The Sun. — London, England, 1865-07-14 00:00:00

:GENCE. BITOKINGHAIISHIRE. The nomination of the candidates to represent this county took place yesterday in the County nail, Aylesbury, which was densely thronged. A considerable number of ladies were present in the gallery. The High Sheriff, Mr. Nathaniel Grace Lambert, presided. Mr. Drake proposed, and Mr. T. T. Bernard seconded, Mr. Caledon George Da Pre as a fit and proper person to represent that county in Parlia ment. Major C. M. Chester proposed, and MilrrumPer seconded the Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli. Mr. A. J. Robarts and. Mr. E. Wanklyn pro posed Mr. Robert Bateson Harvey. The High Sheriff then declared, amidst loud cheering, that the following gentlemen had been elected; Mr. Caledon George Du Pre, the Right Hon. Benjamin Disraeli, and Mr. Robert Bateson Harvey. Mr. DISRAELI, on coming forward to address the electors, was very enthusiastically received. H e said—Electors of the county of Buckingham, it is some time since we met. On the last occasion, six years ago, I took the opportunity of making a few observations on the state of public affairs. lam not disinclined at present to follow the same course, but I am entirely in your hands. One is not always in the humour for a speech, and if you don't wish to hear the observations which I am prepared to make you have only to tell me so. I can assure you my feelings won't behurt—(a laugh)—for I cannot sup pose you are at alltimes inclined to take those grave views of matters which are requisite when we speak of public affairs. (Cheers, and cries of "Go on.") When addressing you I remember that I am ad dressing a constituency whom I have always held and believe not to be like every constituency. The people of Buckinghamshire have some political knowledge—there are political traditions in the county—you have had something to do with politics, and I feel that in speaking to my constituents I am addressing men of good sense, and with a capacity for forming an opinion on public affairs. (Cheers.) I take it for granted, from the expression of your sentiments, you don't think it unreasonable that your representative, who has taken some part in public affairs since he met you six years ago, should make some observations with respect to political matters on an occasion like the present. Now, when you assembled here six years ago the political situa tion was rather critical. For several years the So vereign of this country had been counselled by the most experienced and veteran of statesmen con tinually to recommend to Parliament schemes of Parliamentary Reform. Lord J. Russell, Lord Aber deen, and Lord Palmerston—men most eminent and most experienced in public affairs—had each in his turn advised the Sovereign to recommend from the throne that Parliament should direct its attention to its own reconstruction. But you know that in "spite of these repeated declarations on the part of the Crown, and of repeated appeals made in Par liathent and out of it, nothing was done. Year after year elapsed and nothing was done ; and the sub ject of Parliamentary Reform, which the Sove reign, under the advice of most experienced counsellers, had repeatedly announced to the coun try, lay in abeyance. Under these circumstances, a change of Government having occurred, Lord Derby was sent for by her Majesty to form a Go verment. On that occasion, in 1858, Lord Derby was disinclined to take office, because, as he told the Sovereign—and I had permission at the time to mention these things, or, of course, 1 should not have done so—the Crown and Parliament were placed in so perplexing a position with regard to Parliamen tary Reform that it was impossible for any Mini ster to assume the reins of government and not deal with the question. Lord Derby did not want to in terfere with the question then. He had been one of the Ministers by whom the Reform Bill of 1832 was carried—indeed, it was mainly through his ability and eloquence it was carried—and though he was not blind to the defects of the measure, and knew that many persons in the country were still without votes who might be safely in trusted with the franchise,he thought it was not ex pedient to interfere with the arrangement of 1832 -without very considerable cause for such interference. Believing, therefore, that it was not expedient to interfere with the question of Parliamentary Reform, but being of opinion at the same time that in con sequence of the advice given to the Sovereign by I experienced Ministers it was impossible, with a due regard to the dignity of the Crown and of the Go vernment, to leave the question untouched, he de clined to take office. (Hear, hear.) But what happened ? None of his eminent opponents in public life would accept the responsibility, and her Majesty was obliged to send for Lord Derby again. It was impossible for him under the circumstances it would have been unworthy of one in his high position in the Legislature and in the country—to decline to enter the service of the Crown ; but entering the service of the Crown, it was necessary that he should pro pose to deal with the long-pending question of Parliamentary Reform in a manner which, without interfering with those institutions in which I be lieve the majority of the country are interested, at the same time would terminate the embarrassing position in which the Crown and the Parliament of Great Britain were placed by the previous conduct of Ministers. You know what took place. Lord Derby did not accept the task without the under standing that, although none of his rivals would pledge themselves to support his measure—for that would have been unreasonable—his measure should have a candid and fair reception. You know what took place. It got no reception whatever. It was not allowed to go into committee ; an abstract re solution, which was carried by the comparatively small majority of 35, prevented the Bill from being considered. When Lord Derby took office his Government was in a minority of 140, I think, in the House of Commons. The fact, therefore, that when the division was taken on the merits of that Bill the majority against Lord Derby had shrunk down to 35 is one which tells somewhat in favour of the measure. (Cheers.) It is not necessar y for me to say anything further on the question; but this I may remark—and the circumstance is one which must have attracted your attention—that in the speeches made by candidates throughout the country during the present elections there is an al most universal expression of feeling on both sides that the success of the opposition to that measure of Lord Derby was, on the part of the Liberal party, a very great mistake. It has been so spoken of by many distinguished members of the Liberal Party. (Hear, hear.) I may say here—and I have no wish to misrepresent anything—for, hav ing been honoured with a renewal of your confi dence, I should be sorry to use any expression not dictated by a desire to place the state of public affairs accurately before you—l think I may say that public opinion, after the opportunity which six years have afforded for a cool and careful con sideration of the matter has declared most decidedly in favour of the principle on which that measure was founded. (Cheers.) It was a measure which would have increased the constituencies of the county—it was a measure which would have intrusted the suf frage to men who by their industry, integrity, and other praiseworthy qualities would, I am sure, have proved themselves quite fitted for its exercise. It was founded on a principle which is the principle of the English Constitution—that the suffrage is a privi lege and a trust. It was not founded on any principle of the rights of man, but on a principle which is in unison with the Constitution of this country ; and it was a measure which, if carried, I believe would have strengthened the garrison of the Constitution. (Hear, hear.) Now, it is highly important in great questions of this kind that an opinion should be formed by the people of this country. What is called the question of Parliamentary Reform is the question of the distribution of political power. 