The Sun. — London, England, 1867-01-31 00:00:00

E SUN, LONUON, THURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 31 1867. Mr. Bright at Rochdale. ROCHDALE, Wednesday Night. A public meeting of Mr. Bright's fellow-towns men was held this evening in the Theatre Royal, which was densely crowded, for the purpose of pre senting an address to him and testifying their respect and admiration of his public and private character. Mr. Henry Kelsall presided. Mr. Bright, on entering the platform, accom panied by Mr. T. B. Potter, Mr. Jacob Bright, and the leading Liberals of the borough, was most warmly received. 'The CHAIRMAN briefly opened the proceedings, observing that they were met to render a simple act of justice to their illustrious townsman, after the recent attacks made upon him by his political ad versari, s, who having vainly exhausted their argu cnts in answering his speeches on behalf of ad mitting a large body of his fellow—countrymen to their just rights, had resorted to the un-English, and he was glad to say the unusual, course of as persing his private character. He had known Mr. Bright 40 years, and could bear witness to his un ceasing anxiety and his efforts to promote the welfare of his workpeople and his poorer townsmen. They could all of them bear the same testimony, and they all knew perfectly well that on many oc casions he could, if he had chosen to desert other friends, have been returned as their representative in Parliament. They were proud of his political fame, and knowing him as they did in all the rela tions of private life, they were still prouder to claim him as a fellow-townsman. (Cheers.) Mr. W. SHEPHERD then moved that the follow ing address be presented to Mr. Bright " Honoured Sir,—We, your fellow-countrymen, in public meeting assembled, desire to express the sincere admiration we feel for your private character and your long and dis tingitished career in advancing the social and political con dition of the people. All the services you have rendered to our common country in conjunction with the illustrious and lamented Mr. Cobden the nation and the world know, and we are thankful to believe that the great announcement of " Peace on earth and goodwill toward men" has received another impetus by your noble efforts to establish friendly relations between the nations of the earth. As an employer of labour you have ever manifested the strongest desire to educate and elevate the working man, and numerous in stances testify that you have always been guided by a love of justice and humanity. We know, sir, that during your long advocacy of the people's cause your words have been frequently misrepresented, and your character unjustly attacked ; and, although we aro assured that you will be ever sustained by the consciousness that your cause is just, we cannot but express our sympathy with you and hope that you may long live to champion the cause of popular freedom." The address was then adopted and presented to Mr. Bright amid loud cheering. Mr. BRIGHT, when the cheering bad subsided, said—l am, as I ought to be, very grateful to you for the address which has just been presented to me, and for the most kind manner in which you bave received the observations which have been made in my favour. If we were all here in the witness-box to-night, I must say that I would not undertake to prove even one-half of that which has been said in my praise ; but grateful as I am, I confess to you honestly that the address and the meeting to-night in prospect have been burdensome to me, for I feel that I have small claim to the honour which my townsmen have seen fit to show me, and I would, if it had been possible, have escaped this meeting alto gether—and, as you know, it has been driven almost to the last moments—to the meeting of Parliament, partly in the expectation and the hope that it might have been forgotten. (A laugh.) I account for your exceeding kindness in this way—that you have observed that I have been assailed in the most unusual manner by public writers and public speakers of a particular party, speaking and writing in many parts of the king dom ; and doubtless you have come to the con clusion, which was reasonable from the fact that some order had gone out from headquarters that all the miserable writers and speakers of the mis , ,:rable and hateful faction should endeavour i the interval between the session of 1866 and the sea-ion of 1867 to defame me as much as possible, in the hope of injuring in some degree whatever in fluence I may have in favour of the great question of the txtension of the franchise ; and, seeing all this you thought it but fair and right that you, my neighbours and townsmen and friends, should give me such support as was in your power, in the hope that, placel as I am, by some accident which I can not explain, partly in the forefront of this great conflict, I might, perhaps, derive, as I shall certainly derive, much strength from yourgenerous sympathy. (Loud cheering.) Wondering sometimes at these various and continued assaults. I have just cast a look over the 25 years of political life which I have lived, and I have asked myself how it happens that that is done in political life which is not done in any other kind of life with which we are acquainted. (Hear, hear.) A man may be very active and in the forefront of a religious controversy ; he may hold the same position in some literary controversy or in some scientific disputation, but no man living, how ever much opposed to him, would think of pursuing him with that rancorous spirit which, unfortunately, is introduced into political controversy, and which has pursued me with an unrelenting animosity, not for months only, but for years past. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") In looking over these 25 years, I found, as far as my mental eye could detect f that my path has been straightforward, not varying, so far as I know, to the right hand or to the left from any un worthy motive. (Loud cheers.) I found that the prin ciples upon which I had acted were well defined,were distinctly avowed, and were easily comprehended, and those principles were simply these—that the law and the administration of the law in this country should regard with just and equal eye all classes of the people—(cheers)—and that to all questions of government, all great national questions, we should bring those simple but sublime principles, the high and everlasting principles of a pure morality, which we deiive, or ought to derive, from the religion which we profess. (Loud cheers.) Now, in these 25 years, so far as I know, I found no divergence from the principles with which I first set out, but unfortunately in some respects I have not allied myself with any political party. (Hear, hear.) The public men of this country are mainly of two parties. The public press until recently was of two parties, and if any politician took a line independent of these two parties he did not and could not hope to receive any friendly support from either of them. (Hear, hear.) Perhaps I have held a peculiar position on another ground. I am, as you know, a member of a small but somewhat remarkable religious sect, a religious body which had a remarkable origin, and which, in its early days at least, had a somewhat re markable history. Of all the religious sects which have appeared in the world, certainly since the cor ruption of the Christian Church, it is that which of all others has moat taught the equality and equal ights of men, and I venture to say that it is re markable for another thing—that, probably more than any other body, within its borders and in its service personal ambition is practically unknown. (Hear.) I think that many of my opinions and much of my course of life have been determined, or at least greatly influe nce d, b y t h e training I received in that body. The belief in the equality of all men in the sight of Heaven, and of the rights of all