The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-16 00:00:00

rEE gUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MA Y 16, 1857 s

themselves to the larger; but it was thought better to
have plans f,r covering the whole of the gr,und ; so that
what was now built might form portion of a comorehen-
sive des!zil, rat.r.er than be wholly disconnected from
what roikot, suosequently he done. The successful com-
petitors would only be entitled to the premiums awarded
to them. The copyright of their plans would then belong
to the Government, and it would be for them to adopt
such portion of them as they might think fit.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH expressed his dis-
satisfaction with the course which had been pursued with
regard to the Houses of Parliament. Some persons
might praise what had been done ; but he confessed that
he was himself mortified and disvusted at the extravagant
expendi;ure into which they had been betrayed. (Cheers.)
Titer,. was no necessity for the Government to embark in
building operations at al. Why could not St. James's
Palace be made into a Foreign office ? (Hear) Close by
was another large building—Marlborough House. It was
true they bad now some trash there which, he regretted
to say, he had lost half an hour seeing ; but it might be
packed up and taken away. It was said Marlborough
House was wanted for the establishment of the Prince of
Wales. But it was wholly unsuited for such a purpose ;
whereas it would do admirably for public offices. (Rear.)
There was a third building called Scitomberg House
which the Government might also convert into offices ;
and thus by an expenditure of 50,0001 they might avoid
one of five millions. (Cheers ) Really, they must pay
some regard to economy. If toe House of Commons
would not do its duty, their llrdships, however foreign
to their custom it might be to in' erten., in such matters,
I must call the attention of the public to the subject ; for
the public must have one. house of Parliament that would
notT neglect its
of M
its finatatEllltarests. (Cheers.)
Tee Earl SBURY said that one of the
reasons given for building new public offices was the ex-
pense to which Government was put in hiring houses. It
was said that 20,0001. a year was thus spent ; but the
interest on the mil ion and a 11,1 f which the Cliancalor of
the Exchequer himself calculated the ground alone would
cost would, at 4 per cent., be 60,0001.

Earl GRA.NVIL LE was understood to say that noble
lords on the other side had admitted that there must be
a new Foreign-office.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH had pointed out
how an excellent Foreign-office might be obtained with-
out. cost to the country. With regal d to the War De-
partment, he confessed he did not see what reason there
was for additional accommodation, when they were di-
minishing the army in a manner which caused him great
alarm. Only the otber day they determined to decrease
the arti:lery at the rate of 20 men per troop ; whereas
the country bad been given to understand that that was
an arm which was in ll:awe to be kept up on an efficient
scale. (Hear, hear.)
Phe Earl of HARDWICKE certainly thought that
the artilery was the last aria in the service that ought
to be weakened. (Hear, Lear.)
Lord CAMPBELL appealed to the Government on
behalf of the law courts. (Laughter ) He trusted that
means would be found to afford better accommodation
to those engaged in the administration of justice; and
that that might be done without removing the courts
from Westminster. He should like also to see the pre-
sent facade of the courts brought more into harmony
with the handsome structure which it at present dis-
graced. (Hear, hear.)
After a few words from the Marquis of LANSDOWNE
and Lord _REDESDALE,
Their lordships rose at five minutes past seven.

ber of the Administration—(hear, hear)—and, knowing
the deep and sincere interest which my noble friemd
takes in the measure to which he has so long devoted his

attention, I am quite sure he will forgive me for appear-
ing to take it nut of his hands. (Hear, hear.) It appeared
to me, that if ever there was a moment peculiarly favour-
able for calling the attention of the house to the oaths
which are by law now prescribed to members of Parlia-
ment on taking their seats, the present was precisely that
moment, because the house having been recently consti-
tuted every member whom I have tbe honour of address-
ing must have fresh in his recollection those oaths which
by the present law he has been compelled to take, con-
taining, I am sure I need not say, many things that
every man must be very reluctant to subscribe to under
the solemnity of an oath, and which must therefore be
most repugnant to his feelings. There cannot, I appre-
hend, be a more solemn act than the taking of an oath. It
is an invocation by a man to his Creator to give His sanc-
tion to an engagement which that man is about to un-
dertake. That man has thereby pledged to a certain de-
gree his future well being for the performance of certain
duties which by his oath he has undertaken to discharge.
Such engagements have been sanctioned by the practice
of all nations. Thera are duties of such importance in
this world that it is fitting that those who have to dis-
charge them should bind themselves by the most solemn
sanction to a due and conscientious performance of them.
But tbe more solemn the act the greater is the responsi-
bility which a man incurs by taking an oath. The more
that engagement is entitled to the respect of men, in the
same proportion ought to be the seldomness of its being
taken, and the importance of the occasion upon whioh it
is taken. (Hear.) To invoke the Supreme Being with
reference to engagamente which are absurd, and which
no man could be supposed to break, is a profanation of
a sacred rite. (Cheers.) It is, in fact, a breach of that
commandment which forbids man to take the name of the
Creator in vain. There are things in the oaths we now
take which were, no doubt, fit to be sworn to in times
long gone by, bet which are so inapplicable to the days
in which we live, and to the persons by whom those
oaths are to be taken, that they are revolting to the
mind of every reasonable man. I may observe that the
changes which I propose to make do not apply to the
oath taken by Roman Catholics. That oath was settled
upon full deliberation at the time when the disabilities
of the Catholics were under discussion. Ido not intend
to disturb that settlement. (Hear.) The change which I
am about to propose applies solely to the oaths to be
taken by persons who arq not of the Catholic religion.
The object of the bill which I beg leave to introduce is,
in the first place, to relieve Christians from the neces-
sity of taking oaths which are repugnant to their reason
and to their feelings. (Hear, hear.) But, in the next
place, by so doing, I propose to put an end to the
last remnant of former prejudice and exclusion. The
chauge which I am about to propose would not only
relieve a Christian from oaths which a Christian
ought not to be called upon to take, but would also sweep
away that portion of one of those oaths which is the only
obstacle to the reception of Jews in this House of Parlia-
ment. (Cheers.) It is hardly necessary for me to remind
the house of the oaths which we now by law are compelled
to take. So long a the law compels us to rake those oaths
we submit to the necessity, and nn man can blame a per-
sou who submits to the law. But I do say that if the
house has the power, which I contend it hoe, to relieve
itself from these profanations of a sacred right, the house
would incur a heavy responsibility if it did not exercise
that power, and relieve individual members from the ne-
cessity of taking those oaths. What I propose to do is to
abtloh, in alt cases in which they are by law required to
be taken, the oath of allegiance as it now stands, the
oath of supremacy, and the oath of abjuration, and to
sutstitute for those three oaths oce single oath, which
shall contain the oath of allegiance as well as that which
is requisite in the other oaths, but which shall leave out
ad those portions of them which I conceive are not fir,
ttng or proper to be retained. The oath of allegiance will
!stand as it now does, with such additions as I have men-
tioned. But to begin with the oath of supremacy. That
oath is as follows :
" I do swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest, and
abjure as impious and heretical that damnable doctrine and
position that princes excommunicated or deprived by the
Pope or any authority of the see of Rome may be deposed or
murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever."
On what possible ground are we called upon to take that
oath ? (Hear.) Why, sir, it is abjuring that which none
of as believe in—(hear)—which no Protestant ever did
believe in, and which I humbly venture to say no Catho-
lic of the present day beliave3 in. (Cheers.) It is true
that in times long gone by that doctrine was held by
some portion of the Catholic Church, but it is a doctrine
so utterly repugnant to every feeling and principle of
the present day that I am sure no man takes this oath
without—if I tuay ;ay so—an inward blush at being
compelled by law to abjure what under present circum-
statce3 could not by any possibility be even coutere-
plaoed. Tile oath proceeds ,

