459 Admission of Baron Mayer {COMMONS} incestuous (although a great majority of both in the House and out of doors considered them to be perfectly innocent,) he attempted unjustly to prejudice the House against the Bill. Then there was an argument which had been endorsed by the noble Lord the Member for the City of London, and that was that if a man ought to be permitted to marry the sister of his deceased wife he ought also to be permitted to marry his deceased wife's niece and other relations in the same category. He had no answer to make to that. This Bill was simply to legalize marriage with a deceased's wife's sister. The Order of the day which preceded this was a Bill about tramways in Ireland, and you might as well say that tramways ought to include roads of all descriptions as say that this Bill, which was brought in for a special purpose, ought to make provision for something else. When a Bill was brought in for a special object, he submitted that Parliament ought to discuss that object alone, and ought not to allow its attention to be diverted to other collateral matters. He quite admitted that the same reasons which were urged in support of this Bill applied to the legalization of marriage with other relations of a deceased wife; but if the Bill had gone to that extent its passing through Parliament would be impeded. The real question at issue was the legalization of marriage with the deceased wife's sister, not his niece. The grievance of a man not being allowed to marry his deceased wife's niece was so small as to be infinitesimal-he might say, almost invisible-no particular hardship was felt from the state of the law in that particular, and it was therefore not deemed necessary to encumber the Bill with any provision on that subject. In conclusion, he expressed a hope that the House would by another division defeat the attempt which the hon. Member for Maidstone had made to stop the progress of the came to the Table to be sworn; and stated that, being a person professing the Jewish Religion, he entertained a concientious objection to take the Oath which by an Act passed in the last Session has been substituted for the Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, in the form therein required: Whereupon the Clerk reported the matter to Mr. Speaker, who desired Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschild to withdraw; and he withdrew accordingly. MR. SMITH said that, following the precedent of last Session, he had to move two Resolutions. The first was,— "That it appears to this Ilouse that Baron Mayer de Rothschild, a person professing the Jewish religion, being otherwise entitled to sit and voting by his conscientious objection to take and vote in this Ilouse, is prevented from sitting the Oath which, by an Act passed in the last Session of Parliament, is substituted for the Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration in the form therein required." Now, MR. NEWDEGATE said, he did not rise for the purpose of delaying the proceedings of the House by opposing the Motion, but to remark upon the extreme inconvenience which the regulation provided by the Act of last Session had imposed upon many hon. Members. Under that Act, if a person professing the Jewish religion were elected by any constituency in the country, he and his advocates were at perfect liberty to come to this House and choose their own time for proposing the Resolution which the Act of Parliament directed should be submitted to the House on the occasion, and that Resolution was to have the force of law itself. what he complained of was, that in the present instance no notice whatever had been given to the House of the intention to propose the Resolution. In saying this he had no desire to reflect upon the conduct of the hon. Gentlemen who had brought the Gentleman, who had been elected, to the table that day, but wished to remark that the House were establishing a prece dent by which they might be constantly taken by surprise, for he assured them that both himself and many other hon. Members were totally ignorant up to the present moment of the course which was intended to be taken on the present occasion. This was a grave question, because if they once established a precedent by passing ResoADMISSION OF BARON MAYER AMSCHEL lutions which might be considered as par measure. Question put, "That the word now' stand part of the Question." The House divided:-Ayes 135; 77: Majority 58. Noes Main Question put, and agreed to. row. DE ROTHSCHILD. Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschildreturned for the Town and Port of Hythe, taking of the nature of privilege, having also the force of law, the greatest inconvenience might result. He wished to ask, 461 Admission of Baron Mayer {FEBRUARY 16, 1859} Amschel de Rothschild. 462 for his own information, whether, in the opinion of the Speaker, this Resolution, which was passed under the authority of an Act of Parliament, had effect for the Session only, or during the existence of the Parliament; or whether it was a perpetual obligation until rescinded? He wished, also, to put a question to the hon. Member for London (Baron Lionel de Rothschild) whether the hon. Gentleman the Member for Hythe, who bore his name, was a british subject by birth, by naturalisation or otherwise? SIR GEORGE GREY said, he should be glad to hear the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman on the first question, which was a very proper one; but, as to the second, he submitted that if the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) was of opinion that the Gentle man who had come to the table was not duly qualified, the proper course to try that question was to present a petition to the House. MR. CONINGHAM observed that the scene they had just witnessed was a strong example of the evils of compelling any one to take the Oaths at all. The conscientious opinions of those Members of the House who happened to be Jews were now to be