The Express.
London, England, 1866-04-13 00:00:00

- FIX,PRES9O "PIPM7.:fWVW. 1 I 14111RY4':.1A47. :186.0irr

frisnottber,lhey busted that the bill in its intesr ity would
roomye the sanction of the house. They stated that linos
the`Pabitng of the'exlating Reform Act the population of
their borough had doubled, but that their political power
honained the same, whilst other towns with 1-89th of
the population of Birmingham, and which contributed in
even a less proportion to the revenue, sent an equal num-
ber of representatives to parliament. They said that
they bad heard with the greatest pleasure, that
it was the intention of government to introduce a bill
for the redistribution of seats, by which means a much
more equitable representation of the people would be esta-
blished throughout the country. They prayed that the
Franchise Bill might be permitted to become law, and that
the question of the redistribution of seats might be taken
into early oonsiderstion. The hon. member presented also
several petitions from other plum with the same prayer.
Petitions in favour of the bill were then presented by
a great number of members.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
second reading of the Franchise Bill, and explained that in
introducing the measure be had abstained from giving it
any party aspect, or any aspect of setting class against
class, and had assumed that the principle of so moderate
a Mil could not have been gainsaid by thou who, by
introducing reform, had pledged themselves to that policy.
But as they had asked for reasons why such a measure
should be brought forward, he would supplement his
former statement by reference to the history of the
question of late years, beginning with 1851, when the
House of Commons gave a vote in favour of a measure for
lowering the franchise. He then stated the circumstances
of that time and subsequently, under which he urged that
the House of Commons had forced the consideration of the
franchise on government, there being no more ardent par-
tisan for that course than Mr. Horsmsn. He pointed out
that promises of reform had been given by Lord Russell,
Lord Aberdeen, and Lord Derby, in the latter case with
peculiar deliberation—the lowering of the franchise
with a view to the admission of the working classes
being emphatically declared. A like promise was
lastly given by Lord Palmerston ; and all this con-
stituted a distinct engagement with the people on the
=osn. He argued that the number of working men
was yew than in 1832 ; while since then numerous
causes had contributed to the elevation of their education
and character, giving them fitness for increased political
power. The working olseses,while possessing five-twelftbs,
only held one-seventh of the parliamentary franchise,
while, as to their being likely to act together as a class
in one political direction, it was certain that there was
as much variety of political opinion amongst them as
in any other clue. By the present bill there would be
60 boroughs, with 101 seats, in which the working
oldies would have the majority, white before
1832 there were 130 seats which were in a
like position. With regard to the argument that
the working classes were fast attaining to the exist-
ing franchise, he replied that it would be proved
that that growth had diminished rather than increased of
late years—whatever might be the case In regard to the
middle classes. There was no transfer of political power
contemplated by this bill. With regard to the redistribu-
tion of seats, if the house chose to exceed the usual limits
of the session for that purpose, the government would be
prepared to make any personal sacrifices also. Having
vindicated the working classes against the denunciations
of Mr. Lowe, he concluded by an earnest appeal to the
house to be wise in time on the subject of reform.
Mr. LOWE ',Malted the gross, wilful, and sys-
tematic perversion of the language which he had used.
His argument against the lowering of the franchise was
founded only on the proved malpractices of constituencies
at elections. He never intended to cast any reflection on
the poorer closed of the country.
Earl GROSVENOR moved his amendment, to the effect
that it is inexpedient to discuss the reduction of the fran-
chise before the entire minima of the government for the
amendment of the representation of the people. He ex-
plained that the reason why he rose to put a question on
the previous day was to ascertain whether the government
had changed their minds as to bringing forward the subject
of redistribution of seats, and then proceeded to justify
the Gourd he bad taken, on the ground that he preferred
the interests of the country to his allegiance to his
party. He denied that his resolution was meant
as a vote of censure or went of confidence in the govern-
ment, or that it said one thing and meant another. He
urged that the very line he was taking now was adopted by
Lord Russell in regard to the bill of 1859, and argued
that if the anomalies in the distribution of seats were great
now they would be much exaggerated by the passing of
the present bill, while it would give the preponderance of
power to the working classes.
