The Sun. — London, England, 1861-03-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF COMMONS.T(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after twelve o'clock, NAVY (WOODEN SHIPS). Mr. CORRY obtained a return specifying the names of the wooden ships intended to carry guns on more than one deck now building, and showing in Bths the state of pro gress of each ship towards completion. COUNTY FRANCHISE BILL. Mr. LOCKE KING moved the second reading of this bill. He said, as the principle of the bill had frequently been approved by that house, he need not repeat the argu ments which had been adduced in its favour; but he had to regret that hon. gentlemen who opposed him did not resort to direct means for throwing it out, but took indirect measures, which he did not think creditable to the house. The hon. gentleman met some objections which have been urged against the bill, and came to the conclusion that there were no real force in them. lie strongly urged upon the Government the necessity of proceeding without delay with some practical measure of reform. Mr. A. SMITH moved as an amendment "The previous question." He thought they could not look to the measure by itself, but must regard the inevitable consequences which would flow from it. If they proposed this bill it would be impossible to retain those differences which ought to exist between county and town constituencies. He considered that the hon. member for Birmingham had done much to retard the progress of reform by his ceaseless agitation. Although that hon. gentleman perseveringly smoked the pipe of peace, he raised such a cloud of smoke as to lead to the supposition that there was something like incendiarism at the bottom of it. Mr. DL CANE considered that the motion of the lion. member for East Surrey was extremely inopportune at the present moment, and he therefore seconded the amend ment. The question had been fairly discussed i n t wo sue. cessive Parliaments, and under the auspices of two adminis trations, and he had no hesitation in saying that, throughout the country there was a perfect indifference on the matter. Lord HENLEY objected to the bill, because, while it created a vast number of additional county electors, it made no provision for diminishing the expenses of county elec tions, which were at present enormous and scandalous. In Northamptonshire the expenses of conveying voters in one year, from February, 18.58, to February, 1859, were £lO,OOO, or very close upon it. He would take the case of Colches ter. In that county there was a farm of 1,000 acres, which was let out to at least fifty tenants.' Now, the proprietor of this ground might, by means of the number of small voters be able to swamp the whole consti tuency. Mr. ADDERLEY said, he did not consider the hon. member (Mr. L. King) had any ground for congratulation on the description of support which he had received from hon. members. The hon. member seemed to consider that there was a virtue in a £lO occupancy, but he denied that he had _advanced any proper basis for his measure. He denied that the county constituency was corrupt, or that it exhibited any want of independence, so as to justify a bill of this description. The case for the bill rested on an isolated instance, and it was not of general appli cation. The fact was, that constitutionally the county con stituency was not placed in a proper position, and he re ferred to Staffordshire, where the electors connected with the potteries overwhelmed the other constituency, and to Birmingham, where the 40s. electors formed a considerable number. Ile, therefore, felt bound to oppose the second reading. _ _ Mr. BRISTOW expressed his surprise that any opposi tion could be offered towards this bill by those who called themselves reformers. He thought hon. members were mistaken about the feeling of the country, if they supposed there was any sentiment of indifference pervading the com munity in reference to the question of Reform. (Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding that reformers had been twitted with the absence of indignation meetings, he could assure hon. members that in the Midland Counties where greater interest was felt on the question than in metropolitan boroughs, constituencies were watching with anxiety the progress of this bill, in order to see how members who were sent to Parliament pledged to support reform, and ministers would act in reference to the measure, as indices of what they might expect from their representatives and Go vernment. He supported the bill not only on its intrinsic merits, but on extrinsic grounds, for it had a peculiar im portance at the present time with the people of England. He trusted, therefore, that the bill would be carried by a large majority of independent members, and that Govern ment would show, not only by their conduct in regard to the present question, but in future with regard to the subject of reform, that they were anxious to have the question settled. Ho believed that this alone would be the means of averting that storm of popular indignation which might be expected to break forth by a further delay of the question, notwithstanding the patient and reasonable character of the people of this country. (Hear, hear.) Sir L. PALK strongly deprecated the attempts made by hon. members in respect to the question of reform, by en deavouring to effect a defeat which they could not accom plish by acomprehensive measure which Parliament had already rejected. He denied that there was any popular feeling in favour of this bill, which was shown by the fact that the hon. member for Surrey had to re• introduce it from session to session. He believed that eventually a corn • prehensive measure would be required, but he did not think • the time had arrived. He considered that the effect of this bill would be to throw increased political power into the hands of the commercial classes, and it would be most dan gerous to pass any bill of such a nature without accompany ing it with safeguards. Ile concluded by moving as an amendment the previous question. Lord ENFIELD said he felt bound to support the bill. It had been objected to the measure that the amount en titling to the franchise was too low, but he believed that no one was pledged to any amount, and as far as he was concerned he reserved to himself a perfect right to deal with the bill in committee. With regard to the argument about the rejection of large measures of reform by the house as being a reason for not introducing a measure of detail, he, contended that Reform was more likely to be carried out by means of the latter. Reformers might endeavour to carry out their views in reference to the county franchise by pas sing this bill, and next session they might deal with the question of the borough franchise. (Hear, hear, and oh, oh.) Considering the pledges he had given to his consti tuency, and the promises of the house to deal with the sub ject of Reform, he thought he was called on to support this bill. Mr. lITJNT said the object of the bill was to introduce into county constituencies a town element of franchise which operates most unjustly. Ile thought it might be desirable to make an alteration in tha county franchise, which he would not object to see lowered to £2O, provided it was attended with safeguards. Mr. CONINGHAM considered that bringing forward a measure of this description was only trifling with the great subject of reform, and bringing the Liberal party into con tempt with the country. Members who advocated the mea sure must know that with the opposition of the Govern ment and of members on the Opposition benches they could not expect to carry the bill. He was a sincere Reformer, and denounced measures like the present as the result of a sham and hypocritical feeling on the part of pretended Reformers. However, he did not intend to vote against the bill—(laughter) —for he would not wish it to be under stood that he was opposed to the £lO franchise, but he would not vote in its favour. Mr. A. EGERTON opposed the bill, but considering himself pledged to reform, he would support a compre hensive measure, including a £25 franchise. Sir G. C. LEWIS said that it had been observed that there were three modes of dealing with the question of re • form. In the first place, the Government might introduce a comprehensive measure, or, as in the present instance, it might be dealt with in detail by private members. The Government came to the conclusion that after the experi once ,f I.lst session, it. would not be advisable to introduce a similar bill on the subject of Parliamentary Reform to that of last year. He concurred in the wisdom of that de- vision, and was a party to it, and his opinion was unaltered, He thought that the wisdom of that decision had been con• firmed by the vote of the house on the first nighi of the session and the feeling of the country, On the occasion alluded to there was a reso• lotion proposed pledging the house that it was their opinion the Government ought to introduce a comprehen give measure of Parliamentary Reform, and it was nega tived, there being_ only 46 in its favour, while