The Sun. — London, England, 1861-04-03 00:00:00

THE SUN,' ": LONDON, _ WtDNESDAY ,:EVENING, DIR. ROEBUCK AND HIS CONSTI- TUENTS. The adjourned meeting at Sheffield for the pur pose of hearing Mr. Roebuck's explanations of his views on Italian affairs and other matters was held in the Surrey Music-hall yesterday morning. There was again a crowded attendance, but all and the meeting was -were comfortably seated, ex tremely orderly, being quite intolerant even of slight interruptions during the speeches of Mr. Roebuck, who, as also Mr. Hadfield, was loudly cheered on his entrance. Mr. H. VILLIERS, the Mayor, again took the chair, and, after bespeaking a fair hearing for Mr. Roebuck, urged that the meeting must notcondemn Mr. Roebuck simply because be differed in opinion with them. (Cheers.) Mr. ROEBUCK, on coming forward, was receiv ed with loud and enthusiastic cheering. He said, — Mr. Mayor, I ask you all at first to be kind enough to be quiet, for lam not very strong, and I want really to make a full and, I hope, a candid expla nation. (Hear, hear.) To make that explanation will take time, and will test my strength. That strength won't allow me to get through my task if you are noisy. (Hear, hear.) And now, sir, I will at once go into the matter, and yesterday I asked a question, which I was about to answer, but which I was not allowed to answer ; and my question was what it shall be now—Why am I here ? lam here, sir, because statements have been made re specting m y character as your representative which I think it my duty to answer. (Hear, hear.) And if I could only find my enemy to his. face I should be perfectly satisfied. But anonymous attacks, un fair insinuations, and, I will add, base calumny, have dogged my steps throughout the whole of these proceedings. (Loud cheers.) Now, I ask you to be quiet, and depend upon it no man is your friend—my friend I care not about—but no man is your friend who endeavours to interrupt you. Mark him, because I would point him out as your enemy, if there be such a man in this assembly. Well, then, now, sir, what was the fault found with me ? The faults found with me are two. (A Voice.— " Three !" answered by cries of " Put him out," "Where is he ?" and confusion.) Now, be quiet ; you will have an opportunity of answering. lam accustomed to an assembly where a man is allowed to say exactly what he chooses. I hope that the people of Sheffield will not be more bigoted than the English House of Commons. (Hear.) That is an assembly -where a man can say exactly what he likes, and therefore I honour that assembly. Now I will go on my own division, and I say the charges against me are two—first, that I voted in support of maintaining Lord Derby in his Administration ; and next, that I made a speech called an Austrian speech. Now, Sir, I have myself been a servant of the public nearly 30 years. I commenced that ser vice a poor man; I have remained a poor man ever since ;lam so now. Well, but the insinuation is that during the last two years of my life I have gone back from all that for 28 years I professed, and that I have sold myself, body and soul, for a sum of money. If I had so sold myself I should have the money, I suppose. My answer is, I have not the money, and I have not spent it. (Cheers.) That, I should have thought, would have concluded the whole matter, but I will not hound the accusation through all its windings and turnings. The first ac cusation is that I voted for Lord Derby's Govern ment, and the imputation conveyed by the accusa tion is this, that the Galway Company obtained a subsidy from Lord Derby's Administration ; that I was part of the Galway Company, and therefore I voted for Lord Derby, Ido not blink the question at all. First and foremost let us take dates. When there was a doubt as to whether a subsidy should be granted to the Galway Company I voted against Lord Derby's Government, but when the subsidy was granted, and there could be no doubt about it, I voted for that Government. Thus, if I had expected anything, I went against my own interest. This is the fact. I said the accusation is that the Galway CoMpany paid me. Now lam here, I have just got this to say:—l was a director of the Galway Com pany. Very shortly after that company got its sub sidy I ceased to have connection with the company, and from that time to this I do not know what they have been doing. But there was an imputation that there was a sumof XlO,OOO kept back to be divided among the directors, and that of that amount I re ceived a large sum. I have a book before me with which I expect you are not so familiar as I am. It is called a Parliamentary blue book. (Oh, oh !) lam very blind, and obliged to wear spectacles, and I hope you will excuse me. (Hear.) Now this was a committee appointed to inquire into contracts en tered into by packet and telegraph companies with the Government. When I was applied to by cer tain gentlemen whom I had never before seen in my life, I asked them what the Galway Company was to do. They said their object was to establish a line of steamers between Galway and New York, Galway being the nearest point between Great Britain and America. They said the passage would occupy about six days ; and if they could create that line it would be a benefit to Ireland, and to the trade between both countries. Well, I said, " That is a very legitimate object, I will join you ;" and I did join them, They also said the Government had granted a subsidy to a Liverpool line for carrying the mails ; and they added, "It is also our intention to carry the mails to New York, and we hope they will subsidise a line of steam packets from Galway to New York also." I said, " That, too, is a per fectly legitimate object. I think the people of Ire land ought to have a rapid communication with America, and I will apply, along with the rest of the directors, to Lord Derby's Government for a sub sidy." (Hear.) The subsidy to the Liverpool line had been granted by a Whig Administration. I said that being the case, I suppose it is a liberal measure, and lam only carrying out what my friends ap prove.. I applied to Lord Derby, and after some negotiation a subsidy of £75,000 a year was granted. It was to be paid when the mails were car ried, and not before. No money was paid by the Government till long after I left the company, and I am not sure whether any of it has yet been paid. So of that subsidy I never saw one farthing paid to the company, and I have had no connection with the" company since. (Cheers.) I was at thi s point yester day, when the noise became so great that I could not proceed ; but now comes a matter that I think you ought to know. There was £lO,OOO kept back by the promoters of the company, and put into the deed of settlement to be appropriated among t4e direc tors. That money was appropriated among the directors, and now I will read to you the result. When we came before a committee, they naturally put their fingers on this, and said, What! have members of Parliament received money for their services ? Now, I will read to you : "Mr. Edward Ellice (asked this question of the chair man of the Galway Company, who was then under exami nation) —Referring to the item in the balance-sheet just put in of £lO,OOO remuneration to promoters in paid-up shares, were any members of Parliament remunerated for their services as promoters by paid-up shares ? (They thought they had me there.) (Laughter.) At the present moment I do not know that T can answer that question, becausS several of the parties who bad got 'paid-up shares have returned them to the company actually, and others have promised to do so. The 10,000 shares were expressly Provided by the articles of 'association, as being allowed to he distributed among the promoters of the company, and 15107 were distributed; £2,500 wore given to Mr. Lever, and a v the , r-007ere g i ven t o M r . L ascar idi, ma ki ng £5,000 i n a ll, y ng the p r i nc ip a l p ar ti es i n g etting u p the line ; the other m £6,000 were rateably distributed among the r o e Iserabe rs of the Board, of whom I myself am one; but er l have benefit of the Vetu rned those shares to the company for the but if any gentleman chose to re tain them, th g e y tl33l)an Y , e , „ et ; perfect liberty to do so under the articles of associate,. " Were there (they' fteked, following up the question) any members of Parliament upon the list among whom those £5,000 . of paid-up shares were distributed ?—Yes, Mr. Lever was one. You have just stated that 4 5,000 was divided between 31r. Lever and Mr. Lasearidi ?