Mr W. J. Lormer, J.P., of Melbourne, who was prominently associated with recent proceedings connected with alleged tamper ing with the judicial bench, having publicly called attention to the number of " foreign " Jews in Melbourne who aspired to public offices, and asserted that that number was wholly disproportionate to the numerical strength of the community itself, the Rev. Dr Abrahams, in the course of a series of powerful sermons delivered during the recent holidays, reminded this re viler of his co-religionistß that the only persons really entitled to hurl the epithet "foreigner" against the inhabitants of these new lands were the aboriginal owners of the country. He went on to say that tha word Jew was sometimes used as a kind of ivproach. He dilated on what the world considered were the personal characteristics of the ancient Jew, holding that many judged of his reli gion by his gaib and mode of expression No doubt he (the preacher) would surprise them when he said that Abraham was the first Protestant, because he protested against the various sections of the Jewish com munity contemporary with him, and he was the first to substitute what he thought was a purer and a more refined religion. The preacher entered into a historical and elaborate narrative as to the origin of the various religion?, and the mission that he thought the Jews were culled upon to fulfil. They never arrogated to themselves that, although they were called a kingdom of priests, they were placed in a better posi tion than other nations professing other religions. They believed that every nation would have the same divine assistance to reach a future state. But as a kingdom of priests the responsibility, which was great, would devo've upon them to show that they fully realised their position, and would do the best they possibly could to disseminate such views as to lead other denominations to think that they were deserving of the high position in which the Supreme Being had placed them. He was painfully sur prised to hear it asserted that the Jews were represented in the Legislature and in public institutions out of all proportion to their numbers. An assertion of this cha racter betrayed a, totally mistaken concep tion of the true facts of the case. Leaders in public institutions were elected on the score of citizenship, and not of religion. 