The Sun. — London, England, 1859-02-02 00:00:00

MEETING OF LANCASIIIBE REFORM DEPUTIES. Yesterday afternoon an exceedingly large and crowded meeting was held at the Assembly-room, Free-trade Hall, Manchester, being a conference of Reformers in Lancashire favourable to the general principles of Mr. Bright's Bill. Mr. Bright, M.P., was present, and was received with most enthu siastic cheering. The following is a list of some of the deputations present , but owing to the late hour at which some of the appointments were made it is not complete, and it is probable some few mistakes are made in names The following are the names of the deputations and friends from the various towns named ACCRINGTON. --Messrs. Langbridge, Geo. Bury, Thomas Haworth, James Barlow, R. Massey, E. Bowker, Swaine Rhodes, Bridge (Church, Robt. Westin (Church), J. Tattersall. ASTLEY.-Mr. Samuel Newton. ASEETON-UNDER-LYNE.--Mr. William Hill. BLACKBURN.-Mr. James Pilkington, M.P. ; Aldermen Wm. Pilkington and R. R. Jackson ; Messrs. W. H. Johnson, Adam %Hough, T. B. Westall, Thomas Eccles, R. Shackleton, B. Abbott, R. Webster, James Shaw, H. Cocks, F. Nichols. BOLTON.—Messrs. Robert Heyw , ood, Thomas Thomasson, P. R. Arrowsmith, T. Satterthwaite, Henry Ashworth (the Oaks.) BAcur.—Messrs. Chas. Stewart, Richard Smith, Robert Smith, John Howarth. BURY.—Messrs. Thomas L. Openshaw, Thomas Pilkington, Thomas Grundi James Kay, James Chattwood, Richard Ward, d wa rdßates, William Farebrother, Thomas Crompton, Samuel Kay, John Wood, John Ratcliffe, James Livsey, John Horrox, John H. Tyson, Peter M. Cooper. CHADDERTON.—Mr. Allen Mellor. CHORLEY._Messrs. William Lawrence, William' Gillibrand. HASLINGDEN.—Rey. G. W. Clapham. HELMSHORE.—Mr. James Whittaker. KIRKELAM.—Mr. Richard Bowdler. LANCASTER.—Mr. James Thomson Wray, and Mr. Alderman G. Jackson ; Messrs. George Cle minson, Verity, John Clark Hornby, Tennant Kirkby, and W. Guineas, Bentham. LIVERPOOL.—Messrs. Robertson Gladstone, J. R. Jeffery, Lawrence Heyworth, Charles Holland, J. P. Danson, R. W. Ronald, Richard Shiel, David M'Clellan, R. Bennett, J. Steel, T. Cope, and K. Liversedge. .LEEDS.—Messrs. George Atkins, Chas. Andrew, John Holroyd, H. Atherton. MIDDLETON.—Messrs. John Knox, Edward Howarth, John Woolstencroft, Thos. Mills. NEWCHURCH.--Messrs. John Kershaw, Whit taker, H. Law, Barcroft, George Hood. PRESTON.—Messrs. Rolt, R. Charnley, J. Han kinson, J. J. Merriman, John Thompson, Jun. OLDHAM.—Mr. Councillor Dransfield, Messrs. Leonard Haslop, John Bromley, John Swailes, E. Ingham, Jos. Shaw, John. Ashton, Edwd. Kirkby, John Bradley. Adam Bradley, John Beswick, John Green, John Swires, Edward Rye, Richard Peat, Charles Mellor, J. Hulme Hill. ROYTON.—Messrs. James Stott, Thos. Chadwick, John Buckley, Jos. Harrop, Adam Whitworth, John Mellor, Miles Taylor. ROCHDALE.—Mr. Alderman Healey, and Mr. Alderman Livsey ; Messrs. Jacob Bright, John Pe trie, George Ashworth, Robt. Kelsall, Henry King, James King, T. B. Willans, J. F. Pagan, William Shepherd, Abraham Greenwood, Sam Asquith, John Clegg, Sam Casson. SOUTHPORT.—Dr. Craven ; Messrs. Wood, Henry Robinson, Robert Lloyd, John Jackson, Walter Smith, Wm. Hodge, Boothroyd. STALEYBRIDGE.—Messrs. W. Bayley (Mayor), Randall Ridgway, John Summers, George Smith, Hugh Marsland, Abraham Hilton, Jos. Shawcross, E. Shipley, J. Kenworthy, W. Bayley, jun. ST. HELEN'S.—Messrs. Samuel Gurney, Bernard, Dromgoole. STOCKPORT. Messrs. Alderman Chapman, liampson ' and Walmsley ; Messrs. Forrester , Blaekett (Stacksteads), Richard Ashworth, David Bowlas, James Longson, S. Maiden. TODMORDEN.—Messrs. Abraham Ormrod, Robt. Fielden, W. Fielden, L. H. Suthers, John Fielden, Thos. Chambe rs _ i John Whitaker, James Nuttall, Edward L, William Crabtree, Joseph Firth, W. Haworth, J. Shepherd, Wm. Greenwood, Ashton Stansfield, John Barker, jun., George Hinsliffe, James Schofield, John Cockcroft. James Dawson, John Brooke, Wm. Shackleton, Henry Duckworth, J. H. Wilson, Barker Crabtree, James Ashworth, John Veevers, L. Tapling. WARRINGTON. —Rey. R. A. Mould ; Messrs. Peter Rylands, Holbrook Gaskell, C. H. Cartwright, Edward. Robinson, John Burgess. COWPEN.—Edward Ashworth. The following letter had been received from Mr Bailey, M.P.: " Hayesleigh, Manchester, Jan. 26. " My Dear Sir, —Having been long engaged to proceed to London on Tuesday next, to fulfil an important engage ment, I cannot, I regret, have the honour of attending the Reformers' Conference on the evening of that day. " Again, I beg to assure you that I shall feel it to be my duty to assist in obtaining as comprehensive and judicious a reform in the representation of the people of this country as the Legislature can be induced to yield. " Allow me to ;take the opportunity of thanking my Liberal friends for the honour of electing me a vice-presi dent of their Reform Association.—Believe me to remain, most faithfully, " THOS. BAZLEY. " George Wilson, Esq., &c.” On the motion of Mr. J. C. DYER, seconded by Mr. HARVEY, Mayor of Salford, Mr. Geo. Wilson was unanimously voted to the chair, amid loud cheers. The CHAIRMAN regretted that, in the absence of one of the most distinguished Liberals in the county, he had been, at a. few minutes' notice, called to take the chair on this occasion. The object of this meeting was to afford to the leading Reformers of Lancashire an opportunity of expressing their opinions on the great measure of his friend Mr. Bright. (Cheers.) Speaking from his intimate ac quaintance with the past assemblages of Liberals in thii district, he was prepared to maintain that the names which had been sent in as those of dele gates to this meeting offered a selection more re spectable and influential than he had ever seen in the palmiest days of the League. (Cheers.) As this was a meeting of delegates, he hoped no gentleman would refrain from expressing his opinion, inas much as at great personal inconvenience Mr. Bright was present. If they were to have a discussion on Mr. Bright's measure, now was the time for it, and now was the time to obtain any information re quired in reference to it, in order that, after due and mature consideration, they might combine to gether strongly and with the requisite degree of force, in order that that measure should have its due influence in the House of Commons. (Cheers.) He thought Mr. Bright had reason for peculiar gratification at the reception of his proposals, not only by the great meeting s he had addressed at Birmingham, Manch es t er , Edinbu rgh, Glasgow, Bradford, and Rochdal e , but even meetings . of importance had been held, nwb when the parties much e to them were advocates ofmore extensive measures than that of the member ho t n h . orefo for Bir mingham. He (the chairman) retookit for granted that we were not likely ha v e t heold game played over again, but that the classes for themselves were prepared to ac cep t wor kingh the leadership of Mr. Bright with reference to thi s te Reform Bill, and that we should see a combination e throughout the country in favour of this meas ure such as was never presented in favour of a Refo rm Bill on any former occasion. A good deal of unani mity had probably arisen from the fact that Mr. Bright was not self-elected as a leader, because he had been chosen by the London Reform Association, the first reform association in the country for the talent of its members and for the attention it had given to the cause it advocated during the last two or three years. He took it for granted that the members of that association, with their 50 or 60 members of Parliament on its council, would not have made that selection unless they , had come t o the Conclusion that a measure of reform could be safely intrusted to the hands of Mr. Bright. (Cheers.) He considered that Lancashire had especial reason for supporting this Reform Bill. Long before 1832, and since that time, no county in the kingdom had received, in the acknowledg ment of population or property, such unfair treat ment as Lancashire. • (Cheers.) They asked for no exclusive privileges, but for fair-play.. We should, no doubt, hear from that: ingenious advocate of the landed interest, and probably the most able . supporter of the present Government in the that of Commons, Mr. Disraeli, a great outcry 'kat the counties had not their fair share of repre- Sentation in proportion to :their population and their voter s Bucking hamshire, it Taking his own, county of Bucking urwinould be found, however, that for many years during the e contest for the Reform Bill Mr. Disraeli sat g h k now i ng that .Buckingham