The Sun. — London, England, 1865-02-02 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 2, 1865. Reform Meeting at Leeds. A meeting, called by the Mayor of Leeds (Mr. Luccock), in compliance with a numerously signed requisition, got up under the auspices of the Leeds Working Men's Parliamentary Reform Association, was held in the Town-hall of that borough on Tues day evening last. There was a large gathering on the occasion, fully 2,500 persons being present. The chief speakers were Mr. E. Baines, M.P., ML W. E. Forster, M.P.; and Viscount Amberley, eldest son of Earl Russell. Lord Amberley, who is about 23 years of age, and who may be said to have made his political debut on the occasion, was the great attraction of the evening, and there is no doubt that many persons, both Liberals and conservatives, attended the meeting in order to hear his speech. He met with a very cheering reception, and was listened to with deep attention. the proceedings, said that The MAYOR, in opening after he had received the requisition from so large body of his fellow townsmen as had signed it, he had no hesitation in calling the meeting. The sub ject they had met to consider was one of the deepest importance to the welfare and happiness of the country. It was a subject which had engaged the attention, not only of the present, but of other Par liaments ; for they found that the Earl of Derby, as representative of the great Conservative party, and Lord Palmerston, as the representative of the great Liberal party, had both expressed their opi nion on the great measure which the meeting had met to consider. They had declared that there was a large, virtuous, intelligent, and independent body of men excluded from the franchise who ought to have it. (Hear, hear, and applause.) They had met that night to petition Parliament in favour of granting to that large and important body of men the exercise of the electoral right which had been denied them, and unjustly denied them, for many years. (Cheers.) But there was another subject for them to consider. There was at the present mo ment a large body of men intrusted with the fran chise who had been unfaithful to their duty—(cheers) —some men who, from want of moral energy or from indifference, had, in their exercise of the franchise,been treating it with contempt; others who would sell their franchise fora pot of beer; and others in a higher rank of life, who systematically and de terminedly set themselves to work in order to tempt men to violence, and to do that which they knew to be contrary to the best interests of the State. (Hear.) It was for the meeting to say what should be done with such men—whether they should be struck out of the electoral list altogether, or whether they should be punished in some way in which the law may decide. (Cheers.) Alderman CARTER moved the first resolution, which was as follows : " That, in the opinion of this meeting, the present House of Commons having been specially elected to carry a just measure of Parliamentary Reform, and the leaders of both political parties having admitted its necessity, her Majesty's Ministers ought not to allow the next session of Parliament to pass without affording another opportunity to the House to fulfil the pledges then solemnly given to the country." The principal object of the meeting, he said, was to call upon the Government, solemnly and earnestly, as Englishmen, to redeem the promises they had made in the Queen's Speeeh, and in the speeches of the Ministers, to give the country, before their time of office expired, a fair, reasonable, and just mea sure of Parliamentary Reform. (Applause.) Mr. E. FINNIE, a journeyman printer, seconded the resolution. Mr. E. BAINES rose to support, and was received with rounds of cheers. He commenced by saying— I rejoice very much to meet an assembly under the presidency of the chief magistrate to promote this great cause, and especially I rejoice to promote this great and noble cause, and especially I rejoice to meet an assembly which has been convened through the instrumentality of the working men of Leeds—(cheers)—of the Working Men's Par liamentary Reform Association, which has been now for nine years existing, and which intends still to exist, to' assert the rights of their order and to extend the liberties of the people of Eng land. (Loud cheers.) All the operations of that Parliamentary Reform Association, and most espe cially the resolutions and petition which will be laid before you to-night, have been characterised by the most signal moderation and fairness. I rejoice that I have been able as your representative to appear in the House, of Commons, and with the full assent of my judgment and my feelings, to endeavour to carry the measure on which you have set your hearts. (Cheers.) I am not in the slightest degree dis couraged by the delay which has hitherto taken place in the accomplishment of the measure. Con sidering, as I do, that every year witnesses an in crease in the intelligence, an improvement in the education, and an advance in all the moral qualities fitting them to exercise the franchise, of that vast portion of our fellow subjects who still remain ex cluded from the pale of the constitution, I am, cer tain that every year there is gathering behind us an increased - moral force that, without any physical violence whatever, yet will sweep away every ob stacle that shall remain in its course, and carry the establishment of the just rights of the people. It is the cause of justice and the cause of liberty, and it would be utter blindness to the teachings of history, utter blindness to the power of moral con sideration, utter blindness to the force of those in stitutions which we already have in Parliament, — the press, the right of discussion, and the right of meeting, to suppose it was possible for long to deny the just rights of those who now claim to be ad mitted within the pale of the constitution. (Cheers.) It is well and universally recognized that self-go vernment constitutes freedom in nations ; but self government cannot exist for those who have no vote in the choice of their governors, and therefore I say, as I have said many times before, that I recognise that there is real freedom on the part of those classes who are excluded from the franchise ; and, at all events, nobody will deny that which is the universal guarantee for the protection not only of life and propcity, but for the protection of liberty and all that is dear. That guarantee does not exist for those who are excluded from the ex ercise of the franchise. I do not think that I should be just, that I should be doing what is right, if I were to make you a long speech this evening, because we are favoured with the presence here of two visitors whom I am most heartily re- -- - __ joiced to see,—first, my valued friend and yours, the hon. member for Bradford—(cheers)—whom for many years you have now known as the stanch advocate of the rights of the people—(cheers)—who visits his old friends in Leeds--kindly visits them. I am grateful to him for it, and he will address you, I think, with more propriety at length than I should do this evening. But I have also most gratefully and with the utmost pleasure to acknowledge the presence this evening of a nobleman whose name recalls some of my earliest and dearest recollections connected with this great cause and with the town (3 , 1 Leeds in which we stand. Lord Amberley, bear mg the illustrious and venerated name of Russell— (cheero_comes here with a hereditary claim upon your respect in the • and gratitude , for there is not a na me ; . 11 ' 14e 'rY of this century connect, century so closely, so illus triouslyd with the reform of our institu tions and the extension of our liberties as the name which he b ears ; and and ungratef u l if we we should be most forgetful did not re mem b er th a t'to his father we ow e d it , that h the Reform Act, confer proposed, ten years before to franchise u p on this borough, and whi c h it then did did not Reform enjoy , and that afterwards it was the very same Act which that has immortalised his name, did act within the pale of the franchi se . ll ua y call us re joice that that young nobleman (Cheers.) lis about t mence his public career in a town which has ° corn reason to be grateful to his father, and so much which, I am n sure, will fondly wish for him a career as b • - bright an d as useful as Lord Russell has enjoyed. (Rear, hear.) But although I must speak shortly, o n account of your wish to hear our visitors address you, perhaps you may think that, as you may think think that, as your representative and as havini , t, taken a somewhat prominent part elsewhere on this question, I ought to say a few words to you upon the subject. (Hear, and applause.) What is our great grievance? It is that three-fourths I don't know that thfee-fourths of you—but that three-fourths of the man ) * millions of the inhabitants of this country are shut 0 Alt of the enjoyment of those rights and immunities which 'peculiarly characterise free men ; millions of our fellow men—a large propor tion of whom, as I believe, are qualified by educa tion, intelligence, and moral qualities to e:ercise the franchise, are deprived of that right. That is a grievance which sins against justi e, which sins against the individuals deprived