'These are ques tions on which the people of this country ought to have opinions, and I think that one of the consolatory consequences of the rejection of the bill of 1858 is that it has given an opportunity, from repeated dis cussion, to the people of this country to ponder well over this question, and to arrive at a sound and definite conclusion, so that if ever the subject comes before us again, I think we shall be able to bring to its conside ration a more mature judgment than hitherto, per- ELECTION INT . haps, we might have exercised. I hold that it is the sperous, and when I find public questions fairly duty of the people on such subjects as the distribution treated by my political opponents, I should not of political power to have definite opinions. These grudge them the applause which they have justly may be the opinionsof gentlemen on my right or they earned, and I should congratulate you . all on that may be the opinions of the gentlemen on my left, but prosperity and give the Ministers of the Crown the as long asthere are clear and definite opinions on such credit to which I think they are fairly entitled— subjects the country is safe,because truth is the child (hear)—because although my experience of public and creature of discussion, and there cannot be discus- affairs, or at least of official life, has not been sionwithoutthoughtandknowledge. (Cheers.) What very considerable, it has been quite ample enough I want, therefore, is that there should be opinions to teach me that the duties of a Minister of the on these great questions ; for they are the questions Crown are as much as any man can well bear, and that the which sooner or later must regulate the formation responsibility is greater than that which exi s t s i n an y o th er of Governments and the construction of parties. It position hitioanvine been strickenlife. Nor can almost wefo i rg: th ttl e fatsom o e f of o n u h r o ab d le b st me is the interest of s ome t o di vert your attention from the cares and responsibiliti es o f th a t position. (II ,hear.; pride 3 these great questio ns , an d to ta lk to you of the I say that the condition of England is, generally speaking, management of finances and the maintenance of a prosperous one. If 1 make any exception it is not with i peace —two very important topics, no doubt, and in reference to the Government for any party object, but a few minutes, if y ou w i s h to h ear anyth i ng o f t h ese really for the sake o f t ru th. l am not convinced myself that much great isas commercial sound pro sp erity questions, I shall touch u p on th em. (A l aug h an d the of which we h ave h ear d so p t e h r ela n s s t a y p e p a e r ar we to h cheers.) But then y ou mus t un d ers t an d th a t the I cannot forget that daduringsoaimveagsieneen;coarand great questions are questions such as the one to mercial failures which for number and in the largeness of which I have referred—namely, the distribution of the sums that have been lost we had never before known power in the State, or as another question on which to be equalled. I do not think the general condition of I will make an o b serva ti on —th e re l a ti ons b e t w een Pauperism in this coun t r y i s one on wh i ch we ought to uelit m Church and State. I say that these are questions congratu late uper sm throughout orselves. the I country,beve buth at ofour on which Englishmen ought t o f orm o pi n ions, what- pa the metropolis, whi c h f orms so important areespecially the nature portiono the in ever those opinions may be. (Hear, hear.) Great country, and of which it is impossible not to speak, even in men of science in the present day teach that in the the county of Buckingham —I believe that that is now a system of the universe there are certain great powers subject of just anxiety, if not of apprehension. I consider which they call principal forces, such as electricity that the state of Ireland is not satisfactory. I hear some and gravitation. By these agencies, under Divine gen tl e men congratulating uitht us on the large amount of popu- Providence, the great system of the universe is ..... I will not say as g a statesman , ountry . butl confess, n leastf ess, a however, s a l i that e ian maintained. The questions I allude to, such as the —I cannot look at such a result without a feeling of great distribution of power in the State, and the form of apprehension. I know that we have been indebted to that government by which you are to be ruled, or the population in past times for some of the bravest of our aol question of the connexion between Church and Biers, and it is impossible to avoid the consideration what State, are what men of science and philosophers call may be °m condition hereafter if th e p o p u l a ti on o f I re l an d " great forces" in politics. You may depend on it should go on diminishing w ith th e same rap idi ty t h at i s that now taking place. B u t l e t th a t pass . I say that our con you must not allow your mind or attention/ dition is generally prosperous, and I would in silence allow whatever the conclusions you may arrive at, to be the Government of the country their fair share of credit diverted from these great questions if you wish to for such a result, were it not for the extraordinary de keep the position as Englishmen which your fore- mends which they make on the expression of our grati fathers occupied before you. (Cheers.) I will now trade. I think there is a line of discrimination in this t tter which independent Englishmen like my constitu say a word about the question of Church and State, e ma n ought not to overstep. Ido not believe that the good which excites some little interest among us here, harvests we have during the last two years enjoyed have and which I think deserves grave attention. been produced by any cabinet council whatever. (A laugh.) lam myself in favour of religious liberty. I Ido not think that the gold discoveries, or that the wonder am in favour of the principle of religious liberty, ful construction of those railways which now interlace the without qualification, without condition, abso- country—l do not think that these discoveries have been lutely and completely. I understand by religious have mad been carried on ein e Downing-street, ort capital th f es l e g a r n e d at en u e nderta o k f in t r ie s liberty that every s u bj ec t o f th e Q ueen should ministers of th e Crown. (CheersY the pta and laughter.) But, enjoy the full and free exercise of his religion. That gentlemen, it is said that, in the management of the I call religious liberty—(cheers)—and I am not at finances of the country this cannot be denied, and that, if all surprised that men should prize the possession a Conservative Government had been in office, these great of such rights. We all know—history teaches us— financial operations could not have taken place, and these that religious rights and religious privileges are those a gr m ea n t e fi t na e n in cial te re e s n u t l e ts r Winotouladfunloltarhgauvme beenteunpon achieved.thi ques tion, s I most esteemed by men. For these not only men, but forgl dye too great regard for you to weary you with nations, have made the greatest sacrifices ; and for long-drawn arguments, but I will resort to facts, because the same reason as I recognise the value of religion facts constitute proof, and are always acceptable ; and if I think it is the duty of the State to secure to all its there be arguments that can answer these facts let the subjects the opportunity of enjoying religious privi- opportunity be taken of putting them before you. I am leges. I further think that the full enjoyment of re - going to make commeemntsruspoofnththeeproceediugs Government—the han oof 0 Cn of ligious liberty by every man in the count r y i s per - the collar of m ost the Exchequer. eminent It is said that Mr. Gladstone has m fectly consistent with the constitution whi c h the been extraordinarily successful in his finance ; that by his country at present enjoys. Now, the difficult thing financial measures he has effected the most beneficial results ; is to ascertain how you can best arrive at such a re- and that it is impossible that the same advantages could suit, because in other countries the attempts to arrive have been obtained if the Conservatives had been in office, at it are very unsatisfactory. In those countries the (A voice—" It would have been spent in war.") Oh, very l laughter.) Government secures to the great body of th e popu l a- well,hlwr ) Generally ill remember you uwh I come to this part of the subject subject of tion the enjoyment o f re li g i ous r i g h ts by taking my address is dry, but g tey speaking I will not weary you by entering what are called the ministers of each religion into into unnecessary details. I will take the results univer the pay of the State. But there are great objections sally admitted by the members of the Liberal party, and by to this, because when the ministers of all religions, that means it will be perceived that the question can be who of all men ought to be of an independent char- tried fairly. Ido not know any operation that has obtained acter of mind, are salaried servants of the State, the Chancellor of Exchequerabuse in than more the repeal praise r . l of the . some they generally beco me it s i ns t ruments, and are paper qa duties. r and more fn others , (Hear, hear.) The repeal of the pape r d u ti es highly valuable to a corrup t an d tyrannical Govern- was looked upon as a great financial feat. What were the ment. Again, when the State announces that it reasons