shire; with i t s 64400 00 voters (borough' and county ipcluded), its population, and its property rated to the income tax of considerably less than £1,000,000, returned 11 members , while Lanca shire, with a poPulation of and. m upwards ore of 2,000,000, more than 8 8 , 0 0 0 voters, than o L 10,000,000 property tax, only of assessment .to &returned 26 members to Parliament, and that if county of Lancaster during that time had returned i n portion to the county_of Buckingh am, pro am, instead of 26, it would have had 130 members. (Cheers.) H e would, however, not take the comparison with Buckinglrata alone. At . the ..present time there were'- nine counties in England with less than 400,000 porgation, with assessment under sched u l e A of the prolierty-tax of - £700,000 less than that of Lancashire, Which returned 98 members to Par liament against the 26 from Lancashire. And, taking into consideration the great increase of population since the Reform Bill, it would be found that the increase alone in Lancashire since then exceeded the entire present population of Dorset, Buckingham, and Devonshire, which returned 38 members.. (Hear, hear.) The Times had stated some time ago that there were but three men of great debating power in Parliament, and those were Lord Derby, Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Bright. Now, all these gentlemen were Lancashire men — (cheers)—and -he thought they had reason to be proad of the fact. Mr. HENRY ASHWORTH, of Bolton, cong ratulated the meeting on the influential character f the de putations sent. One . leading feature of the pro posed Reform Act was an extension of the suffrage, and it might be supposed to be some new and dangerous discovery. But where did we hear of a Reform Bill of which it did not form a part ? Lord John Russell's Bill - proposed a £5 rating clause, and therefore it appeared that Mr. Bright's proposition was not altogether novel. If the con stitution, which was always in danger, was in need of repair, he thoug ht the y w ould not be disposed to take advantage of anything in the institutions of the continent. A great outcry had been made against assimilating our institutions to those of America, but to what country could we go with greater hope of deriving a lesson that would be use ful and safe ? He referred to the question of the ballot as an instance. It had been found to work well on the whole in that country, and therefore we might expect it would work well here. He proceeded to defend Mr. Bright's Bill, and thought that even in it they had not asked for all to which they were entitled. He concluded by moving a re solution to the effect that Mr. Bright's measure deserved the support of this county, and that the conference was disposed to give it all the support in their power. (Cheers.) Mr. HERVEY, Mayor of Salford, seconded the 'resolution. Mr. BARNES, late M.P. for Bolton. supported the resolution, and said he should have been prepared to go with Mr. Bright if he had gone a little fur ther. He did not know but he should have asked for manhood suffrage, because Governments seldom gave all that was asked. He believed there never was a man who stood before the country with the 1 same amount of confidence, that he spoke the sen timents of the great mass of the people, and he be lieved that the people never had such an able ad vocate before. What he wanted was a power at his back—(hear, hear)—and if this bill was lost they might depend it would be their faults, and not Mr. Bright's. (Cheers.) Mr. R. GLADSTONE, of Liverpool, rose amid great cheering. He regretted that Liverpool had not been in the foreground on this question, like Manchester, and he came there to give his feeble help, because he thought it would be a stigma on them if they remained silent. He spoke for himself, and not for others, and he asked whether it was better to wait till greater evils had developed them selves in our political system, or to apply at once a remedy while there was time. ln Liver pool there was , of course , a considerable difference of opinion. Of course, from the old Tories there was an opposition, but they knew how that oppo sition was to be dealt with, and that if the people were firm and resolute in their demand not the Tories, nor even the Times newspaper—which, after all, was a Tory—with all the briefless barristers and preachless ministers at its back as writers, could stand against the arguments which pointed to such a measure of Reform as Mr. Bright now proposed. He did not profess to speak either for the Tory or the old Whig party of Liverpool, but he came to that meeting as one of a considerable phalanx of the more advanced Liberals, to express their most grateful thanks to Mr. Bright for his distinguished services on this question. (Cheers.) Mr. JEFFERY, of Liverpool, and Mr. THOMPSON, of Ray, near Lancaster, heartily . supported the re solution, which' was carried unanimously. Mr. BRIGHT then rose to address the meeting amid enthusiastic and repeated cheering. He said, —Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen,—l can corrobo rate a remark which has been made by the chair man in reference to this meeting, for, looking back to all or any of the meetings which were held under the name of " conferences," and called in the middle of the clay, during the agitation of the Anti-Corn Law League, I do not remember any one so numerous, and I rembember none more entirely united in action, more enthusiastic or in fluential than that which I loook upon at this moment. (Cheers.) There are one or two points which have been referred to as to which I feel constrained to take something like an objec tion. Now, it must be understood, from the first I have never put myself forward with any view of becoming a great popular or Parliamen tary leader, either on this or any other public question. You are aware, I presume, how it was that I undertook to prepare a bill to be laid before Parliament :—that a conference was held in Lon don, that many influential men were there, that they represented many more, as they believed, who were not present ; that they thought it would be desirable that Parliament should see a Reform Bill prepared by earnest reformers ; and that they did me the great honour to ask me if I would under take, hr conjunction with others, to prepare such . a bill, with a view to its being laid before Parliament. Well, I did not feel at liberty absolutely to refuse, but I explained clearly the ground upon which I intended to proceed ; and I now allude to this question in reference to what has been said by my friend Mr. Barnes. I said " I shall not be ex pected to introduce a bill framed upon the pro gramme or specification of anybody else or of any Reform Association, but it shall be one that shall square with my own convictions ; and I will take the advice of some gentlemen in whose opinion I have great confidence on a question of this nature." I did not propose to prepare a bill that should be theoretically perfect. We were not landed from a colonisation ship in a new country, and about to arrange a constitution without reference to the past, I have no wish at all to be severed from the great part of this country, but I proposed to take this course—to prepare a bill just such as in my conscience I believe it is the duty of any Minister of the Crown really and honestly in favour of re form to prepare and submit to Parliament; not to submit to Parliament for the sake of having a great field-night, and making a great speech, and having a vote, and. the thing being then dismissed, aid never heard of again until another session or some subsequent period ; but a measure that should have regard, as far as possible, to all that exists in the country, whether of fact or of opinion, hoping thereby to combine in its favour so large an amount of public support that it should finally obtain the acceptance of the most influ ential of our statesmen, whose influence, of course, must diminish when they set themselves permanently against the power of public opinion in this country. Well, now you will observe the pro , positions that I have made, and, as I said even at that time, anybody who is dispdsed to cavil may cavil. (Hear, hear.) Anybody might cavil at the Reform Bill of 1832, but it was a great measure notwithstanding, and it passed ; and anybody who is not now honestly , in favour of reform, or who has any personal dislike to the prominence which I have taken in this matter, can of course, if he likes, find fault with many of the arrangements which I propose. But I have