Lord STANLEY seconded the amendment, and said
that he only wished to assert the proposition which it con-
tained, and his difficulty was not in finding arguments,
but in the multiplicity of those which arose in ite favour.
It was an enunciation of a principle which the govern-
ment had laid down only three weeks ago. He argued
that, apart from the other inconveniences of se-
parating the questions of franchise and seats, even
if a bill relating to the latter were Introduced
it could not peas this session ; and who could gua-
rantee the identity of a bill on that subject next year with
that of the present year? It was also a question what the
government would have the power to do next year. The
house should have a guarantee that the same body should
deal with the question of sesta as dealt with the franchise,
which was impossible under existing circumstances. The
object of the amendment was that the whole subject of
reform should be comprehensively taken up next year.
The noble lord argued with sonic elaboration the question
of the franchise and the probable effect of the present bill.
Mr. P. W. MARTIN expressed his intention to rapport
the bill provided the government would introduce a clause
to save the rights of the dockyard artificers, but not other-
wise.
Mr. HORBFALL commented with some severity on the
language used by Mr. Bright in referencereferenceto Liverpeol,
ieluhe described as most unjustifiable. He described
the freemen of that town to be quite as independent as
the IW. householders, and while expressing himself
anxious to assist in any compromise or settlement of the
question when the proper time arrived, expressed himself
hostile to a measure which would transfer the balance of
political ywer to the working classes, and which would
enormous increase the expense of elections.
Mr. PI disclaimed any idea of regarding the question
of reform as one of party. He did not wish to see the
government displaced, but he could not give his consent to
a fragmentary measure, although he was quite disposed to
support a fair and moderate measure of concession when
the proper time arrived.
The Marquis of HARTINGTON could not understand
upon what unelligibleground the opposition were prepared
to give their sanction to the amendment of Lord Gros-
venor. That amendment was directed against a real and
practical proposition, and if it were now rejected it would
be impossible to tell when there would be a settlement of
the question. He denied that the measure bad
been brought in at the dictation of Mr. Bright.
It was inspired by the Feature of long-standing engage-
ments, which no honourable men could longer resist. Rad
the government met the new parliament without a reform
bill it would have been said that they had sacrificed their
principles to their place. The fate of the cabinet was, it
was true, staked upon the bill, but a far more important
question than the resignation of ministers remained
behind—the peace and prosperity of the country.
General PEEL reminded the house that the new-born
seal of the government in favour of reform had been ,
inspired by the death of the late Premier. Before the
dissolution of George 111. the cry of the government
was, " The good old King and no Popery," and during
the lifetime of Lord Pabnerston the cry was, " The
good old Palmerston and no Reform Bill" To ask
the House of Commons to sanction the principle of
a franchise bill without accompanying it with a plan
for the redistribution of seats was to treat it nice a
child. For his own part he was not prepared to consider
one without the other, and, so far as the lowering of the
franchise was concerned, he would not give his assent to
a 71. occupation in boroughs even if accompanied by a
measure for the redistribution of seats. He considered
that a 71. franchise would open the door to endless
corruption, as it would revive the old freemen,
soot and lot voters, and potwallopers, whose
existence was destroyed, or nearly destroyed, by
the bill of 1832. If the bill were paused in its present
shape it would open the door to all descriptions of corrup-
tion, and boroughs would be bought and sold like shares
in the Stock Exchange. The cost of every borough would
be fixed ; a parliamentary bill of fare would be drawn
up, and the price of mint sauce for Nottingham " lambs"
would at once be ascertained. He was not indisposed to
give the working classes a reasonable share of political
power, for be was not afraid of them ; but he owned he
was afraid of the men by whom they were likely to be led.
