Northern Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-01-19 00:00:00

MR. BRIGHT'S SPEECH AT BRADFORD. On Monday evening, Mr. Bright delivered a speech to some four thousand persons at Bradford, in elucidation of his own Reform Bill. Mr. Bright, on rising, was received with loud and con tinued cheering. After some introductory observations, he said that he was most anrions that any step which the Government and Parliament might take might conduce to the lasting and highest interests of this great nation. He had been particularly stimulated to address the great meetings in Birmingham, Manchester Edinburgh, Glas gow, and now i n B ra d ford, because he ' believed it to be of an importance which could not be described in words that those who wished for reform should know what it was they wanted, and so understand the question that they could detect in a moment any imposture that might be attempted ; so. that there might be no mistake com mitted which we hereafter or our children after us, might have cause to lament. (Ilear, hear.) Everybody was for reform. H e th oug h t that, in coming to Bradford he had met in th e ra il way carriage one who was opposed to reform ; but it proved that he was not so ; he only didn't much like paying to hear political speeches. (Laughter.) If everybody was for reform, where then was the peril? Why warn anybody against any possible imposture ? He as quite willing to allow it to be assumed that his recent pr6posltif.m.c lAA not been in all things judicious, and that he might have -:!3‘de mistakes ; but s till th e comments of a considerable portion of the press had not been the comments of those who merely pointed out with a friendly finger mistakes which he might have committed. They had been comments dictated by intense hostility-- (hear, hear)—and he knew not whether the press repre senting the present Government, or that representing the last Government, was more to be charged with bitter hostility. (Hear, hear.) Look again at the panic into which certain members of the aristocracy had 'been thrown. (Laughter.) They were not anxious that the question of reform should be discussed by those who were able to handle it thoroughly—(hear, hear) ; —and they thought that the people would be let away from the pursuit of a great object by attributing to him oftentimes language, and 'always objects, to which he had never, zimen — the smallest approbation. (Hear, hear.) Thib-question they had to discuss was really composed of three questions : —First, what ought to be done with regard to the extension of the franchise ; second, shall any alteration be made in the mode in which the right to the franchise shall be exercised ; and third, what steps shall be taken to withdraw members from places and populations wholly incompetent fairly to exercise the right of election, and to what new towns, old towns, great towns, or industrious populations, shall these new members afterwards be di s t r ib u t e d ? (Hear, hear.) Upon the first point, he would say at once that he was against all fancy " franchises—(hear, hear)—fran ehises given not so much with reference to those they would include, as with reference to those they would exclude. (Hear, hear.) In this catalogue he grouped, proposed, or suggested special franchises to lawyers, and doctors, and members of colleges. 'Why not make a special electoral body of the worsted-manufacturers of Bradford ? They were just as useful men in the country as lawyers. The lawyers had three or four representatives always in the Cabinet, and just as many more on the opposite benches waiting to take their places, and there were, he supposed, not less than one hundred barristers in the house ; so that lawyers really required no more representation. Doctors were educated men, and devoted to the great interests of society in their own department ; but they were not specially learned in politics. (" Hear, hear," a n d laughter.) Then, it was proposed, that £5O in a savings bank should entitle to a vote ; but upon that arrangement, if a young man married, and invested his £5O in the fur niture of a comfortable home, although he thus became a more responsible citizen, he nevertheless lost his vote. (Hear, hear.) All these propositions were submitted by men who really hail not considered the question at all, or who had considered it so much that they had found out modes by which they could manipulate the representation, .with a view not to confer it upon the actual citizenship of the kingdom. (Applause.) The real grievance of the suffrage, as it at present existed, was, that while it was distributed with a considerable freedom amongst all other classes of society, it was fixed at a point which necessarily excluded the most important class of a ll. (Hear, hear.) He had never denied that the Reform Bill of 1832 was a great bill to be the first step taken with a view to extend political rights amongst the people; but its object was to exclude, and It did exclude, the great wages-receiving class ; which exclusion he maintained to be an injury to all the other honest classes, and an eno rmous grievance t o the class excluded. (Applause.) Proceeding to explain his rating . suffragc, the hon. member said he knew that there was in Bradford an association in favour of household suffrage. He confessed that he was unable to discover any real difference between the two propositions. He would not ask anybody who preferred household suffrage to go with him for rating suffrage; but with the greatest plea sure he would go for household suffrage. He believed there was no difference but this, which would be conceded : If no person was to vote except inhabitant householders, some who had shops, offices, warehouses, or manufactories, might be excluded, although they might be persons of much more means—higher in society, according to the measure of wealth, than many householders. (Hear, hear.) He was willing to extend the household suffrage to all boroUghs in the United Kingdom ; and if that was once done, he believed there would be a consciousness which nothing could disturb, that so far as that matter went, at least, Parliament and the law had done fall justice to all classes of the people. (Hear, hear.) Any exceptional franchise to admit, or to make it easy for persons wishing to have a vote to obtain admission to the franchise, he would be perfectly willing to see superadded. (Hear, hear.) What he proposed might in some boroughs increase the number of electors threefold ; but in all those not strictly manufacturing, the increase would probably not be more than double and he inclined to believe that the average would not reach 24 times the present number of electors. (Hear.) This large number of new voters would be guided precisely by the same motives which swayed the present consti tuencies. All the theories about violence and turbulence on the part of men who possessed votes, arose from an ignorance that was positively incomprehensible. He always imagined that when a man had a vote, and could go and register his name in favour of his can didate and his own opinions, violence vanished from his heart, and that the club dropped, as it were, from his helpless hand. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) He was told in a letter from an intelligent friend in London, " They are getting up a fear that your franchise would swamp the shopkeepers, and the shop keepers are turning against you.' But in 1832, it was said that the shopkeepers ought not to be included, because they would swamp somebody above them. Laughter.):- But they never had done so. (H ear , h ear. ) If you went lower io the scale, you would still find me n of the same flesh and blood, the same interests, hopes, and fears; and it would be found that at elections, the working classes Would be broken up into sections as much as any other class. He should be per fectly satisfied to see a £lO household qualification established throughout the counties; for he believed that that would meet with a large amount of acceptance throughout both boroughs and counties, and he had no intention of proposing or advocating a measure far In advance of public opinion, but rather wished to act in harmony with that opinion. As to the second branch of this subject, he believed the ballot to be absolutely essential. There were 230 members, or more, in favour of it in the present House of Commons ; an election without a Reform Bill would add to that number ; but with a Reform Bill—if it were possible for Parliament to pass ono without the ballot—the number of members in favour of that measure would be very largely increased. He Was as satisfied as he could be of anythin g to come, that the b a ll ot was now a l mos t , if not entirely, within the reach of the constitutencies of the United Kingdom. (Rear, hear.) The hon. member then continued :—'We will now step on to the question of the distribution of members, which is a point on which I have never expressed myself in more than general terms in the speeches which I have recently delivered; because it was impossible, until the list of boroughs .throughout the kingdom had been carefully gone over, the census examined, the returns of taxation co nsulted and all in vestigation made as to the particular population parti cular borou;11; now enfranchised, or of to wns one a , t . o t ught to be enfranchised —until this had been d impossible to state anything i n d e t a il. I was laskweads since coming to Bradford, if I could tell what the Govern' meat bill was. (Laughter.) He was r a th er a young politician who put the question to me. (Continued laughter.) lam not in the secrets of the Government. At the same time, I take this opportunity of stating 'with perfect honesty, that no step that I have taken with regard to this question has been influenced by any hostility to the government of Lord Derby (applau se .) my experience teaches me, .thdt if there be a great question to be carried, if there is a great principle to be passed into law, it is necessary, if you wish to have on your side the „Ten at heart and conscience of the people, that you should T above partips ; that you sho u ld go s t ra i g ht on, not for party objects, but for the great object which you and the public have in view. (Applause.) There ire several ways in which the distribution of mem bers, if *there be any distribution, may be treated. But it is, not exactly. the mode of distribution of which I am now about to speak ; .because the members would be left just where they are. It is possible f or th e government or any one e l s e to propose - hat all the little boroughs, which everyone admits ought not to send members to parliament, should still retain ' their right of returning them, with the addition of two or three country parishes, whose population, added to the population of the little borough, should make what would appear a sufficient constituency to return a member or members. Now, we have had some experience of this in several boroughs. There are the boroughs of New Shoreham, of Cricklade and East Retford—boroughs composed of a little town, with the grass growing in every street ; (laughter) ; and a small village—here and there—hardly a village; five or six miles in one direction and as much in another; a few farms, a few farm labourers, a wheelwright's shop, and so on. (Continued laughter.) And all this is cooked up and made into a parliamentary borough, and Lord Some body, or Mr. Somebody, who happens to own the land, is, in point of fact, the entire constituency of the borough. (Hear, hear, and applause.) Now,we shall not give our selves much trouble on the question of reform, if that be the kind of bill we are asked to be satisfied with. We had much better remain as we are. (Hear, hear.) There is another mode of treating these boroughs. You may grou p two or three together, if you can find them within any rea sonable distance, and then you will' make a constituency more numerous than at present, and you may gain a few members to distribute amongst larger towns. But this grouping together has great disadvantages, as every man who has represented one of such boroughs must know. He must have a committee in every one of them, and if the unhappy system of employing lawyers prevails there, he must have a lawyer in every one of them. (Laughter.) And when you have taken 'all this trouble, and gone to all this expense, you have only put three dead bodies together in the hope of making a live one out of them. (Loud laughter.) There is another course still; and that is, to take a certain line and disfranchise a number of small boroughs, distributing the seats thereby obtained amongst existing constituencies. You maydistribute them, one-half, three fourths, or even all, to increase the county members. But that I should take be a mode of parliamentary reform which would not be satisfactory to the great body of the reformers of the kingdom. (Hear, hear.) We know very well what giving members to the counties means, as things exist at present; and we know that such an arrangement would necessarily disable the Government, if it were disposed, from giving members to those great towns whose representation is now so wholly inadequate to their population, their property, their taxation, and their general influence in the kingdom. (Hear, hear.) The Reform Bill of 1832 gave 63 seats to boroughs, and, I think, 65 to counties ; but I believe that generally, from that time to this, there has been a feeling amongst all those in favour of reform, that too large an influence was then given to the counties and to the landed interest, in the distribntion of members made by that bill. I wish you, and my countrymen everywhere, to watch this point with the keenest eye possible. Repudiate without mercy any bill, of any government, whatever its franchise, whatever its seeming concession, if it does not distribute the mem bers obtained from the extinction of small boroughs mainly amongst the great city and town populations of tho king dom. (Hear, hear, and applause.) The question of -dis tribution is the very soul of reform, and unless you watch that you will be deceived ; and when the bill is passed, you may possibly lament that you are not in the position in which you now find yourselves. (Applause.) I have undertaken on this occasion to explain the mode in which I should propose to disfranchise, the extent to which. it should be carried, and what I should propose to do with the members and seats obtained from the extin guished boroughs. (Hear, hear.) The bill of 1832 laid its hand upon 56 boroughs, and totally extinguished them. Those boroughs returned 111 or 112 members, It, laid its hand upon 30 either boroughs, some of which you could not have found if you had travelled through the county to look for them. It.laid its hand upon those 30 boroughs, and it took one member from each ; and it gained two members by the union of two, or rather of four boroughs. 