against it there were 129. The Principle clearly affirmed by that vote was that it was not desirable for her Majesty's Govern- meat to introduce this session any bill on Reform. Nothing had since occurred to call for any alteration in the course the Government had pursued. With regard to the two measures, the present and the one relating to the borough franchise, which proposed to deal with the question, united they would effect a considerable alteration in the constitu encies of the country. But they were the measures of different members, and were not produced simul taneously, and great difficulties necessarily existed in dealing with them. In illustration of the feeling of indifference towards the question of reform, he referred to the bill which he introduced for the transfer of four seats. S ome y ears ago th at transfer would have been et considered a mater of considerable i m p or t ance, b ut the manner in -- in which it had been treated did not show that there was a ny strong feeling on the question at pre sen t. H o hwiassodleisniirost the ef seeing reform carried out in detail, b u t i n ject. However there had not at rived for discussing the sub for hie was nothing to prevent gentlemen front votin g of the £lO franchie second reading of the bill on the ground committee, and he se lli for the measure could be altered in ,and asielf would vote for the second read ing. (Hear. hear himself oppo:itifhter.) Mr. BARRO fretiu t ,i he bill on the ground that it would swamp the 40s. Mr. OSBORNE cornplaineutierw:h;,:ong,ly of the conduct of some of the reform members, reform in a state of confe ith left the question of gesol,rirai:cll(wsaisir Gincreased by the speech of the right hon. s . C. Lewis). He thought his hon. friend the member f or . had been trusted in respeet.to his measure like a to o CourZfiy promitg young Youth, f bu m t ahre lady. He (Mr. L. King) had received a riage from the right hon. gentleman in his bad been abandoned in his sere and yellowleaf—(laughter) —and ultimately he found himself turned into the streets of the metropolis. (Great laughter.) This question of Ite form, which had been one of the great stalking horses, had become simply ridiculous. He thought the feeling in favour of Reform was much overrated, and that the only two hon. members that were 'really sincere on the subject were the hon, member for Birmingham and the noble lord the member for the city of London, and that many other members in their apparent zeal on the question were guilty of political insincerity. They had come fresh from the hustings, where they had spent more money than they wished, and they were pledged to reform, so that they were apprehensive, if they did not make some sort of demon stration in its favour, they might be sent back to their constituents the next year. (Hear, hear, 'and laughter.) He felt bound to support this bill, and would not follow the example of the non. member for Brighton (Mr. Coning ham) —(laughter)—but would vote for the second reading. After a few words from Mr. BEACH and Mr. EGERTON, Lord J. RUSSELL—In rising to give my opinion on this bill I must be allowed to advert to subjects which have been partly adverted to by other members which do not im mediately concern this bill, but have regard to the general question. In 1848 and 1859 I gave an opinion that there ought to be a further extension of the right of voting for members of Parliament. I did so, in the first place, because I thought the foundations of the constitution would be strengthened by the admission of a great number of persons who were well qualified to vote, and in the next place, from the experience I had had, and seeing that the question was then debated by gentlemen belonging to different parties with a good deal of eagerness. I remember that for many years the Catholic question used to be debated in this and the other house of Parliament, and there was sometimes a majority of six or eight for the measure and a greater ma jority always in the other house of Parliament against it. But there came a time when immense mobs were collected in Ireland, and Parliament, which had debated the matter as if it were a pure matter of speculation for so many years, immediately that it saw the prospect of a civil war, and that a great party was organised under a powerful leader, passed he bill. Another question which was agitated in the coun try and in Parliament was the question of the corn laws. On that question again there was a majority, not great, in this house, against the repeal of the corn laws, and a much greater majority in the other house. But there came a time of agitation, there came the failure of a harvest, and then in the midst of that agitation the whole question was conceded, and the corn laws were at once repealed. Now, it always appeared to me that the example of facts such as these tended to lower the authority of Parliament. If Parliament by its wisdom and by its deliberations had not been able to settle these questions, if it found that the prejudices against con. cession were so powerful as to prevent Parliament from set tling the question, it was a great weakening of the power of Parliament that suddenly in a moment of panic all that deliberation, all that resistance should at once be waived, and that the popular will, whether of England or Ire land, expressed with power and with menace, should effect that which the opinion of some of the more distin guished members of Parliament had not been able to effect. It was with this impression strongly on my mind that I made the proposal for an extension of the suffrage, on the principle that it was far better to come to some arrange ment when Parliament could freely deliberate upon it than to wait for a time when the repetition of theagitation which had taken place on these two questions should prevent and overwhelm alldeliberation. I may have beenquite mistaken in this ; but as the question has gone on and has been dis cussed, there has been, as I conceive, less and less of favour shown to the desire of amending the constitution, and I may say, in fact, it has not bean, like the opposition that was made to the Reform Bill, and to reform before that bill was introduced, an opposition from 'a particular class into ' rested in a monopoly which existed before the Reform Bill, but the opposition that has been made to reform recently has been an opposition particularly of the middle classes of the country. In the discussion on the Reform Bill we never disguised that the object of it was to transfer the power to the middle classes. It has had that effect. We may say it would be wise in the middle classes to share that power with the working men, but there is no doubt that, in point of fact, for the two or three years last past, and especially last year, it has been evident that the middle classes fear a great admission of the working classes into the number of those who hold the franchise, and that the opposition to the bill of last year was far more from the middle classes than it was from the House of Lords, or any portion of the richer classes of the country. That being the state 01 affairs, I say I am much disposed toconcuras a general ques tion with an observation that was made by the right hon. gentleman opposite the member for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli), that if you wish to deal with the question of reform it is better that you should deal with it by some comprehen sive measure than by particular measures introduced from time to time. Nay I will say even more than this. I will say that in the present state of parties not only in this house but in the country, I do not think that any comprehensive measure would be likely to succeed, except a measure which was founded upon the opinions not of one party, upon the interests not of one class, but upon a general consideration of the opinions and of the interest of all classes. It will be long before that general agreement takes place, but it seems to me, I confess, coming to this bill, that it is not necessary that the house should wait, in order to con • sider this particular question, either for the introduction of a comprehensive measure of reform, which should be carried only by the violence which took place at the time of the Reform Bill, but that it would be wise for Parliament to consider this question as it stands alone. It must be con fessed that people now seem to consider that the franchise established by the Reform Bill belongs to:the:old:constitution of the country ; but with regard to the county franchise, it should be recollected that a very great change was made in that franchise at the time of the Reform Bill, and, instead of being, as I conceive all the other changes were, for the general advantage of the country and the extension of popular rights, it was a change very much for the worse. It was a change proposed by one of the greatest enemies to the Reform Bill. It was carried against the opinion of Lord Althorp, then the leader of the house and the repre sentative of the reform Government and the reform party in this house, and against the warnings which he gave. Lord