The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-30 00:00:00

PETITIONS.

Mr. REYNOLDS presented a petition from a proctor
residing in Ballinasloe, Galway, complaining of the Bill
to alter and amend the Prerogative Court of Ireland,
and praying, in the event of the Bill passing, that a
clause might be introduced rendering him admissible as
an attorney to practice in the court without the pay-
ment of any additional fee.
Mr. MACGREGOR presented a petition for Glas-
gow praying that the House might promote every mea-
sure tur the purpose of extending steam navigation with
the Australian colonies.

Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition against the
admission of Jews into Parliament.

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. REYNOLDS gave notice that when the Muni-
cipal Corporations (Ireland, No. 2) Bill came on for the
second reading, be would move that it be read a second
time that day three months.
THE BRISTOL RIOTS.

Sir WILLIAM CODRINGTON threw himself upon
the indulgence of the House while he explained
a matter personal to himself. On Friday last the
Hon. Member for Bristol, in alluding to him in his absence,
had made assertions with regard to him (Sir William
Codrington) which were not founded in fact, and
therefore calculated to impugn his character and the
character of the troop of Yeomanry he had the honour to
command. The Honourable Member for Bristol
on Friday night, comparing him and his troop
to a certain King of France, who marched
up a hill and then marched down again, said he (Sir
Codrington) and his troops marched into Bristol at
the time of the riots, and immediately afterwards
marched out again by the light of the fires. Now, in
answer to that statement, he bad to say that the first
intimation he got of the Bristol riots was about three
o'clock on a Sunday afternoon, and he immediately
called up his troop of yeomanry, consisting of 60 mem-
bers, and in less than four hours 59 of them were in the
saddle, while within four hours after that they reached
Bristol. As soon as the troop reached Bristol he reported
himself to the commander of the district, Col. Brereton,
who kept him in conversation for some time. He told
the captain that his troop had come a long march, and
were anxious to act immediately, but they could
not act without a magistrate. They endeavoured
to find a magistrate, but did not succeed, and then
Colonel Brereton said the troop had better leave the
town, remarking that he hoped there would be no more
blood shed, and the sooner they left the better. Now,
under those circumstances, what alternative had he but
to march out?—(Near, hear.) He should base given
evidence before the court-martial, had not Colonel
Brereton terminated his existenca, and he had, ►here-
fore, had no opportunity of making this statement.
Having made it, however, now, he would thank the
House for its kind attention, and leave it to decide what
amount of reliance was to be placed on the assertions
of the Hon. Member for Bristol.
VENTILATION OF MINES.

Mr. F. O'CONNOR wished to know if it was the
intention of Government to take any steps to secure
the ventilation of mines.
Sir GEORGE GREY .:aid a Bill had come down from
the Lords wish a view to that object, which stood for a
,econd reading to-night.
BARON ROTHSCHILD—ADJOURNED DEBATE.

Mr. C. ANSTEY then rose to resume the adjourned
debate, and commenced by complaining of the conduct
which Government had pursued in reference to this ques-
tion. It was hopeless, after what had fallen from the
Premier, to think of asking the Home to deal
with the third oath by way of resolution. The
Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon said that
Quakers, notwithstanding the Act which relieved their
consciences at the time of the revolution, were not ad-
mitted to give evidence in criminal cases until 1828. Was
the Hon. and Learned Member aware that Quakers had
been admitted to make an affirmation in criminal courts
of justice from 1828 down to the present time, and
did be forget that Quakers were allowed to
take their seats in that House in the person
of Mr. Pease without any oath at all?
What the House of Commons was asked to do to•
day, on behalf of Baron Rothschild, was exactly
what was done in the case of Mr. Pease. Though
the forms of oaths of abjuration were very various,
yet he would venture to say there was not one of
them which a Jew or even a Heathen might not take.
The nearest form to the present Christian oath was one
concluding " So help me God and his Holy Gospels."
It was well known that the courts of law had alwa3s
considered the Pentateuch to be the Gospel of the Jews.
He believed no one would deny that. a common-law oath
was of as much authority as one prescribed by statute.
