The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1870-06-28 00:00:00

brat &until exges.
TUE-DAY. JUNE 28. 1870.

After much trouble and uncertainty the
Government have had their Education Bill, as
altered by themselves, ratified by a majority of
7to 1-421 to GO. It is now pretty clear that
strong as the Nonsectarian. and Secularists are
in debate, and demonstrative as they may be
with public meeting., they are in • hopeless
minority in Parliament, and we believe in the
country. The denominational system has now
obtained a 1191! Jesse of life, and the point
having been practically settled by the recent
debate (for Mr. Gladstone, in summing up,
staked the principle features of the Bill upon the
vote of triday evening), there seems no ream,
why the measure should not be passed through
Committee during this week, and get up to the
House of Lords in time to be passed this session ;
for their lordships will no doubt have worked
their sweet will on the Land Bill before they see
the Education Bill, and will be just brought into
good training for hard work. As for the rather
important amendments the Lords are making in
the Land Bill, they will doubtless be made the
subject of compromise, and it is not likely they
will prevent the Bill passing.
Mr. K. D. Hodgson, one of the members for
Bridport prior to the last Reform Bill, was on
Saturday elected as one of the representatives
of Bristol, and with the other member for that
city (Mr. Morley), will support Mr. Gladatone's
ministry. It was a well-fought election, bu, Mr.
Hodgson kept a slight lead throughout the d.iy.
Of over 14.000 polled, the Conservatives
were able to muster within less than 000 of
the victorious candidate, which shows the
wisdom of the Radicals in giving up Mr. Odger
and uniting their exertioia with the Liberals ;
and it also indicates what a strong claim the .
Conservatives would have to return one should
Bristol succeed in getting a third member, as
no doubt it ultir:iately wilL
A verdict for another ,£l.OOO has been given
against the Brighton Railway Company in favour
of a sufferer by the New Cross collision, which
has now become one of the moat expensive rail-
way accidents ever known, if, indeed, the com-
pany have seen the end of it. This naturAlly
makes us think of the Newark calamity, and
what a tremendous bill of damages there will
be in that case, making a woeful difference iii
the Great Northern dividends for the coining
half-year. A great deal may be said for andl
against this heavy mulctiiig of the railway
companies. On the one hand, it may be alleged
that it is the only way to give reasonable
security to the public, though that may he
questioned, as perhaps legal regulations for
signalling and running trains, with effective
Government supervision, miAt do as much for
the public safety as the imposition of fines, for
which the company recoup them:elves by charg-
ing heavy fares. (in the other hand, it is certain
that while the liability. of the companies to
sufferers by accidents remains unlimited, we can
never expect to have railway travelling cheapened
and developed as would otherwise be possible.
The House of Commons committee have sanc-
tioned the principle of limiting the damages to
be recovered from companies in the case of the
cheap trains t o be run for workmen, and this is
probably the beginning of a new system of
railway traffic. At all events, the public cannot
have both cheapness and unlimited responsibility
for compensation,

A net:the pressing need of rain which has been
so generally realised, we can hardly feel very
deep regret, be we never so loyal, that even
the Queen's garden party on Friday evening
(breakfast, as it is ridiculously called in official
language). was somewhat marred by the sharp
showers, which fel: about five o'clock. One
consolation for the incommoded guests was that
they would have fared no better, as regards
weather, on Saturday, if the party could have
been postponed, for the north-east wind and
clouded sky on that day made up for any
deficiency of rain.
It was anticipated that the House of Lords
would pass the Married Women's Propeity Bill
with gracious alacrity, by way of in iking up for
what some ladies thought an ungallant slur upon
the eligibility of sisters-in-law. They had good
reason for acceding promptly to the claims of •
class, who are not looking forward to matrimony,
but to relief from some of its penalties. The
measure prop( sed on their behalf by Mr. Russell
Gurney extends to married women of the poorer
classes the same command of their own property
which all who are rich enough for marriage
settlements can have as • matter of course. Th.'
House of lords after long debating the possi-
bilities of female recklessness, has consented to
the second reading, but refers the bill again to
the ordeal of a select committee. According to
the statement of Lord Shaftesbury, their hesita-
tion imperils—or postpones—the interests of
800 000 poor women who support themselves,
and wholly or partially support their children.
The degree in which their industry or self-denial
enables them to do this depends upon the
character or caprices of their husbands, whose
power is often ruinously exercised. Lord Shaftes-
bury told the Peers, with justice, that to women
in this position the protection is far more requisite
than it is to the ladies whose existing security no
one ventures to challenge. Common justice
requires that rich and poor shall be protected alike
as far as law can help them..
. .

In the sina,l hours of Friday morning, when
daylight was filing the House of Commons,
there was a fierce battle, fortunately not with,
but about, guns ; and the country party, whose
Power of "staying" in every sense of the word,
sporting and literal, is al ways greater than that
of the commercial members, divided and divided
again until they carried an amendment to Mr.
Lowe's Gun-tax Bill, whereby a landowner carry-
ing a gun on land in his own occupation shall be
exempted from paying the tax. The tax was
only ten shillings a year ; but it was not the
amount, but the principle—the principle that
the landowner is a privileged person—which
was prized; and so, a joyful about rent the air aa
Mr. Lowe was beaten.

Commemoration week at Oxford has again
been "distinguished" by the usual playful banter ,
chaff, and licence—not to say vulgarity—of the
undergraduates. The &arida/ d admitathat this dis-
play cannot be altogether right. Nevertheless, it is
what "no healthy-minded Englishman would
care to lose." And why? The voices of the
undergraduates, says our contemporary, represent
"a very rare kind of public opinion as to the
characters and the conduct of the leading men of
the day. It is uotonly that this opinion is utterly
sincere, and free from bias or guile, but that it is
really of a high order." This is pretty well.
There can be no doubt that the howls of the
gallery at Commemoration 'represents very rare
kind of public opinion," and the rarer the better;
but we had yet to learn that such opinion was