" And I do declare that no foreign prince, person, pre-
late, State, or potentate huh or ought to have any juris-
diction, power, superiority, pre-eininence, or authority,
ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm."

I propose to leave that declaration as it stands. We next
cove to the ca'h of abjuration, which in these terms :
" I do truly and sincerely acknowledge, profess, testify,
and declare, in my conscience before God and the world,
that our Sovereign Lady Queen Victoria is lawful and
rigutful Queen of this realm, and all other her )Majesty's
dominions and countries thereunto belonging."
Tuat declaration, in a somewhat briefer form, may, I
oroperly be retained. Toe oath then goes on :
and I do solemnly and sincerely declare that I do be-
lieve in my conscience that not any of the descendants of
the person who pretended to be Prince of Wales timing
the life of the late Bing James 11. ;
as if James 11. had died some two or three years ago—
(a iatig,E)—

" and since his decease pretended to be and took upon him-
self the style and title of King of England by the name of
James the Third, or of Sectlend by the name of James the
Eighth, or the style and title of King of Great Britain,
bath any tight or title whatsoever to the Crown of this
realm or any other the dominions thereunto belonging ;
and I do renounce, refuse, and abjure any allegiance or
obedience to any of them." reeet
I propose to sweep away altogether that declaration;
(Cneers.) We might, with as much reason, for all prac-
tical purposes, abjure our belief in the lieptarchy. (A
laugh.) The oath proceeds :
" And I do swear that I will bear faith and true alle-
giance to her Majesty Queen Victoria, and her will defend
to the utmost of my power against all traitorous conspi-
racies and attempts whatsoever which shall be made
against her person, Crown, or dignity ;"
Triat is, I Oink, a very proper declaration, and one
which I propose to include in the new oath which I
shall ask the committee to substitute for the caistioes
oaths, The oath goes on,—
" and I will do my utmost endeavour to disclose and make
knee n to her Majesty and her successors all treasons and
aitoroue conspiracies which I shall know to be against
her or any of there."
That portion of the oath I propose to retain, because I
think it a declaration which may properly be made by
members of this house. (Hear, hear.) The next clause
of the oath is,—
" And I do faithfully promise to the utmost of my
power to support, maintain, and defend the succession of
the Crean against the descendants of the said James, and
against all other persons whatsoever, which succession, by
an Act intitnled `An Act for the further Limitation of
the Crown and better securing the Rights and Liberties of
the Subject,' is, and stands limited to the Princess Sophia,
Electress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, and the heirs
of her body, being Protestants."
Although I do not propose to retain the precise words I
have just read, the form cf oath I shall submit to the
committee will contain substantially the same declare-
tien,—namely, that the members of this house will
erogage to maintain the Protestant succession in the
descendants of the Electress Sophia of Hanover in con-
formity with the Act of Parliament. The oath concludes
in these terms :
" And all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknow-
ledge and swear, according to these express worth by me
spoken. and according to the plain common sense and under-
standing of the same words, without any equivocation,
mental evasion, or secret reservation whatsoever; and I do
make this recognition, acknowledgment, abjuration, renun-
ciation, and promise heartily, willingly, and truly, upon
the true faith of a Christian."
I propose to omit all that disclaimer of mental equivoca-
tion and reservation—(hear)—and I also propose to omit
those last words, "upon the true faith of a Christian,"
which are the words that preclude a Jew from sitting and
voting in this house. (Hear, hear.) I will now read to
the committee the form of oath which I propose to sub-
stitute for the existing oaths,—
"I do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful
and bear true allegiance to her Majesty Queen Victoria,
and will defend her to the utmost of my power against all
conspiracies and attempts whatever which shall be made
against her person, Crown, or dignity ; and I will do my
utmost endeavour to disclose said, make known to her Ma-
jesty, her heirs, and successors, all treasons, and traiterous
conspiracies which may be formed against her or them ;
and I do faithfully promise to maintain, support, and de-
fend, to the utmost of my power, the succession of the
Crown, which succession, by an act, intitled ' An Act for
the further Limitation of the Crown and better securing
the Rights and Liberties of the Subject,' is and stands
limited to the Princess Sophia Electress of Hanover, and
the heirs of her body being Protestants, hereby utterly re-
nouncing and abjuring any obedience or allegiance unto
any other person claiming or pretending a right to the
Crown of this realm ; and do declare that no foreign
prince, person, prelate, State, or potentate, bath or ought
to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre eminence,
or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm."
That oath wil', I apprehend, contain every portion of the
existing oaths which we can in reason be called upon to
continue, and will relieve the Protestant members of this
house from the necessity of pronouncing at the table,
under the solemn sanction of an oath, a mass of jargon
wholly unsuited to the times in which we live. I appre-
hend that no one can object to the proposal I make on
general grounds, although no doubt in the future stages
of the bid I shall have to encounter the opposition of
those who are adverse to the admission of Jews to Par-
lsament. Now I have never yet heard any argument
which appeared to me to have the least weight against
the admission of British subjecte, being Jews, to sit
and vote in this house. The main argument which has
been urged it, that this house is a Christian assembly
—that is to say, it is an assembly composed of men
professing the Christian religion, the chief prac'ical doc-
trines of that religion being to act with charity towards
all—(hear)—to do unto others as we would they should
do unto us—(hear)—not to persecute ; to love our neigh-
bours as ourselves ; and, in short, to carry out in practice
those principles which are ignored by the arbitrary and
unnecessary Exclusion of our Jewish fellow countrymen
from Parliament. Is it believed that the members of the
Jewish persuasion are less enlightened, that they are
less able to assist us in our deliberations, endless likely to
1 ecome useful members of the Legislature, than any other
class of the community ? Anyone acquaue ed with the
1 facts knows that those Jews who most aspire to be meni•