Althorp said —I have not looked at his speech for many years, but he said in effect—" If you give the £5O tenants the franchise, you will not be extending the franchise to those who will exercise it fairly and independently. Those who exercise it fairly and independently are the 40s. free holders, and we propose still to keep up the right of voting by tenure for those who have leases to a certain amount for 60 years, and for a smaller number of years for a smaller amount ; but this extension of the franchise to occupiers is, in effect, giving the power of returning mem bers for counties to the owners of land, according to whose will and pleasure the greater part of these voters will vote." This was the substance of Lord Althorp's speech, and his predictions were so true that I have always regretted that his opinion was not adopted at the time. The reform party had an immense majority in the house, but many who supported reform thought that this, being an extension of the suffrage, it was wise to adopt it, as at all events by adopting it, there would be a greater number of voters. In my opinion this was a subtle poison. We have felt ever since that the elections were not determined, as they were formerly, by the freeholders of the county. I be lieve with an hon. gentleman who has just spoken that there is no better franchise than thefreeholders of the county, that they are men who have shown great independence of character and conduct, and that the right of voting could not be better placed than with them. But their voices have been overpowered by the occupiers. Well that question was considered before the introduction of the last Reform Bill, and it was the opinionof Lord Grey's Cabinet, that although the giving the franchise to £5O occupiers could not but be injurious, still the House of Commons, having determined on it by a considerable majority, it was bound by the opin ion of the majority. In the course of time it appeared de sirable to enlarge the franchise in counties, and I must say I admire the courage and constancy with which the hon. member for East Surrey, whether in season or out of season, has proposed this extension. The preamble of my hon. friend's bill says, " Whereas it is expedient to extend the franchise to many of her Majesty's subjects who have not heretofore enjoyed the same." I concur in the proposition. My hon. friend proposes that it should be extended to occu piers of premises of the annual value of £lO, but although that binds my hon. friend it does not bind the house, if they assent to the second reading of the bill, that the franchise should be conferred upon £lO occupiers. I should also state, because I think it is important for the consideration of this matter, that we have not hesitated to extend the county franchise in one part of the United Kingdom, although we have not changed it in any other. We found in Ireland that the franchise, which had been given to them by the Reform Act, and as it had been settled by the bill which had been introduced a few years previously, operated injuri ously, and we introduced a bill in this house by which, I think, we gave the franchise to occupiers rated to the amount of £B. That proposition was modified in the House of Lords, the occupiers of £l2 in Irish counties being de clared by that house entitled to the franchise. The bill a) modified passed into law, and it was an instance in which, although we did not alter the whole frame of the Reform Act for Ireland and the country generally, Parliament did not think itself excluded from altering the franchise. I be lieve Parliament has been justified its that change by a great improvement in the state of the electoral franchise of Ire land, where undoubted frauds had prevailed with regard to the freehold franchise which have not taken place in the rated franchise that now exists. If the house should agree to the second reading of this bill, it will be open to it to deal with the franchise as it thinks fit. My hon. friend will take the course that he thinks proper, but I should say if he could make an useful extension of the franchise which is likely to obtain the assent of Parliament, even though it may be that the particular franchise decided upon not the one that he himself proposes, he will confer a benefit on the ermtry. Bat that will be a matter for his consideration. And now, sir, hiving stated what I think of this bill, of course I shall consider it my duty to vote in favour of the second reading. I consider it a question totally apart and distinct, I think my hon. friend is justified in bringing forward a bill for the extension of the county franchise, and I have no objection to the principle of the bill. I can not, however, finish without saying a word or two on the question generally. An hon. member has stated that by re jecting the bill of Lord Derby's Government we acted very unwisely, and that we lost thereby an opportunity of effect mg a reform. Now, I cannot admit that because a bill was called a bill to amend the representation of the people, it was therefore a bill that would effect that object. With out going at present into the merits of the bill, there was one prevision in it alone which induced me to think it was the duty of any House of Parliament to reject the bill— namely, that which enabjed landowners to act with regard to small boroughs as they acted in the last century, and of which there are many examples in our parliamentary his tory. By that provision a landlord in Northumberland or Cumberland could get a large or small property in a borough —say in Cornwall—and insert in the list of voters for that borough, 100, 200, or 300 of the servants of his tenants in Northumberland and Cumberland, and send their votes by the post, thereby swamping the votes of the inhabitants of the borough. I think that proposition alone was in itself so monstrous that it quite justified the house in rejecting the bill; and I cannot but think that such a provision, if passed by Parliament, would not only not have been in ac cordance with the constitution, but that it would have totally destroyed all the benefits obtained by the Reform Act. Those who have read the parliamentary history of this country know that two or three centuries ago the persons who voted in those boroughs were small voters, who gave their votes according to their local interests; but when a seat in Parliament became an object of desire, the great landowners of the country went to the different boroughs, bought freeholds in them, and established by that means such influence in them that these boroughs became what were called nomination boroughs. Those nomination boroughs were destroyed by the Reform Act; but by the bill intro duced into this house by the late Government the power of converting boroughs into nomination boroughs would have been restored. This, I think, was a sufficient reason for net adopting that bill. I will say, further, with regard to the general question, that I do not think this is the time for in troducing a general measure. I said so on the first day of the session, and I believe that what has passed in the interim shows that the country does not wish that in the present year a large and comprehensive measure should be intro duced, but such a measure as that of my hon. friend, I think, might be agreed to with advantage. Mr. DISRAELI—The noble lord commenced his obser vations by some of those historical recollections in which he so frequently indulges. The noble lord tells us that he remembers the great demand there was for the repeal of the corn laws and for the relief of the Roir an Catholics in olden days, how the neglect of those demands on the part of Parliament led to a prolonged and dangerous agitation for years, and that he, warned by those agitations, re-opened in 1851 the question of Parliamentary reform. But the noble lord forgets that there is no paralll between the in • stance of the repeal of the penal laws against the Ronseei Catholics ana tne repeal of the corn laws and this question of Parliamentary reform. There is a fallacy in all the ob servations of the noble lord which are based on these illus trations, because the noble lord forgets that there was a settlement of the reform question in 1832, and that there had not been a settlement with regard to the penal laws against the Cat holies, nor with regard to the corn laws. They were great grievances which had been neglected, and in con sequence of that neglect there was extensive public disaffec tion, which led to that state of affairs which the noble lord justly ,laments. But there is no analogy between these questions and the question of Parliamentary reform, be cause there was a settlement of the question of Parliamen tary Reform in 1832, for which the noble lord is in a great degree responsible, and therefore the question which the noble lord had to consider in 1851, when he re-opened the parliamentary discussion on the subject, was whether the settlement of 1832 had been an adequate and sufficient set tlement of the question, and whether the circumstances which existed in 1851 justified him as Prime Ministerin coun selling her Majesty to