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

LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 30, 1850.

SU,N,

and the legacy was declared to be good.—(Bear, hear.)
Well, that was the way in which he wished the House
to say the common sense and mode of law does not
exist in thh. case.—(Cheers.) When they found a thing
doubtful they ought to take the common sense and
common reason of the thing.—(tear, hear.) In a court
of law if such a point arose the Act would be looked into
to see if it applied to Jews, end it would be found that
the Act was directed against Papists, and could not there-
fore apply to the Jews.—(Cheers.) An abominable pro
vision of the Act of George 1., which no one denied Ras
directed against Papists, still remained in force, which
ought to have been referred to in the report, and which
would illustrate the inconvenience of construing such
Acts as these strictly, and not according to their plain
common sense reason and meaning.—(Hear, hear.) By
that Act any two magistrates who took it into their
heads that such and such a person was diseffeoed, might
call upon him to take the oath of abjuration, and if he
refused it, to inflict upon him all the penalties which it
provided for.—(Hear, hear.) Now could it be supposed
that under that provision two magistrates would be jus-
tified in going to a Chartist meeting, and, selecting a
Jew, require him to take the oath, and yet that was
how it was proposed to act in this case.—(Cheers.)
He came now to the only argument which had been
urged against the case of the Baron de Rothschild, and
that was that in two instances Acts cf Parliament had
been passed to protect the Jews from the operations of
en Act directed against Papisty, which requited all
Catholics who held real estates to take the oath of
abjuration upon the true faith cf a Christian upon
pain of forfeiting their estates. Now one of these, the
10th of George the First, was passed in the year fol-
lowing the passing of the Act requiring all parties to
take the cash to whom it might be tendered, and as the
case case cf Hireton v. Baiker had not been decided,
it was thought proper to pass this Act to
prevent its applying to Jews. In the other Act, how-
ever, the 13th of George H., which had reference to the
Act for the Naturalization of Foreign Protestants and
others, was passed to give the Jews the benefit of that
law, but it did not affirm that Jews could not take the
oath prescribed by the original Act, bat simply declared
that it was passed because " Jews may be prevented by
the oath from receiving the benefits of the Act."
What he (Mr. P. Wood) said was, that the House had
only a priced facie case, suggested at the time when the
principal law was not clearly understood. They ad-
mitted Mr. Pease on a resolution, and they passed an
Act afterwards, saying that the oath must be taken in
the very way in which Mr. Pease took it.—
(Cheers.) And that was not a declaratory
Act. Yet the. House admitted Mr. Pease
to take the oath in that way. There
was then no fear of any of those conflicts with any
other place, or with any of the higher or lower branches
of judicature, which had been apprehended in this case.
But the real truth and substance in Mr. Peace's case
was, that the House acted on general principles.—
(Hear, hear.) The House allowed Mr. Pease to
frame a declaration, that declaration was made an
Act of Parliament atter they admitted it, and not by
a declaratory process, and not by an enacting process.
Therefore, by their own argument, he contended Hon.
Members opposite were all wrong in admitting Mr.
Pease.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. P. Wood) hoped he had
now grappled with every difficulty in this case; and it
would be fur the House to say whether or nut, in a case
of this gravity, they would hear it solemnly discussed
and argued by counsel, if the House was to be a
judicial tribunal. But he said it was a very
solemn duty they had to perform. They were about
now to exclude a gentleman who, by the tesolutions
they bad passed, was admitted to have a clear and dis-
tinct right to a seat in that House. He had been elected
twice by large bodies of his constituents; he was ad-
mitted not to be proscribed on the old pretence of his
being an alien, or of that being a Christian Legislature.
They had gone by all that, and they had coma to the
narrowest possible question, a hich was simply
whether, that being a statute which introduced
into the oath the words "on the true fai:.h cf a Christian,"
following in the wake of a statute of James intended to
suppress Popery, that Act, though a court of law might
sue for penalties, had any particular application to this
case. The House had also something else to consider.
It bad been put to the House try the Noble Lord at the
head of the Government that the House must take on
itself a dispensing power to get rid of the difficulty.
That was the strongest way in which the case could be
put. The courts of law took on themselves no dispens-
ing power, but they acted with largo liberality in the '
construction of statutes. The courts of law took upon
themselves to say, we will enter into the substance and
meaning of an Act, and we will decide upon the true
effect and spirit of its intention, and rule accordingly ;
and iu doing so they would exercise no dispensing
power. They would take the meaning of the Act in
its most liberal sense in favour of the claimant.
There were many points which could be raised in a
court of law which he had thought below the dignity of
that House. For instance, what would they say to this
point? The statute of George 111. said that the oath
should be taken under all the old penalties, to be sued
out in the courts of law. Now that House was no court
of law. The courts of law, indeed, would strain every
technicality, not against Baron Rothschild, but in his
favour. Let them look at their own position.
Here was a person suing for their determination
in this matter, a person deprived of a great privilege, and
they were bound to give every reasonable latitude to pre-
vent his being disabled. Again, they had this conclu-
sion arising from the whole, putting a liberal construc-
tion en the statutes, they had to see whether the Crown
had that security which these oaths were in-
tended to give it. That was the great question to
look at. They found these Acts reciting in
their preambles that these oaths were entirely
for the purpose of preserving the succession, and all
that they wanted was to secure that. Baron Rothschild
had taken those oaths in their full sense; he had given
every pledge which was required, and which the Legis-
lature, of which the Crown was a part, had enacted its a
protection to which both Crown and subjects
were entitled, and he asked could any Hon. Mem-
ber say, after looking
.at all the Acts, that the
whole substance of the oaths had not been taken, and
whether Baron Rothschild had not fairly fulfilled all the
conditions? The Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loud
and continued cheering.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he was
desirous of expressing as distinctly as he could the
view which he had formed upon this subject. He
could say that in coming to a conclusion he had en-
deavoured to divest himself of every personal feeling.
Upon every previcus occasion upon which this question
had been brought before the House he had voted
for the admission of Jews into Parliament, and upon
a former occasion he had expressed his opinion
upon the propriety of that measure. At the same time
he considered that, on looking at this question, he had
two things to consider with respect to tne wishes which
Le himself might have upon the subject. Ile earnestly
wished that Baron Rothschild should be admitted a
Member of that House, and that all persons of the
same persuasion should sit and vote there like-
wise. But he was bound to discard every
feeling of that description the functions whicn
the House had to perform were purely judicial,
not quasi-judicial, but purely judicial, and it was de-
sirable to express this more strongly, because it was
impossible not to perceive that very strong personal fee'-
fogs had been excited as to whether Baron Rothschild
could sit in that House.—(Hear, hear.) Ile con-
fessed that on looking at this question it was
important to look at the' position in which it now
stood. The Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon
had moved for a new writ for the city of London, and
the Hon. and Learned Member for Oxford had moved
as an amendment that the seat was filled. Ho could not
think that the course which the Hon. and Learned
Member for Abingdon had taken was the one Lest to
be pursued, even if his view of the case were con, ect.
Ile would now refer to what took place in the case of Mr.
O'Connell. He was quite ready to admit that there was
some difference between the two cases. As it appeared
from the journals, Mr. O'Connell was called upon on
Friday and asked if he would take the oaths, and he
stated he was content to take the oaths of allegiance and
abjuration but not the oath of supremacy; therefore the
debate was adjourned, and on the Monday following he
was heard at the bar. On the following day he was
called again to the bar, and Mr. Speaker asked him if
he refused to take the oaths, and on his replying
that be did refuse, the Douse came to a resolution
that he was not entitled to a 55 at in the House.
But there was some distinction between that case and
the present ; the Hon. Member for the city of London
had not refused to take the oath of abjuration.—
(Cheers.) The House had, ,however, come to the con-
clusion that he had not taken the oath in the form
prescribed ; and, perhaps, out of respect to the farms
f the House, it might be proper to call him again to
the table, and ask him if he refused to take the oath in
any other form than that in which he had taken it.—
(Cries of " No.") If he refused, then the view taken
by the Hon and Learned Member for Abingdon might
be the most correct one under the circumstances.
But with respect to the real question itself;
ho confessed he had considerable difficulty in com-
ing to the conclusion which appeared to him to be
the right and proper conclusion, but wh:ch he admitted
he had arrived at with considerable pain. If ho were
sitting as a judge on this case, and had to decide ac-
cording to the obligation of the oath, and was auxicue to
do justice between the parties, he could not say in
hie own mind that the Hon. Member for the city of
London had taken the oath of abjuration in the form
prescribed by the Act of Parliament.—(Cheers from
the Opposition.) He confessed he came to that con-
clusion with very great regret, but still it was
his duty to communicate it to the House.
forr:g argumentstoelotregretted
d,
(Continued cheering.) He had listened with
very great pleasure and interest to the extremely able
to(1 lalnthr .di his
Page°n andVoo Wood)—(Hear)—but r(nHceda Friendr
ti t t h e
though Memberhe
one him to ba actuated ut:hataetdd bhLyeotth e(mairnce
producedrAe st sincerest
Attorney-General)
ymotives,same-Gfcereabol be
was ebliged to come to a dihffaedrent
d.
conone
elasoinen. that of
was
on his mind as he
not tibia to get over what appeared to him to be the
notbato ute n,rf
nog
hrt
ieooo fwnt th,
eheveeAct
r r
r .doubtft
twhich
o tnh a
had
t ma
bptp
lecindumaet nsah
tddei if
eo noao oro h hadmo
thebnl ees
men chrso raised st nf
de
abjuration,
that it was neces-
sary that he should affirm that he was a Christian.
Pease would have had no objection to have made
such affirmation.—(hear, hear.) It was clear that
atlirrnetion by statute was to be taken as equivalent to
an oath in the case of Quakers. With respect to the
ohtervations that had been made by his Honourable and
Learned Friend the Member for Oxford, upon the 3d
end 4th William IV., passed subsequent to the case of Mr.
Pt a3e, they r.pi eared to him to have a contrary tendency
to that which he contended for, as by that statute
aPar-
liament appeared determined to put an end to all doubt,
and if such an Act had been passed in the case:of Baron
Rothschild, all doubt would have been cured. But ther,
supposing it to be clear that Parliament meant in the
case of Mr. Pease to put an end to all doubt, the ques-