It was quite true that many of the oaths to which he re-
ferred were of a juridical character; but he could not
understand the distinction between juridical and pro-
missory oaths. But allowing there was the distinction
contended for, still so early as the reign of Richard I.
Jews had been admitted to the office of judge. There
was also a distinct recognition that the oath of f:aity
might be taken by Jews in those days. There was no
specific precedent of such an oath to be taken by Mem-
bers of Parliament, but there was an oath of office to be
found in the Statutes at Large which persons had to take
in the time of Edward I. on being admitted to the
King's Council. Of that council the House of Com-
mons might be considered a part, and he had no
doubt that that oath was taken by barons, knights,
and burgesses on admission to the King's Council.
The terms of that oath were to counsel the King—
to respect the privilege of debate to maintain
the rights of the Crown— and it concluded with
the words "So help me God." Now that was an oath
which any Jew might take. At the first establishment
of Parliaments Jews were admitted, but shortly after-
wards by ordinance—legally or illegally—they were ex-
pelled the realm. In the time of Henry 111. a general
assembly was called for the purpose of granting supplies,
and writs were directed to the Sheriffs of the different
towns in which the Jews resided, commanding them to
send to Westminster two or more Jews, according to
their number in the population. Either the Jews were
admitted to that assembly without an oath, or they took
the same oath as the other Members. Soon afterwards
the Jews were expelled the realm. At the Resteration
there were only 12 Jews in the kingdom. Their number
increased in the reign of Charles 11., and still more so
in the time of William 111., when large exemptions were
granted them. In that reign the question of the alien-
age of the Jews was brought before Parliament by peti-
tion, but the House refused to receive it as it related to
a Bill not before them. In 1689, 100,000/. was levied on
the Jews, being a taxation of 10/. for each Jew. The re-
sult was, that in the first land tax Act the Jews were treated
not as aliens, but as natural subjects, and aliens were
taxed as before. With these Acts before them it was
impossible to agree with the views laid down by the
Hon and Learned Member for Abingdon. The Natu-
ralisation Act of George 11. related to foreign Jews re-
sident in the kingdom. Their object on the present oc-
casion was not to admit Mr. Rothschild as an alien, but
as an English Jew. The Noble Lord at the head of the
Government said that this was not a question of civil
and religious liberty, but a judicial question. Why the
Noble Lord considered it a judicial question ho did not
know, but this ho knew, that the Noble Lord had pro-
posed the consideration of this judicial question by pre-
judging it, and without having heard a syllable which
bore on the third oath, an oath which he shotild en-
deavour to show was illegal, whether administered to
Christian or to Jew. The truth was that the question
was question of civil and religious liberty. It was also
a judicial question, and if it was also a party question the
Noble Lord had himself to blame for making it so. He
should certainly vote as he had spoken, in favour of the
amendment of his Hon. Frientl.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. P. WOOD cold not allow the ' question to go to a
division without making some observations. He re-
gretted that the Noble Lord at the head of the Govern-
ment should have thought it necessary to pronounce any
opinion at all on what some had called the second ques-
tion. At present the first question, and that only was
under their consideration. With respect to the amend-
ment of the Hon. Member for the University of Oxtord,
ho thought it ought to be negatived. It was impos-
sible for any one to maintain what was asserted
in teat amendment, and it was contrary to
every day's experience to say that no person took an
oath without deslaring ho was a Christian. It was well
known to many that Moravians and Friends took an oath
without any such declaration.—(Hear, hear.) When he
formerly addressed the House he ventured to assert that
no lawyer would be found who would hesitate to say
that by common law every individual had a right to be
sworn in the manner which he declared to be the most
binding on his conscience. It had been said, however,
that such a proposition should not be too widely laid
down, and that exceptions must be made, first as re-
garded oaths of office and secondly as regarded some Fes.
culiar limitations relating to the oaths of Members of
Parliament. Ile had net, however, heard a single au-

------- ..
