The Jew Bill of 1753

<plain_text><page sequence="1">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. By ALBERT M. HYAMSON, F.R.Hist.S. (Paper read before the Jewish Historical Society of England, April 1, 1906.) For a brief period in the middle of the eighteenth century, the Jewish Question became in England the burning topic of political discussion. To the exclusion of all other interests, Jewish naturalisation monopolised the attention of politicians and publicists. The Jew became the centre of Parliamentary debates ; his psychology, his habits, and his opinions supplied the material for newspaper articles innumerable ; around him was waged a warfare in which scores of pamphleteers took part. The Jewish Question passed beyond the portals of Parliament and the study of the publicist. The controversy fell to the level of the man in the street, and mobs paraded London threatening its Jewish inhabitants to the sound of the refrain : "No Jews, no wooden Shoes." The cause of the alarming agitation was a harmless measure introduced into Parliament by the Whig Government of Pelham to enable foreign Jews settled in England to apply to Parliament for naturalisation just as their Christian fellow-aliens were able to do. Although the Jews were expelled from England by Edward I., there was, until 1609, no bar to the naturalisation in the ordinary course of any foreign Jew, settled in England for the requisite period, who could induce Parliament to grant him English citizenship. The right was, however, theoretical rather than practical, for there is no record of any such application ever having been made by a Jew. The anti-Catholic agitation early in the seventeenth century led to an alteration in the law affecting the naturalisation of aliens. It was enacted by Parliament in 1609 that in future naturalisation should be dependent on the accept? ance by the candidate for English citizenship of the Sacrament and also 150</page><page sequence="2">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 157 of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy.1 The measure was intended to prevent the admission into the English community of foreign Catholics. It is undoubted that, in the consideration of the Bill, the question of its effect on Jews who might afterwards settle in England was unnoticed. Nevertheless, the measure raised an effectual barrier between foreign Jews and English nationality. The position created by the Act of 1609 remained undisturbed for two generations. In 1663, however, the stringency of the law affecting foreigners was slightly relaxed. The commercial necessities of the nation demanded a more elastic code, and the value of foreign methods and foreign intellect was recognised. It was found that the incorporation in the English body politic of certain foreign elements would be of great advantage to the country. It was, therefore, enacted in the fifteenth year of the reign of Charles II. that foreigners who should for three years exercise in England, Wales, or Berwick, the trade of breaking, heckling, or dressing hemp or flax; or of making and whitening thread ; or of bleaching cloth made of hemp or flax only; or of making twine or nets for fishery, or string cordage; or of making tapestry hangings, should, upon taking the oaths of supremacy and allegiance before two justices of the peace, enjoy all privileges as natural-born subjects.2 No reference was made in the Act to any necessity for taking the Sacrament, and, con? sequently, any alien possessing the mentioned qualifications could by its means acquire English nationality. In 1740 the anti-alien laws were still further relaxed. A measure of that year entitled, "An Act for naturalising such foreign Protestants and others therein mentioned, as are settled, or shall settle, in any of His Majesty's Colonies in America," dealt specifically with the case of Jews coining within that category. In Section II. "such who profess the Jewish religion" were exempted from the necessity of receiving the Sacrament as a preliminary to the Act of Naturalisation. In Section III. the same persons were allowed to omit the phrase " upon the true faith of a Christian " when taking the Oath of Abjuration.3 Beyond those immediately affected by it, the measure aroused little interest, and for thirteen years its working proved as smooth as its passage had been. 1 "Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1374. 2 Ibid. 3 Transactions of Jewish Hist. Soc. Amer., vol. i.</page><page sequence="3">158 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Nearly two hundred Jews, the majority of them residents in Jamaica took advantage of the Act, and became English citizens. Thirty-one years earlier, in 1709, Parliament had accepted a proposal to naturalise foreign Protestants upon their taking the oaths and re? ceiving the Sacrament in any Protestant Church. The Act of that year, however, had been repealed in 1712. A similar measure had been brought forward by Mr. Nugent in 1745, and another in 1751. The latter Bill was warmly supported by Henry Pelham, then at the head of the Government, and the country being at the time in a state of alarm at the alleged decrease of population, due, it was suggested, to excessive drinking,1 the measure passed through its earlier stages with ease. A powerful opposition, however, soon appeared upon the scene. Commercial rivalries were aroused, and the hostility of the Church, which feared a reinforcement to the army of dissenters, awakened. Engineered by the powerful organisations of the City and the Church, an anti-alien agitation soon arose, and the Bill was quietly dropped.2 The Government might have been warned by its experience in this connection, but it seems to have preferred the precedent of 1740. The opinion appeared justifiable that if a measure removing from Parliament the power of naturalising an unlimited number of Jewish aliens, for the most part of moderate means, had been accepted without demur, another measure not of itself naturalising a single individual, but merely enabling foreign Jews of wealth to apply to Parliament for admission to the English community, would arouse little opposition. A desire had already arisen among the richer foreign Jews settled in England to obtain for themselves the same status as that enjoyed by their co-religionists who had been born in the country. There was also, despite the many decisions given in favour of the contention of the Jews, considerable doubt whether even English-born Jews were qualified to own estates, and foremost among those who desired this point definitely and finally decided in favour of the Jewish claims was the famous financier, Sampson Gideon, a personal friend of Walpole, and the trusted financial 1 Walpole's "George II.," vol. i. ; "The Other Side of the Question," p. 3. Dr. Maddox, Bishop of Worcester, estimated that the population of the country had decreased between 1733 and 1750 by 162,084 souls. 2 W. E. H. Lecky's " History of England," vol. i.; Wm. Coxe's " Memoirs of the Administration of Henry Pelham."</page><page sequence="4">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 159 adviser of the Government. Gideon had already acquired the ambition to establish a family among the landed gentry of the kingdom, and the proposed legislation, he thought, would contribute valuable assistance to his project. When the Bill for the Naturalisation of Foreign Protestants was before the House of Commons, the Jews developed a deep interest in its progress, and expressed a desire that its powers might be extended to include themselves. Their suggestions obtained a sympathetic reception, but as the Bill itself was in great jeopardy, they voluntarily withdrew their application, lest the suggested extension might imperil a measure with which they had already every sympathy.1 The views of the Government coinciding with those of the Jews, the Session of 1753 saw the introduction into the House of Lords of a measure " to permit persons professing the Jewish . religion to be naturalised by Parliament and for other purposes therein mentioned." The Bill, after references to the Act of 1609, and to the disqualifica? tions it laid on Jews, " whereby many persons of considerable substance professing the Jewish religion are prevented from being naturalised by Bill to be exhibited in Parliament for that purpose," and to the Naturalisa? tion Act of 1740, proceeded: "Be it therefore enacted . . . that persons professing the Jewish religion may, upon application for that purpose, be naturalised by parliament without receiving the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the said act of the seventh year of the reign of King James the first, or any other law, statute, matter or thing to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding." The measure further provided that a candidate for naturalisation should have dwelt in the country for at least three years previous to his application to Parliament. Applicants under the proposed Act would be called upon to prove to the satisfaction of the legislature not only that they professed the Jewish religion, but that they had done so for the three previous years. Finally, the measure proposed to lay a disability on the whole of Anglo-Jewry, natural-born or naturalised, from which it had hitherto been free. It enacted that " every person professing the Jewish religion shall be disabled, and is hereby made incapable to purchase, either in his or her own name, or in the name of any other person or persons, to his or her use, or in trust for him or her, or to inherit or take by descent, devise, or limitation, in 1 " Considerations on the Bill," p. 23.