Star.
London, England, 1830-05-18 00:00:00

sir J. WRO'ITESLEY, on the question that these petitions be
brought up, said it was not to be supposed that an bumble indivi.
dual such as he was could expect to obtain a hearing in the course
of a debate so important as that about to take place ; he should
lake that opportunity to express the reasons which induced him to
support the bill, and to state the extent to which he was disposed to
lipport it. He confessed, then, that he could riot see the slightest
ohji ction to grant the Jews all that they required, except the per-
iiie.sion to sit in that house. If the representative system produced
. fair expression of the opinions of the people, he might be inclined
to allow the Jews an opportunity even of trying the influence of that
opinion as candidates; but when it was notorious that seats in that
lion,. were to be had to any extent for money, he could not consent
to allow any to become members who were not also Christians.
The petitions were then read and laid on the table.
)Ir. R. GRANT, in moving the order of the day for the second
reading of the bill, said that it was unnecessary for him to reply to
tile objection of the hon. boronet at that time. Anfassent to the se-
cond reading of the bill for the Relief of the Jews did not pledge
any member to the details of the measure. It merely declared that
they thought the Jews should be relieved, and left all objections to
the details to be taken in that subsequent stage, when they, with
more propriety, came under consideration. The hon. member then
moved that the bill be now read a second time.
General GASCOYNE declared his determination to oppose the
bill, if it proposed to confer on the Jews the same privileges al.
ready granted to the Roman Catholics. The constitution was a
Protestant constitution, and it was necessary for its support and
protection that the institutions which made it so should be main.
tained. If any man had a few years ago asserted that in the course
of two sessions that house would repeal the test and corporation
acts remove all the political disabilities of the Roman Catholics,
and now entertain the question of relieving the Jews—he appre-
hended that his friends would have thought him a person it was
necessary to keep a tight look after. (Laughter.) For his part he
entertained no very favourable opinion of religious liberty. He
thought it was little better than a mere union of sects--a union
of sects—(continued laughter.) He could not for his life understand
how any man who opposed the admission of the Catholics could vote
for the relief of the Jews. The Catholics indeed, had some claims
to that which was conceded them. They Possessed considerable pro-
perty, an immense population, and they professed the religion once
upheld by our ancestors—(Hear and a laugh.) It was true, the
palings of the constitution had been broken down, but he entreated
them not to make it altogether a waste spot. It was said that the
opinions of the Jews were not represented in parliament He be.
lieved they amounted to some 40,000 or 00,000, and in the present
state of the representation, he conceived the smallest unit to be
sufficient for their share of that representation. He agreed with
those who conceived the state of the representation to present
an objection to the admission of the Jews to that house. Them de-
formities of the Constitution were not to be overlooked in consider-
ing the propriety of making concessions. There was a spirit of
innovation abroad in religious matters as well as in commercial, and
the friends of the one were the supporters of the other. The hon.
and learned gentleman (the Member for Knaresborough) had de-
clared on a former occasion, on the debate on this subject, that
" you ought to do unto others as you would that others should do
unto you." Now, he would ask, if the Jews had the power to
grant the Protestants what they now asked from them what would
they have obtained ? The history of the Jews at all times showed
that they were not very tolerant to those opposed to them in religious
opinions. In conclusion, he called upon the house to unite with
him in opposing the measure.
Lord BELGRAVE expressed his sorrow at being obliged on this
occasion to differ with many he was accustomed to agree with in
public and private. He felt it his bounden duty to oppose the mea-
sure, and in doing so, he did not think he was departing from the
principles he had professed upon a former occasion, becausehe con-
sidered a man might hold the most liberal sentiments in general,
and support the claims of the Roman Catholics, and yet adopt a
different course in respect of the bill now before the house. For he
believed that these .aims were founded on justice, reason, and
truth—he considered that the Roman Catholics had clearly shown
that the privileges they demanded would not be abused ; and he felt
that it was but fair to concede advantage to those who had never
flinched from the support of the state. Now' there were two points
on which he objected to the measure in favour of the Jews.
First, they were a distinct nation ; secondly, they were, he would not
say by reason, but through the medium of their religion, disqualified
for political privileges. Jews were scattered over almost all the
countries of Europe and of the East, but they were amalgamated
with the people of none. It was impossible then, he contended, that
a Jew could ever be considered an Englishman, or love our native
laud as, he thanked GOD, an Englishman was wont to do. Was
the Jew, he asked, to be considered an Englishman because he
bought a coat in Monmouth-street, or negotiated a loan upon the
Stock Exchange for the benefit of this country, or that country, cc
any other country, provided it only squared with his own interest?
Or was there the slightest reason for presuming that in his specula.
Lions he would give any decided preference to the interests of Eng.
land ? No; the fact was, no lean could be an Englishman so long
as he remained a Jew. (Hear, hear.) In answer to the argument
founded upon the wealth of these people conferring a degree
of power upon them which might be dangerous if not secured in fa.
your of the State, he contended, that by advancing them to a higher
degree of power the evil would only be increased, since the tie could
not be made binding, and the epee irritarnennon malornes could
only be used with additional effect. Besides, the Jew, so long as
he continued truly such, could never feel himself bound up in the
fortunes of a country in which he only considered himself a so.
journer. He always comforted himself, under all circumstances of
degradation, with the lively hope, that though despised on earth,
they will not be outcasts on high, and one day they will return to
the land where their fathers have dwelt, and where their chil.
drat shall dwell for ever. And feeling and believing as they did,
he asked if it were possible that Jews could love this land, in
which they were permitted to dwell, as Englishmen did, to
whom it was endeared by the ties of blood and old associa.
doom, and the memory of so many proud historic deeds ?
Could the bosom of the Jew thrill with interest at the men-
tion of those glorious names, " familiar in our mouths as
household words?" or could he dwell with delight upon the
recollection of the achievements of our forefathers ? No ;
he looked with an incessant and undivided regard to the
history of another land;—all his hopes and wishes turned
towards it ; and his heroes were the inhabitants of another country,
and it was upon their glories he reflected with confidence—it was to
them his memory reverted with delight. This divided interest,
therefore, be maintained, incapacitated the British Jew from ex.
ecuting the duties he would be called upon to perform as one
enjoying the full privileges of an Englishman. The constitution
was chiefly supported by that love of country which pervaded every
nglish bosom, and anything that dogged that feeling must be de.
kterious.
hard DARLINGTON said, that although a friendto liberty in
general and to Parliamentary Rehm, he should oppose this motion,
as he considered it uncalled fbr. He did not see that It could be
advocated as necessary either upon grounds of justice cc state policy;
and, therefore, although unwi, he must raise his voice against
it; and this, notwithstanding a voicing he bad received tram a