submitted to my countrymen a measure, as a whole, founded upon broad and easily understood principles—recognising the great rights of a great people, stepping not to the right hand nor to th e l e ft t o f avour p ar ti cu lar interests or par veccuolmare t localities—(hear, hear)—and I offer this measure them calculatedat once,t ogive bevleievthinegmit, thatif i t fai s r h , o a u n l d d become equal, and complete control over the legislation and Government of this country which our constitution says we ought to possess, and our experience of the past shows us is necessary to our welfare for the future. (Hear, hear.) So, with regard to the question of the Parliamentary suffrage, I da not include everybody. I don't know i n y suffrage sca rcely that could, but I hand it out freel so that no class and no man of any class can sta n d' up and say, "Your bill is directed to exc l u d e me, while it intends to include somebody else." (Hear, hear.) The exclusions are of that nature that they affect eq ually all classes, and the invitatio ns to come in within the pale of the constitution are broad and general to all classes of the people. (Cheers.) Well, then, you will observe that there is not very much discussion at this moment on the question o f the franchise. The discussion now turns upon the mode in which I have endeavoured to arrange the distribution of members after having disfranchised a certain number of the boroughs. To obtain a certain number of seats, I am told with great pertinacity in some quarters, though with great feebleness of proof— (laughter and cheers)—that I have been greatly unfair to what is called the landed interests of the country. Now, I suppose it is intended that the distinction between boroughs and counties is still to be kept up. I proceeded upon an observance of, and a regard for, the ancient customs and lan d ‘ marks of o ur s y s t em . If anybody wishes to sweep them all away, and arrange something else, well, let him try. But I understood that the great body of the thinking people of this country preferred something built, as it were, upon ancient founda tions rather than that we should clear the ground of stone, and brick, the mortar, and everything that has existed heretofore, and begin a new build ing upon an entirely new theory. (Hear, hear.) Now, it is essential that the public should be con vinced, if the,7 are to support this bill, that I have dealt; fairly with the different classes of the country. Observe, nobody has found fault with the figures. You have seen the lists of those schedules. You know that somebody has spent days and nights, almost weeks, in arranging those schedules and figures, but nobody has yet undertaken to show that there are serious errors of any kind in them, and from this you may well be assured that great care has been taken in the arrangement before it was submitted for public approval. (Cheers.) But the charge is that we are lifting a great power which is now on the side of what is called the landed interest, and we are placing it on the side of the commercial interest, and that whatever is the pre sent disproportion and want of balance, if this bill passes we shall have an equal want of balance with that which now exists, but on the other side of the house, or upon the other interests of the country. I showed on a very late occasion that so far as the great towns are concerned, and the purely agri cultural counties, accepting thus all populations (although . bear in mind that all population is neither enfranchished now nor is it intended wholly to enfranchise them), the purely agricultural popu. lation have more members in proportion to their numbers than the population of the great towns to which I propose to give three or four, or six repre sentatives each. (Hear, hear.) I showed that if there were any counties not sufficiently represented they were those which had a great manufacturing and mining population, and that those which really and obviously were very insufficiently dealt with and had much too few members were the counties of Lancashire, the West Riding of York, Middlesex, and Surrey ; but it is very difficult to get men to look at a question with anything like fairness. Some one sent me yesterday an extract from a paper of large circulation, published in the town of Liver pool. That paper goes upon this simple statement, that the population of the counties is so much, and I propose to leave it with so many members, that the population of the boroughs is so much less than that of the counties, and that I propose to leave it with so many members, much more than the coun ties, and the writer says I am treating the counties with a gross injustice, but what is the state of things now ? How grossly unjust, according to his theory, is the present position of the county representation ; because, at this moment, the population of the counties being in excess of the Parliamentary boroughs the counties now have about 159 members (I am speaking now of England and Wales only) and I propose to give them 177, which is 18 more, while the boroughs now have 337 ; and I propose to bring them down to 301, but this learned scribe never com plained before. (Laughter.) Why, if by giving the counties 18 more and the boroughs 36 less (because I take from English borough to give some to Scotland and some to Ireland) I am guilty of grievous injus tice to the counties, I should like to know what is the way to do this gentleman justice—(cheers) — but if this gentleman writer, whose criticism I am now criticising, would have carried his observation a little further, he would have seen that there is a portion of the borough representation in England which is nominally over-represented. As far as the counties measure with the great boroughs there is no great disparity.. It is not of the slightest consequence to us as inhabitants of boroughs whe ther every member represent a thousand more or less than in the counties, and, taking the two to gether, all the rural counties and all the great boroughs, the difference is altogether unessential, or, if there be any difference, it is in favour of the counties ; but if you get lower in the boroughs, to all those which return or are proposed to return one member each or two members each, you will find of course that the representation appears to be greatly in excess. You will find that whereas if all the 'population were divided by all the members each member would have about 37,500 persons in the small boroughs, with only one member the average had not more than 11,000 or 12,000, and in boroughs with not more than two members the share of representation is very much greater than in the counties or in the large boroughs. But then this is absolutely inevitable if you intend to main tain the distinction between boroughs and counties, and I can show you how the equalisation is brought about. (Hear, hear.) I can show you, as I believe in :my conscience to be absolutely true, if my bill were to pass, it would be utterly impossible for any man studying the figures and studying the facts to hold the opinion that the county popula tions or the landed. interest were not sufficiently represented in the scheme I have laid before the public. I shall not occupy more than a moment or two in explaining how that is. Now, in looking over the schedule of those boroughs that are to have one member each, schedule B and schedule D —that is, all the boroughs between 8,000 and 25,000 population—T believe there aro at least 50 seats which may be set down to be almost certainly connected with the same influences which direct the representation of the counties, and therefore they may be fairly added to the county repre sentation of the country • but there is another schedule, that of boroughs with two members, and I should just like to read over the names of a few of these, to show you exactly . to what my arguments tend. If you ask, " who is the representative of a county ?" in almost any part of Great Britain, you will find, with the exception of half-a-dozen counties or divisions, that he is a good landed proprietor, or a son or near relative of some nobleman or great proprietor of the county. Traders are never admitted into the agricultural counties. You can return Willitim Brown and John Cheetham for the county ; but if you go to North and South Cheshire, and the various other agricultural counties of the Kingdom, you will find that your merchants and manufacturers are not admitted there. But how is it with your boroughs P Take, now, on this very list, in what I call schedule D, the