The Sun.
London, England, 1848-05-26 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT•
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 2.5.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the
Woolsack at Five o'clock.
The Earl of ERNE presented a petition from the
Protestant inhabitants of Balieborough against the
National system of education in Ireland ; also from
th'e guardians of Lenniskea against the mode of
asg,,ssment to the poor-rate in Ireland.
Lord REOESD ALE presented several petitions
agains.t. Jewish emancipation.
The Earl of FORTESCUE presented several
petitions in favour of Jewish emancipation.
Du Earl of RADNOR and Earl GREY presented
several petitions with a similar prayer.
Lord STANLEY presented several petitions from
the clergy of various dioceses against Jewish eman-
cipation.
The Earl of GALLOWAY presented a petition
from the General Assembly of the Church of Scot-
land against the Jewish Emancipation Bill. He cor-
dially concurred in the prayer of the petition, and he
believed that the Bill was uncalled for.
The Earl of ROSEBERRY presented a petition
in favour of the Bill for altering the law of entail in
Scotland.

SPAIN.
Lord STANLEY asked whether it was the in-
tention of her Majesty's Ministers to submit to Par-
liament a full account of the circumstances under
which our Minister at Madrid had had his passports
furnished to him, and been ordered to leave that Court ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said those papers
were in course of preparation, and it was the anxious
desire of the Foreign Secretary to lay them before
Parliament to-morrow if possible, or at all events at
the next sitting of the House.
FRANCE.
Lord BROUGHAM wished to draw attention to
a late pretended speech of M. Lamartine, which
stated that the principle of the French Govern-
ment was to assist and help any people to attain what
they called their rights, and that an army of 30,000
men was assembled, to be increased to 60,000 men,
to assist the rebels of Italy against Austria. Had
his Noble Friend received any account of that speech?
The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE had no know-
ledge of the speech alluded to, except what he had
derived from the public papers. A dispatch had been
received from our Ambassador in France this morning
in which no mention was made of the speech alluded to.
THE JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.
The order of the day for the second reading of the
Jewish Disabilities Bill having been read,
The Marquis of LANDSDOWNE (who was occa-
sionally inaudible in the gallery, owing to his turning
round to address the bench of Bishops) then rose and
said:—My Lords, I beg leave, in pursuance of the notice
I previously gave, to move the second reading of
Bill, a motion which has been delayed a cons'
eor_att
time, not from any indifference to the importance f
ues desire
aubiect to which it relates, but from an anf
to meet the convenience of many of those oar:lour Lord-
yin the dis-
shiae' House who were desirous to take
cussion uppon it. In the outset I !n?st pconfess to your
Lordships, this Bill, important as it is as affecting the
interests of many of her Majesty's most loyal subjects,
is, nevertheless not of a nature to excite that degree
of interest which has attended other measures for
the removal of civil disabilitietes. I a
to emc aiteware it dsame
oes
not, and cannot be expected x the
amount of interest and attention, nor can it be urged
that its acceptance will prevent danger and ap-
prehension. It is but a small voice that en-
deavours to make itself heard at your doors, but the
question is, whether that voice is the voice of justice?—
(Hear. hear.) I think I cannot do better, in the outset
of the observations with which I shall feel it necessary,
es briefly as possible, to trouble your Lordships, than
call your attention to the state of the law on this sub-
ject. It is always convenient, as well as important,
when you are about to make a change, or to consider
the propriety of making a change, that you should well
know what is the state of the law which it is proposed to
alter. You do not, in this instance, intend to make any
change in the constitutional law of the country. That
law prescribed that there shall be no distinctions what-
ever. That was the character of your constitution at
the best rime, and I hope it will continue to be the dis-
tinguishing character of it. For a long period
of English history there was no exclusion what-
ever. Take your great constitutional Acts, take
your great constitutional proceedings from the
very birth of that constitution, from Magna
Charta downwards, you will find no Act dis-
qualifying any of the King's liege subjects from being
elected and appointed to all situations which they were
capable of. But the time did come when, not with the
character of a permanent Act, not under any pretence
of making a permanent law, but for temporary purposes,
Parliament thought fit to enact a temporary exclusion of
a certain class of people. In the reign of Elie ibeth this
first took place, and certain oaths were prescribed, there
having been, up to that time, no oaths required to be
taken by Members of Parliament. At that time, how-
ever, certain oaths were prescribed, which persons elected
to serve in Parliament were obliged to take. In the
reign of James 1. other oaths were prescribed by an Act
of Parliament, but in that Act there was not only no
mention of the Jews, but it was even a distinct and
specific, and on the face of the Act of Parliament
avowed purpose, namely, to put down the Popish
recusants.—(Hear, hear.) That was the object
for which that Act was passed, the effect of
which has since, but not uniformly since, been to
exclude persons of the Jewish persuasion from Parlia-
ment. That Act was passed under these circumstances,