respected, but there were many others whose conscientious opinions were not yet respected. Many persons who held peculiar convictions on religious subjects were absolutely still denied that lawful justice which was the common right of British citizens. There had been several cases before the police courts in which men had been questioned about their religious opinions, and when those were found not to be consistent with those of the great majority of people in the United Kingdom, their just complaints and rightful claims before those courts had been denied. This injury was done them because they were too honest and truthful to swear in a form contrary to their own consciences. He trusted, however, that the day was not remote when oaths would be abolished as immoral and impious-a Pagan institution, which had been imported into a Christian country. LORD JOHN RUSSELL said, that with regard to the objection which he understood the hon. Member for Warwickshire to make, that the hon. Member for Hythe had come to the table without notice, he thought it most unreasonable, because he conceived that it was to the public interest that the House should be full. MR. NEWDEGATE explained that he objected to the form under which they were proceeding, under which the House was called upon to pass the Resolution without notice. LORD JOHN RUSSELL said, it seemed to him that the hon. Gentleman had repeated the objection to which he had adverted, because if the hon. Member for Hythe came to the table without notice, the question must be raised without notice. But there was another statement which he should like to hear from the Chair, whether the Speaker conceived that these Resolutions, which were declared by the Act to be necessary, were in force permanently for the Parliament, or for the Session; in short, what was the opinion of the Chair on that subject, which would guide the House now and on future occasions? MR. SPEAKER: In answer to the question addressed to me, I should say that it is a well-established rule of Parliament that a Resolution of this House expires with the Session in which it is passed. It has force during the Session, but has no force after prorogation or dissolution. If a Resolution remained in force as long as it stood on the Journals, and until it was rescinded, there would be no difference between a Resolution and a Standing Order, but there is a difference well known to every Member of this House. In my opinion the course now proposed is the correct course, and in strict conformity to the statute passed during the last Session of Parliament on which the Resolution now moved is founded. Resolved-That it appears to this House that Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschild, a person professing the Jewish Religion, being otherwise entitled to sit and vote in this House, is prevented from so sitting and voting by his conscientious objection to take the Oath which by an Act passed in the last Session of Parliament has been substituted for the Oaths of Allegiance, Supremacy, and Abjuration, in the form therein required. MR. SMITH said, he had then to move the second Resolution, which was, -- "That a person professing the Jewish religion may henceforth take the oath prescribed in the Act, omitting the words, and I make this declaration on the true faith of a Christian.'” MR. NEWDEGATE said, that although his objection to the admission of Jews into Parliament was as strong as ever, he should not, after the statement of the Speaker, divide the House. Up to that moment he had been in utter uncertainty | fectly authentic and correct. The noble as to when this matter would be brought Earl also asks whether the reforms embefore the House, and he did not think it fair to a great number of hon. Gentlemen who shared his convictions on the subject, that the House should be moved in this manner in their absence. Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschild being again come to the Table, desired to be sworn on the Old Testament, as being binding on his conscience: Whereupon the Clerk reported the matter to Mr. Speaker, who then desired the Clerk to swear him upon the Old Testament. Baron Mayer Amschel de Rothschild was sworn accordingly, and subscribed the Oath at the Table. House adjourned at Three o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Thursday, February 17, 1859. MINUTES.] PUBLIC BILLS.-1a Ecton and Walton Exchange. 3 Law of Property and Trustees Relief Amend ment. braced in that Message, and in the communications attached to it, were sanctioned by Her Majesty's Government. Just let me remind the House first of the position and circumstances of this question. Last autumn, serious difficulties having arisen Resolved-That any person professing the Jewish Religion may henceforth, in-difficulties threatening to make themtaking the Oath prescribed in an Act of selves felt in the internal administration of the last Session of Parliament to entitle the Ionian Islands-my right hon. Friend him to sit and vote in this House, omit at the head of the Colonial Office felt that the words "and I make this declaration the first step to be taken in this matter was upon the true faith of a Christian." to obtain accurate information on the points connected with the alleged grievances and anomalies. Accurate information could only be obtained by local inquiry in the Ionian Islands themselves; and, knowing the importance of obtaining an impartial judgment on the subject, he proposed to Mr. Gladstone to undertake the task of a special mission for that purpose. Mr. Gladstone accepted that task, and received before leaving this country full instructions and communications, many of them of a confidential nature. On his arrival at Corfu he addressed himself with extreme ability and with indefatigable patience to an inquiry into the alleged grievances; and after a very full investigation he communicated to Her Majesty's Government first of all those facts with which he conceived