On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    out equivocation , -without mental evasion or secret reservation—and I do this upon the true faith of a Christian 11 any person were voluntarily to go into a grave society , and make such a statement , he would be considered as lit only to be put under 3 ome restraint . ( Hear , hear , and laughter . ) Only let their lordships imagine a noble lord coming into that house , standing at the table , all business suspended , and the noble and learned lord on the woolsack assuming additional gravity to hear that statement made , not voluntarily , but by compulsion—not only read , but sworn tothe Almighty called to witness the oath—and then the person subscribing his name as a testimony that he had been engaged in an absurdity , so that it might be handed

    down to posterity—on hearing all this , surely their lordships , after the matter had been brought under their notice , would not any longer sanction such an absurdity . Therefore he proposed to strike out every part of the oath to which he had referred , except that which related to the succession of the Crown , as fixed by the act of settlement , and the character of the Sovereign upon the throne as far as regarded his religion—for he conceived that no greater calamity could befal this country than that the Crown should ' placed upon the head of a Eoman Catholic . ( Cheers . ) In altering this oath , he had been pressed to strike out the words ' on the true faith of a Christian . ' His answer to that request was , that he felt bound to respect and he could not

    the decision of then- lordships' house , strike out those words , because , if he were to do so , there would be no chance of passing the bill . He yielded , therefore , to necessity on this occasion . But at the same time he must be allowed to say that , although he yielded to necessity , he did so against his own inclination . The history of the introduction of those words was curious . In the time of King James I ., a manuscript , partly in the handwriting of Garnett , Superior of the Jesuits , was discovered : it was called a ' Treatise on Equivocation ; ' and showed how the obligation of an oath might be evaded . For instance , if you are asked by a person whom you think in your conscience you are not bound to answer , ' Were you in London to day ? ' you may say ' I was not , ' mentally saying , ' for an improper purpose . ' ( Loud laughter . ) Now , it was remarkable that tho very year this was discovered ,

    and immediately after the conviction of the conspirators , the oath of allegiance was introduced , and then , for the first time , were added these words , ' without equivocation , mental evasion , or secret reservation / and ' upon the true faith of a Christian . ' ( Hear , hear . ) There could be no doubt that these words were not introduced as a test of Christianity , but solely to render the oath more binding . Surely they were never intended to apply to persons of the Jewish persuasion , for they were then in a state of banishment , and had been absent from the country for 400 years . But it had been said that if this oath had not been in existence some direct act of legislation would have been passed relating to the Jews . Now during great part of the reign of William III . no attempt was made to introduce aiiy such bill , and yet there was nothing at that time to prevent persons professing tho Jewish religion from taking their seats in Parliament . "

    Lord Lyndhurst concluded by an emphatic opinion on this point : "It would be more consistent with tho dignity of the country to exclude the Jews , if they are to be excluded at all , by an act of the Legislature . No British-born subject —no natural-born subject of this country , ought to be deprived of . sharing in tho rights of his fellow-citizens unless bo bad been convicted of some great crime , or was excluded by some direct act of legislation , directed cither

    against himself or his class . That was a principle of the constitution , and if ho , a person could-only be excluded by the concurrent voice of both J louses of Parliament and tho consent of tho drown . If a person was excluded by tho casual operation of a clause never directed against him or his class , ho was deprived of his birthright . Although ho retained the words ' on the true faith of a Christian , ' ho retained them from necessity , and contrury to his own views and wishes . ( Loud cheers . )"

    Lord DvAtUY , without opposing tho second reading of tho Hill , expressed some , object-ion to it . Looking at the encroaching spirit , of tho see of Rome , lie thought it important that every Protestant member should protest against tho assumptions of that see . Wlien Lord John KuHsell introduced his Jew Hill last session , " perhaps having u stronger opinion then than now of tho danger of 1 l upal legislation , " he introduced words renouncing the jurisdiction of tho I ' ope words Lord Lyndhurst now proposed to reject . Hut Lord Lyndhurst had , he said , retained the words excluding the Jews—not approving of them , but in order " to fneilitate tho passing of the Hill . " Hut in the other House these significant words

    muni , be ; omitted . Then , considering the extent of financial business before the Commons , the bill thus amended could not be remitted to the Lords till July or August , and then the Government would have entire control over the Hill . He , therefore , would wish that the ( JovernnuMit should pledge themselves thud the late decision by the Lords on tho Jew Hill should not at that time 1 m ; reversed 1 > y u side wind , and in a thin house . Lord John Russell , in his answer to a deputation , seemed to consider that the Hill might be uhoiI for such a purpose .