that there had recently been machinations discovered
of an alarming character, aimed at the subversion of
the Crown and Government of these realms. Ia all
these conspiracies persons of the Roman Catholic reli-
gion were included, and it was then known that many
persons of that religion were not bound by any common
oath, and an Act was passed excluding them from Parlia-
ment, unless they swore adherence to the Throne and the
Protestant constitution. And it is without any mention
of a Jew that these words were introduced in an oath
through which no equivocation could creep, the object
of which was not to exclude bad religionists, but
bad subjects from any participation in the Govern-
ment of these realms. The first Act of Parliament,
or the establishment of William and Mary, involved
the consideration of this subject, and the result
was, that the oaths were in the language of the
Act, " repealed, abrogated, and made void." That is to
say, that those oaths which were contended by many
to be a peculiar security for that which those persons
held to be a principle of the constitution, namely, the
exclusion of 'Jews from Parliament, were in full consi-
deration at the very first time of your constitution dis-
tinctly, and in terms annulled and made void, not by
accident, not in the heat of the moment, not at a time
when party slept, or church division slept, or at the
time of any of those questions which were calculated to
divert men's attentions, and lead them to acquiesce in
that which was dangerous, from the absence of that
precaution and vigilance which would point out danger,
but at a time when every constitutional and religious
question was carefully weighed and balanced. when there
existed great differences of pelitied opinion and ecclesi
astical opinion, when the divisions of high and low
church were at their height,—it was at that time Par-
liament came to a resolution that these oaths should be
abrogated, and no man was found to say, " If you abro-
gate these oaths, persons or irreligious opinions will get
into Parliament." For thirteen years, being those in
which the principles of the Constitution were most
weighed and valued, Jews were admissible into Parlia-
ment. Undoubtedly this did not continue
; but why?
At the close of the reign of William, and on the com-
mencement of the reign of Queen Anne, at a most criti-
cal period, it was thought expedient to revise the old
oaths. - But is there the least vestige of the object ofw
that Act being to exclude Jo.other per-
sins but those against whom it was immediately or any
o at directed,
, to
themoment
that
the Roman Catholic non-jurors,o
wh
were. eonsidered dangerous, owing
Pretender
being recognised by Louis, and
that
monarch's
avowed intention to support him. Accordingly,
tnthose
oaths were revived, and ,:the same words, 1
faith of a Christian" introduced. Although that Atheet
was only intended to meet a temporary evil, yet its prac-
tical effect had been ever since to exclude a whole class
of her Majesty's subjects from Parliament. The Noble
Marquis then proceeded to detail the various Acts which
had been introduced into Parliament for the purpose of
doing away with that exclusion, but which had been re-
jected. He then urged the injustice of denying Jews
admission to Parliament. In heathen times these were
monuments of pride and ambition, but nothing had been
done for the poor. It was reserved for the spirit of
Christianity to proclaim " Blessed are the merciful, for
theirs is the kingdom of Heaven." If he was told that
are' Jews were indebted to the Christians fur the
virtues which they practised, he would ask, were they
not entitled to the credit of having adopted them ?
Jews had filled the office of High Sheriffs, and if they
were dangerous or mischievous, they had greater op-
portunities of being so in those positions, in packing
juries, than they could be as members of an assembly in
which the greater and predominating members were
Christians; it was impossible far a few Jews to do any
injury in such an assembly. They had much greater
danger to fear from infidels who had found their way
into Parliament—(Hear, hear)—and from persons, who,
believing themselves to be Christians, did not know the
,paxims of their religion, and by their conduct, belied
'Them ()yen by the persecution of the Jews. In the last
ter
with Holland there were officers Jews in the army
of that country, yet that was the Christian army, and no
of
fne
jeleweleieheeeeio.
d it was deprived of that character by the fact
aziaemployed in it, and even now, in many
parts of heorn jesty's dominions Jews were sitting as
jmaelzhieeras,
and, t Legislative Assemblies—in Canada, in
by
in
rt
thee last post, ho had received the
intel
officeligen
intelligence that i, the
had been elected to a
similar
island of Ceylon—notwith-
standing it was held here that the admission of a Jew
.would contaminate a Christian legislative assembly. He
noon
was of opinion that every
should be admitted who
could establish his cleith, Fle
ask
would
i not further tres-
pase on their time than to then to look to the claa-
That it was lowly at its birth,
;acter of their religion.
his kingdom was
and that its founder had "thatdeelarerdel,,i
not of this world," that their on
tle prevailed, not by
em.o.nations under
force, by persuasion, and brought
shoule,ney of that
the shalow of its influence, by the
principle. Why, then, he would ask,
cereat that be
and
applied in the hour of 43 "t.religth and maturity,
admit, within thwlei be e Constitution
all those
ambition to
Merited it,t4y their conduct' acrd 'had, the'
enter it. Ile hoped they would agree to the
end
'reading of See all, which wouftl rather contribute
the strength than to the weakness of the Constitution,
which was hound up with Christianity, and destiued to
uphold it. It W 63 in this spirit of the Constitution,