After a few words from Mr. KINGLAKE, justifying
the withdrawal of the amendment of which he bad given
notion,
Mr. BANES-STANHOPE opposed the bill on the
ground that it was not an honest measure. It was well
known that it was the handiwork of the member for Bir-
mingham, who had openly declared that no measure would
give satisfaction to him and his out of doors which
was not accompanied by the
Mr. BAXTER moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. AYRTON hoped that the house would not give way
to a feeble uxoriournese—(a kiwii)—and on an occasion
like this adjourn at 12 o'clock. He trusted it would show
something like the manly *pour of former times •, and, if
not to-night, would at least in future carry on the debate
tillthree or four in the morning.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
present custom had prevailed for the lad five-and-thirty
years. During that time it had been the practice to
continue debates till three or four in the morning, for the
of adjourning then. He hoped, however, that
Milisieembers would so far consent to facilitate the dis-
cussion as to allow their motions for this (Friday)
evening to be postponed. (Hear, hear.)
sir C. O'LOGBLEN said that, so far as he was ooncernea,
lis abould be happy to do so.
r • Sr. &COCHRANE was very mush disinclined to do any-
'thing 'thing to facilitate the pessurg el this measure.
•Chenceilar of the Exchequer excused himself from bring-
ing forward a more oomprehamive measure of reform en

the ground that there would be only twelve days beyond
the usual government days that could be gins to the
discussion of the bill.
After a few words from Sir G. Guar,
The adjournment was agreed to until this day.
The report on supply was brought up and agreed to.
The Art Bill was read a second time.
The Established Church (Ireland) debate we. adjourned
until that day fortnight.
The house adjourned at a quarter to one o'clock.

THE GOVERNMENT REFORM BILL.

THE GREAT MEETING IN THE CITY.
At the meeting at the Mansion-house yesterday,
after our report left,
Mr. JONIS came forward to move an amendment but
was met with considerable interruption. His amendment
was—" That the political rights of the mechanical men
of this kingdom should rest on a higher basis than the
mere valise of residence."
This was met with laughter and cries of " Oh, oh ;"
but not being seconded fell to the ground, and the original
resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. P. GASSIOT moved that a petition be adopted, and
that the Lord Mayor be requested to sign it on behalf of
the meeting, and that the members for the City of London
be requested to present the same to the House of Com-
mons. The petition accepted the bill with gratitude, and
expressed the gratification of the citizens of London that
the government intended to exert all constitutional powers
to carry it, and prayed the house to resist all
attempts to interrupt its pawing or to cripple
the bill during its propene. Mr. Oursiot supported his re-
solution in an energetic and humorous speech, in the course
of which an allusion to Mr. Roraima's attempt to form a
party of himself and Mr. Lowe, was responded to by the
e- xhibition of a large coloured carricature, embodying Mr.
Bright's happy idea of the Scotch terrier, with the fees of
Mr. Lowe at one end and that of Mr. Borman at the
other—a display which, as a matter of course, evoked peals
of laughter.
hir..ll. 0. Roamers seconded the motion.
Mr. GOSCEIHN, M.P., who was enthusiastically
thanked the meeting for their enthusiasm. Every week
that had peened since the introduction of the bill proved
that it had gone on gaining more and more favour with the
country. The country had recognised it se an honest and
reasonable bill, and they knew the government meant bad-
ness. Much wee due to Mr. Lowe, whose attack had con-
tributed greatly to the display which had been witnessed.