thority to prove that the juridical call was not appll,•:
cable to the oath of office. He WOS Collfidellt DO such
authority could he found. He apprehendcd all they
could say with reference to oaths was this, that at ono
time, in this country, there was a general assumptioa
that every person was Christian, and hence the gener?l
mode of administering en oath carets to be on the neli
Gospels, as the form most binding on the consciescer
But the moment any question arose as to best
with respect to some individuals, that was the
sense
mode of binding the conscience, common
stepped in and said that the real point for inquiry wansi
whether a religious sanction had been obtained, et. t,
whether the party had been bound in the presence 0 ~
God whom he believed to be the avenger of of
oaf
This doctrine would be found laid down in the case
°
ee the
" Ommichin v. Barker." It was the doctrine
Roman law acted upon by the Emperors, who decreec!
that everybody should be sworn according=
lib to
shal. is obt
r.
superstitioe. The Church had not been lesr
Augustine, in his 134th book, stated that if the oath o.t
an idolator was not admitted, there would be no adept
Ing
means of forming a covenant with him, or of ofillgi.
him to keep his word; and that it was not forbidden It
any law of God to employ the oath of a man whose falls'
(L)
it was to swear by false gods, if he kept faith 11e re
doing. Such a principle was acted on in Spain, w in
the oath was administered to Moors and Jews. 9to
1755:a case came before the Parliament Of Paris, a „
whether Jews should be allowed to swear in a differenti
mode from that prescribed by the French law, which wll9
simply je le jure. A Jew came to be sworn alter his
own fashion; he kept on his hat—held a Bible t• •,--•
left hand, touching it with bis right, and the Presi,auer't
decided that he had been properly sworn. The (Lot to
of Cessation had decided that a Jew had a right Lo
be sworn in his own manner. With reference to vra,e,
again refer br,
had been done in this country, he must
The olicito
the case of " Ommichin v. Barker,"
General of that day supported the new mode of sweat'
. a,
ing, and argued, though such a case had not before all:we _
that the common law worked itself pure by rules dr
5;
from the fountain of justice, which was in suck ea his
superior to Acts of Parliament. The Chief Baront'ico,
giving judgment, said that reason, and not anY P.°. hose
lar case, ought to govern them in interpreting tne 1,00
more especially when the law was doubtful. ° be
of
Hardwick° ordered the words complained
struck out of the oath, and since that time petari: bile
a the
been indicted for perjury who had sworn false'Ytf-e-aiher
Old Testament only. The Hon. and Learned su 1 to
for Abingdon had contended that that did not aPProry.
oaths of office, It
-- was quite true that a deel%!t re'
, Act could not alter the law; but the declaratory times,
..t en
f Trod to &Glared what had been to law
and referred to a tan h "either agaitur
gau oat ; meet t°
men, a witness, adeponent, or on any aPPa'rt,—„,faiidr
office or employment."—(Hear.) The law 0' -at de-
therefore, swept away the distinction altogetherer' „ and
stroyed three-fourths of the argument of the Gentle'
Learned Gentleman. If the Hon, and Learned 0 the
man referred to the remaining fourth, and relict' ~13, the
Act of Supremacy, he would join issue with hntl,,',
question whether the words in the sth Elizabel'erhe9o
dered it impossible for a Jew to take the oath•
ci`tette
words were that a Member of Parliament On& I, sot
the oath on " The Holy Gospels." But it was °llhiaeh the
of Charles 11. that that oath rested, and je Vr.-:-0 vies
mode of taking it was pointed out. The declare
sad
'lee 3
to be made at the table of the House between oi „Tod
four o'clock, and nothing said in 't
ab°tl 13
was
Holy Gospels." The Ist of William and Katy
abrogated the statute of James. Thus the oath fl, pre'
to be taken before the High Steward was t'a-ebse'
scribed by the Act of Elizabeth. Now that wes, oath
lhtlatdelY gone by the statute of William, and i! !atered?
