The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-31 00:00:00

Sir W. JOLLIFFE wished to ask the Honourable
Member fir Montrose a question. The Hon. Member
had given notice of a motion for next week on the sub-
ject of the new Houses of Parliament. Did the Hon.
Gentleman imagine that the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government assented to his proposal to appropriate
a day to the motion next week.
Mr. HUME apprehended, that when the Noble Lord
saw the importance of the motion, h,, would give him an
early opportunity of bringing it forward.
MINISTERS' MONEY (IRELAND).
Lord J. RUSSELL thought it right to state to the
Hon. Member tor Cork, who had a motion on the paper
relative to the abolition of ministErs' money, that her
Majesty's Ministers had held a consultation on the sub-
ject, and Government was now engaged in preparing a
plan which was likely to prove satisfactory to the
House and the country. He therefore hoped the Hon.
Gentleman would nut press his motion.—(Hear, heir.)
Mr. FAGAN was understood to say that he wool] not.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could
assure his Noble Friend and the House, that in opposing
the motion he was fully sensible of the feeling enter-
tained by many persons upon this subject, and should be
exceedingly sorry to he supposed, from any word that
he should say, to differ at all from the view the Noble
Lord had expressed of the value of the Sabbath-day.
(Hear, hear.) But this motion went but a very small
way towards carrying that view int) effect. If the ob-
ject were that no lsbour should bo perform2d on the
Sabbath, a very differeut motion would be required; be-
cause, even as to persons employed in the public service,
the Noble Lord was in error when he supposed that these
were the only persons upon whom Sunday labour was ,
imposed. What did he say to the case of the Police, the
Exciseman, the Coast Guard, the Custom-house officer,
all of whom were often called upon on the Sunday ?
(Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
had mentioned persons connected with his own depart-
ment ; but there were many other class of servants, pri-
vate and public, from whom the Noble Lord could not
venture to propose to take away the burden of Sunday
labour. That it should be reduced to a minimum, both in
public and private establishments, no one felt more
strongly than himself;—(hear.) And he hoped to show
that upon this subject the Government had not been neg-
ligent, but had within the last two years carried that
principle to an extent never contemplated previously,
and fsr exceeding what had been done in the last half
century.—(Hear.) He had to thank the Noble Lord for
acknowledging so frankly what the Government had
done; because for the last six months the Government
had been subjected to the grossest mis-statements of
fact as to what they had been doing for the past two
years.—(Hear.) For those two years the Noble Lord at
the hrad of the Post-office department, and gentlemen
connected with the administration of that office, had been
unremitting in their endeavours to reduce the amount of
Sunday labour—(llear)—and it was a pioof how
strangely things were sometimes taken up in this coun-
try, that the very measure which effected the largest re-
duction was treated as one in the opposite direction,
and tending very largely to increase Sunday labour!