men before earthly Governments, usually leads to a strong sympathy with the great body of the pe o pl e . (L ou d cheers.) I look upon the multitude, the Inillions who form a nation. In the social rank they may be called of the lowly. They labour more, they suffer more than the ranks above nem. They have less of what we consider enjoyments of life, they have fewer of give to us who a re betterthose compensations which off the many charms of life, and I have karat from my earliest youth to feel for those men—(loud cheers)—to feel for them a sympathy which I have never been able to express in words, and for which I can find no proper exhibition of outward conduct which I can manifest towards them. My belief is that the condition of this vast body of the people might be immensely improved and raised. I believe they might have less toil, more joy in their lives, and more of all that without which to per sons in another state of life it would appear to be hardly worth haying. (Hear.) Well, with this symrathy it was not wonderful that 25 years ago I should find myself called out into active political life. Many of you will recollect the state of this country from the year 1838 to the year 1842, during the period of bad harvests, when starvation visited hundreds and thousands of homes. Now, I became convinced that the origin of that fearful suffering was the landowner's monopoly in the supply of food to the people. (Hear, hear.) In this beautiful address there is a reference to the services which you are kind enough to say I have rendered in con junction with the illustrious and lamented Mr. Cobden. (Cheers.) This reminds me of an inci dent which had something to do with my after career. In the year 1841 I was at Leamington, and spent several months there ; it was near the middle of September, when there fell upon me one of the heaviest blows that can visit any man. I found myself left there with none living of my house but a motherless child. Mr. Cobden called upon me the day after that event, so terrible to me and so prostratir•g. After some conversation he said, " Don't allow this grief, great as it is, to weigh you down too much. There are at this moment in thousands of homes in this country wives and children who are dying of hunger--of hunger made by the law. If you will come along with me we will never rest till we have got rid of the Corn Laws. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) We saw the colossal injustice which cast its shadow over every part of the nation, and we thought we saw the true remedy and the relief, and that if we devoted our selves in conjunction with, as you know, hundreds and thousands of good men in various parts of the country, we should be able to bring that remedy home and afford that relief to the starving people of this country. (Cheers.) 1 recollect in some of our labours when I looked forward to the day I could not but see and know that was coming when that injustice would be removed, and law-made hunger would be for ever after prevented (loud cheers)---I recollect at that time I took to myself something of prophecy from the lives of one of our poets. When that day shall come I thought that then— "Shall misery's sons and daughters In their lowly dwelling sing— Bounteous as the Nile's dark waters, Undiscovered as their spring, We will scatter o'er the land Plenty with a secret hand." And so exactly was that prophecy fulfilled tbat, if you will turn to the Parliamentary books, you will find that from the year 1846 to this year in which I speak more than four hundred million—l believe near five hundred million—pounds' worth of food, which the corn laws were intended to prohibit, has been imported into this country, and has been eaten upon the tables of the English poor—(cheers)----and, as you know, trade has so far extended within 20 years that it has surpassed beyond all calculation its extension in the previous history of England. (Cheers.) Wages have been increased—l was going to say everywhere ; I believe there is scarcely a re mote agricultural parish in which they have not in creased ; but in this district, as I could show from the books of my own business, wages have increased from 30 to 40 per cent., although the actual pro duction of work in many respects has not been in creased at all, but has been diminished, by the shorter hours of labour. Those who were readers of newspapers and who attended public meetings 20 years ago will recollect that during the contest, in which the facts and arguments were on one side—a contest which has ended so triumphantly for us, and with such stupendous advantage to the people— those same writers, same speakers, the same politi cal party, led by thevery man who is now the Prime Minister of England—they were just as busy against the reputation of your late illustrious representa tive, now no more with us. Their calumnies are now steadfastly levelled against me at this very hour. (Loud cheers.) And when that one ques tion of the importation of food was disposed of, why a whole brood of evils perished With it ; the mono poly in sugar ; the monopoly in shipping ; the import duties upon 1,200 or 1,400 articles coming in at our ports were all swept away. In commer cial affairs, as far as the monopoly of protection was concerned, there was a complete revulsion esta blished in the country. The whole country rejoiced at the deliverance, and breathed freely that one great step in freedom never to be retracted had at last been ac..:ounplishecl. (Cheers.) But this great party and the Parliament which would net let the people get their bread from the best markets in the world were equally opposed to the supply of food to the mind. You, who now can get for a penny as good a newspaper as is published in the world — many of you have not an idea of the trammels in which, I suppose almost from the days of Queen Aune until within the last few years, the press of the country was fettered. ,The papermaker could tell you that before he could sell a sheet of paper big enough to print the Manchester Examiner upon, for example, he had to pay an Excise duty of 30 per cent., and there was a Government officer going in and out of his works with equal authority with him self, but when he had paid his 30 per cent. and sent his paper to the office of the Examiner in Man chester, or the Observer here, what followed? Why that the editor, could not print it until he got a stamp put upon it, which stamp cost him as much as the whole value of the paper. The stamp was 100 per cent. on the value of the paper, and when he began to print his newspaper and to fill the columns with those things which newspaper proprietors so much like, what happened ? If the advertisement was one line or two lines only—a lufusemaid want ing a situation, a gardener wanting employment, a clerk wanting a new engagement, or an estate for sale that took a column to fill, the price was all the same. Big and little, each advertisement paid 18d in shape of taxation to the Government. The result was that you had very few newspapers, and they were dear, and I must say, taking them all together that they were not nearly so good as they are now. Now, what is a newspaper in this country ? It is a tremendous power. I wish every newspaper w a s i n the hands not only of an intelligent, but of an honest and good man. If that were the case it would not so often be made the vehicle of slander and the instrument for diffusing errors among the people. But we must have a fair stage, and we hope and believe that that which is true in the newspaper world will finally prevail. But I doubt whether your school system, which is a very bad one, or your pulpit, which doubtless might be improved— (laughter)—or your platform, which assumes great freedom in this country—l doubt whether any one of these can measure itself along with the newspaper power in the influence which it every day exerts on the people, and on the interests and prospects