of the i ight, and in my conscientious belief it does an injury to the community which it thus deprives. (Hear, hear, and applause.) But we are attempted to be fright ened by a great bugbear. We are told that you cannot remedy this evil—which really nobody pre tends to defend—that you cannot remedy it without introducing a state of things so extreme in the oppo site direction that you would swamp and swallow up the upper and middle classes of society. (A laugh.) Why, this is a comment that has been made by one of the leading journals of England within a few days upon the recent speeches of my hon. friend the member for Birmingham—(loud cheers)—and the member for Huddersfield. (Cheers.) We are told that the evil cannot be remedied without going to the extent of full democracy, of pure, unqualified democracy. I say for my hon. friends, that if they go further in the direction of enfranchising than I would do, both have shown themselves practical and honest friends of reform. (Cheers.) Neither of them has ever advocated extreme measures in Par liament. Both of them spoke and voted in favour of the bill of Lord Russell ; and both of them spoke and voted in favour of the bills introduced by Mr. Locke King and myself—(cheers)—and you know that these bills were not measures advocating any thing like democracy. (Hear, hear.) No bill has ever been proposed in Parliament—certainly none of late years—none in my recollection, that could be considered as anything more than a respectable instalment of the rights of the people. (Hear, hear.) What was the bill of Lord Russell in 1860 ? I believe it would have given a great and substantial measure of enfranchisement, but that bill went to the extent of admitting occupiers of £lO premises in counties, and of £6 premises in boroughs. Now, would that have swamped all the upper and middle classes of society ? What was Lord Russell's calculation ? He calculated that the effect in boroughs—for there was no sufficient estimate of the effect in counties, only I may put that aside by saying that not a single working man would have been admitted in counties by a £lO occupancy. It is you, the great working men, who are the bugbear that frightens them. (Laughter andcheers.) It is you in the boroughs who frighten these folk in high places out of their propriety. (Renewei laughter and applause.) Well, what would have been the addition made to the constituencies ,by Lord Russell's bill in boroughs ? He calculated, upon official authority, obtained for him by the Poor Law Board from the Poor Law authtrities all over the kingdom, that there would have been an addition, on the average, to borough constituencies of 48 per cent. ; that is, less than one half of the present constituents had to become new voters. Suppose there were a town that had 200 voters, it would henceforth have 300, or a town that had 2,000 voters would henceforth have 3,000. Surely if every one of that additional 1,000 had been a working man, they must have been very cunning to swamp or swallow up the 2,000 of the middle and upper classes. (Laughter and applause.) I have given you credit for intelligence, for strong heads, and for great qualities ; but I never gave you credit for this, that 1,000 of you could swallow up 2,000 of the upper and better classes. (Renewed laughter and cheers.) Well, the working men would only be admitted in the boroughs ; none of the working men would be admitted by the addition it was proposed to make to the county voters. Therefore, if you take the borough and county voters together, and make a proper deduction for those newly-admitted who are not working men—and there is a very consider able proportion of those who would be so admitted who are not working men—l say the proportion which the working men would bear to the upper and middle class electors would not be, as near as I can calculate, more than about one in four. (Hear, hear.) The working classes are three-fourths of the population ; they would only be one-fourth of the electors—and yet that is called swamping ! (Laughter.) My own fear has ever been that the measure was too small, not that it was too large (hear) ; that it would be rather a difficult thing to vindicate it before a popular audience, and I could uly do so by having a strong confidence in the mo- deration and good sense of my fellow-countrymen, and by saying that I believe it is the utmost that in the present state of society it would be possible to obtain, and that it would really be a very substan tial extension of the franchise. (Hear, hear.) After entering upon a course of further argument to show that there was nothing formidable to the middle and upper classes in the measures of Parliamentary Reform which had been proposed, and, adducing in accordance with 14 custom, a batch of statistics, the hon. member concluded by saying—l appeal to the common-senserand to the memory of English men, has not every reform of the last 30 or 40 years worked infinitely better than even its friends anti cipated from it, and disappointed all the fears of those who conjured up bugbears against it, such as now we hear conjured up to oppose the further ex tension of the franchise ? Why, the great Reform Act, the Act of Lord Russell, that I say has been the most prolific source of strength, of wealth, of union, of prosperity, of reformation, and of happi ness that was ever passed by any Legislature in the world. (Cheers.) My confident belief is that it was so because it infused new blood into a some what exhausted system, and I believe there is more blood to be brought into the same system still— hear)—as good, honest, pure English blood to be brought in which will still further carry on the advance which was made through the operation of the Reform Act. (Cheers.) I will just say a word with regard to the resolution. That resolution says that it is the duty of the Government, as redeeming the pledges they gave, and considering what has been said by the leaders of both political parties, to take the opportunity of the very next session of Parliament which begins next week to pass a Re form Bill. I most conscientiously believe that that is their duty and their wisdom. (Hear.) I believe if they would attempt it they would succeed. (Hear.) You know that two private independent members got the great bulk of the Liberal party to honour them by following them into the lobby when they proposed measures to carry out the extension of the franchise formerly proposed. But Government has a vast advantage over private members. There are many men who say, some from caution, some, perhaps, seeking for an excuse, " That this is a question so great, of such constitutional magni tude, that it ought to be brought forward by Go vernment, and not by a private member." (Laugh ter.) But I never will admit the force of that argument to the extent that it should prevent inde pendent members from bringing forward such a measure—(hear, hear)—for otherwise I must con- demo Lord Russell for contending for ten or twelve years, as he _ did, in constant minorities, for that _ . Reform which at length was triumphantly carried ; but I do admit that there is no question Govern ment has a much better chance of carrying suc h a measure than an independent member, and if Lord Palmerston were now to say to the House of Com mons, " I lay this measure before you ; it is a mea sure which in its principle has been recommended by the Queen several times, and in principle actu ally carried by the House of Commons—(for Lord John Russell's bill was read a second time without a division) ; I stake my office upon that bill, and if it is not carried either I go out or appeal to the country and let them decide"--(cheers)—my belief is he would carry the measure. (Bear, hear.) But if he did not, I say still that he would stand in a a disorganised, better position than if he goes, as he must go in a t h ew . months, to the country, not having done his 3 1. - (near, hear. ) an(l I to carry a Reform measure, for he would then send his friends the Liberal party to the country as ab n ov e e part would find in the .partbasabilait y di is sho th no at ur h ed e mare last session of Parliament far super{, than h first session ; for he would ever obtain in the seeing members, though very fond of your f aces— often, you know Yet don't like to see them too passed through the ordeal l augh) —and just having m which they may hav ea e l of one contested election they don't like to h ave • paid pretty h an d some l y ediately pay for the gave cere mony afterwards tt; a g ain. (Laughter.) Therefore, the first session of Parliament is the worst time to propose a Reform Bill, the last ses sion is the best time, and we Reformers have a right to ask a reforming • Government that they will bring forward the measure at the most favour able time, and not at the least favourable time. With one more condition I should be almost confi dent of success. If we could get, not members of small ability and small influence, like those who have brought forward these measures before—(l say that for myself, and not of my friend Mr. Locke King, who has with the most indomitable courage and perseverance for many years advocated the franchise in counties)—if instead of these we could have such a man as he who stands forward as the ablest of our statesmen and the first of