The Press. — London, England, 1858-11-27 00:00:00

to pay a visi short interval Princes will g TUE PRINC eighteenth I Prussia, was extraordinary Prussian roy twelve o'cloc. Royal, where the German I members of breakfast pre drawing-rood mist three o'c of Wales, wl uniform of a a few of the of the theatre of the day. E pale, looked Daring the di of costly pres pates her con would be imp which this ev society in Be THE Yous , the late Duc montese regi gone to Tur visit to his Madrid. THE MARI Pennington, Edgar Athel Elizabeth D St. James's A Menus( before the H fourth son of eldest (laugh A MARRIA place betweel Bourke, four Longley, eld MR. NEWL THE annual Conservative on Thursday The show were some v, The event Tavern in th siding in th prevented at his relative, Mr. Newdeg for the nortt After the 1 been dispose the society tributed, The Om members fo toast which Mr. NEW] then rose to Mr. Presidi to me that re which I helm for the perfo deemed it we labourers, wh the course of ness, I have I consider th 110 sinecure, duties which, took. (Cher we have long which is the I at the comm Collective ha rejoice to see bars which p Political subj speak everyi recognition Englishman cireumstancl Proud privily which, trust of the people those which without dm whieli we Ii but acting 0 the Com Farhat:nem, THE PRESS, NOVEMBER 27, 1858 to IV a visit to her loyal subjects in Canada, a short interval only will elapse before one of the young Princes will go there. THE PRINCESS FREDERICK WILLIAM OF PRUSSIA'S eighteenth birthday, the first she has passed in press* was celebrated on Sunday, at Berlin, with extraordinary rejoicings. The members of the reassign royal family arrived before no.m, and at twelve o'clock the whole party entered the Chapel Royal, where an impressive service was performed in the German language. After this ceremony all the members of the royal family withdrew to partake of a breakfast prepared for them in one of the principal drawing-rooms. The company retired about half oast three o'clock. His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, who is on a visit to his sister, wore the uniform of a colonel in the Guards. In the evening a few of the public offices were illuminated, and some of the theatres had sp-!cial performances in honour of the day. Her Royal Highness, although somewhat pale, looked remarkably animated and happy. Daring the day her Royal Highness received a number of costly presents. The Princess, it is said, antici pates her confinement early in the ensuing year. It would be impossible to describe the enthusiasm with which this event is looked forward to by all daises of society in Berlin. THE YOUNG COUNT DE CH ARTRES, second SOD of the late Duchess d'Orleans, having entered a Pied montese regiment, his brother, Count de Paris, has gone to Turin to visit bim, and thence goes on a visit to his uncle, the Duke de Montpensier, at Madrid. THE MARRIAGE of the Hon. Louisa Theodosia Pennington, sister of Lord Muncaster, with Mr. Edgar Atheling Drummond, son of Mr. and Lady Elizabeth Drummond, was solemnized yesterday at St. James's Church, Piccadilly. _ . • A MARRIAGE as arranged and will shortly take place before the Hon. and Rev. George Wingfield Bourke, fourth son of the Earl of Mayo, and Miss Longley, eldest daughter of the Bishop of Durham. A MARRIAGE is arranged and will shortly take place between the Hon. and Rev. George Wingfield Bourke, fourth son of the Earl of Mayo, and Miss Longley, eldest daughter of the Bishop of Durham. Volitual. MR. NEWDEGATE AND MR. SPOONER AT RUGBY. THE annual gathering of the Rugby and Dunchurch Conservative and Agricultural Association took place on Thursday at Rugby. The show of stock was rather limited, but there were some very fine specimens of cattle. The event was celebrated by a dinner at the Eagle Tavern in the afternoon—Mr. C. M. Caldecott pre siding in the absence of Lord John Scott, who was prevented attending in consequence of the death of his relative, Lord Courtown. He was supported by Mr. Newdegate and Mr. Spooner, the two members for the northern division of Warwickshire. After the usual loyal and constitutional toasts bad been disposed of, and the various prizes awarded by the society to farm servants and labourers been dis. Mimed, The CHAIRMLN proposed the health of the two members for the northern division of the county-9 toast which was drunk with much enthusiasm. Mr. NEWDEGATE, who was very warmly greeted, then rose to return thanks. He said : Mr. President and Gentlemen,—You have again extended to me that reward to which 1 am proud to say the class to which I belong aspire, as that which will recompense them for the performance of their duties. I rejoice you have deemed it well that our health' should follow those of the labourers, whom you have just honoured. I trust that in the course of the