—yos. " That left £5,000, and of that £5,000 was any part given to other members of Parldament ?--Lord Bury, who was or 71 sh ares o f th e d e puty-chairman, rec rived , I think, 70 the amount. " Are you sure ?—Quits certain. (Cheers.) " AnYbody e l se ?—(Yc iu see how . pertinacioua th ey w e re. one else. Not v, mark the answer e f th e chairman uman • (He ar,f hear.) " (They were determi ned no longer to beat about th e bi ish, end so they said :) —I think we should have the p er . ti. ;ulars of the last f0t5,00( 1--.1 have givezz them , day that the remaining 45,000 was proposed to be equally distri buted among the members of the board rateably. " Were Mr. Lever and Lord Bury the only members of Parliament on the Board ?—Mr. Roebuck had been upon the Board, but he had retired, and he never received any amount of the shares whatever ; but in order to give the fullest answer to the question, it is right to say that he was offered them, and that he refused them. He never had them in his possession. " Sir Henry Willoughby (who thought he would clinch the whole matter, put it thus :)—Any statement that Mr. Roebuck had received any portion of that money would be untrue? (The answer is) —Absolutely false, (Loud cheers.) " Without a shadow of foundation ?—Without a shadow of foundation." (Loud cheers.) Now, what was my vote about with respect to which they make this imputation ? It was about reform in Parliament. What was my argument ? (Interruption.) lam not accustomed to die very easy. (Laughter.) If you will allow me to proceed I will not leave a shred of the imputation against me. The vote was about reform in Parlia ment. Now, what was my argument ? We; the friends of reform, are in a majority in the House of Commons. I am given to understand that Lord Derby's Administration were determined to bring in a better bill than before. Now, I said, we can make what we like of that bill. Let us pass it through the House of Commons ; Lord Derby's Go vernment, which had a majority in the House of Lords, can pass it through there. We shall get a Reform Bill shortly if we keep them in. But, mark my words, I said, so sure as you turn them out, you will get no Reform Bill from the so-called Liberal party. (Hear.) People said, " That is one of the wild assertions in which Mr. Roebuck deals," and then came that other beautiful adjunct which I have answered. But I declared again—depend upon it, if you turn out Lord Derby and bring in a Liberal Administration, no reform act we shall have. They did turn out my Lord Derby, and have you got a Reform Act ? (No, no, and cheers.) Has it been in troduced as a bill this year ? (No.) Do you think you will ever get it ? (Cheers,) Depend upon it, until the people themselves are determined—till they coerce either a Liberal or Conservative Admi nistration—reform you will not have. But if you had allowed Lord Derby at that time to bring in his bill, and improved it in the House of Commons —made it what you liked—he could have carried it, and he would have carried it, through the House of Lords, and then we should have seen in Sheffield what, sir, when I mentioned to my friends—some of my liberal friends in Parliament—l see a cold shudder to come over them. (Laughter.) "What," they said, " is your present constituency ?" I said it was between 6,000 and 7,000. " And what will Lord John's £6 franchise do there ?" they asked. I said, " I don't know ; I don't pay much attention to statistics, but I am told by my friends there that the constituency will amount to between 18,000 and 20,000." (Hear.) 0, sir, if you had seen their faces ! (Laughter.) " Goed God ! are you really in earnest ?" I said, " Yes ;" and then came out that expression which, in the present state of the atmosphere, I have no doubt you can well under stand—" All the respectables will be swamped." But, swamped or not swamped, I am for a £6 Fran ' chise. (Cheers.) I voted for Lord John's Bill, and so did your other representative. I voted for it along with that bright gentleman, Mr. White. (Laughter.) I wish I could see him here. He put himself forward as a great reformer, and we voted with him. What did we then learn ? Why, that the Liberal Administration will bring in no Reform Bill this year. So, whatever becomes of it, you, the working men of Sheffield, would have been en franchised at least three years earlier if Lord Derby's Administration had been kept in than you will be now, supposing you get a Reform Bill next year. For trying to do that I was said to have sold myself, body and soul, to a Conservative Adminis tration. This, then, is the first charge that has been brought against me; I have answered it. The next thing is, I made an Austrian speech. Well, but then I know my countrymen well enough to know this, that if that speech had been spoken by one who was pure reason itself, and yet if an accusation is brought against the man making the speech, the public mind is turned towards the accusation, and not to the argument of the speech itself. (Hear.) Therefore, I will begin again with the imputation, which was that I made that speech because the Government of Austria had made a contract with me. That bright gentleman, Mr. White—(laughter) —said to me in the House of Commons, "If Mr. Roebuck could hear the statements made in the city," upon which there was a general curiosity in that house to know what the city really did say. Mr. White added, "They say to me in the city, do you hear that Mr. Roebuck has come home ? He has been in gilded saloons"—l think lam in one now—(laughter)—" he has been in gilded saloons ; has dined with archdukes and arch duchesses, and has come home with a lucrative con tract in his pocket." My answer to that is, in gilded saloons I have been. I have really—l do hope you will believe me—l really have dined with an arch duke and and archduchess. (Laughter.) That is not the first duke I have dined with. (Laughter.) Bat I have not brought home a contract. (Hear.) I have entered into no contract. I have nothing to do with any contract entered into with the Austrian Government or any Government under heaven. Well, now, what can I say more ? The speech to which the imputation refers I did make, and it was made upon careful consideration. It never entered into my mind that- anybody could suppose I had come there bought and sold to make an Austrian speech. I knew I had been for 30 years fighting the battles of the people, and I did not expect that my countrymen would treat me in that way—would have pointed their fingers at me, and said, " After 28 years' service that man has sold himself." Bat it comes to that. I distinct:y state that I have no contract; lam no party to any contract ; no contract whatever has been made in which I have had the slightest association, except that I gave to the Aus trian Gsvernment a certain set of advice. Now what was the advice ? As your representative I was very well known in Austria. I recollect one gentleman saying—" We have known that name 30 years. We know he is what is called a Liberal in your country, but nevertheless we rather like the little man." (Laughter.) lam merely repeating what they said ; I dare say they were wrong. (Laughter.) But they listened to me. They said —" He is an old Parliamentary politician; let us hear what he says." What was my advice ? My advice was this—and it was given plainly and boldly to the Prime Minister of Austria—" Give to your people a parliamentary constitution. (Hear, hear.) Give to them thorough self-government in their municipalities; let them govern themselves and you have a Parliamentary representative of the Austrian Empire. (Hear.) Now my object is," I said, " to make you good friends with Eng land. I understand the position of Austria. I know that England's best friend, if you know , your own interests, is here i n thi s country ; and in ' order to bind England to you, do you two things— , give your people liberal institutions, and connect yourselves commercially with England." (Cheers.) That was the advice I gave. Novelet me come to my Austrian speech. (Hear, hear.) If you will be quiet, you shall hear. Now, what was the meaning of what I said in that speech ? I will give you a very rapid statement of what I did say, and the grounds for it. I said that the Italian questio n now really involved European politics. On the north-west of Italy there is a great Power called France, and on the north-east a great Power called Austria. Now, I look at this question as an Englishman. In doing so, I may appear to some very