hers of this house are men eminently distinguished for
the intellectual qualifications which would fit them for a
seat in the Legislature of this country. Is it objected that
the Jews have no property and no stake it, the country,
and that they are, therefore, person 3 who would be ut-
terly heedless of the nature of those laws to which Pato
liament may assent ? We all know, happily for them-
selves, that the very reverse is the case. (A. laugh.)
Many of them are men of great wealth—men who have
a large stake in the country—and who have, therefore
no motive to assent to any legislation which will not
conduce to the welfare and prosperity of the empire.
(Hear, hear.) Why, sir, I must confess that since I
nave been in the office I have the honour to hold,
circumstaness have occurred which have caused•me to
feel considerably ashamed of the present state of the
law on this subject. When the country was in need
of large sums of money in order to carry on the public
service with efficiency some great capitalists came for-
ward--as my right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer can tell you—and upon terms not less honourable
to themselves than advantageous to the public, provided
those means which we required. While making the ne-
cessary arrangements, however, we could not but feel
that the very men who had been instrumental in render-
ing such important service to the country were precluded
by an arbitrary and unjoet law from occupying seats in
this house. (Hear.) Of late years the principles of civil
and religious liberty have made great progress. We have
swept away those urjnst enactments which placed the
Protestant dissenters in a position of inferiority as com-
pared with the rest of their fellow-countrymen. We have
also swept away those unjust enactments which excluded
our Catholic fellow-countrymen from taking part in the
deliberations of this house. The exclusion of the Jews is
the last remnant of prejudice and intolerance with which
we have to deal. What is it that you fear from admitting
Jews to Parliament ? Are you afraid that the admission
of. a few Jews will shake the Christian religion ? Why,
sir, I have heard of many Jews becoming Christians,
but it never fell to my let to hear of a Christian who be-
came a Jew. (Hear, and a laugh.) The progress of
mankind is governed by laws which admit of s) retro-
gression. The Old Testament prepared the way for the
New Testament, but the New Testament will never lead
us back to the Old. Of what then are we afraid ? We
cannot for a moment suppose that the introduction into
the house of a few persons professing the Jewish religion
will at all affect the Christian character of the country.
I am convinced that such members, from their know-
ledge and intelligence, would render us material assist-
ance in our deliberations ; their position as men of consi-
derable property would be a guarantee for their interest
in the welfare of the country ; and by admitting them
to Parliament we should carry out that system of liberal
legislation for the establishment of religious liberty
which has of late years made so much progress. I
trust, therefore, that the house will give its most
sorious attention to this subject. Many members of the
house are unfettered by pledges, and are free to act upon
their own judgment. Ido trust that this measure will
be carried by a large majority of the house ; and then, if
the opinion of the house should be stamped upon the bill,
in approbation of the principle it contains, I cannot but
indu'ge the sanguioe expectation that those obstacles
which elsewhere have hitherto impeded the realisation of
the ardent wishes of my noble friend the member for the
city of London may give way to an impful•e proceeding
from a new House of Commons, and that at last we may
have the satisfaction of giving the finishing stroke to that
which has been too long delayed, but which I hope will
now be conceded. (Great cheering.) Tee noble lord
concluded by moving to bring in a bill to substitute one
oath for the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, and abjura-
tion.

