The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-03 00:00:00

INDIA.

In reply to a qnest ion from Mr. DISRAELI,
Lord PALMERSTON said that another letter of
Gen. Napier had been found at the Horse Guards rela-
tive to the Indian army, and he would lay that portion
of it relating to the native army before the house.
Mr. ROEBUCK ridiculed the idea of any delicacy in
communicating the whole of it to the house, after the
statement of Sir W. Napier that it was published three
years since
WEEKLY COMMUNICATION WITH INDIA.
In reply to Mr. H. BAILLIE,
Mr. V. SMITH said no steps had been taken to esta-
blish a weekly communication with India.
THE OATHS BILL.

On the motion of Lord PA.LMERSTON, the criers
for the day were postponed to enable Lord J. Russell t)
move his resolution.

Lord J. RUSSELL then moved the following resolu-
tion—" For a select committee to consider whether the
Act 5 and 6 Will. IV. c. 62, is applicable to oaths ap-
pointed by law to be taken by members of this house at
the table, previously to taking their seats, and in
what manner the said' act can be so applied, and
to report their observations thereupon to the house :
That the committee do consist of the following
twenty-five wembers :—Viscount Palmerston, Sir Geo.
Grey, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Walpole, Sir J. Pakington,
Lord J. Russell, Sir J. Graham, Mr. Gladstone, Mr.
Attorney• General, Mr. Stlicitor-General, Sir Frederick
Thesiger' Sir F. Kelly, Lord Stanley, Mr. Herman,
Mr. Henley, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Malins, Mr. Headlatn,
Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland, the Lord Advocate,
Mr. Dillayn, Mr. Napier, Lord R. Grosvenor, Mr.
Whiteside Mr. Cdbbett, and all gentlemen of the long
robe members of this house. His lordship said that
the Ba-on Rothschild had been informed that he
could take the oath under 'the above act ; and it wns
in consequence that be (Lord J. Russell) had brought
forward this motion. His lordship then referred to
the act of William IV., which was introduced to do away
with the multiplicity of oaths required to be taken in
the excise and customs, including the officersof the great
departrat nts of the state, and allowing a declaration to
be substituted where necessary. The noble lord, after
reviewing the act, said that ,e considered the House of
Commons was a body included within the provisions of
this act, and that a select committee, with the assistance
of the law officers of the Crown, was the best tribunal
to which they could refer this vexed question.
The words of the oath " On the true faith of a Christian"
were never intended to exclude Jews, but a certain sec
tion of Roman. Catholics, and he saw no reason why
the oath should be literally strained against Jews,
especially as Roman Catholics were by another form of
oath admitted members of that house. Mr. Pease,
a Quaker, was allowed to take his seat on making an
affirmation, alter stating to the select committee ap-
pointed in his case that the words " on the t-ue
faith of a Christian" were objectionable to Quakers,
being considered by many of them as swearing
In the same session that Mr. Pease took his seat, an act
was passed to prevent a similar occurrence, and to pre-
vent all future cavil. Upon that act and precedent he
had named he had founded his application for a select
committee to give their decision of the true interpreta-
tion of the act, after due inquiry and consideration. It
behoved the house, in consequence of the determination
of the House of Lords, not pass an Oaths Bills omitting
the words complained of, to try if they could not find some
other plan bywhich Baron Rothschild could legally take his
seat.

Sir F. THESIGER said he shoull not divide the
house on the motion, but he expressed his astonishment
that the provisions f the act should have been so long
overlooked, when it was recollected that the noble
lord bad for 10 years been struggling to gain the dar-
ling object of his heart. (Hear, beer.) The hon. and
learned gentleman referred to a select committee ap-
pointed some years since on the motion of Sir W. P.
Wood, relative to the terms of theostbs required by mein-
' hers, and call attention to the prophetic words of Sir
Robert Peel, cautiening the house as to the probable
result via., the ultimate admission of Jews into Parlia-
ment, which he said deserved especial attention a 3 they
appeared to be on the eve of a crisis, (loud ores of
" hear, hear," from the Ministerial side of the house)
and be warned the house against doing any act that
might precipitate it. (Hear, bear, from the Opposition.)
He the noble lord (Lord John Russell) had some doubt
then, and again in 1851 when Alderman Salomons was
returned for Greenwich, that Jews could not be admitted
into that house except by an alteration of the
oaths by Act of Parliament. Nothing more
ridiculous or absurd, could enter the mind of man, than
the idea that by the Act of William IV, Baron Roths-
child could take his seat in that house, and the hon. and
learned gentleman proceeded at great length to point
out the inapplicability of this statute to the members of
that house.