tion than would come round, would it be right for Par-
'lament to pass an Act fur a similar purpose in the case I
of the Baron Rothchild. Another statute had been
pressed on the attention of the House as the mainstay of
the question; he alluded to the declaratory statute
of the Ist and 2d of the Queen. Now there was
nothing in that statute that required the oath to be
administered in a particular form, but the Act
provided that when the party had taken the
oath in a particular form the party should Le
liable for the cons: quenees as much as if it was taken
in the regular way. But his Hon. Friend had said that
the cath was no oath, or that if it was it was of no use
at all. If such was the case the proper course would be
to remove the statute which required it from the
status-book ; but if that course was adopted
the House would be, in effect, saying that the
oath was useless, end ought to be nispensed with,
and that it had not the power to do except by an Act of
Parliament. He admitted what had been stated by his
Hon. and Learned Friend, with respect to the courts of
law and the steps which they take in deciding the mean-
ing of Acts of Parliament, but he could not say that be
thought the rule of courts of law ought always to prevail in
that House. It was not at all uncommon for courts of law
virtually to repeal Acts of Parliament.—(Cheers.) The
statute of uses and the statute of frauds had been vir-
tually repealed by them.—(Cheers.) Well now, he had
always considered that it was not a wise course for a
court of justice to pursue. Courts of justice, how-
ever, had been much stricter in modern times.
At no time was it a wise thing even fora court of justice
to dispense with an Act of Parliament, or to argue itseif
out of it; but it appeared to him to be still more incum-
bent upon the House to keep Acts of Parliament strictly
inviolable, and not to alter or change them in any way
without the sanction of the ether branches of the Legis-
lature. If it did the most dangerous results would
follow. Observe what was to be done in this case. The
House was to strike out of the oath the words
"on tho true faith of a Christian," because
the Baron Lionel de Rothschild did not thirds
them binding upon his conscience. Well, but
was not it just possible if they agreed to that proposition,
that herealer some other persons might for the same
reason demand that some other part of the oath should
be omitted?—(Cheers.) In voting that the Baron de
Rothschild should be sworn upon the Old Testa-
ment he intended to affirm the proposition that
the Baron was to constitute himself the judge, not only
of the wanner in which the oath should be adminis-
tered, but also of the words of which the oath itself