given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he makes no distinction of any kind between religious repealed the paper duties ? The reasons given were those • creeds, and that it sets up no standard of religion— which I asserted hundreds of times before I knew Mr. that all religions are the same to it—that conveys Gladstone, and during thepe period of fm nis it earliest l y d outh ;but though to the minds of m en an id ea o f i n diff erence to reli- that generalteoenxcise and abstract duties should be taken off, the grgre que s ti on of gion which may exercise a very injurious influence actually removing them must depend upon what might on the State itself ; because no doubt the principle of prove convenient; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer religion is so strong in men's minds that if religion said to Parliament, "If you do not remove the duty on is divorced from the State—if the State ostentati- paper, somebody else will, because a previous Chancellor ously announces that it admits of no appeal to the that t t he Exchequtebrlhas hot t de dtheolpdreor the same time—you I say u higher considerations which influence men, in my cann Y ot °u sa ca y that n a ce w rtain thing would not have been L o ne opinion that policy is calculated very much to Bete- by a Conservative Government, when Mr. Gladstone him riorate its character and to very much diminish its self states that the change which he proposed originated influence. (Cheers.) now have all these difficulties withhis predecessor. (Laughter.) In duo course I should been overcome in England? Here you find a power- have been anxious to see a repeal of the paper duty pro ful, wealthy, and lea rn ed cor p ora ti on, th e Ch urc h posed, but I should h ave w i s h e d t o see th e c h ange pro !of England, which formerly was independent of the posed on more successful conditions. (cheers and laugh ter.) If I had prop ose d th e measure I s h ou ld h ave sought State, but which in time became a lli e d t o it. I n its to do it in such a way as to prevent the pain which I have alliance with the State it acknowledges the supre- experienced when, in riding to the neighbourhood of the macy of the Crown, which I trust never will be Chiltern hills, I have beheld smokeless chimneys and silent lessened, for it is one of the keystones of our liberty, wheels in localities which once teemed with life and in civil as well as religious. (Hear, hear.) You have dustry, and which gave pleasant and remunerative occu this great corporation, which, while it has sup- pationto themem ber i so s f u a re I should rural pul have atio red ne;nadneadvinou ca to the want consistently w ith th e en j o y men t of 'ng out a beneficia l measure avoid what was calculated to throw out of employment a religious liberty by every subject of the State—at great number of persons throughout the counties of Hort the same time providing spiritual instruction for all ford, Buckingham, Berks, and Bedford. It is quite incon the subjects of Her Majesty—holds a position of sistent to say that the repeal of the paper duties was a independence that most favourably distinguishes it great financial feat, which nothing but the skilful manage from the position of priesthoods which are salaried Exchequerment d have the eou l intrepid courage of the Chancellor of the i servants of the State—thus combining, as it were, main reason proposal produced, that his when for the predecessor p he gives in au his main toleration and orthodoxy, and giving to our insti- office had pledged Parliament to its adoption. (Hear, tutions the consecrating character of religious con- hear.) I think no ono will say that this is worth much flexion. (Cheers.) And it has proved that its as showing that this could be regarded as a great, and suc existence is quite consistent with the ample and cessful, and original financial operation. Well, I will take complete enjoyment of religious liberty by every the budg t et of the present year. It was a large budget, de one of her Majesty's subjects. It is for these reasons si g n e d doubt, to accomplisho produce a considerable effect upon the elections. —seeing the inestimable and priceless blessings There has been a great reduction of ta • xation proposed by which have been obtained by the combination of the Chancellor of the Exchequer which has violated every circumstances and by that connexion of the institu- other principle laid down by all other Chancellors of the tions which prevails in no other country—believing Exchequer, that of anticipating the resources of the next that the mainteance of the Chur c h of England is year. This is th e great b udget which you owe to the Liberal Government, which we are told could not have been con of infinite utility, not merely to our spiritual wants tomplated by a Conservative Government, and which is but also to our spiritual rights—and believing that entitled to the gratitude of the country. What are the great the connexion of that Church with the Crown measures of relief that have been proposed ? I will throw has secured the spiritual freedom which is the right out of view the little points of detail, but there are two of all Englishmen and the spiritual instruction of g r eat propositions d pr u o g o es sit u i po on n s w te h a, ic a h nd it the other onefs a groat is the t remission dt. the people—l am the uncomp rom i s i ng an d conscien- fth in the incom e t ax . Th ese are the two great measures which n tious upholder of that great institution. (Cheers.) it is alleged, could only be proposed by a Liberal Chan- I hope, therefore, that the gentlemen on my right, cellor of the Exnhequer. But`what is the fact ? Why, in although they may differ from my opinions, will 1852, as the organ of Lord Derby's Government, I was the at least allow that I have given reasons for first Chancellor of the Exchequer who ever endeavoured to these opinions, which are deserving of the grave igrapplehat did o I do? Withscalenalargei th with the question o f f the tea duties. What consideration of men of thoughtful m i n d s . (H ear .) ncu c oncurrence e f m y m parliamentary colleagues Now, I say that these are great questi ons o f politics, in the Cabinet, and w ith t h e approval friends, I proposed a reduction in the tea duties almost and when I find—as we see is now the case—some identical with that proposed by Mr. Gladstone in the pre gay journalists, and perhaps some Ministers on the sent year, and we were beaten by a majority of 13. Ido hustings, telling you that the people of England care not grudge Mr. Gladstone the success which has attended nothing about these affairs, that nobody is attack- his policy, but what becomes of the state men t th a t a Con ing the Chu rc h o f E ng l an d, and that th ere f ore it is measure?servative G m v ear rinn h e ea nt r) could Then not there have was proposed thed reu e s t u e c u h 0 f absurd for any o ne t o p re te n d to defend it, th a t no the income-tax. It is said that that could never have been one wishes the Government of the country to be obtained from a Conservative Government. Allow me to more democratic, and that therefore the cry is remind you .that we left the income-tax at the lowest merely; one raised for the moment—l say, don't be point it had reached since its imposition in 1842—namely, misled, whatever may be your political opinions, i s now at sd. Gladstone sd. i in th to d the pound.9lt t was soon re afterwards ducedto ra 4d ised b b u y t by such superficial a n d f a l se o b serva ti ons . (Ch eers .) mI think it is an absolute and absurd mi sre p resen t a ti on . and in to It is an insult to the great Conservative party, say that this policy is one peculiar to a Liberal Govern because if you look to the property, intelligence, m eet. There is your great budget of this year, granting a and education of the Conservative body, all remission of taxation to the amount of £1,000,000. Why, must acknowledge that it is a great party—and the policy pursued is that which we have been urging upon it is an insult, also, to a great section of the the Government year after year, and th though I do not Liberal party, distinguished for their conscienti- t is gru dge a them rdt othe pretend applause that i t is only carryinga L o i a b e e rnalleardmreitilstsaray oneness, their ability, and the energy they display in tion which could have reduced the duties on tea and re the active part which they take in public affairs—l mitted such a proportion of the income tax. (Ch eers ) say it is an insult to both alike to say that no one There is another point connected with finance that I wish wishes to make the Government of this country more to touch upon. Ido not wish it to be said, "He knows democratic, and that no party aims at severing the how to touch upon the raw, but he does not dwell—" connection between Church and State. (Hear, hear.) An ELECTOR—I wish to ask a question with reference to It is not true, and every one knows that it i s no t the Union Rating Bill. true (hear, hear) ; and you may depend upon it that in the great controversy and struggle which these opposing opinions -now occasion we shall ultimately arrive at a scunder and a better conclusion if we acknowledge the importance of the great principles now at issue, and make ourselves masters of these questions, and so by the collision of intellect and the influence of discussion induce a majority of the coun try finally to arrive at that solution which will most contribute to promote the general welfare. 