our orators, who has a heart as well as a head—if we could have Mr. Gladstone. (Enthusiastic and repeated cheer ing, followed by a call for three cheers, which were rapturously given.) I am glad you gave those three round cheers ; we shall hear of it another day. If Mr. Gladstone would take up this matter, and take it up with the same spirit and courage and determi nation with which he proposed and advocated the repeal of the paper duty (the last of the taxes on knowledge), I feel confident this measure would be carried. (Applause.) I am glad that a resolution is to be proposed expressing the hope that Mr. Gladstone may take up this cause, and, depend upon it, he will not have one man who will rejoice more heartily than I shall, or one who will be prouder to be his follower. (Cheers.) But if the Govern ment will not do it, then necessity is laid upon us in some way or other, by some independent member, if not by an official member, that this question shall be brought forward—(cheers)—andyou must know, the country must know, who those are who approve •of the extension of the franchise, and who they are, who vote against it. (Loud applause.) I believe that nothing would tend more to the happiness and concord of the people of England than to grant them all their just rights. I believe that justice is one of the most healing, one of the most beneficent of all feelings. If we could see the civil institutions of England having their foundations laid deep and level upon the rock of justice—if we could see the fabric carried up with such a balance and such a harmony of parts that every pillar, every buttress, and every arch combined to sustain the whole, then may we hope to see the top stone of that fa bric in some future day brought forth in a bond of honour and prosperity the highest that communities of men can ever hope to realize. (Cheers.) That that justice may be done, that that fabric may be reared, you and I must all do our duty—(hear, hear) —and, exhorting you, come what may, never to be wanting to your own consciences and to your coun try, I now, after this too long trespass upon your attention, take my leave. (Loud cheers.) Mr. FoRsTER also supported the resolution. He was received with much applause, and after some introductory remarks, in the course of which he re ferred to the late Reform meeting in Bradford, he said :—What has struck me as the most remark able circumstance following upon that meeting is this, that there has been no attempt whatever to meet the practicalproposition which we there brought forward, by any practical argument. (Hear, and cheers.) What was the proposition we there met in favour of ? It was the same you have met in favour of—a moderate, an immediate increase of the fran chise. (Cheers.) Many of—l suppose the enorm ous majority of you —think you ought to have, as a reform of the representation, not merely an increase of the franchise, but a better distribution of seats and the greater protection of the voter. (Cheers.) Nevertheless, as practical Yorkshiremen, we say that as it seems difficult to get this complete Reform Bill, we are contented at first to demand that which we feel is most urgently required—an increase of the franchise. Then as regards that increase of the franchise the enormous majority of you think that what we are asking for—the increase of the franchise to £6 tenants in boroughs, and to £lO tenants in the county—is very far below what ought to be granted to us. (Cheers.) I cannot say but what I think so myself. (Laughter and applause.) What arguments have been advanced against these demands? I have not seen one practical argument. It is not an argument, and no one has attempted to use it as such, that these six-pounders are unfit for the franchise. No one denies that they are. The member for Huddersfield, Mr. Leatham, the other night delivered an admirable speech to his consti tuents. He spoke in favour of Reform ; he spoke against the Permissive Bill. I am not going to bring in the Permissive Bill except to notice a curious argument alleged by the Times against his remarks on Reform, and it deduces that argument from his remarks on the Permissive Bill. I wonder they do not see that what they and he said against the Permissive Bill is the strongest argument in favour of Reform. They say, " It is very unfair that A should be prevented from drinking because B gets drunk." (Laughter.) I think it is very unfair that the six-pounders of Leeds should be prevented from voting because somebody thinks that the four pounders and the three-pounders are unfit to vote. (Cheers and laughter.) Well, we have been told that what we were not asking for would be a very bad thing. We have not been told that what we have been asking for is bad. We have been met by taunts, and taunts only. Now, take the great organ of—the leading newspaper of the day—the great organ of what I may call fair weather Reformers, which says that, when you get up a good agitation they will be on your side, but not before. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The reply they made to us of Bradford was—" Why, you are not in earnest about Reform ; when you are in earnest we will listen•to you." They did not say that what we were asking for was bad, that it would do harm. That was an afterthought. What they said was—the people are not angry enough ; they are not earnest enough. Just a word or two about this so-called apathy. But really these writers and these speakers who say there ought to be fierce agitation before they will do what is just are playing with edged tools. (Hear, hear, and applause.) I will not speak of physical force and agitation such as we have had, and symptoms of which have threatened the order and the peace of the country; but I will say this, that those who go so far as to speak of an agitation of the working classes, as we call agitation in this country, do not understand of what they speak. Why, to what extent does not such an agitation as that interfere with the industry, with the daily work, with the comfort, and, though it must be orderly, even with the good order of the community ? Those who call out for such an agitation, call out that the working men should give their time to political matters from morning to night, know very little, at least of this part of the country. But failing that interruption to the industry and daily work of the community, what more could you have done than you have done ? The Liberal constituencies pledged the Liberal members to Reform at the last election. What more could they do? I do not think that I should have had much chance of being accepted by the Liberals at Leeds at the late con test if I had not been a Reformer. I can only say this, that knowing I was a Reformer, I went into a few of those sta tistics upon which your member is the best authority. I was forced to do so by the necessities of the case, and grieved I was to find that I could count up the working men in Leeds who had votes. If you had anything like a tolerable share, or anything approaching it, even if you had one-tenth of what your member proposes to give you, I suppose I should not have been here as a stranger, but as your mem ber. (Loud cheers.) I say you did all you could do—you pledged your members. That was done by the Liberal con stituencies throughout the country. And does anybody sup pose that these members will not be pledged again ? That is a question which I ventured to ask, and which I ask here again. Is there anyo ne h ere w h o at t empts to rea d t h e s i gns of political action in the country who does not suppose that at the next election the Liberal members will be pledged to Reform as much as they were before ? Does anyone suppose that the so-called apathy will prevent their being pledged ? Does anybody who attempts to understand politics doubt that those pledges will be exacted quite as strictly, and justly ' with a more suspicious earnestness than they eve r were before ? Well, then, I can repeat another question to which I have got no answer. How long—l will not say do our foes, our opponents, but how long do our friends, those who call themselves our friends, think that those pledges are to be trilled with ? Are we to have another Parliament pledged, anotheriParliament playing with these pledges ? Are we to have another Government elected upon the strength of these pledges playing with them ? I fear that if that be the case those who call out for fierce agitation before a Reform measure is passed, those who demand that agitation will be likely to have that demand granted. (Cheers.) There is a fault somewhere. The Parliament was elected upon Reform ; the Ministry were put int o p ower uponßeform, and yet there is no Reform. i Where is the fault ? Well, it is thrown upon Parliament ; Ministers throw it upon Parliament ; mem bers of Parliament sometimes throw it back upon ltuils ters. They say of Palmerston's Ministry, of Lord Palmer ston himself—and especially because he is Premier—that had he staked his continuance of office upon passing a Re form Bill he might have carried it. Ido not loam if it is of much use bandying about the shuttlecock to find out which battledoor struck it last. (Laughter and applause.) But certainly it is the way for the Ministers to show that they are what they were elected to be—earnest Reformers—to give