The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-02 00:00:00

lion from the county of Tipperary, praying for a revision
of the criminal cole.
The Duke of SUSSEX presented a petition from 7,000
inhabitants of the city of Westminster, praying their
Lordships to pass the Bill for removing the disabilities of the
Jews. His Royal Highness said he should certainly give
the Bill his firmest support, upon the same principle as he
did the Bill for Catholic emancipation ; he thought that
every subject in any country, whatever his tenets might be,
provided those tenets were not subversive of the constitu-
tion of the community in general to which he belonged,
was entitled to the enjoyment of the same privileges as the
rest of his fellow subjects. During the number of years the
Jews had been established in Britain, they had always
been found to be loyal subjects.—(Hear, 'hear, hear.)
The Jews had always proved themselves faithful and use-
ful members of society, and were therefore entitled to
those privileges which every sectarian was permitted to
enjoy. It was not for him to look back to the history cf
the Jewish nation, but he must confess that among them,
at the present moment, were men who had shown them-
selves most serviceable and useful members of so, iety.
He should lay the petition on the table, stating that he
thought it one well worthy the attention of the House,
and that he would give it his most hearty support.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said th it he had just that
moment had put into his hands the Bill for the renewal
of the East India Company's Charter, which he under-
stood was appointed for a second reading to-morrow.
Though be thought it extremely inconsistent to be forced
to legislate till after the printing of a Bill, yet he was not
disposed to throw any obstacles in the way of the second
reading,reserving to himself the right and opportunity ofdia-
cussing the principles of the Bill on its going into Committee.
He begged at the same time to observe, that on the mo-
tion for the Bill going into a Committee he should move,
as an instruction to the Committee, the omission of all
those clauses which related to any alteration in the local
government of India.
Toe Marquis of LANSDOWNE observed, that the
second reading would not have been appointed for
tomorrow, if it had not been intended to afford
Noble Lords an opportunity not only of discussing
the details, but the principles of the Bill on going into
Committee.
The Earl of HADDINGTON presented petitions from
Peebles, the corporations of websters and tailors, the
trustees of the river Clyde, and the city of Glasgow,
against the Scotch Burgh Bill, and praying that the 101
franchise might be reduced to 51. The latter petition also
prayed that the measure might be postponed to the next
session, in which pryer the Noble Earl agreed.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH presented a petition from
the burgh of Selkirk against the Scotch Burgh Reform
Bill.
On the motion of the Earl of ROSSLYN, the Scotch
Burgh Police Bill went through a Committee and was
rep, rted with a few verbal amendments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had intended
to say a few words on the petitions presented
by the Noble Earl (Haddington), but he was
misled by thinking that the Noble Earl (Rosslyn) intended
to present petitions on the same subject. When the proper
time came, be, as a warm friend to the Bill, would he
most glad to postpone some parts of it, but as the mea-
sure had created very considerable excitement in Scotland,
he trusted that it would be received, and favourably con-
sidered by their Lordships.
The Earl of HADDINGTON was understood to ob-
ject to pressing the Bill forward during the present
session, and said he thought it could not be done with any
propriety. There would not be near so much discontent
in Scotland by the postponement, as there would be by
any crude and hasty legislation which would require after-
wards to be altered. He hoped, therefore, the Noble and
Learner: Lord would consent to its postponement.

. .
The LORD CHANCELLOR declined to accede to
the suggestion of his Noble Friend, as he was unwilling
to incur the risk of delaying the measure.
JEWISH DISABILITIES BILL.

The order of the day having been read for the s,cond
reading of the Jewish Disabilities Bill,
Lord BEXLEY rose to object to certain parts of it,
but not to those which affected the political rights
of the Jews. He drew a great distinction be-
tween the disabilities which had affected the Roman
Catholics and those of which the Jews complained,
and contended that the principles which guided the two
measures were widely different.
Lord BEXLEY addressed the House at considerable
ength, but we regret to say that we are wholly unable to
give even an outline of his observations, owing to the low
one of voice in which they were delivered, and no one
sentence throughout his speech having been distinctly
heard in the gallery.
The LORD CHANCELLOR having put the question,