recommend a change in the law affect ing the representation of the people. But there is no doubt on this point, that the noble lord is responsible, as the states man in modern times who has thought it his duty to bring forward this question of Parliamentary Reform again before the consideration of the Legislature; and our vindication for the course that we took in bringing forward our measure is founded upon the preceding conduct of those Ministers who went before us. It is not merely that we found that the question had been recommended three times from the throne; but the house was in this situation, that you were having a reform bill carried in detail. You had different measures on different subjects at different dates brought forward. You had all the inconveniences incident to the discussion of a great constitutional question, discussions on various interests of the country, giving a prominent impor tance to some particular interest to the injury of others, without that ample information and due thought which could alone enable us to deal with such questions. I main tain the soundness of that principle which has been acknow ledged by the noble lord to-day, that you cannot deal with such a subject as the representation of the people except in a complete and comprehensive manner. The noble lord him self admits that there was justice in the observations that were made to that effect ; but, said the noble lord with great inconsistency, although I think that sentiment perfectly just, I make an exception in the case of the county franchise. Now why admit that exception with regard to the county franchise ? Is the county franchise that portion of the fran chise where we find the largest number demanding the suffrage ? Is it in the counties where you find persons most eager to claim the possession of the franchise ? Is the county constituency, in point of numbers, inferior to the borough constituency ? Is it not a notorious fact that that constituency, represented by 150 members, is infinitely more numerous than the constituency which is represented by more than 300 borough members ? Then I want to know if the noble lord admits the justice of the principle that we ought to deal in a comprehensive manner with the subject of reform, on what ground the noble lord can justify the exception in this case. New the noble lord has assented at last that it was necessary that he should in some degree indicate the reasons for the course which he took with re gard to the measure brought forward by the late Govern ment. The house will observe that I who introduced that measure, and I speak on behalf of my colleagues, never com plained of the decision of the house with respect to that measure or any other measure that we brought forward. We, I hope with due self-respect, bowed to the decision of the house. Bat when intentional misrepresentations are put forward by our successors in order to qualify or excuse their conduct, I think the house will say that I do not arrogate too much to myself if I allUde to the subject. This morn ing the noble lord has, in a spirit of curious revelation, ex plained to us the cause of the conduct which a couple of years ago astonished, and I think in some degree annoyed, the country. We now know why the noble lord thought it his duty to oppose the measure of the late Government. Taking up the measure which included hundreds of details, the noble lord has held up one of them, and has said, "This is the reason—because faggot votes can by this machinery be created in a borough by a nobleman residing in a distant county, this is the reason why I felt it my duty to oppose the measure." Well, but if that were the noble lord's chief reason, why did he not mention it in the resolution—. (cheers)—which he asked the house to approve ? Why has he shown this extreme reticence ? Is it that in taking a course which certainly astonished Parliament at the time, the noble lord did not think himself justified in stating to the house the reason that really actuated him ? Why, it is too late in the day to invent this shadow to perplex public opinion. The issue which was taken on the measure which I brought forward on the question of parliamentary reform was this or it was nothing—will you or will you not lower i the borough franchise F That was the broad issue upon which the opinion of the horse was taken, and by virtue of that opinion, and in order to carry it into effect, the present government was formesl. We appealed to the people, and the people decided against us. I think it has been pretty well settled by the conduct of the go vernment, the conduct:of this house, and the opinion of the public generally, that we read accurately and soundly public opinion on the subject, that we tested accurately and wisely the sentiment of the nation. I have given the government credit for the course they have taken, but what I do protest against and cannot pass over in silence is that the noble lord, on second thoughts, should, after nearly two years, in consequence of a general expression of disapprobation of his own supporters that the bill of Lord Derby was not allowed a second reading—l do protest that the noble lord should on second thoughts come forward with this finical reason, which no one ever heard of before, founded on an obscure detail of a bill full of details, to vindicate a policy which at that time almost outraged public opinion, which we at least can look at without mortification, but which the noble lord can hardly regardas a subject of congratulation, unless he be framed differently from other men. Now, sir, with regard to this bill before us, I object to dealing with this question of the extension of the suffrage except in a complete and comprehensive manner. I deny that we can consider the due and legitimate incidents of the county franchise unless we take into consideration at the same time the borough franchise and all that affects the representation of the people in parliament. That would be with me a sufficient reason for not entering into the discussion of this measure, but I will not say, as others have said, that if a large measure was brought before us, and this was a portion of it that I should approve of it. I entirely disapprove of this measure. I would state without the slightest equivocation that it is not in any degree, either in its form or in its spirit, the measure that we proposed with regard to the county franchise. I pointed out the other night, hastily, from a rapid recollection, some of the principle features of differ ence. But there have been subjects referred to ii this de bate of prominent importance connected with the extension of the franchise in the counties, to which I did not then advert. I reminded the house, the other day, when we were told that the measure we brought forward with regard to the franchise in counties was identical with that brought forward by the hon. member for East Surrey, that in the first place it was a £lO occupa ncy,rising from land, and that it was only in the second place arising from houses, and that our measure introduced into the county franchise a personal franchise founded on intelligence, and franchises of ether kinds, but that the mode by which the bona fide and virtual representation of the landed interest was secured Was not merely confined to the invention of franchises. Why, we have been reminded to -day that in that bill there was a provision that the possessor of a freehold, should vote in the locality where his freehold was situate—that is to say, we proposed that while a £lO occupier should vote for the county, we also took care that the urban influence should not be over whelming, and we did this by a provision, that the possessor of land in towns should vote in the locality with which he THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 14, 1861. was legitimately connected. There was no disfranchisement I of 40s. freeholders in the bill which I brought forward, though that there was is a charge generally made in this house when there are these debates, and lam sorry to say the bringing forward of that charge is not confined to gen tlemen opposite. Tho bill of course not being allowed to be read a second time is liable to misrepresentation. (Hear, and laughter.) We looked upon the 40s. franchise as one of the most valuable and constitutional in the country. What we proposed in a large scheme, consisting of so many fran chises, was that the elector should vote in the locality in which he was interested. But is that all ? Why, we have heard to-day of the great mischief that would accrue if this bill were carried, by swamping, as the phrase is, the natural constituencies of the counties, those who own the landed property, and those whose occupation is that which con stitutes the prime industry of the counties. Why, did we not provide against that; did we not secure in our bill the reformation of borough boundaries ? What would occur if the bill of the hon. member for East Surrey were carried is that Manchester or Birmingham, or fifty other great towns, might overwhelm the natural constituency of the counties by a population which is really