</page><page sequence="5">160 THE JEW BILL OP 1753. possession, reversion, or remainder, any advowson or right of patronage or presentation, or other right or interest whatsoever, of, in, or to any benefice, prebend, or other ecclesiastical living or promotion, school, hospital, or donative whatsoever, or any grant of any avoidance thereof; and all and singular estates, terms, and other interests whatsoever, of, in, or to any benefice, prebend, or other ecclesiastical living, or promotion, school, hospital, or donative, which, from and after the said first day of June, shall be made, suffered, or done, to or for the use or behoof of any such person or persons, or upon any trust or confidence, mediately or immediately, to or for the benefit or behoof of any such person or persons, shall be utterly void and of none effect, to all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever." The Bill was before the Lords for five weeks in order that the bearing of its provisions might be thoroughly understood. At the end of that period the measure received the unanimous support of the members of the Upper House, and was introduced into that of the Commons on Monday the 16th of April, 1753. The following day it was read a first time, and duly ordered for second reading.1 By this date, however, the prejudices of the populace having been played upon by political agitators and their passions aroused, the proposed legislation had attracted a widespread attention, and the suggested creation of machinery for the naturalisation of Jewish aliens had become the burning topic of current politics. The imminence of a general election rendered the Opposition all the more eager to seize every opportunity of damaging the position of the Government, and opposition to the policy of the Ministry in regard to the Jewish Question seemed the easiest method of acquiring popularity among the electorate. In the debates and divisions that ensued all the opponents of the Government acted as one in their hostility to the measure, and in this attitude they were supported by many dissentient Whigs who objected on principle to the policy of the leaders of their party. The motion for the second reading of the Bill was accepted, but the sequel that it should be committed was the signal for opening the contest in the Commons. Mr. William Nor they immediately rose to inquire " what terrible crime the people of this kingdom have committed" that they should be threatened year by year with a measure " for depriving them of their birthright." 1 " Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1359.</page><page sequence="6">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 161 The Bill before the House, he considered, went further than any of its predecessors. They merely attempted to rob them of their birthright as Englishmen, " but this Bill I must look on as an attempt to rob them of their birthright as Christians.,, He quoted the misfortunes that befell Esau and his posterity on account of a similar error of judgment, and warned the House not to bring such a fate upon the English, who were to receive in return not even a mess of pottage. He drew a terrible picture of the consequences of the introduction of the measure before the House. The Jews, he feared, would not await its adoption. " I shall expect to see the Jews become the highest bidders for every estate that is to be purchased in England, the counties of which, I suppose, they will at some private meeting divide among their several tribes, by lot, as they of old did the land of Canaan; and when the rich Jews have thus become possessed of land estates, great numbers of poor Jews must necessarily settle in their neighbourhood ; for we know that they can make use of none but Jew butchers, bakers, poulterers, and the like trades, which, of course, must make them soon become very numerous in this country." 1 Other speakers expressed their fears in various terms. Sir Edmund Isham opposed the motion on the ground that although the Bill pretended to be only for the creation of machinery, it would in reality effect the naturalisation of multitudes of foreign Jews. Moreover, these foreign Jews differed from French refugees and German Protestants inasmuch as they never assimilated with, but kept themselves apart from, the general population. Similar behaviour in Egypt had resulted in the increase of one family to 600,000 fighting men in addition to women, children, and servants, and that despite cruel persecutions. By the measure, the Government was attempting to give " the lie to all the prophecies in the New Testament, and endeavouring . . . to invalidate one of the strongest proofs of the Christian religion. By those prophecies they are to remain dispersed ; they are to remain without any fixed habitation until they acknowledge Christ to be the Messiah, and then they are to be gathered together from all corners of the earth, and to be restored to their native land ; but by this Bill, and this new doctrine, we seem resolved to gather them from all corners of the earth, and to give them a settlement here without any such acknowledgment." 1 " Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1366-73. VOL. Vf. L</page><page sequence="7">162 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Instead of going into Committee on the Bill, Sir Edmund suggested that it would be well to appoint a Secret Committee "to inquire whether the Jews be allowed to have a synagogue, or other place of public worship in this kingdom, and if they have, by what authority that indulgence has been granted or allowed; for I am sure, we have several express laws against it, and no law, that I know of, for dispensing with them." 1 The leader of the opposition to the measure, however, was Sir John Barnard, one of the members for the City and a personal enemy of Sampson Gideon. He based his opposition not only on religious grounds, but also on the argument that a Jewish immigration, instead of in? creasing English commerce and thus benefiting the country as well as all its inhabitants, would reduce the profits of the English merchants by transferring a large proportion of their business into Jewish hands. Moreover, the Jews would "in time render it impossible for any Christian to carry on any trade, either foreign or domestic, to advantage; Jews may become our only merchants, and our only shop-keepers. They will probably leave the laborious part of all manufactures and mechanical trades to the poor Christian, but they will be the paramount masters." Not only would the mercantile and trading classes become impoverished; their condition would react on that of the landed gentry, with the result that one common ruin would overwhelm all the Christian inhabi? tants, and the whole or the greater number of the landed estates of he country would pass into Jewish hands. Somewhat illogically, Sir John argued that these estates would be acquired by purchase by the hosts of poor Jews who would swarm into the country if the measure were adopted.2 Another speaker, for the benefit of the House, illustrated the "resentment and cruelty" of the Jews, from the story of Esther, " which informs us, that upon their getting the power into their hands, they put to death in two days near 76,000 of those they were pleased to call their enemies, without either judge or jury." 3 In the proposal for the naturalisation of foreign Jews he saw considerable danger to the State. The Jews, he said, would always be obnoxious to the people, 1 44 Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1379-83. 2 Ibid., 1388-95. 3 Ibid., 1103. Mr. Nicholas Fazakerley.</page><page sequence="8">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 163 and in consequence it would be to their interests to assist the king in his opposition to the will of his subjects, and in all probability would furnish some future ambitious monarch with the money necessary for supporting a foreign army in order to oppress his subjects.1 The discussion was by no means left entirely to opponents of the measure. Each opposition speaker found a supporter of the Bill to reply to him. After Mr. Northey had spoken, Lord Dupplin rose. His chief argument in favour of the measure was that it would introduce capital into the country by attracting rich Jews to settle here. More? over, it would stop the drain of gold that went to pay the dividends on Government loans held abroad.2 Mr. Robert Nugent supported the measure for a different reason. After expressing his pleasure at the support rendered by the bench of bishops, he pointed out that in their action the right reverend divines were only upholding the faith to which their lives had been devoted. By encouraging Jews to settle in England opportunity would be given for conversion to the Church of the realm. By naturalising rich Jews the arguments of Christianity would be strengthened. " There is a fashion in religion," he pointed out, " as well as in everything else; it is unfashionable to be of a religion different from that established in the country in which we live." He foresaw that if the Bill were adopted the son or grandson of every Jew who became a landowner, if not the purchaser himself, would adopt the dominant faith, and he appealed to the House, in the interests of the Church of the land, to pass the Bill into law. There could be no risk in adopting the measure, for it was notorious that Jews never attempted to make converts, nor was it likely that they would succeed if they attempted to do so at the expense of the Church of England.3 Mr. Nicholas Hardinge attributed the opposition to the measure to trade rivalry, and dilated upon the great commercial advantages conferred upon states by the settlement of Jews in their territories. A point was also made of the custom of Jews to provide for their own poor, so that in England there need be no fear of any coming on the parish. Finally, the services of Jews in the crisis of 1745 were mentioned, and the speaker quoted the instance of one Jewish merchant of foreign birth, who, hearing 1 "Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1409. 