it necessary for them to be acquainted; and, secondly, recommendations of a remedial character which he thought it necessary to propose. Both those reports were taken into serious consideration by Her Majesty's Government, and the recommendations of Mr. Gladstone were approved. About that time circumstances took place, into which it is unnecessary for me to enter, which occasioned a vacancy in the office of Lord High Commissioner. My right hon. Friend at the head of the Colonial Department-feelling the weight and authority of the proposals which Mr. Gladstone had recommended for adoption, and which had been concurred in by Her Majesty's Government, and feeling also with how much greater weight and authority those proposals would THE EARL OF CARNARVON: My come from a person possessing the conLords, in answer to the question which fidence of the Ionian people and one who the noble Earl has put so briefly and had made himself completely master of the distinctly, I have to say, first of all, as subject-proposed to Mr. Gladstone to unregards the report which appeared in the dertake provisionally the duties of Lord newspapers two days since of the Message High Commissioner, and to that proposi communicated by Mr. Gladstone in his tion Mr. Gladstone consented, in order to capacity of Lord High Commissioner to give substantial effect to his own recomthe Ionian Islands, that that report is per-mendations. This has been done, and the THE IONIAN ISLANDS.-QUESTION. EARL GREY: My Lords, I wish to ask the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the account which has recently appeared in the newspapers of certain proposals for a change in the constitution of the Ionian Islands hav. ing been recommended by Mr. Gladstone, Her Majesty's Lord High Commissioner to the Ionian Parliament, is authentic; and, if so, whether those proposals have met with the approval of Her Majesty's Government; and, also, whether there will be any objection to lay on the table of the House the correspondence which has passed upon the subject. Seventeen Resolutions and the Message to | render it, in my opinion, highly impolitic which the noble Earl has alluded embody that the papers connected with this subject the formal expression of the recommenda- should be laid on the table of the House tions which he made to the Government, will equally apply on the part of Her and which the Government has approved. I Majesty's Government with regard to a pass now to the last part of the noble Earl's discussion of the question at the present question, as to the laying the corres- moment. Although of course it rests with pondence on the table of the House. I the noble Earl opposite to say whether he regret very much that I am unable to give will be satisfied with the explanation that the noble Earl an answer in the affirmative. has been given, I must not only on the The whole Correspondence, with some few part of Her Majesty's Government refuse exceptions, bears on those questions which the production of these papers, but I must, are at this very moment submitted to the under present circumstances, decline to consideration of the Ionian Assembly; and enter into a discussion of this matter. I cannot conceive anything more likely seriously to prejudice the issue of those deliberations, and to affect unsatisfactorily the whole proceedings in this matter, than the publication of these papers at this moment. I therefore trust the noble Earl will not press that point. I can assure him that as soon as the Ionian Assembly have pronounced their decision, and have either accepted or refused the propositions made to them, and that the matter is in a condition to be brought before Parliament, there will be no delay on the part of Her Majesty's Government to present to the House any papers which may be necessary for the due consideration or discussion of the subject. EARL GREY: My Lords, I think it is quite reasonable, when serious questions of this sort are pending, that no demand should be made for the production of papers relating to them; but we cannot disguise from ourselves that in respect to this matter there is a possibility, at all events, of steps being taken-and if once taken they will be irrevocable-that may lead to very serious consequences. Before these steps are taken, I think it necessary that this subject should be discussed by your Lordships' House; and, therefore, though I certainly will not press for papers which Her Majesty's Government on their responsibility declare cannot be produced, I shall on Monday next move an Address to the Crown for the production of papers in order that with such information as we now possess we may discuss this very important subject, and that Her Majesty's Government may state more clearly than they can do at this moment their grounds for objecting to the production of those papers. I hope that before I make that Motion a certain portion of those papers may, at all events, be produced. THE EARL OF DERBY: I think it right to say that the same motives which THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: It is admitted that the papers in question, under present eircumstances, cannot be produced, and that discussion may be dangerous; but I wish to ask my noble Friend the Under-Secretary for the Colonies in what manner, supposing the constitution to be accepted, the Lord High Commissioner is to be enabled to dismiss the Ministry if the Ministry should not be willing to go out? Under the Constitution every Act must be countersigned by the Minister, and therefore, unless the Ministry consent to their own elimination, it is quite impossible to remove them. Nor is it possible for the Lord High Commissioner either to prorogue or dissolve the Parliament without the consent of the existing Ministryprorogation or dissolution being the only means of enabling him to extricate himself from their power. I perceive, also, that one of the recommendations, as I understand them, of the Lord High Commissioner