(Hear, hear.) He could not help suspecting that some
portion of the feeling manifested had taken its rise in
the mis-statements which were circulated in the country
upon this question—(Hear, hear)—he did not at all mean
to say that an honest feeling did not exist upon the sub-
ject, but really the most extraordinary mis-statements
had been circulated, and conduct was imputed to the
Government the very reverse of that which they
were pursuing.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He would
state generally the effect of the measures the Govern-
ment had pursued. The effect had been to relieve from
any Sunday labour, preventing attendance on divine
worship, no less than 8,000 persons in the United King-
dom.—(Hear, hear.) The measure which excited so
much feeling was the temporary employment of about
25 clerks in London on the Sunday tor a very few
months; 27 clerks had been employed in the London
Post-office on Sunday for years without exciting obser-
vation, and it was proposed to employ temporarily 25
more; and that was a portion of a general measure—and
it was unjust to consider what took place in one parti-
cular town and exclude what took place in the rest of the
country—that was part of a general measure, by which
in England upwards of 6,000 persons were relieved. It
had since been extended to Scotland and Ireland, and
2,000 more were relieved.—(Hear, hear.) Bat what had
been the effect with respect to London, where the out-
cry arose? , Why, not only had the additional employ-
ment of 25 persons (to bring the new system into opera-
tion) been discontinued, but the 27 persons heretofore
employed had by subsequent arrangements been reduced
to four.—(Hear, hear.) In London the 27 persons em-
ployed had been reduced to a clerk and three messengers,
and in the country generally the persons connected with
the Post-office had been relieved to the number of 8,000;
and with the exception of those who attended (as we under-
stood) to the receipt and delivery of the mails, and who
would not be relieved even by the proposal of the Noble
Lord, no person was debarred from the opportunity of at-
tending public worship on Sunday.—(Hear, hear.) He
would appeal to the House whether such attacks as had
been made upon the Post-office department were jus-
tified.—(llcar, hear.) He had certainly felt eery
strongly the exceeding injustice of the attacks made upon
the department by persons who never took the trouble to
ascertain what the facts were.—(Hear.) He hoped the
House would take what the Government had done as a
pledge and earnest that they were willing to the greatest
possible degree they believed practicable to carry further
this reduction of Sunday labour—(Elear)—and ho was
perfectly ready, with reference to the latter part of this
resolution, to undertake that inquiry should be made
how far it was possible still further to reduce the con-
veyance of the mails on Sunday.—(Hear, hear.) But
the proposal of the Noble Lord was, first, that there
should be no collection of letters on the Sunday in the
country—that was, that the Post-office messengers
should not be sent round to collect the letters, but that
people should be at liberty to put them in on the Sun-
day—though, if there was to be no dispatch on the
Sunday. that would not be, much. Now, so far as the
Post-uffice was concerned, this was (we understood) in
operation; so far as the Post office was cen-
cerned, it was perfectly easy to close the office;
it was a question for the public to determine;
and where any district had expressed its wish
that there should be no collection and no de-
livery of letters, that wish of the inhabitants was con-
formed to.—(Hear.) The second question was one of
greater difficulty, because it involved a very consider-
able delay in the transmission of letters to many parts of
the country. It was, after all, not so much a question
for the Government as for the country to decide. If the
country was prepared to forego the receipt and delivery
of its letters on Sunday, and to submit to the inconve-
nience which the delay of the transmission of mails on
Sunday would impose upon it, there was no difficulty, so
far as the Post-office was concerned. But he believed
that the country would find that this imposed exceed-
ing great difficulty and hardship upon it—(Hear)—
and he confessed he thought he was faithfully represent-
ing the great majority of the people when he said that
such a course ought not to be adopted.—(Hear.) A
etition was presented from Bath, but there came a
counter-petition from many persons in that place repre-
senting the hardship that the measure asked for would
inflict upon them ; they stated that the persons living
there had connexions in every part of the globe, and
that early intelligence from them and communication to
them was an object of great solicitude.—(Hear.) Was
not that so with all persons of all classes, from the highest
to the lowest? In the case of the highest, indeed, many
means of obviating the difficulty might be resorted to. It
was easy to send a message by electric telegraph, or to send
a messenger—for the Noble Lord did not propose to stop
the trains. But that was not in the power of the great
majority—it was not in the power of the poorer or the
working-classes; and believing that to them, no less than
t the wealthy, early intelligence from relations and
friends was an object of great interest and anxious soli-
citude, he was unwilling to debar them from the advan-
tage which the Post-office gave them.—(Hear, hear.)
Tne question had been raised in the United States, in
many parts of which stricter notions prevailed upon the
observance of the Sabbath than in England; but upon
consideration they came to the same conclusion as he
hoped that House would come to. They were desirous
of a diminution of Sunday labour, but they felt that it
could not be utterly discontinued; that the comfort and
happiness of a large portion of the people were essen-
tially promoted by the regular transmission of the mails.