of the country. (Cheers.) But all this was - being strangled by these taxes, and after we had got the advertise ment and stamp duty off, there came a desperate fight, as you remember, about the paper duty. When the House of Commons, carrying the Budget of Mr. Gladstone, repealed the paper duty, the House of Lords, following the rash counsel of Lord Derby, resisted that repeal—they rejected that bill. They brodsoot ftelnselves into partial collision with the House of Commons, and in consequence of that vote, for another year the tax was still collected. But there is not in the world a class of persons who really, if they knew it, were more interested in the abolition of these taxes than the Tory party. I. know no class of men who are so wanting in good information of every kind. (Laughter and cheers.) As I have said that the repeal of the corn law was felt in every hamlet and in every family, I say that the repeal of the taxes on newspapers has been felt in every part of the country, and there is not a single village in the United Kingdom in which the average intelligence of the people has not been raised by that great act of legislation. There is another subject on which I wi:l touch for a =- moment rcmotc from this, but still of great im portance to the interests and character of the nation. You know that Great Britain and Ireland, or rather the Crown of these realms, holds sway over a very large empire in the East Indies, an empire so large that its population is probably more than double the population of the most populous of the other empires of the world, excepting only that of China. I took a great interest in the government of India. I objected to an empire of 120,000,000 or more being confided to 24 directors of an antiquated commer cial company sitting in Leadenhall-street and who were mostly elected by a s y s td m of corruption at .least equal to that by which a large number of members of the House of Commons got their seats. I was against the Company, and insisted that that form of government should be abolished, that the government of India, so long as India was a de pendency of this kingdom, should be direct from the Crown, and that there should be in this country an omnipotent Indian Minister responsible to Par liament. The old system which prevailed was about as bad as it could be. It was good for conquering and taxing, but for nothing else, for the law was bad and the administration was bad, and through out many parts of India I believe the government exercised by the East India Company partoo'k rather of the nature of a Turkish government than of a Christian administration. (Cheers.) Yet we have seen the Indian Minister for two, three, and four hours at a time get up and defend that system. But there came an event (laughter and cheers)—there will come another event before long (cheers) —there came the great Indian Mutiny, when it was within a hair's breadth whether the power of England should not be driven absolutely from India, and what happened? Why the Indian Minister was converted to my view of the case. It was not only my view, but the view of men of far more Indian experience than I had. The Cabinet was converted, the Houses of Parliament were converted, and this company that just before had been described as the most ingenious and admirable system of government was swept away, perhaps not without remorse, but it was swept away, and the Government of the Queen succeeded in its place. There was one recommenda tion of mine which was not followed, to which in one sentence I will refer. I urged that this great empire in India should be divided into five or six in dependent Presidencies or States. 1 argued that the 20 millions of people in the Presidency of Madras could be governed farbetterfrom the city of Madras than they could be governed in conjunction with all the other Presidencies of India by a Government sitting in Calcutta, and I urged that this division should take place on two grounds—first, that India could be governed better by a series of Presidential Governments than by one central authority ; and, further, I used an argument of a more far-reaching character, which is this, that the time would come when the power of England would be withdrawn from India, and that it is our duty to that country, to which we owe so much, to endeavour, if possible, to build up there a series of nationalities, so that when the all-controlling and dominant power of England ended there should remain in each Presi dency a distinct organised nationality which should be able to sustain for itself a government, and.to perpetuate order where, if something of this sort be not done, chaos, I am afraid, must come. There is no such thing permanent as universal empire. If you turn to history you will find that the great empire of Alexander fell to pieces after Alexander's death ; the great empire of Charlemagne fell to pieces after his death ; the First Napoleon appeared as if he was to establish a continental empire, but when his hand was withdrawn that empire separated into several States, and when the hand of England is withdrawn from India, instead of 120 or 150 millions in one nation, in all proba bility you will have a break up and a separation and a chaos, and, it may be, no end of civil strife ; whereas, if we have the power, with creating five or six separate nationalities of a reasonable size, in all probability when the time came for England to withdraw from India, that great country might be resolved into five or six several States, in which there ought to be good government and order, just as much as there is at least among the various nations of Europe. I must speak of another coun try, which, though geographically not so far from us as India, is still unhappily partly in the condition of a foreign, and even of a hostile, country. I allude to Ireland. (Hear, hear.) There is a party in England which speaks of justice to Ireland as if it were merely a catch phrase for the popular ear in that country, and as if it had no real meaning. Now, I hold that to sustain in a country a foreign and a hostile Church, and to confiscate all the ecclesiastical revenues of that country to that Church, and that Church enclosing within its bor ders but a very small minority of the people—l say that that is an act of injustice such as I believe statesmanship or mirstatesmanship has never yet committed in any other country—(cheers) —and I say, further, that to maintain laws which are adverse to the national division of the land where the whole soil has been confiscated, as it has been within the last 200 years, is to perpetuate the exclu sion of the people from the possession of their own soil, and to create and make perpetual pauperism and discontent. If that were done in Poland, in Hun gary, in Venetia—if it had been done under the in fluence of a conquering Government, I believe there is not a single man or woman iu England who would not have been ready to condemn such a state of things. (Cheers.) I have raised my voice on many occasions —I believe on every fitting occasion—against a state of things which is absolutely destructive of content and loyalty in Ireland. With regard to other subjects, you know that I have on some occasions spoken against the existence of laws of this country favouring the preservation of game. I believe them to be most in jurious to the farmer and most demoralising to the labouring population on the farms. You k n o w th a t 11 have been opposed to what I considered an ex cessive cruelty in our penal code, and specially I have been opposed to that most barbarous return of heathett times—the infliction of the punishment of death. You know, further, that I have urged altera tions in our laws with regard to land, leaving natural circumstances to interfere with that injurious ac cumulation of land which is constantly proceeding in this country, and that I have recommended that common sense and common justice should deal