Sir F. THESIGER— It is not my intention to oppose
the introduction of the bill proposed by the noble lord ;
but, inasmuch as its avowed object is the admission of
Jews to Parliament, and as my sentiments upon thatim-
portaut subject have undergone no change, I shall feel
it to be my duty in its next stage to offer to the bill my
sincere and earnest opposition. (Cheers.) The noble
viscount at the head of the Government has made a
graceful apolegy to the noble lord the member for the
city of London for taking this question out of his hands;
and I wish, as this has now become a Government mea-
sure, that for the sake of consistency the noble viscount
had adopted the same course with respect to the present
bill which be has pursued with regard to all other mea-
sures relating to Parliamentary reform. (hear.) The
other evening the hon. member for East Surrey proposed
a bill for the aboliticn of the property qualification of
members. The noble viscount permitted that bill to be
introduced upon the understanding that it should be
carried no further, and waived all discussion upon the
subject, because, he said, by common consent ad ques-
tions relating to Parliamentary reform were to be post-
poned until the next session. (Cheers.) That was a bill
f)r the abolition of the property qualification. Toe pre-
sent is a measure for the alteration of the oatlis qua-
lification—(bear)—and if the one is connected with Par-
liamentlry reform, so also, I think, must be the other.
(Cheers.) Why, therefore, it there is a common under-
standing that we are to have no discussion upon the
subject of Parliamentary reform, the present bill should
not share the fortunes of all the other measures and
be postporwd until the next session I am at a loss to
imagine. For what reason are the Jews to be so peen-
liar,y favoured 7 Are their demands so urgent upon the
noble viscount that he cannot resist them ? (Laughter.)
I cannot help thinking that the noble viscount has been
forced by some pressure into his prominent position upon
this occasion. Before the elections took place a deputa-
tion from the city of London waited upon the noble vis-
count and requested him to introduce a measure fur the
admission of the Jews, and to make it a Government
question. The noble viscount was unwilling to give any
pledge upon the subject, and I have reason to believe
that his reluctance and hesitation were not unservice-
able to the noble lord the member for the city in the
manly and successful appeal which he made to that
constituency. (" Hear," and a laugh.) The noble vis-
count, however, is now committed to this measure. If
he looks back lie sees no possibility of retreat. I know
well the resolution and perseverance of the noble vie
count when he has made up his mind, and therefore I
have undertaken in attempting to oppose a measure
which is brought forward under the auspices and which
is to be supported by all the weight and authority of the
noble viscount. Tae noble viscount has bad a consider
able advantage in the experience of the last 10 years in
framing his measure in such a shape as he thinks w;11 be
most heely to secure its ready acceptance. I have taken
a rather prominent part in thestruggle upon thisquestion,
and I think it will be neither uninstructive nor uninte-
resting it I shoull glance at the different measures which
from time to time have been introduced, enabling the
house to see how at the beginning the advocates for the
Jew were ready to admit the Chtistian character of
this assembly, and how at last they have advanced
to demands which have a tendency utterly to supplant
and destroy it. (Cheers.) It is not known to those
who have riot paid attention to the subject 'under how
many disabilities the Jews laboured as late as the year
1330, when Mr. R. Grant introduced his bill for their
ernancieation. They extended to their exclusion from
civil and military offices, from corporation posts, and
from a wide circle of civil employments. No one, I hope,
will believe that I have the least desire to revert to such
a state of things, but I have always considered that the
condition of the Jews at that tune furnishes one of the
strongest answers which could be given to the suggestion
we hear made from time to time that Jew's are prevented
from sitting here by the accidental insertion of certain
words in an Act of Parliament passed for a different
object. (Hear, hear.) The disabilities to which I have
referred were gradually removed between the years 1830
and 1847 ; and the first attempt which was made after
that Fong period to introduce the Jews to Parliament
came from the noble lord the member for the city of
London, immediately after his return for that consti-
tuency with Baron Rothschild. I know that the noble
lord is unwilling to have it supposed that his exertions
upon this subject, which have been consistent and
straightforward, had any connexion whatever with his
return with Baron Rothschild ; but the fact is that, al-
though the noble lord was in high office during the greater
part of the period between 1830 and 1847,it never appears
to have occurred to him that the fitting time had arrived
for proposing this measure until the coincidence took place
of his return with—l may not say by—Baron Rothschil 1.
(Cheers and laughter.) Let us now see what was the mea-
sure which the noble lord first thought it right, after a
mattie:e deliberation of 17 years, to introduce to this
house, It was emphatically, if I may use the expression,
a Jew B:11. It was a bill to provide a particular form of
oath for persons belonging to the Jewish persuasion, and
the noble lord at that time thought it so inconsistent that
Jews should hold certain high offices in the State, that
he introduced provisions to prevent a member of the
Jewish persuasion from holding the office of Lord Chan-
cellor, the office of Lord Lieutenant, and some offices in
the Eccl3siastical Courts, and also from presenting cx
eci.) to any livings. That bill passed this house, but was
rejected by the House of Lords. In 1849, the noble lord
brought forward another bill of a rather different descrip-
tion. It provided a new form of oath for all the Christian
members of this assembly. The oaths of allegiance, su-
premacy, and abjuration were repealed, and thiscommon
form of oath was to be substituted, containing the words
—" Upon the true faith of a Christian," and I rememe
ber well that my right hon. friend the member for Ox-
ford University expressed his gratification at finding
that the noble lord had preserved these emphatic words
as part of the oath to be taken by the Christian members
of this house. (Hear.) It was provided that a Jew, in
taking the oath of abjuration, should omit these words.
There was no exception with respect to particular offices
in that bill, because it was wholly unnecessary, inasmuch
as the common oath was to be taken only as a qualifica-
tion for sitting in Parliament, and of course all those
uigh offices to which the former bill referred could not
be held without the holders taking the eld oath, includ-
ing. the oath of abjuration, with the words—" Upon the
true faith of a Christian." That bill also passed this
house, but was rejected by the House of Lords. In 1850
the noble lord made a very considerable step in advance.
He introduced a bill which provided that in all cases
persons of the Jewish persuasion were required to take
the oath of abjuration, they should omit the words—
Upon the true faith of a Chrietiar." There was no ex-
ception, as in the first bill of 1847, of those offices to
which I have referred ; and the consequence was that,
supposing that measure had received the sanction of the
Legislature, it would have been competent to Jews to
hold the highest offices in tha State. (hear.) line noble
1 'rd, however, was compelled in the month of July to
drop that bill, and then some very unjust suspicions
havirg, it seems, entered into the minds of the ad-
vocates of the Jews, they determined to take the
matt,r into their own bands, and a very extraordinary
scene apAeared in this house. Baron Rothschild ap-
peared in the house, and claimed to take the oaths on
the Old Testament. The house came to the absurd deci-
sion that he :eight do so, though the oaths embrace the
words " oil the true faith of a Christian ;"and the plan.'

