The Sun. — London, England, 1866-06-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS.-LAST EvENING. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Kilmar nock Water; Great Yarmouth Haven, Port, and River; Peterborough, Wisbeach, and Sutton Railway ; Thetford and Walton Railway; Bute Docks Railway and Bridge of Allen Water Bill. _ _ The following bills were read a third time and passed : Greenwich and Woolwich Lower Road, Horsham Bland ford Road, Macclesfield, Knutsford, and Warrington Rail way. METROPOLITAN RAILWAY (ADDITIONAL POWERS) BILL. _ _ _ On the motion for the third reading of this bill, The Earl of ZETLAND moved the omission of clause 42, which had foritsobject thelimiting of the liability of tho company from accidents in the conveyance of the working classes. He contended that the clause in question was not calculated to promote the interests of the public, who had a right to be protected. After some observations from Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY and Earl NELSON, the bill was read a third time without a division. MISS ANGELA BURDETT COUTTS'S ENDOW- MENT OF COLONIAL BISHOPRICS. The Bishop of LONDON presented a petition from Miss 13urdett Coutts relative to certain bishoprics of the United Church of England and Ireland in her Majesty's colonial pos.sessions. The right rev. prelate said that the petitioner h a d subscribed £17,500 for a bishopric in Cape Town, with the distinct understanding that the doctrines to be inculcated should be those of the Church of England, and that on the part of the prelates appointed ender the bequest of the petitioner should recognise the supremacy of her Majesty the Queen. There was another bequest of the same amount in reference to another colonial bishopric, and there was £lO,OOO subscribed by the lady for a bishopric—British Columbia. He contended that in the case of Bishop Colenso there was a clear violation of the specific objects of the foundation of Miss Burdett Coutts, inasmuch as that prelate, whose case had excited so much attention, had ignored the royal supremacy. The right rev. prelate went into learned and elaborate details to show the indispensable necessity that existed for the recognition of a central Royal controlling power in carry ing out the administration of ecclesiastical affairs of the Church of England. Lord Brougham, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Grey, Lord Russell, the Bishop of Oxford, Lord Lyttelton, and Lord Houghton took part in the discussion, which was brought to a conclusion by The Archbishop of YORK giving notice that on Thurs day he would move for the appointment of a select com mittee. Upon the motion for the third reading of the Public Schools Bill, , Lord DERBY proposed an amendment to omit the words which empowered the Commissioners to alter the constitution of governing bodies. Lord CLARENDON opposed the amendment, but after a brief discussion the house, upon a division, adopted it by 28 to 27. The bill was read a third time and passed. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS--LAST EVENING. The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Ayr Harbour, Bradford Coporation, Cambrian Railways (New Works), Cork Harbour, Devon Valley and North British Railway Companies (Arrangements), Glasgow Police, Groat Northern and Western (of Ireland) Railway, Lancashire Union Railways, Laugharne Railway, Magdalen Hospital, North British Railway (Camps, & c ., Branches), Waveney Valley Drainage, White haven and Furness Junction, and Whitehaven, Cleator, and Egremont Railway, Wycombe Railway, and Gaslight and Coke Company. NEW MEMBER. Mr. HILDYARD took the oaths and his seat for Notting• hamslfire. DAUNT'S ROCK. Mr. MAGUIRE asked the President of the Board of Trade if-any steps had been taken, or were about to be taken, to remove from Daunt's Rock the wreck of the steamship City of New York. Mr. GIBSON said it had not been thought the circum stance to which the hon. gentleman alluded was of such a pressing nature as to call for a large expenditure of public money. Assistance had been offered the owners of the City of New York to get the vessel off. THE ELECTORAL RETURNS. Mr. KEBEWICH asked the President of the Poor Law Board whether he had sent any instructions to the Boards of Guardians for the purpose of recommending a scale of payment to the clerks for the additional trouble and expense they had incurred in preparing the electoral re turns laid upon the table of the house ? Viscount ENFIELD said a communication had taken place on the subject, but the expenses of collecting the returns would he paid by the Government, and not by the guardians out of the local rates. • LAW OF IIYPOTITEC. Mr. CARNEGIE asked the Lord A6rocate when the bill on the Law of Hypothec would be introduced? The LOEB ADVOCATE said such a bill had been pro pounded, bet lie did not think it would be introduced dur ing the present session. TENURE OF LAND (IRELAND). In reply to Mr. BLAKE, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was impossible to fix a day for the resumption of the adjourned debate on this bill until further progress had been made with the reform bill. It was intended to proceed with supply to-morrow at 12.. IRON GUNS. Mr. WHITE asked the Secretary of State for War whether he would have any objection to produce a copy of the correspondence between the War Department and Mr. Parsons from May, 1860, to the present time, relatj►e to the plan of that gentleman for strengthening cast iron guns ? The Marquis of lIARTINGTON said ho had great ob jections to producing the correspondence which took place between the War-office and inventors, because it usually resulted in the furnishing at the public expense a detailed account of the invention. With respect to the second por tion of the question ho had no objection to produce the re turns, so that the hon. gentleman perhaps would signify whether he would accept that as sufficient for his purpose. THE FENIAN RAID IN CANADA. Mr. DAWSON asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, since the house rose on Friday, he had received any further despatches from Canada convoying information as to the suppression of the Fenian raid upon British territory, or the moans taken to effect that object ? Mr. CARD WELL stated that he had received a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, dated June 4, stat ing that a force of Fenians, about 800 strong, had made a raid on Fort Erie, were attacked by Volunteers, who, being outnumbered, retired. The Volunteers were on the march to join the forces under the command of Gen. Peacock, and met the Fenians on their way. The l'enians, after the retirement of the volunteers, did not wait the arrival of Gen. Peacock, but recrossed the fron tier d uring the night, when they were arrested by the authorities of the United States. Not only on that occasion, but on every other, the readiest and most effi cient assistance had been proffered by the United States. (Bear, hear.) General Grant had placed General Barry, an officer of the United States, in command of certain important positions, and there were no w in Toronto Gaol about G 5 prisoners. The loss on the part of the British authorities was small. ST. PANCRAS CUURCH.YMID. Midland Mr M'EVOY asked the Secretary of State for the H om e Department whether h e was aware that th e Railway Company, having obtained an act in 1363 for passing a bridge over the additional burial-ground of St. Pancras, had in excess of its powers taken a portion of the more ancient churchyard of St. Pancras for such bridge, and was causing desecration thereby, the destruc tion of the tomb; and the removal of the dead. Sir G. GREY said no further inquiry had been made on this subject since it was last under the attention of the house until he saw the question of the hon. gentleman on the paper. Ho had before sent Mr. Holland to inspect and report the exact circumstances of the case. THE FENIANS. Mr. WATKINS, reverting to the Fenian raid, said ho wished to know whether it was true that., after the raid, the President of the United States had issued a proclama tion, and that Generals Sweeney and Roberts had been ar rested. Mr. CARDwE,LL said he had stated the whole sub stance of the despatch he had received. He was, however, in possession of theied circumstance that the President of the United States had had proclarnation—(hear, hear)— and as various other questions been put to him (Mr. C ar dwell) be here wished t o s athat the utmost loyalty had been displayed by all her 11. North American estY's s ubjects, and that their exertions ti were in th e hi g h es t de give satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) THE REFORM BILL. The house then went into committee. On clause 5 being read, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he in_ tended to nvike a statement, when Mr. DISRAELI objected to the right hon. gentlem an proceeding in the way he intended, it was against the ordi nary rule of the house, and be yid not think it was desir able that a statement should be made which might contain an answer by anticipation to the proposals of the hon. gen tlemen who had given notice of their intention to move amendments to the clause. After a short and somewhat angry discussion, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would persevere in the desire he had to address the house. Lord DUNKELLIN then rose to move his amendment to the clause, which was to substitute a rating for a rental franchise in boroughs. He considered that the rating franchise was much to be preferred, and such being his opinion, it became his duty to make the proposal to the house, although it might in some quarters be considered that it was made simply to obstruct the passing of the bill. Such was not his intention, beCause he was not respon sible for the figure that had been selected as the amount of the borough franchise ; and with that figure he did not interfere. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) He therefore moved the amendment of which he had given notice, namely, that the words " clear yearly value" be left out, and that instead there be inserted in the clause the words " clear rateable value." Mr. 0. CAVE seconded the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who was received with cheers, said—The hon. gentleman who has last sat down has undisguisedly regarded the last part of the speech for the amendment as an argument for the re striction of the suffrage. I wish to point out both to my hon. friend and to the hon. gentlemen that in all they have said bearing properly upon the merits of the motion—that is in respect to the words proposed to be introduced—this fallacy runs through their speeches, that they make a com parison between the rating system and the present system of examination before a revising barrister. All through there was not a word that took cognisance of the great change introduced in the bill. lam not sure my noble friend has examined the table by which the rating is fixed, or whether ho is aware of the system of estimat: ing the gross rental. If he is aware of the system of fixing the gross estimated rental in the bill, I am surprised he should not have drawn a comparison be. tween it and that which he now professes. The Irish system, I must say, is totally different to that proposed to be introduced by my noble friend. It is different, be- cause it is universal throughout the whole country—(hear, hear)—and it is different, because it is administered by a Government officer. (Hear, hear.) The Scotch system does correspond almost entirely with the estimated rental, and that system gives almost as much satisfaction in Scot land as the rating does in Ireland. These matters are, however, only illustrations, and it is better I should pro ceed to the merits of the question. Now, sir, after hear ing my noble friend, I am conscious I might have saved him a great deal of trouble if it had been in my power to state the issue involved in this portion of the clause, be cause his speech has mingled together three or four ques tions entirely distinct and heterogeneous one to another. The operation of that part of the clause on which my noble friend proposes his amendment is political. It relates to the amount of enfranchisement, the moderate amount of enfran chisement the Government proposes to effect—an amount which I estimated at 144,000, an amount which would be augmented by 60,000 by the abolition of ratepaying clauses and by the new provisions introduced with regard to house holders. I cannot be misunderstood when I say that from that moderate amount of enfranchisement we are not, under any circumstances, prepared to recede. (Cheers.) By it we intend to stand. (Cheers.) There are various provisions on the notice paper of the house. The hon. member for Guild ford proposes an amendment which, from the 144,000, would strike of 65,000. The £6 rating to be proposed by the hon. member for Wenlock would give the franchise to 105,000. That is the most liberal of them all, falling short only by 40,000 of the number we propose. The hon. gen tleman who has just sat down has made the least liberal suggestion. He suggests a £7 rating, by which after 31 years from the Reform Bill, he would liberally admit a new body of 45,000 to the constituencies. (Laughter.) That is an increase of between 1,400 and 1,500 on the population of this country. If the hon. member can establish such a rate of enfranchisement as that, for the guidance of future times, I think he will be pretty secure from error in the way of excess. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) But whether it be 45,000, 67,000, or 105,000, it is not a number to which we are prepared to accede. The political part of this motion is one thing, and the practical part is another. With regard to the political part, I will observe that though my noble friend has not professed to fix a figure by his motion, yet he has laid down principles in his speech which will strike 60,000 from the number we propose to enfranchise. We propose to abolish the ratepaying clauses and to introduce provisions which will enable compound householders to be rated, although they are not rated individually ; but toboth of these the noble lord objects, and therefore ho begins by striking off 60,000 from the number we propose to enfran chise. Having spoken plainly on that portion of the ques tion, I come to the practical portion of the case, viz., the argument made by my noble friend for the basis of rateable value, in lieu of clear yearly value, as it is proposed by the Government. There are four questions which in this matter may be raised, and which is of vital consequence to sepa rate one from another, but the whole of which has been hopelessly mingled in the speech of my noble friend. The first is, shall the voter himself personally be rated as a con dition of his obtaining the franchise ? secondly, shall he Ibefore registration have paid all rates which aro at the time due from him ? The second is totally and absolutely distinct from the first. The third is, shall the franchise bo ruled as it is ruled in the bill—that is, upon clear annual value explained by the column of gross estimated rental ; or shall it be ruled by the column of rateable value ? That is the third question, and that I take to be the proper object of the motion of my noble friend ; but ho has mixed it up with all the others. As he has treated his own motion as Igaining the other two objects also. (Cries of " No, no.") Very well, if lam mistaken lam very glad. But let it be clearly understood, we have nothing to do now with deter mining whether a man shall be rated or not, or shall have paid his rates - (hear)—that these two questions are re , s3rved for some future period. The question now is, whether occupation value is to be calculated on the column of rate able value. But there is a fourth question which my noble friend has treated as if involved in his motion, via., whether the valuation made by local authorities shall be fixed, or whetherthere shall be an appeal or judicial process if voters desire, before the revising barrister. The noble lord has in his speech treated his motion as conclusive, ruling that there is to bo no appeal to the revising barrister. I quite under- stand that he proposes to leave the course of appeal as is fixed for the purposes of local taxation. (Hear.) If, then, the third and fourth of these questions are embraced in the speech and in the object of my noble friend, I am bound to say I believe it to be doubtful whether they are both embraced in the legal effect of his motion. That his motion would have the effect of fixing rateable value as prima facie ground upon which the occupation must bo considered and estimated is perfectly clear, but I don't know whether the noble lord has referred to the very strong language in which the revising barrister is autho rised by the Reform Act to insert in such list (that is, the list of voters) the name of every person who shall be proved to his satisfaction to have been entitled on the last day of July next preceding. It is very doubtful whether that might not be held to make the title of the voter still subject to review by the revising barrister. But that I believe to arise only from the ambiguity of the language of the noble lord's motion, and I will take the motion as it is intended. (Hear, hear.) We are now debating a motion which does these two things -first, it fixes that the occupation giving the franchise is to be estimated according to the column of rateable value ; and secondly, the revising barrister is to be ousted alto gether, and the court of appeal is to be that provided for the purposes of local taxation, and no other. I will there fore address myself to those two questions. First, with re gard to the question of