years during which, through your kind -sess, I have represented you, I have not failed to show that I consider the office of representing North Warwickshire ao sinecure, and that I have endeavoured to discharge the duties which, when you first elected me, I thought 1 under took. (Cheers.) This is one of those meetings in which we have long cl a i me d f or ourse l ve s that liberty of speech which is the highest privilege of Englishmen. The Speaker at the commencement of each Parliament claims it for the Collective body of which I am a humble member, and I mono* to see that throughout the country those artificial bars which prevented the free expression of opinion on Pvliucal suljects have been removed, and that Englishmen speak everywhere more freely than they did. This is a recognition of the fact that political affairs concern every Englishman of every grade, and in every line of life, and circumstances make us still more rejoice that it is our Ptoild privilege that we have provided institutions under which, trusting to the prudence and other qualities of the People, we dare discuss the highest questions, and those which affect us most intimately, unreservedly and without damage to the form of government under which we live. I never considered myself a delegate; but acting on the true principles, as I understand them, `2. 1 the Constit u ti on , I f e lt th a t w hen you sent me to F arliatnera, understanding the principles on which I in• tended to act, you confided to my discretion the mode in which I should apply the power you intrusted to my charge. (Cheers.) Still, I rejoice at being able to explain to you the reasons which have actuated me in many im portant crises ; and I now beg to be allowed to touch upon one or two matter& which occurred during the last session of Parliament. To me that session has been the moat painful which I have ever experienced in your service. You well know that for eleven years I have humbly but earnestly striven in defence of the Christian character of Parliament. (Cheers.) I believe I did so with your full assent; and it was with deep regret I saw that great principle of the Constitution infringed for the sake of ad mitting to the House of Commons a man of great sealth, and, for aught 1 know, of great attainments, but ono who could not profess the true faith of a Christian. Such has been the circumstance which occurred last session, one painful to myself; but before I allude to other subjects I wish to explain why, after refusing at the last election to support Lord Palmerston, I avoided taking a part in a division the effect of which was to expel him from office. You remember the vile attempt made on the life of the Emperor of the French—an attempt at assassination, the crime most abhorrent to the people of this country. Certain parties—most of whom have paid the penalty of their guilt—were implicated in it during their residence in this country, enjoying the hospitality which it extends to all foreigners ; and at the commencement of the session the Conspiracy Bill was introduced. I voted for the first reading of that bill; but on the table of the House of Commons there was afterwards laid a despatch from Count Walewski, impugning the laws and thel Administration of England. I was then content to know what had been said by the Govern• ment of France. That despatch was unanswered ; but I concluded it was owing to the press of other Government business, or to some accidental circumstance ; but before the second reading of that bill another despatch from the Government of France was laid on the table of the House of Commons. This I found was also unanswered; and when I understood Lord Palmerston meant the House of Commons to answer those two despatches by changing the laws of England at the instance of a foreign power, I voted that the House of Commons should answer them by resolution, and not by bill—i.e., that they should answer them specifically, and in terms, deferring, until that answer had been virtually received, any change in the laws of this independent country. (Cheers.) I can scarcely claim any meed of praise for the part I took on the India Bill. Having been a member of the committee of 1853 I thoroughly disapproved of the proposal to abrogate the government of the East India Company. I thought that form of government needed amendment ; but I saw no reason, under the circumstances, why it should be totally abrogated and annulled. 