    Lord AmcitnicuN , first characterising Lord Lyndlumtt ' H speech us " full of eloquence , and a triumph of good Kcnsn , " objected to this unusual suggestion . Why Hhcmld not Lord Derby oppooo thin Bill by proxies a . s he had oppodcd , nnd HueoosHfully , the measure for the relief of tho . Jkwh ? « Ah it Htauds I cordially support the . } . ' \} "we * no doubt tho inmiHtora in thin Houho . will cordially nupport it "

    Some conversation followed , in which several peers expressed their fears that the Government would take advantage of the amendment anticipated by Lord Derby to legalize the admission of the Jews . But Lord Aberdeen declined to give any pledge upon the subject , and Lord Lyndhurst ' s Bill was read a second time . On the committal of the bill , Lord Ei ^ enborottgh : revived the objection that the Jews might obtain admission to Parliament , by means of it , and to their admission he was conscientiously opposed . They had knocked often enough at the door of the House ; " if their lordships had owed them money they could not

    have knocked more frequently . " Some alteration m the present oaths—mere " mumbling mummery" — might be usefully made . The abjuration might be made simple and intelligible , in itself , by stating that the succession to the Crown was » in the heirs of the Princess Sophia , being Protestants , and many unnecessary words might be omitted . Had Lord Lyndhurst ' s bill come from the House of Commons , he would look on it with favour , but as at present it was likely , on its being sent to the Lower House to be altered so

    as to admit the Jews . Were the admission of the Jews a political question , he would not wish the House to persist in opposing the Commons ; but it was not a political measure , it was a measure to disparage Christianity . Lord Derby repeated his fears that the Jews , by a Commons amendment of this Bill , would be admitted by a side-wind , and also apprehended that ( in accordance with what Lord John Eussell had lately said ) the clause of the oath which binds Roman Catholics not to seek injury to the

    Protestant Church , would be altered so as to remove any such restriction . Lord Aberdeen declared himself ignorant of Lord John Russell ' s intention regarding the Bill , but would not give any pledge upon the subject . He would promise that the Government would not delay the Bill ; and as far as he knew , the friends of the Jews did not intend to introduce the amendment anticipated by Lord Derby . The motion for going into Committee was rejected by 84 to 69 .

    JUDGES EXCLUSION BILL . The consideration of this bill on Wednesday provoked a debate of unexpected interest . T ? ie bill proposes to exclude all judges from the House of Commons . On the motion for the third reading , Mr . Henry DKTTMMONn moved , that the bill be read a third time this day six months . Judicial authorities were of proved utility in the House ; many questions had

    arisen in which their opinions had been of great importance , and such occasions would arise again ; for the next war was likely to involve delicate and complicated questions . The canvass of the candidate waa objected to as unseemly ; but " no gentleman was degraded in the eyes of any man by the act of canvassing . " Approving of representatives of the Universities , the Inns of Courts , and other learned bodies , Mr . Drmmnond said : —

    " At present those on the Ministerial side of tho House seem only disposed to bring in reform bills which will exclude all property , and those on tho other side bills which will exclude all brains ; and thus the House will bo made a mnss of pauperism and ignorance . ( Laughter . ) That was Socialism ; and when they had made tho House a body of persons without property or intelligence , tho sooner they fell under a military doapot tho better . " —( Laughter . )

    Immediately as Mr . Drurmnond sat down Mr . Maoauxay rose , and delivered one of his happiest speeches , the lir . st lie has spoken . since his return to the Legislature . He started with , " I shall vote with all my heart and soul for thd amendment . " In passing , ho expressed surprise at this bill having advanced ho far , " it wns hardly creditable to tho House . " On what grounds was this bill brought in ? No practical evil or inconvenience bad resulted from the presence for the hist six hundred years of the Master of tho Kolls in the House ? None of tho eminent judges who had hold that oflico and seats in tin ; Houho hod been

    loss efficient on the bench because he hold a seat in tho House . The union of political and judicial functions is condemned by this bill ; but the noble lord's was the most wretched and pitiable reform that was ever produced—the most homoeopathic dose that over ( juiiek proposed for the widest spread malady . Political ami [ judicial functions arc combined and interwoven in nil our political and judicial institutions ; this reform is comparatively but an infinitesiiniil change . If you exclude the Muster of the Rolls why not exclude tho Chairman of Quarter Sessions , many of whom have been decided party men , and yet may have to try for an election riot political partisans ?

    " Well , but oven if I were to admit thoro is soniofclungin tho functions of ( ho Muster of th <» Holla which makoH it peculiarly important that he should tako no part inpoliticH , 1 nhould still voto aguinNt tho bill bofort ) tho House an being utterly inconHJutont and inelliciont . If it be unfit that tho Master of tho RoUu ( mould bo a mouiber of

    political assemblies , why not exclude him from aH political assemblies P But you do no such thing . You shut him out of this House , but leave the House of Lords still open to him . Is that not a political assembly ? And is it not notoriously the fact that for several centur ies judges have alwavs had considerable sway in that House , nay , that they * have very often had a decided a scendancy m that House ? Is it not perfectly notorious that Lord Hardwicke —a great judge—long ruled that House ? that he be-Lord

    queathed that power to another judge , . mansnem ; and that when his energy decayed the power passed to a third judge—Lord Thurlow ? We many of us can remember how powerful a political influence lord Eldon exercised in that House—how he made and unmade Ministers —with what veneration , approaching to idolatry , he was regarded by one great party in this country—with what peculiar aversion by the other . When Lord Eldon ' s long domination ceased , other great judges , both Whig and Tory , were contending' there . " of the

