The Sun.
London, England, 1848-04-04 00:00:00

TAXATION.

Mr. EWART said several Hon. Members, like
himself, had notices of motion on the books relative
to the taxation of the country, and it would per-
haps save the time of the House, by these motions
being rendered unnecessary, if the Noble Lord at
the head of the Government would state whether it
was his intention to take into his consideration the
general subject of taxation in the country.—CHear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said he had stated on a former
occasion that Government were prepared to go into
the subject, but it was impossible for him to say when
they would be in a position to bring it under the con-
sideration of the House.
GALWAY GAOLS.

Mr. P. SCROPE;vished to know from the Right
Hon. the Secretary of • State for the Home Depart-
ment whether it was true that the county gaol of
Galway contained 755 prisoners, when it was only
built to accommodate 154. Of the former number
no less than 108 had died since their confinement
within the last three months, while eleven
others died within twenty-four hours after
their imprisonment. Fever and dyssentery were
rife in the prison, and it was stated that the ordinary
bridewells of the town were in a no better con-
dition.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY said, if the Hon. Gentleman had
given him notice of the question, he would have been
prepared to answer it, but he could state at once that
the gaols of Galway were in an overcrowded state,
and measures were being taken by the Irish Govern-
ment to get rid of the evils which had resulted from
this state of things.—(Hear, hear.)
STATE OF IRELAND. _ _

On the motion being put for reading the order of
the day for going into Committee on the Jewish Dis-
abilities Bill,
Lord JOCELYN rose and said, in putting the
qustion of which he had given notice relative to the
state of Ireland, he felt it was impassible for him to
do so without violating the rules and regulations
of the House by prefacing it with a few words of expla-
nation. In order however that he might be in a situation
to crave the indulgence of the House in that respect,
he had given notice that he would put the question
on taking the order of the day, and he therefore
hoped the House would have no difficulty in conceding
to him the indulgence which he asked.—(Hear, hear.)
He thought it right to state to the House that,
lo'oking to the present state of things in Ireland,
he felt it to be his duty, not only as a matter of justice
to the Government, but to enable the Noble Lord to
consider the subject before he was called upon to
answer his inquiry, to state to the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government the purport of the ques-
tion which he wished to put to him. Indeed it was
impossible that he could have done otherwise than
put the Noble Lord in possession of that information,
for he felt that this was not the time when men could
wish to embarrass Government, or check the present
administration of the affairs of Ireland, and he had to
thank the Noble Lord for the permission he had given
him to put the question. He could assure the
House that the answer to the question he was about
to put was looked for with great interest by all her
Majesty's loyal subjects in Ireland. He believed
that the attention of the public, and every Member
of that House, must have been directed, within the
last few weeks, to the mischievous and traitorous con-
duet of certain people in Ireland. He believed there
was not a single Member in that House who had not
seen with indignation and disgust the language that
certain mischievous and traitorous men had ad-
dressed to the people of Ireland avowedly for the
purpose of overturning the institutions of the country
a;d levying war upon the Crown, by inciting the
p ople to overt acts of rebellion.—(dear.) With
a;milar feelings had the public of this country seen
tsat men had been found in Ireland so devoid

of their own and all national honour
as to be at this moment asking from
a:foreign country for the loan of arms to carry out
their nefariousand traitorous objects, and he as anirish-
man, but the representative of an English constituency,
fClt it to be his duty, though he did it in sor-
row, to call the attention of the English representatives
in that House to the effect which this mischievous
language and traitorous conduct would have upon
certain dissatisfied individuals in the country. But
the majority of the subjects of the country, he was
lipppy to say, were loyal and patriotic, but still this
language of these mischievous persons in Ireland
must be checked, or it would sap the loyal feelings
of even the people of this nation.—(Hear, hear.)
The Lord-Lieutenant had been enabled by his policy
to rally round him persons of all ranks and of all
persuasions, but he had been unable to put down
this rebellious language of these mischievous
Men. Feeling as he did, with thousands of his
eiountrymen, that such conduct must lead to blood-
shed, though they did not fear the result so far as the
safety - of the institutions of the country were
concerned, •yet they deplored the consequences
which must ensue if they remained unchecked.
They had in their memories the recollection of the
Wood that had been shed in civil contests in Ireland,
and wishing to see civil war driven from her shores,
apd in their name he asked the Noble Lord
Whether he thought there was sufficient power
still vested in the Executive to crush this rebellious
spirit at its birth, or whether he did not think the time
had come that some alteration should be made in
the law which allowed the instigator of rebellion
tp escape, whilst his unforti•nate victim is doomed to
condign punishment, and, further, whether he thought
the time had not c3ine when the Executive should be
*lowed with power to act with more vigour and
eFect whenever any emergency might occur.
Lord J. RUSSELL then rose, and proceeded to ad-
cl.ress the House amid profound silence. He said—Sir, I
se with considerable anxiety to answer the question
the Noble Lord. It is quite true that language
o
the nature that he has described has been
sed in Ireland--language exciting to rebel-
s n against the Crown—language exciting the
eople to acts of violence against persons and pro-
-Tv, and with the view to establi-h Ireland as •a
'pirate nation, independent of the Crown of these
ations. Such language may at some periods be
assed Over as the mere ravings of a distempered
ncy, which may have no dangerous effect. Un-
rtunately it is not so at the present moment.
(Hear, hear.) I have to look at the effect pro-