1 was observing to you that the habit now is to endeavour to persuade the people of England not to think of these important topics, but, on the contrary, to con sider how admirably their finances have been ma naged, and how admirably the peace of the country has been preserved, and what blessings of a skilful administration they have enjcyed under the present ➢Ministry. (Hear.) Now I believe the general condi tion of the country is prosperous ; and I think it is most unfair, and shows a churlish andgrudging dis position, when a country is generally prosperous, not to give the responsible Ministers of the Crown their due and fairshareof credit for that prosperity. I am not one of those who are disposed to be cap tious in tl matter. When I find the country pro- Mr. DISRAELI—You know I have not come to the Union Rating Bill yet. (Laughter.) There is one subject upon which great credit is taken by the Administration, that or the French treaty. It has been said on Liberal platforms and in Liberal newspapers that only the Liberal party could have effected such an arrangement—that if you had not had a free-trade Government you would not have had the treaty of commerce with France. Myanswer is that I am in favour of treaties of commerce, but I am surprised that a free trade Government should have given us such a treaty. In 1843, when commerce was languishing, and when persons were seeking to devise measures for giving an impulse to trade, I had the opportunity of bringing the general ques tion of treaties of commerce before the House of Commons, and I then dwelt upon the advisability of effecting a French treaty of commerce as well as the compassing of treaties of the same kind with other great Powers ; but what was the treatment I met with ? It was said, " This is the most old-fashioned stuff ; we do not want treaties of commerce ; open your ports, take care of your imports, and your exports will take care of themselves ;" and even Sir Robert Peel said he doubted whether he should live to see another treaty of commerce. That was the view taken in those days. I have always been told that the course of events has proved that my views were per fectly futile. In 1852 one of the first things done by the government of Lord Derby was to negotiate with the French Goverunrent a treaty of commerce. We were quite consistent, but when the thing was mentioned it was ro- ceived with a scoff, or with contumelious silence, by the free-trade party. But that violated their Principles. Now you know how advantageous treaties of commerce are, and you know that the increased trade consequent on the treaty of commerce with France has materially supported Eng land in the crisis through which she has been called to pass during the struggle which lasted for so long a time in the United States of America. How can it be said that all this benefit is due to the Liberal Government when they so put themselves in opposition to the principles of a French treaty ? The Liberals have been telling you that there is to be a great treaty of commerce with Austria. It has been announced, from week to week, that a treaty of commerce with Austria was likely to be concluded from which we were to derive benefits similar to those which have re sulted from the French treaty. I said there was no chance of any such thing. We have heard of a right hon. gentle man (Mr. Hutt) who has dined with the Emperor of Aus tria, and who has made speeches in various languages, but the simple reason we are likely to be unsuccessful in this case is, that we have no concessions to grant to the Aus trian Government When you adopted the principle of un restricted competition—whatever other benefits might re sult from it—yet, of course, viewing the question in its particular bearing with respect to Austria, you allowed all the products of Austrian industry to come into this coun try, and now what have you to induce Austria to lower her duties on the articles of your production ? Why did you succeed in completing a treaty of ::commerce with France ? Because, though you adopted generally the principles of unrestricted competition, yet Sir Robert Peel was obliged to keep the duty on some articles of French produce, for instance, upon their wine and upon their silk, because Sir Robert Peel thought that you could not at that time part with them with due regard to the revenue, and therefore when you entered into negotiations you had a great deal to offer France ; you had the offer of reducing the duties on wine and silk, and there fore you negotiated a successful, a most successful treaty, which has been of inestimable advantage to this country, because it has been effected in total violation of the princi ples of free trade. (Hear.) I attribute the attention with which you listen to me to the interest you naturally take in this subject, which is one of the most important with which Englishmen should acquaint themselves. (Hear.) I am told there has been a large reduction of taxation by her Majesty's Government. I admit it, but it has been of taxation which they themselves levied on the country, and that fact is omitted. (Laughter.) There is one subject on which I confess that Mr. Gladstone and myself have differed. I have agreed with him in reducing the duties on tea, and in reducing the charge of the income tax. I was in favour of the principle of a treaty of commerce with France, though I differed in detail as to the manner in which it was brought forward. There is one point, however, in which we differ, and that is the malt tax. (Cheers.) My excellent colleague in the representation of the county has already expressed before you decided views upon the subject of the malt tax, though in my address I have omitted to. touch upon that topic. I do not treat the matter now for the first time. For eighteen years I have enjoyed your trust and general approbation, and being placed, more by accident than by any merit of my own, is charge of the public revenue, I asked 3ou to allow me to be returned to Parliament unpledged. But 1 did think that if there was any subject on which it was unnecessary for me to declare my sentiments it was the malt tax. I remember that in 1852, when the general taxation of the country was reviewed, and when the country had finally adopted the principle of unrestricted competition, I re commended, on the part of the Government of Lord Derby, that the malt tax should be reduced by one-half. (Hear, hear.) What happened ? Many Liberal gentle men—l do not say that I received a fervent support even from many members on my side—but the generality of Liberal members professed a belief that a remission of one-half of the malt tax would be of no use whatever. I heard .of many such gentlemen who have since stated, either in the House of Commons or battling at the hust ings, that a.reduction of one-third of the malt tax would be of advantage.; but at that time they refused a proposition for remitting it by one-half. Why did we deal with the malt tax ? ,We did. not believe that, though the country had definitely accepted the principle of what is popularly called free trade, but what is really unrestricted competi tion, there was any doubt that that policy must have an in jurious effect upon the wheat crops of the British farmer in the long run, and events have shown that that opinion was not incorrect. Therefore it was of great importance that the crop next in value should be freed as much as pos sible from all unnecessary impost in its general use, and that the farmer should be freed as far as possible from e very disadvantage. In the adoption of the proposition to take off one-half of the malt tax you would not have entirely obtained that object ; but when you had to deal with a tax which then produced £6,000,000, and now produces £5,000,000 annually, it was necessary to have a beginning; and if one-half were taken off first, and there was a recur ring surplus such as we have of late been accustomed to, you might soon take off the other half. (Hear.) Therefore I believe this is a sound policy. (Hear.) I - believe that the real reason that there is so much feeling in the couu- try respecting the malt tax is, that experience has proved that the British farmer can no longer depend upon the weight and profit of his wheat crop, but that he must look to his barley. [A Voice : " Then we should get jolly drunk."] (Much laughter.) I should think that gentle man has had a glass before this. (Renewed laughter.) When the question of the malt tax is brought forward we must consider it with reference to the general state of the country, and with regard to our finances, and, if we possibly, can, we should relieve the British farmer from this tax, on principles of financial justice as well as on the ground of general utility. (Cheers.) One other observation with respect to finance. Almost all that has been said in addresses at the hustings has referred to expenditure, but there is another equally important in finance; I mean economy. (Hear, hear.) We are told there have been great benefits accruing from the placing of the finances in the hands of a Liberal Government, but I will place before you simple facts which cannot be controverted. In 1858-59 the expenditure was £64,900, 000, though really it was only £63,000,000; but in 1865 the sum of £2,000,000 for the payment of the Terminable Annuities was no longer required. The expenditure of last year was £66,000,000. (A Voice—‘.