with property when it comes from some owner who has died intestate—that is, without a will. (Cheers.) And you know that on many occasions I have argued that it was for the direct and obvious interests of the nation that there should be esi ablished univer sally a system of education which should be under local direction, and supported by local rules. (Cheers.) You know, also, that with regard to a point referred to is the address as to peace between nations I was greatly opposed to the war carried on 12 years ago for the support of the Mahomedan Empire, in which, as I believe this country had not the remotest interest, as at various times I have argued with the people of this country against those foolish panics with regard to France, in favour of peace for ever with this country, and more recently in favour of the most cordial friendship with the English nation beyond the Atlantic. (Cheers.) I have merely mentioned these subjects to show you what are the points which I have felt it my duty to touch during the 25 years of my political career. On looking back I do not con demn myself for anything I have done with regard to any one of these questions, and I believe now, when I stand before you thus to recapitulate them, that you will not condemn me. (Cries of " No !") Nor will you say that I have knowingly swerved from the great commanding and direct inghich when I first came before til e principlepub l ic 131)(3n intended ' to base my political life. (Cheers.) There is one thin g , it is true, that I greatly regret in this retrospect,and that is the small success that has attended any efforts that I have been able to make—(no, no) —with regard to many of these subjects. And now, when I ask a very rea sonable thing, that the millions of my countrymen may be freely heard in that Chamber which for so many hundreds of years has called itself the Com mons of England, when I ask that they shall be heard, when I have said that it would be a good thing for the United Kingdom, and good for free dom everywhere, that they should now seize the sceptre which for the last 200 years has been wielded by a class—when I say this I a m subjected not only to opposition—for that I could understand —but to an opposition conducted with a falsehood and a malice which know no scruple, and which, if I were not supported by the honest sympathie.4 of millions of my countrymen, might overwhelm me. (Cheers.) What is the end proposed by these changes ? It is not to destroy our institutions, it is not to change a dynasty, it is not to seize the pro perty of the rich, it is not to give to ignorance and to vice the disposition of great national affairs, but it is. to give power to Parliament from that source from which its only power can be received, so that Parliament may have power to remedy abuses which are acknowledged to exist on every hand in the de partments and thelegislatiun of the State. (Cheers.) Parliament has not power now to save the public money. We would give it power to save the public money ; to make the law something felt of justice and benevolenee throughout the whole land ; and also that it should be able to raise the people to the highest level of comfort and instruction, of morality and freedom. (Cheers.) At this moment, notwith standing that the omnipotence of Parliament exists as it has ever existed, Parliament is paralyzed. You hear some talk about the reorganization of the army . Ido not know what that is or means. It generally ends in a large additional vote of money. You hear some talk of the reconstruction of the navy. This will end in another million or two being voted beyond the excessive votes of past years. Every body says that the Board of Admiralty wants re forming ; but there is no power in Parliament to re form it. Everybodyknows that the laws of England are a chaos hardly equalled in the world besides, and that it remains very much like what Cromwell de scribed them 200 years ago when he said that they were a " tortuous and ungodly jungle." They re main very much so now in this country; while in the various States of North America the whole legal s} stem has been codified, so that some men, at least, can understand the law. The law of England stands such that no man, not even the greatest luminary on the Bench, can tell you what the law of England is on 50 questions. Take the question of education, you will hardly talk to a man in the House of Corn mons who will not tell you that education is a great question, and admit that what has been done has been done awkwardly and expensively, and that somethingmore is required; but I do not believe that it is in the power of any Government to pass any decent or satisfactory measure through that house. Take the caseof the Church. Onedoes not like to say much against the Church, because the Church always says that she is in danger, and I would not add to her fears ; but the Church just now reminds me very much of that old woman of whom the doctor asked what was the matter with her, and she said that she did not know, but she felt very badly in her inside. (Laughter.) I am not referring to anyassaults upon the Church from the outside ; but I see every day in the newspapers accounts of the fearful conflicts waging within the borders of the Church itself ; and when anything comes to a crisis it goes to a court of law, to the Committeeof the Privy Council, or some where else, and a number of judges with wigs on decide what is or what is not orthodox in the Church of England. lam glad to see zeal in the Church of England, but if any Churchman gives himself the trouble to read what I am saying, I beg to remind him that nothing is so perilous for an Established Church as religious zeal, and I should not be sur prised if some within this building who are now lis tening to me will witness a tremendous catastrophe in that venerable institution—the Established Church of England. But Parliament cannot meddle with the Church of England. It has not the power, of course. If everybody is willing, Parliament could upset the Church of England, like the Parliament of Florence is just doing in Italy ; but, at present, Parliament has not the power to do anything with regard to it. Take the question of the accumula tion of land. Why, if a man rose from the dead on the floor of the House of Commons to point out the terrible consequences of the land laws to the great bulk of the population labouring on the land, to the great and small landowners, they would say he was an impostor, and tell him to begone to the realms whence he came. (Cheers.) Take the question of Ireland. There is no man in the louse of Commons who takes more interest in, or who is more friendly to a'just goverment of Ireland than Mr. Gladstone ; there is no man either in the Ministry or the Oppo sition who can prevail on the House of Commons to do anything substantial to remedy the grievances of the Irish people. In fact, it has been so for a long time in the Parliament of England, from the time of the Revolution down to the time of the Reform Bill, a dreary period of 140 years. You will look in vain for any considerable, wise, or good legisla tion in that House. Immediately after the Reform Bill, on the wave of a great popular commotion, there were many useful measures passed, and fol lowing the agitation for free trade, aided by the famine in Ireland, a commercial revolution was ac complished, but since then nothing has been done and nothing can be done at this moment. I ven ture to say that the corruption of Parliament and the class interests there represented are dominant, and that the House of Commons is paralysed for good. You hear in the Tory papers, which are s thea said people canno t o n agree behalf d o o f a a n •G y t o b v i n e r g n on e n t the e q .w u l s i e t h i on i t o i n s looking around for some kind o f excuse to offer to which the people want something to be done, that they are going to offer a whole batch of measures