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

rHE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY

themselves to the larger ; but it was thought better to
have plans for ccvering the whole of the ground ; so that
what was row bnilt might form portion of a comprehen-
sive design, rather than be wholly disconnected from
what might subsequently be 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 coarse which bad been pursued with
regard to the Houses of Parliament. Some persons
might praise what had been done; but he confessed that
be was himself mortified and disgusted at the extravagant
expenditure into which they had been betrayed. (Cheers.)
There was no necessity for the Government to embark in
building operations at all. Why could not St. James's
Palace be made into a ]foreign office ? (Hear.) Close by
was another larp budding Marlborough House. It was
true they had now some trash there which, he regretted
to say, he had lost half an hour seeing ; but it might be
nacked up and taken away. It was said Marlborough
House was wanted for the establishment of the Prince of
Wales. Bat it was wholly unsuited for such a purpose ;
whereas it would do admirably for public offices. (Rear.)
There was a third building called Schomberg 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 the House of Commons
would not do its duty, their lordships, however foreign
to their custom it might bo to interfere in such matters,
must call the attention of the public to the subject; for
the public must have one house of Parliament that would
not neg►ect its financial interests. (Cheers.)
The Earl of MALNIESBURY 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
intere,t on the mil ion and a half which the Chancellor of
the Exchequer himself calculated the ground alone would
cost would, at 4 per cent., be 60,0001.
Earl GRANVILLE was understood to say that noble
lords on the other side had admitted that there must be
a new Foreign-office.
The Earl of ELLENTOROUGH had pointed out
how an excellent Foreigc-nffice might be obtained with-
out cost to the country. With regard to the War De-
partment, he confessed he did not see what reason there
was for addition,' accommodation, when they were di-
minishing the army in a manner which caused him great
alarm. Only the other day they determined to decrease
the artillery at the rate of 20 men per troop ; whereas
the country had been given to understand that that was
an arm which was in future to be kept up on an efficient
scale. (Hear, hear.)
Phe Earl of HARDWICKE certainly thought that
the artillery was the last arm in the service that ought
to be weakened. (Hear, hear.)
Lord CAMPBELL appealed to the Government on
behalf of the I•aw 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 fcioade of the courts brought more into harmony
with the handsome structure which it at present dis-
graced. (Rear, bear.)
After a few words from the Marquis of LANSDOWNE
and Lord REDF.SDALE,

Their lordships rose at five minutes past seven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--(YEsTBRDAT.)

The SFEAKEIt took the chair shortly before 4 o'clock.
SWEARING IN OF MEMBERS.

Mr. A. M'Carthy, Mr. B. Hughes, Mr.S:norett,
Mr. Connelly, Sergeant O'Brien, Mr. Deasy, Mr. Leslie,
and Mr. Greaves took the oaths and their seats.
•
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed :
—Bedale and tsyburn Railway ; Meriton's and Ha.
g,aa's Sufferance Wharves ; and. Peebles Railway.
PETITIONS.

Petitions were presented in favour of the Beer Bill ;
against the growth of opium by the East India Cum
parry ; the removal of the Jewish Disabiaies ; for an
alteration of the civil service superannuation fund ;
against tie taws on knowledge; against the abolition of
Church rates.