homogeneous with the population of those large towns. What was the instance mentioned by my hon. friend the member for Cheshire just now ? lie is naturally afraid of being overwhelmed with the town population in his county—that of Staley bridge for example. By our bill that could not have hap pened, because Staleybridge would have been represented by a member for the borough. In our bill we endeavoured to secure to the landed interest that predominance which is necessary to public liberty, and that was the object and the only object which, with regard to the land, we wished to attain. We recognised the fact that in the due preponderance of that interest in the constitutional scheme there was the best, the oldest, and the most valuable secu rity for good government and for public liberty. I will not trespass for a roomen't, more on the house, because the hour has come when we ought to divide. I have not completely, but I have sincerely, indicated the course we took when we introduced our bill to extend the franchise and to provide for the due representation of the people. I may remind the house that in that bill with regard to the county franchise we worked out a self-acting registration and a multiplication of polling places, and we proposed that all expenses should be illegal, which alone would have been a better security than any other for purity of election. I believe that there are many provisions in that bill which will be found most valuable on future occasions; but after the attack which the noble lord has made on the bill, I can only say that, though it was not successful, I am at least as proud of having been the organ for bringing it before the notice of Parliament as the noble lord can Do of having obtained office by carry ing a resolution implying a promise to extend the franchise which he has not had the power of fulfilling. (Cheers.) The "previous question" having been moved by way of amendment, the house divided upon the point, " That the question be now put"— Ayes 220 Noes Majority —2B The cheers of the Conservative party were of the most boisterous character, when the numbers were announced by the tellers, the bill being virtually lost. AFFIRMATIONS BILL. Sir J. TRELAWNY moved the second reading of this bill, substituting affirmations in lieu of oaths in certain cases. Mr. HARDY said the real question was whether oaths were to be administered in courts of justice. Believing that it made a great difference to people whether they were sworn or not, he opposed the motion, He moved as an amendment that the bill be read a second time this day six months. Mr. MALINS seconded the amendment. Sir G. C. LEWIS confessed that he hardly ever knew a bill so extensive in its operation which had been founded on so narrow a basis. He was of opinion that the plaister proposed by his hon. friend was a great deal too large to cover a wound so small. Tho effect of the bill would be to abolish all oaths. He would not now enter into a moral or religious discussion on the effect of oaths ; but he believed that the administration of oaths in eliciting truth in courts of justice was very generally recognised, and judges and barristers were generally impressed with the importance of the obligation. He did not think the house had any proof that could justify them in abolishing oaths. The bill of his hon. friend was so drawn as to render it unnecessary for any person to take an oath. It was not proposed to abolish oaths upon any religious grounds ; but simply on the ground of objection to them. The hon. baronet's case, however, did not rest upon that. It rested on a case which occurred lately in the North of England, and which was brought recently under the notice of the house. It was the case of an old woman who said she did not believe in rewards and punishments in a future world. The proper course would be, in his opinion, to bring in a bill asking persons, before being sworn, whether they had any religious belief, and if they said " No," then not to administer the oath. In the case of the old woman referred to by the hon. baronet, she said she had no religious belief whatever, and therefore she was not a competent witness. Therefore, with regard to the bill which the hon. baronet had brought under the consideration of the house, he could not give his vote in favour of the second reading. Mr. E. H. CRAUFORD, amid impatient cries of " Divide," moved the adjournment of the debate. The house divided. The Lumbers were— For the adjournment of the debate 5O Against it htajonty .. --133 The SPEAKER.—The house has expressed a wish that the debate should not be adjourned, but by the superior order of the house—adjourning debates on 'Wednesday sit tings at a quarter to six o'clock—the debate stands now ad journed. EXEMPTION OF VOLUNTEERS FROM TOLLS. Mr.,BRISTOW obtained leave to bring in a bill to exempt the Volunteer forces of Great Britain from the payment of tolls. The Bill was brought in and read a first time. COLONIAL MILITARY EXPENDITURE. On the motion of Mr...ARTHUR MILLS the select committee on Colonial Expenditure was nominated, and comprised the following members, namely :—General Peel, Mr. Ellice, Sir George Grey, Lord, Stanley, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. Childers, Mr. Chichester Fortescue, Mr. Thomas George Baring, Mr. Adderly, Lord Robert Cecil, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Marsh, Mr. Fitzgerald, Sir James Fergusson, and Mr. Arthur Mills :—Power to send for persons, papers, and records ; Five to be the quorum. The house then adjourned. THE NORTHUMBERLAND AND DURHAM DISTRICT BANK. The official liquidators of the Northumberland and Durham District Banki3g Company have pre sented a further report to the Court of Chancery, detailing the progress of the liquidation from the time of the last report, the 26th of November, 1859, to the 16th of Februa r y l as t. A t the date of the former report the assets were estimated at £1,110,597, and the liabilities having been reduced to £974,437, there appeared to be a surplus of £136,160. The liquidators, when they made that report, anticipated that £481,521 of the assets would have been realised by the end of 1860. The amount realised up to Febrtary 16 in the present year, however, has only been £299,671, £181,850 less than the amount anticipated, The difference between the amounts expected and realised arises princi pally from the non-receipt cc' one of the instalments for the sale of Messrs. Carr' collates, of some pro missory notes relating to tke Derwent Ironworks, of the amount to be received from the executors of Mr. C. W. Bigge, of the mortgage debts due from the Messrs. Grainger, and the non-sale of portions of the Elswick Estate. Tho only head under which the assets realised have exceeded the amount esti mated is that of "shareholders," who have paid £52,420, £24,420 over the amount estimated. The total amount received on the estimate was £21,420, or £6,580 less than the estimate ; but the share holders who subsequently associated together for obtaining their release by a payment of £85,250, paid £31,000, thus giving the excess of £25,420. Assets still outstanding are no less than £1,088,515. Of the £299,671 received by the liquidators since they made their last report, £103,855 has been applied in repayment of loan to the Bank of Eng land, £4,330 has been advanced on account of securities held from various debtors, and £112,814 has been paid to secured creditors ; law charges have absorbed £10,093; "liquidators on account of remuneration and liquidation charg es ," £6,642 ; and salaries and office charges, £1,486. The amount now in hand is £59,€02. The liabilities which in 1859 were £974,437 have been reduced by £72,426. The liquidators state that from the very great dis appointment they have experienced in realising the assets they feel they ought not to attempt any pre diction of the period' at which the remainder may be collected. They add, however, that there ougbt to be in the autumn a sum of £300,000 from pro perties, and debts arranged for, for a dividend upon £1,800,000. The liquidators, in conclusion, state that the payment of futuro dividends will depend on the fulfilment of the arrangements under which payments are to be made by instalments, and which cannot be anticipated by the creditor. The report is not deemed very satisfactory in Newcastle-on- Tyne and the neighbouring towns. [ADVENTISEDIENT.] Pills and medicine invariably ag gtavate and perpetuate diseases; their annoyance, dis appointment, and expense may be avoided by persons in indifferent health sending only their address to E. S. Barry, Esq., 77, Regent-street, W., London, and they will receive gratis and free by post the " INVALIDS' OWN .1 urDE," or Natural Restorer, without medicine or ex p'nse, of perfect digestion, strong nerves, sound lungs, and refreshing sleep, to the most enfeebled, insuring the remov& of indigestion (dyspepsia), constipation, liver complaints nausea, epilepsy, paralysis, debility, nervousness, palpitation , cough, asthma, consumption, dropsy, flatulency, diarrhoea, dysentery, biliousness, fevers, sore throats, catarrhs, colds, noises