rateable value, which it is proposed now for the first time in this country—(hear)—to make the basis of the political franchise. We have argued—and no one has attempted to show the reverse —that rateable value as a test is false in principle. Rateable value is intended to establish the not value of the property. Rateable value is the just, the obvious, the legitimate basis for all opera tions having reference to local taxation. The right hon. gentleman the member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) spoke the other night as if the tenant really paid local taxation. Local taxation is borne by property ; therefore the test of rateable value, or the true net value, is of course made the basis of local taxation, and we should be as inconsistent and incongruous if we proposed to depart from the basis of rateable value for the purpOse of taxing property as my hon. friend is in proposing to take rateable value as the basis of the political franchise. (Hear, hoar.) The true basis of the political occupation franchise is the capacity of the voter to pay a £l4, a £5O, or any other rent. (Hear, hear.) Whatever the rateable value set against hi socupation, that has nothing to do with it. That is constructed for a diffe ren t p u rpose. I come now to the question of i nequa li t i es; these are o f t wo d escr i p ti ons , namely, inequalities from caprice or carelessness, and in equalities from necessity. It is not denied that they exist, and the nobl e lord drew an ingenious comparison between : two sides of a street on a ono side of which the rent paid to a grasping landlo r d i s liberal minded prop r i e t or le?'eashrl s and on the other a more houses at '47 ; and he points to this as an inst ance of difference inthegross esti mated rental of houses of th e same value. • Why, precisely y t i t s he th sa a m t a e proof in favour of rateable value ? i nequa lities will exist iu regard to ra t ea bl e value g, an y man to point ou t ono source of error which ear.) come into the column of gross estimated re n t a l wh i ch m I c ay hallon would not pass onward from that column into the column of rateable value. I quoted cases of this kind the other night in Bury St. Edmund's, showing that deduc tions made from houses of the same value iu two different unions were in one case one-tenth, and in another case one-sixth. That is an additional source of error in the rateable column. Now the noble lord has ingenuously ad- Milted that in the Irish system - there is only one colun. Then don't let us a rgue on the Irish system, for it is f m or a different purpose, and is practically a very different system to ours—(hear, hear) —and the noble lord has been misled by a mere use of the word rating—(hear, hear) —in supposing that the two systems are the same. As a proof of the equality of deductions made on the same class of houses the right hon. gentleman quoted Oxford, where t....h.3 deductions varied from 20 to 33,1 per cent., and to L iverpool, where in th e city it was 10 per cent., and in the suburbs 20 t o 25 per cen t. Th e pro p o s a l of the noble lord goes t o thi s, to establish a different political franchisein the same town f or men w h ose circumstances are in every respect the acme, who who pay equal rents, but who are placed at different sums l r 'nthe rate books. Of these 'a portion would be enfranchised, e and a the unions mak e their =anti portion would not, on account of being pl ace d in different unions . It has been said, let and you will not attain to more uniform. That is all very well ; but that i s not ng done, that equality witho u t p rov iding _ a central authority to fi x the basis on each union on which local rates is to be paid. TEE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JUNE 19, 1866. But that could not be worked out except after a long time, and even then you would not get rid of the:second portion of the inequalities, which, while they are inequalities just as objectionable with reference to the political franchise, are inequalities which, for the purposes of local taxation, you are bound to maintain. If a. house in one case requires repairs at tie rate of 5 per cent., and in another case re- guiles repairsat the rate of 20 per cent., the effect of taking rateable value as your basis would be that of two men pay ing equal rates you would enfranchise one and disfranchise the other. The right hon.-gentleman went on to show that even, fixing an equal rate of deduction would be a gross injustice with reference to the purposes of local taxation; that any errors in the gross estimated rental system went forward in an aggravated form in the rateable value column, in which were errors peculiar to itself. He called atten tion to the fact that there was property in this country not rated at all, which the proposal of the noble lord would dis franchise. He pointed out that the scot and lot system, so far from being in favour of the noble lord's proposal, had nothing to do with rating value, as it had nothing to do with any amount. The old precedent of scot and lot was in favour of household suffrage—(hear) —for the fact of being rated, no matter what the amount, conferred the suf frage. (Hear.) A man paying 6d. scot was just as good a voter as a man who paid £6. Coming to the proposal to oust the revising barrister, the right hon. gentleman re gretted that such a proposal should be raised incidentally by mixing it up with a subject which was complex enough in itself. I confess, he went on to say, that that is a ques tion of very great difficulty, and it appears to be desirable :o raise and discuss that question by itself. I admit it would be a benefit to get rid of the cost of registration courts— (hear, hear)—but you would lose the benefit of that object if you were to introduce the very same class of questions, to be decided by bodies less judicial and less competent. The effect of that would be that although you change the tribunal you increase the litigation. It is a most serious matter. I am not aware what precedent is alleged from Parliamentary history to say that you are to commit the political rights of those whom you deem worthy to be en franchised to be decided in relation to the question of amount by local government and local authority. (Hear, hear.) But, again, a large majority of the small boroughs of this country are boroughs where town parishes are united for poor law purposes with a great number of rural parishes in the neighbourhood, and every parish is represented at the board by a separate guardian, the result being that boards of guardians are composed of an overwhelming proportion of rural guardians, and the proposal is in effect that those rural guardians shall have the power of fixing the franchise in boroughs. (Cheers.) Mr. HUNT—The assessment committee of the unions, and not the boards of guardians, acts in the matter. (Op position cheers.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—That is in effect the board of guardians. (Cheers.) Mr. HUNT—The ,boards of guardians have to appoint them. They appoint a certain number of magistrates and a certain number of ratepayers. (Opposition cheers.) It is not likely the rural parishes would override the town parishes. - The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—That does not mend the matter much, because there will be an over whelming number of guardians of the rural parishes. Sir H. CAIRNS—Let the right hon. gentleman read the whole clause. The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUER—The clause of the Act of 1862 provides that the boards of guardians shall every year appoint from among themselves not less than six and not more than twelve to be an assistant com mittee, such committee to be composed of not less than one-third ex-officio guardians. Sir H. CAIRNS—The town council have the power of appointing an equal number. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Yes, where the union and the borough have the same limits. (Cheers.) Does the hon. and learned gentleman think I would take the statement from his assurance ? (Opposition cries of " Oh, oh!") If I did, what a pretty predicament I would find myself in —(cheers and laughter)—from his most erroneous assurance —erroneous, not from intention, but inadvertence. With respect to the transfer of this authority for fixing the political franchise for local pur poses from the revising barrister to persons who are mixed up in politics, and not restrained as he is by judicial habits and judicial knowledge, I will take the case of a small borough, _in which suppose the assessment corn• mittee, with a view to politics, underrate 100 voters—a number generally sufficient to turn the scale in small con- stituencies. Suppose that instead of £8 they rate the houses at £6 15s. ; the difference of this would be only £125, which would not be thought too much to pay for political influence and for disfranchising 100 persons. (Hear, hear.) Suppose there is here and there a man who is by no means a rogue, but an unscrupulous partisan either of one side or the • other, who would take a liberal view of the value of a certain sot of houses, and make a liberal deduction to the landlord on account of what he calls necessary repairs. Am I to be told that the party can appeal to havo the rate raised? As I understand the question, no such right of appeal exists. I win also suppose a case in which the assessment committee rate a number of houses too high—say at £7. That can be done cheaper still, for at £7 the difference upon 100 houses would be so small as to afford an induce ment to raise the rating for political purposes. No doubt they would be entitled to appeal if the rating were too high, but the assessment would take care not to overrate except in cases where parties were willing to be overrated. You Would by this be introducing into tho electoral system a number of elements that aro apparently of considerable danger. Whether it may be possible now or hereafter to control these elements so that we may run the risk I will not undertake to say. I admit the great value we would derive if we could establish such a test as would enable us tacking the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whose manner he characterised as irritative, saying that his case was either extremely bad, or a spirit of enthusiasm had carried him beyond ordinary tactics. He thought the amendment of the noble lord was put in a very able and efficient man ner, and did not deserve the rebukes passed upon him. It was his opinion that the rateable franchise was desirable in boroughs, as the parish books were drawn up with the greatest care, and each one looking to his own interest and watching the officials lest he was charged too much. He spoke as a supporter of the Government, but he found that outside the house there was a growing dislike for this Reform Bill. Referring to the Govern- ment, he said it was a Palmerston MiniStry without Pal merston, and the want of his wisdom and judgment was now felt by the Government leaders. He must, therefore, support the amendment, and he did so because he did not wish to bolster up a scheme which he thought was not palatable to any one within the house or without it. _ _ . _ Mr. BRIGHT said the committee would agree with him when he expressed a hope that the hon. member for Tam-. worth felt himself happier and greatly relieved after the opportunity he had had for pouring out the history of his personal grievances. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) He began by charging the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a man ner unfriendly and irritating. (Hear, hear, by the Oppo sition.) He ventured to say that if the noble lord had thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer irritating at all, the thought had not entered his mini until it was pointed out by the right hon. baronet. He undertook to say nothing could be more fair—(oh, oh) —nothing could be more generous—(oh, oh) —than the ,views which the right hon. gentleman took of the speech of the noble lord the member for Galway—because he gave him full credit for sincerity in wishing to amend this bill, shutting out alto gether and entirely any suspicion he might have that the object was to limit the franchise. The question as between rating and rental or value, as a matter of practical advan tage,had been discussed almost as much as it could bo with any great advantage to the committee. The real object of the amendment, and the cause why hon. gentlemen opposite were so unanimous in its support, was that it prOposed to meet the Government proposition of a £7 household franchise in boroughs by a proposition which would raise that limit to £9. It was true that in the Reform Bill he (Mr. Bright) had prepared he proposed that the rate book should be the basis of the register ; but then he proposed that every one whose name was on the rate book should be placed upon the register. If the rate book and any particular figure was chosen, the franchise might be limited very much beyond what it would ba if that figure were taken as clear annual value. If the noble lord intended that the franchise should remain as extensive after the amendment were car- ried, as it would be by the proposition of the Government being sustained by the house, he would have told the house that if his amendment were carried, he proposed to substitute £5 for £7 in the clauses of the bill. The figure £6, as suggested by the hon. member for Wenlock, would not be so extensive as the £7 in the bill. The real ques tion before the house was whether they world agree to £7 of clear annual value, or to a £7 rateable value, which was substantially if not exactly £9 of annual value. If the amendment were carried, the great object of the bill would be entirely defeated, and the claim of the working men would be in effect rejected. Referring to the position of the working men who are the managers of the Rochdale co-operative societies, the hon. member showed that 17 of those men lived within the borough, of whom the Govern ment 1,7 proposition would enfranchise 11. If the £7 franchise were changed to £B, only two out of the 17 would be enfranchised, and if the rating proposition of the noble lord were adopted and the figure £7 remained, not a single man out of that 17 would be enfranchised. (Hear, hear.) He asked whether they were prepared to extend the franchise to 11 of those 17 select working men to whom he had referred, or only to two of them, according to the proposition of the hon. and learned member for Guild ford, or were they prepared to deny it to every one of them according to the amendment of the noble lord, if the word £7 remained in the clause ? Now, these were what might be called select men, of whom any coun try might be proud, and yet it was proposed to shut the door of that house in their faces, and deny them an en trance there, not in their own proper persons, but in the persons of any representatives. It was to his mind ono of the most lamentable things that the great body of the working classes should be divorced from tho political in terests and institutions of the country. Since those dis cussions commenced, a gentleman showed him a letter from a gentleman with whom he was himself well ac quainted, in which he stated that he regretted to see among his workmen a stronger interest in American politics than in the politics of their own country. He happened to meet the writer of the letter some time after, and he asked him whether what he stated was the fact ; and his answer was that in his own mill there were as many American news papers as there were newspapers published in this country. Hon. gentlemen might think this had nothing to do with the question, but he would tell them that such a state of things among the population of Lancashire and Yorkshire was not a healthy state of things, and demanded the attention of the house. (Hear, hear.) All of those who employad labour looked to the passing of the bill as a means of increasing the desire for education, stimulating self respect, and improving all the social relations of the people. The'noble lord the member for Huntingdonshire spoke of the state of things in Europe, a state of things calculated to fill all their minds with grief, and argued that because of that state• of things the bill could not be wisely pro ceeded with. He should argue from it precisely the reverse (Cheers.) The war in Europe might end differently from the idea of kings and persons looking on. It might end in a fever of revolution in Germany —might end in the pro mulgation of opinions not favourable to settled order— (hear, hear)—and no one know to what extent those opinions might spread. Ho was not speaking now in the interests of the working-men, but he regretted from the bottom of his heart to see the constant endeavour that was made to create a gulf of eternal separation between the great body of the working classes and the middle class. (Cheers and counter cheers.) They might rely upon it that the setting up of a barrier of that kind was bad in every way, but it was especially perilous when advocated by a great and powerful party in that house. ' Between 400 and 500 public meetings had been held in favour of this bill, and especially of the clause now under consideration; but, so far as he was aware, there was not one meeting held to condemn the bill as dangerous to the institutions of the country, or even calculated to extinguish the Conservative party. If they carried the amendment, if they rejected the bill, and overturned the Government, this question would still remain. (Cheers.) Don't let them, imagine that the right hon. member for Bucks would come there to defy the ivhole Liberal party of England, and tell them that the measure of their political franchise was full. Depend upon it the