should consist.—(Hear, hear.) That was a thing
which he could not conscieetiously vote fur,
according to the view which he took of the
case; but, said his Honourable and Learned Friend,
you change the words our Sovereign Lord King George
for our Sovereign Lady the Queen. Now, really,
was that a mode of dealing with the case ?--
(Loud cheers.) Might they not just as well say
that they could change the cads because they
did not say A B, but inserted the name of the party
sworn?—(Cheers.) Looking, then, at this case with the
greatest ettention which he was able to give it, he aid
say that the House had not the power of dispensing with
any portion of the oath. The oath was imposed
by an Act of Parliament, and having given the best at-
tention he could to the Act, the:words "on the true
faith of a Christian " did appear to be part of the oath,
and it was the duty of every Member to take it in full
before he could take his seat in the House.—(Cheers.)
His Hon. and Learned Friend seemed to be a little sur-
prised that the Noble Lord et the head of the Government
should have expresed his opinion without having beard
the arguments. Why, his Honourable and Learned
Friend must know that;:it was his, as well as the
Noble Lord's duty, to consider and look into
the case well before coming down to the
House, and no doubt the Noble Lord had done that.—
(Hear, hear.) At a.l events he hod considered all the
bearings and facts of the case, and he came to a conclu-
sion which was liable no doubt to be removed
by argument, but he had listened with the
greatest attention to the ablest argument he had
ever heard in his life from his Hon. and Learned Friend,
and he must conf-es that it had failed to remove from
his m-iud the deileulty which he felt about altering an
Act of Parliament.—(Cheers.) So long as a statute
required them to take a particular oath the House could
not dispense with any portion of it; he bslia%cd then
the words " on the true faith of a Christian" to he
part of the oath; and, speskiug there in his judicial
character, upon his conscience he did think the
Baron Lionel 'Nathan dc Botlliehild had not
taken the (whs. in the form prescribed by the Act
of Parliament, or in such a manner as to entitle him to
take his seat in that House.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ANSTEY asked why bis Hon. and Learned
Friend the Attorney-General had addressed the House
on this occasion? He would tell him. It was to give
some sort of colour to the Noble Lord at the head of
the Government—(Cheers)—some sort of justification
for the Noble Lord for his indiscreet and unseasonable
speech of yesterday.—(Hear, hear.) His Hon. and
Learned Friend (the Attorney-General) had reminded
the House that this was a judicial question. If that was
so, why was the question preiudged ?—(Hear.) If it was
a judicial question, why was it made a Cabinet question?
Why was the law officer of the Crown put forward
to defend the Prime Minister? Had his Hon. and
Learned Friend (the Attorney-General);, ventured to
reply to the unanswerable speech of his Hon. and
Learned Friend the Member for Oxford ? He had
not; he had contented himself with a sic vole sic jubeo reply.
The argunient of the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen was
this:—Either the House had power to tamper with the
Acts of Parliament or the oath had expired. Every
fresh Parliament Protestant Members were called upon
to take the oath. It was not put to him, or he would have
claimed his right to be heard at the bar, and have showed
that it was au illegal oath.—(Laughter.) Hon. Members
might laugh, but he would quote a passage from the
statute, which would set the matter at rest for ever.
The arguments of his Hon. and Learned Friend opposite
had been greatly perverted. It was allowed that a man
ought to be sworn according to the form moat bind-
ing on his conscience, and the question was, did the
words "on the true faith of a Christian,"
ferm part of the of tho oath which was held bind-
ing on the conscience in certain cases. He said they
did. Whatever opinions might be formed by lawyers or
courts of justice as to the mode or prescribing the oath,
they could not shrink from doing their duty and
acting justly to one who, though elected to sit in that
House, was about to be deprived of that privilege by the
starting of an objection which he thought could not be
righteously sustained—
" Fiat justiciat, net rcelum."
The Hon. Membe: concluded by expressing a hope that
the question would not be allowed to rest until Baron
Rothschild was permitted to enioy his right of sitting
and acting as a Member of the House.
Mr. HUME said it would be quite impossible for him
to attempt to enter into the legal arguments of the case,
after the very masterly end very able speech of his
[lon. and Learned Friend the Member for Oxford; but
he wished to observe that one argument hsd been
used which had not been answered by the Honour-
able Member for Abingdon (Sir F, Thesiger).
The Hon. and Learned Member called upon the House
to agree to a motion to the Effect that the Hon. Member
for the city a London had virtually vacated his seat, be-
cause he had not taken the oath of abjuration in the pre-
sc:ibed form ; and he wished to ask him by what Etetute
or by what law he considered the Honourable
MN
e
iaoe
rvrmo,
mnb
no
Rothschild
one,hador t e
h n renderedde
ah:apd that
het taken
tke
en
ndhja
eietsdh
the oaths
could
tduthl
sd
nvo
oaf
dtc
oaa
unl
bl
btee
tg? —i
thateaxn(cpl. lee el
aal
expelled.
the)and
supremacy, and having taken those two oaths he (Mr.
(hThe last oath, the oath of abjuration, was one of pains
end penalties, but the Baron would not be sub-
ject to those pains and penalties unless he had
sat and voted. Perhaps it might be better,
as the Attorney-General had come into the House, that
he should put the ques,tion to him. He wished to know
from that Learned
the
cityof
Gentleman
oaths
t by what law the Hon.
bo f Londonsu
phraedm
area; aatnedd a
seat;Alem b ehre forrdhis
taken the
lle-
gi slice, but it was said he had not taken the oath of ab-
juration.—(Bear, hear.) In_hie(s/r. Hume's) opinion
he had.—( Hear.)