'Altogether it obtained 143 seats. Now, I. propose to proceed upon the same principle as the bill of 1832, but to travel a little further, exploring a little more, but I hope and believe, not more than is required by the necessities and by the wishes of the country. (Hear, hear.) By the Reform Bill of 1832, every borough containing under 2,000 of population was utterly extinguished ; and every borough with less than 4,000 population lost one mem ber. In the bill which Lord John Russell introduced in 1854, and which as you know did not pass, he pro lapsed to extinguish all boroughs under 5,000 pope lation, and to take one member from all those under 10,000 population. I observed lately, in a news paper of great eminence and of great influence, an article suggesting what should be done in this matter. It is a newspaper that has not been very civil to me of late, and has not been very fair either ; for I ask for nothing but fairness. (Loud applause.) The Times newspaper suggests that we might very well carry the line up to 10,000, disfranchising all boroughs below that population, and thus obtain a large number of seats to distribute amongst the large popuations. I thought the measure of Lord John Russell was not suffi cient. I thought further that it was not necessary to draw the line so high as that which was proposed by the Times. And on looking over the list of the boroughs, beginning with the smallest, which is the town of Arundel, having a population of 2,748, I 'find that if I came down to the line of 8,000, I shoUld include the borough of Woodstock, and include altogether 56 boroughs, the precise number included in Schedule Aof the original Reform Act. Of these boroughs, 25 return one member, and 31 return two members; and the whole schedule of the 56 boroughs includes 87 seats or members There then was the point to consider—if all boroughs were disfranchised under 8,000, where would be the point below which you would allow no borough to return more than one member? If lam not mistaken, the same article in the Times recommended that boroughs of less than 25,000 inhabitants should not return more than one member to Parliament. I have not taken exactly that course. 'And, bear in mind, that every proposition I have now to explain has been decided, I " believe, without reference to any of those suggestions, for I did not happen to see them and know Ef — the - aa at the time they were published. I propose to disfranchise all, boroughs with a popula tion under 8,000. Then I step on to the population of 16,000, and say that all the boroughs under 16,000 shall henceforth return only one member. This will give 34 seats to be added to the 87 ; and if we add four more seats for two corrupt boroughs, St Albans and Sudbury, that some Years ago were disfranchised, we shall have a grand result, as far as England and Wales are concerned, of 125 seats to dispose of. Now, I propose to explain how these seats shall be disposed of, which, after all, is the pith of the whole question. (Hear, hear.) There are a number of boroughs between 16,000 and 25,000, some of which have one member, and I 'think about 12 or 13 of them have two members. Not wishing to make any more change than appears to be necessary, I propose to leave them precisely as they are. I begin then at 25,000, and I give to every borough above 25,000, now having only one, an additional member, until I come up to the population of 51,000. I will read the names of the boroughs that are included in that list. There are 16 boroughs with populations between 25,000 and 54,000. They are : Gateshead, Walsall, Monmouth, Chatham, South Shields, Tynemouth, Ashton-under- Lyne, Huddersfield, Cheltenham, Bury Dudl e y, S wansea , Leith Greenock, and Paisley. And I believe—yes, it is so—the borough of Rochdale is included in the list : I had left it out, I find, in the copy from which I have read. All these boroughs would return two members. When I got to the population of 54,000, I proceed with the list of boroughs that henceforth are to return three members. They are these : Bath, Nottingham, Lei cester, Bolton, Sunderland, Norwich, P r e s t o n, B r i g ht on , Portsmouth, Oldham, Stock-upon-Trent, Hull, New castle-upon-Tyne, Bradford, Greenwich, and Wolver hampton. Those are sixteen boroughs, all of which would, under this scheme, return three members each to Parliament. Then I come to four boroughs which ought to be included in that list, but which at present return only one member to Parliament —Merthyr-Tydvil in Wales, Salford in Lancashire, and Aberdeen and Dundee in Scotland You will observe that in making this scheme, I have known nothing of the river Tweed, and nothing of St.. George's Channel. I wish to treat Scot land and Ireland precisely on the sate principles, in every respect, that I would treat England. (Hear, hear.) Those boroughs bring me up from 54,000 to 135,000. All these calculations are on the census of 1851. Beginning at 135,000, and going up to double that num ber, 270,000, I propose that nine boroughs shall hereafter return four members each. They are Sheffield, Bristol, Leeds, Southwark, Birmingham, 'Westminster, Lambeth, and the Tower Hamlets—the population of which is so enormous, that I propose to form two complete boroughs, to each of which four members will be given. Then I come to a very select, a very large, and most important list, w'hich comprises five cities' or boroughs, but of the very largest in the kingdom, which are entitled, as I am sure you will say, to exercise a powerful interest upon the goverment of the country. To the boroughs of Man chester, Finsbarv, Marylebone, Liverpool, and Glasgow, having a population, at the last census, of more than 316,000, and now, doubtless, of 400, 000 f I propose to give the right of sending 'six members to Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Then comes the question of the new boroughs. I ought to say here that I do not consider this list to be absolutely complete, because there are some places of which I have not information sufficient to enable me to judge. But if ever this bill, or any similar bill— and you have only to will it that it may be so —(applause) —if thi s bill passes a second reading in the House of Commons, th ere w ill b e no difficulty inadding to this list three or four or h a lf- a -d ozen others, a °° ,if g bde made out for them. Changes of this kind case e can e during the p assing of the Reform Bill of 1 8 32 wer To m eac a h of these five boroUghs I prose to give one member — Gravesend, Leamington, Stilyhilidge, Burnley, and Bir kenhead. One of these boroughs cuts in a claim for two members. That is a point to be con Mered. I have put it down for one, because my information did not lead me to think that I could, at this stage, take ally other course. Then there are two places which Lord John Russell, in 1854, proposed to make one borough —the parishes of Chelsea and Kensington in the west of London. Their population is so large and so rapidly increasing, that 'I think they ought to be two boroughs, and to have two members each. These new boroughs, therefore, will absorb nine members. I have read the names of several Scotch burghs which are to have additional members. There are four others which may be considered new burghs. You are probably aware that in Scotland the plan of grouping burghs has always, so far as I know, been practised. Several of these groups are so large that I should have been compelled to have given them two members if kept together; and 1 thought it was much better that four or six places joininc , to return one member, and having po pulation enough for two, shouldbe separated into two dis tinct groups, eaeh returning one member. From the Stirling group, I propose to take the burghs of Dunferm line and Inverkeithing, and they will return one member ; Hamilton, Lanark, and Linlithgow are to be taken from the Falkirk burghs, and given one member; Dumbarton, Port Glasgow, Renfrew, and Rutherglen are to be taken from the Kilmarnock burghs, and to. have one member; and the towns of Arbroath and Brechin are to be taken from the Montrose burghs, and to return one member.. There is one other