the Parliament yet another trial. That brings me to your resolution, which I confess I think is a most practical and a most wise resolution. In it you call upon the Ministry—in this the last year of its Session—to make another attempt to do that which they were put into power to do—to bring forward a franchise bill. (Hear, and applause.) Now, I am anxious to speak upon that point, because I do not want any one:to suppose that I do not think that the wisest course for Reformers to take. I must confess that at our meeting at Bradford your member was rather more hopeful than I was. He being our leader in this matter—and as, being an independent member, ho must continue to be—and it will be very hard for us to find a better—(loud applause)—it is well for us that he is hopeful. I do confess I had my doubts whether the Ministry would see so strongly and imperatively as they should that it was their duty to bring forward this measure. But I had no doubt about what was the wise course for them to take, which ,it is our business earnestly to call upon them to take, and I will say further, regarding which it was our duty to ask them imperatively the reason why they did not take it. (Hear, hear, and applause.) Well, we aro not merely met with taunts of apathy by our fair weather friends, but our opponents have something to say ; and what do they meet us with ? They do not meet us with arguments ; they also meet us with taunts. And what is their taunt ? Will the Whigs give you reform ? Will Lord Palmerston give you Reform ? Do you suppose you will ever get it from him ? I say the time is come, and it is well for us, the members of the Liberal party ; it is well for the leaders of the Liberal party ; it is well, above all, for that man who is the Premier of the Ministry and of the Liberal party, to take these taunts well to heart and find out what is their meaning. Only a few days ago our Conservative friends had a great gathering. They met three or four strong in one of the agricultural counties. (Loud laughter.) They began, as they generally do, with a very good dinner. I only wish we could do it, 1)4 there are generally so many of us that it would be rather hard work. Their chairman, Mr. Mowbray, who was an influential member of the Derby Administration, made a capital speech. As he was describ ing the state of parties, just hear how he described our Premier :—" We have had for many years a Liberal leader born and bred in a Tory camp, who, having spent middle life among the Whigs, seems in riper age to revert in heart to the fond recollections of political childhood. (Laughter.) Now, I say it is not pleasant for me as a member of the Liberal party to hear my leader thus described by one of his and my opponents. (Cheers.) Ido not exactly know what Mr. Mowbray meant to convey—whether that Lord Palmerston was in his second childhood, or had deserted us for the principles of those against whom he professes to lead us; but I am quite sure he was congratulating himself and those who were dining with him on the fact that they (the Conservatives) were perfectly safe, while the Liberals were led by a man in whom they (the Conservatives) had the fullest confidence. They may be right, or.they may be wrong ; but I say, what can be more insulting to our leader, what can be more humiliating to us his followers, than such remarks as these ? (Cheers.) If they be true, then surely, notwithstanding Lord Palmerston's claim to the respect of this country, it is time for us to think whether we will any longer stultify the Liberal party by being led by a man in whom the Conservatives have the fullest confidence.(Cheers.) If it be false, then I say Lord Palmerston ought himself to prove its falseness—(hear, hear) —by showing his earnest ness in that Reform without professions to support which he would not at this moment be Premier. I say in no pos sible way could he show the falseness of such remarks more clearly than by allowing his Cabinet again to try whether Parliament will do that work for which it was specially elected. (Cheers.) He may say, "I agree with the Times—l think the country is apathetic." Try—that is all we ask — whether they aro apathetic. Ido not pretend to have any special knowledge of the signs of the times, but I believe the reply that he would obtain would be very different from what some persons feel. lam like your member—l am rather hopeful of what would be the result in the House of Commons if a franchise measure were brought forward — because, as he said, the members would not have the fear of dissolution before their eyes, because they know it must come ; but they would rather have the fear of those whom they will have to meet at a dissolution. (Applause.) But we will suppose that they are beaten in the House of Com mons—then I follow Mr. Baines and say—let them go to the country. Well, but it may be said, they will be beaten in the country. It is possible they might be, but if it be so, if a good franchise measure, a good, moderate, but earnest and sincere franchise measure be brought forward by the Mi nistry, if it be beaten in the House of Commons, if upon it they dissolve, if upon appealing to the constituents the con stituents elect those in the majority who are opposed to it, that will prove that the Conservatives aro in a majority in the constituency of the country. (Applause.) If they were so, then, I say, let us be ruled by a Conservative Govern ment. (Hear.) I am not one of those who would escape as the Secessionists in America did from the rule of the majo- city. If the Conservatives are in a majority, let them have the responsibility of Conservative government. Let them have the blame, the reproach of posterity for carrying out a policy which, as we honestly believe, is not most to the interests of the country. (Cheers.) Do not let it be done by the Liberals. If there be that Conservative reaction of which we hear so much, and if it has taken so much possession of the country, I say far better is it that we Reformers should at once know our position. (Applause.) We hear much of the Conservative reaction ; we hear much of the power of the Conservatives. It is not so much because the country is more Conservative than it was ; it is not because the Con servatives are more powerful ; but it is because the Liberals are less powerful—because the Liberals are weak ? And why ? Not because the mass of them have lost confidence in their principles, but because they are doubtful whether they Aught to have confidence in their leaders, and because in fact, they have not been led with that earnestness which can alone command success. (Loud cheers.) I say, let the leklers come forth, and there will be followers enough. (Hear.) We had a hope given us last year that we should have a leader—the leader who of all others would guide us to a safe but sincere and earnest measure of Reform—Mr. Gladstone. (Loud cheers.) I am right sure that that great man was not trifling with the people of England when he held out that hope. I feel sure that h e w ill f ulfil it. If the Premier would not any longer stop th e way, b ut would allow 3 , r e . t b before e long Gladstone t o we g o should forward, i have a goodbelieve the measuretime would n I of reform. (Cheers.) And we should not have a leader in that house only. I do not know why the presence of Lord Russell's son to-night should prevent me saying what I should have said in any circumstances—that I blame Lord Russell less than any of the Ministers for the present posi tion of reform. (Hear, hear.) I believe that those words at which we have wondered of late have been wrung from him rather by the feeling that he has not been sufficiently supported than by the feeling that he does not still ear nestly wish to accomplish that great work which he has begun, and which he has been so instrumental throughout his life in aiding. (Cheers.) I say, if we had a bill brought forward in the House of Commons, we should have a very good hope that after it left us it would receive his energetic and earnest support in the Lords. (Cheers.) I won't detain you any longer. You are anxi- 1 ous, I am sure, to hear his son. So am I. (Cheers.) I look upon it as a good augury for the future that the first appearance at any large public demonstration of Lord Russell's son is among the working Reformers of Leeds. (Loud cheers.) I think it shows that the Russells mean to be true to the principles of their family, and that we shall have in future days, as we have had in many a past day, la Russell inthe van, when the cause of the people is to be struggled for. I trust you will give him such a welcome as will enable him to tell his father that if he takes heart again, if he, while thankful for his rest, is willing once more to start forward, if he will come forward and use his influ ence to fulfil the just demand of the people, and to declare that their patience should no longer be trifled with, nor the promises of statesmen broken—that, at any rate, he will have the full support—and I think he knows what that means—of the Reformers of Leeds, and I may say of York shire. (Cheers.) The resolution was then put to the meeting and was carried without any expression of opposition with loud acclamation. Alderman MIDDLETON proposed the second resolution, which was as follows : " That in the event of her