duced—partly to the excitable nature of those to
whom such language is addressed—partly to the
very great distress which has been felt by all classes
now during three years—distress which natu-
rally induces them to listen to any desperate
remedy, and thirdly, to the great excitement occa-
sioned by the events which have recently taken place
in France and in other parts of the continent. .13ut,
to whatever cause that language is to be
attributed, it certainly has been followed by
the manufacture of pikes, by the formation
of-rifle clubs, and other preparations, which are openly
avowed by a portion of the press of that country,
with a view to create civil war. Now, Sir, I cannot but
agree with the Noble Lord, that, viewing these pro-
ceedings as the causes and instigations of civil war,
it is not so much her Majesty's Government—it is
not so much the institutions of the country that are
in danger as the peace of Ireland, as well as the well-
being of all classes, especially those classes engaged in
the occupations of trade and commerce. My belief
certainly is, that those who have used the language to
which I have adverted have done so for the purpose
of raising themselves, careless of the bloodshed and
ruin they may occasion.—(Hear, hear.) Sir, it
is, however, a most difficult and most delicate
matter for the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to
consider what steps ought to be taken. The Noble
Lord has, I think, paid a just tribute to my
Noble Friend now at the head of the Government
of Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) And I hope I need
not assure the House that, while he is anxious to
put down disaffection and rebellion, it is his
earnest wish to listen to and promote, as far
as he can, remedy and amelioration for any
distress or evils which afflict that country.
With respect to the means now at the disposal of the
Government of Ireland for the purpose of meeting the
conspiracy to which I have alluded, he has been in
constant communication with my Right Hon. Friend
the Secretary of State for the Home Department and
with myself. He has informed us that, while on the one
side there were evident preparations for rebellion ;
that on the other he has received the most gratifying
assuarances of loyalty and support from the members
of all classes—from the members of all creeds—from
landlords as well as merchants—from Pro-
testants as well as Roman Catholics, and
from all parts of the country. (Hear, hear.)
Sir, the Noble Lord must excuse me, if at the Fe-
sent moment I decline stating what further measures
are in contemplation by the Lord-Lieutenant and
her Majesty's Government. f trust, therefore, that
he will be satisfied with the asssurance that we
have, both in Ireland and in this country,
most carefully looked into the law affecting the case
—that we have entered into most constant daily com-
munication with the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and
should he be of opinion that further powers are
necessary, which have not yet been obtained, the Go-
vernment will be prepared to accede to them.
I should then feel it my duty—being convinced that
such measures as we might wish would be no more
than necessary for the occasion—l should then feel it
my duty to come down to the House and ask the
House to entrust the Government of the country
with such further powers.—(Hear, hear, and
cheers.) Lord Clarendon has to consider in any
proposal that he may make, and in any wish that he
may express, that if it should appear, or even bear a
semblance, that he was favouring any one class
of religionists, or of one particular class of the
country above another, that he would thereby
lose a great deal of the support which he
has hitherto obtained in the country—(Hear, hear)—
because, Sir, as I have. already stated, the landlords
and members of the Protestant profession, clergy-
men of the Protestant profession, priests and
members of the Catholic persuasion, have all
joined in giving him their best support ; but
the Noble Lord may rest assured that it is the full
determination of her Majesty's Government, having
the utmost confidence in Lord Clarendon's adminis-
tration to do all in their power to support
the loyal people of Ireland, to main-
tain the peace of that country, and that
we shall not shrink from asking for further powers
upon the subject.
NAVIGATION LAWS.

Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE said that it was with ex-
treme regret that he had heard the Right Hon. the
President of the Board of Trade make the statement he
had with respect to the navigation-laws. This measure
had been announced with others in the Speech from
the Throne ; all, with the exception of the navigation-
laws, had been brought under the consideration of
the House, and of that they had heard
nothing until within the last few days.
It was now announced that the Act for the amend-
ment of those laws would not be introduced until
after Easter ; the non-introduction of this measure
until after Easter meant that the question would
not be disposed of during the present session.
He did not think that the country would be satisfied
with that proceeding upon the part of her Majesty's
Government. Any measure introduced early in May
could not possibly be passed during the present
session, and he thought that the Bill now before
the House might even be made to give way to ti e
more important subject of the navigation-laws.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he did not
think that the complaint of the Right Honourable
Gentlemm were well founded, considerin; what
were the means which the Government hap at their
disposal for the consideration of public business.
He (Lord John Russell) certainly could not
have allowed the Income-tax Act or the Mutiny
Act to expire, in order to bring the subject of the
navigation-laws forward. There might also be other
urgent measures required with respect to the state
of Ireland, and he did not wish to be precluded by
the navigation-laws from considering that subject.
The Government had but a few days at their disposal
and the press of public business was very great.
Sir R. INGLIS said that if the Government
required more days in the week, the House ought to
grant them that indulgence immediately after the
Easter recess.

Mr. HUME said that he thought it most im-
portant that the question of the navigation
laws should be speedily settled.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. RICARDO deprecated the delay that had
taken place in bringing forward the measure.
Mr. WAWN did not think it fair to press the
Measure at the present moment, considering that there
Was a Committee then sitting on the shipping interest.
: Mr. ROBINSON was of the same opinion. He
thought the Government had exercised a wise dis•
cretion in not touching the navigation-laws at
present.
Mr. LABOUCHERE felt convinced they would do
no good by bringing on the measure before Easter ; but
he trusted that shortly after the reeess the Govern-
ment would be enabled to bring in a measure on the
subject of the navigation-laws which would meet
•
with the approbation of the House, and be productive
of great good.
Mr. HUDSON trusted, whenever the Bill was
brought in, it would not be allowed to pass into a law
in the course of the present session.
i Mr. BRIGHT asked if it had not been the custom in
time of war, &c., to grant licenses to introduce cargoes
which, under the navigation-laws, could not be intro
duced at other times? He asked this question specially
with reference to the cargoes of cotton at Havre. Gen-
tlemen opposite, he was sure, would not oppose the
issuing of such licenses, as they would afford employ
nient for British shipping.
Mr. LABOUCHERE knew very well that there was
cotton in Havre which was not wanted there, and which
could not be brought here under the present law. But,
ibasmuch as that law existed, he held that it would be
quite impossible, and far from just, to evade its pro-
visions by the issue of licenses.
Mr. CAI DWELL said the state of affairs was this :
we were in want of cotton; there was at Havre a con-
siderable surplus supply. Now all that was asked was,
that our merchants might import that cotton to England
in British ships. British workmen would be employed
ib its manufacture when brought her^. Those were the
facts. They also had before them the Queen's speech,
in which a revision of the navigation-laws was advised;
but when her Majesty's Ministers were asked whether
they intended to follow up that recommendation, the
tone of their answer was such as to afford great reason
for doubt. And yet, in the face of these facts, the Go-
vernment refused to permit our import of cotton, which
was clearly shown to be so likely to prove beneficial to
the country.