1 thought its abrogation a viola tion of that federal system on which the dependencies of this constitutional monarchy had been governed for many years. I thought it imprudent that, at a time of revolt in India, the Ministers should change the form of government which prevailed throughout that dependency. I thought that the East India Company, as trustees for the Crown had not deserved to have their functions destroyed ; and I think so still. What course, then, was I to pursue? Was Ito go in direct opposition to Lord Derby's Government? Should I, by that means, have stayed the passage of the bill I deprecated? My judgment told me that I might overturn the Government, but that I should not stay the bill. [ therefore adopted that course which is open to every member of Parliament. I abstained from taking any part in those discussions. You know I was once whipper-in of Lord Derby's party. I was the first officer they ever appoioted ; and I know this, that a mem ber may in • division count either one or two. If he leaves the party with whom he generally acts and votes against them, he counts two. One is abstracted from the ranks of his party and one added to the ranks of their opponent.. But if he abstains from voting he only counts one, and that is the course which I thought it my duty to pursue in your interests on the great Indian question. I succeeded after wards in extracting from Mr. V. Smith an admission that after the publication of Lord Canning 's proclamation with respect to India, he had withheld from Lord Ellenborongh, his successor, information explanatory of that proclamation —a proclamation which no doubt induced that severity of language for which, if anything, Lord Ellenborough was to blame, language contained in the despatch expressing his dissent from that which was considered a confiscatory pro clamation. So mach for the session which is passed, and I can only say I trust I shall never witness such another. But forgive me if, pursuing the gime coarse which for years has been adopted in this room, I ask you to accompany me whilst I glance forward. It is impossible that I should ig nore the speeches it has pleased Mr. Bright to make in Birmingham. You will excuse me, therefore, if I advert to them. Don't expect I am going to attempt to answer his doubleharrelled inaugural address. (" Hear," and laughter.) It occupied eight closely-printed columns of the daily newspapers, but still he mooted anbjects of im portance; and although the good sense of England will ignore the sentiments which lie expressed, yet it is impos• sible to doubt that the violence of his address affected the mind's of many of those whose ignorance he appealed to when be endeavoured to excite their feelings against the institutions of their country. I lament that a gentleman giftel with so much talent and so mach eloquence as Mr. Bright should have used his powers of illustration to prove himself so bigoted and narrow-minded a politician. I say bigoted, for although he may claim not to be bigoted in his preference for any particular form of religion, he is bigoted in his hatred to the Church of England, and he is a bigoted advocate of democracy. (Loud cheers.) I am sure you have all read his speeches ; it is nut natural you should overlook them ; but is It not strange that one, who claims especially to be the advocate of freedom, should have blamed England for the exertions she made for the liberties of Europe ? Is it not strange that a member of the Peace Society should have spoke slightingly of the 1151 balance of power in Europe, the sole basis on which na tions in a position of independence can hope to adopt that system of arbitration which the Peace Society has ever advocated, and justly advocated, ne the alternative for war? Is it not strange that he who calls himself a Protestant should grudge an expenditure which has not impaired the progress or advancement of this country, but which we have incurred for the defence of the Protestant interests of Europe? (Hear.) Mr. Bright spoke slightingly of the revolution of 1688, whilst he expressed a hope that, in the town-hall of Birmingham, he might inaugurate another. You who have read history will agree with me that from the revolution of 1688 dated the commencement of that period of tempered freedom during which England has advanced to the high position she holds amongst the nations of the earth. That revolution, I say, has con ferred upon us a freedom of which I will only observe that it is endangered only by its success. i did not advert to Mr. Bright's address merely to reply to the many extra vagances which, I may be forgiven for thinking. he uttered ; bat he entered into the question of reform. Now,that is a question most attractive to the labouring classes of this country, and Mr. Bright assumed to himself, and the party with whom he is connected, the credit of being exclusively the representatives of the labouring classes. My hon. colleague and myself have been much mistaken in our course if we have not ourselves been the friends of the labouring classes. (Cheers.) I can only say that there have been few instances of greater blindness in accom plishing the functions of representatives, if we have failed in duly representing the interests