tical absurdity of the decision the house came to was
soon apparent, for when the baron came to the words
" on the true faith of a Christian," he orni.ted them,
observing " They are not binding on my conscience "
The noele (Lord J. Reseed) felt that tho-e words were a
part of the oath, and refused to be a party to any mdi
rect attempt to get rid of them ; and, therefore, pro.
posed and carried a resolution that Baron Rethschil
should not sit and vote in the house until he had taken
the oaths as required by law. In 1851 the noble lord
brought in a bill similar to that of the previous year,
leaving it open to the Jews to obtain any of the high
offices referred to. That bill was rejected in the House
of Lords, and then Alderman Salornons —lately returned
for Greenwich—claimed, under a resolution of the house,
a right to take the oaths on the Old Testament. He went
through the oaths, omitting the words " on the true
faith of a Christian," kissed the book and then at once
took his seat. He was directed to withdraw, but re-
fused to obey the Speaker's mandate. A resolution
was passed that he should withdraw, and immediately
he reappeared and resumed his seat. Again the re-
solution was passed that he withdraw, and again be
refused to obey, until he was removed by the Ser-
geant•at-Arrns. In the course of the discussion
Alderman &lemons asked the noble lord (Lord John
Ru'sell) if he would prosecute him for the penalties in-
curred in taking hie seat. The noble lord replied that
be should not, but that the alderman would have no
difficulty in finding a friend to do so —(a laugh)—which
he did ; but any idea of making it a mock trial was
thwarted by the honour of the plaintiff's counsel ; and
the result was that it was settled by the judgment of the
Court of Exchequer Chamber that the words "on the
true faith of a Christian" are an essential part of the
oath. (Hear.) In 1852 the noble lord advanced another
step, or rather stride. He introduced a Reform Bill,
which he was compelled to abandon in the course of the
session, and in that bill he inserted one oath to be taken
by all members. In 1853 he introduced his bill with that
form of oath which had been contained in his abortive
Reform Bill ; and front the circumstance that it was to
be taken by all members of the house—Protestant and
Roman Catholic—it necessarily involved in it a partial
recognition of the Royal supremacy. That did not strike
the house, and the bill was passed, but was rejected by
the Lords. In 1854, however, when a second bill was
introduced, attention was directed to this point, and the
bill was rejected. Whether disheartened by this defeat,
I know not, but the noble lord made no attempt in 1855
to bring in his bill, and a measure introduced into the
House of Lords by Lord Lyndhurst failed. Again the
advocates of the Jews became distrustful of the noble
lord opposite, and chose to take the matter in their own
hands ; and in 1856 Mr. Milner Gibson introduced a bill
which certainly would have made "clean work" of the
question, by abolishing the oath of abjuration altogether.
Toere are parts of that oath which are rather precious to
Protestant minds. (Hear.) It contains the only recog-
nition of the Act of Settlement. (Hear.) The noble lord
himself shared that feeling, and found himself in a most
peculiar position—he was unable to take a leading part
in advocating the admission of Jews into the house,
and was obliged to defend the constitution from the at-
tack made upon it by the attempt to introduce them
through the abolition of the oath of abjuration ; and in
committee on the bill he introduced words equivalent to
that oath. It is rather hard upon the noble lord that
again the question is wrested out of his hands by the
noble lord at the head of the government. The noble lord
has explained the form of the oath he intends to propose.
I am not aware of the reluctance of members to take the
present oath of which he spoke. There certainly are
words in it which I object to, because they are obsolete.
But what the noble lord ought to do, as a fair way of
dealing with that question, would be to remove from the
oath of abjuration that obsolete portion of it, and then
leave the question as to the admission of the Jews to be
dealt with as a separate question upon its own grounds,
as in 1847. The noble lord did not desire that on this
occasion we should enter into the argument. But he
i might have spared us his reproaches about " prejudice"
and " intolerance." (Hear.) The noble lord has kis
prejudices. We have ours ; but that is not intolerance.
(near ) There are those who feel deeply on the subject,
and who have no notion that in upholding the exclusion
of the Jews from this house they are guilty of any in-
tolerance. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord said that it
was a question of " civil and religious liberty." It is not
a question of liberty at all. Those words haee a rairnu-
lating effect, and create emotions which very frequently
pass for arguments. It is not a question of liberty—that
is of freedom from restraint ; it is a question of political
power. The question is whether persons who do not
profess Christianity are to possess a portion of that su-
preme power which now belongs to a Christian legisla-
ture. Sir, I join with the noble lord in entreating that
hon. members will give their serious attention to the
subject. They will find from the observations I have
gives that, eager as they may be fer the admission of the
Jews, it is necessary to be cautious that in accomplishing
that object they do not trench on cur honoured institu-
tions. (Rear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, after what has been said by
my noble friend at the head of the Government, and by
the hon. and learned gentleman opposite, it is natural
that I should wish to say a 'ow words. I assure my nuble
friend that so far from finding fault with him for taking
this subject into immediate consideration and bringing it
under the view of 'Parliament, I agree with these who
advised him to do so, because the
,question will stand the
best chance if it has the weight and the influence of
Government in its favour ; and so far from wishing to
introduce it myself, as it has a better chance in the hands
of the Government, and I am only anxious that it should
stand the best chance of success, I cannot envy him the
honour of bringine it forward. The bon, and learned
member (Sir F. Thesiger) has given a history of the
various measures which have been brought forward on
the subject—a history which may be useful, as there are
so many new members in the house, and of which I will
only say that I hope he will soon be in a position to
complete it, and to say "that in 1857 a new attempt
was made by the noble lord then at the head of the Go-
vernment—(a laugh) —and he carried with him a great
majority in the House o' Commons, the weight of a hich,
with the influence of Government, was so successful that
the House of Lords then conceded the measure, and an
act passed for the admission of the Jews into Parlia-
ment." The hon. and learned member alluded to the
connection of my advocacy of the question with my re-
turn for the City. But I first obtained the seat in 1841,
when Boron Rothschild was not a candidate, and secured
it in 1857 when he was a candidate with others, and
where, I am happy to avow, that I received the support
of many who hold the political views of the hon. and
learned gentleman. (Hear.) The hon. and learned mem-
ber detailed the various measures which were brought
forward ; the explanation of which is that we were will-
ing to concede as much as possille if the main object was
secured, and in order to smooth the obstacles which
might be raised in the other house. But Ido not con-
cede the necessity of always proposing such a m-aiure
in the same shape and I consider that my noble friend at
the head of the Government has done well to frame a
measure in that shape, which is an improvement on
many of the bills furmeriy iutrtduced. I remember when
on a question, of which the hon. member might have
given a simear history—that of Roman Catholic ernan-
cipation—Mr. Canning was reproached with not having
alt the same "securities" which be had proposed in for-
mer similar measures, he replied, " I decline to be se-
curity-munger all my life. (A laugh.) I have proposed
securities which you have rejected, and which I d.) not
again propose." So I say as to this Jewish question,
though it may have been right, with a view to obviate
objections, to refuse:the admission of Jews to certain
offices, those prop 'sale having been rejected, it is right
to put the measure in the shape in which it may be most
reasonable. (Hear.) The learned gentleman proposes
on some future occasion, when doubtless we shall have
a keen contest, to state his objections to the measure.
The learned member says he is one of those who have a
deep and conscientious feeling on the subject. Sir, I ad
mit that there are those who have such a feeling ; and I
say that it is a mere feeling, and not an objection founded
ou reason or argument. I have heard many persons ex-
press their repugnance to the measure, but I never heard
any one state good and solid reasons for thinking that
there would be any danger in it—or, in fact, any real and
valid objection to it at all. The learned gentleman said it
was not a question of civil and religious liberty. I con-
ceive that it is so. But the learned gentleman, not being
himself under the ban of any exclusion himself, can speak
at his ease on the subject. (Hear, and a laugh.) It, how-
ever, any measure were to be proposed for excluding all
members of the bar from this hon-e—(laughter)—a
measure in favour of which many plausible reasons
might be given—(laughter)—as, for example, that a
great deal of time might be saved (hear, and laughter)
—we should no-, have the hon. and learned gentleman
say that such a measure was no infringement upon
liberty (hear, hear, and laughte ). We should bear his
voice very loudly raised against it, and he would con-
tend that it was impossible that a legislature could
respect civil and religious liberty who excluded a most
respectable class of persons (laughter) from the privi-
leges enjoyed by other classes of citizens (hear, hear,
and laughter). Let the hon. and learned member put
himself in the position of the Jews, and fancy what his
feelings would be if he were told that in this free country,
although he might be Lord Mayor of Louden, he could
not sit in Parliament, nor enjoy that, the common right
of Englishmen (hear, hear). lam sure that his feeling
would be most strongly that such a state of things was
inconsistent with liberty (hear, hear) ; and I can only
say that when this measure comes on to he detated I
shall be found in my place giving it my hearty support
(cheers).