Majesty's Ministers tailing to introduce a measure of Reform in the forthcoming Session, this meeting hopes the esteemed Liberal representative for this borough will at once place on the notice paper of the House of Commons the motion he has already twice pre sented to that assembly ; and we alsO congratulate that gentleman on the success that attended his efforts last Ses sion in having been the occasion of eliciting from Mr. Glad stone the speech then delivered, and we trust the day is not far distant when the Chancellor of the Exchequer will place himself at the head of the Liberal party on this question." In the course of an impassioned speech Mr. Middleton quoted a passage from Mr. Gladstone's well-known speech on Reform in the course of last Session, which passage he (Mr. Middleton) said meant neither more nor less than uni versal suffrage, and he (Mr. Middleton) would never be satisfied with any Government bill which did not rest upon the two great principles of universal suffrage and a re-dis tribution of electoral seats. The Rev. W. THOMAS, a Leeds Congregationalist mini ster, seconded the resolution, and in the course of his remarks he referred to the proceedings at a recent dinner given to Mr. G..Beecroft, the Conservative member for the borough, by the Leeds Working Men's Conservative Association, and expressed astonishment that any intelligent working man could have sympathy with the Conservative party, which had from his earliest recollections opposed every measure intended for the benefit of the working classes, and concluded by Warning the members of the Houses of Commons as to the reception they would meet with from their constituents if they did not, during the next session of IParliament, pass a Reform Bill which would c,onfer a largely extended measure of reform upon the people. (Cheers.) The MAYOR said he had now the pleasure of introducing to the meeting Viscount Amberley, son of Earl Russell. (Loud cheers.) Ile could not mention the name:of Earl Russell without expressing his deep feelings of gratitude to him as one of the greatest patriots and friends of the liberty of the subject that ever existed in his lifetime. (Cheers.) The office he had the honour to hold owed its existence entirely to the labours of that nobleman, and but for Ear Russell the chain now in his possession would never have encircled his neck. (Cheers.) Viscount AMBERLEY then came forward, and was received in a very enthusiastic manner. After the cheering had subsided his Lordship said,—You, Mr. Mayor, and some of the gentlemen who have preceded me, have been kind enough to allude in very flattering terms to my presence here. Perhaps it may not be unacceptable to you,and certainly it will be agreeable to myself, that I should preface the re marks I have to offer with a brief allusion to the feelings of cordial pleasure with which I am enabled to come among you on this occasion. (Cheers.) I was particularly glad to receive the invitation sent me by your committee, partly because it ap peared to imply a certain presumption on their part—a pre sumption that I trust you will consider to be justified by the event—that I should sympathise with the objects of this meeting—(cheers)--and partly because I rejoice to have this opportunity of meeting some portion of those who at the present time have the strongest claim upon the attention of Reformers. (Renewed cheers.) The subject upon which I am now called upon to speak is one with which I may be said to have a special historical connexion —(loud cheers) — nor does it at all detract from the gratification with which I have resionded to your call, that I have been invited to come here on account of any personal merits of my own, but simply as a son of that statesman by whom the first great Reform Bill was introduced, and who in 1831 and 1832 fought and conquered in that battle of Reform which all modern Liberals aro fighting now. (Cheers.) They are fighting it, indeed, on a different battle-ground, but the arguments they employ themselves and-the arguments they have to meet from their opponents are in many respects almost exactly similar to those which at that period of our history were employed by the Government, on the one side, and by the Opposition on the other. (Hear, hear.) Many of the principles which were urged in 1831 and 1832 in favour of a Reform Bill by the Ministers of that time are applicable now for a further extension of Reform, and in the same way many of the arguments which were brought forward in order to defeat that bill are constantly brought forward now in order to oppose a further extension of Reform. I have alluded to personal and private causes of satisfaction for being here ; but there is another reason, of a public nature, of which I must speak—and that is, that I am glad to have an opportunity of witnessing one of those great meetings which furnish the best and most emphatic con tradiction to the statement so often and so pertinaciously advanced, that the people of England do not care about the franchise. (Hear, hear ; Bravo ; and cheers.) lam not about to dispute or deny that statement, although I must say that it generally proceeds from a rather suspi cious quarter. (Laughter.) It is made by those who, if they cannot entirely prevent the advance of this question, are, nevertheless, anxious to put it off, and to prevent the adoption of a new Reform Bill as long as they possibly can. (Hear.) But if the case were as they say—if it be true that the people of England do not care about Reform—the con clusion I shall draw from that fact is the direct opposite of theirs. They advance it in order to impress upon Mr. Bright and others the hopelessness of persisting in a cause in which they do not possess the sympathy of the people. Now, it seems to me that if the people do not care about Reform, and if they are indifferent to the possession of votes, it should be regarded as a national misfortune. (Cheers.) I know that it is called contentment ; but it rather appears to me to be the contentment of carelessness and ignorance than of enlightened reason. (Cheers.) Therefore, if the people really are indifferent on this question, I would en deavour by all means in my power to put an end to that indifference (hear, hear), and if they really do not desire to possess the political franchise, I would teach them to desire it. It is, I think, especially necessary that such meetings as this should be held, and that clear and decisive opinions should bo expressed ; because you will find in the House of Commons a natural reluctance to effect its own reformation. Public bodies have in this respect some resemblance to in dividuals. There are individuals who may be anxious to correct the errors of their neighbours, but are not particu larly anxious to correct their own (hear, hear), and I think you will observe in large bodies of men the same natural tendency. Thus you have found a Parliament devising the appointment of Royal Commissions to inquire into our universities and our public schools ; and those commis sions, by exposing the abuses which existed in the universi ties and public schools, have induced those bodies, or tried to induce them, to begin to reform. But it was necessary in that case to apply a certain amount of pressure from without, or else reform could never have been effected. (Hear.) Now, Parliament being the supreme authority in the land, it is necessary in every case that the pressure from without should be applied by the people ; and it is my own conviction that you will not obtain the reform you desire unless you aro earnest and steadfast in urging it upon the members of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) A circumstance there is which is exceedingly surprising to me ; and it is that those who are so constantly talking about the apathy of the people upon this question have also another argument against Reform, which appears to me slightly inconsistent with the other. It seems, if we listen to what they say, that those listless and apathetic people— those who do not care about &form—those people who have not the slightest desire for the possession of votes, if once they were enfranchised, would be converted into a frantic and unreasonable mob—a mob that would carry everything before them, and be determined to have every thing their own way, and that would listen to no voice in the councils of the nation that was not in harmony with their own. (Ilear, hear.) Now, I confess it does seem a little strange that those who are so very indifferent to the possession of power should nevertheless be so immoderate in its use. (Hear, hear.) This argument about mob go- vernment has been heard before. It was heard very loudly in the year 1831, and when I look back to the debates of that period I am strongly reminded of what is said upon the subject now. There we find eminent statesmen—men of such distinction as the late Lord Lyndhurst and Sir Robert Peel—using very violent language against the Re form Bill. Sir Robert Peel, on one occasion, informed the House of Commons that if the Reform Bill were passed there would be established in England one of the worst despotisms that ever existed—there would be a Parliament of mob demagogues instead of wise and prudent men ; and Lord Lyndhurst, in the House of Lords, told that terrified assembly that the