The Sun.
London, England, 1847-12-16 00:00:00

JEWISH DISABILITIES.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord John
Russell, Mr. Wakley, and several other Hon. Mem-
bers presented petitions praying for the removal of
Jewish disabilities.

Lord. JOHN RUSSELL, in rising to move for a
Committee of the whole House on the removal of the
civil and political disabilities affecting the
Jews, said, as he understood the Honourable Bart.
the Member for the University of Oxford
intended to oppose this motion, he felt it to be his
duty to state the reasons which had induced him to
bring it forward. He could not say, as on a former
occasion, that the question affected no less than three
million people, but it did affect a large body of the
community professing the Jewish religion, who, al-
though acknowledged to be loyal and faithful sub-
jects of her Majesty, were precluded by civil
disabilities from holding certain offices in the
State ; and he felt that the question he was about to
bring under the consideration of the House was one
of principle rather than affecting a political party.
For wealth and loyalty the Jews of this country
were held in as much respect as any other class, and
the House ought to consider whether it would
be inconsistent with the constitution, or even
with religious toleration, to remove some of the
disabilities that at present affect that people.
He placed this question upon the solid grounds that
every Englishman was entitled to all the honours and
privileges which the constitution could confer upon
him, and he maintained that no man ought to be de-
prived of enjoying these privileges or honours on the
ground that he entertained particular religious opi-
nions. It was not a matter of favour to be awarded
to the Jews, but it was a right which the
spirit of the constitution awarded to them as citizens,
to receive toleration from the State, and unless he
heard that there were strong moral bjections to the
adoption of his proposal he certainly should persevere
in it to the last. He came now to consider the
objections that were urged against this measure. It
was said, if they removed these disabilities from the
Jews it would be tantamount to annihilating
the character which this country possessed for Chris-
tianity, but he confessed he thought the adoption of
this measure had nothing whatever to do with the
religious character of a country. It related entirely
to civil matters. Be that, however, as it might, he
was prepared to contend that it was impossible
simply by the admininistration of an oath
to maintain the religious character of the
country. Such an oath might shut out conscientious
men from that House, but it could not possibly of
itself sustain the religions character of the country.
For the former reasons, therefore, seeing that it
could neither injure the constitution, nor detract from
the Christian character of the country, he could see no
reason why the House should object to adopt his
proposal. Would it at that period have been con-
sidered that men, when they took oaths, would be
more bound by them when they swore on the true
faith of a Christian than by
any other means. The
Noble Lord, after referring to the cases of several
great men who held high offices without, having
taken such an oath, observed that he held that it was

not by declarations of the kind :he had referred
to that they could improve the condition
of that House ; it was not by putting
seeven words into an Act of Parliament that
they could secure religious obligation. It had been
said that Parliament had from time immemorial been
a Christian Parliament, and if the Jews were al-
lowed to sit in it, it would be materially deteriorated
from its efficacy. He thought upon that subject great
mistakes had arisen. For the purpose of proving this
position, the Noble Lord referred to cases to show that
when this declaration was imposed it was not done for
the purpose of imposing disabilities on the Jew or the
infidel, but for the intent of proving the sincerity of the
Roman Catholic, who, it was supposed, owed an
allegiance to a Power that was inconsistent with the
true maintenance of the Protestant religion.
Whatever those reasons might be in the year
1829, Parliament removed all those disabilities.
Parliament in that year enacted that the Ca-
tholics were as well qualified as any other class of
her Majesty's subjects to hold offices.—(Hear, hear.)
If such was the case, if that which he had re-
ferred to as designating the Christian character
in this country in former times, if it had
any existence at all, it had any existence previous to
1829.—(Hear, hear.) Well, those disqualifications
having been removed, there remained only certain
words in the oath of abjuration, and with respect to
them they were only introduced not for the purpose of
exclusion but giving superior sanction to that declara-
tion. It was said that Christianity was part
and parcel of the constitution of ; he had always
considered that that referred to any writing or lan -
gunge blaspheming the Scriptures, which were a por-
tion of the laws of this country. It would be
carrying the matter too far to say, that because
christianity was part and parcel of the constitution,
everybody who took a part in the constitution should
be called upon to make an oath upon the true faith
of a Christian. The declaration which the Jew
would refuse, would be taken at once by the men
who utterly disbelieved in the truth of the Bible.