2 Ibid., 1373-9. 3 Ibid., 1383-8.</page><page sequence="9">164 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. " that the Government was in distress for want of a sufficient number of small ships of war to guard our coasts, in order to prevent the rebels receiving any succour from France, came to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, and told them, that he had then no less than five stout privateers in the river, all ready to put to sea, every one of which should be at the Government's disposal; and, further, that he was so far from expecting any recompense or reward for this testimony of his loyalty, or for the service they might be of, that as long as the Government had occasion for them, he would maintain them all at his own expense."1 The debate was wound up by the Prime Minister, Mr. Pelham, who after observing that he would not contend with the opponents of the Bill concerning the laws that governed the residence of Jews in the kingdom, said that, if their viewrs were correct, it was urgently necessary not only to pass the measure before them, but also to incorporate in the law of the realm another, securing to the Jews of England the tenure of pro? perty. Dealing with the charge of endeavouring to de-Christianise the country, he denied that by any stretch of the imagination the proposed measure could have that effect. Jews, he contended, ought to be con? sidered in the same light as other dissenters, "not as enemies of our ecclesiastical establishment, but as men, whose con? science will not allow them to conform to it. . . . We have less danger to apprehend from them than from any other dissenters, because they never attempt to make converts, and because such an attempt wrould be peculiarly difficult. The strict tenets of their religion exclude every man who is not of the seed of Israel; and as they cannot intermarry with a strange woman, we need not fear that they will have any success in converting our country? women." Pelham dismissed in few words the contention that the proposed legislation was an attempt to prevent the fulfilment of biblical prophecy, and emphasised in more detail the commercial advantages that the legis? lation would confer upon the country.2 At the conclusion of this address the Bill was committed by ninety-five votes to sixteen.3 The next phase in the struggle was that of the petitions. Alarmed somewhat by the opposition that had been shown to the measure in the 1 "Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1395-1402. 2 Ibid., 1412-7 ; Coxe's " Memoirs," pp. 248-51. 3 " Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1417.</page><page sequence="10">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 165 House of Commons, and by the clamour that had been aroused out of doors, the supporters of the Bill determined to petition Parliament in its favour. On the 21st of May a petition was presented by several mer? chants and traders in the city of London, stating " that the Petitioners are of Opinion that the Passing of the Bill, depending in the House, to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalised by Parliament, into a Law, may encourage Persons of Wealth and Sub? stance to remove, with their Effects, from foreign Parts into this Kingdom, and increase the Commerce and Credit of this Nation, and, therefore pray, that the said Bill may pass into a Law."1 The opposition con? tended that the petitioners were for the most part either foreigners or descendants of Jews, and on that account the prayer should be ignored.2 The Corporation of the City had hitherto seldom lost an opportunity for inflicting injury on the Jews settled within its jurisdiction, and it was not likely that the present opportunity would be allowed to pass. On the same day as that on which the petition in favour of the Bill had been presented, one from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the City in Common Council assembled was brought up by the Sheriffs. It expressed the apprehensions of the petitioners " that should the said Bill be passed into a law, the same would tend greatly to the dishonour of the Christian religion, endanger our excellent constitution, and be highly prejudicial to the interest and trade of the kingdom in general, and the said city in particular." 3 The following day a third petition was presented. This came from the merchants and traders of London, especially those engaged in trade with Spain and Portugal. They stated that " they are apprehensive the said Bill, if passed into a Law, will in its Consequences greatly affect our Trade and Commerce with foreign Nations, and particularly with Spain and Portugal; and will also be attended with many other very bad Effects to this Kingdom; and, therefore, pray, that they may have Leave by themselves, or Council, to offer their Reasons against the Passing of the said Bill into a Law."4 A fourth petition came from a section of the population that was strongly opposed to the spirit of religious intoler 1 " Pari. Hist." vol. xiv., 1417; " Considerations on the Bill," p. 31. 2 Coxe's " Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 252. 3 "Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1417. 4 Ibid., 1417-8 ; " Considerations on the Bill," pp. 26-7.</page><page sequence="11">166 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. ance which seemed to be arising. They were opposed to the agitation, for they saw in it a danger to the existing system of government, and the petitioners thought that, uwere it once admitted, that it is proper for the Public to examine People's private Rights on Account of their Religion, none can answer where that would end."1 The petition was signed by more than two hundred considerable merchants, traders, manu? facturers, shipwrights, and commanders of ships on behalf of themselves, as well as many others engaged in shipping and the woollen and other manufactures. The petitioners expressed the opinion that " the Passing the said Bill into a Law, may encourage many Persons of Wealth and Substance, to remove with their Effects, from foreign Parts into this Kingdom, the greatest Part of which, agreeable to the Experience of former times, will be employed by them, in foreign Trade and Commerce. And in the increasing the Shipping, and encouraging the Exportation of the Woollen and other Manufactures of this Kingdom; of which the persons, who profess the Jewish Religion, have, for many years last past, exported great Quantities." 2 After the Bill had been read a third time, the petitions were taken into consideration by the House. Several of the petitioners against the measure were asked to explain their views, and permitted to examine witnesses in support of their petition. The motion was then put that the Bill do pass, and an amendment moved, the adoption of which would have amounted to the rejection of the measure. The amendment was very strongly supported by the Earl of Egmont in a lengthy speech, but was nevertheless defeated by ninety-six votes to fifty-five, and the Bill passed into law.3 The defeat of the an ti-Je wish party in the House of Commons was by no means the end of the campaign. The opposition appealed from Parliament to the people. For every speech that had been held in oppo? sition to the measure in the House of Commons a dozen pamphlets were published in the same interest. In reply, pamphleteering was also adopted as a weapon by the supporters of the Government, and for some months the stream of publications on the Jewish Question flowed 1 " Considerations on the Bill," pp. 29-30. 2 Jbid., p. 32; 44 Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv., 1418 ; " An Apology for the Naturali? sation of the Jews," p. 26. 3 "Pari. Hist.," vol. xiv.} 1117-31.