House of Commons would be converted into a fierce and democratic assembly. Well, now we have for more than thirty years' experience of the state of things, and this experience enables us to judge of the value of such language. We have lived under that terrible despotism pre dicted by Sir Robert Peel ; we have experienced a Govern ment and also a Parliament of mob demagogues—fierce and democratic assembly ; but I do not think we have observed in the House of Commons any particular tendency either to abolish the House of Lords, to overthrow the Church, or to seize upon the property of the rich and divide it among the poor. (Hear, hear.) I think, therefore, we may 'safely regard these predictions as matters of very light impor tance. (Hear, hear.) The great difficulty, undoubtedly, arises when we come to consider the question, where shall the line be drawn between those who are enfranchised and those who are not ; between those who take a certain part in the legislation of the country and those who do not ? Upon this point the great speech of Mr. Gladstone, to which your resolution alludes, laid down a principle which I consider of the utmost consequence. Mr. Gladstone, in speaking upon this question of Reform, told his opponents that he laid upon them the burden of proof ; that it was not for him to show the reason why the great body of the people should be admitted to the fra,nchise, but he left it with them to show why they should be excluded. (Cheers.) He considered it the natural state of a free people to be in possession of votes, and when any large body of the' people was not admitted to that privilege he thought there ought to be some strong and sufficient reason given for that deprivation. (Hear, hear.) Now, it appears to me that is a principle of the utmost value in constitutional government, and I should wish that future retormers in introducing theirmeasures might always bear it in mind. (Hear.) It is said, no doubt, in answer to this, that it is necessary to exclude alarge proportion of the people for the interest of good government, because, if ad mitted, they would by their violent and unreasonable pro ceedings make good government impossible or much more difficult. I confess I think such reasoning as this would go much further than it is intended to go ; that it might per fectly well have been said by the great landowners at the time of the Reform Bill, " We think it for the interest of good government that the power of legislation should be confined entirely to ourselves---we think it extremely un advisable that any portion of the people who have not the same stake in the country and the same interest- in order as we have should be admitted to power ; and therefore it would be better to preserve such a constitution of the House of Commons as would make its members the nominees of the landowners." Then, again, if we go a little further back in our history, I think it would have been open to our Stuart Kings --to Charles I. or James ll—to say in the same way, " We 'think it for the interest of good government that the sole power should be confined to the Crown." (Hear, hear.) Now, representative institutions require that so far as possible the people should be admitted to the elec tion of members—(hear, hear)—and the ultimate aim of representative institutions is not fulfilled when a consider able proportion of the people are still debarred from the exercise of the privilege. (Hear, hear.) It is objected sometimes that by the admission of the people you would place the whole power in the hands of a single class. If any very violent or sweeping measures were proposed this would no doubt be a serious objection and would demand serious consideration. It is no objection to the moderate measures now proposed—(hear, hear)—and even if we were to go much further with reform, and propose a much wider measure than this, I don't think it would be an entirely conclusive argument. (Hear, hear.) I do not wish to place power in the hands of a single class, but at the same time it is exceedingly unjust that on account of this objection an important class should be deprived of the power altogether. end when I we Kr, Pell iu his j recent speech saying that all classes and all interests are at present fairly represented in the House of Commons, and defending the present constitution of the House of Commons on that ground, I must confess that I am astonished at the boldness of his language. (Hear.) I quite perceive that land and capital are represented in that house, but I am unable to perceive that there is a fair representation of la bour. (Cheers.) Now, it is extremely difficult to say how far we ought to go in representing labour in the House of Commons. There are great difficulties in the way of sudden changes, and therefore it may be more desirable, and I am inclined to think it is, that we should proceed in this direc tion by gradual and successive steps ; but I cannot think that the task of Reformers has been entirely accomplished until something more has been done than even the mode rate measure of reform now proposed. (Loud cheers. I hope the day may come—l do not know when it may corn -but still I trust the day may come when it will bepossible that every intelligent and honest man, whatever the class to which he belongs, or whatever the employment he pur sues, may be admitted to the exercise of the franchise. _ _ (Renewed and still louder cheers.) Then we are told that if such extreme measures as this are to be allowedwe shall be making a violent change in the character of the consti tution. (Laughter.) For my own part, then, I have no objection to violent changes in the character of the consti tution, provided only that they are changes for the better. (Hear.) The great Reform Bill might, I suppose, be de scribed as a violent change, although effected by legal and peaceable means. But it was urged at that time, andl think justly, that the object of the bill was not to overthrow the constitution, but to remedy anomalies which had crept into the constitution. (Hear.) And I think the same argu ment may be applied now. It was urged then that it was a great and marvellous anomaly that large towns such as your own, and such towns asManchester, Birmingham, and Shef field, should be entirely unrepresented in Parliament. That no doubt was a serious anomaly, but it is also a serious ano maly that a large and important class of the inhabitants of these towns should be entirely without representation. (Hear, hear.) There is some difficulty in effecting a large increase in the representation, because it is supposed that in this way an unintelligent class of voters would come in who might be particularly liable to the influence of bribery. I will not attempt to disguise from you that on the subject of bribery I entertain the strongest opinions. I consider that the man who accepts a bribe in exchange for his vote is utterly unworthy to exercise it. (Cheers.) Therefore I con ceive it would be of the utmost importance that in admit- ting the labouring classes to the franchise, we should en deavour by every means in our power to impress this truth upon them. It would be necessary, as far as possible, to teach them—l do not say exactly in what way, but you might teach them where they do not know it, and I see that you know it perfectly here—(cheers)—that the man Nth° ac cepts a bribe violates a public trust. (Hear, hear.) It would be necessary to teach them that it is as criminal and dishonest as the conduct of the man who being intrusted with a sum of money by another, makes use of it for himself. This, I say, it would be necessary to do, but I do not imagine that in that way we could succeed entirely in getting rid of bribery. On the contrary, I believe there would still unfortunately be many who would be unworthy of the privilege of voting. That is an unfortunate circumstance, but I cannot look upon it as a conclusive objection to the enfranchisement of the working classes. (Cheers.) Nor is it an objection that could be made with very good grace by the upper classes, unless they could say their own political morality was im maculately pure. (Much cheering.) Really, to hear the way in which some persons talk against the enfranchisement of the poor, we might suppose the rich never employed improper and illegal influences at elections. (Laughter.) We might suppose that they never employed money for purposes of corruption—(hear, hear)—that they never voted or induced others to vote, except upon the loftiest and most patriotic grounds ; but since this is not the case I think in endeavouring to reform the poor upon this subject —in endeavouring to teach them that they are not entitled to sell their votes, we should impress lessons of the same kind upon the rich also. (Cheers.) But, then, it is said there are many, if you go low down among the population and admit a lower class than you have at present, who are en- tirely without education, and would be led away by any de magogue who happened to win their sympathy. Ido not deny that the absence of education is a serious objection to the possession of the vote. It is, I think, of great conse quence that education should precede enfranchisement, al though at the same time I believe the enfranchisement con duces to education. But I cannot pretend to say it would be advisable