‘ The family has got bigger!" followed by much laughter.) A gentleman says the expenditure has increased because the family. has got bigger; but that cannot be the reason, for two years ago the expenditure was £70,000,000, and now it is £66,000,000. (Laughter.) If we had had an nual Parliaments I could have given that gentleman fresher information. (Loud laughter.) I say that there is, even as compared with the year in which I was responsible for the finances of the country, an increase in the amount of taxa tion levied to the extent of at least £3,000,000, an increase from £63,000,000 to £66,000,000. Bat how were those £66,ooo,ooo.arrived at when two years before the sum was larger by several millions? The reduction was produced by repeated.motions in the House of Commons, made by myself, or by my friends, for a diminution of expenditure. I am perfectly willing to give the Government credit for all that they have done in the way of decreasing taxation and introducing greater economy in the public service, but I do not believe that our financial prosperity is wholly the result of their exertions. (Hear, hear.) I have shown that if you had a Conservative Administration there would have been a repeal of the paper duty as well as a reduction in the tea duty, and a great reduction in the income tax. I believe that there would also have been a treaty with France, al though not one, perhaps, framed with such admirable ability as the treaty conducted by Mr. Cobden, and not by the Government. And here I cannot help remembering that it has been said, that while Lord Derby, : when he was Prime Minister, in 1852, was engaged in negotiating a French treaty, another Prime Minister was actually throwing impediments in the way of such a measure. I have shown you that the course of Lord Derby's government has nothing to dread upon this subject of finance from a comparison with their successors ; and I have been forced to take this course in vindication of those with whom I act in pnblic life. In fact, the whole thing has been a genteel impasture from beginning to end (cheers and laughter); and if those gentlemen did not occupy distinguished positions I am afraid they would really be taken before the Lord Mayor for obtaining ap plause under false pretences. (Renewed laughter.) That reminds me of a circumstance which occurred to me to day. A gentleman stopped me on my way to these hust ings for the purpose of speaking to me about the malt tax. He said that the farmers had been treated very badly in that matter, and that they had always looked forward to the falling in of the Terminable Annuities as the means by which they were to get rid of that burden. I said to him, as I was already later than I ought to have been, "My dear sir, I am behind time ; if you hold me by the button the election may be over before I can take any part in it, instead o f me. " (Great laughter. ) I was th us and, perhaps, my excellent friend, Dr. Lee, will be re turnedobliged abruptly to get rid of the gentleman by whom I was so importunely consulted. But it is very remarkable that nobody appears to know what Mr. Gladstone did with the Terminable Annuities. I will now tell you what he did with them. It has hitherto been kept a secret, but Parliament having been dissolved I will let you know all about the matter. One evening there was a very full attendance in the House of Commons,. as it was known that Mr. Gladstone was going to make a great : speech, and to perform a wonderful feat in finance. He had £22,00.000 at his disposal. These Terminable Annuities, to which every class of Englishmen who thought that they had to submit to any kind of fiscal grievance had been for half a century looking forward as the best chance of securing to them some redress, had at length fallen in; and what did Mr. Gladstone do with them ? By a feat of legerdemain, that exceeded any of the con juring tricks of M. Robert, he took ono million of the Ter minable. Annuities and turned them into " ducks" — (laughter) —and then he took another million and turned them into "drakes"—( renewe d l aug ht er )-- an d i n half an hour all these " d ucks " and " drakes " were cac kli ng an d flying about the House of Commons, until we were all so ashamed of one another that we ordered strangers to with draw, and determined to keep the whole affair a profound secret until the dissolution of Parliament. (Continued laughter.) Having I will next p rocee d to notice the case of the U n i on Charge ability Bill. I have hero, in the first place, to state that I have always been in favour of doing away entirely with the law of settlement. With regard to Mr. Villiere's bill, I will confess that, speaking generally, I was in favour of that measure. In the House of Commons it met with but little opposition ; but I think the change might have been arranged in a manner by which less injustice would have bean done to particular proprietors and yet the same ad vantage might have been conferred on the poor of the country. I will only say in reference to this subject that I gave my hearty support to the proposal for the total aboli tion of the law of settlement ; and I hope that a bill for effecting such change will be carried in the next Parlia ment. There is another topic which Ido not wish to let pass unnoticed. I find that the candidates on both sides who have of late been addressing the constituencies through out the country are in favour of what is known as the policy of non-intervention. Now, lam not in favour of non-in tervention, and for this reason, because there is no such word in the English language. (A laugh.) But if you mean by that barbarous expression that England should not under any circumstances interfere in the affairs of foreign coun tries, I am equally opposed to such a view. I think there are occasions when the honour and interests of England may authorise such interference ; but I also think that there must be an unmistakable manifestation of feeling on the part of the nation before you can decide that its honour has been outraged, and that it requires on the part of a ministry very great sagacity and the most careful con sideration before they can come to the conclusion that it is their duty to engage in a quarrel with any other country. I am myself in favour of a Conservative foreign policy, and of a Conservative foreign policy that is founded on the be lief that the maintenance of the tranquillity of the world is the interest of England—(hear)—that peace is the normal state of man, and that in the tranquillity of other nations the best objects of English ambition may be obtained— (hear)—l therefore do not think it is the interest or the duty of England to ally itself with the revolutionary party. I believe that you will have a much greater choice of avoid ing war if you look on the power of England in the world to be essentially a moderating and a mediating power. During the 27 years I have been in Parliament there was only one occasion on which, I think, war was justifiable on the part of England, and that was the occasion of the Cri mean war ; and I therefore supported that war—(hear)-- I think it was a fair boast that was attempted to be made on the part of the Government at a time of dissolution, and when they were appealing to the country, to show that they had maintained peace. I admit that, but lam bound to say that I think the allegation on the part of the present Admi nistration cannot be sustained.. When Parliament met at the commencement of 1864 there was a general opinion in the country that we were on the point of war; that we were going to war with Denmark against Germany. There was great apprehension that that would be the course. The Go vernment was much pressed