Mr. BRIGHT said the cotton he referred to had never
been unshipped at Havre, in consequence of there being
no one there wilting at present to receive it.
Lord 11. VANE hoped the Government would intro-
duce a very short Bill suspending the navigation-laws,
so as to permit the importation of that cotton.
Mr. P. SCROPE said such a measure as the Noble
Lord advised might be properly compared with the mea-
sure of last year suspending the navigation-laws in re-
spect of the admission of corn. There was a dearth of
cotton now, as there was a dearth of corn then.
Mr. IL BAILL/E said a great deal of virtuous-indig-
nation appeared to. be expressed about nothing, for if we
were to pass such a law as that recommended by the two
last speakers, we might depend on it that the Provisional
Government of France would prohibit tha exportation of
the cotton referred to, in order to prevent their own
artisans from being thrown out of employment by a want
of the raw material.
Alderman THOMPSON thought such a Bill as that
referred to would be a very bad and unsafe precedent.
He thought her Majesty's Government ought at once to
take some decisive step respecting the navigation- laws.
Either they should give up their intended proposal alto-
gether, or else introduce a Bill at once.
' Mr. KERSIIAW pressed on the earnest considera-
ation of the Government the desirability of doing some-
thing for British cotton-spinners.
Mr. EWART thaug,ht the Government ought to
Attie the question one way or another. Te leave our
colonial interests in a state of doubt was exceedingly
wijuSt.'
Mr. T. BARING said if the necessity of rep.aling or
r'claxing the navigation-laws was to be tested by prices,
lin could only remark that the price ()I' cotton was at
present very low in England. lie felt that to admit tin
I4avre cotton in the mode proposed would only be to get
it side wind.—(Llear)
rid of the navigation-laws by

Lsisl J. RUSSELL—I only just get up ts: ray tha
b iOre the House adjourns for the Easter holidays I will
either fix a day for istrolocing a measure on the subject
of tile navigation laws, or I or my Right llon. Friend
will make some clecalsd statement on the subjstct.
The (location that the orders of the day be read was
then agreed to.
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.
On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair, in
order to go into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. GORING rose to move, by way of amendment,
that " so long, at least, as the House of Commons exer-
cises the authority which it at present exercises over the
Established Church, no Jew ought to possess the fran•
chise, much less be allowed to sit in this House." The
Hon. Member said that at present they were in the posi-
tion of a man who set fire to his neighbour's house
whilst praying that it would not burn. Christianity was
so interwoven with our institutions, that it was utterly
repugnant to place any but a Christian in a position of
authority in this country. Suppose there was a Com-
mittee of that House on the subject of the Church,woult
they exclude a Jewish Member from serving on it? It
seemed to him that a Jew in that House would be
much in the position of a Christian in India required to
bow the knee before a graven image. It was not fair or
right that the Church, if governed by that House, should
have among its governors men who were not Christians.
But there were other grounds on which he opposed the
admission of Jews. The men whom it was proposed to
admit to place and power were the jobbers and gamblers
of the Stock Exchange—men who reaped their richest
harvests in times of political disquietude and panic. Was
it for the interests of England to introduce such men as
these to the councils of the nation?—(" Oh.") One of
the apostles of Christianity inculcated that they "should
not receive into their house" a man who did not believe
in the words of Christ, and yet they were about to admit
the 'eviler of that Christ into their national Legislature.
—(" Oh, oh.") If they did so, he feared they would in
consequence draw donn upon themselves the wrath and
vengeance of the Deity.---(Renewed cries of " Oh.")
He concluded by moving his resolution.

6t

The amendment having been put,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the Honourable Member
seemed to think that this was a debate upon the prin-
ciple of the measure. As that debate had taken place
upon the second reading, he trusted the House would
not now re-open it.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. BRUCE, despite the Noble Lord's appeal, must
venture to say a few words. On two former occasions he
had expressed his opinion against this Bill, and he had
heard nothing to induce him to change his views. The
grounds of his opposition might, indeed, be summed up
in one sentence, that the Bill tended to unchristianise
the country. He could conceive that, for the pos-
sible attainment of some great and practical good,
conscientious men might be inclined to support on some
eccasions measures of which they could not fully ap-
prove. But so far as the attainment of any practical
good was concerned he could conceive no measure more
absolutely useless than the present. It removed no prac-
tical grievance. All he could find in it, in fact, was a
practical renouncement of the highest allegiance of the
nation. Politically, he did not think the Jews would do
any harm by being admitted to that House, except in so
far as they would doubtless desire to separate the Church
from the State. He should have thought that the history
of the Jewish race for centuries and centuries past would,
from the blighting influence which the wrath of heaven
had cast upon that race, have afforded a warning against
the admission of any inch principle as that now sought
to be introduced. The Scriptures abounded with ex-
hortations to nations, and to the governors of nations, to
cleave unto the Son of God, and to reject all association
with every race whose tenets rejected the Saviour.
He should have thought that the experience of only
the last two years might have afforded a proof to the
British nation of the immediate punishment attending
national sin. But two years since the whole nation had
given itself up to the worship of mammon, to the idolatry
of covetousness, and he would ask whether the punish-
ment of this national sin had not already been felt
throughout the land?—(" Oh, oh.") For the sake of a
halfpenny or a farthing saved in the pound of sugar the
people of this country had consented to the ♦iolation of
national faith, to the destruction of the West India in-
terest; the punishment had long since manifested itself.
—(" Oh, oh.") He had all due respect for the Jewish
people in their personal characteristics, and he would
give them all due protection and due justice in their
personal character, but he would not consent to. go
beyond this point or to act counter to the will of
God. He could not support the immediate amend-
ment of his Honourable Friend, because he did not
think it just to deprive the Jews of the elective fran-
chise which they now enjoyed; but to the Bill itself
he should give his decided opposition at every stage.
Mr. GARDNER said that, to suit the views of some
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, it would really seem desirable
to appoint a Committee up stairs of controverted doc-
trines as well as a Committee of controverted elections.
He cordially supported the Bill as a measure absolutely
essential for the due accomplishment of civil and politi-
cal liberty. He denounced the Church of England as
having, for a mess of pottage, surrendered her birthright
to the State. The damage that at the present moment
threatened the Church, as the Church, was not the ex-
tension of religious liberty to other creeds, but the
rottenness which existed in her own bosom. For
the sake of the Church herself, he earnestly
called upon her to withdraw the pretensions she had so
long put forward and so far carried into effect, of maintain-
ing the Imperial Parliament, not as a Protestant Parlia-
ment, not as a Christian Parliament, but as a Church
of England Parliament. The vindication of our common
Christianity was not a pcculium of the high Church
party, or of the Church of England; it was a matter in
which the Methodists, the Baptists, the Unitarians,
Roman Catholics dissenters and Protestant dissenters,
e ere ( qually interested, and as heartily. Where, then,
were the petitions which these bodies had found it ne-
cessary to send forth against this measure? There were
none such, or scarcely any; and the reason was, that
these bodies had not the loaves and fishes to struggle
for—the real rationale of the enthusiasm of the Church
upon this and similar subjects. He himself was wholly
opposed to all church establishments whatever; he re-
garded the connexion between Church and State as
wholly incompatible with the spirit of the age, and was
thoroughly convinced that sooner or later it must be
abandoned. The lamp of old Nonconformity was not
yet hurried out.