boroughs that, according to my proposal, would have two members. There are 19 boroughs out of these which cannot be said to return or to have chosen manufacturing represen tatives for themselves. There is the borough of Gateshead, Well, Mr. Hutt, who represents Gateshead, is by marriage connected with an aristocratic family and a large landed property in that district. If you come to Carlisle, you find Sir James Graham, the owner of a magnificent estate within, I believe, ten miles of that place, represent ing the city of Carlisle. If you come to North ampton, you find Mr. Vernon Smith, himself a man of great wealth, and I believe of great landed pro perty, representing that town. If you come to the borough of Aylesbury, you find Airlesbury is a siball county in itself, for it has a very large lande( district united to the town. If you come to Chester, you find a son of the Marquis of Westminster is almost always representing that city. If you come to Oxford, you find a very excellent gentleman of landed property, represents that city. If you come to the borough of Shoreham, in the county of Sussex, you find it is as much a county as any part of Not tinghamshire or Buckinghamshire, because there is a large district added to the borough, and the votes of the district. and the land rule the representation of the borough. If you ".come to Ipswich, you find a very excellent gentleman, Mr. Adair, the son of one of the largest landed proprietors in Suffolk, representing that borough. If you go to Galway, in Ireland, another town in the schedule, you find Lord Dunkellin—a son, I think, of Lord Clanri carde—representing that city. If you come to Cheltenham, you find Colonel Berkeley, one of the family of the late Lord Fitzhardinge, representing the town of Cheltenham, and returned through the influence of the Berkeley family in that county. If you come to Coventry, you find that very excellent friend. of mine, Mr. Ellice, represent ing that city. He is a large landed proprietor in Scotland, a man of great wealth, and connected by marriage very intimately with oxe of the most aris tocratic families of the country. If you come to Macclesfield, in our own neighbourhood, you find Mr. Egerton representing that place, and he is a brother, I think, of one of the largest landed pro prietors in the county of Chester. If you go to York, you find Mr. Smyth, who is a very large landed proprietor in the neighbourhood of Wake field, representing the city of York. If you go to East Retford, in Nottinghamshire, you find it is a landed district of country, itself inside a county, and having no more to do with what we call com mercial interests than the most agricultural county in the whole kingdom. And so you may go through all these, and you will find in this very schedule, with two members to every borough, not less than 19 or 20 seats at this moment occupied by persons having no connection whatever with commerce or manufactures, being themselves landed proprietors, or allied to great landed proprietors, in the neigh bourhood. Well, I venture to say this affects—if it were fair, which I believe it is not ; but if it were fair to take the population exactly of the counties and boroughs into consideration, I say the consideration of these facts very much affects the question which is before us. I think it is quite possible to be shown that even if this bill passed the commercial classes of this country would still be able to speak with fairness against the very powerful and unbroken phalanx which the landed interest would offer in the House of Commons; but we don't pretend to be legislating for boroughs only. The members for Manchester now, or the members for Manchester ever since the Reform Bill, had never been men who pretended to legis late for cotton mills and great warehouses. They have no Game Laws to fight for. They have never THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 2, 1859. protested against a fair share of taxation being laid on their constituents. They have taken simply the great principles of political economy. They want those principles carried out in the Legislature. They want economy, not for Manchester only, but as much for Suffolk as for Manchester. (Cheers.) I should be ashamed to go to the House of Com mons to represent a sectional and special interest, to be the organ of shipowners or cotton manufac turers, or Birmingham traders. No • I would "go there broadly and generously and truly, so far as my intelligence and powers enabled me, to consider all subjects that came before the house with refe rence to the great interests of every portion and class of the population of this great empire. (Loud cheers.) There is one other point only with regard to this scheme that I need speak of, and it is tlus— If you look over your population tables you will find that great boroughs are increasing in popula tion, perhaps three times as rapidly as the counties. (Hear.) If it were possible to show that there was a single figure in favour of the counties or in favour of the boroughs, I ask you what it will be 10 years hence ? The population of this county, I believe, has increased about 700,000 since the passing of the Reform Act; its population is now over 2,000,000. By the census of 1871—that is, the, census next to that which we are just approaching—the popula tion of this county in all probability will approach 3,000,000. Then make your calculations accordingly with regard to . your boroughs and your counties. You are not legislating as if it were all hidebound in the great bulk of your agricultural counties. During the last 15 years there has been no increase whatsoever in the county electors ; but what an increase there has been in your . great manufactur ing and mining counties, and particularly in this district. And so it will go on as long as coal and iron last, as long as your capital is not absorbed and squandered in wars—(great cheering)—as long as your intellects are clear and your hearts honest and earnest, so:iong will the eminence of this county continue, and so long shall we find the population of these great manufacturing counties, with all their vast interests, making infinitely greater pro gress than it is possible that the agricultural popu lation of England can make. (Cheers.) Now, I ven ture to say that my scheme is a moderate scheme of reform. (Hear.) Ido not think that any man who is in favour of a representation at all, who has any reliance upon the character of his countrymen —who believes in the perpetuation of freedom through a real Parliament—l do not think he can deliberately and conscientiously condemn the pro position that I have laid before the public as one unjust to any section of the people, or likely to tend in any way to the weakening of any institutions in this country which it is worth the while of the people to care one single farthing about. Why, as to our friends of the House of Lords—(laughter and cheers)—they ought to be very much obliged to me for discussing . this question with the public. Their own position is not particularly enviable with re gard to it. You observe them coming out at " Social Science" meetings, at mechanics' institutes, and in little villages here and there, doing of course, a cer tain not easily appreciable amount of good—(laugh ter)—telling the people all those things which, as we all know, every Sunday school teacher in Eng land could tell them just as well—(laughter and cheering)—cothing on to platforms, descending, shall I say, from their altitude to come among . com mon men. But now, when the whole country is dis cussing this question, when every newspaper is filled with it, when the population from one end of the country to the other is expressing its approval more or less entire, of this measure, why there is not one of these gentlemen who comes upon any plat form and meets the public, who faces the breeze of popular opinion, and helps in the deliberation of the greatest question that can-possibly be discussed by a great people. (Cheers.) Now, we have no idea —not the slightest—of meddling with the House of Lords. Reference has been made to what has been done in a past time when the power of the Crown was limited by Act of Parliament, and we are not proposing to limit the power of the aristocracy of Parliament. We leave them as they are, with all the power and prescription law, privilege, custom, and opinion will permit them to have ; but we say, here is another House sacred even to higher inte rests than the interests of an aristocracy. (Cheers.) The constitution has no