upon the question; the situation was mysterioul ; we wanted light; the fear of war haunted the public mind; and it was peculiarly the duty of the Oppo sition, but it was also the duty of members on the Liberal side of the house, to press the Government for information under such circumstances of perplexity and anxiety. We could get no information. No papers were presented, and it was . only after repeated inquiries, and it was only by an appeal to a hostile motion that, at last, papers were presented, and then only a portion of the papers, which did not give the information required. The situation appeared alarm ing—we were about to ask the House of Commons, by a vote, to relieve the mind of the country from the anxiety universally felt, but instead of getting a clear account of the state of things from her Majesty's Ministers they told us that a conference was about to be held. We could not risk the peace of the country by attempts at interference either in the House of Lords or in the House of Commons, lest it should bring about the catastrophe we were wishing to avoid. The conference at length rose, and papers were placed upon the table which threw off the appeal to a later time. But what did these papers prove ? They proved by the published despatches of the Secretary of State for Fo reign Affairs—and I am sure that if I am in any way mis stating, there are many gentlemen present distinguished by theirpolitical knowledge who can correct ine—it was proved that Lord Russell, the English minister acting under the immediate advice of Lord Palmerston, the Prime Minister —it was proved that these responsible ministers made re peated overtures to Russia and to France—and especially to Franco—to enter into an alliance to declare war against Germany on behalf of Denmark. These were the acts of a Liberal Government. (Laughter.) Dr. Lee—l agree with the right hon. gentleman in his opinion of war in general, and of the Crimean war in par ticular. I agree that war is justifiable in self-defence, though not in aggression. Mr. Disraeli—This classic episode encourages me— (laughter)—but I want to know what comes of the observa tions of the hon. gentleman, who shows that he is equally hasty and uninformed, with many others, on this question. What becomes of the charges against the Conservative party, when indubitable evidence is brought. forward that this Liberal Government, whose existence is pledged on the basis of the maintenance of peace, tried to stir up war in three quarters ? and if it had begun it would probably be raging at the present moment. (Hear, hear.) And if there had been war there could have been no reduc tion in the tea duties, no remission of the income tax, and the manifold advantages of the French treaty might have been lost. You wore nearly precipitated into war, and the united efforts of the two most influential members of the Government, Lord Palmerston and Lord Russell, were made to stir up the flames of war in Europe. (Cries of " Oh, oh.") To whom do we owe the preservation of peace ? To the firmness of the Sovereign, to the concilia tory character of our allies, and, allow me to say, in some degree to the united exertions of the Opposition. (Hear, hear.) Gentlemen, 1 have now placed before you the general state of our public affairs. I have vindicated the party with whom I act from the unjust imputations made against them, but it is matter almost ;of insignifi cance to draw your attention to the mere transient character of the Ministry—the important question is as to the existence of our institutions, and whether the form of government under which we now live is to pre vail. (Hear.) I address you in the spirit which I think becomes a public man who is not the slave of party, who speaks to you because he wishes to impress upon you, as his constituents who have unanimously returned him to Parliament, as well as upon the country at large, the fact that it is the duty of Englishmen in these great questions of politics which will concern the future form of govern ment under which we and our successors are to live, and which relate to some of the dearest interests that can influence a human being—l would impress upon all, whatever may be the minor differences of opinion among them, the necessity of arriving at definite conclu sions. It is your duty as Englishmen to act in this manner, and not to allow yourselves to be drawn from so noble a duty, from so exalted a privilege, by the superficial and interested insinuations of persons who are influenced by very unworthy motives, that these questions are not at issue, and that all you have to do is to applaud the financial management which, under any Ministry, would have been the same, and that the upholding and preservation of peace is especially due to the existing government. Gentlemen, assured that I possess the con fidence of my constituents, I now thank you for the great distinction you have conferred upon me on this occasion. I thank the gentleman who proposed me, and who repre sents one of the greatest houses in this great and undivided county, for the honour he has done me. I thank the gen tleman who lives at the other end of the county, and who so well represents its yeomanry, for the distinction he has conferred upon mo by seconding my nomination, and I assure you that, supported by the conviction that the people of Buckinghamshire will stand by me, I shall re-enter public life in the new parliament with no less confidence in the future than before, and with a courage which I hope will not be lessened. And, gentlemen, whatever may have been my deficiencies—and I acknowledge they have been numerous—whatever may have been my errors—and I have never denied them—so long as I possess the con fidence of the county of Buckingham, I hope that, whether I servo in a more or less responsible public position, I may be able to serve in some manner the country to which I belong. (The right hon. gentleman sat down amid groat cheering.) Mr. HARVEY then rose to thank the electors of Bucking hamshire for returning him a second time as their repro ' sentative. He had rejoiced in the opportunity of listening to one whose abilities and eloquence had obtained for him a deserved and world-wide renown. The ground upon which ho wished to stand was the good opinion of the electors. His political opinions were so well known that there was no occasion for him to repeat them there. Ho had entered parliament a disciple of the pure Conservative creed, from which, he hoped, he should never swerve, be cause he considered that the essence of that policy was truth. He was opposed to any extravagant enlargement of the franchise, which, he believed, was already placed within the reach of every honest, industrious, and well conducted person in the country. (Hear.) Dr. LEE here came forward and asked Mr. Harvey whether ho would bo prepared to abolish the game laws, and whether he would join the Anti-Tobacco Society. (Much laughter.) Mr. Harvey here produced a well-filled cigar case, and said ho believed that was a sufficient answer to Dr. Lee's last question. With regard to the preservation of game, he should say that ho did not believe the farmers in that country had much to complain of upon that subject ; and it should be remembered that if there were no game the country gentlemen would probably not reside so much as they did on their estates. Mr. Du Pro then proposed a vote of thanks to the High Sheriff for the admirable manner in which he had that day presided over their proceedings. Sir H. Verney seconded the proposal. The compliment was then acknowledged by the High Sheriff, and the proceedings terminated. LADVERTISEMENT.j—HoIfoway's Pills.—Counsel and Comfort.