Mr. SIMEON should oppose the introduction of Jews
to Parliament, but he a mld not consent to withdraw from
them the privileges a hich the wisdom of former Par-
liaments had thought fit to accord to them as British
subjects. The hostility which the Hon. Member who
spoke last manifested to the Church of England was an
additional argument against the admission to the House
of a fresh race of Dissenters.

Mr. URQUHART supported the Bill. Ho could
not understand the exclusion of the Jews from an assem-
bly to which Dissenters of every possible description
were admitted.

Sir W. VERNER could not assent to the argument of
the last speaker, which went to prove that, because
Roman Catholics had been admitted to Parliament, the
Jews ought not to be excluded from it. The qualifica-
tion required for a Member of Parliament was, that he
must be a Christian. The law had formerly excluded
some classes of persons, notwithstanding they were
Christians ; it had, however, been relaxed in their case.
He was of opinion that no further relaxation ought to
take place, more particularly in the case of the Jews.
The proposition to admit Jews into the House was
guarded by the declaration that they were to take the
oaths on the same footing that the Roman Catholics did
—namely, that they were to stand engaged to do nothing
to injure the established religion of the country. Now,
could it ba pretended that, ever since the Roman Catho-
lics had been admitted into Parliament, they had not
done all in their power to injure the Church of England
—and would the Jews observe their engagements any
better than the Roman Catholics had done? He felt it
to be his duty strenuously to oppose the Bill.
Lord D. STUART vaid that the question before the
House was whether they were to pursue those principles
of toleration which were advocated by so large a propor-
tion of the people, and the universal acknowledgment of
which had been so advantageous to the best interests of
mankind. To those who snapped their fingers at the
expression of popular feeling which had been manifested
in favour of the emancipation of the Jews, he woul
only say, let them remember their own appeal to the
same authority, which they had made on the same
subject before Christmas. They then pointed to the
disparity of numbers in favour of and against the ad-
mission of the Jews to Parliament, and, certainly, he
(Lord D. Stuart) admitted that the number of persons
who petitioned _Parliament before Christmas against the
admission of the Jews to Parliament was as 13700 com-
pared with 6,600 in favour of their admission, or, as
nearly as possible two to one against the present Bill.
But itliat had been the result of the appeal that had
since that period been made to the people on the present
question ? There were 56,000 persons signing petitions
v thano u r o3r Otoh,
eOOO had
sa, eer,si ep teot
tt
ihoen
sJ cs,
iwnsc,e whileschri
s t
mn oa s fienw afar
eman-
cipation of the Jews, and the counter. petitions had been
got up at hole-and-corner meetings, whereas the friends
of he Jews agitated openly in favour of their
views. li had a
the important towns in the kingdom had
shown decided feelings in favour of the measure. Lon-
don, Dublin, Manchester, Bristol—all the great consti-
tuencies of the empire—had publicly avowed their
opinions to be for the emancipation of the Jews, and
only two places had petitioned against the measure,
namely, Jedburgh and Sudbury. One of the argu-
ments against the Bill urged by the Hon. Member
for Oxford (Sir li. Inglis) was, that though the Jews
were few in number, they might by their wealth
influence many constituencies to return them to Parlia-
ment. That was a strange argument to hear from the
LI m. Baronet, who he recollected had always in the un-
reformed Parliament advocated the rights of wealth to
influence constituencies in returning Members to that
House to protect property. He denied that there was
any feeling throughout the country against complete
toceration; on the contrary, he believed that the great
and growing feeling was in a directly contrary direction.
He should give his most earnest and hearty support to
the measure before the House.
Mr, HORN BY, in opposing the measure, denied that
the recent election for the City of London was to be
taken as a conclusive test of public opinion on the subject.
H believed that never on any occasion of a similar kind
lied greater bribery or intimidation been practised.
—(hear, hear.) He should not be at all surprised if at
the next electien four Jews were returned for the City
of London. He would oppose this or any other measure
teticleil to increase the number of the enemies of
E eallished Church in that House.
Sir R. in reviewing the epinione of the
epeelsers who had preceded him in debate, complained
strongly of the hostility which the Hon. Member for
Leicester lc di,played towards the Established
Mire!). The sentiment's which that Iron. Member
keel %pressed gave the House a very fair sample of
what they might expect from him when he got his new
allies into Parliament. For his (Sir part