point—what shall be done with the distribu tion of members as regards the counties of England ? I propose to take a course nearly like that adopted by Lord J. Russell in his last bill, in which he proposed to divide the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire into three district divisions. I should give the West Riding of Yorkshire four additional members, to South Lancashire two additional members—l am assuming that South Lan cashire is divided—to the North Riding of Yorkshire one, North Lancashire one, South Devon one, and to the rest one, namely—West Kent, South Stafford, West Cornwall, North Essex, South Essex, West Norfolk, East Somer set, West Somerset,. and that portion of Lincolnshire known, by the name of the Parts of Lindsey. These have been selected on account of their great populations, and because within themthere has grown up, not only a large population, but very large interests not exclusively .con nected with the land; and therefore, I think, they have a right to some extension of the number of members in any re-arrangement of the representation that may take place.. There is only one other point, and that is with regard to Ireland. And here I feel extreme difficulty, because am anxious. to extend the same principle to Ireland as to England and Scotland ; and yet I am well convinced that there are many men in Ireland,. some well qualified to give an opinion who will not coincide with me in the course that lam proposing. The boroughs in Ireland are much less than the boroughs in England. There are nine boroughs in Ireland whose average number of electors is only 173. There is one whose number of electors is only about 81 orBs. Now, what am Ito do with these little boroughs ? Some would say, " Leave them as they are ;" some would say " Disfranchise them ;" and some " make them. into groups." I believe that, make . . them into whatsoever groups you like, with little exception they will still be boroughs very small and hardly com petent, under an improved system, to return members to Parliament. I have concluded to take this course now; but of course not only I, as an unofficial member of the House of Commons, but a minister even in proposing such a measure, would leave himself at liberty to make such changes as might appear most satisfactory to the population of Ireland itself. I have proposed that nine of these haroug,hs, beginning with Portarlington and ending with Bandon, should be disfranchised and that six of their members should be distributed in this way :—Two to the city of Dublin, and one each to the towns of Belfast and Kilkenny, and the cities of Limerick and Cork. Then, looking at the vast population of many of the Irish counties, I propose to give from the boroughs of England, five new members, which, added to the three saved from these disfranchised boroughs, will give one member each to six of the princyal Irish counties, and two members to the county of Cork, which may be termed the Yorkshire of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid that the narration of all' this has been necessarily somewhat tedious ; but it could not be avoided in the course which I had laid out for myself in addressiwe you this evening. It is possible some one may think I unreasonable in proposing four members for certain boroughs, and six for certain other boroughs. What is to be the basis of your representation ? Popula tion ? No ! the timid say. Property ? Yes, property has something to do with it. Taxes ? Taxes have a great deal to do with it. I will give you one or two facts. Ipro pose to give to Manchester and Liverpool six members each, twelve together. What do they pay annually to the Government in income tax ? On schedules A and D, trades and professions, house tax, assessed taxes, and land tax, they paid in the year 1857,. £897,000. Take all the boroughs that I have proposed to disfranchise— having populations under B,ooo—the constituencies now of 87 members ; what did they pay . that year ? They paid £221,000 ! The constituencies of 87 members paid £221,000, while the constituencies of four members in past time, of twelve as I propose to arrange it, paid more than four times as much !--(" Hear, hear," and applause.) Again, compare Manchester and Liverpool with the 69 boroughs which I propose, under Schedule B, shall in future return 69 members. In 1857 the constituents of those 69 members only paid £386,000 ? And if I add the amount paid from the other 41 boroughs. by the constituents of 55 members, that is taking all the boroughs with a population under 25,000, the whole amount is only £857,000 of taxes, against £897,000 paid by Liverpool and Manchester. (Applause.) I am not afraid, then, that anyone who looks into these schedules will charge me with giving uodue influence to the population or to the property of your great towns and cities. If any man tells you that this will do mischief, or is wrong or unfair, at heart he is not for a representative system at all, or he does not in the least comprehend it. (Hear.) When I undertook, hazardously, and perhaps unwisely (loud cries of "No, no") to prepare a scheme, I did not overlook the diffi culties that lay in my path. I knew then, as I know now that in drawing up.a scheme of this kind no precise point can be laid down which a man could say was the exact and right thing. In the Reform Bill of 1832 every point was•open to contest, and, was contested; and in the reform bill of 1859, be it mine, be it that of the Govern ment, every point may be contested in like manner. But the question I submit to the country is this, not whether you should make some little change on one side or on the other from the line I have laid down, bat whether this scheme as a whole, which I have elaborated, and upon which I have - consulted some of the most judicious friends of reform in the country—whether, in its broad features, in its entirety, it recommends itself as estab lishing great and free constituencies, and giving them an approximation to that fair share of infl u ence in the government of the country to which they are entitled ? Hear, hear, and applause.) Some persons will tell you, and you will see it before the week is over in many news papers, that I am treating the counties in a manner which is not fair, considering their population, and the great property which is comprised within their borders. I will give you my opinion upon that matter. County seats, as you know, are at present landlords' seats (hear, hear) —with the exception of three or four counties, where other interests have grown up so lar,gely as to overshadow the territorial power. Lord Derby says the same of them. He told you some few years ago, that if anybody would tell him what were the politics of three or four of the great land-owners of any county, he would undertake to tell what were the politics of the members for that county. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) And ask any of the farmers in the United Kingdom whether they return the members for their county. (Hear, hear.) There is one thing that I long for, almost more than any other in connection with this question —that the time should come when the honest, the intelligent, and the constantly improving cul tivators of the farms of England should be as free and in dependent in the exercise of their political rights, as is the corresponding class in the cities and boroughs of England (Loud applause.) You have not read the newspapers or seen the course of Parliament without discovering that the landowners as a body, in the House of Commons, are very much in alliance, in opinions and actions, in sympa thies and prejudices, with the landowners in the House of Peers. You know that they are generally of the same class, and that they represent the same interest. The peers represent the land. (Hear, hear.) How many peers go up to represent the land of Yorkshire ? Ido not know exactly, but I suppose that ten .fingers would scarcely be sufficient to count them upon. Will anybody tell me that they do not represent the land ? I have asked this question before, and want somebody to answer it—Whom do they represent, if n o t th e l an d ? Do they represent trade ? Do you know any traders in the House of Lords ? (Laughter.) There are two or three connected with coal mines ; two or three, perhaps, con nected with great iron works; and two or three, I think, are sleeping partners in great breweries. (Con tinued laughter.) But they do not represent trade. They don't many of them know much about keeping accounts and buying and selling, the rise of prices,. and the fluctuations of markets. They once had generally a notion that there was nothing so good for raising prices and making good trade, especially in corn and wool, as an Act oeParliament. They represent land, and that is, in the eyes of the Constitution, the object of their being in the House. I saw in one newspaper—l forget exactly which—that the Lords did not represent land or anything THE NORTHERN TIMES, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 19, 185 lse specially, but that they represented all the interests of the country, and that they sat by ancient right which nobody had power to call into question. I don't doubt it in the least. They do sit by ancient right, by law, and by the consent of the people ; and I am not proposing to disturb them. (Hear, hear.) I have an extract from a remarkable act —an act of two parliaments, I think--- which will tell us whether the Peers represent anybody or not. It is from the Act of Union, and the 4th article of that act : "That four lords spiritual of Ireland, by rotation of sessions, and twenty-eight lords temporal of Ireland, elected for life by the peers of Ireland, shall be the number to sit and vote on the part of Ireland in the House of Lords of the Parliament of the United King , dom ; and that one hundred commoners'sbe the number to sit and vote on the part of Ireland in the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom." Scotland sends sixteen peers to Parliament, elected by the Scottish peers, and elected, too, as members of the 'House of Commons, ,are elected, for one Parliament only. You have in the House of Lords thirty bishops and archbishops, called up by the fiat of the Crown: Do they represent anybody ? Ask the Independents, the Baptists, the Methodists, do they represent any of them ? No, they represent the members of the clergy and the interests of the Established Church—(hear, hear) ; —and they have just about, and no more, the same connection with representing the interests, I will not say of dissenting bodies let us get rid of that word—(hear; hear) - but the interests of the free- churches of the United Kingdom, as the peers have; or their friends pretend they have, .vith representing the general interests of the country and of trade as much as land. (Applause.) The peers have another great advantage as representing the land. They do not sit with us in the House of Commons. • I was almost going to say I wished they did. (Langh : ter.) They would not then get home to dinner every evening at seven o'clock; and the course of debate- would not always run so smoothly as it does in their serene atmospheres. They sit in a house by themselves:; and what is the result ? Representing one great interest and one only, they have infinite power in defence of the rights, or privileges, or monopolies of that interest They have ten times more power than they would have if they sat with us ; for you cannot pass the smallest law without their having, by the constitution, as absolute a veto as the House of Common's itself. (Hear, hear:) Whenever the• counties claim —and they have not yet claimed, for I have seen no great meeting of farmers— ' (laughter)—or of small freeholders, and I do not believe the farmers consider it any advantage, as things have gone hitherto, to have frequent elections or many members to return—but whenever the counties shall claim and obtain a proportion of members of the House of Commons in accordance with their population, then the time will come when the towns. will ask why the counties should be the sole constituents for the members of the House of Lords. (Hear, hear, and applause.) You have had two gentlemen on this platform to-night, who moved and seconded the resolution which you have been so good as to pass, welcoming me here, and if the House of Lords is to be representative of all the great interests of the country, not of the land exclusively, you would find there, not barons, and marquises and dukes, but men like them, princes of manufactures and of indus try. Ido not wish to open this question. I am so far Conservative as to be willing to retain the institutions which I find in my time, so long as they can be made to work without obvious and serious damage to the interests of the country. (Hear hear, and applause.) Let us go on with the House of Lords, by all means ; but let us have a real representation in the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) And when we get that, the Lord's will wake- up, rub their eyes, and discover that they have been mistaken in several important particulars. (Hear, hear.) They will not exactly turn their backs upon themselves, but they will look upon popular interests and popular sympathies with a different eye, and feel towards them with a different heart ; and you may have for a long time to come such harmony between the two houses, in legislating for the conntry, as you have had in times past. (Hear, hear. In considering this proposition, we must ask ourselves two questions: —ls the representation, as it at present exists, very defective ? And if it be—ls the full time come for applying a remedy ? I think the whole country is agreed that the representation is defective. We have the authority of Lord Aberdeen. one of' the most experienced and most temperate, and still liberal statesmen we have; we have the authority of Lord John Russell, who is well acquainted with this question ; we have the authority of Lord Palmerston, whose friends say that he does not regard it as so important as some of his fellow states men ; and we have the authority of Lord Derby. There never were more than four men in England at once who were thought fit to be prime minister— (laughter) ; and we have the authority of all of them for the fact, that the representation is defective, and that the time is fully come when a *Tat improvement ought to be made. If the time is come,Thall we do it, or half do it, or just nibble at it, and scarcely do it at all? There is a certain evil in stirring these questions. lam one of those who believe that stability in a government has great advan tages, even when that government is far from theoretically perfect; but any government may be shaken down, and any constitution frittered away, if you will continually dis turb it. I want to have a government that has the respect and the confidence of the people; and unless we are ready to have a good bill, let us have no bill at all. (Hear.) A bad bill is a revolutionary bill ; and a little bill, though it spay not be revolutionary, is of no good, and is very perilous. From the moment these bills, or either of them, is passed, you must begin again, motions in Parliament, discussions in the country, until at last people get dis gusted with the utter want of sympathy between the ruling class and themselves, and some opportunity may