There was, therefore, no security whatever to
what might be called the Christian character of the
country. It had been said that the Jews were a
separate nation ; this the Jews themselves denied. It
had also been said that they were aliens ; if
so, to what country did they belong ?—(Hear,
hear.) To what country or king did they
owe their allegiance, if not to the country
in which they were born, in which their ancestors
lived, and in which their property was situated.—
(Hear, hear.) What right had they now to turn
round, and say to the Jews, who were once prevented
from holding land even in this city, that they should
now no longer hold land ?—(Hear, hear.) In
other countries the Jews had been admitted
to share in the Government, in France they
had for a long period served with fidelity in the duties
to which they had been called. But other arguments
had been urged, they had been told that the Jews were
notmaly on grounds of policy disqualified, but that there
were solemn denunciations of prophesy which
would for ever disqualify them, if that were so, it
was not for us to decide what should be done. Pro-
vidence would work out its own ends, and it was not
their acts which would retard or hasten the fulfilments
of prophecy.—(Hear, hear.) The Jews had already
been allowed to hold offices in corporations, and it was
only a few days since that a Jew was raised to the
dignity of an alderman in the city of London,
How then could they pretend to say that the line of
demarcation, marked out by prophecy, of the
Almighty Being, was to be bounded by an alderman,
but was not to include a Member of Parliament.—
(Hear, hear.) There was no doubt but that the
Almighty would accomplish his own ends by means
which he thought best adapted for the purpose.
There was, however, a popular prejudice against the
Jews, but that popular prejudice was now rapidly
declining, for he knew that a member of that pro-
fession was elected as a Member from the City of
London, by about seven thousand of the electors
of the City.—(Hear, hear.) He believed that
the general opinion was, that religious opinions ought
not to bring with them any penalty ; he thought
that that opinion was fast spreading among the people.
—(Hear, hear.) He had now stated to the Home
the reasons why he thought the exclusion of the
Jews was not right. He appealed to the con-
stitution of the country, which gave to every
man his just reward, according to his abilities. He
appealed to that constitution, which was the enemy
of all restriction and disqualification —in the
name of that constitution, which, by the
abrogation of the law existing a few years ago, had
put an end even to those cases of exemption
which their ancestors had, upon the 'ground of im-
minent danger to the State and to the Church, felt
justified in imposing. He asked them, in the name of
that constitution to take away this last remnant of
religious persecution.—(Cheers.) He asked them,
in the name of that constitution, to admit
the Jews to all the privileges, and to all
the rights to which they were so justly entitled
He appealed to them upon a higher ground, on the
ground of the high principles of Christianity. He
appealed to them in the name of that religion—
of that religion which was a religion of
love and charity—which taught its professors
" to do unto others as ye would that others should do
to you." He asked them in the name of that religion
which taught by example and principle that it was
not the priest and Levite who was singled out as the
instances for their approbation and admonition, but
those of a despised and proscribed sect which then be-
longed to the refuse of all the nation. He asked
them, therefore, in the name of that Consitution,
which was a constitution of freedom, liberty, and
justice. He asked them in the name of ;that religion
which was a religion of peace and good-will to all
men, to agree to the motion which he had made.
Noble Lord resumed his seat amid loud cheers.)
Sir R. H. INGLIS then rose for the purpose of
resisting the motion of the Noble Lord.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Dec. 15.
COMMERCIAL DISTRESS.

[The following is a fuller report of Lord G. Ben-
tinck's speech than appeared in our Afternoon Edition
of yesterday.]
Lord G. BENTINCK said that it had not been his
intention to attempt to address the House until his
proper turn came, when the name of the Right Hon.
Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade should
be proposed as a Member of the Committee; but he felt
that be might perhaps be consulting the convenience of
its
attention House, if he rose to endeavour to draw back
attention to the real matter under debate, and, if possi-
ble, to stop the debate from running into a discussion on
the general question of the currency.—(Hear, hear,)
It was not his intention to be tempted, by anything
which the lion. Member for West Surrey had said, to
say one word on the currency question, but to address
himself entirely to the constitution of the Committee.
Perhaps he should also best consult the convenience of
the House by debating now, once for all, the whole queic •
Lion of the alterations in the Committee, and though it
would be necessary to take several divisions, he would
not again trespass on the attention of the House.—
(Cheers.) In proposing to exclude the names of several
Hon. Gentlemen, he could assure those Gentlemen tkiit
he meant no disrespect or discourtesy of any kind to
them. He was, by the circumstance that the House was
pledged to have twenty-six Members, and no more than
i
twenty-six Members, n the Committee, reduced to the
invidious necessity of excluding the names of certain
Members. When he addressed himself to the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite, he could especially assure him
that if he (Lord G. Bentinck).had his choice of all the
Members of her Majesty's Government whose names
were placed upon this Committee, and if the Right Hon,
Gentleman were not fettered by the obligations which he
(Lord G. Bentinck) thought properly belonged to a
Member of the Government, there was not one name
which he would sooner include than that of the Right
Hon. Gentleman. So, again, in addressing himself to
the Hon. and Learned Member for Liverpool, he would
say the same thing to him. No man could appreciate
the morec highlycourse
se m thanoat o he ee didopen
t to
Trade
hredeainmdgt
etlreheamawantteadit
:tahnl
hteeloyne,t smtahaikganedhdt
Honourabletisnh abilities
of that Honourable Gentleman; but seeking, as he did,
to reconstruct the Committee in the least invidious and
least personal manner in which he was able, he thought
gentlemen who stood lowest down in official
deryua,atenwneilncddo,
ex-
clusion oltdhneanot
President of
tohietho et consideration,
hßeorairido
on
f.
him
.to select the Right Honourable Gentleman the
Learned Member for Liverpool. In proposing the ex-
like manner, addressing himself to the Hon. Member for
Stoke-upon-Trent, that he had selected him him as re-
presenting the least large commercial or manufacturing
interest. So, in proposing to exclude the Hon. Member
for the Tower Hamlets, Sir W. Clay, and selecting Mr.
Pattison, he had done so because he felt that the city of
London ought to be represented on both sides of the
question ; and that, while the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government must of course be placed upon this Com-
mittee, it was only proper that some other Member for
the City, representing the commercial interests of Lon-
don, should also be put upon it, and that it should not
be a gentleman wbo was fettered and tied down by being
the author of a work on the subject of the currency.
When his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said that there were fourteen gentlemen on the
Committee who took the same views as he (Lord G.
Bentinck) did on this question, and only fire who agreed
with him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), he was dis•
posed to take rather a different view of the facts. First
.