he would not be a party to giving to a new secs
Dissenters power to regulate his Church, because h.) be-
lieved that that Church was as much an integral part o:
the constitution as Magna Cliarta or the Bill of Righte,
—(Hear, hear.) It was because he believed hi
Church to be an integral pert of the constitution tlin
he would not consent to admit into that assembly a se
of men to make laws and enact regulations for an estab
lishm,2nt with which they had avowedly no sympathy ce
feeling in common. With reference to the proposition
of his Hon. Friend the Member for Shoreham, he con-
curred entirely with its principle, but, as a question of
expediency, he would recommend his Hon. Friend to
withdraw it, and reserve his strength for the division oi
the main question.
Mr. ADDERLEY expressed his regret that the Hoe.
Baronet the Member for Oxford University had waste('
so much good feeling on the speech of the Hon. Memb,
for Leicester, a speech which had been listened to by th 4
House with sentiments of unmixed disapprobation.—
(Hear, hear.) With reference to the measure before th,
House, he believed that public feeling was entirely
against it, and he regretted that that opinion seemed t,
have so little influence on the deliberations of Parlia
ment. He could net understand how a people wle
everywhere repudiated a common nationality could eve,
be expected to fuse or amalgamate with the people
this country. The case of the Jews of Damascus woule
be fresh in the recollection of the House. That hod)
when persecuted applied for assistance, not to anj
of the Christian princes of Europe, but to the
leaders of their own nation—the Rothschilds and
Monteflores. The only case in favour of the Bill
was that a Jew had been returned for the City 0:
London; but that was in his mind no sufficient ground
for passing this measure. Of all constituencies none
was perhaps more amenable to the influence of wealth
than that of London, and it might easily be conceiver:
that to that influence the return which had occasioned
the introduction of the Bill was in some degree owing.
He hoped the House would reject the measure, because
he feared that its passing would give rise to a feeling in
the country that in these changes they were influenced
rather by an indifference to religion than by a spirit of
impartiality.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GORING would not trouble the House to divide
on his amendment, which was withdrawn, and
The House went into Committee on the Bill.

Clauses 1 to 5 were agreed to.
On clause- 5 being read,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY proposed to add words
which should prevent Jews being appointed to " any
office in the gift or appointment of her Majesty, her
heirs or successors, to which the appointment or
recommendation to any office or preferment
whatever in the United Church of England and Ireland.
or in the Church of Scotland may belong." He did not
object to some offices in the State being filled with Jews,
but it would be a most anomal els thin,g• that a Jets
should have any power over the Established Church.
And as the Bill stood there was nothing to prevent
Baron Rothschild becoming Prime Minister, and thins
having in his hands the appointment of the Bishops, and
the whole control of the Church of England.
Sir J. WALSh seconded the amendment, and hoped
his Hon. Friend would take the sense of the Committee
against it. Under the Bill as it stood, a Jew would not
be eligible to hold the office of Lord Chancellor, and, on
the same principle, he should be ineligible to the office
of Prime Minister—an office to which pertained a far
greater amount of ecclesiastical patronage than that of
the Lord Chancellor.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that all the ar-
guments which were urged in support of this amendment
had been urged against the Roman Catholic Relief Bill.
It was a mistake to suppose that a Jew could not, as
the law stood, held ecclesiastical patronage ; he was
fully competent to do so, and there was no occasion
whatever for introducing further legislation on the sub-
ject. He hoped the amendment would not be pressed.
Mr. BANKES argued that, if the Great Seal could
not be held by a Jew, on account of the patronage of
ecclesiastical benefices, the same exclusion ought to ap-
ply to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, the
President of the Board of Control (who had large eccle-
siastical patronage in India), and the Colonial Secretary,
who were all on the same footing. It was no answer to
him to quote the 10 George IV. (the Roman Catholic
Relief Act), because he did not concur in that measure,
and would not consent to its being made a precedent for
other innovations.
Mr. REYNOLDS asked why the Jew was excluded
from the Lord Chancellorship of Ireland? If this was
done because the Roman Catholics were excluded
from this office, he would observe that the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland had not the patron-
age of a single living. An injustice. having
been committed towards the Roman Catholics in this
respect, why should the injustice be indorsed on the
back of the Jew?—(Laughter) He would support the
omission of the word " Ireland " from the clause, other
wise it would be a justification of the exclusion of
the Roman Catholics for ever from that office. On the
bringing up of the report he would move this amend-
ment.

After a few words from Mr. ANSTEY,
Mr. GARDNER contended that the private patronage
of the Church of England was a great disgrace to it.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he understood the object of
the amendment to be to take away, not the power of
appointment, but of recommendation to any benefice.
In the Roman Catholic Relief Bill there was no such
restriction; and, in fact, there was no office to which the
rower of recommending positively belonged. The
highest recommendation, that of the Ministry, had fre-
quently been exercised by Secretaries of State and the
Lords Privy Seal; but there was no one to whom it be-
longed of right. Therefore it appeared to him that the
amendment was unnecessary.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said it was a fact, and a great
fact, that the Prime Minister did appoint all the bishops
whatever might be the right to do so.
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment 99
Against it ...... 196
Majority 94

- -
Sir R. INGLIS proposed at the end of section 6, page
4, to add these words, "Or judge of any of her Ma-
jesty's courts of law, or member of her Majesty's Most
Honourable Privy Council." He objected to any measure
which would place in the Privy Council persons who
could not .give her Majesty sound advice in her double
Capacity as head of the State and head of the Church.
ne also objected to giving the Jew power to decide
Christian causes between Christian men.
Col. SIBTHORP seconded the amendment. Under
this Bill a Jew might become Speaker of the House, and
in that case, bow could he join in the usual prayer with
which business was commenced?
The Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority

Tho clause was then agreed to, as were the remaining
clauses.

Mr. C. ANSTEY moved the following clauso:
" And whereas no alteration of right can or ought to be
made in any matter belonging to the doctrines or disci-
pline of any religious communion save with the full and
free consent and concurrence of the proper ecclesiastical
authority, and according to the laws and usages of ouch
communion: be it therefore enacted, that from and atter
the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for Parlia-
ment to make any enactment for changing or altering
any matter belonging to the doctrine or discipline of the
United Church of England and Ireland, or to the doc-
trine or discipline of the Church of Scotland, save with
the full and free consent and concurrence of the said
Churches respectively, such concurrence to be signified
i❑ the case of the said United Church of England and
Ireland by vote of the convocation or convocations of
the said United Church, and in the case of the staid
Churchof Scotland by vote of the General Assembly of
the said Church and not otherwise."
Mr. HILDYARD asked if it %ere competent to move
this clause?