Mr. NEWDEGATE said that the indifference shown
by the noble lord to the religious feelings of a large
bodiof his fellow-countrymen was so great as to amount
to a.gross prejudice. He would not enter into the
argument of this question, but begged the house to
bear in mind that the experience of the last ten years
bad shown that, notwithstanding the repeated attempts
which the Jews had made to force, their way into that
assemblys—uotwithstanding their lavish expenditure of
money and their pandering to the popular tastes—they
bad not been able to excite among the Christian people
of this country anystrong feelingin favour of their admis-
sion. He trusted that the members whohad come to that
house for the first time would, before they gavetheir vote-
reflect that this measure was by the large majority
of the people regarded as a direct attack upon the
Christian character of the Legislature, and that het
Majesty would never be called upon to sanction any
measure which was directed against the religion of whicl.
she was a sworn defender. To adopt this measure would
be to decide that the laws should be enforced by n
sanction of religion, and that they would govern ib,
country by the ruh of might. He warned them that if
they followed such a couree they must expect it to re-
sult in evili sim far tf, those which had been caused by
its adoption in other countries. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. LOCKIL KING assured the hon. and learned

gentleman the member for Stamford (Sir F. Thesigcr)
that he was no party to any understaniing tiat all melt:
'ores of Parliamentary reform should be pos.poned nnt;l
next session, and he was very touch surprised when be
lward the noble lowd at the head of the Governaleat
,tAte thst such an understiniiing cxisted. The abation
of the property qualification of 'heath _,rs was iutimattly
connected with this question of the oaths, and be hoped
that when ho moved the second reading of his bill for
that purpose, the noble lord would not oppose the
motion.

