The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1854-02-28 00:00:00

IF the " Bill to Repeal the present Oaths, and
to substitute a single Oath in their room," which
has been introduced into the House of Commons
by Lord Jons litrasELL, were considered simply
with reference to the previous efforts of its pro-
moter in the same direction, no language could
condemn too forcibly the pertinacity which would
force on a Legislature, nominally Christian, men
who believe Christianity to be an imposture. This
point has, however, been so often argued, that it
would be needless to go over the same ground
again, inasmuch as the Upper House of Parliament
has over and over declared, by increasing majo-
rities, that it will not admi=t to the privilege of
lawgivers those who wlll not swear allegiance
upon the true faith of a Christian." When,
however, it is considered that the sole object of
'the Minister's pertinacity is simply to enable Mr.
ROTHSCHILD to take his seat in Parliament for the
,city of London, the enorniity of which Lord JOHN
RUSSELL is guilty is the more glaring. It is now
some years since this paragon of self-sufficiency
was returned for the city of London, and it was
believed that his colleague, Mr. ROTHSCHILD, paid
the very heavy expenses incurred, upon the under-
standing that the Minister should obtain an alter-
ation of the law, selhat the hitherto excluded Jew
should be enabled'to taluThis seat. Session after
session Lord Jonv RUssILL attempted to fulfil his
part of the bargain, but without success. He
could not influence the. Ituu3e of Lords, inor could
he persuade any,,but those who esteemed Chris-
tianity as of no value, that it was proper or expe-
dient to destroy the safeguard provided in -the
Oath of Abjuration for the preservation of the
nominal Christian character of the Legislature.
It may be remarked that this was not a question
in which the English Jews as a body took any
interest. It was their pride that .they owned no
country but 'their long-desired Jerusalem, pre-
serving their nationality in their isolation; and it
is only to gratify the personal .ambition of Mr.
ROTHSCHILD 'that this vexed question 'has been
allowed year after year to disturb the public mind
with a pertinacity worthy of a better cause.

Repeated aulures appear to *have had no effect
in diverting Iserd JOHN RIISSELV from his'unholy
design, but, unsuccessful in his *direct attempt, he
is now endeavouring to accomplish the same
object by a measure frau*ht with infinitely more
danger to tho•canstitntion, and -so mischievous in
its tendency, :as to render it doubtful whether
even the House of Comm Ons will endorse- the bill
by voting fof its second reading. No longer con-
fining the alteration to the Jew, who has no faith
as a Christian; the bill proposes to abolish the oath
taken by the Romanist members, and thereby
to destroy the guarantee afforded by the clause in
the oath by •which the Romanist swears, " I .do
hereby disdain), disavow, and solemnly-abjure any
intention to subvert the present Church establish-
ment as .sealed. by law within this realm. And I
do solemnly swear. that I never will exercise any
privilege to which Lam, or may become, entitled
to disturb or weaken the Protestant religion or
Protestant ,government in the United .Kingdom.
And I do solemnly; in the' presence of God, profess,
testify, and declare, -thaw Ido make-this declara-
tion, and every part thereof, in the plain and ordi-.
nary sense of the words. Hof this oath, without any
evasion, equivocation, or mental reservation what-
soever." This -apparently plain declaration has
not been found sufficient to restrain many of the
Irish Brigade, gtho ....Compensate for their latter
want of gentlemanly 'feelings by their zeal to-the
bidding of the Romish priests who sent then,to
parliament ; but .what must' be the effect, whew the
restraint is taken otf,•and eves, Romanist member
'has full liberty, with .the . assistance of Enr,ligh
Radicals, who own Allegiance to no religion, to
assail the Church and the :liberties of Protestants.in
every way which Jesuitical, cunning can devise,
and malevolence execute? 'This an innovation
fax,more deadly in its consequences than even the
notorious Romish aggression, which aroused the
keenest feelings of insulted Protestantism, and
shookeke kingdom to its 4entre,;though the agi-
tation failed of its intended effect. That, however,
was a blow from without, wkichit was the duty of
our rulers to have resisted; while this ,is An insidi-
ous andltreacherous attack from within, by those
who should be defenders of the citadel. We have
beforewserted,and every event has proved:the truth
of the assertion, that, under the Miserable plea of
civil and religious lilserty,,which is a .cry that may
be made lo snit any purpose, Lord jonN RussgLL
has ever been the bitterest enemy of the Protes-
tant faith. He has fostered and encouraged every
aggressive step .on the pai4 of Rome, and, if .any
lingering doubt eats remain as to his traitorous
perfidy, the bill he has now proposed should open
the eyes of his misguided adherents to the danger
of the precipice to which he is leading them.
The bill he has now proposed would, if the legis-
lature dared to pass it into a taw, break down
the last barrier left by Protestant care in 1829 for
the preservation of the national religion, hold out
a premium to the Romish priests to swell their
majority in the House of Commons, and leave no
cheek to -the most unscrupulous Assaults upon that
Church, which the QUEEN in her Coronation oath
and the Ministers in their oaths of office have
sworn to defend to the utmost of their power. It
is a wretched moekery of solemn obligations, a
blasphemous profanity, to impoie any form of Oath
whatever, or deem it binding upon the conscience
of a legislator, when Ministers of State can be so
oblivious of their oaths as to propose such a Bill
for the sanction of Parliament, with the prospec-
tive necessity, of having to advise HER MAJESTY
to commit the deliberate perjury of giving it the
Royal Assent, though such assent could only be
obtained through the same Jesuitical craft which
advised King CHARLES I. that he had a public
conscience as well as a private conscience, in order
to induce him to consent to the murder of the Earl
of STRAFFORD. We cannot believe that either
House of Parliament will do such violence to their
own consciences as to give their sanction to a mea-
sure which stands out prominent in its infamy ;
and it is not unlikely that even its proraster, with
all his hardihood, la already appalled at his own