right hon. gentleman would not do that. Therefore, this question would remain—to break up a Government, it might be—to weaken every Government that sat upon that (the Treasury) bench, and to create excitement everywhere throughout the country, and afford opportunity for the discussion of fundamental principles at every public meet ing. (Cheers.) All that they were about to bring about because the noble lord had imported into this country a proposition from the county of Galway—(loud cries of "Oh, oh")—which was wholly foreign—(cries of " No, no ") anything that had over existed in England and Wales on this question, and for which there could be no foundation found in the kingdom of Scotland. Ho would ask hon. gentlemen whether it was worth their while to take a course which might land them in many difficulties, and whether it would not be better frankly to accept this measure—(oh, oh)—and to give to the people of England a manifestation of their confidence in them, and of their great generosity to the people. From what he know of the people of England, ho would undertake to say that if they treated them with generosity and justice now, they would make an ample return in. obedience to the law and loyalty to the Crown. (Loud cheers.) Sir H. CAIRNS said, after the rebuke which had been administered to the noble lord the member for Galway by the hon. member for Birmingham seine apology was due, perhaps, that he, an Irish member—(Opposition cheers) — should presume to take part in the discussion of an Eng lish Bill. (Renewed cheers.) He might, however, ask the hon. member for Birmingham whether, if none but English members had voted on and discussed the bill they should to-night have been in committee. (Loud Opposition cheers.) It was not his intention to contend whether the manner of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was fair, generous, and courteous to his opponents—(a laugh)—which was, after all, a matter of opinion. He confessed his inability to understand the principle ad vocated by Government of making a deduction with re gard to local rates, and refusing to do so with regard to repairs. If the argument for the'deduction was applicable in the one case, it was equally SU in the other. With re gard to the gross estimated rental system of which the Government were so enamoured, ho pointed out that it worked most unsatisfactorily. In some places he found that there was a deduction of five, and in others of ten, per cent. made from the rental before the gross estimated rental was arrived at. In the case of London the surveyors valued the premises for rateable value, and the clerks in the counting-house added 10, 15, or 20 per cent., as the case might be, to the ascertained value, with the view of attaining to the result so much desired by Government. The hon. gentleman proceeded to refer to the Irish bill, in which he maintained the rateable formula was obtained in exactly the same way as in England. With respect to the revising barristers, he submitted that they were no judges at all of the value of a house. Yet that was the appeal which the Government proposed on every question of law. In conclusion, the right hon. gentleman protested against the Chancell6r of the Exchequer announcing that he wenn not recede from the position taken up by the Go vernment, because it reduced the discussion of the com mittee to a matter of mere form. Mr. OSBORNE, while expressing the opinion that au Irish county member had as good a right to bring for ward the amendment as an English member, pointed out that the Irish system, though admirable for that country, was totally inapplicable to England, because no English borough would submit to Government valuation or Go vernment interference of any kind in local affairs. After pointing out the extreme variation between rateable value and gross estimated rental, which, on the authority of a revising barrister, he gave as from 5 to 40 per cent., the hon. gentleman denounced the policy of those who sup ported the amendment as being avowedly intended to de lay the bill of the Government. (Hear, hear.) It was patent to every one both in and out of the house that the motion was nothing more nor less than another specious pretext, by discussing a rateable clause, to get rid of the bill and of the Government. The course taken by the Opposi tion was forcing many moderate men to the conviction that if the bill was thrown out and they had a rating suf rage, it would be accompanied by household suffrage. (Hear, hear.) Mr. M'EVOY could not be accused of being opposed to Reform, but he considered a rating franchise was the right basis to rest upon. He would not support the amendment, however, unless the proposer of it and those who sup ported him would agree to one uniform valuation through out the country, such as was practised in Ireland. Mr. VILLIERS pointed to the defective state of our pre sent system of assessment, and stated that the Government plan of a valuation rental would be far mere honest than any rateable franchise. Lord DUNKELLIN could not accede to Mr. M'Evoy's additional words to his amendment, but would promise that whenever an equalised assessment was brought for ward he would support it, and he hoped that would be sufficient to obtain that hon. gentleman's vote. After re plying generally to personal remarks made during the de bate by several members, he left his amendment for the committee to decide. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied to some personal remarks made and commented upon during the debate, and concluded by reiterating the statement he had made in the former part of the evening, viz., that the amendment was introduced for no other purpose than to raise the franchise in boroughs, and he could accept it only as fatal to the bill. The house then divided, when the numbers were— For the amendment Against 304 Majority against the Government —ll There was another of those excited scenes which have been so frequent during these reform discussions. When the clerk at the table handed the division paper to Lord Dunkellin, shouts arose from the Opposition which were repeated for some minutes. After the noble lord had read the numbers, these were repeated with renewed en thusiasm. Mr. AYRTON said that after the announcement which had been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Committee had no alternative but to report progress. The hon. gentleman accordingly made a motion to that effect. This having been agreed to, there was a loud cry of " Till when ?" The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—TiII this day at six. A morning sitting having been appointed, I apprehend it cannot be rescinded ; but no Government bill will be taken. (Loud cheers.) The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned. The Defeat of the Government. (From the Times.) The respective advantages of " rateable" and " clear annual value" were debated at length in committee last night ; and at the end the " rating" test was adopted by a majority of 11 in a house o 619 members. The Government thus met with its first serious check, for it was a check rather than a defeat. The result can be a matter of surprise to no one. On the one hand the weight of argument, whether 'from convenience, from constitutional pre- cedents, or from authority, was in favour of making rating—the modern equivalent to the old payment of scot and lot—the basis of enfranchisement. On the other, all the weight of the Government was thrown into the scale in favour of the test of clear annual value. It was a contest between reason and authority, and, not for the first time in history, rea son won the victory. The battle was fairly fought and fairly decided. The fate of the Ministry ought to be completely dissevered from the fate of the re form bill. It has been, on the whole, an advantage to the cause of reform that it should be so, and there can be no question that it is beneficial to the na- tional interests. We can discuss the amendment of the constitution without perpetually thinking of the effect of a decision upon the position of the Minis try. The vote of last night is a practical instance of this truth. It was a distinct repudiation of a Ministerial proposal ; but, unless the Ministers are resolved to sacrifice themselves to a feeling of wounded self-love, it cannot be construed into a withdrawal of confidence and support. They may think it advisable on other grounds to suspend the further progress of the bill, but it is not a neces sary consequence of yesterday's vote, and we are satisfied that their abdication of office would be re pugnant to the wish of the House of Commons and the country. (From the Morning Post.) At the close of an animated debate the House of Commons divided early this morning on a motion which struck at the root of the Ministerial measure of Reform. Extraordinary efforts had been made by the Government and the Opposition