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that it appeared
to him that the seat had become vacant, assuming that
Baron Rothnhild had refused to take the oath
of abjuration.—(hear, hear.) By the 6th of George
111. persoes who refused to • take the oath of
abjuration were subject to the same penalties and
disabilities, as by the laws and statutes already enacted
were provided, and by that statute they referred to the
statute of William 111., which directed that the party re-
fusing to take the oath should be unable to sit in
Parharner t.

Mr. lIERNAL—What became then of the statute of
George 111. ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL considered that the
statute of William 111. overrode it.

Mr. WOOD assented that the statute of George 111.
rep, sled the statute of William 111.
The ATTOitNEY-GENERAL could not agree in
that opinion.
Mr. V. SMITH was not prepared to assume
that Baron Rothschild had refused to take the
oath (Hear, hear,) —yet that was the proposal
of the Honorable and Learned Member for Abingdon,
The Hon. and Learned Member thea proposed further
to issue a new writ for the city of London. He could
not assent to the adoption of such a course, when they
had the first legal authority in that House disputing upon
whether Baron Rothschild was entitled to his sent or not.
He could neither vote for the original motion nor the
amendment, and he would then, fore suggest that a Com-
mittee should be appointed to consider what was the state
of the law on this subject.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY a difficulty its the matter. The
terms of the motion of the HonourAb'e and Learned
Member for Ahingdr,n were that the Baron de Roths-
child had refused to take the oaths prescribed by law;
but the Baron de Rothschild did not lio that; he merely
omitted certain words from one oath, because he did not
think them binding upon his conscience.—(Hear,
hear.) Now he was prepared to vote against the
amendment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Ox-
ford, declaring that the seat was full, and he must say
that be thought they ought to proceed with great caution
and deliberation betre they agreed to the motion for
the issue of a new writ.—(llear, hear.) They must
look at this as a pre ccdent for all future time,
and what would the minut, f the House disclose? It
would appear that a Nfember came to the bar—he took
the two first oaths prescribed by law; he took the last
oath prescribed by law, with the omission of certain
words, stating that he did notrefuse to take thew, but that
he did'not use them because they were not binding upon
his conscience.--(llear, hear.) He thought with his
Honourable and Learned Friend the Attorney..
General that these wends formed part of the oath
prescribed by taw, and the House had not the
power to dispense with them; but still they
ought to have something more to proceed upon
than the statement of the Hon. Member himself before
they proccwiea to declare the teat vaunt. There was