of the labouring classes comprised in this large constituency ; and when he taunts us, as he has done, with having failed to re present the working classes, it would be easy to reply, Is plaque, How is it that Mr. Bright, the representative of the interests of the working classes, was a vigilant opponent of the Ten Hours Bill ? how was it that he op posed every measure fur the mitigation of the severity of factory labour? how was it that he opposed, as we all remember, a measure for guarding machinery and protecting from injury those employed in factories? (Cheers.) I was whipper-in for the late Mr. Fielden when his bill came before the House of Commons, and if you refer to the division on that occasion, you will find that the majority consisted of men of like opinions with myself—Mr. Fielden, Lord Ashley (now Lord Shaftesbury), Lord John Manners, and others, who claimed for women and children and men employed in factories that mitigation of labour which has proved nowise injurious to the trade or com merce of the country. (Cheers.) And Mr. Bright, from first to last, with all the powers of declamation, and all the energy he possesses, opposed this bill, and then he comes to Birmingham and tells us he is the exclusive friend of the labouring classes! (Cheers.) But Mr. Bright pro poses a Reform Bill, and, in doing so, he deems it necessary to say that for thirty years he and his party have waged perpetual war against the predominance of the country gentlemen in Parliament. Now in what does that predominance consist ? If it consists in the county representation I will show you the vast power—the vast forces—against which Mr. Bright has made this perpe tual war. He said the only way to procure a just and real representation of the people was this—that the mem bers should be taken from the smaller boroughs and con ferred on the larger boroughs and cities, which were to be divided and subdivided for the purpose of creating the constituencies to receive them. Now, what measure of justica would that be, according to Mr. Bright's own prin ciples ? Mr. Bright is a democrat, and he holds that the only true representation of the people is that toe majority should choose their representatives, and that divisions of the constituencies, as I understand him, should he made for that purpose. And, mind you, his proposal is to add v) the number of borough members by extending the repre sentation ofthe exisths g boroughs and the districts over which their precincts extend. Yon will forgive me if I just show how the matter stands in the point of view in which Mr. Bright has chosen to consider it that is the population represented by county members and the number of th ose members, as compared with the population of the boroughs and the number of members who represent them. I claim this for the comity members—that they are the representatives of the majority of the people of this country. I *ll just call your attention to the proportion in which the population of counties and boroughs are represented in Parliament, at present, under the Reform Bill of 1831. I find by a return moved for by M►. Fitzroy in 18.53 (and the circumstances have not changed since then) that the whole population of Eng:and and Wales was 17,927,609, and the total number of members 496. The population residing beyond the precincts of cities and boroughs was 10,405,9x91, and the number of county mem bers reprtsenting the population was 159. Then the popu lation residing within the precincts of cities and boroughs was 7,1.11,679, and the members who represented them 337. Now, these facts explain many circumstances which perhaps you have been at a loss to understand. There is a powerless ness ou the part of county members in the House of Com mons. It is true we are divided in opinion ; but I wish to show how small a body of members rep►esents the majority of the population of England and Wales. According to this calculation, and I believe it to be correct, each county member—and, mind you, Mr. Bright treats us as if we did nut represent the people—represents 66,612 of the popula tion, while each borough member only represents 22,052 ; and Mr. Bright's proposal is to increase this disproportion, by which &county member represents three times the popula tion represynted by a borough member. ( Cheers.) The result then is that although we, the county members of England, re • present the majority of the population, yet in the House of Commons we are in a minority of less than one to two ; and this great reformer—this advocate fui• democratic principles —washes to perpetuate and enhance that disproportion. But that is not all. Remember that if a voter lives within a borough, and has property nut immediately connected with his house, he votes for the county also. lam likely to know that tact, seeing that I have 1;300 constituents