narrow-minded ; but, somehow, I have taught myself to believe that what is for England's interest is for the world's interest. (Hear, hear.) When I bring my mind to believe that anything is really a benefit to the good people of Eng land, I believe, standing as we do in the van of freedom, and being a great light to all the liberal world, that what is for the benefit of England is for the benefit of mankind. (Hear.) Now, what do I want ? I want a free and I want an independent Italy. (Hear.) I said, at the pre sent time it is all very well to talk about a free and independent Italy. Some people go to war for an idea—(hear)—and that idea is embodied in a large icountry. They ran themselves up to the top of the Alps by taking Ni ce an d Savoy. Since the days of uhttrus VIII. of France, France has had her eye upon Italy, and my desire and wish is to check France; that Italy, when she is united--which she is not now,—when she is united, shall be an inde pendent Italy, and not the vassal of France. At the present moment, I said,--speaking from the infor mation of the newspapers,—France has 40,000 troops in Rome. I am told by the Times that I was in error; they have only 20,000 troops there. Well, now, I want to know why a wedge of French troops should be pushed in between South and North Italy, and should keep possession of Rome ? Sir, as I said in the English House of Commons, I will say here-1, who have no faith in Louis Napoleon, want those troops away. My belief is that, for the sake of Italy, for the sake of England, for the sake of in dependence generally, the old Italian policy ought to be carried out in Italy. What is that? Why, to balance one Power against another. France is like a threatening cloud overhanging Italy from the crests of the Alps. They have wished, the Emperor of the French has wished, to have his family in Italy. My desire is that the Mediterra nean should not be a French lake—(hear, hear) — but that English ships should sail there as safely as in the English Channel, and my purpose was to recommend to the Administration of Lord Palmer ston that they should really have no interference with political transactions abroad; that non-inter vention should really be carried out. Now, how was I answered ? "We don't intend to interfere." Very well, then, I said, " Abstain from recommend ing to Austria to withdraw entirely from Venetia." Now, this is the question between us. I want to know, as a politician, having studied that ques tion, whether, because that is my opinion, I am unworthy of your confidence; whether I am supposed to be sold, body and soul, because that is my opinion ? (" You are wrong," and " Hear, hear.") Well, that is my opinion. I say now, at this present moment, Austria having given a liberal constitution to every part of her dominions. (" No.") It is all very well to say No, but I have that constitution here with me in this town. (Cheers.) That constitution has been sent to me; I have it bound, and it is now at the house of your honoured mayor. (A Voice—" It would be better if it were in Austria.") (Cries of " Turn him out!" hisses and groans, the meeting being obviously intolerant of the slightest interruption.) The MAYOR called for order, but his voice was inaudible amid the manifestations of disapproba tion at the interruption. Mr. ROEBUCK at length resumed—l hope you will forbear, and . will allow anybody to express his opinion. I would only say to these gentle. men who interrupt, " Just check your im patience awhile ; I cannot talk for ever, and then will come your turn." Well then, sir, that is my opinion. I believe you check France better by having Austria upon the borders of Italy than' by sending her up to the crests of the moun tains. But lam told, " Beautiful Venice, worthy Mantua, learned Padua, would you have them under the hoof ?" (Hear, hear.) Yes, I understand per fectly well what that means—" Would you have them under the hoof of"—what they choose to call —" stupid Austria ?" Well, now, it is all very well to say " Stupid Austria ?" let me say a word about Austria. I went into that country, and in their families I found English books. I found that from one end of the country to the other there is perfect liberty springing up. They told me they had got all these ideas from the literature of England. In every family where they could afford it, they had English governesses to teach their children. (Hear, hear.) They had English books. What was their statement ?--" Your literature is rich ; we can put your books in the hands of our children, and we cannot do that with French books. Therefore, our minds have been turned to England. England is a glorious country ; there you govern your selves ; for that we pant." As sure as the sun rises, the time will come when Austria will be self governed. Austria has another constitution now. It depends upon the people of that country whe ther they will be self-governed. I say calling them stupid Austria only shows how ignorant they are who say this. A more instructed, kind, and cour teous people I never met with. (Cheers.) Well but then. (Interruption.) Wait until I have done. Well but then, they say, " it is all very well for you to say this, but what do you mean by not ad miring Garibaldi ?" I say Ido admire him. Gari baldi, to my mind, is a very remarkable man. (Slight interruption, and cries of "Order.") He has never had * an opportunity of showing himself a great general ;it is not as that I admire him. Ido no think he is a great statesman ; it is not as that I admire him. But he is a remarkably good man ; he has shown an utter abnegation of self. Unlike any other man except George Washington, he has shown himself to be heart and soul in the cause for which he stands up, and on that account he has my admiration and respect. (Cheers.) Now then as to the matter of fact. When Garibaldi went to Sicily he did not fight under the name of any na tion ; he was a mere adventurer; he was what the Americans call a filibuster. (Oh, oh, and no, no.) Don't mistake me—understand my definition. A man who fights not under the name of any nation, not under the flag of any people, that man is an adventurer. I am only telling you a matter of fact when I say that it is laid down by the law of nations that a man so fighting, if he be caught, if he be taken prisoner, can be and is hanged. (Serve him right.) No, I say no. (Cheers.) I say that Garibaldi, when he went to Sicily and Naples, did a great good to mankind. Thatkingdom of Naples was so horribly governed that when he went into Naples by the railroad—he did not go with an army —did he not show there his own great confidence in his cause—did he not go to put an end to the effete and abominable Government of the King of Naples ? Did he not show himself to be worthy of the admiration of mankind ? (Yes, yes, and cheers.) I say yes. But if that same man had been taken by the soldiers of the King of Naples—if he had been seized, then, according to the law of nations, they might and, according to the character of the Neapolitans, they would have hanged him. (A voice, " Serve him right !" and counter cries of " Shame !") Now, then, as to the fact. Let it be truly and fairly understood that for Garibaldi I have the highest respect. As a matter of fact have stated to you what he really was, and if he had gone against a British regiment, a French regiment, or an Austrian regiment, his army would have been broken. That is my opinion. I believe that, with the set of men he had, brave although they were—and yet they were not even equal to our Volunteers, and our Volunteers have not yet been in the field, although when they do go there I have no doubt they they will give a good account of their enemies.; but, Sir, tha followers of Gari baldi were a body of men, not an army; they were a set of adventurers, gallant fellows for the work they went out to do, but they could not have stood up against an English, French, or Austrian regi ment. (" What about Como ?") I don't want to go through the history of that campaign. They have not yet met with a regular English, French, or Austrian army, and I hope they never may. The French army at this present moment remains in Rome. No Piedmontese troops, no Gari baldians will drive them out. If they go they will go of - their own accord. Depend upon it, any attack by Garibaldi and his followers upon Venetia will end as I tell you; it will be a wave going against a rock ; an d, b ecause I have a great respect, regar d, and admiration for Garibaldi, I pray God he may be wise enough not to do