come, some period of' great excitement, when peers and the upper and governing class may be treated witk a hand far less tender, far more rude, than that which I would now apply to them, in the measure which is now before us. (Hear, hear.) Is this bill worth moving for ? (Applause.) Is less than this worth the country making a great effort to secure ? (No, no.) When I was asked to prepare a bill, I said, "I will be bound by no man's programme. I will act upon my own conviction ; obtain advice wherever -I can ; and I will not try to draw a bill that shall be theoretically perfect, but one that shall be practicable, that shall meet the necessities of the case, that- shall invite the moderate to support it, and that shall go far to satisfy the ardour even of the most earnest." (Hear, hear.) I do not want this bill to be merely the subject of a night's debate, and then to be thrown into the waste basket of the House of Commons. I bring it forward because I believe such a measure is necessary, and that it ought to pass ; and I hope the people of England will so approve of it that they will enable it to be passed. (" Hear, hear," and applause.) The towns of England have it in their own power. Let them meet ; let them resolve ; let them petition ; let them represent to their members what are their wishes upon this great question. You know that lam not—l believe it has been decided by several editors of newspapers that I am not—a statesman. (Laughter.) I never pretended to be one. I am a citizen —one of yourselves. (Loud applause.) lam powerless in this matter if alone. But do not suppose that I shall be alone if the people will speak out. There are eminent men whose sympathies are with us, watching events, looking for to-morrow's papers, looking for the reports of meetings during the next month, all of which will go far to decide the course that they will take. If you speak out, they will come. If there is a great army, there will be captains and leaders. (Hear, hear.) Do not suppose that there are not amongst the aristocracy families, more than one or two, who will not betray or belie the historic reputation which belongs to them. (Applause.) Let the nation speak esst, ant its fiat will certainly be obeyed: For myself, I have been for three months the subject of much misrepresentation and slander ; but I have gone through all that before, and in another form. (Hear, hear, and applause.) When last I spoke to the people of Bradford, I stood shoulder to shoulder with a political friend and brother, a man of deep sagacity, of calm judgment, of extensive knowledge, and of persuasive speech. (Applause.) Were we not subjected to the same charges and to the same slanders ? Did we not succeed ? (Hear, hear, and cheers.) Have we not now, as a compensation for all that, the price less thought that there is no hand in this country that wipes the sweat from the brow of toil, whose labour is not lightened, whose reward is not, increased, by the sacrifices we then made ?—(Loud cheers, the audience rising ; followed by " Three cheers for Cobden.") In the speeches I have lately delivered, I have abstained from assailing any single individual. (Hear, hear.) I have been met by certain members of the aristocracy in a manner I scarcely expected. One Scotch lord told a great audience that I ivas afflicted by a Visitation of Providence, and that I was suffering from a disease of the brain.—(Cries of " Shame.") Well, his friends can tell whether that is a complaint with which he is ever likely to be attacked. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) Another, destined one day to make laws for you in the House of Peers, says that I am a destroyer of property, and a traitor to my class. I stop not to answer language like this. (Hear, hear.) There are some great men, and there are many good men, in the ranks of the English aristocracy ; there are among them who would be nobles though coronets and privilege were things unknown. But even their virtues cannot long sustain their order against the perilous-defence to which it is now. exposed. (Hear, hear.) And I warn them to call back the champions who, in every display of their prowess, exhibit here ditary nobility allied with intellectual poTerty, and members of the peerage wanting the manners and the politeness of gentlemen. (Loud applause.) I cannot, I say; answer language like this. I cannot consent to suspend, even for a moment, the progress of this great debate, to take part in personal conflicts. I brush aside the miserable detractors, whose nature it is to bark a vain opposition to every great and good cause. (Applause.) From these platforms I address a great nation on a great question. lam in earnest. I believe, and therefore I speak. (Hear, hear.) I have no eloquence but that which consists in a hearty love of truth; and the facts and the arguments I make use of enter the understand ings and reach the hearts of my countrymen. (Applause.) I am, as an individual, powerless. They, my country men, are a nation and omnipotent. And to them, and to you to whom I now speak, I commit the issue and the fate of _this great question. • The hon. — member resumed his seat amidst applause which continued for several minutes—he having spoken for an hour and fifty minutes. A MAN AND HIS WIFE COMMITTED FOR MURDERING THEIR CHILD. On Monday, Mr. Herford held an inquest at the William the Fourth public-house, Rusholme-road, on the body of a female infant, aged four days, the child of John and Charlotte Parkinson. Mrs. Elizabeth Mawdsley, of Hyde Grove, stated that on the sth instant the parents of the child engaged lodgings at her house, and afterwards entered them. About midnight on Saturday week Mrs. Parkinson was confined, mid her husband went for a surgeon. No nurse was sent for, the husband saying that he could do all that was wanted himself. The child seemed to have arrived at matu rity, and several times the witness observed that it was going on remarkably well. In reply to the witness's questions, Mrs. Parkinson told her that the doctor had said the child was weak in its lungs, and would die in convulsions. On Wednesday morning the child' appeared' to be going on remarkably well, but the next morningit died. Witness questioned the parents about the death; as she found that it had died with its mouth open, andthat its lips and tongue were quite black. They replied that "it was inwardly convulsed, and that they had watched it die." The husband said, "Now; we must get it interred as soon as we can, and we must do it as a still-born child." Witness told them that they would have to bury - it in a proper manner. The husband went for a joiner - to make a coffin and on Friday Mrs. Parkin son told witness that the child' was going to be buried, and that they had got a certificate from the registrar ; and she seemed "well pleased" at it. Mr. Chas. James Rix, surgeon; said he attended Mrs. Parkinson soon after midnight ow Saturday: There had been no preparations. In reply to a'question which was put to him by somebody, and which he. thought a strange one, he told them- that the child was "likely enough to live." It had arrived at maturity. He never made any remark (as stated by Mrs. Parkinson to the former witness) about the child having convulsions, or being likely to die, or anything of the kind. On Monday the child was doing well. On Thursday Parkinson came to him, and told him that the child was dead, and asked for a certifi cate, which he refused to- give. He asked why he had not been sent for when the , ehild was thought likely to die ; and the man replied that - " he thought it would not have been much use." He told the husband that •an inquest must he held, and he had better