another question, however, to be decided. Was: the
refusal of the Honourable Member final and com-
plete, and :be seat thereby vacant ? For his
part he believed the Act of William 111., which made
the refusal to take this oath vacate the sear, was still in
force, notwithstanding what had been said to the con-
trary by the Honourable and. Learned Gentletnau the
Member for Oxford.—(Hear, hear.) At the same time
they were now netiug judicially, and he did think
in the t resent state or conflicting opinion on the law they
would be acting unwisely if they now decided that the
seat was absolutely vacant without taking more time to
look into the point —(Cheers.)
Sir F. THESIGER was anxious to proceed with
all proper caution and due deliberation, and
undoubtedly when he proposed his resolution in the
teems which he had submitted to the House, he thought
he was pursuing the course of precedent. beccuse there
was no doubt whatever that there were a variety of
instances upon which peaks had come to the table
and refused to take the oaths, and upon that
refusal there had been immediately made a
motion for the issue of a new writ.—(Cheers.)
Now, Baron Rothschild took two of the e.a.t.!,s at the
table; but on coming to the words in the third, " on the
true faith of a Christian," he cloed the book and said
he omitted those words because he considered them not
binding on his conscience. He then kissed the book.
(Hear, hear.) He (Sir F. Thesiger) certainly did not
understand, when the Baron said he omitted these words,
for the reason which he gave, that there was a re-
fusal to swear to those words.—(Hear, hear.) If he (Sir
F. Thesiger) was wrong in supposing that that
amounted to a refusal to take a substantial portion of
the oath, he wished to know in what mode the Right
Hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) proposed that the House
should ascertain clearly and distinctly whether it was the
intention of Baron Rothschild to take the oaths pre-
scribed by Act of Parliament or not.
Mr. PAGE WOOD said on the part of Baron Roths-
child, bat without consulting him, be would say, that
Baron Rothschild had not the least hesitation in saying,
that the omission to take those words should be taken as
a refusal to take them.

Sir FREDERICK THESIGER said, then if that
were se, he could hardly understand why his Hon. and
Learned Friend the Member for Oxford (Mr. P. Wood)
wished to claim what his Hon. and Learned Friend
called a locus penitentia for Baron Rothschild on this
occasion.—(Laughter.) He (Sir F. Thesiger) had
merely risen to make the explanation which he had
given to the House.
Sir GEORGE GREY explained that Mr. O'Connell
distinctly refused to take the oath of supremacy, and the
house resolved that he was not entitled to take his seat
without taking that oath. The Speaker having informed
Mr. O'Connell of the resolution of the House, Mr.
O'Connell ask‘d to see the oath, and he said he declined
to take it because it contained two propositions which he
believrd to be untrue.
Mr. ROEBUCK said all he knew from the Hon. and
Learned Member for Oxford was that Baron Rothschild
refused to take the words on " the true faith
of a Christian." That did not imply that Baron Roths-
child had refused to take the oath.

Mr. Alderman SIDNEY, amidst shouts of " Oh, oh,"
said if this was a judicial question, and if this House was
to be the judge of it, it required not the learning of a
lawyer, but the sound sense of an individual to form an
opinion upon it. After listening to this debate for three
days he had come to the conclusion that the question
whether the House was to admit Baron Rothschild to take
Mama or not was virtually decided by la►t night's debate.
This was not a party question, but it was une in which
each of them would feel himself called upon to act the
part of a magistrate. He entertained an opinion that
the time was gone by %hen this House could persuade
the country that a constituency like the city of Loudon
was not able to judge for itself. Ho trusted that the
House would not stultify itself by proclaiming to the
orld, and to the city of London in particular, that they
would not accept the man whom they had chosen, and
by requiring them to go through the farce of a third
election.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL asked the House to come
to some decision as to the course of proceedings. If the
Hon. Winter for Oxford, who represented the Hon.
Member for London in that House, thought some delay
advisable, before proceeding to a division he should pri,
pos3 amt they should adjourn until six o'clock.
Mr. P. WOW) said that as he understood that it
was the desire of mr.ny Hon. Members to speak, he
should move that the debate should adjourn until to-night
at six.

Mr. DISRAELI—As it appeared to be the general
freling of the Hhuse that the question was narrowed
to the point whether they should repeal an Act of Par-
liament or nor, perhaps it wotildbe requisite to allow some
farther time for consideration. He would remind the
Noble Lord that the Irish Franchise Bill stood for to-
night. Ile wr uld propose to adjourn until to-morrow.—
(Ores of " No, n0,",-, " Divide, divide.") He would
propose, then, that they should go on with the Irish
Franchise Bill at six o'clock.

Mr. P. WOOD said, that having consulted with Hon.
Members, he should b© perfectly ready to go on with
the division.