—(Hear, hoar.) This was not a question of revenue;
the revenue would not be affected by the decision; he
utterly disclaimed that consideration; but he believed the
comfort and happiness of a great portion of the people
were promoted by a very small degree of Sunday labour
in the transmission of the mails, and he believed the evil
was much less than the advantage. Wherever Sunday
labour could be diminished, the Government were per-
fectlyutterlyhappiness
oafhd enthegtrter
ealtybody
dis-
continued.—(hear, hear.)
Col. THOMPSON said, that regard being had to the
part which he had formerly taken with respect to this
question, he might expose himself to the charge of
cowardice if he del not at once announce his decided
objection to the motion. The Noble Lord who intro-
duced the motion said he would decline all theological
argument, but, at the same time, he declared that all
scriptural churches and all sects were unanimous upon
the question of Sabbath observance. Now, for his part,
he believed that as long as Christianity, and not Judaism,
was the religion of the great majority of the people of
this country, the belief would prevail amongst a con-
siderable number that the observance of Sunday after
the Judaical manner was not only not enjoined by
Scripture, but absolutely prohibited by it. 'rho great
Author of Christianity himself vs as exposed to the same
imputations as might bo cast upon the humblest of his
followers, when he went against the received opinion of
his country and his age with respect to the observance
of the Sabbath. Another high authority, second only
to Christ—the apostlepar excellence—the Apostle Of the
Gentiles—would allow no man to judge another in
re-
spect
of the Sabbath-day. Christians were relieved from
the most onerous of Jewish rites only on the same grounds
and authority by which they were liberated from the
severe observance of the Sabbath. No such observ-
ance of the Sabbath was required by the early Christian
Church. The expression of the " Lord's day" was
used by the early Christian Church because it was
thought proper to devote the first day of the week to the
commemoration of the great event which it was thought
could never be brought too frequently before the eyes
of Christians. But the Lord's day then was observed
without severity; the early Christians merely held
meetings and made charitable contributions on that day.
Luther made it a point to buy something every Sunday,
in order, as he said, to prove his Christian liberty; and
Calvin said the only reason he could assign for the ob-
servance of the Sabbath being so strictly enjoined to the
Jews was, that it was the only means by which relaxa-
tion could be provided for the multitude of slaves they
held in bondage. The Church of England gave the
but drew Commandments from Exodus, b w no inference
from them. It had fallen to his lot is experience the
inconvenience arising from
the London Post-office being
closed on Sundays. He once attended on a Saturday
the deathbed of his wife's brother, aho fell a victim
to au attack of cholera in a village near the metropolis.
The young man died at three o'clock on the Mon-
day meruitig, and he TM unable to send A Ivltq 931 the

-„

Lord J. RUSSELL, with reference to the notice he
had given, that he should in Committee of the whole
House move for leave to bring in a 13111 to " regulate the
anode of administering the oath of abjuration to persons
professing the Jewish religion," observed that it was not
his intention to make any statement on the subject, for
he did not think the House would object to grant him
leave to bring in the Bill, seeing they had twice passed a
measure based on the same principle. In moving the
second reading of the Bill, he should state the reasons on
which the measure was founded, and why he thought
legislation on the subject desirable. There being so
much doubt and uncertainty with respect to the law, and
it bring a matter for consideration whether Jews might
not come t) the table of the House and take the oath on
as good grounds as persons belonging to the Society of
Friends—a course, however, which it would be decidedly
not right to take—he thought it desirable that both
Houses of Parliament should have an opportunity of
considering the question in all its bearings as to what
was the intention of the present oath of abjuration, and
what course ought to be taken in the matter.

Mr. NEWDEGATE expressed his regret that, after
the strong proof of religious feeling afforded that evening,
the Noble Lord should have persisted in a measure
which raised a question as to the maintenance of the
Christian character of the House. When the Noble
Lord nsoeed the second reading of the Bill, he should
move that the Bill be read a second time that day six
months. He was confident he would be supported by
the same strong feeling out of doors, the force of which
might be traced in the division of that evening.