gone, he would ask how it could be adri].nt'
,1,,, eeonci
That brought him to the consideration of l'",-ely sic,-
question in the case. Now he protested *gains' -110 alt
cTond question beiug assumed to be in that easee 01'0
he Hon. and Learned Member for Bute ratscicusa-es on;
expression or two which he could not suffer °bad sat,
answered or unnoticed. The Hon. Member ;coo* ,'
that they who were acting in that House ia j - pita'
thes dclaim made by Baron Rothschild were acthe)ggouse•
vi e ly, and taking an unfair advantage of th 1-etheite
The Hon. and Learned Member had also said 5,°.7°, 'eget
about special pleading. Now this vvas the fair
que.stion, whether the party concerned WAS tO
b 6 r the
an important trust confided to him? and whhet ee6t OfL
citizens of London wore to deprived f the -et'
ha'
be o 9 10 tct
his services on a mere dry, technical quibble' hill bo
state of things, they who advised Baron Rotbs"i'eetsge
recommended him to take every possible aav tit of
hiswhichhis position. position. And ho begged it might be distalieut tee
derstood, and that there might be io naistalo a, 1-1,, de•
subject, the Hon. Member for 1 London was,°,l7'cbill•
termined to act upon that advice. Baron o°ros ine"'
be deter
hs°
was advised that the first question to
was, whether or not he had the right °bleb bi'
the oaths administered to him in the manner wht peel
felt most binding on his conscience? That triej esf‘ere.
to the question of a distribution of the oaths a-orssecl 5-5
He was sorry the Noble Lord should have "Parr-301 kihSit
strong an opinion upon that question. It via
misses •-•',
to quote any opinion expressed before the C°l33, had—i be,a,•o
the Attorney-Genera], because nothing forces' qioereosia,
done by that Committee. Its proceedings
conversational. They had been stopped from disco bile;
anything. The present question, •ht ell
tot bet
he thoag ' to t
fore the House in quite an independent Manner' 09 $131;
unprejudiced by any opinion on such an occesinehealti '-
Committee. He thought no decided opioin° te- 10 °id°
pronounced or formed on any case until the weclreteNr
had been heard and understood. There was 8,1 teb'c'e
which ho had heard had Voile le-
been circulated a Vol to
he was most • . anxious to contradict. It had beell,eeal
about that It had crossed Baron Rothschild'3 `ijoi6slti
ask for the Roman Catholic oath on preseatingfounded
moro .I,l3tesehil
aatnithe table. Never was there a
false misrepresentation. -"•°• d be:
Baron elite 0
was a man of too high a character and too line; seo Pei
nour to allow such a notion for a moment te 1:°1i0 °a's
mind. He could not ask for the Roman CatVeritbOild,
without at Ceti same time professing the Iteei:111, iedff,
faith. He did not believe there was a more bi„,Plher-rt
honourable man in the House than the Hoye a'e,,-lighte:s
the city of London; and there need not be tlieE3-; be tit
apprehension of his taking any such course. rh'• ;be lad
fully determined to take every advantage Ivbe'pc belileiees
permitted to secure the position to which 'ideseese'', e
himself entitled. But he would not avail •••,, of tP-sf
well as he (Mr. Wood)could • f an) •e° °
ascertain, 0 r noti ,
legal advantages without • •the House '9 shiers
giving for •,,oe
the matter. The Hon. and Learned Member for
st-te
don spoke of Jews as aliens, but it was a long time tete;
AS heir
any British-born Jew, was considered as snoregisterkhor
in the time of George 11. called upon them t° phiso .lets
properties; and if they were supposed to be hea
could not possess any. The Jew Bill vvhieb
since passed had reference to foreign Jews. Ile 0111,11;
Mr. S. WORTLEY said he did not rely 01r,t,it taket of
ment that it was necessary that Jews ah°u" all •13 s'
oaths on the Holy E • h eght gee
Evangelists. He t 0 f the ,oa
could do was to look to the practical part 0 , ea" be
tion; and from all the information which thelre %' of
their journals the three oaths totaken We
t'
0
be roe 05
combined. They were not entitled to sePe' It
fa an) 00 tails
and to put one oath and not another.---s—e worn - e-
clear when the Hon. Member refuse( to be e;Wil-ear.) 0,
0°
Gospel that he was not a Christian.--e( f the- h'
thought it absurd on the part of the friend!, 0, vvit4e)
Member to press that matter, for it was trioaabor, h.% od,
question and with the time f the House•--(''`e le'" 0°
• be Pel
Suppose he had taken the two first oaths as , 1;011h 00
would he not refuse the third, and then theJ r '
(110 '
obliged to shut their doors against bina---
and cries of " Divide, divide.") tea
The House then divided. ders el
• h 0
On the re-admission of strangers it ware vill-
that Sir R. Inglis's motion had been negst
a division, and that the numbers were 13
For Mr. Hume's amendment ••• -59
Against it •
------ 54 re'
••• ••• '• be
Majority ..• deb*"
Mr. NEWDEGATE asked, Id the of
would der '
sunned?