</page><page sequence="12">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 167 unabated. The controversy fell to an even lower level than that of the pamphleteers. Ballad writers and mongers also adopted the an ti-Je wish cry, and the populace was enabled to add to its repertoire more than one song imbued with prejudice and venom. In " The Jews' Triumph: a Ballad. To be Said or Sung to the Children of Israel on all popular occasions, by all Christian People. London : Printed for Isaac Ben-Haddi, in Fleet Street," the populace was told: IV " But, Lord, how surpriz'd when they heard of the News, That we were to be Servants to circumcis'd Jews, To be Negroes and Slaves, instead of True Blues, Which Nobody can deny, &amp;c. ******** VIII That Jeios have the Mammon all Christendom knows, But are not to be trusted, but just as that goes, For as Gold's to be got they are both Friends or Foes, Which Nobody can deny, &amp;c. IX Are these then the People that's mark'd with the Brand, That the C?g?y have preach'd shall inherit no Land, Which now they have gain'd against God's Command, Which Nobody can deny, &amp;c. x Why the Bishops were mute at what they have preach'd Is beyond Comprehension, and not to be reach'd Except Jew's Presentations reverting to each, Which Nobody can deny, &amp;c. ******** XIII Then cheer up your Spirits, let Jacobites swing, And Jews in our Bell-Eopes hang when they ring, To our Sovereign Lord Great George our King, Which Nobody can deny, deny, Which Nobody can deny,"</page><page sequence="13">168 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. The " Jews Naturalised; or The English Alienated" opened with the verse:? " Our Rulers have dar'd the Decree to revoke, Which was in Judea so frequently spoke, T'incorporate with us that fugitive Tribe ; But, what is it Britons won't do for a Bribe ? Sing Tantararara, Jews all! Jews all! Singt &amp;c." As has already been mentioned, the cry "No Jews, no wooden Shoes " resounded in the streets. Jews were insulted and attacked in public. The bishops, too, in consequence of their support to the ob? noxious measure, suffered considerable annoyance. Libellous attacks on the order were many. The Bishop of Norwich was insulted in several parts of his diocese when he went to confirm, and notices were attached to the churches, to the effect that " the next day being Saturday his Lordship would confirm the Jews, and the day following the Christians." Members who had had the hardihood to vote for the measure were com? pelled to resort to extraordinary measures in order to appease their irate constituents. For instance, Mr. Sydenham, the member for Exeter, in order to acquit himself of the charge of Judaism, "dispersed printed papers, justifying his attachment to Christianity, and urging as a proof of it his travelling on Saturdays, when his business required it, and his strict observance of Sundays."1 Arguments against the new Act, many of them mutually contra? dictory, poured forth in a deluge. Some of them have already been mentioned in connection with the Parliamentary debates. In addition, it was alleged that the Act would reduce the consumption of ham and bacon; that under it the Jews would become so numerous as to exclude Protestants from all offices, trades, and professions. Bich Jews, it was feared, would settle in the country, purchase all the estates, and influence elections. They would even become members of Parliament, and perhaps attain to still higher office. On the other hand, poor Jews would flock into England to such an extent that they would deprive the natives of all means of earning a livelihood, and would introduce such a mass of pauperism as to impair the resources of the country, and seriously increase 1 " Hardwicke Papers " ; Coxe's " Memoirs of the Pelham Administration."</page><page sequence="14">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 169 its taxation. These same Jews would endanger the constitution of the Church and State, and would increase in number and wealth to such an extent as to make their own customs universal in the land, and estab? lish Judaism as the fashionable religion of the English. The adoption of the measure would destroy the alliance of friendship between England and Portugal. It would bring on the English nation all the curses pro? nounced upon the Jews, and by its recent legislation the Parliament of England had repeated the crimes of Julian the Apostate. In naturalising the Jews the English Parliament showed less concern about the safety of the country and less regard for the honour of Christ than even the Turks, who refused to receive Jews into their community unless they first became Christians.1 The naturalisation was a dishonour to Christianity. By the Act the Jews themselves had transgressed their own law, which enjoined them to make no covenant with the nations. The expectation held out of the conversion of the Jews was unjustifiable. A similar excuse was used in the time of Cromwell, and in the century that had since elapsed how many converts had been made, it was asked : "So few, that for our own Honour, we had better conceal the Number."2 It was suggested that all the rich Jews in the world would come to England, set up a Messiah, and start a revolution. For that important office one writer went to the extent of suggesting Sampson Gideon, who would certainly have done just as well for the purpose as Cromwell.3 Another writer drew a terrible picture of the evils that were about to befall the country in consequence of the Act. After a lengthy capitulation of the varied vices attributed to Jews from time to time, the author proceeded to detail a selection of blood accusations. In passing, he compared the attitude of the Jews at the period at which he wrote with that of their ancestors towards Hamor ben Shechem. The Jews, he feared, would soon gain control of the estates, and " both by their Money and Sway among their Tenants, be able to carry many Elections for Parliament-men, if not get into the House themselves." " Would not a Christian," he asked, " be overawed frequently by a Jew Justice of a Peace? And might it not be feared that, in future Ages, some of these Israelites might buy themselves a Place too near the Throne? And if an 1 " An Answer to a Pamphlet." 2 Ibid., p. 22. 3 Ibid., p. 33.</page><page sequence="15">170 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. artful Rabbi should spirit his Nation up with the Expectation of a future Restoration of the Jewish Kingdom, as History informs us has been often done, who would be able to defend the Crown itself from a People that have in all times and places, where the least success has buoy'd 'em up, left Examples of their imperious and rebellious Spirit ?"1 In an open letter to Sir John Barnard the readers were told " unless a future Parliament should repeal or restrain the Act granted this Session in their Favour, that many Generations will not pass away, before it will be seen that they know how to embrace the Privileges granted them, and that from a wandering, destitute, unsettled People, they shall be blessed with Vineyards and Olive-yards, enjoy the choicest Sweets of the Land of Canaan, and become Favourites and Nobles. Shall we, Sir," continues Britannia, " purely to satiate the Avarice, maintain the Luxury, and defray the Debts of a few particular extravagant overweening Persons, foolishly Part with our Birthrights, and shun the Blessings which our Fathers designed for our Inheritance 1 Shall we tamely resign our Bights and Privileges, the very Essence of our happy Constitution, our dear-bought Liberty, which our Progentors many of them purchased at the Expence of their Lives, which their Successors so vigorously maintained and asserted in despight of all opponents, and the many strong Trials to deprive them thereof ? Shall we, their lawful Heirs, squander away this glorious Freedom, and, like idle Boys, in wanton Sport, give away that which was so dearly bought to a People whose Country and Habitation are destroyed by the Command of their offended God; whose Towns, Cities, and Empire is desolated and waste, whose chief Metropolis is now the Haunt of wild Beasts, and Dragons lurk in their pleasant Palaces ? " The gem of the whole collection of anti-Jewish pamphlets of this period is undoubtedly " Seasonable Remarks on the Act lately pass'd in Favour of the Jews; containing Divers Weighty Reasons for a Review of the said Act." Of the arguments used in the pamphlet itself, hints are given in the preface, in which, for instance, it is stated that Parliament, following the policy it has adopted, " will, perhaps, in due time, proceed to oblige great numbers of poor Natural-born Christians, to work even harder than they do at present for their necessary subsistence." In the pamphlet itself, which reads like a satire, the fear was expressed 1 ** An Appeal to the Throne by Britannia."