it. Well, now, Sir, I have got this to say. You have heard my opinions. Are you satisfied with them ? If not, are you so infal lible as to say, because I am of those opinions I must be wrong, car, being wrong, I must be un worthy ? That is the statement made against me. Your•penny papers, the very existence of which is in a great measure part of my work—for, from the very time I went into Parliament, I advocated a free press—your penny papers have contained and your walls have been placarded with insinua tions—aye, let me use the word—with base state- ments against myself. (Hear, hear.) Well, but this is a politician's question. I have no doubt all of you are a great deal cleverer than I am. (Laughter.) But I happen to be your representative, and you must allow mg to judge for myself. Depend upon it, no other man judges for rne. What I think I say with every boldness, as you yourselves have I,kn - own before now. When I differ from you I tell you so. Nothing has guided me through my whole political career but the view ,I have taken of Eng lish interests. I may have been wrong. Where is the man who has not been wrong? (Hear, hear.) I have learnt to bear and forbear. I would tell all those who judge of me by themselves, I suppose, I would tell them that time out of mind I might have been sold; I might now, instead of being as I am, put upon my trial, have been so well off that not one of those parties would have raised his voice against me. (Cheers.) Sir, I really am proud—l acknowledge it. 1 began life as the servant of my country. I am talking of my political life. From that time to this I have fought the cause of freedom. No man dared to come to me and ask me to vote this way or that. lam never told in the House of Commons what I am to do. No whipper-in ever comes to me. (Laughter.) Oh, they say, he will do exactly as he likes. (Laughter.) I have from the commence ment of my career done exactly as I liked, and let it be told to you now, not for the first time, that I shall do as I like. (Cheers.) lam sent to Parlia ment as your representative; at the end of that term I come to answer for the deeds I have done in your name, and you know what to do. If you don't like me, send me adrift. (Cheers and laughter.) If you think I have acted honestly and to the best of my ability, and that I have been devoted to your service, you then know what to do. (Cheers.) Now, let me tell my detractors that I am afraid of no imputation. Truth is great and will prevail ; (" Well done !") and, God willing, so long as I have health and strength to fight the battle of the good people of England, I have that confidence in my countrymen that, eventually I am sure they will say I have been a good and faithful servant, and as such honour my name. (Loud and protracted cheers, during which Mr. Roebuck resumed his seat.) Mr. W. M. WOOD said he wished to ask Mr. Reebnck what would be the cost of the fortifica tion scheme of Lord Palmerston for which he voted, and against which Mr. Hadfield voted, and what would be the annual cost of keeping up those for tifications ? (Cries of " No !" " Qnestion !" "We've nought to do with it," &c.) Mr. ROEBUCK—WiII you bear with me for a moment? Our friend here,. I have no doubt,fancies (interruption) he has a right to ask this question, and I hope I have a right to answer it. I believe from one end of Great Britain to another there is a feeling of suspicion growing up—or did some time ago grow up—that we, as a great nation, were no t in the position we ought to be in ; that there was by - our side a man who wielded an army of 600,000 men, in whom the people of England had no confi dence. They thought the Volunteer movement ought to be got up, and it sprang from the earth, as it were, armed, and frightened the despot. (Hear.) I believe—and though I have differed in that from my hon. colleague, we very seldom do differ—l believe it was wise in England to haveher arsenals defended, for in these days of steam a fleet can be got together to meet at Portsmouth at a cer tain given day, and if there was nothing to resist, then our arsenals and our power of resistance would be taken away. (Cheers.) In order that England might have her due weight among the nations I voted for Lord Palmerston's proposal. Ido not be lieve my countrymen thought I was doing wrong. (Hear.) I believe my colleague was mistaken. (No, no !) Do you suppose that therefore I thought him unworthy of your confidence ? No, my regard and respect for him remain the same, and I ask you to treat me as I treat him. I may be wrong, but lam sure in this matter I had the largest portion of my countrymen with me, and none more so than the men of Sheffield. (Cheers.) Mr. DODWORTH said he had long supported Mr. Roebuck, and was glad to hear him answer for him self in the manner he had done. Nevertheless, he had something against him from the speech he had made. (Cries of " Question," and interruption.) Mr.:Roebuck said, depend upon it we shall never get reform till the people themselves are deter• mined to, have it. (True !) He also said that what ever was for the interest and good of England was for the interest and good of the world. That was his opinion. He (Mr. Dodworth) wished to ask him this question. If any nation or people determined to rise against their rulers, would Mr. Roebuck take sides against such people in favour of such rulers, because it was for the interest or good of England ? (Hear, hear.) Or would he leave the people or nation to do the best for themselves, and be strictly neutral both with regaiel to moral and physical aid ? Mr. ROEBUCK—In answer to that question I would say I should first inquire what the interests of Eng ! land require. I will suppose that nation to be Ire land. (Hear.) In 1828, if you had polled Ireland you would have got a majority against England. But I should have kept up and maintained the union between England and Ireland. (No, no.) I have always been for the union. I may be wrong, and I daresay certain ardent Irish gentlemen will think that I am, but I was unfavourable to the movement for a dissolution, and stood up for the union between England and Ireland ; and I believe I did wisely at that time in not joining a large portion of the people of Ireland who were for disunion. There is another nation under our rule that has a Parlia ment who are determined to poll the:people whether they will remain under the dominion of England or not. That is the people of the lonian Islands, known as the Septinsular Republic. They have a Parliament, and it met about two months ago, and passed a resolution that they should poll the people of the islands whether England should retain Corfu. The Governor, an Englishman, prorogued that Parliament. Should I join the people of the lonian Islands against England ? I say, No. I say it is for the interest of mankind that England should have interests in the Mediterranean, and that it should not become a French lake as the great Napoleon wished to make it. England governs Corfu as she governs her own country. The people are contented and happy, and I would maintain the power of England. I would join England against anybody. (Cheers.) Mr. W. SHARMAN wished to ask Mr. Roebuck bow it was that he justified Austria in retaining Venice, and advised the British Government not to recommend Austria to withdraw from Venice, while he condemned France for keeping Rome in bondage in like manner? (Cheers.) Mr. ROEBUCK — The position of Austria and of France is entirely different. (Hear, hear, and disap probation.) Austria was put into possession of Venetia by treaties to which England was a party, at what was called the pacification of Europe in 1815. The then Republic of France sent troops and took possession—violent possession —of Rome. Now, if Venice were situated down where Rome is, I should say the sooner Austria was out of Venice the better. The position of Rome is a very different one, and the possession of Rome by France is a very different one from that of Venice by Austria. One is the result of treaties to which the whole European world was a party, to which we are bound in faith and honour now. I say to England, " Hold your hand. Have nothing to do with any foreign intervention ; let them settle their affairs as they will." I tell you that my opinion is that by the balance of power Austria is required. She is what I call your natural ally on the Continent. The sooner France is out of Rome the better. You will then hare a united Italy, and with the aid of Austria and England y ou will have an independent Italy. But