The CHAIRMAN replied in the negative, and the
matter consequently fell to the ground.
The preamble was then agreed to, and
The CHAIRMAN put the question, that "I report
this Bill without amendments to the House."
Mr. LAW said he should move as an amendment, that
the Chairman' leave the chair on Friday.—(Laughter.)
Mr. LAW (angrily)—l mean, that this Bill be not
now reported.—(Renewed laughter.)
The CHAIRMAN—The question is, that "I report
this Bill without amendments to the House." Do you
divide?
Mr. LAW—Yes.

The CHAlRMAN—Strangers must withdraw.
Sir R. H. INGLIS hoped that the Right Hon. Gen-
tlemen would not divide.

Mr. LAW said, all he desired was to insure that this
Bill should receive full consideration at a period when
the termination of the assizes and sessions enabled all
the Members of the House to be present at the discus-
sion. If he could have the assurance that this measure,
which he felt assured would hereafter be execrated by
the people—(oh)—which he felt would be the first step
to the extinction of the Christian character of this coun
try—(oh, oh)—if he could have the assurance that the
measure would! have a fair consideration hereafter, he
would now withdraw his amendment.—(Loud cries of
" Divide," " Oh," and laughter.) Those cries were not
consistent with peaceful measures, and he would not be
put down by clamour.—((;roans.)
Lord J. RUSSELL understood from the Hon. Member
for the University of Oxford that he wished the third
reading not to take place until Monday next. He had
had some difficulty in agreeing to that arrangement, but
considering that his Hon. Friend always united the most
conscientious:opposition to the most courteous bearing—
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear")—he had come to the
resolution of agreeing to that propse.l. With respect
to the argument or the Right lion. Gentleman opposite
that the third readingought to be postponed in order
that Members might have an opportunity of remaining
in the country—(Laughter)—he could only say, that if
the Right Hon..Csentleman considered it necessary for
the interests of the Church to force the house to a divi-
sion, he should only regret that the care of the interests
of the Church had devolved upon such hands.—(Loud
and reiterated cheers.)
Mr. F. MACKENZIE, as a consistent opponent of
the Bill, thought it would not be consistent with usage
to divide the House on this occasion.
Mr. LAW, under such circumstances, I.'ollll withdraw
his amendment.—(llcar, hear.)
On the llolse resuming,
Lord J. RUSSELL wished to say that, although he
had not considered the course pursued by the Right
'ion. Gentleman very discreet or wise, he had not, in
what he ha I sail, intended any persona! nflection.
The Bi 1 was then reported.
OiZ!)%IZ, OF !;U:'INE'S,
Lord J RUSs:EI,t, th;tt tlcxt it ""
his intent 'es t- ni-ve
-1 the at and Tens it 1;m, f
itl 141-M11: It 1,,
Select Co tunittee. In the t'vent of tliat Bill not being
opposed, he should ou that day Wove the further pro-
.: , • •

ceeding with the He o: 'Towns instead, °flaking
it on Monday next.
Mr. CARDWELL had understood it to have been
arranged in the early T art of the evening, that the
Health of Towns Bill should not be, taken until the large
towns had had an opportunity of considering its pro-
visions. .
Lord MORPETH sail Ws Noble Friend (Loid J.
Russell) had no:, been in the House when that arrange-
ment was made, but he entirely concurred in it, and the
Bill would accorling'y not be taken on Friday next—
probably not until Friday week.—(Hear. hear.)
DISTILLING FROM SUGAR BILL.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER, the House went into Committee upon this
Bill.
Mr. P. MILES took some objection to the Bill, but
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER depre-
cated discussion on this stage, and recommended the
opposition should be reserved for the third reading.
Mr. KERSHAW complained that Members could not
understand what was going on.—(Laughter.) There
was a sort of conversation across the table, and suspi-
cions were begotten that all was not quite straightfor-
ward.—(Renewed laughter.)
The Bill passed through Committee and was ordered
to be reported. The House resumed.
ELECTION RECOGNIZANCES BILL.

Mr. S. WORTLEY moved the third reading of this
Bill.

Mr. ELLIOT—I move as an amendment that it be
read a third time this day six months.
The House divided, when there appeared—
Ayes
Noes
Majority —44
On our return to the House,
W AWN was speaking. He said he opposed the
Bill upon this principle, that Members petitioned against
had canvassed other Members to vote upon this Bill.—
(Laughter.) It was a fact that could not be disputed,
and as an independent Member he must enter a strong
protest against a Bill carried by such means.
The 81l was then read a third time and passed.
SOUTH SHIELDS PETITION.

Mr. WAWN moved that the petition of the inhabit-
ants of South Shields on the subject of custom-house
faeilities, &c. (presented 31st March) be printed with the
votes; but the motion having been opposed by Mr.
Thornely on the ground that the Committee on public
petitions had ordered it to be printed, was put and ne-
gatived.
WOODS AND FORESTS AND LAND
REVENUES.

On the motion of Viscount I)UNCAN a Select Com-
mittee was nominated on woods, forests, and land reve-
nues:—Viscount Duncan, Viscount Morpeth, Mr. Pusey
Sir E. H. Inglis, Sir B. Hall, Mr. Langston, Viscount
Jocelyn, Mr. Trelawny, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. H. Drum-
mond, the Earl of Lincoln, Mr. Gibson Craig, Mr. J.
Wi!son, Mr. Monsell, and Mr. J. Locke.
ELECTION OATHS.

Mir. BERESF0111) moved. " That it be referred to
the Committee on Election Oaths to inquire into the le-
gality of oaths, otherwise than those authorised in such
cases which have been sworn to by Protestant Members
of this House, on taking their oaths ;" observing that
the Member for Cork (Mr. E. B. Roche), who was a
Protestant, had taken the oath prescribed for Roman
Catholics.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL thought the motion badly
worded and almost inexplicable, and hoped that in the
absence of the Hon. Member for Cork it would not be
pressed.
After a few words from Sir G. GREY, objecting to
the vagueness of the motion, it was withdrawn.
The House adjourned at One o'clock.