to admit in all cases those who have little educa tion and know nothing and care nothing about politics. But when we are told that they are easily led,away by dema gogues, by orators who make use of their influence for selfish purposes, I reflect that there are two modes of influ encing the votes of the electors. One method' is employed by the large landowners, and another method is employed by the demagogues. And I have heard that the method of the great landowner is sometimes particularly successful —(laughter)—and they find their power of persuasion very great over the minds of their tenants. (Great laughter and cheers.) Now I confess if I had to choose between these two ways of influencing people to vote accord ing to my opinions, I should say the method employed by the demagogue is infinitely the more constitutional and more straightforward one of the two. (Cheers.) Then we have to consider the question, What are we to do with those who, on account of education or want of interest in political matters, are as yet unfitted for the exercise of the franchise ? That is a difficult question, and I have not dis guised from you my opinion that it might be wise to prefer their admission to the privilege of voting. (Hear, hear.) That X conceive to be a principle not so much of a Conser vative as of a Radical description ; for if it were pushed to a logical conclusion it would lead to strange results ; and I should be inclined to warn Conservatives how they accept it. Let me ask you to fix your attention for a minute on that venerable and respected body the House of Lords. If you look at the House of Lords you will find some, no doubt, who are able men and admirably fitted for the seats they have in that body, but I am assured you will find others who coming into their seat simply by hereditary right are not so fitted. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) You will find some who have no political education worthy of the name —who cannot be said to have any political convictions, be cause they simply adopt the opinions of the family, and cannot be said either from their talents or from any other reason to be fitted for the exercise of the great privilege of sitting in the House of Lords. Yet these men, whose range of political ideas is confined within narrow limits, are per mitted to sit and vote in the house, and obstruct the legisla tion of the country. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, you will have been able to gather from the remarks I have now addressed to you that I am not of those who regard the advance of democratical opinions with particular alarm. That there are dangers in democratic government, as there are in every form of government devised by man, I am willing to allow. Nor do I say that it will be possible to dispense with every kind of safeguard against the errors or excesses into which a democratic government may fall ; but I cannot look on the abolition of those distinctions or the lines of demarcation whioh hitherto have subsisted between the various classes of men—l sa y I canno t l oo k u pon that with displeasure or regret. I belieVe you will find that those distinctions which democracy tends to get rid of are not real and natural distinctions; but artificial distinc tions created by•society. You may get rid of that distinc tion which subsists between different men solely on ac count of birth, but you cannot get rid of those differences which spring from character, talent, or education. You would yourselves perceive it to be a false and unnatural condition. of society which asserted idleness to be on a level with industry, folly on a level with wisdom, or ignorance and incapacity on a level with knowledge and ability. (Hear, hear.) It is my opinion these distinctions will not be got rid of by any form of government, but will still subsist. All false distinctions and those which produce mischief rather than benefit, will, I hope and believe, gra dually disappear and vanish from among us, but of those false distinctions which, I trust, I see disappearing in the course of time, is that which is still extant in this country between the governing classes and the classes which are governed. It is, of course, absolutely essential that we should have men set apart for the work of the executive government, and to conduct the business of the public offices ; but when I say I dislike the dis tinction between the governing class and the class to be governed, I mean that I do not believe in that state of society which gives some men facilities for entering upon a political career and makes it more difficult for others to walk in the same line, although perhaps the ability of those who are excluded may be greater than that of many who are easily admitted. It is desirable that there should be some facilities for all to exercise their talents. This ideal of a representative government requires that every class of the community should be equally interested, and equally concerned in the maintenance of order, in the preservation of freedom, and in the adoption of such laws as may be most conducive to the welfare of the community at large. Parliament to be a representative institution should always tend to such an ideal as I have described. And this is an ideal towards which you especially may combine with us in bringing this country nearer and nearer, for although it may be possible to prove by theoretical arguments that the working classes of this country should be admitted to the exercise of the suffrage, it is possible for you, you who be long to that class, you who have hitherto been represented —to add an argument more conclusive still—the argument of your own conduct. (Cheers.) It is for you especially to refute the error that you are unfit for the exercise of that important and responsible duty. It is for you to prove both that you are earnestly and truly desirous to be admitted to that trust, and that you would, if admitted, exercise it wisely and well, and with a duo and serious sense of the responsibility it brings. It is for you in furtherance of these objects to combine energy with patience, resolution with discretion, and a firm and unswerving adherence to your demands with courtesy and charity to those who still re gard them with suspicion and dislike. (Loud cheers.) And thus, although you may safely leave it to the eloquence and talents of others to urge your claims upon the House of Commons and the country, it is for you to add the final and convincing proof of the justice of your cause. (Loud and repeated cheers.) The resolution was put to the meeting and carried wl, th much applause. After the adoption of a petition to Parliament einhridyi ng the two resolutions, a vote of thanks on the motion of 3lr. BAINES, seconded by Viscount AMBEBLEY, was given to the chairman, and the proMedinge Were Dreught t 9 § 09,50. Naval and Military Intelligence• - In accordance with orders received from the Horse Guards the depot companies of the 43d Light Infantl and the 51st King's Own Light Infantry Reg p. will leave Chatham garrison this morning, to dept the 7th Depot Battalion at Winchester. The dep° of the 43d Light Infantry numbers eight sergeants and about 260 rank and file, with the following oft cers—viz., Lieutenant E. Villiers, Ensign Carter, and Ensign J. Bromfield. The depot fo ° the 51st Regiment numbers about 100 men o t ranks, with the following officers :—Captain C. B. Hamilton, Lieutenant R. N. Cabb, Ensig n 1 Talbot, and Ensign R. R. Tomson. Both depat.s have been officially inspected by Major-General Sir Robert Walpole, K.C.8., before taking their de- parture from the garrison. The deaths of the following offi cers have b eeil officially reported at the War office since Jan 1 General Sir W. Tuyll, K.C.8., colonel of the Itu, Queen's Own Hussars ; and W. L. Walton , Colonel of the sth Fusileers Regiment ; Major-Gen. It. G. Armstrong, Royal Artillery ; Lieut.-Col. C. G. Gray, Royal Engineers; Majors G. W. Baldwin Onur de , in Japan), F. H. Crawford, 98th Regiment, an d Campbell; Capts. G. G. J. Campbell and J. Greine r ' Royal Artillery, R. P. B. Burnett, S. 0. Go odst and R. Webster (Quartermaster), sth Fusileeil Lieuts. M. W. Daniel and E. A. Anderson, RI Artillery, R. M. Bird (murdered in Japan) , „.1 . 1 O'Rorke, 60th Rifles ; A. C. de Bahirha rd, Dragoons, G. H. Kerr, 104th Bengal Fusileers, ~° l l R. Dighton ; Ensigns T. L. Courtenay, Ist Battaseth 23d Royal Welsh Fusileers, and J. Lee , 78 Highlanders ; Surgeon-Major J. Maitland, g• Vt s ° Deputy-Inspector-General of Hospitals ; surge C. T. Abbott, M. 8., 39th Regiment, R. C°ePe ci 4th Dragoon Guards, M. Neill, 56th Regiment, Ti rO G. Garrett, M.D. ; Assistant-Surgeons G. BA T "p ; J. H. Sprague; Veterinary-Surgeon H. Solicitor, E. White, Grenadier Guards. „ r • The Terrible, 21, 800-horse power, Townsend, master in charge, left Chatham hsr' o f just before flood tide yesterday afternoon, i n too lo a couple of steam tenders, and was removed the river to her former moorings, where she completed for commission. The Valiant, 24, screw steam iron vessel, 4.0131; tons, 800-horse power, master in charge Na i to G. Arguinbau, which has for some time been for the first division of the steam reserve at hey, ness, left that port yesterday for Portsmou th, J. temporary command of Commander Georg e 4s Hodges, Assist.