The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-15 00:00:00

JEWISH DISABILITIES.
A public meeting of the inhabitants of the It e
o rough
if Southwark was held yesterday, in pursuanc of a
requisition to the High Bailiff, at the Tow- a Hall,
Southwark, for the purpose of considering the p :opriety
of petitioning Parliament for the removal of the existing
civil and religious disabilities of her Majesty's Jewish
subjects.
Shortly after twelve o'clock the chair was taken by
Mr. Pritchard, the High Bailiff. The attendance at
the meeting up to that period was very scanty, there
Lot being more than forty persons present, and the
ocarunencement of the proceedings were protracted
for a short time in order to afford opportunity for the
attendance of other persons. A quarter of an hour
hiving elapsed,
The HIGH BAILIFF proceeded to state that the
meeting was called pursuant to a requisition
Which was very numerously signed. The question
to be submitted to the meeting involved the rights
of a certain portion of their fellow-subjects, which, in
accordance with the principles of the British nation,
every loyal' and peaceable subject was entitled to
claim. Statutes had at various times been p Issed
tending to deprive some of her Majesty's subjects of
these rights, in consequence of certain religious
opinions which they held. A statute N‘ as passed in the
third year of the reign of James I. (c. 4), the object of
which was to protect the country from the hostility
which was then generally considered to prevail upon
the part of certain persons of the Roman Catholic
persuasion against the monarch here. Some members
of the Catholic profession were disposed to fall in
with, the spirit of the rest of the country, and to ac-
knowledge the Sovereign of this country as the
supreme head of the Church. Others, again, clung to
the principles which at that time prevailed among the
Catholics, and thought supreme allegiance was due
to the Bishop of Home; and it was in order
b) insure aiegiance up vo tii•J part of the latter
who might accept abf office; that this statute
was passed. Its forms were very stringent, requiring
the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to be adminis-
tered to all who might take office—the concluding
words being "upon the true faith of a Christian."
These words were inserted, not in order to preclude
any particular denomination of religionists, but, on
the contrary, were merely added in order to give
solemnity and sanction to the oath. In the 7th of
James I. another Act was passed requiring
the oath of allegiance to be taken by
Members of Parliament in the same terms as
prescribed by the statute of the 3d of James I. The
object of the measure now introduced into Parlia-
ment, was to repeal those words at the conclusion of
the oath, so as to admit Englishmen of the Jewish
persuasion to take their seats in Parliament. It was
not for him to express any opinion upon the subject
of petitioning Parliament upon that measure. That
was a subject for the meeting to decide, and be
trusted that they would hear with patience and fair-
ness all the speakers Who might address the meeting
on the subject.—(Hear,)
The requisition, calling upon the High Bailiff, to
summon the meeting having been read,
The HIGH BAILIFF stated that he had received a
letter from Sir William Molesworth, which he would,
with the P
consent of the meeting, read to them :
encarrow, Bodmin, Jan. 12, 1848.

My dear am very glad to hear that there
is to be a meeting of the electors of Southwark in
favour of Lord J. Russell's Bill for the qualification
of the Jews to sit in Parliament. I regret very
much that I am at such a distance that I cannot
be present at it. I flatter myself, however, that every
one of my constituents knows my opinions upon
that subject. I should be very much obliged
to you if you would make my excuses for not
being present at the meeting, and assure them
that I shall take care, as one of their representatives,
to be present in my place in Parliament, to vote for
Lord J. Russell's Bill.—Believe me, yours truly,
"AVM. MOLESWOR'fH."

Mr. ArsLEY PELLAT, in moving the first resolu-
tion, thought that the meeting would concur with
him in the opinion that the time had now arrived for
the abolition of all persecution or deprivation of rights
on the ground of differences of religious opinions. No
Government had any right to interfere in matters
.which were entirely a matter of conscience. It had
been urged by one of the ablest opponents of the
measure, that the effect of Lord John Russell's pro-
posed measure would be to unchristianise the nation.
He did not think that such an argument had much
weight. The number of Jews in this kingdom
did not exceed forty thousand, and was it likely
that so small a minority of the vast population of the
country could ever be able to unchristianise or cor-
tar the character of the country, even if it was their
lash to do so ? The Jewish religion was not in his
opinion hostile to Christianity ; the morals inculcated
upon the children of the members of the Jewish per-
, suasion were of the highest order, and they were re-
spired to pray fervently at the shrine of the Almighty
for the prosperity of the country in which they en-
joye d their liberty. Was it right, then, to exclude
members of such a profession from a share in
fte lejislation and constitution of the country ?
The vestion was to be viewed entirely apart from
that of a lienship, for, according to Blackstone, any
person bcrn in the country was eligible to perform
the duties of a British subject. What was the prac-
tical effect ,of the measure ? Did the churchwarden