go to the Coroner's office, but he seemed unwilling to do so. He made' a post-mortem examination, and found the child generally . healthy. It had died from- suffocation, and not from con vulsions. The discolorations on the chin and neck might have been done during or after death. The same pressure might produce suffocation, and the appearances under the chin. Mr. E. B. Rowley, registrar of births and deaths,. said that Parkinson came- to him to register the child, but brought no medical certificate, alleging that the child was so young and premature that he did not think it worth while. He therefore registered it as " premature, and not certified." The jury returned a verdict of " Wilful murder" against John and Charlotte Parkinson, for whose committal to Kirkdale Gaol the Coroner issued his warrant. The father and mother both stated that the child had died naturally of convulsions, and described how the death occurred. ENGLISH PATENTS The following patents, amongst others, were sealed during the week ending January 12, 1858':—Lawrence Hall, of Black Lane Mill, near Bury, manufacturer, for certain improvements in looms for weaving. Dated August, 5, 1858.—Christopher Penryhn Aston, of London, gun maker, for improvements in breech loading arms. Dated nly 15, 1858.—James Jones, of the City Waterworks, Oxford, engineer, for improvements in meters for measuring liquids ; dated July 14, 1858. Charles de Bergue, of London and Manchester, engineer, for improvements in electric telegraph cables for submarine purposes, and in the machinery for manu facturing such cables, and also in the machinery to be used in paying such cables out of ships at sea ; dated July 16, 1858. Thomas Hart, of Glasgow, plumbei, for improvements in taps or valves, and in apparatus for regulating. the flow of fluids : dated July 17, 1858. James Spence, of Liverpool, iron merchant, for an improvement in the manufacture of tin plates, and terne or leaded plates : dated July 17, 1858. William Wildes, of Maidstone, Kent, paper maker, for an improved arrangement or arranzements of machinery for reducing vegetable matter to pulp : dated July 17. 1858. Edmund Leopold Benzon, of Sheffield, steel manufacturer, for improvements in the manufacture of steel—a communication : dated September 27, 1853. Thomas Preston, of Nottingham, - for manufacturer, im _ _ provements in the manufacture of looped fabrics : dated October 1, 1858. John Milnes, of Sutton Mill, near Leeds, overlooker, for improvements in weaving fabrics, where cross weaving is employed: dated October 5, 1858.---Froin Messrs. Hughes and Bloodworth's List. Although it is the month of January, 1859, most people admit we are living in hard times, hence it should be the study of every one to ask themselves the question, " How can I save my money ?" We reply, without hesitation, buy your steel pens, and other sta tionery, at E. T. Hall's wholesale steel pen warehouse, 23, South John-street. Joseph Gillett's, Thomas Lowe's, G. W. Hughes, and other maker's pens at is per gross. Good Pen Holders 2d per dozen. BURNING OF THE PORTO Novo.— We are glad to be able to state that the ultimate loss on the cargo of this vessel will not be so serious as was at first supposed, and that it is now estimated that £3,000 will cover the entire damage. It is found that nearly the whole of the palm oil is uninjured, a great part of the ebony and ivory has escaped destruction, and about 100 tons of barwood had been unloaded before the accident took place. It should have been stated that the bulk of the gunpowder was transferred from the. Porto Novo to the powder-mills at Shirebampton on her arrival at the port, and that the quantity which exploded was comparatively small. One of the men who were so seriously injured, and who was taken to the British General Hospital, has suffered a relapse, and his recovery is now doubtful ;.the other con tinues to go on hopefully. CANADA AND BRITISH NORTH AMERICA. —The net revenue of Canada in 1856 amounted to £1,114,800, and the expenditure to £945,643. The gross revenue, £1,497,385, was derived principally from the customs duties, which amounted to £1,127,532. Of the sums ex pended, £225,224 was appropriated to the payment of the interest on the debt, £56,030 to civil government, £114,254 to the administration of justice, £117,445 to legalisation, £97,514 to education, £38,757 to hospitals, &c., £36,108 to the militia and enrolled force, £39,850 to the ocean and steam ri'ver service, £4,733 to police, and £9. 2 1f to the removal of the seat of government. 5,356,7 . 62 tons of shipping entered the ports of Canada in 1856 (2,731,296 British), and 5,620,247 tons cleared out wards. 148 vessels of 45, 339 were licensed in Canada in 1856, and 171 registered. The value of the imports for consump tion was £9,806,487, and that of the exports £7,210,579. The value of the imports from the United Kingdom was £4,553,233; and the value of the exports thither from Canada, £2,313,667.. The gross revenue received from the several canals amounted to £95,395; 3,164,823 gallons of proof spirit were distilled in Canada in '1856, yielding an excise duty of £17,278. The revenue of New Brunswick, in 1856, was £119,305; and the expenditure, £141,709 ; 3,225 vessels, of 648,756 tons, entered the ports of the colony ; an d 3,375, of-704,149 tons, cleared out. The imports amounted to £1,521,178, and the exports to £1,073,351. The rate of wages for labour in New Brunswick was, for domestic service, £2 lOs to £3 per month ' • for predial service, £2 lOs to £4 per month ; and for trades, 5s 6d to lOs per day. The value of the imports into the ports of Nova Scotia in 1856 was £1,869,832, and that of the exports £1,372,958. The population of P rince Edward's Island in 1856 was 71,496 souls (36,131 males and 35,365 females). The revenue amounted to £27,108, and the expenditure to £33,576. 619 vessels entered, tonnage 35,931 ; and 603 cleared, tonnage 42,865. 88 vessels of 14,910 tons were built there in the samo year. The im ports are valued at £237,126, and the exports at £258,860. There were 941,905 acres of cultivated and 346,880 of uncultivated land. Of Newfoundland the income in 1856 was £118,832, and the expenditure £105,846. 1,327 vessels, of 161,640 tons, entered, and 1,140, of 145,819 tons, cleared outwards. The imports were £1,271,604, and the exports £1,338,797. Domestic labour was remunerated at the rate 'of £2O to £3O per annum, predial at £lB to £25, and trades at 7s 6d per diem, THE SAILORS' HOM.E.-THE REV. CARTER AND BOARDING-HOUSES TO THE EDITOR OF THE NORTHERN TIMES. Sir, attention which. I, along with the public, have always received at your hands, induces me again to trespass on your space; but I shall be as brief as possible. Permit me, however, to premise that your former kindness, in publishing my letters, has done some service, and that you are duly appreciated, for the indepen dence shown by you—ready always to open your paper to the redress of wrong, come that wrong from high or other quarter. So far as lam person ally concerned, I could afford to bear - up aga inst any calumny ; but when an entire body of industrious tradesmen are attacked and falsely accused of very serious offences, it is time that some one, however feeble in abilityc or unwilling to come before the public, should stand up for truth sake, and dispel the slander. If we had not an honest and independent journal like the NORTHERN TIMES, the task would be hopeless ; but, sir, with your assistance, we can at least meet our enemies on open ground, and let the public judge if our accusers are good men and true." In my former letters I challenged Mr. , Murphy, and all the authorities of the Sailors Home, to contradict