of all, as the Committee stood now, there were eight
iomtie ma
Tb joresv
eHroenf
eehne
tkpnrgeeowsiennpgte
rai
fnnedteottl hyae
well
lsoctGhmeoitvt
teeervene mrwyeenmatte
tmuhpheeorner
with his mind fettered. He was disenabled from ex-
pressing his own judgment. He must follow the. course
epooitnktehdowouwthbeythehristhleeadNero.hleHLeo(rLdoradt Gth.eßheneatid of the
Government tdide
Government would take an active part in the Committee,
he rather thought that his Right llons Friend the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would take the lead in it, and all
the other members of the Government would probably
abstain from any. inconvenient course of examination,
and vote with their leader through thick and thin. And
when his Right Hon. Friend spoke of past, present, and
future Governments, he (Lord G. Bentinck) begged
leave to tell him that there was a great distinction be-
tween independent gentlemen, such as hie (Lord G,

Bentinck's) friends were, who were in no way bound to
take any particular course, and members of a past Go-
vernment, who had "eaten the King's salt."—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) And there was this further diffe-
rence, that the Right Hon. Gentleman who represented
the Bank Charter Act, and the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, were intimately allied
on this subject. Indeed, for all practical purposes, the
Right lion. Baronet the Member for Tamworih, was
he might almost say, the Government. Nothing was
done in consequence of the representations of the mer-
chants until the Right Hon. Baronet came up to
London, and the House had heard in the course of that
debate, which was so very inconveniently burked—(A
laugh)—t hat before any definite course of action was
determined upon, the Right Honourable Baronet had
had an interview with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Surely, if the matter were submitted to a jury, they
would be disposed to think that the Right Honourable
Gentleman the Member for Tamwortb had dictated the
measure of his Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. What struck him as a fundamental
vice in the construction of the Committee was, that it
was entirely overwhelmed and swamped by eight place-
men and ex-placemen. They were all connected to-
gether, while the Protectionists, and those who opposed
the Bank Charter Act, were none of them committed to
any particular views, and there was none of that union
bete een them which existed between parties whose poli-
tical honour and consistency were bound up with the
maintenance of that law. What the country desired
was, not to see an old Committee reconstituted, but to
see some new blood infused into it.—(Hear, hear.) His
Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had said that he had endeavoured, as far as he
could, to appoint a Committee capable of forming a clear
and impartial judgment. It was because he (Lord G.
Bentinck) thought that they were not capable of form-
ing an impartial judgment that he objected to the
constitution of the present Committee. Ile did not know
whether his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, or the Noble Lord at the head of the Go-
vernment, had pledged the Government to stand or fall
by the Bank Charter Act, but the House knew very well
that her Majesty's Government were pretty well dis-
posed to do so. True it was that the Noble Lord con-
sented at last to break through the bulwarks of that
Act, but how unwilling was he to take that step ! It
was not till houses had failed to the extent of fifteen
million pounds, that the Noble Lord could bo induced to
give way. The Noble Lord was first of all called upon
by a deputation from Liverpool—and while he was upon
this subject he might beg leave to state, though the
statement was not exactly in the due order of succession,
the reasons which had induced him to propose the name
of the lion. Member for South Lancashire, instead of
that of the Hon. and Learned Member for Liverpool.
He thought that, as the Committee stood at present,
there was no representative of the cotton manufacturing
interest. The lion. and Learned Member for Liverpool
could Lot be considered as the representative of the cot-
ton interest, and though there was no man more im-
pressed than himself with the opinion that Liverpool
ought to be represented in the Committee, still he thonght
he might be allowed to doubt whether the Hon. and
Learned Member for Liverpool did entirely represent
the feeling of Ireland upon this subject. He really
thought that he was doing the lion. and Learned Mem-
ber no unkindness in proposing his exclusion. He was
sure that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman felt himself
placed' in the greatest difficulty. There he was, a mem-
ber of the late Government, bound hard and fast to the
opinions of his leader. What would be the situation of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in the Committee?
Liverpool held one opinion, and the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman had expressed another opinion of a totally
different. character. From the position in which he was
placed he must, therefige, find great difficulty in choos-
ing between God and Mammon.—(Bear, hear, and
laughter.) Ile (Lord G. Bentinck) did not wish to lead
the lion. and Learned Gentleman into temptation, and
therefore he wished him to be excluded from the Com-
mittee. As far as he could learn what the proceedings
of the deputation were, the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman, though he was dragged up to attend the
meetings, acted only as master of the ceremonies, and
did the ornamental part —(A laugh)—while the Hon.
Member for South Lancashire did the useful and work-
ing part of that deputation. He was therefore justified
in saying that, so far as regarded the commercial
interests of Liverpool, the merchants of that town had
selected Mr. W. Brown, their county Member, in pre-
ference to the lion. and Learned Gentleman, to repre-
sent to the Government the true causes of the com-
mercial distress. lie was sure that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman would feel that ho (Lord G. Ben-
tinck) meant no disrespect or discourtesy to him or to
the Right lion. Gentleman the President of the Board
of Trade in proposing the exclusion of their names. Let
the House look at the constitution of this Committee.