you w ill not have an independent Italy if you have the dominion of France. If you drive out Austria you will make France stronger than she now is. You will make the Mediterranean what the First Napoleon wished it to be—a French lake. And there again comes in my rule—Eng land's interest requires it to be a free sea, and I am in that case, as in all others, the friend, the honest and ardent friend, of my country. (Cheers.) Mr. DODWOILTH said that Mr. Roebuck had not answered his question in the way that he had put it. He answered it politically, and by his speech he (Mr. Dodworth) gathered that Mr. Roebuck meant that because he believed the English people had more liberty and more stability about them than any other people he thought what was for their interest was for the good of the world. Therefore, for the good of the world, and the good of England, he understood Mr. Roebuck would interfere' with the rising of any other people. (Mr. Roebuck dissented.) Mr. Roebuck said that the English had done the same thing to Ireland that Austria was doing to Venice, with the difference that Venice was given to Austria. (Disapprobation and counter cheers.) Now, he wanted Mr. Roebuck to answer his previous ques tion on this point, and also to say whether, because Venice was given to Austria in 1815, he considered that binding on people living in 1861. (Cheers.) Mr. ROEB UCK—(Cheers)—I will first answer the last question, " Are the people of England bound by what was done in 1815 ?" I say they are. (Cries of "No.") N ow , I ask you, is not every nation governed by l aw ? (Y es. ) A n d d o y ou sa y I am not to be ob e di ent to an A ct o f P ar li amen t passed a bad one."] I want t o k now if l am t o be a judge of that. tn Ain 1815 I P [Mr. Sharman—" Not when it's an estate ; new, to say to my nei g hb our , " You have , in my opinion, I oug ht to have it ?" Can I here stand up and sa y, "It i s a ll very true you passed that law in 1815. l am li v i ng in 1861 ; t I don't think that law a good one, and I won't obey it." What would be the consequence ? I should be shut up in youy.town gaol directly. Then 1 dof APRIL 3, 1861. say that I am bound by what my forefathers have done until I properly, and according to law, estab lish another law. 1 say that when I look upon Italy and Venice, where the people are now well governed--(Mr. Sharman—" They don't think so.") (Confusion, and cries of " Turn Sharman out," " Get to the pulpit," &c) How do you know ? (turning to Mr. Sharman). Again I tell you I may be mistaken. You may be right, but again I say does that put you upon ground to make those base insinuations against me ? Do you consider I come here to answer you or any person who chooses to question me ? I came to vindicate my character. I tell you that is untarnished, and to tell me your opinion differs froni mine is simply to tell me you think yourself a cleverer fellow than I am (loud laughter and cheers)—and in that you may be right ; but you are not a member of Par liament, and therefore you are not called upon to act in the name of the people. I am. It is of the utmost importance to me and to you that my cha racter should be above suspicion. For that purpose I have come down here to vindicate myself, and I dare defy any man here to attack me. (Protracted cheering.) A persOn in the body of the meeting said Mr. Roebuck said he had voted for Lord Derby's Go vernment because he believed they would get a libe ral Reform Bill. Now, he wished to ask Mr. Roe buck whether Lord Derby's Government gave any pledge to the House of Commons that it would bring in another Reform Bill. He bad understood Lord Derby to say that the Government had redeemed its pledge, and they would take no fur ther action in the matter. Mr. ROEBUCK—I was in communication, in daily correspondence with the gentlemen connected with Lord Derby's Administration, and I learned from them, and I believe that we should have had a Reform Bill proposed by their Administration. If they had not proposed it, we could have turned them out, but I believed they would have proposed it, and said so when I voted for them. I said Lord Derby will bring yoU in a bill. You can make it a good bill in the House of Commons, and send it up to the House of Lords. He can pass it if he pleases through the House of Lords. It was for your interest then to keep Lord Derby in power to get from him what I believed he would give —a thoroughgoing reform. I believed, and I do believe, that Lord Derby would have proposed a Reform Bill. I knew, as I know now, that if he did not we should turn him out the next day. Mr. fINIGRAIII (news agent) said Mr. Roebuck, at the West Riding election, had stepped out of his way to attack Mr. Wortley. He had said that any man coming before the electors in favour of Lord Derby was a man opposed to the extension of the suffrage, and yet had voted for Lord Derby himself on that very question. Mr. ROEBUCK-4 said then, as I say now, that any man who voted for Mr. Stuart Wortley did his utmost to put Lord Derby in a majority. If ha had been in a majority we should have got no Reform Bill. (To Mr. Ingram.)—You see I think differently from you. We are both politicians, and I may he mistaken ; but my opinion was that the great thing was to keep Lord Derby in such a state that he would be subservient to the House of Commons. I wanted him to be so, and the moment you sent Tory members to Parliament you gave him the power over the house. Now, my object was to make him subservient to the house, and I advised the people of Sheffield, as I always advise them, to return a liberal member to Parliament. Now, I want to know if because I differ from Mr. Ingram am I of necessity wrong ? (No, no !) Am I not in a posi tion, sent to London by you, to judge with a little more evidence than the hon. gentleman before me ? (Laughter and cheers.) Alderman FISHER moved : " That, having heard Mr. Roebuck's exposition of his views on the subjects of Austria and 'ltaly, this meeting agrees with him in desiring that the principles of constitu tional and commercial freedom should prevail in Austria ; but also reiterates its ardent sympathy with the efforts of the Italians to free their country from internal tyrants and external domination, and its hopes that before leng Venetia and Rome may be peacefully united to the Italian king dom." (Cheers.) In regard to the Galway contract, which Mr. Roebuck had supported on public grounds, he mentioned that a memorial in favour of that con tract was signed by all the large houses in Sheffield which were desirous to quicken and improve our communication with America. Dr. HOLLAND seconded the motion in a speech of some length, strongly repudiating all sanction of the imputations upon Mr. Roebuck's integrity. Mr. SFIARINEAN supported the motion, and read the following letter from Mr. Dunn, the chairman of Mr. Roebuck's Election Committee, in reply to a request that he would move a resolution at the meeting : " Richmond, near Sheffield, March 29. "Dear Sir,—ln reply to your note of yesterday, request ing me to attend the meeting called by the Mayor tor Mon day next, I beg to say that it will not be in my power to be present, as I have an important engagement with several gentlemen at 2 o'clock on that day, which I cannot put off. I am glad that your intimation to me was to speak to a moderate resolution. Hard words do not help any argu ment, and I do not, I trust, forget the important services which for a long:period have been rendered by Mr. Roebuck to public cause. Nor do I despair of his yet rendering fur ther important services to the same great cause. lam bound, however, to say that I cannot agree in his present opinions (so far as I understand them from his speech in the house) regarding Austria and Italy. " True it is our interest that Austria should be powerful, but to me it appears clear she cannot be powerful so long as Hungary is in its present state, and so so long as she wastes her resources by holding part of Italy in chains. I agree with Mr. Roebuck that Italy should be powerful also, and also free; but that she cannot be, as it appears to me, so long as Austria is in possession of the great fortresses of Northern Italy. "I agree with Mr. Roebuck that it is most desirable effi cient checks and safeguards should be had against the tre mendous military power of France, wielded as that power is by one man ; and I think one of the greatest safeguards will be found in Italy united and free, with not one foreign gun within her long extent. A free, powerful people, will, I believe, be found the natural and best allies of free, power ful Great Britain.