to secure the attendance of every one of their respective sup porters, and, as a natural result, the house was full to overflowing when the question was put from the chair. The, speeches which concluded the debate were received with manifestations of more than ordinary impatience, and all seemed anxious to pre cipitate a division which it was believed would de termine the fate of the new Reform Bill. In a house composed of 624 members, inclusive of the Chairman and Tellers, 315 supported Lord Dun kellin's amendment, and 304 recorded their votes against it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that he would announce the intentions of the Go vernment at the meeting of the house to-day. In the presence of so large a majority against them it is difficult to imagine that any other course is open to the Ministers but resignation. (From the Daily News.) Whatever may have been the motive of Lord Dunkellin in proposing the amendment which was last night submitted to the House of Commons, there can be no doubt as to the feelings of the ma jority which supported him. Their object, in which they have succeeded, was to throw out the bill, and, if possible, the Government with it. It is true that Lord Dunkellin left open the question of the quali fication to be finally selected ; but the scope of his amendment must be judged, not by his professions and intentions, but by the undisguised sentiment of that part of the house on which he depended for support, and by the amendments which followed his own upon the notice paper, and which did what Lord Dunkellin refrained from doing, and fixed the amount, of the borough franchise. (From the Morning _Herald.) Mr. Gladstone takes a view of his position as leader of the House of Commons which is peculiar in more than one respect. The eminent men who have occupied that high post before the member for South Lancashire have regarded it as their chief duty in that capacity to conciliate the good-will, consult the fair requirements of all sections of the house, and to maintain and enforce those rules which the house has agreed to for the proper and convenient carriage of business. Mr. Gladstone, on the other hand, ostentatiously insults the Opposi tion, arrogantly disregards the rights of independent members, and, what is, if not so offensive, very much more inexcusable, violates the rules of the house and takes liberties—for so we must call them—with the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees unheard of before his time. Last night an impertinence of this kind was summarily punished. Mr. Gladstone repeated his declaration that the Government could not accept the amendment, and the house divided to pass the amendment by a decisive majority, and dispose, if Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues act up to their declarations, of the bill and the Ministry. We congratulate the house and the country on this signal triumph of the constitutional cause. (From the Morning Advertiser.) Last night the time of the House of Commons was again devoted to a discussion on the Reform Bill. The point at issue on this occasion was whether the £7 borough franchise should be based on rating or rental. The bill of the Government recognises the principle of rental, whereas the amendment of Lord Dunkellin was that it ought to be based on rating. The amendment was stoutly opposed by all the members of the Govern ment who spoke, and it was maintained on the Liberal side of the house that a rating franchise would practically be a£9 franchise. On a division, Ministers were defeated by a majority of 11, the numbers being—For the amendment of Lord Dunkellin, 315 ; against it, 304. The result of this division will be fatal to the bill, for Mr. Gladstone explicitly stated that it would be so immediately before the division. Whether he also meant that it would be fatal to the Government remains to be seen. We shall know before another dal has passed which way it is to be. (From the Morning Star.) To the last the Tories have been true to their false tactics. They fought and yon last night a battle after their own hearts—a battle in which the real issue was not the nominal issue—a fight in which a mere tittle of administrative detail was made the subject of a discussion ranging over the whole field of the great constitutional question that awaited Parliamentary settlement. It was no fancy picture of alarming contingencies that Mr. Bright drew in the peroration of his last night's speech. It is not long since Earl Grosvenor declined to vote against the Government because he dared not take the conduct of foreign affairs out of their hands. Since then war has actually commenced. But it is not only the danger of embroilment in war that is incurred by the defeat of the Reform Bill. There is the further danger of wilfully avoiding those acts of grace and good understanding towards the people which would render innocuous, so far as England is concerned, all the events, however con tagious and inflammatory, of continental warfare, which, beginning in the unbridled ambition of princes and statesmen, may result in an unlimited liberation of peoples and the re-establishment of revolutionary ideas. A more unfortunate moment for a Ministerial crisis can hardly be imagined. Nor could such an event have been occasioned by any thing more ill-omened than the rejection of the mild enfranchisement clause of a moderate Reform Bill. THE PRUSSIAN ARMY. (From the Times' Military Correspondent.) BRESLAU, June 15, 7 a.m. The Bund has passed the Austrian motion for the mobilisation of the armies of the Confederation against Prussia. Prussia has declared that she con siders herself no longer bound to the Confederation, and the commencement of hostilities appears now to be only a question of a few hours. Heavy masses of Prussian troops are drawn toge• ;her on the northern frontier of the kingdom o: Saxony ready to advance at a moment's notice, if requisite, against Dresden. In Silesia the army has hitherto been scattered in cantonments at various points along the frontier, but yesterday it has been concentrated to a great extent between Briez and the frontier. Whether the Prussian concentrations are for offensive or defensive purposes no one even now dares to pretend to tell certainly ; but probably those in Saxony are for attack, as far as Dresden is concerned. Those in Silesia may be intended to pre pare either for an e Rance into Moravia, or to op pose an anticipated attack by the Austrians from that quarter. The railways are swarming with troops. It is evident, too, from their appearance that 'Prussia has made great exertions in order to place the army she has in the field on a war footing. Boyish recruits, who seem hardly able to carry their knapsacks and arms, and grizzled landwehr men, who have long left the ranks of the regular army, are equally en rolled in the regiments which have lately been sent to the front. At every railway station detachments of soldiers either get into or out of the trains, and everywhere can be detected the busy stir and feverish bustle which forbodes the gathering together of an army for battle. Daylight this morning was ushered in by a slow, drizzly rainfall, which soon made the roads moist and sloppy ; but marching detachments have been splashing along them since the earliest dawn appeared, to gain the country railway sta tions, on the platforms of which, made greasy by the moisture, the soldiers, wrapped up in their cloaks huddled together to get as much shelter as possible from the weather, until the time came for them to get into the train. Some of the detachments appeared to be recent levies drawn from the neighbouring country. Many of the men were accompanied on their march to the station by women, who wept silently as they moved almost mechanically alongside of the marching ranks, and who strained with eager eyes after the train till a turn in the line or distance hid them from our view. The soldiers themselves looked grave, but very determined. The news which came from Frankfort last night has roused the war spirit in the land; still there was many a wistful glance cast back towards the cottages which, with black beams built into their white walls, and high-thatched roofs, look not unlike the homesteads of Cheshire or Wor cestershire. Nor does the appearance of the people destroy the resemblance. Especially in the men there is a marked look of the better agricultural classes in England. From every little village and every small town soldiers appear to be hurrying to central positions for the concentration of their brigades, divisions, or corps. The large bodies marched yesterday to their places of assembly ; this morning outlying detach ments and small bodies of men from distant parts were being called up to headquarters. There are also a few—fortunately very few at present—of those detachments to their rear which have always to be made daily from