of administrative reform. Some measures may be proposed, and one or two probably passed, but it majority o f th a t body will be something very small, for yo u can h ave no idea, who have not sat in the House of Co mmons , how yt o g difficultaree to a i ist toy g o pr ood on a measurewhatsoever; and I say neither Lord Russell, nor Mr. Gladstone, nor week can prevail Lord Derby, nor Mr. D m is e r a a s e u li r , es no o r f any am ot e h li e o r ra m tio an n next t d honestly to the considerationownhoi t w t il o l smeetet itselfinofth any ys H olu ou te s l e y and improvement which the people have a right to demand, and which nearly every man in Parliament will admit call for its attention. (Cheers.) I say that there is only one power in the country which can do anything in these matters, and that power is that the people that in this country, sayin g g t never was more i t tsr h u e t eh p et e h o sao p nu l people. There os T f a h pt e o r tl e hi am a l n opm o o l le d vne s tr a . is at any rate, there is no other source of political power to be exerted on behalf of the people. There fore, I say, without fear of contradiction, that the extension of the franchise, and the improvement of the representation of the people, which I ha v e for gmaenssyayneda by th e rtshdem anded, safety loudinevitableis as ne cessary for the pro gathering and the almost unanimous cry of a great people. (Ch eers. ) l am therefore, if it be possible, more than ever in favour of this Reform, and I believe it to be necessary for the House of Commons, necessary for every insti tution of the country,_ and as absolutely necessary for the contentment of the people. (Cheers. Ido not intend to make a speech to-night, and, indeed, I have not made a speech on the subject of Reform. I have rather contented myself with looking.back over 25 years since I have been confronted openly and prominently with the politics of the country. I have pointed out to you many of the great ques tions in which I have taken any interest. In some of these questions a grea t prog ress has been made ; in some others, in many o th ers , very little has been done. I plead b e f ore you as a fair tribunal of my countrymen against the charges which have been brought against me of anti-national feelings, of a disregard for the true interests and the real and valuable institutions of the nation. (Cheers.) I judge by this meeting, and by this kind address that you have presented to me, that you admit my plea, and that you freely and unanimously acquit me. I thank you from my heart for this address, and for your manifold kindness to me. lam overpowered with the sense of how little it is possible for any man to do to merit this kind of confidence and the amount of commendation which you have shown and expressed to me to-night. You judge favour ably of my services. I have not worked, as you know, for honours or the emoluments of office. I have striven for the substantial good of the millions of my countrymen, an d I can rest content with the feeling that my count r y w ill do me justice. The hon. gentlema n , having spoken more than an hour, sat down amid en thusiastic cheering. On the motion of Alderman Thomas Ashworth, —" seconded by Alderm an E. L. Ashworth, and sup ported by Mr. Coun c ill or John Petrie, it was re solved That this meeting, r egarding Parliamen tary Reform as th e po liti ca l question of the day, thoroughly - approves Mr. Bright's course in refe rence to it, and assures him of its hearty sympathy, and pledges itself to give him and his colleagues its earnest support until a good, honest, andsubstantial Reform Bill becomes the law of the land." The usual vote of thanks was then given to the chairman and the proceedings terminated. ARRIVAL FROM JAMAICA.--The steamer Chian, with dates ,from Jamaica to January 4, arrived at Liver pool yesterday. News had been received of a rising of Indians at Honduras, and troops had been sent from Kings ton to Belize to suppress the revolt. Our Holiday at the Hayes. BY GEORRE STRONG, M.D. (From the Anglo-American Times.) Dr. Strong's object in giving this little volume to the world is clearly to treat an abstruse subject in a pleasant and popular style. In his opinion homoeopathy is the path in medicine which leads the physician to the true system of treatment, and he brings out forcibly the ad vantages of this practice and in a conversational style, which , may be generally read and understood by the world. He takes his readers with him, and a party of medical men, to a pleasant country house, and he is careful to introduce an allopath army surgeon and a well-read country squire to maintain the argument. Those who know little of homoeopathy, and desire to know more, may here gather the honey of much labour in a couple of hours' agreeable reading. A lecture is playfully introduced, in which the party is carried into a century hence, when all the errors of the present and past are exposed. From Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood, which proved a greater triumph for surgery than for medicine, the lecturer traces the successive blunders which followed from phlebotomy with its leeches, cup ping, and lancet, to the thriving trade of the chemist, when the wholesale consumption of drugs was the order of the day. Errors are discovered and dismissed, after hundreds of thousands have fallen victims, till, at last, science strikes into the right and onward path leading to the golden age of medicine, which, according to our author, is the homoeopathic system of treatment. It would be presumption in us to do more than state Dr. Strong's opinion, which he backs with able arguments and strong facts. In this free land, people can choose for themselves, and such works, which have every appearance of an open and honest discus sion of the subject, can easily be procured by all. We quote from his work : " Dr. Jones resumed :—You are a friend to Dr. Billing, and I daresay you remember the opening sentence of his clever principles of medicine ?' " The first step towards treating disease success fully is to ascertain, as free as possible, the nature of the alteration which has taken place in the seat of the disease, or what has been called technically the proximate cause. How if this step prove a false step ? Nothing in life is more common. A patient with an obscure and obstinate ailment runs up to town, and takes the opinion of half-a dozen of our leading physicians, and I will lay you any amount of odds that not even two will agree in the opinion and treatment. Thus a notable fallacy generally underlies the first step. Here is one of our greatest triumphs : our treatment is quite independent of the proximate cause. Here are a score of the most formidable known diseases, all arising from infinitesimal poisons. The nuMber is so large . as to lead us to infer that most diseases spring from causes more highly sub tilised than the common minerals of our globe. Further, moisture, heat, and cold—subtle agents still, are the prolific source of the next great class of acute attacks. Now,. Mr. Carlyon candidly admits that many of our drugs may be considered as poisons too. Ought not, then, a shrewd intel ligent mind, to catch a hint from this obvious analogy, and strive to work out hence some simple and practical method of employing the one to com bat the other ? Why persist in carrying gross drugs against mtherialised poisons, or powers ranging at large in our bodies ? " This idea of a drug poison and a disease poison, carrying on a combat a l'outrance with each other, and the battle-field being a man's body, has many an analogue in nature or in art." * * The knowledge that the exciting cause is virulent poison does not very much assist the homoeopa thist in the cure. We may learn this from the study of another exciting cause—cold. If the present company at this moment were exposed to cold, one of our number might be attacked with catarrh, another