—Yours faithfully, THOMAS DUNN." Alderman SAUNDERS moved and Mr. GLADES seconded an amendment declaring that Mr. Roe buck had entirely refuted the calumnies that had been propagated against his integrity, but protest ing against his views in regard to the Venetian question. Alderman FISHER said he was quite willing to incorporate the former part of the amendment with the original motion, and to this Alderman Saunders agreed. Alderman H. E. HOOLE then moved another amendment, declaring the meeting to be perfectly satisfied with Mr. Roebuck's explanations in answer to the calumnies that litd been cast upon him, and avowing its full confidence in his personal integrity and political worth. Mr. DODWORTII seconded the amendment. The MAYOR said Alderman H. E. Iloole's amend ment was not properly an amendment but a repeti tion in other terms of the sentiments of the earlier parts of Alderman Saunders' amendment, which Alderman Fisher had agreed to adopt. He thought therefore the most convenient course would be to put Alderman Hoole's amendment as the first resolu tion, and then, as a second resolution, Alderman Fisher's motion, as he originally moved it. After some conversation this course was agreed upon. The first resolution was carried unanimously with loud cheering, and the second was carried with a small number of dissentients. Mr.ROEBucK--(loud cheers)—l have to thank you and I do it most sincerely, for the confidence which you have expressed in my honesty and worth as your representative. You and I differ as to a politi cal opinion upon a certain matter. Time will show whether lor you are right. (Hear, hear.) I don't pretend to be infallible, but I do pretend to be an honest man. (Cheers.) You have expressed, with out any dissentient voice, that you believe all those insinuations against me are false. (Cheers.) Of the men who made it I know, thank God, nothing, and what is more, I don't want to know. (Cheers and laughter.) But I thought I knew my country men. I thought they did not believe that a man was made bad all at once, and that 28 years of thoroughly honest conduct was not to be forgotten in a moment; and that for some paltry sum I should sell myself, when I had resisted that temptation 28 years. Well then, I have that confidence in truth, I have that confidence in you. Igo back to London as your re presentative. Now, I look round on this meeting, not one hand held up against me. (Hear.) Against my opinion on one particular point you did hold up your hands. Well, then, ail I can say is, I still be lieve I am right—(loud laughter and cheers)—and I think that time will prove it. I would ask you honestly to have faith in me as simply an honest man. (Hear, hear.) When my friend Dr. Holland talks about my sarcastic tongue, I would entreat you to compare my tongue with his, (Laughter and cheers.) There was an old proverb, " Give a dog an ill name and hang him." (Laughter.) I believe they would very willingly have hanged me— (laughter)—but that our good forefathers have made laws to protect us. Ah, well ! I wish, gentlemen some of you had to bear the shafts that I have. Temper is all very good until it is tried. Hour by hour, minute by minute, has been this dropping upon the stone ; and can you wonder that temper has given way at last ? I don't pretend to have a very good one—(laughter); but I have that respect for myself that whenever any accusation is made against me I meet it face to face ; and here I am be fore this stupendous meeting--(hear, hear)—and I have said my say ; you have believed me, and that is my answer to my calumniators. (Loud and protracted cheering.) Mr. HADFIELD, M.P., who was warmly cheered, expressed the pleasure with which he had witnessed the vindication of Mr. Roebuck's character and position by his constituents, and remarked that though he and Mr, Roebuck were sometimeti in different lobbies, yet they: differences were no greater than men were always liable to when party feeling was not allowed to override all independence of thought. After referring to several political topics, he appealed to his constituents to support measures of reform, and asked for a petition with 20,000 signatures in favour of Mr. Baines's Bill, which would increase the constituency of Sheffield to 20,000. (Cheers.) Votes of thanks were then passed to Mr. Had field for his presence, to Mr. lioudan for the use of the hall, and to the Mayor for presiding. The meeting terminated at two o'clock, having lasted three hours. THE GREAT SIL,i. .RoBBERY. Yesterday the investigation into the circumstances con nected with the plunder of 10 bales of silk, valued at £l,OOO, on the river Thames, was resumed at the Thames Police court, before Mr. Woolrych. On Monday, the 25th ult., William Crane, aged 41, porter, in the service of Messrs. Drakeford and Co., silk merchants in Great Winehester - street, London, was arraigned before Mr. Woolrych, and after the examination of several witnesses remanded until yesterday. It was then stated that three persons were in custody at Derby on a charge of being concerned in the robbery, and that the whole of the stolen silk had been re covered. It was also stated by Mr. Mumford, the superin tendent of the St. Katharine Dock police, that he intended to proceed to Derby and bring the prisoners to London. On Monday night John Newton, aged 52, a silk manufac turer and broker, of Derby ; Joseph Barker, a shoemaker, aged 31, of Hope-street, Bethnal-green ; and Peter Debock, his brother-in-law, aged 30, stated to be a dealer in silk, were brought to London from Derby by Mr. Hilton, the superintendent of police, and Inspectors Vessey and Fearn, of that tou n, and lodged in the Stepney station-house, ad joining the Thames Police-court. At 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon the four prisoners, Newton, Crane, Barker, and Debock, were arraigned in the felons' dock. Newton ap peared to be very ill and also suffering greatly from mental anxiety. He appeared to feel acutely the degrading posi tion in which he was placed. He held down his head and supported himself with his hands on each aide of the dock during the whole of the investigation, Barker sobbed loudly when he was put into the dock, and continued to do so for some time afterwards. Crane and Debock appeared to be quite unmoved. Mr. Humphreys, jun., solicitor, of the firm of Humphreys, Son, and Morgan, Newgate-street, conducted the prosecu tion for the St. Katharine Dock Company. The following solicitors appeared for the prisoners :—Mr. Thomas Beard, of Basinghall-street, for Barker; Mr. Hudson, for Crane ; Mr. Angell, for Debock ; and Mr. Leech, of the firm of Gemble and Leech, solicitors, Derby, for Newton. Frederick Charles Agg, landlord of the Clown public house, St. John- street-road, of whom Newton bought the stolen silk, and James Hunter, landlord of the Red Deer public-house, in Cambridge-heath-road, were concerned in the robbery, and have absconded. Before the examination of the witnesses commenced yes terday Mr. Beard, Mr. Leech, and Mr. Angell successively addressed the magistrate, and complained that they were denied access to their clients, who were in custody of the Derby police, and said it was a most unfair and unconstitu tional proceeding. They wished to receive instructions from the prisoners, and unless they did so it was impossible to de fend them properly. Mr. Woolrych, as at present advised, could see no objec tion whatever at the prisoners consulting with their profes sional advisers, but he would rather the application was renewed when Mr. Humphreys, jun., made his appearance. On the arrival of Mr. Humphreys, jun., he said he had no objection to the three gentlemen seeing their clients if w I they were actually retained by them. Mr. Beard, Mr. Angell, and Mr. Leech then repaired to the cells in which their clients were confined, and after a long interview with them returned into court. The four prisoners were arraigned, and as soon as something like order could be restored the case proceeded. Mr. Humphreys, jun., opened the case in a lengthened address. He said he was instructed by the St. Katharine Dock Company to conduct this prosecution, which was one of very peculiar importance. He charged three of the pri soners with stealing and Newton with receiving, knowing to be stolen, 10 bales of China silk, value £l,OOO. The silk was stolen while in transit from the West India Dock to the St. Katharine Dock, or during its delivery in