is, that the Senate shall have a longer duration than the Assembly; and, if that be the case, it may be impossible to dissolve both the Senate and the Assembly simultaneously. There is another point. The majority of the Senate is to be elected by somebody different to that which elects the Assembly, the result of which would in all probability be that the Ministers will always obtain a majority in the Senate ; and as it is only by means of the Senate that alterations in the law could be introduced into the Assembly, the Senate being elected for a longer period than the Assembly, if the Ministry had a constant majority there they would possess more power than I think will be at all convenient. THE EARL OF DERBY: I think your Lordships must see the inconvenience of discussing, in the very partial manner in which it is possible to discuss them, questions on which we have very imperfect and inadequate information. My noble Friend 467 Law of Property and Trustees {LORDS} Relief Amendment Bill. 468 Majesty to decide whether She will accept or reject such modifications. LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: I hope the noble Earl does not mean to contend that it would not be competent to the Imperial Parliament to express an opinion on the propriety or the impropriety of the course pursued by Mr. Gladstone, with the sanction of the Government, in submitting such Resolutions to the Ionian Legislature. THE EARL OF DERBY: It will be perfectly competent to the Members of either House of Parliament to pronounce an opinion upon that point if they shall think fit. But I must, in the performance of my public duty, oppose any attempt to raise any discussion in this House upon proposals which are still under the consideration of the Ionian Legislature. seems to forget that if we are to enter | may think desirable, and it will be for Her upon this subject we shall be going into the discussion of questions which, in the form of Resolutions, are to come for consideration before the Legislature of the independent Republic of the Ionian Islands. In that Legislature all these questions are about to be discussed, and the recommendations brought forward by Mr. Gladstone are to be considered, for the purpose of eliciting the opinion of the people of the Ionian Islands. When that opinion has been ascertained it will be the duty of that Legislature to embody it in an Act according to the constitution of the country, and that Act can be of no force until it has received the sanction of the Crown, For these reasons it appears to me to be inconvenient to discuss these questions before the Legislative Assembly of the Ionian Islands has come to some decision respecting them. I think that by doing so we may place the matter in a very false position. Her Majesty's Government have no control over the Ionian Islands. By treaty Her Majesty is the protecting Power, but also by treaty those Islands form the independent Septinsular Republic. Their legislation is not subject to the control of the British Parliament, although it requires the sanction of Her Majesty; and upon that sanction being given or withheld it is open to Parliament to pronounce an opinion upon the propriety of the course thus adopted. THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: I understand distinctly from the published account of Mr. Gladstone's speech, which, is no doubt, authentic, that these propositions have been laid before the Assembly, to be adopted or rejected by them en bloc, and that that body is not to be allowed to alter them in any way, but must take the whole or none. THE EARL OF DERBY: I think my noble Friend is under a misapprehension; but this is a proof of the inconvenience of discussing this matter now. No doubt, Mr. Gladstone's statement is, that these propositions are to be considered as forming a whole, and that it is not competent to the Ionian Legislature to give their assent to such portion of the plan as may secure the attainment of their special ob jects, while they reject that portion of it which affords securities for the maintenance of the authority of the Crown. Full permission, however, is given to the Ionian Legislature to suggest any modifications in the details of the scheme which they THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: These are the expressions which I found in Mr. Gladstone's speech: "The points which I have now named to you are those which appear to be essential to a beneficial readjustment of your constitution. It is requisite that I should give you fully to understand that the few but important provisions I have recommended as guarantees for tranquil and stable government are tendered to you as a whole." THE EARL OF DERBY: : You have not read the whole. THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH: I will. He proceeds to say: Any vote impairing any of these would be fatal to the entire plan; and I must add, with respect to all the leading points I have touched, that England has kept nothing in reserve; and laid down, you may find advantage in dealing with that, if you do not approve the outlines she has them generally, and declining to accept them. I feel certain that in any case the Assembly will meet the question frankly; and that, mindful of evade by indirect measures the duty of uttering its dignity, it will discountenance any attempt to a clear and intelligible opinion upon proposals of such great moment to the Ionian people. In that spirit I act when I inform you that any vote, such as to alter materially their character, would shake the whole fabric to its base, and might at any stage annul the labours previously spent by rendering it needful that the whole subject should be reconsidered." It appears, therefore, that the Assembly are not to be allowed to introduce any modification into the scheme. LAW OF PROPERTY AND TRUSTEES THE EARL OF DERBY said, he did not wish to offer any impediment to the passing of the measure, but he thought it right to |