When they found on the Committee a Prime Minister,
and ex-Prime Minister, three Chancellors and ex-Chan-
cellors of the Exchequer, and an ex-Secretary of State
for the Home Department—men who had sat on these
Committees before, and were accustomed to extract evi-
dence—he could not help thinking that other Members
of the House, who had not this advantage, would be a
very bad match for gentlemen of such high talents and
so much experience, banded together as one man against
them. Therefore, even if the numbers had been equal
on paper, he could not but feel that the Honourable
and Learned Member for Liverpool ought not
to be added to the Ministerial phalanx, while
the Opposition party was represented by only
one ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer. The re-
mainder of the House were represented only by an ex-
Cabinet Minister, and therefore he must say they would
be most unequally matched in quality, even if not very
much overmatched in quantity. But there was another
view to take of this matter. He found upon the Com-
mittee six gentlemen who were said, the other night, to
be I'eelites, and there were eleven strong Whigs. The
Committee, therefore, as then constituted, would have
17 Members, all, generally speaking, of one view of
things ; anel in that number he did not include the Hon.
Member for Montrose, because he understood that that
Hon. Gentleman did not intend to sit upon the Com-
mittee, which he much regretted, although he did not
concur in all the views of the Hon. Gentleman. He had
explained the grounds upon which he thought the cotton
interests of Lancashire and the commercial interests of
Liverpool would be better represented by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Lancashire, who differed from him as far as pos-
sible in opinion ; and here he begged to call the atten-
tion of the House to this circumstance, that in the names
he had proposed he had named but one gentleman
who held the same opinions with himself, and
wiao -usually acted as he did.—(Hear, hear.)
But he now came to the case of Scotland. The Right
lion. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer said
that he had named the Hon. Member for Perthshire.
lie (Lord G. Bentinck) had already complained that in
the Members the Right Hon. Gentleman had named he
had taken care, amongst those who were held to be
impartial, to name gentlemen who had not taken a very
strong part in politics. He thought he might include
amongst those the Hon. Member for Perthshire. Now,
as the opinion of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member
for Tamworth did not coincide with the general opinion
of Scotland on this subject, be thought it right to say
that the feelings of Scotland were but very weakly re-
presented by the Hon. Member for Perthshire. That
Hon. Gentleman also was the representative of a char-
tered bank, which was already possessed of a certain
degree of monopoly, and his feelings, therefore, were
rather in opposition to the general feelings of the people
of Scotland. He came now to the city of London, and,
without consulting the Hon. Gentleman himself, he had
ventured to put the name of the Hon. Member for the
city of London (Mr. Pattison) upon the Committee.