ber of the Administration—(hear, hear)—and, knowing
the deep and sincere interest which my noble friend
takes in the measure to which he has so long devoted his
attention, I am quite sure, he will forgive me for appear-
hg to take it out 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 the honour of address.
ing must have frash 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 invccation 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 Las undertaken to discharge.
Such engagernente have been sanctioned by the practice
of all nations. There 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.
Bat the more solemn the act the greater is the responsi-
bility whioh a man incurs by taking an oath. The snore
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 engagements 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, but 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 are 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-
eity 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
change 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 tbat 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 ty law are conipel,ed
to take. So long a the law compels us to take those oaths
we submit to the necessity, and no man can blame a per-
son who submits to the law. But I do say that if tLe
house has the power, which I contend it has, to relieve
itself from there 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
abolish, in all 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
substitute for those three oaths one 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
all those portions of them which I conceive are not fit
ting 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 believes 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 may say so—an inward blush at being
compelled by law to abjure what under present circum-
stances could not by any possibility be even contem-
plated. The oath proceeds :
"And I do declare that no foreign prince, person, 'pre-
late, State, or potentate hath or ought to have anyjuris-
diction, power, superiority, pre-eminence, or authority,
ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm."
I propose to leave that declaration as it stands. We next
come to the cash of abjuration, which is 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
rightful Queen of this realm, and all other her Majesty's
dominions and countries thereunto belonging."
That declaration, in a somewhat briefer form, may, I
think, properly be retained. The 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 during
the life of the late King James 11. ;
as if James 11. had died some two or three years ago—
(a laugh)—
" and since his decease pretended to b 3 and took upon him-
self the style and title of King of England by the name of
James tho Third, or of Sectlend by the name of James the
Eighth, or the style and title of King of Great Britain,
hath any sight or title whatsoever to the Crown of this
realm or any other the dominions thereunto belonging ;
and Ido renounce, refuse, and abjure any allegiance or
obedience to any of them."
I propose to sweep away altogether that declaration;
(Cheers.) We might, with as much reason, for all prac-
tical purposes, abjure our belief in the Heptarchy. (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 ;"
That is, I think, 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 existine
oaths. The oath goes on,—
" and I will do my utmost endeavour to disclose and make
known to her Majesty and her successors all treasons and
traitorous conspiracies which I shall know to be against
her or any of thent."

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. (Elear, hear.) The nFxt 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 Crown against the descendants of the said James, and
against all other persons whatsoever, which succession, by
an Act intituled 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 of oath I shall submit to the
committee will contain substantially the same declara-
tion,—namely, tbat the members of this house will
engage to maintain the Protestant succession in the
descendants of the Electress Sophia of Hanover in con-
formity wi4.11 the Act of Parliament. The oath concludes
in these terms :

" Ar.d all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknow-
ledgfl and swear, according to these express worth by me
spo,.cen, and according to the plain common sense and under-
standing of the same words, without any equivocation,
/.otutal 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—(bear)---and I also propose to omit
theae last words, "upon the true faith of a Christian,"
vrilich 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 and 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 thautsuost 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, end
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 I do declare that no foreign
prince, person, prelate, State, or potentate, hath or ought
to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pro eminence,
or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm."
That oath will, I apprehend, contain every portion of the
existing oaths which we can in reason be called upon to
oontioue, and will relieve the Protestant members of this
house from the i'iiticessity of pronouncing at the table,
under the solenin sanction of an oath, a mass of jargon
wholly unsuited to the times in which we live. I appre-
head that no one can object to the proposal I make on
general grounds, although no doubt in the future stages
of the bill I shall have to encounter the opposition of
those who are adverse to the admission of Jews to Par-
l'ament. Now I have never yet heard any argument
which appeared to me to have the least weight against
the admission of British subjects, heing Jews, to sit
and vote in this house. The main argument which has
been urged is, that this house is a Christian assembly
—that is to say, it is an assembly composed of men
pi ofessing the Christian religion, the chief prat ieal doe-
trines of that religion being to ant with charity towards
all—(hear)—to do unto others as we would they should
do unto us—(bear)—not to persecute ; to_love our neigh-
bours as ourselves ; aut.!, in short, to carry out in practice
those principles which are ignored by the arbitrary and
tinnec,ssary cxolusion of cur Jewish fellow countrymen
Irani Parliament. is it believed that the members of the
Jewish persuasion are enlightened, that they are
less able to assist us in our deliberations, and less likely to
Lecorne useful members of the Legislature, thanany other
class of the community ? Anyone acquainted with the
facts knows that those Jews v, ho most aspire to be mem-