</page><page sequence="16">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 171 lest the undoubted antiquity of Judaism would form the basis of a claim for its acceptance as the State religion in place of Protestantism. Moreover, " It is demonstrated by those who are best skilled in political Arithmetic, that the Number of Jews that are known to be dispersed in the different Parts of the World (exclusive of the ten Tribes, who, when they hear of this Act, will undoubtedly discover themselves and take Advantage of it) is more than sufficient to occupy all the Lands, Houses, etc., in this Kingdom. And since it is no less evident that they are possessed of a Fund more than sufficient for the Purchase of them, it is apprehended that all or at least the greatest Part of them will endeavour to be naturalised in the next Session of Parlia? ment, in order to make the valuable Purchase above mentioned." Rich Jews would doubtless defray the expenses of the naturalisation of their poorer brethren. The Act had placed it in the power of one single individual to ruin the country. This remarkable statement was explained as follows :? " There is, it is well known to the Learned, a certain Person, commonly and emphatically stiled the wandering Jew, who, although already upwards of 1700 Years old, is, however, sure of living several hundred Years longer, indeed quite up to the very Time in which not only this, but all the other Nations in the world are to become Vassals to him and his Brethren. Now if this strange old Vagrant should chance to be tired of his present pedling way of Life, and choose to take advantage of this Act (which by the by it will be impossible to prevent, as he is not personally known to any one Man now living) what alas! may not be apprehended from a Man in his extra? ordinary Circumstances? From one who must have acquired such a pro? digious Knowledge of the World, who is probably possessed of immense Sums under a thousand different Names, in all the public Funds and Bankers Hands in Christendom, and whom it would be quite ridiculous to think of hanging, or even imprisoning, if he should be guilty of the most treasonable and detestable Practices. Short-sighted People may indeed imagine that the Vagrant kind of Life to which he is condemned, effectually secures us from all Danger with regard to him ; as if, after he was possessed of half the landed Estates in this Kingdom, he would not be full as much at liberty, as any of our present Nobility and Gentry, to ramble all over the World, or, if he should not choose to cross the Water again at his Time of Life, to be at least perpetually moving about from one Place of public Diversion to another." Among the other evils that the Act would cause was the refusal in the future of Portuguese knighthoods to English subjects. Moreover,</page><page sequence="17">172 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. "in conjunction with the Marriage Bill (it will) compleat the Buin of all those young Gentlemen of Moderate Fortunes, who have been so generous as to devote their whole Time and Studies to the Correction and Im? provement of our half-for med awkward English Taste, instead of addict? ing themselves to any low and lucrative Employment or Profession." The writer suspected that the Act, together with the recent marriage legislation, was intended to enable " Parents and Guardians to compel their Daughters and Wrards to marry the rich Jews that are daily expected here." The Act would lessen the consumption of " Brawn, Hams, Bacon, Black-Pudding, etc." The great hordes of Jews already on the way would undoubtedly in the autumn take possession of Vaux hall, Banelagh, Marybone, and other public gardens for the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles. The country parsons and curates were already alarmed at the undoubted necessity incumbent upon them of studying the Hebrew language. " And it is farther shrewdly suspected, that one great Motive which induced the B?ps not to oppose this unaccountable Act, was in hopes of thereby shifting off, in some measure, the heavy task of converting the Jews on the said Country P-rs-ns and C-r-tes; they having, it is pretended, long ago found, how ineffectual their own Endeavours and those of their Ch-pl-ns have constantly been to this Purpose." The Act would lead to the introduction of Popery, as Jesuits would pretend to Judaism and as Jews become naturalised Englishmen. Difficulties would arise about the Sabbath, and in the end two days would be kept by all, as was the case in Abyssinia, "probably in consequence of some such ill-advised Act of Parliament." The Anti-Jewish campaign was not confined to pamphlets and speeches. The newspapers also joined in the fray, and not only opened their columns freely to correspondents named and anonymous, and devoted space in the editorials to considerations of the Jewish Question, but gave opportunities to countless wits to direct their gibes at the harmless Jew. Dozens of satires were published with the Jews as their theme. Readers were regaled with items such as the following :?" From news for one hundred years hence " :? " The middle arch of the temple, which has been rebuilding for some time past, sunk ten feet a few days since, and, we hear, that there is now five and twenty tun weight laid upon it; and it is further said, there will be a</page><page sequence="18">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 173 lottery for half a million in Great Britain (or Jud&amp;a Nora) for the more vigorous execution of this grand design, and Mr. Jacob Zorobabel is to set out for the British Court with proper instructions how to act in this affair. . . ? On monday last a dispensation passed the great seal to enable Abraham. Levy to hold a living in the synagogue of PauVs, together with the rectory of the Rabbi in the diocese of Litchfield. Same day John Heartwell, shoemaker, was whipped round Duke's Place, for speaking in disrespectful terms of the coming of the Messiah. . . . We are also informed that the statue of Sir John Barnard, formerly father of this city, and a strenuous assertor of Christianity, is ordered to be taken down, and that of Pontius Pilate to be put up in its room.?Last night the bill for naturalising Christians was thrown out of the Sanhedrim by a very great majority. . . . This day was republished Chris? tianity not founded upon argument, and we hear that a statue is to be erected in Westminster Abbey to the memory of the author.?Last week was brought up to Newgate, under a strong guard, George Briton, the outlawed smuggler, wrho was taken on the coast of Sussex in the very fact of running pork into this kingdom, in defiance of the many penal laws enacted to prohibit the same.?At two o'clock this morning, died at his house in Grosvenor Square, the right honourable the earl of Balaam, baron of Zimri, and knight of the most noble order of Melchizedec."1 These are a few selections, by no means the most objectionable, from the satirical literature of the period. The whole of the arguments during the recess, however, did not rest with the anti-Semites. The Jews found stalwart friends who did not fear to exhibit the other side of the question, and pamphlet wras often answered by pamphlet, only to induce a further attack, and consequently a second rejoinder. Some of the defences, however, were somewhat wounding to Jewish self-respect. One kind friend pointed out that it was ridiculous to imagine that all the Jews would collect in the country, for they recognised that they were so detested by Christians that the less they obtruded themselves the safer it would be for them. " If they settled in a Much larger Number in any one country, and attempted to set up any Manufacture, or to exercise any Trade, practised by the Natives of the Country, they would rise, as one Man, against them; and the Legislature, however they might be disposed to protect them, would be forced to forbid them the Exercise of any Trade, if not to compel them to leave the Country."2 As evidence of the consciousness the 1 Craftsman, July 14, 1753. 2 "A True State of the Case by a Bystander."</page><page sequence="19">174 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Jews possessed of their position in the country, they never attempted to make converts. No Jew would buy lands under the Act, for, living surrounded by Christians, he would lead a very uneasy life. If whole counties could be purchased, the Jews might buy them, but they would never buy single estates.1 Another writer, turning the table on his opponents, in discussing the suggested wholesale bribery that induced Parliament to adopt the measure, said that the only objection he could find to the Bill was that it might introduce innocent strangers into a hotbed of vice.2 A Christian in " The Case of the Jews Considered," put forward the theory, often advanced by Sephardim, and notably by Lord Beaconsfield, that the Jews could not be considered responsible for the Crucifixion inasmuch as those of Europe were descended from ancestors who had left the Holy Land before that event. " A True Believer," in " An Apology for the Naturalisation of the Jews," paid a fine tribute to Jewish philanthropy, and pointed out that the parish need never fear to be burdened with Jewish paupers, for Jewry invariably supported its own poor. One writer advocated the measure on the ground that it would facilitate the conversion of the Jews. Heathen princes, he pointed out, were brought to England to be converted, and why not Jews also, he inquired. Jews themselves made no converts in England because they acknowledged Protestantism to be a moral religion, and as good as their own. He also emphasised the valuable services to the State performed by the Jews of London during the crisis of 1745.3 So intense and widespread was the opposition the Act had aroused, that the Government was compelled to bow before the storm. The imminence of a general election no doubt assisted Pelham and his colleagues in arriving at this decision, and as the Act was not " a measure of Government" according to a letter from the Prime Minister to his brother, the Duke of Newcastle,4 the Government did not hesitate long about proposing its repeal. Immediately on the assembly of Parliament the matter came forward. The first business in the Upper House, after the address had been disposed of, was the introduction of a measure of 1 *' A True State of the Case by a Bystander." 