The SPEAKER was d to s5l the
()t
0
understood . e t
the day should then be proceeded with. orefeo .00
The
impression in the gallery was' other 1301
too
l
the debate was to be resumed on some A o r
twelve o'clock this day. However, we beet- ° ;g
announcement of the fact in the House. etirefe r 0,-,
THE MERCANTILE MARINB ' dingy °- %""
The order of the day for the third reveredl boa"
Bill was then moved. Several new clailseei„oeodlßed
up and added to the Bill; various verbatbird- the ,
were alto made, after which it was read a 1597
passed. 500 itie
QUEEN'S MESSAGE.—MARLBOBOITG sider
coo to
The House went into Committee to .i, le/ „
Queen's Message.
Mr.B • the 001'. recv too
The CHAIRMAN ERNAL In
...A the ~r 0 of
proceeded to rea. marwhees, e
the effect that it was expedient to settle „jet beev
House on the Prince of Wales duri the ' stfi fig -,„,b10 et
her Majest
y and the Prince; and tbat sat"-„t. not of
shouldxt be provided for the same establisbrac".4 0"„ao e
he co.- • eoe- se;
Mr. TRELAWNY
complained that the ie 00
satisfactory •
information with respect to r they
~,„
the duchy of Cornwall, which was a Lnetetestioa• e fret
to consider in entertaining the present tin—selth ',e to ~
Lord J. RUSSELL said certain
returos toeoo ode
yacht' 000 de
to that duch b• y were obliged by Act fah 0
*prea n,
made to that House, and they were eta 0%;
given. But a motion which the 1100• lue,-heelilestol3"
in the beginning of the session to throw ," of VOr'-
agement of those revenues into the ban oaf
had been negatived by a large inejoritY.(ea,
ales 40
After a few words from Mr. TREL A " fW- basta
~_.,eo o _to e
Mr. HUME said he thought
ea ie,
at present too young, only nine year He ogre beal 1. ets
such an establishment settled on him. ,e'-`-cded "e
eta
they ought to have more information rtne.,,,11. a sod
lative to the revenues of the duchy of C°rll it
order, „°f'§d
the late Queen had been voted that II it er„'n- 01, vcv •
also arranged that they were to keel) iti. 'l, 40,u,'"e et
the consequence had been that no less than 4h' 1-eet, i
been paid for repairs. He thought theY, I, Arlioteco st„atei
pone that matter until the next session 0`
over bee Vit'alg
Lord J. RUSSELL said ho had lasit.4 'eh
objection before made to the present proP°f 3,110%;00,1,r
her Majesty had intimated her intention ° merlov obey
public to see, the Vernon Gallery Air: to egien°
House, the Government had thought '" the )" • 9
de ,
M •
atesty to make a settlemeet of it °II eictsery,
Wales. i f o°l rOsiji V
Mr. HUME objected to the remof3,° tone- ~e 0 '„},
which should have bes left • tli© ei,e,, ;lne° d
n In De gt ,t,
which had cost the nation so much. Led ° tteinrior
part occupied by tho Royal Academy b° ver els'
had oe ph°
to the pub]. G
in. George the Third 000
to settle any of his sons or Make ee. 0 year S' 1,011
them at such an early . hat of In,j'n-rat, to ii4e'
age as t
After a few words from Mr. SPUD -i-'''-' atieti fl° es
lan eb 0 ,
Lord SEYISIOUR entered into a" e:liborOjed t it
that stables had not been added to gta. io;coe,evet'
because Carlton-terrace was originallY
rose' bow 41
carried further up To whatever nuP re 0108
. r too sal
was devoted, stables would be neeessa oy to
Ole
Mr. HUME objected to their haviaegose,
palaces with their concomitant OP