    Mr . Macaulay here strikingly recalled one great scenes in modern Parliamentary History : — " Some who are here can remember , and no one who had then a seat in this House can have forgotten—those first ten days of October , 1831 . It was the most alarming and exciting , crisis during my- life . It was the time « t which that great debate of many nights took place in the House of lords , which ended in the rejection of the Reform Bill on the second reading . God forbid we should ever see such another crisis ! I certainly can never hope to hear such a debate . It was , indeed , a great and most splendid dfi ** play of every kind and variety of ability . I dare say some of those are here who , like myself , waited all that last night —waited until the late daybreak of an autumn morning for the result of the division—walking up and down the * Court of Requests , crowding and squeezing to reach the

    doors of the House of Lords—pleased if we could catch a word of that wonderful conflict of oratory . And there , in the front of either side , appeared two judges leading the opposite parties — Lord Brougham , the Lord Chancellor of England , on the One side—and Lord Lyndhurst , the Chief Baron , on the other . ( Cheers . ) How we hteag on their words ! How eagerly they were read before noon that day by hundreds of thousands through the country ! "What fearful excitement these proceedings caused was proved a few hours later by the disasters of Nottingham and the sack-of Bristol . ( Cheers . ) And yet this so exciting and important arena the noble lord , who hates political judges , is perfectly willing to leave open to the Master of the Rolls . His objection is not to the union of the political and judicial functions , but simply to fche » union of the judicial character with that of a member of the House of Commons . The

    Master of the Rolls may be—the noble lord has not tho least objection to it—the soul of a great party—the head of a great party—the leader of a democracy , the leader of an aristocracy—he may use all bis powers of rhetoric and ooplueiry to uiflmie the -p « M » iona xuad mislead the understandings of the senate ; but it must not be in this room ; he must go a few hundred feet from where we are assembled ; ho must sit on a red bench and not on a green one ; he must say " lords" and not " Mr . Speaker , and then ! the noble lord is perfectly willing to allow him to form part of a political assembly . " ( Cheers . ) But this was even understating the case ; for already the peers , as peers , were necessarily judges . In the morning they sit as judges , and give decisions binding on " the very . Master of the Rolls himself . "

    Then in the afternoon the same lords shall meet as politicians , shall attack each other sometimes pretty sharply , sometimes in a way for which if you , sir , were amongst them , you would be inclined to call them to order ( laughter ) , and shall debate the question of the Canadian clergy reserves , of Irish education , of the Government of India —• and to all this the noble lord Bays he has no objection whatever . Hero , then , you have a judicial system in which tho exercise of political functions is combined with tho judicature both above and below . If we pass this bill it will probably it ^ fcaken to tho House of Lords by men

    who have judiciaTTunctions , and will there bo taken out of thoir hands by the Lord Chancellor , who is a Cabinet Minister , arid at the samo timo tho highest judge in tho realm—and this mummery we call " purif y ing the administration of justice . " ( Cheers . ) Oh no , it is nothing of the kind . This a bill for tho purpose of purifying tho administration of justice ! If justice doea need such purification , it is utterly ineffectual ; it is effectual only ior ono purpose—the purpose which has boon so ably noticed by my hon . friend—it is effectual only for the purpoHO of weakening and degrading tho Ifouso of Commons .

    This game had been played before . More than 150 years ago , rash and short-sighted men procured an enactment that no servant of the Crown should Hit in Parliament . That enactment wan speedily repealed . If it , had not boon repealed , its effect would have been to degrade that branch of tho Legislature that spring's from tlw people , and to elevate tho hereditary aristocracy . All the Ministers of tho Crown would bo nocesaarily members of the other House of Parliament . As soon as any man , b y Ins oloquoneo , or b y hia knowledge of business , had rawed hinm < , lf to such distinction that ho was selected to bo Chancellor of tho Exchequer— First Lord of tho

    Admiralty -boerotary of State—Firat Lord of the Treaauryhcorotary at War , or no matter what , ho should instantly turn his back on what would have boon then emphatically called tho Lower Houho , and go to that House in which it , would bo alonn possiblo for him to display his mrcat ability ior tho administration of public affai r * . Sir Robert Wa polo , tho first Pitt , the second J » itt , Fox , Canning , ™ 1 i ! t mon who 80 fame wa » ins eparably associated with tho Lower Houso of Parliament—whoso names were mentioned with prido—whoso memories must fee m tfce rocolloction of every ono who passes through St . Stephen ' s Chapel , tho old sceno of their Conflict * and of thoir trnWpfar —( oheew )—nil thouo men , in tho prime and vigour of

    Untitled Article

    532 THE LEADER . [ Saturday ,

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 4, 1853, page 532, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1989/page/4/