the St. Katharine Dock. He should be able to show that 10 bales of silk were missing in the St. Katharine Dock, which were safe in a lighter called the Dorville when it left the West India Dock; 411 bales of silk, ex the ship Solent, from Shanghai, were put into the lighter in the West India Dock. They ought to have been delivered into the St. Katharine Dock on the morning of the 14th of last month. but, instead of 411 bales, only 401 were delivered, and 10 were found to be missing. He should be able to show that the 10 bales of bilk the subject of this prosecution had been tallied into the lighter in the West India Dock } _ and had never entered the warehouses of the St. It atirarine Dock Company in Cutler-street, Houndsditch, as they ought to have done. He would prove they were quite safe in the lighter; he would prove they were missing, trace them to . a private dwellinghouse in Spitalfields, and ultimately to Mr. Newton's mill in Derby. He would call upon Mrs. Gardner, of No. 2, Hope-street, Spitalfields, the house which Barker rented and lived in, to prove that the 10 bales of silk were brought there, and taken away again in one of Pickford's vans. Mr. and Mrs. Gardner occupied the first floor of the house, and on Friday, the 15th. March, they saw a light van drive up to the door with two men, and 10 bales, which appeared to be bales of silk, in the van. The bales were covered over with a tarpaulin, although it was a fine day. The 10 bales of silk were unloaded and placed in one of the lower rooms of the house occupied by Barker, but which of them Mrs. Gardner could not say, She would positively say the 10 bales of silk were never upstairs. All the time the bales were in the house, Barker, who occupied the two lower rooms and a washhouse, was pursuing his trade of a boot and shoemaker. They must have been in the lower front room, the door of which was locked, and the ,window blind down, from the time the bales were brought into the house until they were removed. On the afternoon of Monday, the 18th of March, Mrs. Gardner saw one of Pickford's vans driven up to the door of the house, and the 10 bales - were taken out of the house immediately after wards, and put into the van. It had been already proved on a former investigation that Crane had directed a man named Tooth, one of Messrs. Pickford's carmen, to drive his van and horses to Hope-street, and there receive 10 bales of milk. Crane joined the carman in Hope-street,Us sisted to load the van with the silk, and gave the carman is as a gratuity. Tooth would be again put into the witness-box, and say that Debock assisted Crane to load the Jan. Al though Barker was not present when the 10 bales of silk were removed from his house, it was clear hb rented that house, occupied the two lower rooms, and was there from the Friday until the Monday. On the night the bales were put into the van Debock went down to Derby, and about 5 minutes past 1 o'clock on the morning of the 19th March he entered the George Inn in Derby, accompanied by the prisoner Barker, and asked for beds. Mr. Robotham, the landlord of the George, informed them he had only one bed unoccupied, and that one of them might sleep on a sofa in his parlour. Debock and Barker accepted the proffered ac commodation, and partook of some refreshment. A few minutes afterwards Newton, who was charged as a receiver, came into the same house, taking no notice of either De bock or Barker, partook of some refreshment at the bar and walked out again. During the short time Newton was in the George, Debock said to Mrs. Robotham, " I know thaw gentleman at the bar-door. It is Mr. Newton, but he don't know me. Don't say I have been asking for him ; don't tell him I have been going upstairs to bed, or he will perhaps be wanting to see me." Mr. and Mrs. Robotham took no particular notice of the observations of Debock at that time, but those observations were material, as showing that, although Barker and Debock entered the George as strangers, and Newton did not recognise them, they were known to each other. On the following morning, after breakfasting at the George, Barker and Debock asked the landlord the way to Mr. Newton's silk mills. Mr. Robo tham directed them, and they left. On the same night Barker and Debock returned to the George, and one of them, Debock, who assumed a foreign accent and manner, took a £lOO Bank of Engbard note from his purse, and asked Mr. Robotham to read it, and to give hip opinion whether it was a genuine one or not. Mr. Robothain looked at the note, and he asked him if it was a good one. Mr. Robotham said it was a perfectly genuine note, and Debock returned it to his purse and said, " I am much obliged to you ; I received the note in town," Mr. Robotham asked him if he received it in the way of business. Debock at first said he had received it in the way of business, and after a few more words said, " No, no ; I have not received it in a business transaction. I have taken it in change for other cash." Mr. Robotham said, " I should not like to have done that myself to a stranger, not knowing it was a note." The prisoners Debock and Barker partook of several glasses of ale in the house, and left it. Mr. Robotham, believing there was something suspicious about the t wo men, and that Debock ought not to have such a large sum of money with him, communicated with the town police of Derby, and Debock and Barker were arrested at the railway sta tion by Mr. Hilton, the superintendent, and other officers. Debock was searched, and three £lOO Bank of England notes and two sovereigns were found ;upon him. Barker was also searched, and the officers found in one of his pockets a halfpenny. (A laugh.) In consequence of what was said by Debock and Barker, the Derby police went to Newton's mill and asked him if he had bought any silk re cently. Newton admitted that he had purchased 10 bales of silk of two London men named Agg and Hunter, and h a d given a cheque for £230 and three £lOO notes in pay ment. Now, it was important to observe that the same number of notes were found in the possession of Debock. Other visits were paid by the Derby police to Newton's mill, and upon one occasion Newton's son, in the presence of his father, gave to Mr. Hilton an invoice and receipt for £738, and it was represented that that was the amount paid for the 10 bales of silk. There was a stamp on the receipt, and writt en across it were these words, " Settled F. C. Agg. " Mr Humphreys, jun., then read the document, as follows " London, March 1.5, Is6l. " Ur. John Newton, bought of F. C. Agg. 10 13, of China raw overland (A) 11 21 H 10 40 A 14'£738, net cash. " Settled. " F. C. AGG." Mr. Woolrych—Let me see that document. Mr. Humphreys- , —You see, sir, that it don't tally with the first statement, that £530 was given for the silk, and among it three Bank of England notes for £3OO. The fact that three notes for £lOO each were found upon Debock is a singular confirmation of Newton's first statement. Mr. Woolrych—Who is Agg ? Mr. Humphreys, jun.—A publican, the landlord of the Clown publichouse, near Sadler's Wells Theatre. Hunter, his confederate, is also a publican, keeping the Red Deer publichouse in Cambridge-heath-road, Bethnal-green• Neither of them was in the silk trade. Agg was formerly In the service of Drakeford and Co., silk merchants in the city, and was well acquainted with Crane, who, at the time of his apprehension was alsc in the employ of Drakeford and Co., and had been so for many years. Ten balesof silk were found in Newton's mill, which Mr. Mumford, the superintendent of the St. Katharine's Dock police, had seized and brought to London. It would be shown that the silk was similar in quality and other particulars to the silk of the 401 bales delivered into the dock warehouse in C utler- street. After some further evidence the prisoners were remanded, without bail. THE CIIARGES AGAINST MR. LAING. The directors of the Great Western Railway of Canada have issued a pamphlet of considerable bulk by way of reply to the report of the committee of investigation. They of course refer to the charges against Mr. Laing, and proceed to argue at eonsi. derable length that that gentleman must be held to be completely exculpated. They observe : The board see no reason to doubt the truth of Mr. Laing's assertion that the verbal understanding between himself and Mr Wythes was never reduced to writing or rendered capable of being carried out in any practical form, and that long before Mr. Wythes had finished his work Mr. Laing had put an