pneumonia, a third with pleurisy, rheumatism, or erysipelas ; but appropriate reme dies would have to be sought according to the homoeopathic law. The medicine chosen must agree with the symptom, not with the cause, otherwise we might have a panacea or universal remedy for all the varied effects of cold. From this subject the conversation goes on to discuss a case in which the drug was given as a cure, which would produce the symptoms under which the patients were labouring, which is in accordance with the law of homoeopathy. Formerly, in allo pathic days, says Dr. Strong, with doubt and quaking, I used to knock at my patient's door ; now I have no fears. I walk in confidently, and it is an exceptional occurrence to find a patient unexpectedly worse, or suffering a relapse. There is a great change. Illnesses are shortened ; the dangers and horrors of the old system are vastly mitigated. Think, too, what a gain, what a relief, to the mind of the physician, that he now follows one rule, one law in prescribing, instead of hesitat ing between half-a-dozen fine-spun speculations ! He quotes from Dr. Lardner's discourse on the study of Natural Philosophy the following sentence : "So far as our experience has hitherto gone, every advance_ towards generality has at the same time, been a step towards simplification. It is only when we are wandering and lost in the mazes of par ticulars, or entangled in a fruitless attempts to work our way downwards in the thorny paths of appli cations, to which our reasoning powers are incom petent, that nature appears complicated ; the moment we contemplate it as it is, and attain a position from which we can take a commanding view, though but a small part of its plan, we never fail to recognise that sublime simplicity On which the mind rests satisfied that it has attained the truth." Several medical questions of absorbing interest are discussed, but the author as far as possible adheres to his plan of making the subjects intelligible to the ordinary reader. Those who have faith in homoeopathy, would have their faith strengthened, and unbelievers in the systeth might be converted. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. n.ustralia and New Zealand, via Southampton. --Feb. 19 Ditto, via lifarseilles .......... Feb. 3 Brazil and Capa Verdi. by British packet. Ycb. Ditto, by French packet Cape of Good Hope, Asoension, and St. Helena Feb. 27 China, Penang. and Sing4pore, via Southampton Feb Ditto, via Marseilles Feb. 13 Faikland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton Feb. 2. India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Bouthampton 1%_1) 2. Ditto, via Marseilles India (Bombay), via Southampton. Feb. 2 ._ . Ditto, via iarseillee Feb 7. Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Feb 2. Ditto, via Marseilles Feb 7 Mauritius, via Southampton Ditto, via Marseille 3... Fr b. • 3 Newfoundland Portugal • Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon.. United States and British North America, by Bri tish packet. Ditto, by United States packet, via Southamp ton Ditto, via Cork Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderry .. Feb 1 BEDS IN SPAIN.—Next to the cuisine, beds became perhaps the most important consideration to a traveller; and of those provided by our amo, we can not speak too highly. They were soft, _springy, and beautifully clean, and cradled us most snugly till about seven o'clock next morning, the early dawn of Madrid ope rative life. It has become a conventionalpractice to impugn -the cleanliness of the Peninsula in the matter of domestic vermin, but whatever its deficiencies in other respects, we must speak of it as wo found it in this. Although it certainly was our lot at Cordova " males pati culices," this was the solitary instance in which we ever saw any of these uninteresting entomological specimens. Victor Hugo's mother, during her husband's diplomatic career in Madrid, describes with unpleasant minuteness the " swarms" of those creatures she encountered in the folds of the blue and unit= satin draperies of Prince Masserano's Palacio. All we can say is, we were 1010.3.1 in a thimoughly Spanish house (certainly sixty years later than the time to which Maclaine la Gdn6rale alludes), and never saw the ghost of a " Norfolk Howard." After all Spain is not so vary arriere, and we may blush to read in " Pepys' Diary," at the date of 1668, the following plain spoken ;entry " 12th, Friday.—Up, finding our beds good, but lousy: which did make us merrie !" —Colas de Espana. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—On the eve of the session there is an ever increasing difference to be observed between the political public and political personages. The former are all curiosity and zeal. Nothing will satisfy them but they must know at once what foes as well as friends are about to do. They assume that every thing has been decided ; yet, somewhat inconsis tently, they wish to feel they are strengthening re- , solution and contributing advice, and so entitling themselves to share the triumph at hand. On the other hand, the personages have but little to say, and don't wish to say it. Their great anxiety is to keep themselves perfectly clear for any course that may be found best. They are aware that their words are not only heard by their admiring consti tuents, but are also put down by truthful reporters, printed, dispersed over the world, and carefully scru tinised by clever antagonists in search of rash pro mises, unsound principles, or foolish admissions. They are, or ought to be, masters in the art of " reticence"—the new name for what was once called the use of language to conceal meaning. So nobody of any sense would expect to learn much from a speech by Mr. Milner Gibson, a letter in stead of a speech by Mr. C. Villiers, or an address by the noble and youthful M.P. for Nottingham. We should be really sorry to think that we pos sessed even the outlines of a policy in the ingenious compositions before us ; and, in fact, they are stu diously wide of any mark that might be imagined. Mr. Milner Gibson favours his constituents with a neat speech on the restoration of peace in the United States, on the working of the French treaty, the Reform debate of last session, and the advan tages of popular Government, with nothing nearer the approaching crisis than replies to one observa tion in a Conservative journal, and another by a =Conservative acquaintance. Mr. Villiers reminds the people of Wolverhampton that he has always been a Reformer on all subjects whatever, and may, therefore, be trusted to do what is best when the time comes, but that, as he wishes to give every proposal the fairest consideration, he would rather not drop a word that might prejudge the question. Lord Amberley dis courses at large about the Constitution, the proper I place and composition of the House of Commons. the licence to be accorded to the working classes in the choice of their own political methods, the can dour due from one class to another, and the exag gerated estimates apt to be formed of all political reforms. The people of Nottingham must have thought him exceedingly clever in concealing some thing or other, but whether that were knowledge or the contrary would not be so clear. It is a very pretty speech, nevertheless. Mr. Milner Gibson may be considered the proper representative of ex treme opinions in the late Cabinet, and on that ac count alone would be worth the sort of eaves-drop ping attention now given to many a man of less consequence. When he tells us, in reply to some observations he has seen and beard, that any mea sure introduced by a Conservative Government will be either a good one or a bad one, and that in the former case it will split the party, in the latter ex pose it to certain defeat, he says only what has been said before, and is so probable as to occur to most people without high and authoritative sugges tion. Indeed, it is the