The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-12 00:00:00

nourable and' Learned Member for Midhurst says, that
we are called together to advise her Majesty on
matters concerning the Church of England, and be-
cause these words are inserted in the writ of summons,

argues that Jews cannot be admitted to seats in Par:

li3nient. Now what is the answer which a Jew would
give to that argument? "Surely lum as well qualified
to give advice concerning the Church of England as a
Quaker. Ido not. refuse to pay tithes.—(hear, hear.)
I am not disqualified from discussing the question of
peace or war by any religious scruples about the legality
of war.—(Cheers.) If you say that the qualification to
give advice concerning the Church of England is indis-
pensable, how conics it that you have admitted the Uni-
tarian? The Unitarian differs from you on the most
essential principle of Christianity. But you have ad-
mitted him, and you have also admitted the Quaker.
Why do you not take from the Jew the same declara-
tion which you take from the Quaker ? So little im-
portance do you seem to attach to the declaration on
the true faith of a Christian,' that a Quaker is not re-
quired to make it. I asked the Clerk of the House to
he good r !lough to give me the declaration which is ad-
ministered to Quakers. I apprehend that a Quaker be-
lievr.s all the leading doctrines of the Church of England.
I do not thick that he would have objected to make
an cilirmation on the true faith of a Chris-

tint' ;' " but you have relieved him from the necessity of
milting it. Since the speech of mine to which the Hon.
Member for Dorsetshire referred, important changes
have tulitn place.—(llear, hear.) The Quaker, the
Nloravian, and the Separatist, have been made eligible to
seats in the Legislature. You say that if a Jew comes
into Parliament, a Mahomedan and a Hindoo must come
in also; but you push the argument further than it is
ever likely to advance. Will it be sufficient to say that
you will keep out the .Jew because by the law of logical
deduction you must otherwise admit the Hindoo and the
Mahomedan? Sir, I apprehend, even at the point at
which we stand in this debate, and after all the attention
which has been paid to the subject, that the real position
of the Jew is not yet quite understood. It is said that a
Jew is entitled to all municipal offices, and that a Jew
may be sheriff. The Jew, in two recent instances, one
occurring under the present, and one under the late Go-
vernment, had been admitted to high distinctions; two
Jewish gentlemen, Sir Moses de Montefiore and Mr. 1)e
Rothschild, have been created Baronets. (Hear,
hear.) And I further believe that at this moment the
Jew is eligible to any executive office to which
the Crown may appoint him, no matter how important
may be the duties attached to that office, unless he be
precluded by the oath which is administered to a Privy
Gaincillor.—(Hear, hear.) I apprehend that there is
nothing which can prevent a Jew being Secretary of
State to-morrow, except through the indirect operation
of the oath required of a Privy Councillor, and there is
nothing in the form of that oath to which a Jew would
object. If you will but permit the Jew to take the
Privy Councillor's oath on the Old Testament the oath
of the Privy Councillor will not exclude him from the
Privy Council.—(Hear.) It is my conviction, therefore,
that unless through the indirect operation of that oath
there is not an office within the gift of the Crown from
which a Jew, practically, is excluded. A certain decla-
ration, containing the words "on the true faith of a
Christian " was substituted for the declaration against
transubstantiation in the year 1828; and, observe, these
words "on the true faith of a Christian " were
not sent up to the Lords by the House of
Commons.—(Hear, hear.) The Act of Parliament
when it left the Lower 'louse did not contain these
words; the Commons were content to admit the Jews
to all executive and municipal offices without requiring

that declaration of Christian faith. The words were in-
serted in the House of Lords, and, rather than lose the
Bill, the amendmer.t was acceded to. A marked dis-
tinction arose as to the period when the declaration was
required; in the case of executive office a certain time
was given, and in the case of municipal office the Jew
could not be admitted because he was required to make
the declaration previously to, and upon, the admission to
office. In the case of all other offices under the Crown,
the Jew was permitted to make a declaration *thin the
per!od of six months from his appointment. During the
whole of the last two reigns, however, during the reign
of King William and the reign of Queen Victoria, all
parties appointed to executive office have been given,
under the Annual Indemnity Act, the whole year to
make that declaration. Before the year expires another
Indemnity Act passes, and, therefore, the fact is, at this
moment, except through the indirect operation of the
Privy Councillor's oath, there is not an office under
the Crown which a Jew may not hold and be
protected in holding.—(llear, hear.) Can we, then,
having acceded to thoseimportant changes, permanently
maintain the exclusion of the Jew from Parliament—
when he has the elective franchise ; when he is eligible
to, and has entered upon, municipal offices ; when
he may be Lord Mayor of London next year ; when, in
a word, he is shut out from no office under the Crown
excepting that of the Privy Councillor ? You show no
jealousy of the Crown ; you have permitted the Crown
for the:last 17 years to appoint the Jew to high politi-
cal office, and you have practically relieved him from the
necessity of making any declaration whatever ; but
here is a certain trust which we can exercise only

through the goodwill of the electors, the great majority
of whom must always be professing Christians, and yet
you say, such is your jealousy and fear of him in the
character of legislator, that you will continue to exclude
him fom the House of Commons. You have, since the
year 1834, admitted to all Parliamentary functions
the Quakers, the Separatists, and the Moray ians, and
though you have shown no jealousy of the Crown in its
appointment of Jews, you exhibit such jealousy of the
Christian electors of this country, that you will not
permit them to send the man of their choice to this
House if he but happen to be a Jew.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, my opinion is, that you cannot permanently main-
tain that exclusion.—(Cheers.) You have made previous
concessions with little danger to the interests of the
Church, or to the interests of the Christian religion, and
I do not now think it safe to insist on this only remain-
ing exclusive.—(Cheers.) My firm belief—and I re-
joice in the conviction—is, that the Church of England
is stronger at this moment than at any period within
recent history.—(Hear, hear.) I am sure that such is
the condition of the Church, and I believe that the dis-
position which has been shown to apply timely and
salutary reforms has been the great cause of that
strength.—(Hear, hear.) I believe that in this way a
deep religious feeling has been awakened through the
country, and I am convinced that the strength of the
Church and of religion is not now dependent on the
question of two or three votes, more or less, in this
House.—(Hear, hear.) I believe that the Church
is strong enough to be independent on all essen-
tial points almost of the decisions of this House ;
it is rooted in the affections of the people. The
religious fee in
creased
and daily increasing, has been
and confirmed by the wise resolutions of the