He returned to Tunbridge Wells, where he wrote (in 1753) a treatise against the Naturalisation of the Jews,[81] which was a question then being agitated. One can scarcely imagine a man with large sympathies, as was Jonas Hanway, a travelled man, also, of great experience of men, taking the narrow view of such a question of social polity. After a severe fight the Bill was carried (26 Geo. 2) and his Majesty gave his consent on the 7th of June, 1753,[82] but the opposition to it was so great that when Parliament next met (15th of November, 1753) the very first business after the address (which only occupied half-an-hour or so--a valuable hint to present M.P.’s) was to bring in a bill repealing the privilege of Naturalization to the Jews. Popular clamour on its behalf was senseless, as it usually is, but it was too strong to resist, and in the debate thereon, on the 27th of November, 1753, William Pitt (all honour to him) said, ‘Thus, sir, though we repeal this law, out of complaisance to the people, yet we ought to let them know that we do not altogether approve of what they ask.’[83] The Bill was carried on the 28th of November, and received the Royal Assent on the 20th of December, the same year, and consequently an injustice was for some time done to some of the loyalest, quietest, and most law-abiding citizens we have. Hanway, however, thought so strongly on the subject that he wrote four tractates upon it, which, as the question is now happily settled, may be dismissed with this brief notice. He was naturally of a busy turn of mind, and could not sit still. He wrote about anything--it did not much matter what--of the paving, etc. of Westminster and its adjacent parishes; he even wrote a big book, beautifully illustrated, on a little trip he took, when travelling was not so common as now, ‘A Journal of Eight days’ Journey from Portsmouth to Kingston-on-Thames,’ (1756) a second edition of which was published in two volumes in 1757, with the addition of ‘An Essay on Tea, considered as pernicious to Health, obstructing Industry, and impoverishing the Nation.’ So we see he took strong views on things in general, which have since, by experience, been modified.