The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-20 00:00:00

JAMAICA.

The Earl of BELMORE, after some preliminary ob-
servations totally inaudible in the gallery, moved that the
following papers be presented to the House :
Despatch, addressed to Viscount Gederich, dated 4th April,
183'2, No. 163, together with the papers inclosed therein, signed
(Belmore).—Also,
Despatch, addressed to the Governor of Jamaica, dated 18th
February, 1932, signed (Goderich).—Also,
The reply thereto, dated 30th April, 1932, No. 204, signed
(Belmorc).
The Noble Lord was understood to say that his object in
moving for the production of those documents was to free
him elf from accusations regarding his administra! ion in
Jamaica, which had been most unjustly brought against
him. He was quite ready to run the risk of condemna.
Lion for the purpose of getting a complete justification.
The Earl of RIPON said he had no objection to the
production of the first despatch, but suggested to the
Noble Lord whether it would not be better not to call for
the others. He bore testimony to the highly efficient
manner in which the duties of Governor of Jamaica had
been performed whilst the Noble Lord held that office,
and observed that as far as he was concerned he saw no
necessity for the inquiry which the Noble Lord seemed to
meditate.
SEPARATISTS' AFFIRMATION BILL.
The order of the day for the third reading of this Bill
having been read,
The Earl of GOSFORD moved that this Bill be then
read a third time.
The Bishop of HEREFORD opposed the motion, on
the ground that no case to prove the necessity of the Bill
had been made out. The alleged objection of the Separatists
to take an oath was founded on the divine prohibition,
"Thou shalt not swear ;" and if they were sincere in that
objection he could not see how they could conscientiously
subscribe to the form of affirmation laid down in the Bill,
which, divested of its technicalities, was really neither
more nor less than an oath. Besides, if the ground of ob-
jection alleged by the Separatists to exist to an oath was
once admitted by the legislature, their next step would be
to do away with the system of oaths altogether, and merely
require a party to subscribe whatever form his conscience
might dictate as binding upon him. Indeed sn convinced
was he of the utter inutility of the measure, were it not,
he thought, decided that the Bill should pass, lie would
move for its third reading that day three weeks.—(Cries of
" Move, move," from several Peers, particularly from the
Duke of Cumberland and Lord Wynford.) Having been
thus called upon, he would move that the Bill be read a
third time that day three we-ks.—( Hear, hear.)

The Bishop of CHICHESTER thought his Right Rev.
Friend had gone to rather an unjustifiable length in setting
up his own conscientious opinions as the judge by whom
the justness of the conscientious scruples of the Separatists
to the taking of an oath ought to be decided. He con-
tended that, as regarded precedents for similar pro-
ceedings to that in which they were engaged, as re-
irded the respectability of the parties e2eking for the
measure, and, finally, as regarded the security to life and
property which an oath was considered to effect, there
could be no reasonable ground of objection to the Bill, and,
such being the case, he regretted much the opposition his
Right Rev. Friend had offered to it. On what, he asked,
did the validity of an oath depend? Surely it was on the
degree of conscientious feeling with which it was made ;
and, if a particular sect declared that the ordinary form
of oath was opposed to their conscientious scruples, the
very best means of insuring the validity of the obligation
was to lay down such a form as, without destroying the
requisite responsibility in cases of false swearing, best con-
sulted those religious scruples.
Lord SUFFIELD said the Separatists, unlike the
Quakers, did not object to the taking of an oath, but to
the taking of a form of oath, which, like that in ordinary
use, unnecessarily, as they thought, called down a curse
fro Heaven, should they swear falsely.
from
ELLENBOROUGH doubted much whether the
wording of the Bill, and particularly of that part of it
which laid down the form of affirmation to be in future
taken by the Separatists, got rid of the objection to remedy
which it was introduced, and suggested its postponement
for some short tune at all events.
After a desultory conversation, in which the Marquis of
CLAfialcaans, the Earl of Wacm.ow, Lord SUFFIELD,
the
p
RD, took part, Earl Gary replied, and their
Lordships
divided—
For the original motion.... 35
For the amendment lB
Majority —l9
s
of Gk
e of WELLINGTON, Lord WYNFORD, and the Earl
F °

Whilst the gallery was closed, the Marquis of SALIfI
MIRY moved for a copy of the correspondence between his
Majesty's Secretary of State and the Sheriffs and other re-
turning officers in England and Wales, with respect to the
provisions contained in the Reform Act for the registry of
voters for Members to serve in Parliament, which was or-
dered to be produced.