Mr. PLUNIPTRE would second the amendment of
his Hon. Friend (Mr. Newdegate) when the proper time
arrived. He protested against the measure in any shape,
and would take every opportunity to offer it his decided
opposition.
The House having then resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of the whole House, and after a resolution therein
agreed to,
Lord J. RUSSELL obtained leave to bring in a Bill
to " regulate the mode of administering the oath of ab-
juration to persons professing the Jewish religion."
The matter then dropped.
COMPOUND HOUSEHOLDERS.
Sir W. CLAY obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the law for the registration of certain persons
commonly known as " compound householders," and to
facilitate the exercise by such persons of their right to
vote in the election of borough Members to serve in Par-
liament.
ENGLISH AND IRISH UNIVERSITIES.
On the order of the day for the resumption of the de-
bate on Mr. Ileywood's motion relating to this subject,
Mr. GLADSTONE said, that when he gave notice,
in un early part of the day, of his intention to move the
postponement of this adjourned debate, it was in the be-
lief (which he was sure was shared by every Member
' who heard him) that there was not the least probabi-
lity, in the ordinary course of business, that this subject
would come on before eleven or twelve' o'clock at night.
Hai he been aware of the course which business had
actually tsken, he knew of no reason why the debate
should not have been resumed that evening. He should
be the last to ask the House to show great indulgence
to Members who neglected their duty; but, considering
a circumstance which was known to all, (alluding, we
presume, to the dinner at the Mansion-house to Lord
Gouzh), and considering also the general expectation
, that it would not come on, he did not think it unrea-
sonable to ask the House not to go on with the discus-
sion that night. With the single exception of himself and
the Hon. Member for the University of Dublin, all the
other representatives of the Universities were absent, as
were also the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Tare-
worth and other Gentlemen who were deeply interested
in the question, particularly some lawyers of great emi-
nence, who believed that it involved a constitutional
point of great importance, and who were desirous to
open up that topic.—(Hear, hear.) Another question
which had been raised, very much to his surprise, was
that the discussion should be dropped altogether. He
hardly knew whether it was necessary for him to go into
an argument on that matter, because it was difficult for
him to persuade himself that any Gentleman who
sat in that House, and who was in the least degree con-
versant with the history of the Universities and the
actusl relations between them ,and the State, could se-
riously imagine that the question of an inquiry by a
Royal Commission was so
slight and trivial as not to de-
serve discussion in that House.—(Hear, hear.) The
Noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown had in the
fairest manner admitted that it did deserve discussion.
He was quite sure the Noble Lord was right, and that
it was for the interest of tte Noble Lord's own view of
the question that it should be discussed. He begged the
Reuse to remember that they had yet hal almost no de-
bate upon the question whether a royal commission
should be issued—because the debate upon that point
had virtually commenced with the speech of the Noble
Lord at a late hour of the evening. He begged likewise
to observe that the organs of the Government had ac-
quainted him and the other representatives of the Uni-
versities in an early part of the evening in question, that
the Government intended to meet the motion of the Hon.
Member f r North Lancashire (Mr. Heywood) wish the
previous question. He felt assured that the turn and
the tone of the debate would have been very different
from what they were if Hon. Members previously had
bad any idea of the serious and formidable announce-
ment of the Noble Lord; for, however much the Noble
Lord might feel the strength of the reasons which in-
duced him to make it, there was no denying that it was
a serious and formidable announcement to make.—
(Hear, hear.) He begged to state that tho intention of
himself and his friends was directly to raise the question,
whether the proceeding which the Noble Lord had an-
nounced was or was not an unconstitutional proceeding.
They did not intend merely to debate the question
whether it was expedient to institute an inquiry into the
state of the Universities—not merely whether there was
ease to warrant the iaterfereuce of the State, Thp