Star.
London, England, 1818-08-08 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COUtiT OF CHANCERY. AugusT 7.
• VIC SEPTORD CHALLITy.
The qttestion in this case arose on the petition of J.
and others, wiiich was heard before his Lord-
on Friday lest, and which involohl in it the
of persons of the Jewish persuasion to become
participators in the advantages of the Bedford Charity.
Sir S.tszuere RoltiLor, lir. Etna., and Mr. RSALD
• heard on a former day on behalf of the peti-
toners : the'SOI•IC/TO7l-GENERAL was now heard on
plat of the Trustees.
..,,_
The mittettOn-GENEitAt. commenced his argtt-
'' by disclaiming any feeling on the part of those
itlemen for whom he appeared, except that of a
to discharge in a cortscieotious manner their
towards the public, conforrr.ably to the inten-
t Of the founder of ;his maenificent Chas ity.—
quettion now was, whether Sheba- Lyon, the
ghter of one of the petitioners, being of the Jew
persuasion, was entitled to draw a lot for the ap-
prentste-fte? He had now to contend, she was not;
that upon the authority of the ease of Calvin,
:Wed before the Lord Chancellor and the twelve
lges, in the reign of Jaines I. In that case it was.
tided that the Jews were an elies people, and that
could not he entitled to the rights of natural-
_ subjects. This was a decision on the law, as it
stood hi the reign of James I. as it had prevailed in
of Elizabeth, and as it was in the time of Ed-
yeard VI: In whose reign the Bedford Charity was
And, ender letters patent granted to Sir W. Her-
From the letters patent, it would appear, that
was ttOt the intention of the King to found a Cha—
• for the benefit of the Jewish people; neither h.id
\V. Harper any intention to endow such a Cha-
'Mtn the question was last before the Court,
Lorcithip directed that inquiry should be rn:tde to,
ascertain whether an/ person of the Jewish persua- I
had ever been elected a trustee of this Charity?'
..ould answer that question most confi•lentlythat 1
:re never had. Joseph, one of the petitionerS,`had,
sis character of a housekeeper of Bedford, voted
ice in the course eif thirty-two years at the election
Trustees. Joseph, it appeared, .was the first Jew
had, within the recollection of any person now:
1,- beta resident in Bedford. That the founder
to
never intended this Charity for the benefit of the
Jews was plain -and obvious, from the peisor.is whom
_ had named .ls Visitors—namely, the Warden and
Yellows of :Seer College, Oxford ; and there was also
certain number of exhibitions of tto a-year each,
send vupiis to Oxford and Cambridge. The Lear-
Solicitor-General also eubmitted, that the Peti-
, could not be received, inasmuch as there were
loaned in it five persons, Eldtes of a Synagogue in 1
London, who could not be interested in the question,
the beneatz of Charhy being confined to the in-
habitants of Bedford.
:qr. PetttLimoßb and Mr. SUADWUZ. followed an
ae same side. ,
Mr. S:otowntt contended, that on the face of the
linters patent i; was apparent a Jew cold not be a
trustee, since, at his eleihion, he was obliged to swear
- would mai stein and heep in repair a statue of Sir
d.ldarper, the rounder. This, consistently with his
isligion, he could not do, as it would be swearing to
ittPport a graven image.
Fir Sesettnte Rosereov, in reply, submitted to his
Urdi,bip, that the observations made on the Elders I
Of the London Sinagnoue having joined in the Peti- ,
eon, might be answered in a single sentence. The
tion was one of great general importance, and
Elders felt it their duty to bring thtquestion be-
Ees
hii Lordship. Even from the arguirient on the
Other side, it appeared that, for years past, the Jews
this
been in the habit of sharing in the advantages of
this Charity. The children had been admitted into
: School, had been apprenticed,. and received the
coward Of good conduct. It had been argued, that
there never had been a trustee of this Charity of the
Jewish religion. That was because there 'had never
been a Jew claimant of the rank in life which would
have entitled leim to be admitted to a tenst so impor-
Wit. -He denied that Jews,. the childrcie of Jews,
natural-born subjects, could be considered as aliens.
If, however, Lis Lordsll:p should in this case decide
that Jews could not pattake of the a.lventages of the
School, still it decided nothing as to other branches
the Charity. They might still be entitled to the
mai-liege portion, the pren.:am of•apprenticeship, etc.
According to the areeaments adenine(' on the other
side, no poor Jew eonld he adinitted to participate in
he benebts of St. Thitnrash Hospital. It might as well
contended, that Jews were not entitled to the be-
.efit of the Poor Laws,' or to the benefit of ChErgy.
He should contend that the Jews were entitled to the
• teantages of all those Establishments, except such
from their nature were conFned in their operation
members of the Established Church. Mr. Shad-
;ell had ;said a Jew could not be a Teestee of the
dharity, because he must swear to keep in repair a
statue of Sir W. II arper ; anti this argument he founds
en the Jewish religion, and the second commana-
ment. Mr. Shadwell knew little of the Jetrish reli-
on, if he supposed they could not keep up a statue
for temporal purposes. According to Mr. Shade
well's argument, neither could any Christian be a
trustee. eks, with respect to the persons partaking
elf the benefits of this Charity attending a place of re-
giotes worship on Sundays,
,Mr. Shiidwell said, a
)cw could not do this. Was Mr. Shad Well, then ig-
tionna that the trynagogne was bpen every day in the
+meek? So with respect to the Christian and sur-
name. He contended it meant nothing more than
the first name and the family °ante. The Leal--
heti Gentleman tonteaded that the words in the let-
ttes patent " all children," and again " the child en
of all persons," were the strongest proof of the gene-
ral intentions of the founder.
'The frotittroit-GENswiz wished to declare, that
in the areument he had put sued he had-no intention
to elrehrde the Jewish people from any of the privie
leges they enjoyed under the law as it stood, or to
complain of doe Legislature for having given them,
those privileges.
The Loan Criewcer.obe said he would delay giv-
it „judgment in this case, which he considered as one
Of considerable importance, until Monday next.

tOrA SList:411011.3V;;;I. we at,:: ge7ifto *state,
at Lis 'Mate in 32,MISV.:Itta:t.