When the bill bemme law—and it would become law—
there would still be in the relations of labour, land, and
capital stair adjustment of influence. " Thaw," continued
the right hon. gentleman, " from whom we have re-
ceived the moat abuse are the clever reformers—those who
are in favour of the representation of minorities—of plu-
rality of votes—of giving the household suffrage to the
great towns, but not lowering the franchise in the small
boroughs, and of venous other ingenious devices of a like
character. I admit that there is much to be said in favour
of many of these schemes, but there is one difficulty com-
mon to them all—that is that they won't paw--whereas
our bill will. (Loud cheers.) We believe that our bill is
practical, that it will effect a wholesome expansion of the
constitution—that it is in perfect accordance with theprin-
cipleof that Reform Act, under the operation of which the
country has grown up into a state of unparalleled prospe-
rity. (Hear, hear.) We believe that it is not only just but
that it will be perfectly safe to make this reduction to Ti.
in the franchise. It has been said that in the small bo-
roughs the voters will still be corrupt, and that we are
proceeding on the rule of thumb. As to that lam not
sure that the English constitution has not been altogether
arranged by the rule of thumb. At all events, we insist
upon the principle of giving no man more power at the
polling booth than another. After again expressing his
Might at the fulness and the unanimity of the meeting,
and observing that no gpe could say that the citizens of
London were democratic, seeing the members they had re-
turned, although practically household suffrage prevailed
in the City, he concluded by expressing his conviction
that if, as them was no reason to doubt, the same feeling
existed throughout the country in favour of the government
bill as had been exhibited there to-day, not only would the
second reading be safe but it would peas safely through
all those innumerable amendments and difficulties, by
which it was threatened from opponents of all abodes.
(The right hon. gentleman sat down amid loud and
enthusiastic cheering.)
Mr. CRAWTORD, M.P., also spoke in favour of the reso-
lution, remarking that in favour of the government bill
the judgment of the country was more exercised than its
feeling, and in this respect there wee a marked difference
between the circumstances of the present and the Reform
Bill of 1832. He congratulated himself on having sup-
ported the bill on its first introduction, seeing that his
opinion was so unanimously concurred in by his con-
slitnents.
The petition was unanimously adopted.
Alderman W. LIIW/ENCI, M.P., likewise advocated the
petition.
Mr. M. CHAIIIHIRS, Q.C., moved a vote of thanks to the
Lord Mayor for having convened the meeting, and for his
able and urban* conduct in the chair.
Mr. A. ROTHSCHILD seconded the resolution, which
was canied unanimously and by acclamation.
A brief acknowledgment from his lordship, in which be
expressed his earnest hope that the government bill
would be successful, and paid a high compliment to Earl
Russell for his consistent efforts in favour of parliamen-
tary reform and religious liberty, concluded the pro-
-odings.

TOWER HAMLETS.
A crowded and enthusiastic meeting of inhabit-
ants of the Tower Hamlets was held last night, in support
of the Reform Bill at the Beaumont Institution, Mile
End ; Mr. JOHN HOLKB, a large employer of labour,
occupying the ohair.
Letters were read from the members for the borough,
excusing their absence on the ground that their presence
was needed in the House of Commons. Mr. Ayrton wrote
that he considered the reform question was now in a satis-
factory position, and that the action of the govern-
ment ought to be supported. Mr. Salisbury Butler,
after adverting to the fact that the borough was
the largest and most populous in the country, expressed
his hearty concurrence in the government measure, and
his thorough belief that ministers would keep faith with
the liberal party. He thought no arguments were re-
quired to induce his constituents to approve the bill as an
honest measure, and invited them to sand him a nume-
rously signed petition in its favour.
Major JOHNSTONE proposed the following resolution, via.:
—" That, believing the bill introduced by the government
for extending the electoral franchise to be an honest instal-
ment of a much-needed reform in the representation of the
people, this meeting tenders its thanks to the government
for the measure, and for their expressed determination to
supplement it by other necessary reforms of parliament,
especially that of the redistribution of seats, and resolves
to use its utmost endeavours to secure the passing of the
bill into law."
Dr. Bowmen. seconded the resolution, which was sup-
ported by Mr. Newton, a well-known local reformer, who
said the bill would double the constituency of the borough,
and carried by acclamation.
A petition to the House of Commons in favour of the
bill was agreed to, and the proceedings closed with a vote
of thanks to the chairmen.