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION.

The meeting adjourned from Liverpool on Thursday
week took place at Birmingham on Saturday. As on
the former occasion, not a single member of the Great
Western directory was present. Mr. P. H. Muntz oc-
cupied the chair, and at the commencement of the
proceedings a letter from Messrs. Hunt, of Whitehall,
solicitors to the Great Western Company, was read to
the meeting. The letter chiefly referred to technical
differences between the solicitors of the two companies,
and was intended to defend the Great Western Company
from alleged aspersions contained in Mr. Dobie's report,
in which a hope was expressed that it may not yet be
too late to accommodate matters.

Mr. DOBIE begged to state, with regard to certain
disputed points, that when the two counsel met it was
undersood that all propositions made were without pre-
judice. After the meeting at which the negotiations
between Sir F. Kelly and Mr. Rolt were discussed, he
(Mr. Dobia) felt it to be his duty to see Sir Fitzroy, and
he (Mr. Dobie) then asked him, " Have the Birming-
ham and Oxford Company drawn back or failed to
perform any engagement into which they have entered
through you as their representative ?" Sir Fitzroy
replied most distinctly " No," adding " I entered into no
engagement, and, in agreeing to propose the secret ar-
ticle, I told Mr. Rolt, that although I felt convinced of
the good faith of Mr. Mosley and other principal share-
holders, it was no use shutting our eyes to the fact that
the North-Western, the Hudson lines,' and, in fact, all
the important lines in the north of iEngland, will con-
tinue to oppose the broad gauge wedge getting into that
part of the country."
The CHAIRMAN stated that he had been in communi-
tion with the directors of the Great Western Railway
Company, and they assured him that they were anxious
to carry out the agreement in all its integrity, and he
fully believed that such were their wishes and
intentions. There was no doubt that the
coupons were to be given independent of the con-
tingencies with respect to the obtainment of the broad
gauge, but it was impossible to forget the means which
had been adopted to defeat that which was the known
object of the Great Western Company in purchasing
the line.

A long and desultory conversation ensued upon the
terms and effect of the agreement of 1846. There was
nothing new in the argument; all parties expressed a
wish for its literal fulfilment, but still no nearer approach
was made to an amicable arrangement.
Ma. NEWBERY (of Manchester) asked—Suppose the
Great Western Company obtain an Act for confirming
the sale of the Birmingham and Oxford line, but fail in
obtaining the broad guage clause, will they, notwith-
standing, issue the coupons ?
The CHAIRMAN entertained no doubt upon the subject.
Mr. MozLEY suggested that the coupons pending the
Bills now before Parliament and present negotiations,
should be placed in the hands of a third honourable
party, to be delivered upon the completion of the agree-
ment.

This view was supported by Mr. ALSTON ; and ulti.
mately, a petitioh having been read, resolutions upon the
motion of Mr. Mozley were adopted, for petitioning both
Houses against the Bill for conferring additional powers
on the Great Western Railway Company with reference
to an agreement of the 12th day of November, 1846, for
the purchase by them of the Birmingham and
Oxford Junction and Birmingham, Wolverhampton,
and Dudley Railways against the Bill for
enabling the Great Western Railway Company to
construct a loop line from the Birmingham and Oxford
Junction Railway through Leamington, and for other
purposes, and to withdraw certain words in the sth, 6th,
12th, and 14th clauses of the Birmingham and Oxford
J unction Railway Bill, relating to the Great Western
Company, and their claim to become purchasers of the
said junction railway, and authorizing Messrs. Dobie,
Colemore, and Beale to appear as agents on behalf of
this company before the committees.
It is almost unnecessary to say that the chairman
refus(d to put the resolution, and they were consequently
submitted by Mr. Mozley, and by him declared to be
carried.

This, as well as the special meeting was then adjourned
until the 11th of April.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
LIVERPOOL, API:IL 3. _

STocx EXCHANGE.-The market to-day has been very
dull, end prices continue to manitest a declining tendency.
The sales are-Chester and Holyhead, 14s. 9d. ex int.-
Cornwall, 2s. 1-10 d. ex int.-Eastern Counties, Perpetual 5
per cent., No. 2,3 s. 4d. ex int.-Newcastle and Carlisle,
60s. ex. div.-Ditto, Quarters, 15s. ex div.-Ditto, New
Quarters (black), 15s. ex div.-Ditto, New 1001. Shares
( black), 60s. ex div.-Ditto, New 1001. Shares (red), 3s.
101,0. ex div.-Scottish Midland, 7s. 10d.-Ditto, Thew, 4s.
-Belfast and County Down, 4s. hi. ex int.-Londonderry
and Coleraine, 13s. 7d. ex- int.-Londonderry and Ennis-
killen, 3s. 2d. ex int.-Midland Great Western, 13s. 7d. ex
int.-Ditto, Halves, 3s. ex int.-Waterford and Kilkenny,
si. 3d. ex int.-Demerara, 2s. 7d. ex int.-Sambre and
Meuse, ss. 10d. ex int.
MANCHESTER, Amu. 3.

STOCK EXCIIANGE.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanca-
shire, and Cheshire Junction, 6 9.16 dis.—Lancashire and
Yorkshire, 32/. Shares, 714 die.—Ditto (\Vest Riding Union),
n. dis.—London and North-Western (Manchester and
Birmingham), Quarters (C), 21A p.—Manchester, Sheffield,
and Lincolnshire, Eighths, 5 dis.—North British, Thirds,
dis.—North Staffordshire, 2X3 dis.—Sotith-Ea.stern and
Dover, No 4, 3,4 dis.