—A disordered stomach throws the whole system out of gear, and renders us unfitted both for work and amusement. A few doses of these strengthening and puri fying pills will, however, speedily restore order, if taken according to their accompanying directions, and so enable the stomach to digest its food without difficulty. These excellent pills are suitable alike for the peer and the peasant, the soldier and the sailor, and particularly for home and foreign colonists. Holloway's pills are very use ful in checking feverish attack, bilious complaints, and in flammations. They have also made the most signal cures in cases of dropsy and diseases of the kidneys, heart, and lungs, when the suffe rer seeme d pas t th e roach of medicine. Proposed Exhibition of National Portraits. Yesterday a meeting for organising a national portrait exhibition was held at the South Kensington Museum ; the Right Hon. the Earl of Derby in the chair. Amongst the other noblemen and gentlemen present were Earl Granville, the Earl of Clarendon, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Duke of Buccleuch, Lord Taunton, Lord Houghton, Viscount Sydney, Mr. John P. Knight, R.A., Mr. F. Y. Hurlstone, Mr. Edgar A. Bowring, the Dean of Windsor, Mr. James Spedding, Mr. T. D. Harding, Mr. G. Scharf, Mr. R. Redgrave, R.A., Rev. James Beck, Mr. R. J. Sketchley, Rev. Dr. Brock; Mr. Cole, secretary, &c. The Earl of DERBY opened the proceedings by an address in which he said he should apologise for putting the meeting to some inconvenience in conse quence of calling them together at 3 o'clock, instead of 12 o'clock, as originally proposed, but lie was compelled to attend a meeting at the latter hour at Marlborough Home, at which the Prince of Wales was present. With regard to his occupying the place of chairman on that occasion it arose from the circumstance that he originally suggested to Mr. Redgrave, who called upon him for a contribution for another object, the desirability of holding an exhi bition of portraits of eminent historical persons, chro nologically arranged, as well as of persons distin guished in art and literature. Mr. Redgrave con curred with him in that suggestion, and he reported the matter to the Art and Science Department of the Committee of Council. He (the Earl of Derby) was afterwards requested to put on paper the substance of his propczition, and he heard nothing more on the subject until he received a printed paper signi fying the approval of the Committee of Council, with his name inserted as president. Having sug gested the proposal he did not feel at liberty to de cline the honour, and that was the reason why he appeared that day in the position of chairman. It was not intended at the present meeting to propose any resolution, but they met rather as a committee of advice, and for the purpose of receiving any sug gestions that might be thrown out by any one pre sent. The object of the exhibition was to collect portraits of eminent persons, statesmen, warriors, and men of literature and art, beginning, say, from the middle of the 15th century, and bringing them down to a recent period. They were to collect from private sources as many of those portraits as they could obtain and exhibit them in a chronological series. Such an exhibition would trace the pro gress of British art, beginning, say, from Holbein, to Vandycke, Lely, Kneller, Gainsborough, Rom ney, down to Lawrence. He might mention the names of Hudson and others who had obtained dis tinction by painting the portraits of eminent per sons. He thought from an historical and artistic as well as from a general point of view that such an exhibition would be valuable and interesting. There was a vast number of portraits scattered through out the country, and he believed that the owners of them would not object to the loan of them for such a purpose for a short period. It was advisable to consider in what manner they should address the proprietors of those pictures and how they were to obtain information respecting the pictures that might be so obtained. It was proposed to hold the ex hibition in the refreshment rooms of the Interna tional Exhibition of 1862. The site, which was south of the Royal Agricultural Gardens, afforded a very favourable space for this exhibition. It was true that the light was not from above, but from the side windows. Within the last half-hour he had visited the spot in com pany with Lord Granville and Mr. Cole, and he contemplated the effect produced upon two pictures that were hung up there as an experiment. There were 1,420 feet run of space, and there was a height of 13 feet. It was proposed to allow 24 square feet for each picture, being the , same space that was allowed in the Manchester Exhibition, which would afford accommodation to 800 pictures, and which would be arranged in a series of bays. They would allow the light to fall on two sides, and also in front. There would be three entrances to the Exhibition—. one in Exhibition-road, one in the Prince Albert road, and a third, a central entrance, leading from the Horticultural Gardens. It was proposed to open the Exhibition in April, 1866, and to keep it open two or three years, according to the number of pic tures that might be offered to them. If there were only to be two exhibitions it struck him that 1688 would be a convenient limit by which to separate the two exhibitions. In the first they might have all the authentic portraits that could be obtained from the time of Richard 111. or Henry VII., coming down to Elizabeth and the Stuarts until they arrived at the epoch of 1688 ; and in the second exhibition all those that belonged to a later period. If the pictures within this period were too numerous then they might continue the exhibition for a third year. He had had communications upon the sub ject with several individuals both personally and by letter, and they all intimated their readiness to contribute those portraits which they possessed themselves, and to ascertain how many could be obtained from persons living in their respective neighbourhoods. It would be also satisfactory to the meeting to hear that he had received a letter from General Grey, intimating the Queen's entire approval of the project, and her Majesty's cordial desire to assist as far as she was able the object in view. Her Majesty further stated that she would patronise the project by contributing pictures from the Royal collections—that whilst there might be some difficulty in denuding the walls of Windsor, there would be no difficulty in contributing largely from the collection at Buckingham Palace. The Marquis of Exeter, the Duke of Wellington, and other noblemen and gentlemen had expressed their readiness to co-operate with the committee in car rying out this scheme ; and he anticipated that those present would use their best personal exer tions in furthering an object from which he antici pated permanent and lasting benefits. Earl GRANVILLE thought that the thanks of the Department of Art and Science were due to the noble earl for his valuable suggestion, and for the lucid manner in which he explained the mode of carrying it out. Perhaps Mr. Scharf would be good enough to state to the committee what the general rules were in regard to the National Portrait Gal lery. Mr. SCHARF regretted he had not a copy of the rules before him. He might, however, say that the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery had three objects in view. The first was the historical im portance of the person represented ; the next the authenticity of the portrait ; and the third was its importance as a work of art—three things which were somewhat difficult to combine. If he might be permitted to suggest a principle of management in respect to the projected three exhibitions, he thought that the collection would be made more valuable if, instead of being made chronological in their arrangement, they were arranged by classes-- that was to say, for the first year say an exhibition of the portraits of Royal personages and of the nobility ; for the second year an exhibition of great naval and military commanders, statesmen, &c. ; and for the third year the portraits of men eminent in literature, arts, and architecture. The Earl of DERBY considered that the chrono logical arrangement would be much more interesting and instructive. (Hear.) He should like to know how far public bodies would be justified in contri buting from their collections to the proposed exhibi tion. In the British Museum there were several valuable historical portraits. In the official residence of the Prime Minister there were many portraits of former ministers which perhaps the Prime Minister of the day would consent to contribute. The Dean of Christ Church had expressed his willingness to lend from the collection in the hall of Christ Church. Earl GARNVILLE concurred in the opinion as to the chronological arrangement being the best and most interesting. With regard to the loan of pictures from Downing-street he had no doubt, after what his noble friend had said, that if lie were Prime Minister he would lend the collection. The Earl of DERBY here made a brief observation which was not heard at the reporters' table, but which occasioned some laughter. Mr. SCHARF said, although he was not empowered to speak for the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery, he knew that both individually and collec tively they were desirous of doing all in their power to promote the proposed exhibition. The Earl of DERBY called attention to a rule of the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery, that the portrait of no person, unless he was at least ten years deceased, would be admitted amongst the col lection. Mr. SCHARF said that the trustees had considera bly modified that rule recently. The Earl of DERBY said he was sorry to hear it, believing it to be a very good rule, and one which, if they adopted, would relieve them from the pain of refusing the portraits of certain persons whose merits they would wish to leave to the judgment of poste rity. It was, however, a