2 " A Letter to a Friend concerning Naturalisation." 3 ?* Considerations on the Bill." 4 Coxe's " Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 291.</page><page sequence="20">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 175 repeal by the Duke of Newcastle, the leader of the Government in that House. Although still in favour of the naturalisation policy, the Government introduced the new Bill because it considered the principle of less importance than the public tranquillity. The proposed Bill repealed the whole of the previous measure with the exception of the portion that disqualified Jews from acquiring any advowson or interest in any ecclesiastical establishment, hospital, or school.1 In the debate that ensued the motion was supported for reasons of expediency by Seeker, Bishop of Oxford, and Drummond, Bishop of St. Asaph, the speeches of both being based on sentiments of liberality, charity, and breadth of view. The same side and sentiments were adopted by the Chancellor, Lord Hardwicke, who supported the repeal, on the ground that the measure of the preceding session had raised so considerable and violent a prejudice against the Jews, that there was great danger of an anti Jewish outbreak. Excesses had only been prevented, he believed, by the general expectation that the obnoxious measure would be immediately repealed.2 The House was, however, not unanimously in favour of the repeal, and one of the finest speeches in the debate was made by Earl Temple. He protested against the proposed submission to popular clamour, and called upon the Lords to stand forth as a bulwark against the prejudices and superstitions of the mob, and the intrigues of the agitators. He expressed a fear lest the Bill before the House would be followed by another to repeal that portion of the Act of 1740, which affected Jews. He trembled lest the fires of Smithfield should be re? kindled for the burning of Jews, and declared that the persecution of the Jews would inevitably be followed by a similar treatment of the Christians.3 In Committee the Bill was made to cover the whole of its predecessor, it being considered that the retention of the clause regarding the presentation to advowsons, &amp;c, would suggest that Jews had a right to the possession of land, a right that was still in dispute.4 Meanwhile a similar course of action had been entered upon in the Commons. In that Chamber the supporters and opponents of the pre? vious measure vied with one another in their eagerness to secure its repeal. Even before the address had been disposed of, Sir James 1 Coxe's " Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 291; " Pari. Hist.," vol. xv., 92-4. 2 ? Pari. Hist.," vol. xv., 99-103. 3 Ibid., 94-99. 4 Ibid., 117-8.</page><page sequence="21">176 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Dashwood engaged the attention of the House for a motion that he intended to make at the first opportunity. His motion was seconded by Lord Parker, a supporter of the Government, but in the meanwhile the Duke of Newcastle's Bill had reached the Lower House.1 The measure as a whole met with unanimous approval, the only difference of opinion arising over the terms of the preamble. The Bill before the House opened as follows:?" Whereas an act of Parliament was made and passed in the twenty-fifth year of his Majesty's reign, intituled, An Act to permit persons professing the Jewish religion to be naturalised by Parliament, and for other purposes therein mentioned; and whereas occa? sion has been taken, from the said Act, to raise discontents and disquiets in the minds of his Majesty's subjects, be it enacted," etc. Great excep? tion was taken by the opponents of the previous measure to this account. It was stigmatised as false in fact, injurious to the dignity of Parliament, and conveying an unjust reflection on the people in general and on the Parliamentary opponents of the measure of the previous session in parti? cular. Sir Roger Newdigate proposed as an alternative, i' Whereas great discontents and disquietudes had from the said Act arisen." The amend? ment was strenuously opposed by the Government, both the Prime Minister and Mr. Pitt, who had hitherto been prevented by illness from attending for several months to his Parliamentary duties, speaking against it, and it was defeated by a majority of almost three to one. Mr. Pitt, in his speech, treated the matter as entirely foreign to the interests of religion. He maintained that though Parliament consented to repeal the Act, in compliance with the wishes of the people, they would compromise their dignity if they revoked it without publicly expressing their disapproba? tion of what was required.2 This point being settled, the Bill speedily passed through the House, and received the royal assent on the 20th of December 1753, less than a year after the Act that it repealed had been entered in the Statute Book.3 The anti-Jewish party, intoxicated by their success, determined on another step in the creation of Jewish disabilities. In the course of the controversy, the legislation of 1740 attained a prominence of which 1 "Pari. Hist," vol. xv., 118. 2 Coxe's " Memoirs " ; " Pari. Hist." s " Pari. Hist.," vol. xv., 162.</page><page sequence="22">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 177 it had hitherto been quite innocent. The advantages that Jews had obtained under that measure were now patent to the world, and the Opposition decided that so much of the Act as affected the Jews should find the same fate as the Naturalisation Act of 1753. On the 4th of December, six days after the Repeal Bill had passed the Commons, a motion to that effect was proposed by Lord Harley. The list of Jews who had taken advantage of the Act had already been placed on the table of the House on the motion of Mr. George Cooke. Harley was strongly supported by Sir James Dashwood and the Earl of Egmont, but opposed by the Government, whose spokesmen were again Pelham and Pitt, and the motion was defeated. On this occasion the Opposition did not have the country behind them, and as no interest in the matter could be aroused in the nation, the whole subject speedily passed into oblivion.1 The clause in the Act of 1609, necessitating the acceptance of the Sacrament by a candidate for naturalisation, retained its position among the statutes of the realm until 1825, when the law on the subject was amended to the extent that the acceptance of the Sacrament was excused. The Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance were, however, still retained.2 Nineteen years later a new oath was substituted for these, to which no Jew or person of any other faith could raise objection.3 Accordingly, it was not until 1844 that the long contest for the naturalisation of foreign Jews was brought to a successful close. In 1870 further legislation on the subject, which however, did not affect Jewish rights, was adopted, and all previous Acts from that of 1609 until the one immediately preceding, passed in 1847, were repealed, and the following simple form of oath adopted :?" I,-do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Victoria, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God." 4 1 " Pari. Hist." ; Coxe's " Memoirs." 2 6 Geo. iv. c. 67. s 7 &amp; 8 Viet. c. 66. 4 33 Viet. c. 14. vol. vr. m</page><page sequence="23">BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST OF PAMPHLETS RELATING TO THE JEW BILL OF 1753. All the pamphlets are octavo, and were published in 1753, unless otherwise indicated. The numbers in brackets that precede many of the items relate to the entries on pages 62 to 69 of Jacobs and Wolf's Bibliotheca Anglo Judaica (No. 3 of the Publications of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition of 1888). The numbers in brackets at the end of the entries are the corre? sponding press-marks in the Catalogue of the British Museum Library. Many of the pamphlets not to be found in the Museum are contained in the Library of Mr. Israel Solomons, to whom thanks are due for very valuable assistance in the preparation of the present bibliography. 1. (323) Reasons for Naturalizing the Jews in Great Britain and Ire? land, on the same foot with all other Nations. Containing also, a Defence of the Jews against all vulgar Prejudices in all Countries. 1714. 6 11. + 58 pp. Attributed to John Toland. See F?rst's Bibliotheca Judaica. 2. (324) A Confutation of the Reasons for Naturalizing the Jews, con? taining The Crimes, Frauds, and Insolencies, For which they were Convicted and Punished in former Reigns. 1715. 4 11. + 40 pp. [e. 2007 (1). 3. The Exclusion of the English ; an Invitation to Foreigners. The Humble Representation of Mohammed Caraffa, the Grand Turk; In Behalf of Himself, and all the wandering Gypsies, Tartars, Persians, Chinese, Indians, &amp;c, particularly the Jews, that they may share the Benefits of a General Naturalization Bill. With its</page><page sequence="24">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 179 some Hints of the Advantages that may accrue by Adopting the Cannibals and wild Arabs. 1748. 1 1. + 22 pp. 4. (332) An Act to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be Naturalized by Parliament; and for other Purposes therein mentioned. Folio 3 pp. See No. 72. 