-Master-Attendant at Sh eeri r ihe dockyard, where she will be•plawd in dock. bottom of the vessel will be cleansed, and s he I.c be brought forward for immediate commission. The Challenger, 22, screw steam corvette/ l ' e ty, tons, 400 horse power, Captain John J. ge n t ,A. C. 8., which is being dismantled in Sheernes s yard, preparatory to being paid out of con on Friday next, the 3d inst., is, by order front Lords of the Admiralty, to be taken into doek made fit for foreign service as soon as posssible' COUNTRY MARKETS ITESDAY. At our market to-day English wheat wa s in ° l3!' ply, and millers paid last week's rates with re,' ll ,:l e y Foreign remains unaltered in price. Grinding ' 4. 4.20 1V , i active request—stout, 25s per 4481 b; small, 23s p er il o_l Beans and peas neglected. Oats in active den,r t " e iosT fully as dear as last week. The linseed inar.i' e woo" heavy, without material change since the previoist weeic The imports of foreign grain into Hull for the P s Dettll s ' are as follows—wheat, 3,590 qrs.; barley, 2,42 0 ; 630 ; peas, 214; tares, 1,126 ; linseed, 5,345. NEWCAS T LE-ON- T YNE.— T UESDA Y• There was a fair supply of wheat from the grelleir'ralea the coast, but only moderate from abroad. The trae°4o-00. dull, and in the business done a reduction had t o be 'rid- Barley for malting was held for a little more money' 5 t ,0 05 , ing sorts were dull at is decline. Malt was sl ow ; croo° were unchanged ; peas were is lower ; oats, with nti7air arrival, were 3d to 4d per qr. cheaper. Flour barely tained late prices. ° 11 All • Northumberland wheat sold fromt2s to 445, .L O3- ' 36 ' ; Suffolk, 39s to 45s • Dantsic, 39s to 46s ; oats, 21s t ° l ;ali, barley, 26s to 31s ; 'beans, 36s to 40s ; rye, 51s to 62s per qr. ; flour, 26s to 28s sa ck per • E l . gi t4t The averages were—wheat, 38s; 26s • and barley, 7 19s per quarter. 27s to 301' LYNN.-72 VESDAY. 4 oo ! The attendance of farmers at this day's market W S V Wheat was in steady demand at last week's P rice :o4 l° l barley the prices of the best malting and grindini 3' remain unaltered. Beans and oats the turn in ' the buyers. New wheat, 43s to 44s ; new red, 37s to 395; e i r i ss ' r e y o f''' llP sg t 41s to 42s ; old red, 38s to 39s per 36 stone. to 2 65 0 malting, 32s to 34s ; secondary, 30s ; ordinarY, ,„ r ge, per qr.. Dats, 20s to 22s per 24 stone. Beau, to 34s ; small, 34s to 36syer 38 stone. • T L—T UESDAY. 10 4 At our market to ERIS -day there was the usual attend"rt buyers. Wheat trade flat. Malting barley firi l % n o aIJ pressed, and again 3d lower. Indian corn fun'' inquired after. items and peas dull. SALISBY.—TUESDAY. fi114,0 An average supply of wheat of varied qualit3lol ' 1 4 0 at this market t o -d ay . Q uo t a tions--Wheat re' bet ta o, o ,ll 36s to 42s ; barl e y, 28 s t o 33 5; oa t s, 19 s t o 28s; . ( 1 1 to 465; and p eas , 34 s t o 48 s per qr. B e st Ure a household ditto, 9d per 81b. loaf. Foreign Mail Packet List. %, li.• • few ~ Australia and New Zealand, v i a S ou th am pton .. we b, 1' Ditto, via Marseilles .......................... ve b, 3 ' Brazil and Cape Verde, by British pact.et ......... r., 13 , l ' Dit`o, by British packet ./ e lg. .... D. .. ....... . we ~ Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena. • • .-,d ) ', China, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton . . i e b, i''' Ditto, via Marseilles ..... 1 , Faikland Islands .............. Feb,.. 0 Gibraltar, via Southampton • V" , •. • , Feb. ~ India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Snuthampton.•••_„,„ l' .... 1.1.- 1 1 ' Ditto, via Marseilles Feb' , India (Bombay), via Southampton. Ditto, via Marseilles . Fe b' iI , Mauritius, via Southampton Ditto, via Marseil e 3 V D' IS , ' Newfoundland VD 5 Fel). Portugal . . . . _ . ••••• Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon United states and British North America, byßri' D, .Fe tish packet •• • • Ditto, by United States packet, via Southamr tcn Ditto, via Cork - .... / 40: Ditto, by Canadian p ac k e t , via Londonderry . ve t). West Coast of Africa, Madeira, and Tenerife... , West Indies and Pacifi c ( excep t B a h amas , Cubth, ceD , and Mexico .................. ....... ............. " 1 ".0). 1 5 Bahamas, via New York. .......................... Bermuda, ditto... ... . ........... Cuba and Mexico ...... ope ra BREAKFAST BEVERAGE.—Homce )pathie P ra- A c ° and the medical profession generally, recommen d dge o t to trf t, ' as being the most h ea lthf u l o f all beverages . wh trine of homoeop a thy was f i rst introduced i n to tbl tractive to there were to be obt fi ne d no preparat i ons of coCat to the ta s t e or accep t a bl e to t h e stomac h 'Oll7O, was either supplied id the crude state, or so t ill i i,or o s manufactured as to obtain little notice. J. Bp Pa%:" to t tt Homoeopathic Chemist, was induced in the yearL' e led, ° or . his attention to this subject, and at length 8 10 7., 01 0 , 6 e0 the assistance of elaborate machinery, in being te a s ¢! to produce an article puro in its composition, and it by the perfect tiituration it receives in the prec eD L ton/ thro gh, as to be TraoSt acceptable to the delic 4 " - 4 , 2 ° 11 0 , - I fr Fctr general use 'Epps's Cocoa is distinguished 11 . 8 ; 0 0t A v e it . rating, gratelrd breakfast beverage, possessing Az s o ,upo' dons ammo. Dr. Ilassall, in his work, "Ft i ,ty ° . 4 l° Adulterations," says —"Cocoa contains a great vw," - 0 3 "0 portant nutritive principles —every ing,recliftat I7 n `` Y oze the growth and sustenance of the body." itga` t - i:er e ls nutritive, cocoa stands very much higher than e ' vt - Jer e , or tea." Directions—Two teaspoonfuls of the pt 0 breakfast cup, filled up with boiling water or rat d 00 in tin-lined }lb., Ob., and 11b. labelled packets , 11 1 A all grocers, confectioners, and chemists.—[ADS' t I.l7 l:''''' ,3l3 ll‘l' i,. (':l e u i til) ; l o ; R l t t : . nr( I l e 1 1 laeagnLidl.4Btdeti%ll:l:lltl:i Witt 1 1: T O: naell!leTß'l n : ct': , to are rei ,el/1 - able en g %asteads * m o , f-ire ' on - " al Plete t' ~,i tie..... es in A Six An Ei Together Tvirc e.alui.ble int i',2(Dets, or b& CO a nd gentl vi,e?lester, Bi tsi "' Oxford Btlute, Wen lir . , A .,,, lb an's, 11 lir r ii'"anl, an A ge, LondC ',...______ It O YAL !)iialiedQlNX• v'ace, London a gent 4 it AI ( E NDERS to e on Bth Iner info I quan Nfy is For '‘• s, e from /1 Qt" M. 8 Q TErtwoil v▪ rn r, as "Ni 1,17_ mate Te JCL 141 - -s of 7 fvl e .l on appi fop the ho f il en th e „ t tlde Tender Ivele ti r ,P' Bi g' Ottr..-' . , De b l lPpeinte t i e s ND 0] ‘l b eri bed C aid up him Ih'4ailiel AlfYri l i g, p . • 4 0h P P atton Colesh C Child 4 1 p . • L . At th 1 kzk the 2(1 F 4,:-stteet tl '-'l)ec,ll l ' be WILL 4 "e 1)1 4 d ers tFi e° " 31 st Th e Dem 41 1 t h Y have 4 41 ~a rg . e i i t the " Q ubtful i , rofi the' 2g /68. 2i Them of xl 4 6 e Direct() Pe i Per cent. (Qen", 411, , mal to 6" 8 al 11i c arried 1 tte, e tn D ireefc k i r " eleed oil „et , ped 411 D irect( B I oh, The "Ing* el i l e Divide therne tax bra nches, 'OC R To e „al A At a l ,r t ts , • • 15,f, fins Paid APr T o 8 l 'ar , t tt j t tug l 'lll A n a PrJ T o "•• ,to4rlllount 4 0 - ,en s t omc TO abilities I ,br b o t ont a . 0 , - 1 1. 1 41 i 4 2 ( Y i ei r ° %s pro bath earunti 1 1, c at? R. 1 1 ,114 1,1 , 0 . 1 ha c4,, 1 acli 41 0h .e Plac A 4 1 (, o veat rn( tQel , ~4rrirn, oth eke oc .4I P 11) tr e wtt lii th 'hold rt : 3 las-1, i 4 t ti 41 , , t vift,, pestll'34 Ar e an d lib ki n f !ts ioteolter: o 4 ) ,. , l) ,? i s s t e/ v o it t l,int et n, nli te on 't° •• • to o ho dead bai4oBooot 113 • DtOviTitr( 11 1 t i !he It 1 4 01\i / 14()T tn De r ~ A pI vtt,, 'lttp"lre‘e t qi?- t the the 11. 1 - ___:------ of Births. til° ifile BENSON.—On the 31st ult. at 101, Eaton-plac e / A Colonel Benson, C. 8., of a son. , f Cle i COBHAM.—On the Ist inst ,at Morden, the Ni r " -- ° fiv tt Strode Cobham, Esq., of a daughter. • 1 4. ,,,,, 4 , 11 i fr P l ' LEARMONTIL—On the 30th nit. at at Whitelii- • 01 N. 8., the wife of Lieut.-Colo . nel Leal - mol t/74 of a daughter. ,lii 10'.‘0 1 Marriages, i , i , _ tel MARTIN — SELMES.—On the 31st ult., at the p al ,i a tig, ii n ae%, Folkestone, the Rev. H. Marti a, to Helen,' 0 - 00 0 ').11:; ' Henry Selmes, Esq., of 4, Boreverie-place, WILLis--SAms.—On the Ist inst., at St. "je- -11 Ell,, Of le' tO el''' over-square, Richard Willis, eldest son 0 , e, ~ p of Blomfield House, Upper ‘Arestbourrie-t.„e' n . c gii' Amelia, eldest daughter of Mr. Thomas 1141 '"" of St. George's-terrar, e , Hyde-park. il •t' o , P Deaths. ti le o co COLQUHO land Coulqx:- -On the 28th ult., at Rossalitilroics t, houn B . ahoun, daughter of the late Sir '' f or,, poti f fe , " ' ,a,rt. a... FALc lan o ?A N. En.—On the 31st ult., at 21, Farlc-g:',vice . j , _, I '' a-place Hugh Falconer, A M and g• 11 d, 7 • . _out of the Royal Society, aged 56. IW etc)L" o f Tr aARDINGE.—On the 28th ult.,• at Thebertou „, folk, the ev. Henry Harding°, ad 5 8 - HAnursoN. R —On the 31st ult. Benj g ang 1131 job P Blackh , m,th-park, aged 73. 4 1°1 " P ..slO g° ol .................... ia „,....- oo 0 ___ London : Priated and Publielied by WlLLo,face, „off of No. U 2, Strand, "'tinter, at THE SON ' tne COP" Strand, In the Precinct of the SavoY , i ll ALIChileL te.x. —Tburoday, February 2, 1865' 1 I a~