question for consideration whether the works of living artists should be ad mitted into the projected gallery of portraits. There might be some jealousy created if the works of one living artist were admitted and those of another re fused. On the other hand, there might be valuable portraits of persons who were dead 10 or 20 years, but the artist who painted them might be yet living. Mr. REDGRAVE said he should be sorry to see the portrait of Sir Walter Scott by Landseer rejected, because the artist happened to be still living. The Earl of CLARENDON also expressed himself ill favour of the chronological order in the arrange ment of the portraits, and said that he had many pictures which would be of interest to the public, and which he would place at the disposal of the committee. (Hear, hear.) Lord TAUNTON said he thought it would be im portant to be able to assure the owners of pictures that they would be only required for a certain de finite period. The Earl of DERBY suggested that they should not be kept longer than four or five months, say from April to August. But until they had some idea of the number of pictures that would be offered them, and to what periods they belonged, it would be impossible to lay down any rule as to the dura tion of the exhibition, whether it would be for one, two, or three years. The Earl of CLARENDON thought that if it were generally known that the pictures would be kept for only four or five months in the summer it would greatly facilitate the lending of them. The Marquis of LANSDOIVNE said that the princi pal difficulty would be to ascertain in whose hands the valuable historic pictures were. He should be most happy to contribute his collection to the exhi tion. (Hear, hear.) The Duke of BUCcLEUCH suggested that it would be desirable to appoint district committees through out the country to ascertain in whose hands were valuable portraits. He also thought that assurance should be given as to the safety of the pictures from damp or other injury. Lord TAUNTON asked whether it was proposed to admit busts into the exhibition. The Earl of DERBY said that was a subject for further consideration. He thought, however, that the proposed arrangements would not be favourable to the admission of busts. Mr. COLE said that the proposed site for the ex' hibition was perfectly dry, and policemen would be employed to watch the collection of portraits niglA and day. The committee had received assurances of support from the Dukes of Buccleuch, Devon' shire, Marlborough, Wellington, and Cleveland, the Marquis of Lansdowne, Earls Brownlow, Spencer, and Charlemont, Viscount Sydney, Lord De Lisle, Sir R. Peel, the Dean of Christ Church, Mr. Foun' tain, of Norfolk, Mr. Heywood Hawkins, Mr. John Murray, and a great number of others. The Earl of DERBY said that out of 125 notices which the committee had sent out, they had received 80 or 90 answers, only two or three of which ex• pressed any unwillingness to assist the society. Lord HOUGIITON concurred in the suggestion of appointing district committees throughout the country to report to the central committee a s to where valuable pictures were to be found. He knell himself that a Mr. Wynne possessed a most valuable and interesting picture of Thomas More and 1- I L 4 family, painted by Holbein. _ On a motion of Earl GRANVILLE a vote of thank° was passed to the Earl of Derby, which having been gracefully acknowledged by that nobleman, the proceedings terminated. COUNTRY MARKETS MAN CITE S TEE-THURSDAY. Our market this morning was slenderly attended, th e election for the city apparently absorbing the chief att oo " tion. There was very little business passi ng , b u t pric os were fully supported, and we repeat the quotations of tb day se'nnight. During the present week the transactions reported ill corn are on a very limited scale at former rates. At tbi 4 day's market there was a short supply of English wheal for which buy ers re l uctantly p. id an advance of is to is 6 ' per qr. B ar l ey unaltered. Oats tending upwards. Beau° slow sale. Peas quite as dear. etfrrencies :—English wheat, white, 43s to 47s ; red, 39 to 44s per 36 stone. Malting barley, 30s to 35s ; grinding/ 22s to 25s per qr. Oats, 24s to 30s ; Irish, 21s to 24s Per 30 stone. Beans, 42s to 45s ; and peas, 40s to 42s per qr. BRISTOL—THURSDAY. On our market this afternoon there was a small supply of English wheat, which was t a k en f ree ly a t f u ll va l ues . Tli e little doing in foreign was at last week's rates. Barley pressed on the market, and fully 6d per qr. lower. 00 also dull at a similar decline. In beans, peas, and Indian corn no alteration to notice. EDINBURGH-WEDNESDAY. At to-day's market supplies were good. Wheat met I fair sale, at last week's prices. The small supply of Nil' ley was readily sold at last week's rates. Oats a brisk sale' Beans good sale. Average prices. Wheat, 42s Id I Oats, 2ss 5d Barley, 29s ld Beans, 40s11d Wheat on the top, Os 9d down average, Os 9d Barley on the top, is Od down average, 1s 8d up. Oats on the top, Os Gd up.... ........ average, Os 5d up. Beans on the top, Os Gd up average, Os 10d dovrxl• _ _ Total supply and sales. Wheat Barley BB qrs sold 83 Oats 1149 qrs._ .sold 836 Beans B7 qrs sold 8G Town-made flour sells as follows :—White, 37s Od ; extrt i superfine, 35s Od; superfine, 33s Od; fine, 31s Od. GLAS G OW—WEDNESDAY. This day's market was fairly attended. Wheat and flowhave to be w r itt en 3d lower per boll and barrel ; oats, oatmeal, and beans unaltered. Peas and Indian corn 3d cheaper per 2801 b. MIRACULOUS ESCAPE FROM DROWNING.—On e of the most remarkable instances of escape froth drowning occurred lately at Udny. There runs through the village of Quarry a burn or mill lade, which is covered in for about 250 yards—its course through the village. child of four or five years, daughter of the Rev. G. Archl" bald, Free Church, was standing with her mother Ile° where the covering begins, at the moment the water had been let on to set in motion the mill-wheel which it drives• From some cause the child fell into the water, and NO ° nstantly swept by the current under the covering. TO mother, on seeing her infant disappear, and being power' loss to help, was quite overcome, and the greatest conster" nation prevailed among all who were near. Attempts wer° made without success to find the child by removing part of the covering. Mr. Milne, merchant, then stationed himself at the point whore the covering stops, and, after waiting with intense anxiety for several minutes, the poor thit l s came floating out and was instantly rescued. She vra o taken home, and, the usual restoratives being applied/ gradually recovered from the fright. — Buchan Observer. Births. ATTER.—On the Bth inst., the wife of J. Atter, Esq., 121.- Barnhill, Stamford, of a son. BLYTR.—On the 12th inst., at G, Burwood-place, Hyde' park, the wife of Alfred Blyth, jun., Esq., of a son. SHARP.—On the 12th inst., at Oak&ld, the wife of r• Sharp, Esq., of a son. Marriages BLAKESLEY—CLEGG.—On the 13th inst., at St. George' 6 Hanover -square, William, only son of John MakesleY l Esq., of Newton Unthank, Leicestershire to Elise Fran' cos, the eldest d aug ht er o f th e l ate Mr. Joseph Clegg, ° Jermyn-street, St. James's. liAuliis—GoßDos.—On the 11th inst. at Newton Abbott , Devonshire, F ranc i s D ouglas Harris, son of Dr. Harr of Hawkhur s t, K en t , to Harriet Maria Gordon, niece °' Major Frederi c k G or d on, of Barnstaple, North Devon. Deaths. BRUCE. —On the 7th Queen's-gate, Londo/li Nigel, youngest child of the Right. Ilon. 11. A. Bruce , M.P., aged 8 mont h s. Bunts. —On the 10th inst., Allen Burls, 18, Loraine-road/ Holloway, and Lloyd's, aged 33. HAmEL.—On the 10th inst., at Millfield, Tamworth, E. 13 ' Hamel, Esq., J.P., aged 69. HowARD.—On the 11th inst., at Broadfield, Rochdale, John Howard, Esq., aged 69. MELLER.—On the 11th inst., at Edenbridge ' Kent, Jaal o4 Hill Mailer, Esq., late of Southwark, and Cobham, Sta . ' rey, aged 73. WOODWARD.—On the 11th inst., at Herne Bay, Dr. San:We i P. Woodward, F.G.S., of the British Museum, aged 53' London : Printed and Published by WIL LIAM ANDREW n ° ' of No. 112, Strand, Pi inter, at Tmi: Office, No 11 1 Strand, in the Precinct of the F.r.voy, in the CouttY Atiddlesex.—Friday, July 14, 1865, Th( receiv Pany, liam ei North has 13( 2. i crop s , 3. I tained 1. I shar e 2. th e 3,1 I ( Cent. To th; Gent being c I:oquest la the i Intern t hereby the tei or any the sur fixed sum of iviE APP NOI be RE ( for Loz WI th e c I )is ir i t 118111 11er easily an d 1 1-11 rninutei a sand , pro spe grou nd , Proprie THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 14, 1865. 14 .bmi ~~ In FRb Sol the Ob "Kb .11 buy NIL.] --__ Lt of 2 one, Von No I/ Dise( dire° 'Vh, hous, term In 2] Depo Th Allot whic' ab Act ( Shari £2 in The (-• Sc Profe Riv The I The 1 The l The I J. Bai Tho / 60,