Mr. 13. OSBORNE said that he wished to state how
it was that ho had not spoken on this question.—(Cries
of " Oh, oh.") He was one of those who took a com-
mon sense view of the question, and he did not intend
to have his judgment perverted by the quibbles of
lawyers or the equivocal conduct of the Prime Minister.
What was the course of proceeding by the Government?
The Attorney-General moved that Baron Rothschild
should be beard at the bar of the House by counsel, but
the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) got up and told the
House, after the Baron had had been put to great
expense in retaining counsel, and after he bad raised
'the expectation of the electors of the city of London,
that it was true he bad agreed to hearing the Hon.
Member by counsel, but his mind was made up on the
question, and that whatever counsel might say he
would call on his supporters and other Honourable
Members to vote against the admission of the Ho-
nourable Member. They were told that this was a
judicial question, but they knew very well, from the
course of proceeding by the Government, that it was not
a judicial question, but had been made by them a party
question.—(No, and Hear, hear.) It was no use tempo-
rising with the question, and he would tell the House
if it did so that it would engage in a conflict with the
eiVaens of London, out of which it could only come with
disappointment and disgrace.—(Hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL rose to explain. His Hon. Friend
the Attorney. General stated, on the occasion referred
to by the Honourable Member, that he would follow
the precedent in the case of O'Connell, and pro-
pose that Baron Rothschild should be heard by
himself, or by counsel or agent. Then the Learned
Gentlemet the Member for the city of Oxford, said he
was authorised by Baron Rothschild to state that be did
not wish to be heard by counsel.—(Hear, hear.) That
having been declared, a debate ensued in which the
Honourable Member far Middlesex declared very
strongly his opinion on the whole question.—(Hear)—
and such being the ease, he considered himself as well
entitled as any other Member to state his opinion to the
Housta—(Che,rs.)' He accordingly did so, abserving at
the same time that he thought this was a judicial ques-
tion, but he certainly did not wish to influence any
member of the Cabinet, or any other Member of the
House in the decision of the question.—(Hear.)
Mr. STANFORD rose amidst loud cries of "Oh,"
and other marks of disapprobation, for the purpose of
supporting the adjournment of the debate. He hoped
the House would not prejudge the queation, and that he
would have an opportunity of considering its whole
bearings before he was compelled to record his vote.
Strangers were then order to withdraw and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. P. Wood's amendment ... 117
Against it ... ... 221
Majority against the amendment 104

On our return to the gallery.we found
Lord J. RUSSELL stating that he did not think
tie house would be justiFied, without further anthority,lin
saying that heron Rothschild had refused to take the oaths.
He thought the House ought to have time to deliberate
upon the question, whether either an act of Parliament
or the precedent and usages of the House made it neces-
sary and incumbent upon them to proceed immediately
to isata the writ. He was anxious that the
House should take the utmost time to deliberate upon
that point, and Le therefore hoped his Hon. and Learned
Friend the Member for Abingdon would not press his
motion now, but either withdraw it or adjourn it to some
future day.— (Hear.)

Sir F. ITHESIGIiIt was extremely anxious to leave
the matter entirely in the hands of the Noble Lord.—
(Opposition cheers.) He meant precisely what he said.
—(Cheers.) It was a question which concerned the pri-
vileges of the Milo, and he thought it was peculiarly a
matter fur the Noble Lord to decide what course they
ought to adopt. Of course he was not as well versed in the
rules and forms of the House as the Noble Lord, and
being desirous to proceed with due caution, he was
anxious to receive the instrucCoas of the Noble Lord—
(Cheers)—as to the proper course to be adopted.—
(Hear, hear.) lie had no desire to hurry this
matter on, he was only anxious, inasmuch
as they were now: in a position which placed them
in a ,difil!ulty as to the proper mod( of proceeding,
that there should be every opportunity afforded the
House to consider the question ; and he could,
of curse, have no object!on to adopt the s9gges-
tint' of the Noble Lord.—(Cheers.) With respect
to the question as to the retusal of Baron Rathschild to
take the oath, if it was required by the House that they
should have more distinct information on the subject,
he was ready to accede to it, because his object
was to establish a precadea.t for the future con-
duct of the Inure; and it was, therefore, of the
utmost importance that the journals should be full and
complete upon the subject.—(Cheera )
Mr. HUME said, the Hon. and Learned Member
seamed surprised at sons demcnAration of applause
in favour of his conduct, but how could he
wonder at that ? Why, did not the Henourable and
Learned Member leave everything in the hands of the
Noble Lord at first, why did the Hon. and Learned
Member step forward and interfere with the Noble Lord?
The speech of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman was
quite inconsistent with his practice, and he hoped the
House would proceed to a division and negative his mo-
tion.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. V. iSMITti said this was a question for the
House of Commons, and not fur the Ministers to decide.
He was surprised at the lion, and Learned Gentleman
opposite talking about caution, when ho had hten so
rash as to propose a resolution which the House could not
adopt; na,!-, it actually stated what was not the fact,
for it was untrue that the Baron Lionel de Rothschild
had refused to take the oaths,—(Chters.) If any ad-
journment took place, he hoped it would be for the pur-
pose of ultimately having a Committee, to consider the
law of the subject.—(Elear.)
Sir R. H. INGLIS denied that the resolution of the
Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon contained that
which was untrue, nor had the Hon. and Learned
Member been at all rash and precipitate in nil conduct.
—(Cheerz.) The Eight Hon. Gentleman the Member

