike Trusts (Scotland) Bill.
The Earl of ABERDEEN, considering there was no occa-
sion whatever fur the Bill, should object to its going through
the House another stage,
Lord LYNDHURST would suggest to the Noble Earl,
that the better way would be to refer the Bill to the Select
Committee on the Law of Entail in Scotland.
After a few observations from the Earl of ROSEBERY,.
the Hill waa ordered to he referred to the Select Committee.
SEE OF DURHAM.
The Marquis of LO ND ND ERRY presented petitions
from Durham, Sunderland, South Shields, and Stockton-upon-
'fees, against any alienation of the funds of the See of
Durham.
The 1:1441,,c of CLEVELAND presented a petition from the
town of Durham, which was understood to be in favour of the
proposed measure with retpeat, to the see, and said that the
only principle the Bill contained was the separation of the
ecclesiastical jurisdiction from that of the palatmalo,
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY had letters from nu-
merous
rClergymen in the diocese, pointing out the disastrous
consequences that must ensue if a revenue of the amount of
40,0001.; as was proposed, should be alienated. It was consi-
dered in all parts of the county to be a measure of unparal-
lelled cruelty ; and bow the Noble Duke could look upon it as
a matter only affecting the squall= of the ecclesiastical and
judicial functions he could not conceive, unleis his perceptions
were enveloped' by the new patronage that would accrue tp
him wider the. new Bill as custos rotuloruni of the county. He
hoped that their Lordships would not vote in favour of this