more regard for Crown and aristocracy than it has for the people. The people is the most durable part of the kingdom. (Hear, hear.) Privileges are ephemeral, but the people is immor tal. (Great cheering.) What we ask, then, is this r? we claim it by the constitution, and the House i;ir Commons shall be made not with reference as to whether it shall be convenient for the House of Lords or not ; but that it shall be made a real, un deniable, sensibly felt representation of the great body of the people. (Cheers.) What is wanted is this, that we should all as much as possible under stand the question. You observe that nearly all the people who now come into the field to contest it against us don't understand it at all. (Laughter.) Great authorities, as you have seen lately, have made blunders with regard to it. What we should all endeavour to do is thoroughly to understand what we want—to make up our mind whether this proposition—l am not speaking, of course of every detail, for there may be a borough to put in or out, or facts may be laid before any person or any Go vernment having the management oy a bill in its passage through Parliament which mayjustify some alteration in some particular case ; but I say we should make up our mind whether this measure as a whole is a great measure, recognising great prin ciples, adequate to meet great wants, and worthy the great and irresistible resolution of the people. (Cheers.) Mr. Baines, I think, says what this coun try . could do. Why, of course, there is nothing that is right to be done that this country could not do. Two or three counties like this have gone far to make the marvellous change which we see in Eng land compared with what England was 100 years ago. Your ruling classes, when their Chancellor of the Exchequer stands at the table, are delighted to hear that your fleets are on every sea, that your manufactures are flourishing, that the people are all employed and tranquil, that taxes are pouring in with a constantly increasing volume. (Laughter.) All this they are delighted to hear, and recognise the greatness of Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. Yes, but come down here, and see how much of toil, how much of capital, how much of heart work and head work, of daily and nightly anxiety are required to produce all these grand re sults—(cheers)—and don't let us hear of it only in the budget, but let us give to this population, so great; so powerful, so renowned, so irresistible when united—let us give to them that—for we ask for no more than that—which the ancient, the boasted, if you like the glorious constitution of this country says is rightly theirs. (Prolonged cheering.) A vote of thanks was given to the chairman on the motion of Alderman Livesey, and the meeting . concluded. • GREAT REFORM MEETING IN BIRMINGHAM. BIRMINGHAM, TUESDAY NIGHT. A town's meeting, for the purpose of considering Mr. Bright's new Reform Bill, was held here to night. The Mayor presided. The attendance was large. It was moved by P. H. MIINTZ, Esq., and seconded by Mr. Alderman BALDWIN, " That in the opinion of this meeting the present restricted franchise, which excludes the great body of people from the right of voting in the election of members in the House of Commons.the plan of voting which interferes with the free and conscientious exercise of that right, and the unequal distribution of mem bers to the population, whereby the opinions of large constituencies are swamped by small and cor rupt boroughs, are u n j us t, an d s h ou ld no l on g e r be contined." It was moved by GEORGE EDWARDS, Esq., and seconded by Mr. Alderman MANSON, " That this meeting, agreeing generally with the scheme of reform propounded by Mr. Bright, and having entire faith in his integrity, hereby pledges itself to give him its most hearty support in his endea vours to promote such a measure of parliamentary reform as shall • be satisfactory to the great body of the people." Both the above resolutions were carried unani mously, and a petition to Parliament was agreed on. An amendment in favour of manhood suffrage was negatived by a large majority. The meeting, vhich was an enthusiastic one, ter minated at ten o'clock. LOCAL SHARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL-FEB; 1. The market was quiet most of the day, but improved at the cloie. nerwicks, 93 931—Leeds Northern, 48 481— Eastern Counties, 121 12I— Midland, 1024 —Chester and Holyheads, 48 I—Caledonians, 851 51—Lancashire and Yorkshire, 96/—London and North-Westerns, 95 11 — East Lancashire, 95 sl—Dutch Rhenish, 51 5 dis.— Grand *Trunk of Canada, 84 81—Great Western, 55 I Great Western of Canada, 16 161—Devers 221 5-16— —North British, 621 1--York and North Midland, 77 MANCHESTER-FEB. 1. There was not much business doing, but prices were steady. Leeds, 96—Dovers, 224—Eastern Counties, 121 —East. Lancashire, 95I—Trunk Div. Debentures, 9s.— Sheffields, 37 1 4 37I—Canada, new, 41 dis,-Leeds, new £9 shares,. 7-16 dis.—Bright on St o ck, 109 ex div. _ Sheffieldsi 374--Do L v 2 e:s p , s- 73 F 1,— EB L ' eed 1. s, 95I—Leeds New Gas (6k), preen. BIRMINGHAM-FEB. 1. The .transactions to-day were as follows :—Midland 41 per Cent. Pref. shares were dealt in at 1041 --Birmingham Banking Co., 27f—London closed at 96—Midlands, 102. LAW INTELLIGENCE. Feb. 1 COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. ',Sittings at Nisi Prius, after Term, before Lord Campbell and a Special Jury.) MALLALITE v. LYON.--MAINTENANCE OF WIFE. The plaintiff in this action is the proprietor of a ladies' outfitting establishment at 37, Wigmore street, Cavendish-square, but carries on business under the title of " Mayo and Company." The defendant, Mr. Da4tid Lyon, is a gentleman of very large fortune, stated, indeed, by the plaintiff's counsel to have an income of £70,000 a-year, the owner of Goring-park, near Worthing, of a house in London, and also of an establishment in Scot land. The action was brought to recover the sum of £362, the price of certain wearing apparel, sup plied to the defendant's wife, who is the daughter of Lady Charlotte Bury. There was no dispute as to the ordering and delivery of the goods charged for, and the points to be determined were—first, was a certain deed of separation between the de fendant and his wife, bearing date 863, assented to on the part of the wife through. Oct., duresse ; secondly, supposing the deed to have been properly executed, did the defendant allow his wife an ade quate maintenance during the period of their sepa ration ; and thirdly, did he, , pursuant to a decree of the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court, dated the 19th May, 1858, restore his wife to conjugal rights. Such being the nature of the case, the in vestigation might naturally be expected to lead to very painful disclosures. Mr. M. Chambers and Mr. G. Francis were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Lush and Mr. Phip son for the defendant. It would appear that in 1848 the defendant was married to Mrs. Lyon at the Britsh Embassy at Florence. Mrs. Lyon had no fortune, but by her mar riage settlement she was entitled to a sum of £3OO as " pin money," and to a sum of, £40,000 in case she survived her husband. After the marriage they came to England and resided partly at South-street, Park-lane, and partly at Goring-park. _ They lived most happily together until the year 1852, when a source of difference sprung up between them. That source of difference, as stated by the de fendant, was the excessive use of opiates and sti mulants on the part of Mrs. Lyon, as well as her extravagant habits. These differences came to a climax in Rome, in the month of December, 1852, and accordingly the parties left for England, ac companied by a Dr. Deaking, who was in attend ance on Mrs. Lyon on account of bad health. Mr. Lyon, on reaching England, took his wife to Tor quay, and left her there, her mother residing with her, and she being likewise in charge of Dr. Deak ing. She remained there about four months with out once seeing her husband, when, on the 29th of September, a paper was brought to her which she was asked to sign. That paper was a deed of separation between herself 'and Mr. Lyon, and according to the plaintiff's case the lady was in duced to sign it by persuasion and by threats. It was through the instrumentality of a Mr. Philip James, a gentleman residing at Sidmouth, and an old friend of her husband, that the separation was brought about. By the deed—which was witnessed by Mrs. Lyon's mother, Lady C. Bury— it was settled that she was to