any particle of the arguments , I put forward. I gave facts and figures,. and not a single word has been since offered, either in reply or attempted contradiction ; and I am convinced If the parties alluded to could have done either they would have been but too glad to get the. oppor tunity. I see lately by the. papers, that the Sailors' Home authorities have cast Mr.f Murphy on the Local! Marine Board—but I shall deal with that part ofthe subject just now. I first come to a statement made by the Rev.. Thomas Garter, M.A., chaplain of the gaol. In a paper read at the " Social Science" meeting, at Liverpool, the Rev. Gentleman made the following statement in regard to sailors and boarding-house keepers. He said : These men (sailors) are often victimised to a fearful extent. The number of men.before the mast, shipped in British vessels in. Liverpool during last year, was 45,723; the number discharged or paid-off during the same period, was 40,696.. Of foreign seamen of all nations, it is estiinsted that there were about the same number, or, at all events, the• two together, at the lowest computation, may safely be set down at not less than 80,000, who passed in and out of the port during . the period of twelve months. Now, I will detail, as briefly as I can, the process of systematic robbery to which know numbers of those poor•fellows to. be exposed, by certain boarding-house keepers, outfitters, and prostitutes. Many of the two former have boats on the river of their own. A vessel is signalled as having "passed the head" (Holyhead) ; she may be expected up with the flowing tide; the boarding-master is on the alert; he proceeds, with a number of riggers, in his boat, to meet the vessel as she comes up the river ; he is prepared with liquor, often drugged for the par' pose of producing partial insensibility:. Should it be at the period of neap tides, or during a scarcity of dock room, the vessel must come , to anchor in the river, and wait a longer or a shorter period, till there shalt be sufficient water and space to admit of her being docked. The vessel is boarded ; the sailors, after the 'tedium- - may be the hardships of w long voyage—are anxious for the shore. A man agrees with a rigger to supply his place on board, and he is brought on shore by the . boading-house him, keeper, who snpplies in transitU, freely, - from the bottle previously provided and prepared,. and which, ere he sets his foot on share has half done its work, producing that state of stupefaction which renders the man ignorant—at all events, regardless, of what he is doing. On landincg he is soon taken to the tailor or outfitter, and provided with a' new "rig" throughout, for which he is charged most enormous prices. I knot of one instance, wherein the sailor was supplied with four pounds worth of clothing, for which he paid ten pounds. The boarding master receives a commission on these transactions. The paper goes on a good deal further, but of course could. not contain'more venom ; and I say it, with respect to the Rev. Gentleman, a larger amount of romance. I was about calling it by another name, but that will suffice. The Rev. Mr. Carter, being the. chaplain of the gaol, must, I presume, from his position, be well acquainted with the statistics of crime, and the class of p eo ple who are committed for the various offences incidental to a large seaport like Liverpool. There are about 400 bonding-house keepers. in Liverpool, and about double that number of policemen. Now, will the Rev. Mr. Carter, knowing—as I have already stated—the statistics of the gaol, b e nod enough to enlighten the public, by stating how many boarding-house keepers have been prosecuted during the last two years, for such crimes as the following :—Robbery from the person ; robbery from shops and shop-tills ; breaking into churches; perjury ; violent and common assaults ? I should like to see the amount he will give, and then I will turn to the files of the NORTHERN TIMES, and show him the number of policemen prosecuted and convicted of these crimes, and I think the return will stand about thus :—Boarding house keepers prosecuted and convicted, none ; policemen, ditto, about 22 ; not to mention those who have been dismissed summarily by the magistrates and Major Greig. There are a few persons in Liverpool who go by the name of boarding-house keepers, who are in .reality and fact not so, and there may be some civil - offences charged against them, but I defy the Rev. Chap lain to show me an instance of a respectable and professional boarding-house keeper in Liverpool having been prosecuted either for a common-law or statutable offence. I do not wish to compare them with other classes of tradesmen, but I coin pare them with the police, who are supposed to be the standard of morality and honesty—because our lives and properties are left in their keeping—and see how the contrast stands. In regard to what the Rev. Gentleman says about the conspiracy between boarding-house keepers, outfitters, and prostitutes, I shall only make one observation:--it is uncharitable, and therefore not in accordance with our notions of Christianity. because unfounded and untrue. If the boarding-house keepers were the rogues that they are said to be, is it not very wonderful how they escape punishment ? If I purchase a shawl at the Compton House, or any other respectable establishment, and pay £lO for it, at the same time the article being worth only £4, does the Rev. Mr. Carter think I have no redress ? Yes, and he ought to have instituted a prosecution against the person he speaks of, and he would be sure to have got a conviction—that is, if such a person exists, and that such a dishonest transaction has taken place. He says many of the boarding-house keepers and tailors have boats on the river. Yes, and I can tell him that they have more than boats : many of them have ships on the river, and many more large shares in ships, all realised by honest industry, integrity, and per severing straightforwardness —not by robbery, or plunder, or conspiracy with lewd women. I will give the Rev. Mr. Carter a piece of in formation, which, I am satisfied, will be new to him, and which, if he had known before, he would not have made such a calluranious state ment—because he bears too sacred a character. No boarding-house keeper dare, under a heavy penalty, enter an inward bound ship to solicit a sailor to lodge at his house. His assertion, therefore, is not correct. In one of my former letters I plainly and elaborately pointed out to the authorities at the Sailors' Home, the class of men who do such, and who are tolerated to do it. These, as I have stated, are called the forty thieves, and I can prove that they are allowed by the out-door authorities of the Sailor's Home, or Local Marine Board — I care not which—to ply their unlawful work, whilst if a respectable boarding-house keeper attempted to do such an act, he would at once (properly, I admit) be 'seized and punished ; and yet the boarding-house keepers are charged with enticing men away, making them intoxicated with drugged liquor, and finally robbing them, in conjunction with tailors and prostitutes The d'harge that the Rev. Mr. Carter made in October, against boarding-hou se k eepers , I ma d e in your paper in August, against the "forty thieves," anciyet the sins of the l a tt er are l a id +on the former—is this fair play ? I shall show-by facts and figures in the n ex t, somet hi ng i nterest i ng to the Sailor's Home, but as I fear I have trespasssed too far on your space to-day, I must again ask your favour.—Remaining, sir, with gratitude,-- Yours, &c., THOS. CARPENTER. 31 Charlotte-place, Jan. 3, 1859. to-d one• pre, bu s ; -vvis,