BIRMINGHAM, APRIL 3.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Ambergate, Notting-
ham, and Boston, 545. 3d. dis.—Nurth Staffordshire, 435. 9d.
dii.—Shrewsbury and Birmingham (A), 4% dia.—Ditto,
(B), tits. 3d. dis.
BRISTOL, Aram 3.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The market at present appears to
have of improvement. The sales were—Great
vter (aarters,2l/2 dia.—Ditto, 17/. Shares, 134 dis.
les n
ioi, sign

AIRS. ARMYTAGE ; OR, FEMALE DOMINATION.
Mrs. Gore, in her preface to the new edition of this clever
work, which has just been published, in " Colburn's
Standard Novels," states, that the Duchesse de Praslin
was reading " Mrs. Arrnytage" on the night of her as-
sassination, and that the volume stained with her blood
was put in evidence at the Chamber of Peers, and assumes
that the affecting incident may have served to revive an
interest in favour of the boolq but, as the Examiner
justly observes, " it needed nothing to revive its interest
but the recollection of its early admirers, and the greater
accessibility of the form in which it now appears. It is
a book with an excellent purpose, most discreetly worked
out." The Quarterly Review, just published, we observe,
also alludes to the Praslin incident, and to the book as
" that delicate specimen of Mrs. Gore's skill." The
husbands of England certainly ought to raise a monu-
ment to the writer.

[ADVERTISEMENTI—SCORBUTIC Humouus, RING
Nvoniu, AND ALL CUTANEOUS DISEASES MAY BE CURED
BY HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PlLLS.—Numbers of
the human race are subject to diseases of the :kin, and
nothing tends to increase the virulence of such complaints so
much as impurity of the blood, which generates ill health,
and if this is not corrected, the constitution soon becomes
undermined,. ultimately terminating in disorders that are
incurable. Let those, therefore, who are so affected,
seek speedy relict' by using 1.1,,110\v0,v',; Pills and Oint-
ment. These medicines coinbi arc ;!!1 intalliblo cure
fur the most inveterate di f t>>e skit!, and are
equally etficacioni fur oil wound,,, titwouri, and
unnatural swellings. Sold by all druggists, and at Pro-
fessor Holloway's establishment, 244, Strand, London.

TIIE - UNITED

STATES

AND MEXICO.

LIVERPOOL, MONDAY AFTERNOON.

We have received New York papers to the 15th
ult., being four days later, by the packet-ship
John R. Skiddy, Captain Luke, which arrived at
Liverpool this afternoon. She left New York on the
15th, up to which time the Royal Mail steam-ship
Cambria had not arrived there.

The Mexican treaty we find given at full length.
The main points are the same as we have previously
been enabled to publish, but it may be interesting to
state in the exact words some of its principal features•
Article five provides that—
" The boundary lines between the two republics shall
commence in the Gulf of Mexico, three leagues from
land, opposite to the mouth of the Rio Grande, other-
wise called Rio Bravo del Norte, or opposite the mouth
of the deepest branch, if it should have more than one
branch emptying directly into the sea ; from thence up
the middle of that river, following the deepest channel,
where it has more than one, to the point where it
strikes the southern boundary of New Mexico ; thence,
westwardly, along the whole southern boundary
of New Mexico (which runs north of the town called
Paso), to its western termination ; thence northward
along the western line of New Mexico until it intersects
the first branch of the river Gila (or if it should not in-
tersect any branch of that river, then to the point on the
said line nearest to such branch, and thence in a direct
line to the same); thence down the middle of the said
branch and of the said river, until it empties into the Rio
Colorado; thence across the Rio Colorado, following the
division line between Upper and Lower California, to the
Pacific Ocean.

" Art. 6. The vessels and citicons of the United States
shall, in all time, have a free and uninterrupted passage
by the Gulf of California, and by the river Colorado, be-
low its confluence with the'Gila, to and from their pos-
sessions situated north of the boundary lino defined in
the preceding article; it being understood that this pas-
sage is to be by navigating the Gulf of California and the
river Colorado; and- not by land, without the express
consent of the Mexican Government.

" Art. 12. In consideration of the extension acquired
by the boundaries of the United States, as defined in the
firth article of the present treaty, the Government of the
United States engages to pay that of the Mexican Re-
public the sum of fifteen millions of dollars, in the one or
other of the two modes below specified.
" The Mexican Government shall, at the time of
ratifying this treaty, declare which of these two modes
of payment it prefers; and the mode so elected by it
shall be conformed to by that of the United States."
The first mode having been rejected, the second, as
follows, is adopted:--
" Second mode of payment Immediately after this
treaty shall have been duly ratified by the Government
of the Mexican republic, the sum of 3,000,000 of dollars
shall be paid to the said Government by that of
the United States, at the city of Mexico, in the
gold or silver coin of Mexico. The remaining
12,000,000 of dollars shall be paid at the same place,
and in the same coin, in annual instalments of 3,000,000
of dollars each, together with interest on the same at
the rate of 6 per centum per annum. This interest
shall begin to run upon the whole sum of 12,000,000
from the day of the ratification of the present treaty by
the Mexican Government, and the first of the instal-
ments shall be paid at the expiration of one year from
the same day; together with each annual instalment as
it falls due; the whole interest accruing on such in-
stalment from the beginning shall also be paid.
" Art. 13. The United' States engage, moreover, to
assume and pay to the claimants all the amounts now
due to them, and those hereafter to becomo due, by
reason of the claims already liquidated and decided
against the Mexican Republic, under the conventions
between the two Republics severally concluded on the
Ilth day of April, 1839, and on the 30th day of January
1843; so that the Mexican Government shall be abso-
lutely exempt for the future from all expense whatever
on account of said claims.

" Art. 23. This treaty shall be ratified by the Presi-
dent of the United States of America, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate thereof; and by the
President of the Mexican Republic, with the previous
approbation of its general Congress; and the ratifica-
tions shall be exchanged in the city of Washington, in
four months from the date of the signature thereof, or
sooner if practicable.
" In faith whereof, we, the respective Plenipotentia-
ries, have signed this treaty of peace, friendship, limits,
and settlement; and have hereunto affixed our seals re-
spectively. Done in quintuplicate, at the city of Gua-
dalupe Hidalgo, on the 2d day of February, in the year
of our Lord, 1848. _

" N. P. TRIST (L.S.)
" LUIS G. CUEVAS (L.S.)
" BERNARDO CONTO (L.S.)
" MIG. ATRISTAIN (L.S.)"
Senator Sevier has been appointed commissioner, and
was to proceed to Mexico immediately with the treaty
for its final ratification.