5. Reflections upon Naturalization, Corporations, and Companies; Sup? ported by the Authorities of both Ancient and Modern Writers. By a Country Gentleman. 91 pp. [Ill e. 18. Published before the 5th of May. 6. A Letter from a Gentleman to his Friend Concerning the Naturali? zation of the Jews. (8th May 1753.) 16 pp. [213 i. 2 (45). 7. (360) An Historical Treatise concerning Jews and Judaism, in.Eng? land : The Second Edition. 31 pp. [t. 2231 (5). Reprint of a Tract first published in 1703, and again in 1721. 8. (363) The Jewish Naturalization considered with respect to the Voice of the People, its own Self-inconsistency, and the Disingenuity of its Advocates. By George Coningesby, D.D. See Halkett and Laing's Dictionary of Anonymous and Pseudonymous Literature. 9. (365) The Jews Advocate. . . . containing Mr. Locke's Senti? ments in respect to the Treatment of the Jews by Christians. 1 1.+?. + 54 pp. [t. 2231 (26), 10. Complaint of the Children of Israel concerning the Penal Laws, by Solomon Abrabanel. Seventh Edition. 39 pp. Attributed to William Arnall. See B. M. Catalogue. Reprint of a Pamphlet of which eight editions were printed in 1736 ; and under the title "Epistle from a High Priest of the Jews to the Chief Priest of Canterbury," two editions were published in 1821. 11. (382) A True State of the Case concerning the Good or Evil which the Bill for the Naturalization of the Jews may bring upon Great Britain. By a By-Stander. 32 pp. [t. 2231 (8). 12. The Bill, permitting the Jews to be Naturalized by Parliament having been misrepresented in the London Gazetteer of Friday the 18th of May; and probably having never been read either by the</page><page sequence="25">180 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Author of that Paper, or by several others who have since signed a Petition, which that paper was calculated to support: To remove those false Impressions, the following short, but true, State of Facts is submitted to the Consideration of the Public. 4to 3 pp. [4515 f. 5 and 213 i. 2 (46). Attributed to Phillip Charteret Webb. See B. M. Catalogue and D. N. B. A copy of this pamphlet in Mr. Israel Solomons' collection varies somewhat from the two in the Museum. Bound up with [4515 f. 5] are five facsimile plates of Records relating to the Jews. "Ex Autographo in Archi. Eccles. Abbath. Westmonast. sui impensis in a3re excudi fecit Philipus Carteret Webb." Ar. R. &amp; At. ss. 1754. See Nos. 61 and 80. 13. (333) Some Considerations on the Naturalization of the Jews; And how far the Publick will Benefit from this Hopeful Race of Israelites. By J. E. Gent. 24 pp. [t. 2231 (13). 14. (372) A Modest Apology for the Citizens and Merchants of London, who petitioned the House of Commons against Naturalizing the Jews. viii. + 16 pp. [t. 2231 (3). 15. (372b) Second Edition, viii. + 16 pp. [1123 i. (30). 16. (372c) Third Edition, viii. +16 pp. 17. (347) An Apology for the Naturalization of the Jews. By a True Believer. 11. + 30 pp. [t. 2231 (20). 18. (357) A Full Answer to a Fallacious Apology Artfully Circulated through the Kingdom, in Favour of the Naturalization of the Jews. By a Christian. 19 pp. [1123 i. (30). Attributed to the Rev. William Romaine. See B. M. Catalogue. See No. 23. 19. (357b) Second Edition, Corrected. To which is now added, A Post? script. 11. 4- 24 pp. +1.1. [t. 2231 (2). 20. (369) A Letter to the Worshipful Sir John Barnard, Knt. ... On the Act of Parliament for Naturalizing the Jews. (London, July 2nd, 1753.) 2 11. + 19 pp. [t. 2231 (17). 21. (356) Esther's Suit to King Ahasuerus : In Behalf of the Jews. In a Letter to a Member of Parliament. (July 5th, 1753.) Eng. Frontis. (Esther's suit for the Jews) + 24 pp. [t. 2231 (22).</page><page sequence="26">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 181 22. (353) Considerations on the Bill to Permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be Naturalized by Parliament. (Philo-Patrias, London, July 15, 1753.) vii. + 60 pp. [t. 2231 (25). See No. 58. 23. (346) An Answer To a Pamphlet, entitled, Considerations on the Bill to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized. 2 11.+ 96 pp. [1093 e. 30. Attributed to the Rev. William Romaine. See B. M. Catalogue. See No. 18. 24. Second Edition. Reprinted by the Citizens of London. 2 11. + 68 pp. [t. 815 (6). 25. Third Edition, 67 pp. [t. 933 (11). 26. An Address to the friends of Great Britain: occasion'd By the Debates among the People, and the Answer to Considerations on The Bill for Naturalizing the Jews. By a Friend to the Nation. 11.+ 21 pp. [t. 816(3). 27. (350) The Case of the Jews Considered, with Regard to Trade, Commerce, Manufacturies and Religion &amp;c. By a Christian. 11.+ 33 pp. [t. 2231 (16). 28. (359) The Case and Appeal of James Ashley in relation to . . . Henry Simons, the Polish Jew. The Second Edition. Eng. Frontis. + 4 11. + 47 pp. + 2 folded folio leaves. [113 h. 5. This Edition contains as an addition "The Humble Petition of Severnl Merchants and Traders in the City of London in favour of the Jews' Naturalization Bill." 29. (355) An Epistle to the Freeholders on the Naturalisation of Foreign Jews. 30. An Earnest and Serious Address to the Freeholders and Electors of Great Britain, On Occasion of The Clamor raised against the Bill to permit Persons to apply for Naturalization, professing the Jewish religion. By an orthodox member of the Church of England, and a Freeholder. 2 11. + 43 pp. [t. 2231 (6). The Appendix to this pamphlet gives a list of Jewish merchants then resident in the country:?"Abraham and Jacob Franco, Francis Salvador, Joseph and Jacob Salvador, Benjamin Mendes da Costa, Moses Mendes da Costa, Aaron Franks, Levy and Reuben Salamon, Isaac Lamego, Gonsales and Da Costa. Pcreira and Lima, Jacob</page><page sequence="27">182 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. Firnandes Nunes, Mosos Lamego, Abraham Osorio, Daniel Mondes Scixas, Moses Franks, Isaac Levy, Joseph Treves, Araham (sic) Fonseco, Jacob Levy Sonsino, Judah Supino, and a hundred more." 31. (352) A Confutation of the Reasons for the Naturalization of the Jews. 32. (348) An Appeal to the Throne against The Naturalization of the Jewish Nation: . . . With an Appendix, in answer to Rabbi Manasses Ben Israel's Defence of the Jewish Nation. By Britannia. 11. + 34 pp. [t. 2231 (4). 33. (368) A Letter to a Friend in the Country on the subject of the Jew Bill. 34. (344 &amp; 370) A Letter to the Publick, on the Act For Naturalizing the Jews. (A. Z.) 20 pp. [t. 2231 (24). See Note of No. 56. 35. (387) The Impartial Observer: Being a Modest Reply to what has been lately published relating to the intended Naturalization of the Jews. ii. + 36 pp. [t. 816 (5). 36. A Candid and Impartial Examination of the Act passed last Session of Parliament, for Permitting the Foreign Jews to be Naturalized, without their receiving the Sacrament. 2 11. + from p. 9-28. [t. 2231 (1). 37. (380) Seasonable Remarks on the Act lately pass'd in Favour of the Jews; containing Divers Weighty Reasons for a Review of the said Act. 31 pp. [t. 2231 (31). 38. (381) The Unprejudiced Christian's Apology for the Jews. 8 + 90 pp. [4033 f. 32 (1). 39. (361) Historical Remarks on the late Naturalization Bill. 72 pp. 40. The Court and Country Interest united; or, Proposals for a Free and impartial Election. 27 pp. [t. 2231 (18). 41. An Appeal With due Submission addressed to Caesar, and the British Senators, in their present Recess from Parliament; as also, To the Nation in General. By way of Retrospection to All that has publickly passed on the Act, for naturalizing Jews, under the</page><page sequence="28">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 183 Restrictions therein contained. By Oliver Oak, a true born Englishman; and (with Issachar Barebone,) another of the People. 21 pp. [t. 2231 (23). 42. (354) An Earnest Persuasive and Exhortation to the Jews, occa? sioned by The Late Act of Parliament in their Favour. 27 pp. [t. 2231 (15). 43. Full and Final Restoration of the Jews and Israelites . . . with Some Hints, that the late Act for the Naturalization of the Jews, may contribute towards their more easy and speedy Departure, Addressed to all Christians as well as Jews. 11. 4- 30 pp. 44. (367) The Kingdom of Israel Restored by Christ and Judaism Sub? verted. ... in a letter from a Gentleman in the Country to his Friend in London. . . . occasioned by the Act for the Naturali? zation of the Jews, with some observations thereupon. Eng. Frontis. (Abraham offering his Son Isaac) + 32 pp. [t. 2231 (21). 45. (342) Admonitions from Scripture and History, from Religion and Common Prudence, Relating to the Jews. By Archaicus. 30 pp. [105 c. 36. 46. (343) The Rejection, and Restoration of the Jews, According to Scripture, declar'd. ... By Archaicus. 36 pp. [t. 2231 (7). 47. Reflections On the Past and Present State of the Jews. 72 pp. [t. 2231 (29). 48. Remarks on a Speech made in Common Council, on The Bill for permitting Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be Natura? lized, So far as Prophecies are supposed to be affected by it. 4to 11.+ 14 pp. [t. 1746 (11). 49. An Explanation of some Prophecies in the Book of Daniel. Wherein the Particular Times of the Destruction of the Mahometans, and of the Restoration of the Jews, are pointed out. By a Presbyter of the Church of England. 32 pp. [t. 2231 (9).