receive, in addition to her " pin money" as agreed upon in her marriage settlement, a further allowance of £1,300 a year — that is, altogether, £1,600 per annum, which was to be paid in ten periodical payments through Mrs. Lyon's bankers, Messrs. Herries and Co. The very day after the signing of the deed Mrs. Lyon left Torquay, being released from the surveillance of Dr. Deaking, and took up her residence at 9, South Audley-screet, Grosvenor-square, in company with her mother. She lived there for a year, and then in Paris for four months, and then in Audley-square, and elsewhere in London, until March, 1856, when, accompanied by her mother, she went to reside at No. 81, South Audley-street. In the month of April, 1857, Mrs. Lyon was introduced to the plaintiffs establishment by her half-sister, Mrs. William Russell, as the wife of Mr. Lyon, a gentleman of large fortune ; and between this time and the 11th June, 1858, the plaintiff sup plied all the goods charged in the account. The goods charged for altogether amounted fo £402, but Mrs. Lyon had paid £5O on account in the month of March. The whole of the goods were delivered at the house, 81, South Audley-street, and theplaintiff had not the slightest idea that the defendant was separated from his wife until he saw a paragraph in the papers having reference to the proceedings in the Divorce Court. On the 19th of May, 1858, a decree by consent was taken for the restitution of conjugal rights. It was admitted that, up to the 10th of April, 1858, the allowance under the deed of separation was regularly paid, whilst the goods supplied to Mrs. Lyon up to that period, and charged in the present account, amounted to £236. So far, therefore, the narrative embraces the first two points of the inquiry—namely, as to the validity of the deed of separation, and as to the adequacy of Mrs. Lyon's allowance. On the 19th of May the decree for the restitution for conjugal rights was pronounced, and accordingly, on the 25th of May, Mrs. Lyon proceeded, by appoint ment, to meet her husband at the house, 46, Glou cester-place; Portman-square. She arrived there about two o'clock in the afternoon, and Mr. Lyon opened the door to receive her. According to the lady's statement her husband received her most rudely ; he kicked her dog off the steps of the door ; he locked and chained the door behind her, and then summoned the servants in the house into the draw ing-room to attend a meeting between them. When all had assembled he told them Mrs. Lyon was his wife ; that they must treat her with kindness and respect, but that they were to obey her in nothing ; that she was to be debarred from all society, except from a weekly visit to her mother; that no goods were to be received in the house as ordered by Mrs. Lyon ; and that, finally, she was not to be allowed to leave the house except in the company of one or other of those present ; in fact, the contention on the part of the plaintiff was, that Mr. Lyon had not complied with the decree of the court ; that he had not received his wife at his own home, but that he had placed her in charge of keepers, and had treated her as insane. On the other hand, as would appear from the cross-examination of Mrs. Lyon, the defendant maintains that the house, 46, Gloucester-place, was his house, for that he was giving up his house in , South-street ; that there were five or six servants in the house ; and that what he had done at the interview of the 25th in the draw ing-room was to read out to the assembled servants from a written paper certain rules with reference to their future treatment of Mrs. Lyon's friends, directed to saving her from the consequences of her extravagance and imprudence in purchasing things hurtful to her health. Mrs. Lyon remained at the house, 46, Gloucester-place, until the Ist of June, when she returned to 81, South Audley-street ; but although Mr. Lyon slept in the house, at all events once or twice during. her stay in Gloucester-place, she had never seen him. He used to go out at six o'clock in the morning, and refused to see her ex cept in the presence of 411143 of the servants. Accord ing to her belief, neither the house 46, Gloucester place, nor that at 67, Gloucester-place, said to have been subsequently taken for her accommodation, nor that in York-place, alleged to be her husband's present London establishment, were the homes of Mr. Lyon. In her direct examination by Mr. Chambers, Mrs. Lyon stated that having fallen into delicate health, she had been recommended _ the use of stimulants and opiates, but that in consequence of the feeling entertained by her husband on the sub ject she had abstained from the use of them since July, 1853, although between then and October she had reason to believe they were administered to her surreptitiously by the doctor. At all events, she had certainly wholly renounced them after October. She perhaps might have used opiates and stimu lants somewhat in excess. She never exactly knew what Mr. Lyon's income was. They lived at the rate of between £7,000 and £B,OOO a-year, but after his mother's death he told her he came in by that event for an increase of income of from £5,000 to £7,000 a-year. Previous to her visiting the house, 46, Gloucester-place, she had forwarded to Mr. Lyon certificates from Sir James Clark and Dr. Bird as to her state of mind and as to her habits. She had received no allowance since April, 1858. Cross-examined by Mr. Lush—She had likewise dealings with a person named Smith for wear ing apparel ; but then those were for articles of a different character from those charged here for. She owed £276 for wearing apparel purchasd up to the end of February, 1858, whilst living with Mr. Lyon. She had pledged jewellery and plate to the extent of £3,314. She had not purchased the whole of that. She had likewise borrowed a sum of £1,500 from a lady. That was to pay debts partly incurred on account of the house at Goring Park and the house in London. But she had acknowledged her fault in that respect to Mr. Lyon, and he had condoned her conduct. Mr. Hook, the son of the late Dean of Worcester, who had. known Mrs. Lyon ever since a child, proved that up to the time of their going abroad Mr. and Mrs. Lyon had lived most happily together; that in May, 1858, there was no 'pretence for de claring her to be insane ; and that he met her' about the end of the month, the period of her residence in Gloucester-place, walking one day in Portman square, in charge of an attendant, who acknow ledged herself to be a keeper appointed to wait on Mrs. Lyon. This closed the plaintiff's case. Mr. Lush then said that, in consequence of the plaintiff's objections to the validity of the deed of separation of Sept., 1853, he was taken completely by surprise. He had therefore to- apply to his lordship; under the powers of the recent act, to. adjourn the trial, in order that the defendant might obtain the attendance of Mr. Philip James and Dr. Deaking, who resides at Torquay, and whose pre sence would be necessary to clear up all doubts as to the perfect validity of the instrument. His Lordship declared the request to be a reason able one, and adjourned the further progress of the trial until Saturday. COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE. ;Before the Lord Chancellor, Mr. Justice Wight man, and the Judge Ordinary.) KEATS V. KEATS AND MONTEZUIVIA. Mr. Phinn, Q.C., on behalf of Mr. Keats, now applied for a decree dissolving the marriage. It will be recollected that this cause was tried before the Judge Ordinary . a short time ago, and it was some time before the jury could agree with re spect to the term " condonation," as laid down by, the learned judge. The verdict was ultimately given in favour of Mr. Keats, it being to the effect that adultery had been committed, and that the offence had not been condoned. Dr. Phillimore opposed the application for a de cree dissolving the marriage, and moved for a rule for a new trial, on the ground that the Judge Ordinary had wrongly defined the word. "condo nation," and the jury found in accordance with his lordship's definition ; and also, that the verdict was against the evidence. The Court granted the application on both points, intimating at the same time that the learned coun sel was in the position to apply for a rule nisi. Mr. Phinn asked their lordships when it would be convenient for him to show cause against the rule. The Lord Chancellor fixed Friday next as the day on which the Court would hear the learned gentleman. POLICE INTELLIGENCE, Feb. 1. MANSION-HOUSE.