in the ears, rheumatism, gout, impurities, eruptions, hysteria, neuralgia, irritability, sleeplessness, acidity, palpi tation, heartburn, headache, despondency, cramps, spasms, sinking, fits, bronchitis,— " Unquestionably the safest QOM, to health.". RUSSIA AND POLAND. (From the Correspondent of the Times) WARSAW, MARCH 3. A week of great excitement has just come to a close. Events have succeeded one another in such rapid sequence that they have allowed scarcely a moment's interval for reflection. Now, however, there is a temporary lull in the political atmo sphere, and it is possible in some measure to gene ralise one's observations and deduce inferences. It may be interesting to you, therefore, to have a somewhat more detailed account of what has been occurring here than you have probably hitherto received. Moreover, the sacred interests of truth, no less than those of liberty, require that such de tails should be no ex parte statvment ; and such, I conceive, can only be furnished by a foreigner acquainted with the country by residence in it, but having no other interest than a general one in the issues involved. Ever since the Emperor's visit - to Warsaw last autumn, and his interview here with the Sovereigns of Austria and Prussia, there has been a gradually increasing feeling of dissatisfaction on the part of the Polish nation with the existing state of things. This has manifested itself in many ways. The Polish costume—the pretty four -cornered white or red cap and the braided coat—has re-appeared in the streets. Anonymous letters, threatening the demolition of shop windows, have been received by tradesmen whose signs were in other languages than the national one. Warnings have been re ceived by private persons who had issued invita tions for balls or evening parties, that it was no time for Poles to amuse themselves; and the guests assembled on such occasions have been alarmed by the sudden crash of a window and the unexpected entrance of an unbidden visitor in the shape of a large stone. At the schools, too, there have been empty forms where Russian professors were for merly in the habit of meeting and instructing full classes. The most overt act, however, was one on the 29th of November last, the anniversary of tha commencement of the Polish revolution of 1830-1. On that occasion several hundreds of the inhabitants of Warsaw attended a mass in one of the churches, and subsequently sang national songs in the street on their departure from the church. To the astonishment of every one, there was no in terference on the part of the police,—whether from ignorance of it or from policy, it is difficult to say. There is, however, no doubt that this was the origin of the demonstration of Monday last, February 25, the anniversary of the battle of Gro chow, the first collision between the Poles and Russians in the revolution of 1831. It was well known in the town and by the Go vernment some time previously that such a demon • stration was intended. It was not, however, for bidden. The question arises, why did not the Government forbid it ? To this question, from all I can learn, I fear there can be only one answer, There was going on at the time the annual meeting of the Polish Agricultural Society, composed of the great majority of the Polish proprietors, and pos sessing an organisation with such ramifications all over the country that, if used for political purposes, it would be very formidable to the Government. In fact, it has always been regarded with consider able jealousy by the Government ; but, having oc cupied itself exclusively with agricultural matters, it had given no pretext for the withdrawal of the original permission for its establishment. It appears then to have been the policy of the Government to allow the demonstration to take place, in the hope that one or two alternatives would be the result— either that the national feelings of the members of the Agricultural Society would lead them to join the demonstration, and so an excuse would be fur nished for the closing of the society, or that the populace, or Red party, not finding themselves joined by the more Conservative party of the nobi lity and proprietors, a state of antagonism might be established between the two classes of Polish society. Ido not attribute this plan to the Prince- Viceroy of Poland. He is too honest a man and too humane to have formed it ; but his advisers are far less scrupulous, and are constantly intriguing to obtain a paramount influence in the Council of State. However, the committee of the society saw through the plan ; and one of the principal mem bers of the Government, who was present at the meeting of Monday, was publicly warned by the President that if the demonstration was not stopped, the society would denounce him to the populace as an agent provocateur. This was at 3 o'clock, and though a promise was given that it should be stopped, it was found impossible,to do so before 6 o'clock, the time appointed for the mass for the souls of those killed at Groehow. At this hour many thousands assembled in the old Market place with flags and torches. Government had iu the meantime placed two squadrons of gendarmes so as to intercept the direct communication between the market-place and the Palace in which the Agri cultural Society held its sittings, and had further placed a cordon of gendarmes in front of the Palace itself, a proceeding which still favoured negatively the ipea of antagonism between the people and the more aristocratic element of Polish society. The cro ovd increasing, after a time an order was given to one of the squadrons of gendarmes to disperse it by advancing into it in line, but without drawing their sabres. An idea seems at this time to have seized the crowd that the members of the Agricultural Society had played the traitor, and I am told by a gentle man who was present that the cry of "To the Agricultural Society" was raised. Anyhow, the gendarmes were met by flaring torches and waving flags, and the horses refused to advance. Many reared, some threw their riders, and all retreated helter-skelter upon the second squadron. The second was then ordered to advance and to draw their sabres, though, I am assured, only to strike with their flat side. The result was, as might have been anticipated, that many were wounded, some severely trampled upon, and, it was said next day, two killed. This appears to have been an exaggeration, though a woman did certainly die a day or two after from injuries received in the charge. The crowd was dispersed at length, but not before the Chief of Police had received a very severe wound from a horse-shoe thrown at him, and been otherwise very roughly handled. The next day (Tuesday) there was, of course, much ex citement in the town; many stories, grievously exaggerated, were rife ; and by common consent mourning was put on for those supposed to have been killed and those actually wounded. The day, however, paesed over without any breach of the peace. Next morning (Wednesday, the 27th) it was arranged that a mass should be performed in one of the churches for the (supposed) killed and wounded of Monday evening, and that afterwards a procession should take place through the town. All went on peacefully till the procession found its further progress stopped at one point, near the residence of the Viceroy, by a cordon of Cossacks thrown across the street. *Without violence, by mere pressure of numbers, the line was, however, broken, and the Cossacks were surrounded, when they received an order to charge with their peculiar whips, consisting of a handle and a piece of cane, or some similar material, suspended from the end of it, lilt a small threshing flail. These they used freely, and for some time were successively able to advance and obliged to retire. While this was going on, unfortunately, a funeral 3 procession preceded, as usual, by priests and a cross, came along the street in the opposite direction. To avoid the blows of the whips the crowd now retired to the leeward of the funeral, but the priests continued to advance in order to protect them. The Cossacks then attacked the priests, and in the struggle the cross was broken. This instantly roused all the religious prejudices hitherto dormant, and the crowd, retiring to the front of a new house that was building, furnished themselves with stones, and :utterly discomfited the Cossacks, wounding many. A woman, I am told, threw the first stone, fiercely indignant at the profanation of the Cross, and believing, in common with many of the more uneducated, that the Cossacks were Mahommedans. At this point the Cossacks received an order to re tire, and some detachments of Infantry, who had been kept all day in the court of the Castle in case of need, were ordered to disperse the crowd with the bayonet. They were received with stones, and one haying struck the General in command, by name Zablockoy—a name to be held up to Euro pean obloquy—he gave the order to fire. Only one soldier obeyed the order, and it had to be repeated three times before the soldiers delivered their volley, and even then, from the marks of the balls