a large army to carry the sick to the hospitals. Breslau, no longer a fortress, for the fortifica tions have for some years been converted into boule vards and promenades, has to-day quite recovered its military character. Brisk orderlies flit about the streets, carrying huge letters with enormous seals, and wearing such an air of importance that each and every one of them might be the bearer of immediate orders for the Crown Prince to cross the border. Yet trade goes on quietly, the banks and shops are transacting their usual busi ness as if there were no armed men in Silesia and no Austrian advanced posts hanging upon the frontier. The crops in the country around the town are about high enough to reach to the knee of a man standing up, and, wherever the clumps of fir wood do not break in upon the cultivated ground, stretch as far as the eye can reach. A few rays of bright sunlight, which made an effort to struggle through the heavy clouds in the early morning, lit up the cornfields, studded with the darker foliage of the pines, as if for a moment to show how fair a scene is likely to be scorched and withered by the hot tempest of war. Nothing-is known of recent Austrian movements, or at least, if any intelligence has come in, it is kept most carefully secret. Although many who pretend to know something of the plan of opera tions disdainfully reject the idea that the Prussians will make an offensive movement, the sudden con centration of the armies and the bustle of rapid preparation evidently forebode an advance. When I say nothing is known of Austrian movements, I allude only to the Austrian armies in Bohemia and Moravia, since, although nothing can be certainly known, an Austrian force is supposed to be assem bling at Aschaffenburg, possibly with a view of sup porting the minor allies of the Empire on an attack on the Rhenish Provinces. The King of Prussia had not left Berlin last night, but it is thought that he will join the army to-day. Hostilities may actually commence either to-day or to-morrow, but as yet it is impossible accurately to foretell what will happen. The military conduct of a campaign is a problem which few can solve, and, when it becomes intermingled with political consi derations, it becomes almost inextricably confused to all except the few who have an insight into every particular. About 36 miles southwards of the town lies, near Freyburg, the castle of Furstenstein, where till two days ago the Crown Prince had his head quarters. He has now transferred them more to the east. The Berlin papers said yesterday that he had gone to Neisze, which is about three hours by railway from Breslau. Neisze is in Silesia what Olmutz is in Moravia—the knot where the roads which lead over the mountains on this portion of the frontier join an advantageous point from which to invade Moravia and strike a blow at the line of railway communica tion leading from Vienna to the Austrian positions in Bohemia, or at which to concentrate an army to resist an Austrian advance from Olmutz. Breslau is in itself also an• important point, for here unite the lines of railway from Berlin by Lieg nitz, from Berlin by Lissa, which connects Silesia with all the eastern provinces of Prussia, the rail way to South-Eastern Silesia, and that to Freyburg, which passes near Schweidnitz. ,o get rid of the great bulk of questions that are raised be• fore the revising barrister. But that is the very thing we contend we are doing. We contend not that the local au thority is untrustworthy, but that it requires to be kept under check. We say, look for the best and most certain test, and that I have shown not to be the rateable value, but the gross estimated rental. I ask, What are the errors to be found in the latter that are not carried forward and aggravated in the former? and I have shown that errors exist in the rateable column which are not to be found in tho column of gross estimated rental. The bill adheres to the phraseology of the Reform Act. It provides that the occupation franchise shall be founded on the clear yearly value, so that we go as straight to the rate book as my noble friend, with this difference, that we go to the right part of it, and he goes to the wrong. Every object my noble friend seeks to gain by going to the column of rateable value can be gained in a much better way under the column of gross estimated rental. If my noble friend desires to oust the revising barrister, the proper way to do so would be to make the column of gross esti mated rental final, that being the column we can fix upon with the smallest amount of risk, and which contains the fewest errors. Such are the grounds on which I hope the committee will reject the motion of my noble friend. I am not surprised at the smallness of the majority for the proposition of the Government the other night, because everybody knows how difficult it must be in complicated questions of this kind to bring hon. gentlemen to a close and accurate knowledge of the facts. For twenty years past there has been a growing sense of the evils conneeted with registration. (Hear, hear.) We share in that con viction, and are ready to take any steps towards diminish ing it. There has been a great desire to set up an external standard, but until the last three years there was no ex ternal standard which possessed any approach to accuracy. But the President of the Poor-law Board introduced and carried through the last Parliament an act by which that question was to a great extent adjusted, and that was by the column of gross estimated rental, which furnished a safe and secure basis, and one which we can now adopt for the franchise. I say, then, that every advantage pointed out by my noble friend can be obtained by our proposition. If my noble friend be right in saying that the decisions of the local authorities ought to be made final, then those de cisions should be based not upon the inferior basis of the rateable value, but upon the surer and better basis of gross estimated rental. (Cheers.) Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment, because the rateable value could always be ascertained and the rental could be concealed. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had admitted that for every other purpose the rateable value was the best test, but for the electoral franchise he said it was not practicable. In his (Mr. Henley's) idea it was absurd to say that any person would allow his house to be rated at a higher value than the rent he paid. Tho debate was continued by Sir F. GOLDSMID on the Government side, and Mr. GOLDNEY for the amendment. Mr. POULETT SCROPE ,went fully into parochial matters, with an endeavour to show that the less local officials had to do with preparing the list of burgesses the better, and that tho rateable franchise would create much jealousy and suspicion, which the rental would not. • Sir W. JOLLIFFE and Mr. GREEN followed on the part of the amendment, and Mr. HIBBERT and Mr. TORRENS for the Government. The latter remarked that if the house refused to pass this moderate bill they would have to accept a much more liberal one in a very short period. rental Af Lo t r e a r ovß a e.r f lt e ih w ooN i r v arr o t r e : b s Gi from Mr. POWELL in favour of the amendment, ' The SOLICITOR-GENERAL argued in favour of tho in the latte r p ar t of hisU° pevalue.esupportedch said thathe bill aits a a nd t present stood was a stepping-stone to universal suffrage, and it was framed w ith the belief that the Government by its means would annihilate the Conservative members. But if the truth were told there were members of the so called Liberal party who were averse to this measure; and he should charge them with cowardice if they voted in favour of it. Mr. FORSTER asked what it was they Were legislating for. Was it not to p r o duce as g oo d a Itaurin Bill as pos sible ? And , he believe d there were me mbers on the other side of the house who were willing to support a measure which would settle the vexed question of Reform. H e argued that from all the statistics they could obtain the rental franchise would give less trouble in its arrangement, would admit more deserving persons, and would lead to ' less disputes than a rateable one. Sir R. PEEL took the committee entirely by surprise, L first by cutting ridicule on Mr. Forster's speech, then at- ra .