—Abraham Kelly, who was charged on Thursday last with having obtained goods of various kinds under false and fraudulent pretences from tradesmen, was brought up for re examination. Mr. Wontner and Mr. Humphries attended for several complainants, but stated that they were not prepared with the necessary evidence, and requested that the Lord Mayor would postpone the investi gation for a week. Mr. Lewis, for the prisoner, stated that his client's offence amounted to nothing beyond a simple debt, as would be shown upon the production of the evidence. The Lord Mayor said that if such a mode of running in debt as had been represented on the first examination were to be endured, there would not be a moment's security for any honest trades man. His lordship remanded the prisoner for a week, and it was intimated that the prisoner would then be prosecuted for having conspired with others to defraud the victims who appeared against him. Jane Simpson, who appeared to be about 22 years old, was brought before the Lord Mayor, charged with having attempted to destroy herself. Baldwin (537) —The previous morning, about 2 o'clock, I saw the defendant sitting on the steps of a hall-door in Cannon-street. I spoke to her, but she did not answer, and then I heard a gurgling in her throat, and turned up her head. I then found that she had a piece of ribbon tight round her throat, and I undid it and questioned her. She said that she had taken poison, and I conveyed her to the hospital, where they told me upon exa mining her that she had evidently done what she had stated. The Lord Mayor (to the defendant)—Now you have been here before upon a similar charge, and we are not going to allow persons of your kind either to take a liberty with their own lives, or to pretend to try to destroy themselves for the pur pose of exciting compassion. The defendant—l am sorry for having done any thing of the kind, and shall never do so again if you let me go. The Lord Mayor—You must find security in the amount of £lO to be of good behaviour for two months, and you must remain in prison until you produce responsible bail to that amount. The defendant was then committed. GUILDHALL.—Maria Elizabeth Welsford, a respectably dressed young person, described as the wife of a printer, living at 15, Milton-street, Fore street, was charged with attempting to commit suicide by stabbing herself twice in the stomach with a knife, on Sunday morning last. Sergeant Dellow, 34, said he was called in by Dr. Simpson to take the prisoner into custody on the above charge, when she admitted that she had stabbed herself in consequence of a few words she had had with her husband. Mr. Welsford was unable to account for the con duct of his wife, and the landlady of the house spoke to the general good character of both parties. Sir J. Musgrove said it was a very mysterious affair, and it would be his duty to sift it throughout. The prisoner was charged with a very serious offence, and he ,therefore required sureties for her appearance on Thursday next, by which time in quiries should be made to clear up the matter. The landlady offered to become bail. Sir J. Musgrove said he was not favourably im pressed with the husband's manner, but the fact of his landlady becoming bail for his wife was rather in his favour. Mr. Welsford said he was as anxious as any one to have the affair cleared up. The prisoner said she could not have known what she was doing or she would never have attempted such a thing. Sir J. Musgrove then remanded the prisoner on bail till Thursday next. Henry Britten was summoned for assaulting and threatening Louis Blomfield, whereby the latter went in fear of his life. This was a squabble between parties respec tively in the employ of Mr. Johnson and Mr. Cooper, of the Court of Bankruptcy, and it was stated by Mr. Depree, who appeared for the com plainant, that the defendant had committed a violent assaulf upon his client in the Court of Bankruptcy, and threatened to dog him to his private residence, and there do for him, in order that he might not again appear in that court. Mr. Beard, for the defendant, said he had sug gested that as his client was not prepared with' evidence to rebut anything that might be said against him, he had advised the defendant to con sent to enter into his own recognisances to keep the peace for 12 months, and also to apologise to the complainant for any warmth•or hastiness of temper he might have been guilty of. This course was approved of by the complainant's friends, and it only remained for the court to sanction it. Sir J. Musgrove said he must have some better security than the defendant's own recognisances. He should require one surety for £2O. This arrangement was acceded to without going further into the case, and the defendant was locked up in default of bail. 130 W-STREET.—A policeman ofthe A division, named Walter John Little, who has been about a twelvemonth in the force, was placed at the bar on a charge of stealing from one of the dressing-rooms in the section-house of the A division station, at King-street, Westminster, a pair of uniform boots. The boots had been issued to James Wenn, of the same division, No. 68, who had left them on Sunday last in one of the dressing-rooms. There were two of these rooms, each accommodating 50 men, and each man having his numbered compart ment. On Sunday night the prisoner was seen leaving the room in which he had a compartment. He left the station with a bundle, and in a few minutes returned without it. The boots being missed he was suspected, and discharged the force, and from subsequent inquiries it was discovered that he had disposed of the boots to an omnibus conductor, named Sunfield. The latter sold them to a Jew hawker of old clothes, named Woolf Lyons, by whom they were now produced. The prisoner, who admitted his guilt, was re manded, to give time for inquiry as to other charges, the witnesses in this case being at once bound over to appear at the trial. CLERKENWBLL.—John Morris Reed, aged 25, a fashionably attired man, who described him , self as a gentleman; Samuel Thompson, aged 34, a clerk; and Ann Thompson, alias Barnett, aged 60, a servant, all residing at 22, Tavistock-place, St. Pancras ; and Thomas Smith, aged 25, of 18 Plum tree-court, Shoe-lane, servant, were charged with conspiring to defraud divers persons of various sums of money, and of obtaining from Mr. I. Otway. of Lower Stownell, Staffordshire, the sum of ,L 1 by false and fraudulent pretences. Mr. John •Wakeling, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs. S. and T. Wakeling, appeared for the prisoners. InspectOr Whicher, of the detective force, said that in consequence of a large number of letters having been received from all parts of the United Kingdom, in which the writers said they had been defrauded out of several sums of money, he was directed to investigate the matter, and to explode the thing, or connect the prisoners with the fraud. It appeared that the prisoners had been advertising in all the country papers under the title of the "Mercantile Loan Fund Association; Office, 2. Weymouth-terrace, New North-road, London, N.," and. they professed to make immediate cash ad vances. The advertisement ran as follows :—" This association, possessing the advantage of a large paid-up capital, offers immediate cash advances, in sums from £2O to £5OO, with the least possible delay, for long or short periods, at 5 per cent. per annum, repayable by such monthly or quarterly instalments as may suit the borrower's convenienc The sum applied for granted in full." The adver tisement was signed " John Campbell, resident manager." When persons answered the advertise ment it was the plan of the prisoners to write back and say that if a post-office order was sent for the amount of the travelling expenses, their agent should at once call, and having inquired into the reference, would at once pay the money. Be should be able to prove that the prisoner Reed had represented himself as Campbell, and had taken the money at the post-office in that name, but lately having met with an accident, the woman had been to receive the money. Th e prisoners did not stay long at Weymouth-terrace , but left word at the district post-office that all letters were to be 'forwarded to Tavistock-place. The prisoners had received as many as thirty letters by each post. Yesterday he went to the chief Money Order-office, and gave to one of the pay clerks eight marked half-crowns. About half-past three the female prisoner came with two post-office orders, one from Sligo, for £1 