for Northampton had said that the Hon. Member for
the c:ty of London had taken the oath, and if the
Right Honourable Gentleman limited himself to
the word oath, ho was justified in saying so,
but the Hon. Member for the city of London bed not
taken the oath, which was the whole point at issue. The
lion. Gentleman had taken an oath, but ne the oath.—
(Cheers.) Supposing the Hon. Mombsr had omitted clause
3,4, or 5 of the oath, would the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Member for Northampton then say that the 13Lron
de Rothschild had taken the oath ?—(Cheers.) There-
fore, then, he contended that the motion of his Hon. and
Lqarn,tl Friend was not premature, was not at all ill-
advised, and affirmrd nothing but that which was obli-
gatory upon every one of them.—(Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the debate be
siljourned to twelve o'clock on Thursday next. His
Ilan. and Learned Friend th 6 Attorney-General would
then propose such a resolution, or resolutions, as his
Hon. and Learns Friend and himself (Lord John Rus-
sell) should have conceived the dignity and the usage of
the House rt quired.
Sir F. THESIG ER seconded the motion.
Sir B. HALL said, whatever iesoultion the Govern-
ment might propose on Thursday next, he, tor one,
should insist that the motion of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Abingdon should be affirmed or negatived
by the House.—(Cheers.)
Mr. P. WOOD said, as any resolution the Govern-
ment might propose on Thursday would be in the shape
of an amendment to the motion of the lion. and Learned
Member for Abingdon, he did not see why the House
should not dispose of the motion of the Hon. and
Learned Member for Abingdon.
Mr. ROEBUCK reminded the House what they were
going to do by adjourning. The real facts of this case
were before the House, and the only doubt was about
the conclusion from those facts.

Mr. HUME thought that if the Noble Lord (Lord J.
Russell) meant to tct fairly on this question, the motion
of the Hon. and Learned Member for Abingdon should
be disposed of or withdrawn.
After a few words from Mr. ANSTEY,
Mr. AG LIONBY ahked the Government if they were
going to incur the odium of preventing the House com-
ing to a decision on the motion of the Hon. and Learned
Member for Abingdon?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that he thought it
far better to adjourn the debate until Thursday than to
come to any hasty decision on the motion before it. As to
any odium he might incur, he did not think it would be
wise for the First Minister of the Crown to be very
sensitive on that point,—(Laughter.) lie doubted it
was part of his fate to incur odium, but he should seek
to avoid it as much as possible.
The gallery was then cleared, but no division took
place. On entering we found
Sir F. THESIGEH cxpressing his willingness to with-
draw his resolution, or to have it negatived ; but the
House must understand that it was solely on the ground
ihat he might not interfere with the Government reso-
lution.

Sir F. Ile;iger's motion was then put and nega.
tined without a division.

In reply to a question from Sir B. HALL,

The ATTOIeNEY-GENERAL said that it would
not be possible for him to lay his resolution on the table
before Thursday.
Mr. ANSTEY complained of this delay.

The debate was then: adjourned until Thursday.
Mr. DISRAELI suggested that Hon. Members who
had notices of motion on the paper should allow the
Government to proceed with the Irish Franchise Bill
this everiug.
Lord J. RUSSELL expressed his willingness to com-
ply with the suggestion.
Mr. P. SCROPE said that be would willingly postpone
his motion if it were the wish of the House.

The House then adjourned at a quarter after four
until halt'-past six.

THE LONDON GAZETTE,

(THIS EVENING.)

CAMBRIDGE-HOUSE, JULY 29.

The Duke of Catublidge has been pleaseci to cppoint
Lieutenant-Cclonel S!r William Davist,e, Major the
Honourable James:Macdonald, Mr. Edmund St. John
Mildmay. end Major Bnron Knetebeek, to be Ills Royal
Ilighnesa' Equerries ; and the Reverend Henry Harvey,
the Reverend John Rile Wood, M.A., and the
Reverend James Hutchinson, M.A., to be Hia Royal
Highness' Chaplains.

Conarcission bythe Lord-Lieutenant of Northamptonshire.
Northamptonshire Regiment of Militia—Edward Hat-
ton Finch Hatton, Esq., to he Lieutenant, July 22.
BANKRUPTS.
William Woods, builder, Prospect-place, Wandsworth-
road, to surrender Aug. 16, at half-past twelve, and
Sept. 6, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Can-
aan, official assignee, Birchiu-laue, Cornhill ; Wilkinson,
Gurney, and Stevens, Nicholas-lane, Lombard-stroet.
Reuben Brooks, picture dealer, Regent-street, Aug. 5,
and Sept. 7, at half-past twelve, at the Court of Bank-
ruptcy. Pennell, cflicial assignee, Guildhall-chambers
Basiughall-street; Carlow and Haynes, Palace-chambers,
St. James-street.
Gale Peasegood, draper, Sheffield, Aug. 7, at two, and
Sept. 7, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell,
official assignee, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall-street;
Jones, Siso-lane.

Thomas Tibbett, corn factor, March, Cambridgeshire,
Aug. 5, at two, and Sept. 7, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Guildhall-
chambers, Basinghall-street; Abbott and Wheatley,
Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane; Miller and Sop,
Norwich.

Thomas Tappenden, tailor, Friendly-place, Old Kent-
road, Aug. 6, at half-past two, and Sept. 7, at two, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. 13( linen, official assignee, Guild-
hall-chambers, Basinghall-stre.-A; Foord, Pinuers'-hall,
Old Broad-street.

David Clement, saddler, Neath, Glamorzanshire' Aug,
12 and Stpt. 11, at ieleven, at the Bristol District Court.
Otficiml-assignee, Hutton, St. Augu3tine's•place, Bristol;
Sewell, Old Bruad-street; Whittington and Gribble,
Bristol.