Mr. HENLEY expressed his regret that the noble
lord had not separated the removal of surplus or objec-
tionable phrases from the oaths—to which probably all
members of that house would have assented—from the
question of the admission of the Jews, to which many of
them could not give their .upport. His own opinion
was unchanged, nod he should vote again-t this bi las
he had done against many others of a similar character.
He did not see that there was anything objectionable in
the introduction of this measure apart fru!) a Reform
bill, from which it was a Boni-what different qneetion—
(hear, hear)—but be that as it m;ght, the bill was now
before them, and when it came on for a second rea iing
they must deal with it. He wished to know when the
noble lord proposed to take that stage of the bill ?
Lord PAL WIERSTON said, that the bill could
not be brought in until Monday night, and he tierefore
could not fix the second reading earlier than imme-
diately after Whitsuntide.
The question Was then put, and the motion having been
agreed to, the house re-umed, and leave was at once
given for the introducti,in of the bill.

TRANSPORTATION AND PENAL SERVITUDE
BILL.

On the order for the committee on this bill,

Lord A. V. TEMPEST moved as an amendment that
it be referred to a select committee, his view being ter es•
tablish before that committee the possibility of making
our prisoners support themselves by their labour.
Sir G. GREY hoped that the house would not accede
to the motion of the noble lord, the only effect of which
would be the renewal of long-protracted inquiry for pur-
poses which had been already achieved. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. Pearson had explained his views to the house at
great length on the selfeeernunerative system, and Col.
Jebb and the Recorder of Birmingham had both been
examined by committees of that house It would be a
throwing away of all the advantages derived from the in-
quiry of last year if the select committee were now to be
renewed. Besides, there was nothing in the present bill
to interfere with the noble lord's selhremuneiative views,
as it applied merely to that class of offences for which
protracted terms of penal servitude were at present pro-
vided. At present convict labour was emp'oyed at Ports-
mouth and Chatham, and in both places supplied the
place of hired labour. At Portland also, and Ber nude,
convicts were employed in remunerative labour, and that
would also be the case at Dartmoor, but that the cleat;
of criminals sent there consisted of persons whose le..bour
would be of little voles elsewhere. The main, object of
the present bill was to enable the Government to send a
certain class of prisoners out of the country.
Mr. BAXTER believed that the only effect of the
present system of training was to send prisoners back .to
society much lass able ti support themselves than be-
fore. He believed that immense' evils had arisen from
the abolition of transportation, which had been as ad-
vantageous to the colonies as to the mother-country.
Having these convictions, he cordially supported the
proposition for sending a p irtion of our prisoners to
Western Australia, but be warned the riot hon. gen-
tleman that it would be orly a temporary expedient, as
the free colonists of Australia would soon raise an out-
cry against the pollution at their soil.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS could see no reason why con-
victs in this country should not ho made to support
themselves. In the prisons in New York, Canada, and
various parts of the Gentinent, the labour of the pri-
soners more than defrayed the whole expense of the
establishment.
Lord NAAS believed it was not only possible but
easy to return to transportation ; it was merely a ques-
tion of Expense ; bus they ought not to shrink from any
expense within reason for the purpose of re-establishing
that which be believed to be the most effectual secondary
pui idament human ingenuity had invented.
Mr. LABOUCHERE, after the most anxious in-
, vestigatiot, found it impossible to shut his eyes to the
fact that to attempt to force convicts upon a free colo-
nial population would tend to the alienation of many of
our most important colonies. The Australien colonies
felt quite as strongly on this subject as the old Ame-
rican colonies did upon the subject of taxation. Is had
been proposed to establish a penal settlement in the
Gulf of Cerpentaria, and the noble lord the member for
Cockermouth said that it was a mere piece of sentimen

ta,liem for the inhabitants of Sydney aid Moreton Bay
to object to it. But in the case of Moreton B,y there
were sheep walks that Extended within 500 miles of the
Gulf of Carpentaria, and wherever sheep-runs Existed
men easily travelled over 1 arge tracts of country, and
thus facilities were ail irded for the escape of con viete
He had .a
curious instance the other day of the sensibility
of the Australian colonists on this subject, for he beef re•
ceived an addess from Tivrnania, which is the extreme
south of the Australian colonies, praying that ne penal
settlement should he established in North
which could only have meant the Gulf of Carpentaria,
for in the extreme north the climate was too tropical to
allow of its being settled as a place of labour for the whi e
man. In his (Mr. Labonchere's) opinion, we shuol f act
most unwisely by attempting to disturb the present state
of things in Australia, which was, that a penal settlement
was in existence in Western Australia- -a region singu-
larly adapted for the purpose, being entirely insulated
from the other parts of the colony, there being no land
communication between it and them ; it was not
adapted for sheep-farms ; so that there would be none
of the intercourse those farms afforded, while it had,
even by sea, more commercial intercourse with India
and America than with the other parts of Australia.
All these circumstances combined made it a fitting
place for a penal settlement, and above all the other
colonies agreed in the selection. He hoped it would be
understood that it was not intended to deluge Western
Australia with convicts ; but that it was only to be
made available for the purposes of transportation ;
so far as any intention was of carrying out that system
on a modified plan. He believed that it was the wildest
of notions to suppose that we could throw our convicts
here, there, and everywhere. Some gentlemen said, let
them be sent to the Falkland Islands, and if they
escaped it would be of no consequence, as in the places
to which they went, they would be glad to have them.
But it was the fact that when a few hardened convicts
from Bermuda went some time since to America, a law
was passed by which a ship entering a harbour with even
one such person on board was net allowed to land its
cargo and was sent away. He believed that it was not
safe or wise to legi-late against this feeling, and that any
attempt to allow our convicts to find their way to other
countries would be frustrated, and they would be re-
turned on our bands., He could not al:ow any such
assertions as had been made with regard to the feelings
of the colonists on this matter without a protest, and
without urging that we were bound to consider the feel•
ings of the colonists in dealing with this question.
After a short di-mtPsion, in which Mr. S. Fitzgerald,
Mr. Garnett, Colonel Sykes, Mr. Macartneys and Mr.
Wyld took part,
Lord VANE withdrew his amendment, and the house
resolved itself into committee.