end to the arrangement. The committee offer no evidence to contradict this statement. To speak there fore of the joint claims of Messrs. Wythes and Laing under the contract seems simply an unjustifiable aspersion. The committee of investigation very well knew that Mr. Laing never received one farthing under the contract; that it was a mere understanding to enable the line to be floated, to assure the mind of Mr. Wythes in taking a contract in a strange country, entered into for the advantage of the pro moters of the company, and not for the advantage of Mr. Laing ; and at their solicitation and not at the desire of Mr. Laing; that it ceased when Mr. Laing became con cerned in the conduct of the Great Western Company's affairs ; and that, whilst the promoters of the Company pro. fited by the facilities the arrangement afforded them in going to the public, Mr. Laing never profited to the extent of is. by his share in the transaction. The appendix to the report contains a letter from Mr. Wythes, the contractor, explana tory of the transactions in which he was engaged in con junction with Mr. Laing. Mr. Wythes says :—" The inves tigation Committee report with regard to this railway, that Mr. Laing had entered into a partnership agreement with Mr. Wythes for the construction of the Hamilton and Toronto line. I was applied to to become the contractor for the construction of the Hamilton and Toronto Railway. Having had no experience at that time in the construction of railways in America, I was not inclined to undertake the work. It was, however, much pressed upon me by various parties, and amongst others by Mr. Laing. At last I agreed to undertake it provided the parties pro. moting the line would show their confidence in the line and in their own estimates for its construction by taking some share of the risk. It was agreed that Mr. Laing should do so, and should become liable for one.:tbird of any loss I might sustain. There was nothing but an honourable understanding in the matter, and that honourable understanding was put an end to, at Mr. Laing's desire, about 14 or 15 months after the agreement. As I had felt myself prejudiced. by Mr. Laing's connec tion with the matter, which occasioned much interference and annoyance from the manager, I was rejoiced to end the connection. There was, of course, no account of any sort up to the time the understanding terminated. It is not true, as the conimittee assert, that when I made my claims upon the company for extra work, Mr. Laing accompanied me to the board and advocated my claims. He never accompanied me to the board. On one occa sion I believe he was present when I attended with my solicitor to get a settlement; but it la wholly untrue that Mr. Laing, on that or any other occa sion, attended with , me to advecate my claims. ' 1 10 could have no interest in doing so ; and, indeed, at the period when I made my claim, we were not acting in per ect harmony. Concerning my contract for this line I can only repeat what I wrote to you under date 20th Novera" ber last, that lam ready to reopen the whole question and refer it to arbitration, as provided for in the contract,' and to refund whatever the arbitrators may decide, if I have been overt aid anything, provided your company will, on your part, undertake tc pay me such sum as the arbitrators may determine that lam fairly entitled to in excess of the moneys already paid me.' " COUNTRY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL-APRIL 2. There was a fair attendance of the town and country trade at this morning's market, and we had but a limited consumptive demand for wheat and flour, at no advance on the week. Oats and oatmeal were in limiOd sale, but at the previous currencies. Barley and peas *ere also un changed. Indian corn not much inquired for, at former rates. LEEDS-APRIL 2. Our market to-day was fairly attended by millers, but the trade in wheat was of a limited character. Fine Eng" lish wheat must be v o ted a t b are l y th e rates of last week; Barley is lower. Beans and oats easier to buy. NEWCASTLE-UNDER LYNE—Antth 1. At this corn market there was a limited show of wheat. The trade was very steady, and prices were at the extreme rates of last week—white making 60s to 745, red b6s to 655. The demand for barley was limited, but at no reduction in value. Oats were in steady request, with a fair sale, from 26s to 32s per 24 stone. Beans as before, hom 40s to 50s per qr. MELTON MOWBRAY—Aritn. 2. There was an avera ge s h ow o f wheat to-day, which sold _ at no advance on last week's rates for all descriptions Barley less inquired for, at scarcely late rates. For oats the trade was less firm. Prices :—White wheat, 563 Od to 60s Od ; re d; 48 s Od to 54s per 36 atone; beans scarce, but dear, at 520 to 56s for old ; new 40s per 38 at.; barley, 40s to 44s for malting, and 28a to 34s per qr.. for. grinding ; oats, 29s to 38s Od per 24 stone. NORWICH CATTLE. The show of store cattle to ; day was short. A clear ance was effected at prices quite equal to Thursday last. Scots, 4s Od to 4s 6d ; shorthorns, 3s 6d to 4s • 3i Od to 38 6d ; Devons, 48 to 4s 6el (estimated weight when fat). Fat beasts a large show, and sales brisk, at 8s Od to 88 6d ' per 141 b. Sheep—There was a good supply of sheep in the' pens, Fat sheep, 9s Od to 9s 6d per stone ; prime, 10s Od Pigs—A fair supply. Store pigs, 15a to 21Is ; fat pork, 7s Gd to 8s Od per stone. THE MAILS. MAILS DUE. Australia, Ceylon, and Mauritius (via South ampton) .. • • . • Do. Brazil and Cape Verds Buenos Ayres, Monte Video, &a. Cuba and Mexico. .. . . .. .. April 13. Canada, &c. (via L'derry) April 3. Cape of Good Hope, &c. China, Penang, and Singapore (via S'ampton) AMA p t. y Do (via Marseilles) April _ 4. . Gibraltar (via Southampton) .. • • • • . 11 ' r " India (Calcu p t o ta), Ceylon, &c. (via India (Bombay), (via Southampton) .. April 10. Do. (via Marseilles) .. April 4, (viSaoumtharsamepintoeno) April Apri l 12.4. Lisbon .. .. • . April 11. Malta, Egypt, and Ade n (via Southampton) .. Ap r il 4 . Do. (via Marseilles) .. April 4. Vigo, and Oporto .. .. April 1. United States, California, &c. April 3. Western Coast of Atrica, Madeira, Teneriffe .. April 10. West Indies and Pacific, Carthagena, Cuba, &o. April 13. Fait .. .. Marseilles.) Aril 1 1 8 2 .. - .. April 6. , BIRTHS. ADDISON.—On the 2d inst., at South Minims, the wife of Win. Addison, Esq., of a son. LLOYD. —On the 2d inst., at 77, Eaton-square, the wife of Win. Jones Lloyd, Esq., of a son. PICKFORD.—On the 31st ult., at 32, Gloucester-place , Hyde park, the wife of Charles Hampden Pickford, Esq., of a son. MARRIAGES. DREWRY—IRELAND.—On the 2d inst., at St. Pancras Church, Thomas Drewry, Esq., of the Priory, New" castle-on-Tyne, to Sarah Anne, third daughter of Geo' Ireland, Esq., of London. . . YOUNG--RA LEY. —On the 30th ult., at St. Paul's, Clap - , ham, Mr. George Young, of Oxford-street, to Phebe Elizabeth, second daughter of the late - Henry RawleY, Esq., of Fountain Lodge, Clapham. DEATHS. BLAGDEN.—On the 31st ult., at Bath, Richard Blagdent Esq., E.R.C.S., Engl., late of 26, Albemarle-strett, Lan' don, aged 72. • BUTLER.—On the 31st ult., at 15, Pickering-place, Mr; Richard Butler, aged 81. He was one of the veterans the Nile and Egypt, serving on board the Swiftsuret Capt. Hallowell. CHEETHAM.—On the Ist inst., at Bayswater, Mr. George Cheetham, of Mottram-road, Staleybridge, aged 37. DRINKWATER.—On the 30th ult., at Bath, Thomas Drink water, Esq., of Irwell-house, Lancashire, aged 85. MARTIN.—On the 31st ult., at Elsfield-house, near Maid stone, Richard Plotless, second son of the late Fieuues Wykeham Martin, gsq., of Leeds Castle, aged 68. LONDON Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SuN Office, No. 112,StraIld; ' in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County of Wednesday, A-Pril MAO. G R A 1(1 each sh N. 8.. share) 1 shareh( the pay Ne TEN skTui irm to the Ist hospita thi et] s wi n eontrae ter or h dens, on and d , 1 the tender this offi : TEN] TH1511! enter It "such 1861, to Land F Beparal et tend' ?Ilea tio Pours o be'irop under c Commie IcEa ma A No TE provide, pheatioi arti( the con Office. No T( the day tenderii Office a from ea posed s 1 Ever , Admire der for delivers persons lng, in tract. WI OLT The hafi beautill most dE of soul OLDRII E rating 1 adoptio AM Eold in R, dimpas; vtG deep-si PAT teZUlat 9d.. 4s. CON causes ture, rf retenti female 4s. ed., vice fr( one st: Oxforc ceipt o NOTII publ two squa V A CONI Phys Sum CON New med nd POR ew urE nuf oil, C 4 dre, lam