The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-04-23 00:00:00

EMANCIPATION OF THE JEWS.

Mr. R. GRANT said, that before he proceeded with his in-
tended motion on the subject of Jewish disabilities, he was
prepared to state to the house, in contradiction to what had
already been asserted there,—namely, that the Jews did not
feel those disabilities,—he was prepared to state that he had
received letters signed by the most respectable of that class of
his Majesty's subjects, declaring the interest they felt in the
question, and regretting that it had not been yet settled. The
case of the Jews was so strong, that he thought he might, with-
out offering a single remark, submit their grievances to. the
House of Commons, with a full confidence of success. The
whole body of persons of that persuasion, except a few who
were too insignificant to merit attention, took the deepest in-
terest in what he was about to propose. On.a former occasion,
in 'the old House of Commons, he moved for leave to bring
in a bill for the removal of those disabilities which affected
Jewish subjects; but, in conformity with precedents, and in
accordance with the opinions of the friends of the measure, it
was now thought better to move the house for a committee of
the whole house to consider those disabilities. In that com-
mittee he would then move a resolution on the subject. His
object was to place the Jews on the same footing with taut
class of separatists from the established church—the Homan
Catholics—whose civil rights were now recognized by act of
Parliament. On a former occasion, when the subject was less
considered by the public than it had been. since, lie had felt it
necessary to observe and make remarks upon the whole case.
He did not now deem it necessary to take that course. He
would state first the principle on which he rested his case, and
he should then very shortly apply himself to one or two of the
main arguments that were urged against it. The chief principle
on whin he called on the house to remove those disabilities—

The SPEAKER suggested whether it would not be for the con-
venience of the house to know distinctly what course the hou.
gentleman meant to adopt. If he intended to move a resolution
in a committee of the whole house, it was to be considered, whe-
ther he would move for a committee of the whole house at once,
and then open his case in that committee, or whether he
would open his case now, and end with his motion for a com-
mittee. The difference of the two modes was this—that if he
took the latter course, the debate would, iu the first instance, be
taken in the house, and afterwards in the committee; but it' the
house went into committee in the first instance, the case might
then be opened, and a single debate would suffice on the reso-
lution.

Air. R. GRANT thought the latter course was decidedly the
best for him to adopt. Ile should therefore move "That this
house do resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to
consider the disabilities affectincr Jewish subjects." In the
committee he should state-his resolution.

Sir R. INGLis thought it would be better to open the case in
the whole house, and not in committee.
After a short conversation between Mr. R. Grant, the Speaker,
and Sir R. Inglis, the house resolved itself into a committee of
the whole house, Mr. Warburton in the chair.
Mr. R. GuANT proposed the following resolution :—"That it
is expedient to remove all civil disabilities at present existing
respecting his Majestv'S subjects of the Jewish persuasion, in
like manner, and will; the same exceptions, as the disabilities
affecting his Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic
religion had been "unloved." The right hon. gentleman sat
down amidst loud cheers, _ _

Sir ROISERT INGLis opposed the motion in a speech of consi-
derable length, and concluded by saying that, in the then state
of the house, and in the absence of many who had not ex-
pected that this question would come on to-night, and also in
the absence of His Majesty's ministers, he would not press a
division. _ _

Air. O'CONNELL said that he had struggled for religious
liberty, not from any view of sectarian advantage, but from
the advocacy of the broad principle of leaving every man's
conscience free in• matters of religion. You might punish as
effectually by political restriction,a: by torture for religious dif-
ferences, though not so severely: objecting to any restriction
on the ground of religious opinions, and knowing that such re-
strictions kept out the conscientious man while they were no
restraint on those who had no conscience, he rejoiced that the
day:of common sense had arrived when all such absurd re-
strictions were to be abolished,
.and when the nation which
had borne with s'tch constancy the restrictions to which they
had been subjected on religious grounds, were to be released
from all further disabilities for their adherence to a religion
which they believed to be true. lie was glad that, the nation
was to be relieved from the stain of keeping up those odious re-
strictions.

The motion was then put and agreed to, without a division.
The house then resumed; and the report was ordered to be
received to-morrow.

PROCLAMATIONS IN IRELAND.

• Air. O'CONNELL rose to call the attention of the house to.
the proceedings which had already taken place .unuer the act
recently passed, authorizing the Lord-Lieutenant in council
to suspend the constitution in any county in Ireland, which he
Might please to declare in a state of insubordination. Copies
of all proclamations and orders issued by the Lord-Lieutenant
of Ireland under the statute of 3rd William IV. c. 4; return of
the number of persons committed to the gaol of the county
of Kilkenny, for the last twelve months, specifying the
crimes or offences for which each person was committed,—the
time and place where committed, —how many were indicted and
tried, and the result of each trial; copy of every despatch or
letter from the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, or his Secretary,—
stating the reasons for proclaiming the county of the city of
Kilkenny to be in a state of insubordination or disturbance,
purSuant to the act of the 3d William IV., cap. 4.. He did not
anticipate that any objection would be made to the production
of any of these returns, except the last, and in that case the
cause of the objection must be that-the reason of proclaiming
the city of Kilkenny would appear in the despatch to be just as-
he bad stated.

Sir J. HoutiousE did not know that there existed any objec-
tion to give the hon. and learned member a copy of the pro-
clamation of the Lord Lieutenant, and the return of the number

of committals in the county of the city of Kilkenny; but the
hon. and learned member must be aware that that return would
not give him much information with respect to the state of
crime in that city, because for ten crimes that iwere committed
there was scarcely one committed to prison. Ile last return
which the hon. and learned member had moved for it was not
in his power to grant; and he hoped he would not press the
matter to a division. He could assure the! hon. and learned
gentleman that the reasons which induced the Irish government
to include the city of Kilkenny in the proclamation, were such
as he had just stated to the house, and iu no communication
proceeding from the Irish government would be anything which
could lead to the supposition that the city was proclaimed in
order that the military officers might be accommodated with
good quarters. If the hon. and learned member wished to put