confessed dilemma of Go vernment, which, like every Conservative or Tory Government there ever was, contains men only held back by their colleagues. Reform, however, must come, he says, even in the case of a Conservative break-up, as in that case there will, he says, be two " Caves," the one of which might be paired against the other. We don't quite see how the four parties, great and small, supposed in this double succession, are to sort themselves so as to form a convenient ar rangement for the passage of a good measure. Unless a millenium is even nearer than our sages predict, we can scarcely hope to see five hundred sensible Whigs and Tories agreeing upon a bill, condemned by the recondite reasons of a hundred crotchety bigots or philosophers. We have no wish to see honest independence of opinion trampled under the feet of so overwhelming a majority, however wise and patriotic. But such specula tions only convict themselves, for in the high game of politics the only thing that comes to pass is the unexpected, and that which never comes to pass is the nice little scheme that is to make everything straight and square. There is more faith to be placed in the restoration of ex-Monarchs to their lost thrones than the easy, pleasant, and honourable accomplishment of great reforms. On this point, then, we cannot quite go along with Mr. Milner Gibson. He has more claim to our acquiescence When he says that all the reasons alleged for the postponement of Reform—indefinite as that post ponement must inevitably be —are, in truth, the best reasons for its immediate settlement. The supposed four-fifths now wanting representation cannot reasonably be desired to wait till our diffi culties and arrears have been disposed of by the old Parliament. If they have a right to more place and might in the Legislature, the right is as good for one set of measures, or one branch of legislation, as another. Least of all can the existing House claim to do all that ik . has left undone, and mend all that it has done ill. A domestic servant is dismissed because he wont do his work and leaves it in arrears; and he certainly would not gain a respite by point ing to the disorder, the confusion, the accumulation, and the dirt visible in the whole range of his depart ment, and calling for immediate attention. The principal objection that presents itself to Lord Am berley's remarks, where they approach the great question, is that they were Lord Amberley's. He is of opinion that there are too many sons and re latives of peers in the House of Commons, and that there is too close an alliance between that house and the aristocracy, The result is that it does not represent the people. He would rather a less repre sentation of the nobility, and more of the working class, and he goes so far as to recongnize iu the Trades' Unions a sound and safe embodiment of the working classes and a means for their representation. So far as we understand his lordship, he would like to see a score or two lords a❑d honourables giving place to the secretaries, delegates, and other gentlemen we have heard so much of lately. They would be able to advocate with authority the claims of labour, and enable it to fight better its old battle with land and capital. This would, of course, come under the head of those fancy franchises denounced by none so much as the great party to which Lord Amberley belongs, and it certainly implies a very different system of representation from that in favour with high Liberal authorities. But why does Lord Amberley confine his suggestions to the House of which he has seen so little, and which, in the course of nature, he can only be a bird of passage? Has he no plan for giving more efficiency to the House of Lords, and making it fitter for its place in the Legis lature? Can he not even suggest how it is to be assimilated to the more numerous, more powerful, and more energetic body, with which it must always work in entire harmony? When the lordlings are eliminated from the Commons, who is to secure that they shall run well with the Lords, and leave that House at least worth a seat in it? It is easy enough to criticise, but not to stop in criticism. Anyhow, the House of Commons, as it exists, is as good as the Lords; and if the one is to be reformed,—off the face of the creation if necessary,—what exemption or grace can be claimed for the other ? POST.—Whatever differences of opinion may exist in respect to the politics of the Earl of Clarendon, none will deny his title to be considered a fair sample of an English nobleman. Tories may regret that be is a Liberal ; but even his great political oppo nents would not venture to suggest that he has not done credit to the aristocracy of which he is a mem ber. He has taken a prominent place in the House of Peers. Ile has done good service to the State. He has on several occasions been one of the principal advisers of his Sovereign. In his private capacity his worth has been no less unequivocally recognised. lie is a kind and considerate land lord, a polished and educated gentleman. His demeanour is courteous, and those who, when he held the seals of. Secretary of State, knew him in the light of an empl9yer, have always rendered a willing tribute to the kindliness of his character and' his forbearance. No one, therefore, could be better fitted than the Earl of Clarendon to vindicate the peerage from the imputations which it has be come the fashion for a certain class to cast upon,it, and we are glad to see that he availed himself of the opportunity of doing so at the annual meeting of the West Hertfordshire Agricultural Society a few days since. Of the merits of societies such as these it is needless to speak, and the eulogy passed upon them by the Earl of Clarendon will doubtless be re ceived without contradiction. In alluding to the benefits arising from the meetings of men engaged in the same kind of business, he pointed out that community of interest had a tendency to sweep away class distinctions, and then added that if such distinctions were created or maintained it was by those who sought to cause ill will or disunion amongst the people of this country. " This sin," •continued the Earl of Clarendon, " for it would be a sin if it existed, is generally laid at the door of the aristocracy, and every now and then a scapegoat 15 seat foith into the world laden with the sin of the aristocracy, and iy usually prsonitied by souie un fortunate peer who is very ignorant, very lloat(d, and who is au enemy to progress, and who is o ' wealthy and so selfish as to be incapable of sym pathising with the wants and aspirations of the Foor." This is in truth a terse résumé of the articles of a very curious political creed which !s now taught, although not for the first time, in this country, and it may not be out of place at a time like the present, when a complete recasting of the national institutions is demanded, to inquire how far the charges made against the peerage can be justified. The Earl of Clarendon gave them an indignant denial, and disapproved the existence of class distinctions by illustrations of individuals who, though of the humblest origin, had risen to the highest places in the State. To a certain ex tent these answers may be considered conclusive. It is not very easy to explain the grounds on which the extreme members of the Radical party seek to cast odium on the House of Lords. It is very in telligible that any section of a community which is debarred the exercise of particular privileges should regard with dislike those who are more favoured than themselves, and this dislike would naturally be enhanced if the enjoyment of the coveted privileges depended upon pure accident. - The case made against the House of Lords is that its members are entitled to legislate for the nation, not because they are more intelligent or more industrious, or more wealthy than their fellow-citizens, but simply be cause they happen to be