Jonathan Thompson, grocer and tea. dealer, Wigton;
Cumberland, Aug. 8. at eleven, and Sept. 13, at one, at
the Newcastle-upon• Tyne District Court. Baker, official
assignee, Newcastle• upon-Tyne; Lazenby, Wigton; In-
gledew and Daggett, Newcastle.upon-Tyne.
Eliza Way, miller, West Camel, Somersetshire, Aug.
7. at eleven, and Sept. 4, at one, at the Exeter District
Court. Hernaman, official assignee, Exeter; Newman
and Lyon, Yeovil; Stogdon, Exeter.

MARKET INTELLIGENCE.
(From the London New Price current, July 30.)
SUGAR.—To. ay there was more desire evinced to
operate in Letter sorts of grocery anc refining West
India Sugar, whilst a fair business was transacted, end
in several cases the rates obtained are 6d per cwt.
above those of Friday. In inferior and brown
qualities only limited purchases were made, still
holders were firm, and would not sell but at full terms.
At auction 150 hhds and 5 tierces Barbadoes were all
sold; good and line sorts at stiffer rates, and inferior at
furl terms, fine yelloN went at 40,1 to 425, good 38s 6d to
39s 6d, low to middling 36s 61 to 38s, onu lot crystalized
yellow 41s 6d per cwt. The total purchases amounted
to 483 hhds and tierces; the maket also closes with a
firm aspect.

REFINED.—To-day the Refin,d Sugar presented a
quiet aspect, anti prices arc not No firm; there are sellers
of brown grocery lurnds at 49s Gd. British Crushed
Sugar was in lair request, at 27s to 28s Gd per cwt. Of
Dutch Sugar Candy 140 boxes brown at auctioa were
withdrawn.

MAURITIUS.—This afternoon there was an improved
demand for Mauritius 'Sugar, and the public sales of
6,176 bags went at full rates, and a small advance wus
realised for grocery sorts ; low anc mid grey went at
338 to 35s 61, better sorts 368 to 38s, good to fine yellow
37s to 381 Gd, mid nod good mid 35s 61 to 3Gs Gil, low
34s to 35a, good and fine brown 32s 6d to 335 6d.
EAST INDIA.—This afternoon a fair business was
concluded privately iii Bangui Sugar at former rates.
Only 805 bags were offered at auction, and sold at 325 6d
to 33 6,1 for low and mid soft yellow, being full terms ;
but while Benares: realised 39s Gd to 41s for good and
flee, and damp 39s Gd. to 40s,—these aro rather higher
prcos.

FOREIGN.—Tc-clay former rates were sustained for
Foreign Sugar, but the business euneludvd by private
treaty wai of little moment, end none was offered at pub-
lic rale.

MOLASSES.—In West India sales are upon a larger
scale, but at previous low rates. Of St. Vincenls 200
puns were sold at 13s, and small parcels of An-
tigua, and Barbadoes at lfis 6d to 16s ptr cwt. For
East India prices remain at Ils to 123 per cwt.,
COCOA..—An improved demand hai been experienced'
for Foreign, and prices are firm at 27s 6d to 28s 6d,
there is only a limited quantity on offer. For British
Plantation the dematd is increasing, and as supplies are
limited, stiffer rates are obtained. At auction 400
bags Grenada were sold at 39s to 435, and fine at 44a to
463 per cwt.

COFFEE.—This afternoon there was not much desire
to operate in Plantation Ceylon Coffee at the public
sales, which comprised 267 casks and 177 bags, at
which prices declined fully is per cwt, but nearly all
ditto
Mysore4i6 ,o t o)
4w419,js
smb
t6aiodided,
c3ioi
435, and
ddas2nood andi
p6afiedl
fine
e tbbooaerlrtdr,ssiyi
sold ; good middling went at 565, middling 528 6d to
s
5 ordinary
46s :15're63:1:46n4daest toi'4fio.ins24e
good ordinary, and at 378 to 43s for d and
bales Mocha realiied 743 for fineyellowti.aulF;etrs°6;NhastifvOoe'rf
Ceylon 42s 6d to 438 is the value of good ordinary.
TEA.—Thero has again been an extensive demand for
the lower descriptioas of Congou, and prices combine to
advance. Merchants also evince much firmness, and
obtain I lid to ILI for common, 114 to Is for
good ordinary, ls Id to is 2d tor medium
sorts. In good and fine Congou several transactions
have taken place at from is 3d to is Bd, and
holders are less disposed to realize. Of common and
mid green considerable parcels have been sold at rather
higher rates. For better qualities a good demand has
been experienced at fully former terms, indeed, Upon
and Y..ung Ilyson realiz,A a small advance. Of Scented
and Pekoe Teal several parcels have been sold, and
prices are rising.
RICE --To day thcra was less activity in the East
India Rice market, and only a limited business was con-
cluded by private treaty. At auction 1,162 bgs Bengal
were only in part sold at barely former rates; fine white
went at 113 6d, mid 9a 6d to 10s, ord brelesai 8s Gel to
per cwt.
Os'Sarniodc'si.a—mAaged 8 6d to
much better demand has prevailed for
black I'vpper, and previous rates wz,ll supported. At
auction 8,000 begs Sumatra were sold, good clean
black 3d to 3il, grey ditto 2-ill to 3J per
lb. By private treaty a fair business has been
concluded, and Malabar realized 3d to 3:1-d. White
realiz full terms, and met with more attention
At auction 146 bags reaiizNi 6d to 610 for mid. For
brown Nutmegs of inE:rior and mid quality 3 reduction