--" The Late Gas Explosion near Regent's Par The Verdict. Yesterday afternoon Dr. Lankester resumed and concluded the inquiry opened at the Bank of Eng land Tavern, Cambridge-place, Paddington, rela tive to the death of Elizabeth Etall, one of the per sons killed by the late gas explosion, which occurred in the private residence of Mr. Ernest Gambart, No. 62, Avenue-road, Regent's Park. Mr. Montague Williams, instructed by Mr. Kempster, was again present on behalf of Mrs. Greenaway, and Mr. Inspector Dafter (S division) watched the case on behalf of the police. After some additional evidence had been taken, The Coroner said—As there was no further evi dence to be adduced, he would remark that they were all anxious to find out the cause of the exPle sion, and whether any person was criminally respell' Bible. The inquiry was reduced to two points firstly, the vulcanised tubes ; and secondly, th e billiard-room lamps. After results showed that there was a split in one of the ordinary temporal tubes, this question so far was, did the explosion occur through the accumulation and escape of gas at that place ? On the other hand, the witness Waters could not say whether she did or not turn off the gas in the billiard-room. If such was net done while the burning of the gas was going el l with closed doors and windows, carbonic acid gab would be generated which would put out the light s ' and the hydrogen, or common gas, would fill the place ; but on doors or windows being opened the carbonic acid gas would be thrown out, and on the hydrogen coming in contact with a light an explosion would ensue. In this case the witness Waters could not say whether she turned out the gas in the liard room or not. The jury, among whom Wer e , some practical men, would consider their v erdict , upon the evidence placed before them. The jury retired to a private room, and after about half an hour's consultation returned in to Court with the following verdict :—" That the de ceased, Elizabeth Etall, died from the effects of 3 gas explosion at No. 62, Avenue-road, Regent 'e Park, such death being accidentally caused." The jury appended to the above verdict the fol lowing addenda or resolution : , " The jury empanelled to inquire into the canes of death of Elizabeth Etall, at the Bank of Enir land' Tavern, and No. 62, Avenue-road, having re turned a verdict of ' Accidental death,' are of 0 P 1 " nion that the gas fittings on the occasion of all e r plosion of gas which killed the said Elizabeth E tan l were carelessly made and left, but they (the Pit/ lave not sufficient evidence before them to she' that such carelessness was the cause of the es plosion." The verdict was recorded, and the coronethaYi,ng taken possession of the resolution, the jury vrTie discharged from their duty with thanks fro m coroner. COUNTRY MARKETS. COLCHESTER—Jun 16. na There was a small supply of wheat at market to-daY , i t . m i, the business done was at 2s to 3s per qr improvonleoot Beans and peas continue scarce, and quotations are si ll ' nominal. ....4 0 8 :id: 588 1 Beans, Mazagan. Wheat. s white 5 6 1 T Barley .... 348 43s Peas, white 3 ', 2 s Oats grey ...368 GRANTHAM—JUNE 16. There was a meagre supply of wheat at market to-11,1'0/' and prices 2s to 3s higher than last week. Other art' unaltered. eff Old white wheat, 53s to 58s; old red, 50s to 50; vt n ar , white, 52s to 56s ; new red, 47s to 52s per 36 stone. ley for malting, 36s to 42s per qr. ; grinding, 30 s to 5052.4 30 stone. Oats, old, 30s to 32s ; new, 25s to 30e Pe,o, stone. Beans, old, 48s to 51s; new, 4 4 s to 46 e per 38 ° Peas, 36s to 40s per 36 stone. ID—JusE 15. ly supplied with whesti er samples brought 2s to 3s 0' orn firm. 399 Pettis, P m a h rt i r te ldf .. ...... B,,iling ........ 373 404 un.... ..... . • . 368 dit!o, neve....---8 496 Beans, Tick, old ...... 35s 39s new. ... 35s 4 2; Harrow icks• 33 . 6 4CI new. • .. 30 •10 Mazagan ..... 3is CHELMSFO: To-day's market was thin' an eager demand, and best f last week's prices. Spring c Wheat, old white 46s 56s new 44s 55s old red 4is 50s new. 408 .508 258 338 Chevalier -- s ---8 Grinding 9 F s Malt 53e tOs Chevalier 60s 624 Oats 2Js 26s NORTHAMPTON—JUNE 16. • oia New white wheat, 52s to 57s ; new red, 48s to 535!, 40 37 white, 48s to 53s ; old red, 46s to 50s per 36 stone. for malting, —s to —s per qr. ; grinding, 30s to 38 s f e o " D e• stone. Oats, old, 30s to 34s ; new, 28s to 32s per 24 s,t, eof Beans, old, 46s to 50s ; new, 42s to 45s per 38 stone. . 1. 36s to 40s per 36 stone. ABERDEEN—JUNE 15. o 11 Little doing in the market to-day, but prices Ivor ther of an upWard character. White wheat 40s Od to 45s Od) 621 b v busil el ' Red wheat 40s Od to 45s Od Potato oats 25s Od to 25s 6d} 4 0th v bus hel. Common oats 24s Od to 24s 6d 1. Bore 30s Od to 31s Od t 5316 v bushel. n 32s Od to 32s 6d) f 2s01 1) Oatmeal 19s 6d to 20s Od boll? ° 9601D' k of Flour, fine 36s Od to 37s Od ?sac— KIRKCALDY—JUNE 16. Small supplies of all kinds of grain. Wheat is cit e P; r dearer. Barley and oats made the prices of last Iv Wheat. Barley. Oats First 47s Od ;—s ud 29 8 O d second 4Ss Od I 36a Bd 30s 63 Third soa Od 378 ad 318 ad PIGEON FLYING MATCll.—Yesterday mor nog P tA) 10100 match to fly pigeons from Brighton to London 43 7„e to for a stake of £lO. There were ten pigeons belong1"01 different owners tossed up at Brighton at seven o'clo in thirty-three minutes the winning bird reached VS' at Bermondsey. o , l s [ADVERTISEMENT.] Dyspepsia (indigestion), - - ,„,0 tion, debility, consumption, and all nervous, bilious. 0 " - 4 on° and liver complaints in every stage, are only v 0 accelerated by drugs of every description, but perf e t r o 10v able by Du Barry's health-restoring Revalenta 000 Food, as proved by thousands of oases which had be bad' sidered hopeless, such as—cough, asthma, also alioeol4 haemorrhoids, liver complaints, flatulency, O l t ° oel_ 4ll' biliousness, fevers, sore throats, diphtheria, catarr9'n' influenza, noises in the head and ears, rheumatism g,, (1- ple° V , purities, eruptions, hysteria, neuralgia, irritability,o7ollol' ncss, acidity, palpitation, heartburn, headache , poi dropsy, cramps, spasms, nausea and sickness, e're u „ t oeo o ., nancy or at sea, sinking fits, bronchitis, scrofula, tie the chest, pains in the pit of the stomach and he tvi jo10; shoulders, &c. We quote a few :—Cure No. 46,276. 3:yea," Roberts, timber merchant, of Frimley, Surrey, of, o de r : diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangeme ol ' of 0P ; tial deafness.—Cure No. 47,121. Miss Elizabeth Jae° / ;to, 0 0 8 0 treme nervousness, indigestion, gatherings; low' o P_ Ae o,l_., nervous fancies. —Cure No. 1,771. Lord Stuart de Pe' ig,P; of Waterford, of many years' dyspepsits--4%011e4 Fifty years' indescribable agony from dyspepsia, ne_,,, r ne t" $ ll , O asthma, cough, constipation, flatulency, spasms. 0 1 "; .1s 0 ! 3 , vomiting—Maria Joly.—Cure No. 64,816. The T. Campbell, Fakenham, Norfolk, of indigestion 031`90„ ity of the liver, which had resisted all medical UT ; OW , In tins, 1115, •2s 9d; 21b, 4s 6i; 51b, lis; 12115, ~21,500da:%. OlL—Barry Du Barry and Co., No. 77, Regent - street' also Phillips, tea dealers, 8, King William-streetilo'pgaci; at 61, Gracechurch-street ;4, Cheapside ; 13 „„ 16 0 strO 9 o, street Within ; 63, 150, and 298, Oxford-street ; 0 °; 0 01,_.• 003 54, Upper Baker-street; 103, Tottenham-courtm; ost, Upper-street, Islington, N.; Harvey, Nottin..- terr g° olo e Brothers, 65, High-street; and Stubbs , Queen's' od John's-wood, London; and all respectable groerf; mists.—Beware of spurious imitations. Births. o f „, ifi f DUKE—On the 18th inst., at 3, Queen's -garde-cc t, °- park, Lady Duke, wife of Sir James Duke, ) --5 . ilo daughter. 1 sVe FIELD —On the 17th inst., at 6, Eaton-squ are , o• Lady Georgiana Field, of a daughter. A s, iv ' LEIGH—On the 18th inst., at 5, Sussex-gar-,eml3 r. t i park, the wife of C. A. Leigh, Esq., of a daug'o,street, TALBOT —On the 16th inst., at 10, Great o ° °j ,lituO e Westminster, the Hon. Mrs. J. G. Talbot, of $ Marriages. $00 1 ';' A ll i d + PoWNALL—STEINMETz—On the 16th inst., at 1 , 0 0. 0 Langham-place, George Harry, eldest son of O t t . o • yoo l i e Esq., of Great Queen-street, Westminster, f .10 fourth daughter of Wm. T. Steinmetz, Esq" of street, Cavendish-square, and Tovil 11 03 - se t - • a stone. , o 130 414 of, RIDDELL —Scßorz—On the 16th inst., at to, , scllra Chapel, Warwick-street, Edward F. Ilid de .: l .a, t fl‘' The Grange, Northumberland, to ..dela ?d daughter Y° daughter of S. T. S E of P aull. crepe, sq., shire. BLACK —Onaged 71.eatliS. of Of the 17th inst., Alexander Black, Esq, . Regent-square,rang. BLACKISA 15th inst., at 131, N—On the 15th inst., at Chapel-plae, ii, G gate, W m. Blackman, Esq., aged 65. 13. RAM—On the ' Graham lir' , Bart., aged 77. MARllSbire, TIN—On the 16th inst., at Kilmartin, Aro' ed 61. ... Martin, Esq., late of the 3d Dragoon Guards, a i f of gr. rAwLEY—On the 16th inst ,at Dalston, Jan e t W e t C. H. Pawley, aged 76. s tre e l ROSELYN - On the 16th inst., at 12, Lower Delgravie: ea 6 General the Earl of Roselyn, Col. 7th hussars, oco, Park_streat, Si'. SANDILANDS—On the 16th inst., St his mother's 5 5, fe 66, Belsize-park, Walter J. Sandilands, Bacil church-street, aged 23. W °, London : lU N 0:a o v iti ° 'utfe g bed by WIT,LI.O 18-1419. 11‘;Ii of No. 112, Strand, D i e t e r. at Titi; the Strand, In the precinctof tte Savoh 10 ifiddlesen.—Tuesday, June 19, 1E46. 1 a i , 11 A