</page><page sequence="29">184 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 50. The Jewish Ritual: Or the Religious Customs and Ceremonies of the Jews, Used in their Publick Worship and private Devotions. Extracted from the Talmuds of their most celebrated Rabbins and Doctors. ... To which is prefixed, a large and curious Print of the Inside of Solomon's Temple. Engraved Frontis. + 11. + 32 pp. [t. 2231 (19) 51. (371) A Looking-Glass for the Jews: or, The Credulous Un? believers. . . . with an Introduction, Which may serve for an Answer to several late Pamphlets concerning the Jews. 11.+ x. pp. + page 9 to 68. Contains an account of Sabbatai Zevi, the Pseudo Messiah. 52. (378) Reasons offered to the consideration of Parliament for pre? venting the growth of Judaism. . . . inscribed to the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor By the Author of Reasons for a War against Spain. Reprint of a Pamphlet published in 1738. 53. A proposal humbly offered to the legislature of this Kingdom, for the Re-establishment of Christianity. The Bill to pass the House this Session, Lest if it be deferred till the next, there remain no Idea thereof to be re-established. Very proper to be read by the Circumcised and the Uncircumcised on the Passing of the Jewish Naturalization-Bill. Addressed to an Eminent Father of the Church. (Timothy Telltruth.) 21 pp. [t. 2231 (30). 54. (379) A Review of the Proposed Naturalization of the Jews ... By a Merchant who subscribed the Petition against the Naturalization of the Jews. (Tunbridge Wells, Aug. 5th, 1753.) 106 pp. [t. 815 (4). Attributed to Jonas Hanway. See B. M. Catalogue. The Autograph of the author is inscribed on the title-page of Mr. Israel Solomons' copy, and on the half title-page, 44 Tho: Wilson (Bishop of Sodor and Man). A Present from ye Author Mr Jonas Hanway Augfc 20, 1753." See Nos. 55, 63, 81, and 82. 55. (335) Third Edition, corrected and enlarged, with several additions. By J. H., Merchant. (Addressed to the Right Hon. H. P.(elham). 225 pp. [1123 i. 29 (1). See Nos. 54, 63, 81, and 82.</page><page sequence="30">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 185 56. (351) A Collection of the Best Pieces in Prose and Verse, Against the Naturalization of the Jews. 2 11. + page 9 to 88. [t. 2231 (28). Latest extract dated Aug. 14. Advertisement facing p. 9 : " Speedily will be pub? lish'd, The Naturalization Magazine. (Price Six-pence.) Letters, Post paid, directed to A. Z. taken in at Mrs. Cooper's." See No. 34. 57. (376) The other Side of the Question. Being a Collection of what hath yet appeared in Defence of the late Act, in Favour of the Jews. (Meanwell Cheapside, Sept. 6th, 1753.) vi. pp. + 11. x 56 pp. [t. 2231 (27). Latest extract dated Sep. 6th. 58. (358) Further Considerations on the Act to Permit Persons pro? fessing the Jewish Religion, to be Naturalized by Parliament. (Philo Patriae. London Oct. 10th, 1753.) 2 11. + 100 pp. [t. 816 (2). See Nos. 22 and 63. 59. (336) The popular Clamour against the Jews indefensible. A Sermon Preached at Huntingdon October the 28th, 1753, by Peter Peckard A.M. 28 pp. [t. 816 (7). 60. (341) A Sermon Preached at the Parish-Church of St. George, Hanover-Square, Sunday, October 28, 1753 : On occasion of the Clamours against the Act for Naturalizing the Jews: By the Reverend Mr. Winstanley. 28 pp. [t. 816 (4). 61. (339) The Question, whether a Jew, born within the British Dominions, was, before the making the late Act of Parliament, a Person capable, by Law, to purchase and hold Lands to him, and his Heirs, Fairly Stated and Considered. By a Gentleman of Lincoln's Inn. (Lincoln's Inn, 2d November 1753.) 4to. 48 + [Appendix containing copies of public records relating to the Jews] 27 pp. + 11. [Addenda at p. 45] + 2 Folded 11. [facsimile of records]. [514 c. 25 (1). Attributed to Phillip Carteret Webb. See B. M. Catalogue and D. N. B. On the fly-leaf of Mr. Israel Solomons' copy, in a contemporary hand, "By Phillip Carteret Webb, Esq., afterwards Sollicitor to the Treasury." See Nos. 12, 73, and 80.</page><page sequence="31">186 THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 62. Some queries, relative to the Jews; occasioned by a late sermon : with some other papers, occasioned by the queries. (The Querist, Saturday Nov. 10, 1753.) 40 pp. [t. 815 (7). 63. (334) Letters Admonitory and Argumentative from J. H(anwa)y, Merchant, to J. S-r, Merchant, In Reply to Particular Pass? ages, and the General Argument, of a Pamphlet, entitled, Further Considerations on the Bill &amp;c. (Nov. 12th, 1753). 11. + 57 + (Appendix). 15 pp. [1123 i. 29 (2). This Pamphlet was published together with No. 55, the Appendix referring to both pamphlets. See Nos. 54, 58, 81, and 82. 64. (337) A Letter to a Friend concerning Naturalizations: by Josiah Tucker, M.A., Rector of St. Stephen's in Bristol. 29 pp. [t. 2231 (14). 65. The Second Edition, Corrected. 11. + 30 pp. [522 g. 4. 66. A second letter to a friend concerning naturalizations : wherein the reasons are given why the Jews were antiently considered as the immediate vassals and absolute property of the crown; but are now in a state of liberty and Freedom like other subjects to which are added &amp;c. by Josiah Tucker. (Bristol Nov. 13,1753.) 44 pp. [t. 1746 (4). 67. Remarks on the Reverend Mr. Tucker's Letter on Naturalizations. In Two Letters to a Friend. 32 pp. [Ill e. 7. 68. (364) The Jews Naturalized : or, the English Alienated. A Ballad. To which is added, the Parable of the Chosen and Unjust Servant; . . . folio 8 pp. [t. 2231 (11, 12). 69. (366) The Jew's Triumph, A Ballad. To be Said or Sung to the Children of Israel, on all Popular Occasions, by all Christian People. Printed for Isaac Ben-Haddi, in Fleet Street. Folio 6 pp. [t. 2231 (10). 70. (362) The Jewish Gin; or, the Christians taken Napping; and some Friendly Exhortations both to the Jews and Christians. 71. (340) A Pamphlet on the Memorable Jew Bill, by the Rt. Hon. E. Weston.</page><page sequence="32">THE JEW BILL OF 1753. 187 72. (388) Anno vicesimo septimo Georgii II. Regis. An Act to repeal an Act of the Twenty sixth Year of His Majesty's Reign, intituled, An Act to permit Persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized by Parliament; and for other Purposes therein mentioned. Folio 4 pp. See No. 4. 73. A Reply to the Famous Jew Question. In which. . . is fully de? monstrated, . . That the Jews born here before the late Act were never intitled to purchase and hold Lands to them and their Heirs; In a Letter to the Gentleman of Lincoln's-Inn. By a Freeholder of the County of Surry. (Feb. 4, 1754.) 4to. 94 pp. [514 f. 25 (2). Attributed to Joseph Grove. See D. N. B. In a contemporary hand on the fly-leaf of Mr. Israel Solomons' copy . . . "by Mr. Grove, Author of the life of Cardinal Wolsey." See No. 61. 74. (386) The Jews impartially considered. 1754. 75. (383) The Crisis, or an Alarm to Britannia's true Protestant Sons, ... To the unbelieving Jews. ... By a disinterested, inde? pendent and truly Protestant Briton. 1754. 1J. + iv. + 10 + 40 pp. [8133 c. 11. 76. (384) AIA2nOPA. Some Reflections Upon the Question relating to the Naturalization of Jews, considered As a Point of Religion. (Oct. 30th, 1753.) 58 pp. 1754. [t. 1746 (8). On the fly-leaf of Mr. Israel Solomons' copy the following note occurs:?"Anne Weston her book, The Contents wrote by Edward Weston her Husband, and given to her, by him, April ye 23, 1755." See Nos. 71 and 77. 77. (338) Remarks upon some Passages in a Dedication to the Jews by W. Warburton D.D. Dean of Bristol. By the Writer of a piece published in 1754, intitled, AIASnOPA. 1759. 62 pp. [494 f. 26 (1). See Nos. 71 and 76. 78. (389) A letter to the Right Honourable Sir Thomas Chitty, Knt. Lord Mayor of London : Showing the True Causes and Reasons why so small number of men has accepted of the great and ex? traordinary Encouragements etc. By an English Merchant of London. 1760. 130 + [Appendix] 69 pp. [8132 a. 13. The whole of the Appendix refers to the Jews Naturalization Bill.</page><page sequence="33">188 THE JEW EILL OF 1753. 79. (397) Sur Moses Mendelssohn, Sur La Reforme Politique Des Juifs ; Et en particulier Sur la revolution tentee en leur faveur en 1753 dans la grande Bretagne. Par Le Comte De Mirabeau. A Londres 1787. 34 11. + 130 pp. [4034 d. 51. The following additional items were discovered subsequent to the compilation of the foregoing list:? 80. Short but true state of facts relative to the Jew Bill. Attributed to Phillip Carteret Webb. See D. N. B. See Nos. 12 and 61. 81. A letter against the proposed Naturalization of the Jews. Attributed to Jonas Hanway. See I). iV. B. See Nos. 54, 55, 63, and 82. 82. Thoughts on the proposed Naturalization of the Jews. Attributed to Jonas Hanway. See D. N. B. See Nos. 54, 55, 63, and 81. 83. Oxfordshire in an Uproar; or the Election Magazine. Oxford. N.D. 8vo. 74 pp. See pages 31, 43, 58, 60, 62, 63 for references to the Bill for the Naturalization of the Jews. Since the reading of this paper before the Jewish Historical Society, the subject of it has been treated by Mr. Gerald Berkeley Hertz in "British Imperialism in the Eighteenth Century " (London : Archibald Constable &amp; Co., 1908), the third of the six chapters of which, extending to fifty pages, is entitled, " No Jews; No Wooden Shoes. A Frenzy of 1753."</page></plain_text>