10s., and the other from Leeds, for £1 6s. The clerk paid her the eight marked half-crowns and other moneys. The orders were signed "J. Campbell." The female prisoner then went away, and was followed to 22, Tavistock• place. She went in there about half-past five, and about a quarter of an hour afterwards he (Inspector Whicher), in company with Detective Williamson and Sergeant Goodwin, 8 N, went to the door, which was opened by the female prisoner. Sh e was asked if Mr. J. Campbell was at home, and she replied in the negative. He and the other officers then went into the parlour, when Smith was about to leave the room, but was prevented. The prisee 3 F! Thompsom was then brought down stairs in custody. He (Whicher) then went up to the first' floor back, and there found the prisoner Reed. Il e was lying on the bed with his- clothes on, he having a very bad leg. He was asked his name, and Was told he must consider himself in custody on a charge of conspiracy. He was afterwards searched, an d upon him was found £lB in gold and 30s. in silver , and amongst the latter was the eight marked half: crowns. The prisoner was asked whose money it was, and he said, " It is mine." The other prisoners were afterwards told the charge against them, Allen the two men said they knew nothing about it, a nd the female said she was only a servant. The female was again asked where Mr. Campbell was, but she declined to say. Mr. Wakehng said at this stage of the proceed ings he should decline to ask the witness all questions. John Sharp, a constable at the Money Order, Office, said the prisoner Reed and the female ha g cashed orders signed in the name of Campbell. "., Inspector Whicher, in asking for a remand, sa l ? that he found no less than twenty letters ready to go to all parts of the country by the next post. Mr. Corrie said there could be no doubt the Prl; soners had been carrying on a wholesale system. e t h plunder. He saw from the letters before him th e the prisoners were in correspondence with clergy' men, postmasters, and others, who he (Mr. Cori was surprised were so cred u l ous . He she'l l remand the prisoners for a week. Bail refused. SOUTHWARK.—Mary Ann Smith, a decent' looking female, who appeared to be suffering se' verely from some bodily injury, was brought hef° re Mr. Burcham, charged with attempting to dreY l ' herself in the Thames, at Blackfriars-bridge. James Duke, the keeper of a coffee stall a t the Surrey side of Blackfriars-bridge, said that shortly , after 10 o'clock on the previous night he heard ; moaning noise proccoling apparently from the st e p s of the bridge. He hastened down to the wat er ; edge and saw some one plunging about among 8 0111 timber in the river. He instantly called out f or assistance, and crossed the logs, when they perceiceu• the prisoner in the river sustained by one of them' She was quite. exhausted, and they, with conside' able difficulty, got her out. Alfred Nash said—He was passing over the brl 'age about 10 o'clock, when he heard cries for help jou; teedfrom the water's ed g e. He went there, an assisted the prisoner out of the river. Mr. Burcham (to the prisoner)—How came to attempt to drown yourself? Prisoner—l never attempted to commit suicid a l I was taken ill, and went down the steps, when must have fainted away, and fallen among the O UP ; bers. I was so weak from a bowel complaint, the I was unable to extricate myself. Mr. Burcham—What are you ? Prisoner—l am a charwoman, and live with . Of husband, who is a coachman at Knightsbridge. h Mr. Burcham—Had you had any words Wi t your husband yesterday: ? of Prisoner—Oh, no, sir; we live on the bes t terms. f - o Mr. Burcham—Did the prisoner say anything the kind at the station-house ? • Police-constable 286 A—No, sir. She was nl a very exhausted state. It might be, however , she had stated. Mr. Burcham—l will assume such to be the cases and discharge her. In doing so, I really hope t!3 her story is true, and she never intended, to wino' suicide. COUNTRY MAR WS. LIVERPOOL--FEB. 1. At this day's market there was a fair attendance oft town and country trade, and the business done in Wt., and flour was moderate at the rates of last market 0.1 4 . Indian corn had a fair sale, and fully last week's curreil% was taken for all descriptions. Oats and oa t m eal v i !,..h held firmly. Egyptian beans, peas, and barley were saleable only in retail, with no alteration in value. was the the first market for the " Cental," and the new ; sure seemed to be as generally complied with as could w" been expected. NE WC AST LE—FEB. 1. a There was a fair attenda nce a t thi s d ay ' s mar k e t, O de small supply of wheat, which met a good consumptive ,44 wand, at about the same ra t es as S a t ur d a y. F ore ign hand, generally beyond view s o f b u y ers . Fl our a s l ow sa le at i' an rates. Malting barley held firmly. and prices evince , it o upward tendency. O a t s b r i ng fully the rates of this !,:a se'nnight, but was in li m it e d supp ly. B eans and Pv— unaltered. LEEDS—FEB. 1. ,e With a fair supply of wheat in the market, the l'iji., was steady, at about the rates of last Friday. Barley tA O mended fully late rates, and in request. Beans a sue" dearer. Other articles as last week. Averages for the week : Wheat .3,018 qrs., at 42s 61d Barley. ......... 2,454 „ 34s Old Oats llO „ 23s 73. Rye 3B „ 34s 110 Beans .. 86 If 43s bid Peas ••• • 10 24s 4d „ ..... • • . Arrivals this week : Wheat- 2,157 qrs. Oats Barley Beans 43 Rapeseed Linseed 4 NORWICH CATTLE—JAN. 29. There was a large show of store cattle to-day, consisedery of Scots, shorthorns, Irish, and Devons. Sales were fair, but at the close of - the market one-fourth remaineon.. sold. The selling price for Scots was 4s to 4s 6d ; 811. 71,8. horns, 3s 6d to 4s 6d ; Irish, 3s to 3s 6d p er s t one of 1 4 "8, estimated weight what). fat. Fat beasts firm at 7s 6 d t° —very prime, 8s 6d per stone. Sheep—Fat sheep, 8s Od to Bs6d, p r i me l o t s 9 s pers— r jr, Pigs—Good store vi gs , 15 s t o 18 s per h ea d . F a t P°- 5s 6d to 6s, prime Cs 6d per stone. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Pills.—When w 0 CO ig cider how uncertain are life and health and their va to appreciated by all h uman beings it is strange index. observe how often m en neglect the means of preservwf these blessings at even the most trifling cost. Thell. heavily to insure their premises from fire, or their g ..n ° 61, from accident on Rood and field, but they often put Off 7.0 it is too late, the exp en dit ure o f a f ew s hilli ngs on a Holloway's pills, which they might keep by them as 8 . 0 _7 0 ,.. failing safeguard, as a c h arm w hi c h will protect the r,d, sensor against all diseases. They must certainly do If used according to , the instructions given with each v . ' they never fail. BIRTHS. BIRD.—On the nut ult., at 1, Norfolk-square, Stl l4 s . l, gardens, Hyde-park, the wife of Pete r Hi n ckes 13 Esq., F.R.C.S., of a son. DIGDY.-011. the 3:f o st ult., at 132, Piccadilly, Mrs. C. Digby, of a son. SCOTT.—On the 29th ult., at 79, Eaton-square, the 1 0/1. Mrs. Grantham Scott, of a daughter. LANGTON.—On . the 31st ult., at Clapham, Mrs. / 43.11 Langton, of a son. /CARRIAGES. CLEMENTS—TITLE R.—On the Ist inst., by special lieeli + e : at St. George's, ' Hanover-square ' John B. Ciem ol %;" Esq., of London, to Miss Anne Tiplor, of BroraPt°'" crescent. EYKE—IvEs.—On the 30th ult„ at Woodford Old Chug Mr. Joseph Eyke, of Milton-street, city, to Emma, th ", third daughter of H. S . Ives, Esq., of Crutchedu— city, and Woodford, Essex. DEATHS. DAVIS.—On the 31st ult., at Torquay, Devon, IL eiels , Marian, fourth daughter of Sir John F. Davis, 3 A K.C.8. , of Hollywood, Gloucestershire. tto DAUBENEY.—On the 30th ult., at Exmouth, Chart Sophia, sister of the late Lieut.-Gen. Daubeney, IC•h" . aged 70. HOTRAM.—On the 31st ult., the Lady Frances Hahn eldest daughter of the late Earl of Stradbroke, and wi4 3 of Vice-Admiral the Hon. Sir Henry Hotham, G.C.M.H. MAnx.--On the 22d inst., at 10, Alfred-place, Thur l ° .' square, Brompton, John Mark, Esq., aged 70. SOUSTER.—On the 30th ult., at Roehampton, Surrey, Til °l ' Souster, aged 91. Of WILSON.—On the 30th ult., at Bulcote, Notts, Gill W.. - Esq., aged 79. oliff WILS ON.—On the 30th ult., at Ida Cottage, Under Niton, 1.W., John. Wilson, Esq., aged 77. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO ATOf of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 1 ' Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the count/ Middlesex, Wedgelday, February 2, 1859. „~”