HC Deb 17 May 1830 vol 24 cc767-9
Sir R. Wilson

said, he had to present a Petition, most numerously and respectably signed, from the Borough of Southwark, in favour of the Jews. In that borough, the first battle was fought and the first triumph obtained in favour of the Catholics and Dissenters at the last general election; the inhabitants of that borough now asked that the Jews might be allowed to possess the same rights as themselves.

The Solicitor General

said, that he had presented a petition, on a former night, from a gentleman named Levi, and that he had then stated what the petitioner represented to be the sentiments of the Jews upon the measure which had lately been brought in. Mr. Levi had since publicly disclaimed those sentiments. He begged to say that he knew nothing of Mr. Levi. He had received the petition from Mr. Bicknell, solicitor to Greenwich Hospital. He rose now merely to state the authority upon which he had made the representation he had given to the House—namely, that the Jews did not wish for seats in Parlia- ment, but merely to enjoy the rights of property. The learned Gentleman then read a letter from Mr. Bicknell, saying, that Mr. Levi requested him to state that neither he nor any of the Jews with whom he had conversed desired any elective franchise—they wished only for security to their property. He therefore had made the statement to the House on the authority of Mr. Bicknell.

Mr. Brougham

begged to know, merely out of curiosity, who this Mr. Levi was who took upon himself to answer for all his brethren, and to say that they wanted neither elective franchise nor seats in Parliament. He had never heard of him before, but that perhaps only argued himself unknown.

Sir R. Wilson

said, that the Jews already exercised the elective franchise, whether by law or not; certain it was that they had that franchise practically, for they exercised it.

The Solicitor General

said, that if the Jews were in the practical enjoyment of the elective franchise, one of their complaints fell to the ground. As to who Mr. Levi was, he had already said he knew nothing about him.

Dr. Lushington

said, he could hardly suppose his learned friend, the Solicitor General, to be serious, when he said that the practical enjoyment of a right ought to satisfy men. Such an enjoyment was liable to be disputed, and would, of course, be disputed where the vote was of any importance. No rational man, surely, could be satisfied with this.

Lord Killeen

, in presenting a Petition from certain Catholics of Ireland, in favour of the Jews, stated, that he had great pleasure in expressing his concurrence with the petitioners.

Mr. Martin

, in presenting a similar Petition from Roman Catholic gentry of the county and city of Worcester, observed, that the petitioners expressed their gratitude for the measure of last Session, by which they were restored to their rights, and thought they could not display that gratitude in any better way than in petitioning for the extension of those rights to their fellow-subjects, the Jews. He hoped this petition would have, at least, the effect of proving that they who had been stamped as bigots did not really deserve that character: and he begged to say that he heartily concurred in the views which the petitioners had taken of this subject.

Mr. Protheroe

said, that he could bear testimony to the disposition of the Roman Catholics, in that part of the country with which he was connected, to extend to others that civil and religious liberty which they themselves had recently obtained.