Everybody in that House must feel that there was no
man who was better informed upon the interests and
business of the city of London than that Honourable
Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.) But there was another
reason why that lion. Gentleman should be upon the
Committee, and that was, that the Bank of England was
upon its defence.—(Hear, hear.) As the Committee
was then constituted, the Bank of England was re-
presented by one Member only. They had had very
strong reason to feel how necessary it was, in order that
the Bank might be properly defended in the Committee,
to have some gentleman upon the Committee who was
himself actually conversant with the transactions be-
tween the Government and the Batik of England.—
. (Hear.) But for the Hon. Member for the city of Lon-
don they would have been led to suppose that there had
been an entire agreement between the Government and
the Bank of England, as regarded the division of the
profits of the usury.—(Hear.) The other members of
the Committee would have taken, as a matter of course,
the statement of the Right lion. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, and none on the Committee
would have thought to ask any questions upon this
subject. how necessary, therefore, was it that, for the
defence of the Bank of England, which both the present
and the late Government concurred in making
it the scape-
goat on this occasion, imposing upon the blame of a
great portion of the recent distress, that that body, as
well as the commercial interests of the city of London,
should be properly represented—(Hear)—and when he
said the commercial interests of the city of London, he
had a right to speak, because they had reason to
imagine that it was the banking an commercial inte-
rests of London that had at the last moment prevailed
upon the , Government to take off this very restric-
tion.—(Hear, hear.) When the Honourable and
Learned Member for Liverpool and his deputation went
up to the Noble Lord at the head of the Government and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, they were distinctly
told, " There is no hope for you."—(Hear, hear.) Then
came another deputation, from Birmingham, headed by
the Hon. Member for that borough and his lion. Friend
the Member for Warwickshire. True, the Government
were not quite so obdurate on that occasion. The Noble
Lord did not say then, " There is no hope for you;"
but the Noble Lord gave a sort of willynilly answer
(A laugh)—" I do not say I will, and I do not say I will
not."—(Hear, and a laugh.) But still the Government
did not relent until Saturday, when the bankers and
merchants of London waited upon the Noble Lord, whom
he believed they found unaccompanied and unprotected
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. His chaperone
was away; and then the suit offered to him by the
hankers and merchants was something more successful.
His Noble Friend at the head of the Government, imi-
tating the example of Donna Julia in her resistance to
the advances of Don Juan. at last conceded:—
" A little still she strove, and much repented,
And whisp'ring I will ne'er consent,' consented."
And so was it with the bankers and merchants of
London, who am length prevailed upon the Noble Lord
to take off that restriction. But they had the authority
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that no sooner was
that restriction taken off than it acted as a charm. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had told the House that he
consulted all sorts of persons, and one and all said,
" Pray do something for us; pray take care of us; only
say you will do so; only look at us, and cast the light of
your Whig countenance upon us, and all will be right
with us "—(A laugh)—aid said that at last he felt he
should not have done his duty unless he had submitted
and removed the restrictions. That was done, and in-

.

stantly tens of thousands of bank-notes came out of tens
of thousands of tin boxes; and there was an end of the
panic. They found then it was the city of London
which at last succeeded in obtaining the removal of the
restriction, which restored confidence and did away with
the panic. lie asked, therefore, whether it was right
that the city of London should be altogether unrepre-
sented upon this Committee, and it was for that reason
that be proposed to insert the name of Mr. Mattison in-
stead of that of Sir W. Clay. He honoured the ability, the
independence, and straightforward course in Parliament
ot that Hon. Baronet, but he felt that the Hon. Baronet
was so bound hand and foot by the book he had written,
that be was not in a condition fairly to exercise his
judgment in the Committee on this subject. There wag
only one other name to which he had to refer, and that
was the name of his Hon. Friend the Member for
Oxfordshire. He had, for the reasons he had already
stated, proposed to exclude the name of Mr. Ricardo.
That Hon. Gentleman, was also a stockbroker,
and it was not necessary to represent that interest on the
Committee. He did not, moreover, consider that in•
terest as one that could be regarded as a national in-
terest in the country. The lion. Gentleman had, he
might say, almost an hereditary right to strong opinions
on the subject of the currency. It would never be
erased from the recollection ot the country that it was
owing to the opinion given by the father of the Hon.
Gentleman—an opinion afterwards acknowledged to be
mistaken—that the change which was made in 1819 took
place. He had therefore proposed, instead of the name
of Mr. Ricardo, to insert the name of Mr. Henley, as one
of those who were opposed to the principle of the Bank
Charter Act of 1844. For the same reason he proposed
the name of Mr. Hastie. He did think, that when a
great question was discussed. as to how far the Bank
Charter Act should be retained or abandoned, it was
astonishing, to say the least, and must be unsatisfactory
to the country, to see that every lion. Member who
voted in any way against the principle of that Bill was
carefully excluded ; and, for the reasons he had stated
on a former night and reiterated now, he proposed that
the names of Mr. Henley and Mr. Hastie should be in-
serted in the list of the Committee,