A debate of considerable length arose upon an amend-
ment of the first clause, proposed by Mr. Keating, the
object of which was to repeal the clauses in the act of
1853 which eanotiontd the grant of tickets-of-leave.
The committee divided—
For the rejection of the clause B3
F'r r,tmtiun
The clause was then agreed to.
The remaining clauses were agreed to after discussion.
Mr. WILSON obtained leave to bring in a bill for the
amendment of the Cinque Ports Act,
Mr, KENDALL moved for a select committee to in-
quire inuo the law and practice with respect to the rat-
ing 01 Royalties of mines ; which was agreed to.
Mr. BUTT moved for a sel-et committee to inquire
into the circumstances coonected with the employment
of women and young persons in the bleaching and dye-
ing establishments in England, Scotland, and Ireland ;
and to consider how far it may be necessary or expe-
dient to extend to those establishments provisions regu-
lating such employment ; and to report their ob-erva-
Lions thereupon to the house ; which was agreed to.
The house, after some further'business, adjourned at
a quarter-past 12 o'clock, until Monday. •

The house was exceedingly full ; many members wore
unable to obtain seats and had to stand on the fl of
the house beyond the bar. Baron Rothschild was pre
sent and occupied a seat in that part of the house re-
served for peers.

The Wanderer of Vienna announces that the King of
the Belgians has gained the principal prize of 300,000
florins, or 750,000 f., in the drawing of the Austrian
loan of 1834, which took place on the Ist inst.
I ADVICATISKIdSNT. j—SPORTBMeN AND GRA TLEMR ifi OF TS R
ARMY AND NAVY. —S. anti Yi, Solumons, opticians, 39, Albe-
oaarle-street, Piccadilly, W. Observe—opposite the Vork
Hotel.—Portability, combined with great power in Field,
Racecourse, Opera, anti general out-door day an night
powerful wai.tcoat pocket Perspective Gla'ses, weighing
only four ounces, each containing 12 and 18 lenses, con-
structed of German glass, will snow distinctly a person's
countenance two ane a half and three miles. Ihey serve
every purpoze on the race-coarse, and at the opera nooses,
country scenery, and ships are clearly seen at 8 to 10 miles.
They are ale., invaluable for shooting, deer-stalking, and
yachting. Single ones, the szeof a w lent, possessing the
same great power. Her Maje ty s rds are making
US 3 of them as day and night glasses, in prefereLce o ad
others; they havo also le onto iu general us. by gentlemen,
of the Army and Navy, and by sports:, en, gentlemen, game-
keepers, and tourists. The most powerful and brillhnt
,eiescopes, kosswsing such extraordinary power that some,
three and a-hall inches, with an eats.. est nomical eye-
p cce will show distinctly Jupiter's moons, taturn's ring, and
the double stars ; with the same teleseo, e can be aeon a toer-
son's countenance three-and-a-half mile-distant tad an object
from 14 to 16 miles. All the above can be had of larger and
all sizes, with increasing s,owers, and are secured by
Ner Majesty's Royal Letters Patent. Newly-invemed
spectacle Lenses of the greatest transparent power. The
valuable advantage derived from this invention is, tht
vision becomes preserved and strengthened ; very aged
persons are enabled to employ their sight at the most
minute occupation—can see with these lenses of a much
!ess magmfy ing power—and they do not require the fre-
quent change-,
to the dangerous effects of further power-
Ail assistance. Persons can be suited at the mo t remote
part of the world by sendin one of the glasses out of their
,pect,cles in a letter, and stating the dist nee from the eye
they can read :quail urint with it, and those who have not
made use of Spectacles by staling their age. Deafness.--A
,ewly-inveutea ttisi.rinutait felt extreme (Imes of deafness.
called the Sound Mag,n.fier, Organic V ibrator, aid
Voice Conductor. It fits so into the ear as not to be in the
least percept.ble; the unpleasant sensa ion of tinging noises
in the hea iis entirely mho ed. It affords in taut laid' to
the deafest persons, and enables them to hear dis inetly at
church and at tublic asseml,hes. 39, ADiemarle-strect, Picca-
dilly--opposite the York Hata.

Country Markets.

LIVERPOOL-MAT 15.

The corn exchange this mo•ning WAR slenderly attended
by Millers and dealers, awl the trancactiers were limited,
yet, having no pressure on the part of holders, quotations
were nominally,the same as on Tuesday, excepting for In-
dian corn, which was in request to satisfy a continued de-
mand for Ireland.