near the top of the opposite house, they must have purposely levelled too high to hit the crowd. I counted. my self 15 marks at this elevation, the distance of the house from the place where the volley was fired being no more than 30 yards. On the order being given to fire, one sergeant threw down his musket, and went over to the crowd. He was a Pole, and a large subscription has been raised for him, and •he has been sent across the frontier into Germany. But the effect of the volley has yet to be told. Five fell dead, among them one of the members of the Agricultural Society, which just then had closed its session for the day, and was dispersing. Many more were wounded, and have since lost limbs by amputation. It is the popular belief that four or five more were killed, and that in the confusion their bodies were borne off by the infantry and secretly interred. I have been assured by good authority that there are several persons missing from their homes, whose absence can be accounted for on no other supposition than that they were killed. After this the crowd dispersed, but public indignation was at its height. The bodies were carried to the president and committee of the Agricultural Society, the instincts of the crowd having disabused them of any temporary idea of want of good faith on the part of that body, and action of some sort was demanded. One body— that of a Frenchman--was also taken to the resi dence of the French Consul-General, the crowd re questing him to report the slaughter to his Emperor. Before the society had finally decided what line of conduct to adopt the President and Vice-President were summoned to the Castle, and were informed by the Viceroy that force would be used if any further disturbances occurred. They bowed and withdrew, but before they had left the Castle they were recalled, and asked whether there would be peace, and what the people wanted. An assurance was given that there would be no disturbance if proper means were taken to prevent it by making timely concessions, such as the dismissal of the chief of the police and the withdrawal of the military, At first there was no appearance of yielding on the part of the Government, but, a Committee of Public Order having been formed, consisting of represen tatives of almost all professions in the town, a deputation waited on Prince Gortschakoff represent ing the imminent danger from popular indignation at the attack on an unarmed crowd, and again urging concessions. This was late on Wednesday evening ; and on Thursday morning another depu tation from the committee of the Agricultural Society proceeded to the Castle with an address to the Emperor, which, after several refusals, the Prince consented to receive and forward to St. Petersburg, the committee undertaking to do all in their power to preserve order. All the military were immediately withdrawn, and even the police, and the town was handed over to the two Committees to pacify and keep peaceful; Special constables were immediately appointed from the students and others, who patrolled the streets. The Prince published an address to the inhabitants, in which he promised an investigation into the conduct of General Zablockoy threatened any disturbers of the peace, whether Russians or Poles, with instant punishment, and ordered the dismissal of the Chief of the Police, appointing in his place a General Paulucci, who as former head of the Secret Police had gained the popular confidence. By these wise concessions peace was secured pending the arrival of an answer from the Emperor to the address ; and I believe there never was such a unanimity of wish, or such an earnestness of effort, under great provocation, as on the part of all classes of Polish society to pre serve order. Meanwhile it was arranged to have a public funeral for the victims of the 27th. An im mense collection was made for the purpose, and Friday was spent in preparation. The streets were crowded all day, but there was no disturbance and no insults were offered. A former spy and an old officer were discovered in the act of offering arms for sale in the crowd, as if to give a pretext for the use of force on the part of the Government. They were quietly arrested and carried before the Muni cipal Committee, who published an order of the day to the effect that any one foand with arms would be considered an enemy of his country. Friday night passed undisturbed, and Saturday dawned. It was a splendid morning—the sun bright, the air spring like. The streets were filled with crowds, but all quiet, orderly, and dressed in deep mourning. A nation was going to the burial of its murdered sons. Precisely at 10 o'clock the procession moved away from the church, where the bodies had been lying. Special constables, with their tickets of authority on their hats, and members of committee with a distinguishing white badge on theirs, were busy _ . keeping order and giving directions. First came the charity schools, then the guilds of merchants with their banners, then the students of the academies and schools, then a body of mountain peasants known by their peculiar costume, and all of them itinerant workers in wire (Drahtmauner), then all the monks of all the orders in the town in their various robes, then the officiating bishop and the priests, accompa nied by the principal nobility and merchants, then the Protestant clergy of the town, then the corpses —five simple, plain black coffins, all alike, each with the martyr's crown of thorns and the martyr's palm branch upon it, and each surrounded by the friends of the deceased,—then (most significant fact of all, perhaps, to ono who knows the utter hos tility of Pole and Jew) the chief Jewish r..bbi and the principal officers of the various synagogues, and then the mighty mass of national mourners, all obe dient to a word from authority, halting, checking their speed, advancing, as the necessities of the route and the breadth of the streets required. An idea may be formed of the length of the procession from the fact that it took exactly 40 minutes to pass any one point from the first charity school children to the empty hearses (which followed the Jewish rabbi and officers), and without reckoning the crowds behind, who only followed without forming an organised part of it. In the procession and along the line of march there must at least have been pre sent 100,000 persons. Arrived at the cemetery, dis tant two miles from the point of departure, all five bodies were deposited in one grave, with one reli gious ceremony, without distinction of creed or ritual; and, having seen its victims deposited in their final resting place, the people, wither.; noise, with out utterance of reproach, without expression of other feeling than that of deep sorrow, passed back again to their homes. There was something sublime in the quiet self control of such a mighty mass. It was said, and said truly, that the Polish nation was passing its examination, prior to receiving its remove upwards, as worthy of a higher place; and it passed its exa mination right nobly ! Oh ! that its governors, from the Emperor downwards, could have seen it. It was a simple thing, but shows the animus of all present,—the reply which I heard an artisan who had placed himself at a very tempting corner of the cemetery wall, in order to prevent irregular attempts at entrance, give to a man who tried to scale it, " They have ruled us with whips ; show that we don't need them." Here order triumphed, as it did everywhere. Russian officers and soldiers, of course without mourning, mingled among the crowd, and were not insulted. And then the unanimity ! Poles and Jews forgot the bitter animosities of years, I may say of centuries, and formed one united people, pro bably for the first time during their history. There is no doubt a rouge party in existence here, as in other countries; but the spirit of order was so strong that it durst not show itself, and has dwindled away to an insignificant faction. But I must also do justice to the Russians. There is among them a large physical force party,— men who personify the dominant Russian idea prior to the Crimean war,----who sigh for the reap pearance of Paskiewicz from his grave, who under stand no other method of proceeding but the launching of columns of infantry and cavalry against whatever opposes them. Their cry is repeated in every circle, "Les canons ont gagne la Pologne ; les canons la doivent conserver;" or slightly varied in words, "Il n'y a rien que la severite." They long for, and, I fear I must add, endeavour to pro voke a breach of the peace directly and indirectly, in order that an excuse may be given for the use of force. Happily hitherto the Viceroy, Prince Gods ehalroff, has not yielded to influences from this party ; he has made wise and timely concessions. He has recognised the existence of the municipal council referred to above, and advised an increase in its numbers ; he has conceded the point that no political arrests shall be made without the privity of the Council, and that the person arrested shall be tried within 48 hours by a military court, with two of the Council as