the legal heirs of inihvi duals who were entitled to legislate before them. Thus far the case of the Radical party is easy to be understood. However excellent a hereditary peer age may be, it is incontestable that many nations flourish without one, and it is certainly a fair ques tion for discussion whether an individual should be entitLd to a seat in the T..egi,,lature Ly the mere accident of birth. But the opponents of the Eng lish House of Lords do not stop here. They con stantly urge not only that a peer may be an unfit legislator, but that he must be so ; and they make it an essential element of their case that he has direct interest in oppressing his fellow-subjects, and moreover, that he loses uo opportunity of doing so. Mr. Bright on more than one occasion has said that a hereditary peerage was an opprobrium to a civi lised State ; and he and those who support his views assume that no political system should acknowledge any rank, much less its incidental privileges, unless acquired by the intelligence or worth of the indivi dual. The suggestion that a peer individually, or the whole peerage collectively, must have interests antagonistic to the interests of the nation, appears to us not only gratuitous, but is in fact contra dicted by almost every page of English history. If the unenfranchised choose to consider themselves the nation they may point to the opposition which the peers offer to their projects as a proof of the soundness of their theory, but those who regard the unenfranchised as only a section of the English people will probably be of opinion that the peers may well entertain a conscientious view that in opposing certain propo se d c h ang es they are acting in the interests of the entire nation. When the agi tation for the Reform Bill of 1832 was at its height the opposition of the House of Peers to that mea sure put the House in extreme peril, but few persons can entertain a doubt that the peers were actuated by a patriotic desire to maintain a political system which they believed worked well. If they were mis taken in this respect they shared the fallibility com mon to mortals. It is, however, their personal even more than their political character that the peers have most cause for indignation at finding attacked by their opponents.' The Earl of Clarendon was jus tified in protesting against the practice of invariably selecting a peer as the embodiment of all that is selfish and unpatriotic. It is scarcely necessary to say that no body of ipen could exist in a free cowl try whose members were such as Mr. Bright and his friends paint the members of the English peerage. And the most conclusive proof of the fallacy of the assumption on which these gentlemen base thelr arguments is supplied by the good esteem in which the members of the House of Lords are, as a rule, held by those who are brought in contact with thein. If Mr. Bright, as the representative of the manu facturing classes, commands the respect of opera tives and mechanics, the Earl of Clarendon, as a re presentative of the landed interest, comm ands the , respect of those who ar e occu pi e d i n cultivating soil and rearing stock, and i s e l ec t e d by them the president of the agri cu lt ura l soc i e ty o f the count): in which some of hi s es t a t es are s it ua ted. Surely agriculture is as well entitl e d t o be represented in a country as manufacturing labour. The mistake which the extreme reformers make consists in taking a one-sided view of a matter which at all events ad mits of being regarded in two different lights. the COUNTRY MARKETS. SALISBURY.-TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was an average attendance. Good wheat ruled dull, at 2s to 3s under former prices. The trade in barley also slow. Oats made late figures. , The following are the q uotations :—Wheat realised fro": to 65s ; barley, 37s to 53 8 ; oa ts, 24s to 30s ; beaus, 4 "' to 58s; and peas, 40s to 52s per qr. Tares, from 4i 6d to 5 , 6 d per bushel ; B es t b rea d, 15d ; h ouse h o ld ditto, 1 per 81b loaf. Flour, 45s to 49s per sack. MONMOUTHSHIRE—TUESDAY. The supplies at the various markets have boen rod O f most descriptions of grain, and wheat came to hand in Yeri fair condition. A good show of barley, mostly foreign; best malting qualities moved off freely at late rates, an '_; grinding sold a t en h ance d quo t a ti ons . - English and fore i g n beans commanded late values. The following are the average quotations:—Wheat, red, 7s 3d to 7s 6d per bushel ; white, 7s 9d to 8s Od ; inferior, Gs Od to 6s 6d ; malting barley, 46s to 52s per qr ; ing ditto, 31s to 34s Od; beans 44s to 508; w hite oats, zi to 28s ; black ditto, 24s 6d to 25s 6d. TUESDAY. At this day's market there was a fair attendance o f the trade, but the business done was limited, and quite Of lb retail character. E ng lish white wheat, 66s to 7 0s; red, 63s to 665; D 3 ,n t : sic and Konigsberg, 67 s to 72 s ; Baltic red, 62 s to 60' Danish and llamburg, 58s to 60s ; Itussian, 55s to 5 _., 664 Barley, English, 36s to 50s; grinding, Moditerrane. v • P ' 34s to 35s 6d. Oats, new English, 26s to 28s; RUSSIO2 26s to 275. Beans, old English, 58s to 60s• ' foreign, to 445. Peas, English blue, 42- t o 44 s Od • foreign 44s to 455; grinding, 43s to 44s Od per qr, LYNN—MONDAY. • There was a small market to-day, and a moderate sbc'lrs of wheat, which m o t a s t ea d y sale at last week's rat e except damp parc e l s , w hi c h were eas i er t o b u y. Malt and grinding barley was quite as dear. Oats and he firm. New wheat, 54s to 58s ; new red, 40s to 48s ; old 'far 67s to 71s ; old re d, 59 s to 63s per 36 stone. Barley' ;v.'", malting, 46s to 52s ;secondary, 37s to 38s. Oats , De 24s to 28s per 24 stone. Beans, small, 42s to 445. r e ‘'' 36s to 40s per 28 stone. GAINSBOROUGH - lIESDAY. At our market to-day there was a moderate 41 0 ° 6 60 wheat, which met a fair sale, at extreme rates—old, 036 to 68s; red and mixed, 61s to 62s per 36 stone. Her barley rather improved in price. Oats sold at for"' rates. Beans firm. COAL MARKET. Price per ton at the close of the market. a. s. d. s. 6 Eden Main Tunstall Holywell Main l9 6 Hatton Lyons .....••• 4 3 6 Russell's Hetton... Wallsend Haswell 2O 6 Ships at market, 45—sold. 29. .Births. 1101 1 . BRUCE—On the 28th inst., at 13, Hertford-street, tho Mrs. Thomas Bruce, of a daughter. v air DOU GLAS—On the 29th inst., at 21, Moray-place, '- burgh, the wife of F. Brown Douglas, Esq., of a so a il ; of NORTHET —On the 28th inst., at Colchester, the w"" Captain Northey, of a daughter. fit TEvoit—On tho 30th inst., at 19, Belgrave-squa re ' Lady Edwin Hill Trevor, of a daughter. Marriages. VA V ' FARRELL SADLER—At the Royal Bavarian Chapel, Abe wick-squire, London, Fergus Farrell, Esq., late let Royal) Regiment, to Mary, only daughter of the la' Sadler, Cheadhall, Bedale, Yorkshire. GORE—PONTIFEX— On the 30th inst., at St. Paul's (-)P3 PJ Hawley-road, Fred. Gore, of Grayford, second sc' u e - r oae l Gore, Esq., of Herne Parsonage, Kent, to Sophia, 6 ;tef' daughter of It. Pontifex, Esq., of Sandyway, Glou shire, and St. Martin's-lane, London. Deaths. n jOir CALEY— On the 27th inst., Nathaniel H. Caley, of 1 4 ° street and the Chantry, aged 43. Afddle ee%' CAlinicK—On the 28th inst., at New Hampton, 0- 1 A 1.40 V James Carrick, of Churton-street, Belgrave - ro d don, aged 48. Church GREENE— On the 29th inst., at the Abbey Ruins, yard, Buiry St. Edmund's, John Greene, Esq. s° aged 56. , „, ):.s Oa tic Dr:glitou, r. eG'{- 11 ' e — c i ° 1 1. Esq., a J.P. and D.L. for the county of Susses, ag vet'' VERA —On the 18th inst., at Borne, Madme. Carlotta (n6o llaeser), aged 83. London: Printed end Published bylr I.lArvi.A. lo N k l : l ,l l ' l, of No. tl2, etnnd, Putter at TiZ Surf OfV O , - , ‘' t Strand, in '.h^ Precinct of the Savoy, in the t ' °" Middlesex,—Thursday, January 31, 1867. for nn tr e th© th e Att, 4 av, Su RIJN 4441 e S It Erat 3 J Xiitib kg Ito Itt tail