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, although
he rose for the purpose of opposing this Bill, be must say
that he concurred most fully its many of the statements of
his Noble Friend. Objections had been urged against the
claim of the Jews to participate in all the privileges of
itioenship, but with respect to many of those objections
he must say be thougbt just as lightly of them as his
Noble Friend, or any other individual whomsoever. What
the opinions of the Jews were with respect to the return
of that people to the promised land he would not venture
to sat, but if they really expected that the original pro•
mime made to them should at some future time be ful-
filled—if they still entertained hopes of recovering ad-
vantages which depended upon circumstances—it was
his impression that no attempt at giving them a loca-
lity should be made. With respect to their morality,
he bad heard nothing to show that the Jews were more
inattentive to the duties of the religion they professed than
Christians were to the precepts of the gospel, on which
all their hopes of futurity were founded. Making dite
allowance for human infirmity, he would not say that the
Jews were not a moral people; but as to their intellectual
capacity, although he would not ascribe to them the works of
inspiration, he still could hardly, looking at the ability
and beauty of the works that had proceeded from them,
say that they were at all beneath their contemporaries in
understanding. But putting the Scriptures aside, and
forgetting their unmitigated aversion to Jesus of Nazareth,
who could read the productions of Josephus or Philo
without being obliged to admit that those authors stood as
ioigb as any historians or philosophers who bad ever
existed ? He knew not how far the Jews had lost their
attachment fur their own Scriptures, but he had recently
read a work of a gentleman of that persuasion which dis•
played as just an interpretation of the Bible, and showed
as much capacity for criticism, as any Christian com-
mentator had ever exhibited. This same gentleman had
recently refitted some calumnies with which his religion
had been assailed in a manner creditable alike to his feel-
ings and understanding; and a friend of his (the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury), who bad entered into controversy
with the Jewish Priests, was treated with the utmost
courtesy ; and, although he failed to make any impression
apon them as to their doctrines, they separated on the
best and most satisfactory terms. But it was asked why
they should not avail themselves of the assistance of Jews
M Parliament? Their services might, be admitted, be
desirable, but, for his own part, he must say he would not
purchase their services at the expense of principle. It
tiad also been said that Dissenters and /lonian Catholics
had been relieved of civil and religious disabilities, and
many persons had asked why the Jews should be ex-
cluded from the enjoyment of privileges conceded to other
classes of the King's subject., more especially seeing th it
the number of 'them that could by any possibility
he returned to Parliament would be so small, as to put
it out of their power to exercise their influence, if they
possessed any, to the prejudice of the established religion
of the country. But his reply was, that both Dissenters
all.' Roman Catholics were Christians.—(Hear, hear.) As
Christian's, they were admitted to form part or the Legis-
lature ; for, though averse to the Established Church, they
were favourable to Christianity generally. What good
could result, he would ask, what great advantage could
at ise, from the assistance of persons in Parliament, who
were not only opposed to Christianity by their religion,
but disqualified by their prejudices and manner of life
from legislating for a Christian community ? This was
an objection on which he must insist ; but then it was one
of principle, and not of faction or uncalled-fur opposition.
In his estimation, the whole mischief that he apprehended
would be done if their Lordships were to agree to a Bill
like the present. It the question were—shall the fol-
lowers of Brahmin or Mahomet be relieved from disabili-
ties, and admitted to all the rights of citizans, he must
pause as to the course he would pursue, for, in his opinion,
there would be less objection to conceding such privileges to
the professors of Paganism than to those of Judaism. There
was, however, no comparison beeween the religion of the
Pagan and that of the Jew. The creed of the latter was
incomparably better than that of the former ; but then it
was to be considered that the Jews' religion, as far as re-

lated to Christianity, was not merely a negation, but an
absolute denial of its truths, and that it asserted the SA-
viour whom Christians adored to be a religious imposter,
who suffered death deservedly. There were, he was sorry
to say, many persons even in these kingdoms who evinced
coldness and indifference for all forms of Christian reli-
gion, but for his part he must say that he was satisfied
the destiny of nations as well as of individuals was under
the control of a superintending Providence, and that Em-
perors as well as subjects, when they renounced the truths
of Christianity, would forfeit their title to the Divine
blessing. With those views on his mind he would be
Wanting in respect to the great author of the holy religion