assessors, a civil advocate being allowed to defend the accused ; and for the time he has left the maintenance of order in the hands of the citizens. In these conciliatory measures he has been ably seconded by the new Chief of Police, Paulucci. As an instance, I may mention that on the day of the funeral an order was given to all military guards and sentries to present arms while the procession was passing, as is usual with all funerals in ordinary times, though the funerals of Saturday was a national demonstration. As I said above, I believe the Prince to be a most humane man ; still there is no denying the fact that the Russians are very much afraid. All the principal ladies have already left the town. The Govern ment finds itself opposed to a new power that it cannot comprehend—the power of order, self-con trol, patient endurance, with an ultimate appeal to the public opinion of Europe. The system of material force, founded on military organization, has fallen powerless before this new power. " What is to come ?" will be asked in England and elsewhere. I can only reply that the present position of the Polish nation is one of waiting, of expectation. They are waiting to see whether the Viceroy's concessions will be confirmed from St. Petersburg ; they are waiting for the Emperor's reply to their address. The right minded even among the Russians them selves admit the necessity of reforms. The system of education is so devised as to throw every impedi ment in the way of intellectual development. Pub lic justice is under the influence of Government and private dictation. The country is utterly demoralised by the venality of Government functionaries, from the highest general to the lowest Custom•house clerk. This dishonesty is openly defended, so much has it beconaelt habit of society. And, above all the governed have no right of direct access to their So vereign, which, in a country where the press is not free, is the only means of redress. If, then, the Em peror confirms the concessions already made, and grants these necessary reforms, all may yet pass over peacefully. But if he does not, there will pro bably first be an entire disorganisation of the Ad ministration by the resignation of the thousands of Polish Government employes all over the country; and then, possibly, the non-payment of taxes will follow. But force will not be resorted to; it will be the patient, persevering, untiring application of a power that bayonets cannot disperse and cannon balls cannot crush. COUNTRY MARKETS. NEWARK-MARCH 13. The trade in wheat was brisk, and late rates advanced Is per qr. A fair supply at market. A moderate show of barley, but not much doing. Oats realised previous rates. Beans steady. Peas unchanged. White wheat, new, 58s to 76s Barley, grinding.. 32s to 35s Red do. sos to 70s Oats, old, .. 32s to 37s Old white 6os to 76s New do 23s to 29s Red do. 56s to 70s 1 Beans.. 56s to 58s Barley, malting,— . 38s to 44s I Beans, new 38s to 43s Peas, ....40s to 50s. • SHEFFIELD—Mmtcm 12. There was a moderate attendance. the supply of wheat was below an average quantity. Good sorts realised former rates, and in some instances 6d more, with a fair business. Oats in demand. Flour, beans, and peas unchanged. Red wheat, per lead of 3 imperial bushels.. , 24s Od to 28s Od White ,f /y ...25s Od to 28s Od New red • 1 7 f ...20s Od to 22s Od New white „ /) ...22s Od to 26s Od Beans 7) 1, ...16s Od to 22s 6d Peas, per qr s4s Od to 55s Od Grinding barley, per qr Malting ditto, ~ 3ss Od to 43s 01 Oats 2ss 6d to 34s Od Millers' prices for flour-2s 3d, 2s sd, and 2s 8d per 141 b. HULL-MARCH 12. A fair supply of English wheat to-day, which sold at is to 2s higher than the prices of last week. Foreign in better demand. Barley still a heavy sale, at is decline on for mer quotations. Beans as dear, and peas 6d to is per qr. cheaper. Oats, all fine qualities, in request. Wheat.... Old white.... per qr .. 65s Od to 68s Od Old red New white .. New red , Dantzic, Konb , old white 63s Od to 68s Od Dutch, Belgian; and French. 60s Od to 62s Od Baltic and Hamburg, red 60s Od to 62s Od St. Petersburg and Riga, ld. 52s Od to 55s Od Barley.... English malting 3Bs Od to 44s Od Grinding 32s Od to 36s Od Saal and Oderbruck Holstein and Danish 3Bs Od to 40s Od Grinding Oats English, old Archangel and Riga, per st Os 14d to 140 Friesland and Dutch osl4fd to oalsd Swedish and Danish 0614d to 08140 Beans ....English, old, per qr New pigeon 44s Od to 45s Od New tick. 43s Od to 44s Od Egyptian Peas Foreign breakers Grinding Tares .... Spring. —s Od to —s Od Indian Corn Linseed, feeding s2s Od to 54s Oct crushing Linseed cakes (Hull) £lo 10 0 to £lO 5 0 Foreign 9 5 oto 10 0 0 Rape cakes 6 5 oto 610 0 Bones 515 oto 6 0 0 FIRE IN LEADENHALL STREET.—Yesterday morn ing at an early hour the premises belonging to Mrs. T. Jones, termed the Hercules Tavern and Dining-house, No. 119, Leadenhall-street, were on fire. The inmates, six in number, were only saved from a terrible death by the timely arrival of a fire escape. The lower part of the premises was nearly burnt (nt. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —The greatest happiness of a jour nalist is to introduce to his readers some new discovery cal culated to benefit that vast portion of our fellow-creatures which has the strongest claims upon our sympathies. It is with this feeling that we call the attention of invalids to the following extracts from Du Barry's interesting report of cures without medicine by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabic% Food. Cure 180—Mr. W. R. Reeves, 181, Fleet-street, London, of twenty-five years nervousness, constipation, indigestion, and debility. Cure No. 54,618—Wandsbeck, near Hamburgh, May 12, 1857,—1 hereby certify that my mother .in-law, Mrs. Holze, whu has just completed her 107th year, after having suffered for half a century and more, from indigestion (dyspepsia), and consequent dis orders, has been perfectly cured by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica Food, and is now enabled to digest almost any Rind of food with great comfort.—W. Holze. Avoid Pills and Medicines : they invariably aggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment, and expense may be avoided by using Du Barry's Food which, at a few pence per day, saves SC times its cost in other remedies, removing effectually, w Aleut purging, constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia) nervous, bilious and liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew Ure, MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr. Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful daugers of spu rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a penalty of 55,000 against Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents ; and the pretences that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly fake. No canister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, in full, °lathe seal and wrapper. Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins llb. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. Gd. ; 51b. lls. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The 121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt of Post-office older by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re, gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co. ; Abbis, 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63 and 150, Ox bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and 60, Bishopsg. ate street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement ; Phillips and On, tea-dealers; Petty, Wood, and Co., King William-street, City; at 127 High Holborn: and all grocers• BIRTHS. DAUNEY.—On the 12th inst., at 33, Upper Berkeley-street, the wife of Alexander Dauney, Esq., of a son. WzsTwoop.--On the 13th inst., at Tredegar•house, Bow road, Mrs. J. Westwood, of a son. WINCHESTER.—On the 12th inst., at 16, Grafton-street, the Marchioness of Winchester, of a son, stillborn. MARRIAGES. BRIND —WRIE.—On the 12th inst., at St. John's, Upper Holloway, Frederick W. Braid, Esq., of Weldon Lodge Sydsnham, to Julia Mary, the third daughter of John WRae, Esq., of Park-road, Upper Holloway. _ • _ _ HEArS—SWAYSLAND.—On the 12th inst., at St. Maryle bone Church, Henry Heaps, Esq., to Ellen Augusta. second daughter of the late T. A. Swaysland, Esq., of Cawley, and Brighton, Sussex. DEATHS. A sKEw. __C: s l the 10th inst., at 29, Southernhay, Exeter, Mrs. Askew, widow of the late Major Askew, of Chel tenham. _ --- ALLEYNE.—On the 26th flan., at Monte Video, Brazils, on board Curaeoa, Arthur Gore Alleyne, mid shipman, aged 19, eldest son of the Rev. T. F. Alleyne, rector of Kentisbeare, Devon. BROOK.—On the 13th inst., at South Lambeth, Emma, relict of the late Mr. Deputy Brook, aged 80. RIDDELL.— On the Bth inst., at Oxendean, Dunse, Ber wickshire, General Henry J. Riddell, K.H., Colonel of the 6th Foot. LONDON Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, at No. 112, Strand, Printer, at ME SUN Office, No. 112,Strand , in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County of Mildlreen Thursday, Match 11, 1881.