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

    m aidens , claimants for which , were required to send their Christian and surnaraes to the churchwarden It was said \) y Sir Samuel Rom illy , that these words did nut point to any religious distinction . He could not but say that he thought that

    one could not but see from this , perhaps accidental , phrase , the interest of the trustthe persons in the alms-houses are bound to g"O to some place of worship every Sunday : can it be said that Jews would comply with this ? Then , with respect to apprentices .

    two sons of Jews have been so bound , but then it was irregularly done ; they were bound to their Jew fathers , they could not perform any regular apprenticeship , for their faith would prevent their doing * the duty of their situation as a Christian

    master would require it to be done ; they would not work on Saturdays . At the end of apprenticeship the parties are entitled , on production of a certificate of the minister and churchwarden * to an exhibition . The kind of persons who are to make this certificate , shews again cfearly the-intention ; tlie minister cannot be supposed to have auy superintendence over Jews .

    With respect to the clause , requiring * attendance on public worship , Mr . Bell had said , this does not necessarily mean Christian worship , but certainly it meant some worship on Sunday , not Saturday . He knew too of no law that tolerated Jew

    worship , to bring- it within the legal description of public worship If the argument was good , too , it must be carried still farther ; a Mahometan' might claim this

    Charity . If the argument was worth any thing * it would e * > this length . The law said expressly there can be no direct Charity for the benefit of Jews . This had been expressly decided , and how then can a Jew claim the benefit of a Christian

    Charity ? When this Chanty was founded , by law no Jew could take the benefit of it and though tliey have , by the increasing liberality of the times , been tolerated in the exercise of their religion , there had been nothing to alter their rights , certainly nothing to alter the intention of the founder , which must be construed as the law . then stood .

    The Solicitor-General then adverted to the affidavits filed . The affidavit of the petitioner , Mr . Joseph , stated , that be settled in Bedford thirty one years ago—that there had been no Jew there before in the memory of man—that he had a large family who had had the benefit of this Charitythat he liad voted in the choice of trustees

    —that two of his children had received apprentice fees—that these were apprenticed to himself—that two of his daughters had received the portion—that there are now three or four Jew families in Bedford . The affidavit of Dr . Brercton , the master , stated the regulations of the school 5

    Untitled Article

    one was , that prayers were to be read twice a-da )— -boys absenting themselves from prayer , without sufficient reason , were to be punished—that the boys should

    lead the Greek Testament . Can the Jews ( observed the Solicitor-General ) read this book which they discard ? How can they claim the privilege of this Charity , when there are parts of it absolutely inconsistent with their faith : and can thev select narts with their faith - y and can they select parts

    of it ? It is all one system , there is one primary object and intent of the founder ; and is Judaism consistent with it ? If it is inconsistent with any one part , it sufficiently shews the iutention of the whole establishment . The affidavit farther

    stated « , that the two Jew boys , who had been there , never got far in learning—that their father requested the master to dispense with their attendance on Saturday , which he consented to—and that they were allowed to sit while the Christian children were at prayers . The master of the other school

    statedthat the Jew children there were required to read only the Old Testament ; the Christian children being taught to read the Scriptures and the Church Catechism , With respect to the practice which has thus been , as it were , established since Mr . Joseph came , the Solicitor-General observed , that it must be lamented that it

    was ever allowed , because it had given rise to this praver for a general declaration by the Chancellor of their rights , and which would not only extend to this , but manyother charities . He said it was not his wish to inferfere with any civil privileges the Jews might have acquired in other respects ; he could only observe , that no legislative enactment had given them , but he did not meddle with that . It was

    sufficient for his purpose to observe , that they could have no legal title to the benefit of such a Charity which they now claim as their right . After again disclaiming all wish to interfere with th « free exercise of Jewish worship , the learned Counsel

    concluded with contending , that it was con ~ trary to the spirit of the constitution of this country to encourage persons professing a religion at variance with Christianity . No one could maintain , that in the reigns of Edward or Elizabetjj , Jews could have claimed the benefit of this

    Charity ; and what had altered their situation ? Mr . PhilHmore , on the same side , contended , that the whole question was , what was the intent of the founder , and that this must be construed with reference to the state of the law at the date of the .

    letters patent , that the admission of Jews would interfere with the regulations of the school ; while the Christian boys were on their knees at prayers , the Jew box ? must be allowed to sit—» what an example of

    Untitled Article

    Intelligence . —^ Ri glit of the Jews to English Charities . 589

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Sept. 2, 1818, page 589, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2480/page/53/