pass by the ,door of the Jew, or suffer any qualms of
conscience, in making an application to him for the
church and other parochial rates, which, in his opinion,
he considered necessary ? Apart from these prin-
ciples, founded en the constitution of the country, he
bad derived au argument of immense weight
from the precepts of Christianity itself, which
enjoined charity towards all men. The ob-
jection urged against the admission of the
Jews were of the weakest nature. One of them was
that their ancestors had crucfied Christ. It was as
absurd to lay that as a charge to the Jews of the pre-
sent day, as to charge the High Bailiff himself with
being guilty of the crime of murder, because his an-
cestors had put to death Charles the First. Their
moral and intellectual qualifications offered no bar to
their promotion even to the highest offices of state.
The purity of their private life was a pattern
to Christians. Who could deny that per-
sons thus educated, and thus qualified, were
eligible to share in the rights and privileges of the
British subject ? The speaker then proceeded at
some length to call attention to the treatment which
the Jews had received for centuries in this country,
and especially in the city of London, and in Frank-
fort, and the difficulties under which they had
laboured in carrying on their business. He con-
gratulated the meeting that a large number of
their grievances had now been removed, and that in
the city of London the Jews were permitted to
aarry on their business with the same liberty as any
other citizen. He concluded by moving the follow-
ing resolution :
" That this meeting having been long opposed to
the principle of exclusion from political rights founded
en differences of religious belief, have regarded with
the greatest satisfaction the passing of the several
statutes by which that principle has of late been gra-
dually relaxed, and their brethren of the Iternan Ca-
tholic 'religion, and Protestant Dissenters, restored
to the exercise of their constitutional privileges.
They have beheld with .equal satisfaction a
similar-- removal of many of the disabilities
affecting their brethren professing the Jewish reli-
gion, but have, notwithstanding, been compelled to
deplore that that class of her Majesty's subjects,
though now rendered eligible to corporate offices, and
to be elected Members of the Commons House of
Parliament, are nevertheless prevented from taking
their seats and voting in that assembly, ex-
cept on condition of their taking certain oaths, to
which they do not object in substance, but the form
et whitil 13 at variance with their religious senti-
ments.
Mr. Teev,i,na
thought that thtehcsei seconded the resolution. He
civil magistrates had no right to put
a barrier upon
free election of their representatives
by the people. He
right
ton
not conceive that the Legis-
leture had any
odeal with religious questions
concerned beyond that which
et each individual in the
control of his own condu
the present
hear.) He felt
no doubt as to the result of
Ives glad to see Southwark takeiriesent meeting. He
its lead among the
of this metropolitan boroughs in favour great measure,
u
and he trusted they would follow the noble con-
duct of the citizens of London. He most cordially
seconded the resolution.
The resolution having been put, it was
unanimously
agreed to.
Mr.TUORNDORROW moved the second resolution, and
in doing so dwelt at some length oa,, the greatlibe-
rality of the leading members of the Jewish persua-
sion.pkasure
intro.
He earnestly trusted that the measure ;
duced by Lord John Russell. aruld be carried
through the Legislature. Ire. felt.,
`.That
resolution, " with these
in moving, as the second r
impressions, the meeting are armoire t o exress their
litiqualified approbation tho choice may y
brother electors of Londee of Baron Lionel de Roths-
child, as a fit and proper 'person to represent their
ancient city in the House of Commons, and rejoice to
learn that the First Minister of the Crown, the Right
lion. Lord J. Russell, has introduced a Bill into that
Honourable Rouse for removing the remaining ills-
q,ualifications affecting her Majesty's Jewish subjects.
Mr. HEAux seconded the resolution. lie thought
that the question ought not to be treated upon any
other ground than that of justice British-
born
to every
subject, and ought not to he treatedb as a mere
memento of past benefits conferred the liberality
of members of' the Jewish persuasion?'
The resolution was unanimously agreed to.
-Mr. Wax. HOWARD moved that petitions to the
Houses of Lords and Commons, in conformity with
the above resolutions, should be prepared, and lief
the signature of the inhabitants of the borough 9r
of
pouthwark at the Town-hall.
Mr. JOHN HARRIS seconded the resolution, which
was also unanimously agreed to.