A large and enthusiastic meeting was held in Bt.
James's-hall, Piccadilly, last night, in support of the govern
ment Reform Bill ; Mr. Weafeirrott in the chair. There
were a number of large placards hung round the hall and in
front of the platform, with a drawing of Mr. Bright's cele-
brated Scotch terrier, and the quotation from the hon. gen-
tleman's epeech. Underneath was the announcement,
" Messrs. Caine and Stroud sole owners of the animal."
This illustration caused much merriment.
The C HAI MILAN erplained that the borough I
members were in the House of Commons at
that time, but would attend before the meeting closed.
Letters of apology for non-attendance were read. General
Sir De lacy Evans, formerly member for the borough,
wrote to say that he fully approved of the oourse taken
by the ministry, as indicated by the meeting au Tuesday.
was true that a few rabid old twits, a few aristocratic
whip, and renegade liberals—(cheers)—bad conspired
against the government, but should they succeed in
placing any impediment in the way of the government's
patriotic police, it might be &seamed there would be a
dissolution, followed by a most triumphant result. (Loud
cheers.)
Kr. MALLIMON moved the first resolution, which was as
follows :—" That this meeting, believing the Pranchiad
Bill introduced by the government to be an honest effort
to advance the enfranchisement of the people, and relying
upon their promise to introduce a measure for the redis-
tribution of seats and the re-adjustment of borough boun-
daries pledges itself to give to the government bill its
cordial support"
Captain the Hon. E. Gaosrenon, M.P., in seconding the
resolution, referred to a letter recently published in a
leading journal with the signature of " Metropolitan Re-
former." The writer, in advising the holding of a West-
' =miter meeting, flippantly, and rather profanely added
that it might be well to invite him (Captain Grosvenor),
in order to lead him out of temptation and deliver him
from evil. (Laughter.) As this letter was not chal-
lenged by his constituents, he took their silence
as indicating their agreement with the writer
and their mistrust of him. (No, no.) Under those
circumstances he bad well nigh resolved to leave
it to his vote to prove that he needed n• pressure to
induce him to do his duty. (Loud cheers.) He did not
agree with those who said the government ought' to have
introduced a monster bill which, distending its gigantic
jaws, would swallow up all representative abuses at a single
mouthful. (Laughter.) Persons who so argued seemed to
forget that the aged miracles bad passed. The hon. gen-
tleman argued that it was the duty of the government to
bring in a reform bill, to frame it so that it would have a
good chance of passing, and then to stake their existence
upon it. The hon. gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud
cheers.
Mr. 3. nomt supported the resolution.
Mr. J. STUART MILL, M.P. in rising to support the
motion, was received with prolonged cheering. He said
that those who foretold and calculated that the people K
England no longer cared about reform, or, if they did, did
not care for the government measure, would entertain a

different opinion if they could see this meeting, er witness
the demonstiatioius which had taken plass in esm part el
the country, and the petitions which but a feerWmi pre-
vietudy had been laid upon the table of the House of
Commons. (Obelus.) Mr. Gladstone was the only man
amongst recent statesmen who acted in a spirit of
true statesmanship by aiming to be the leader of a
free people, to employ his mind in pointing out the
things which people ought to wish for; not think-
ing it his only banner to yield to pressure,
but to do what a great minister should, napni;
take the initiative in reform. (Hear, hear.) If the e
lr,
of the country did not stand by Mr. Gladstone now, en
he was doing their work, they would deserve to rafter
what must ensue—that they would not smelly And another
who would save them in the same way. (Loud cheers.)
The resolution was carried unanimously.
Mr. JAMES Boar. moved the adoption of a petition, to be
presented by the borough members to the House of Com-
mons. He then read a descriptive account of the early
part of the debate then going on in the house. Mr. Lowe 's
denial of speaking disrespectfully of the people was re-
ceived with loud and long laughter, and cries of " Oh."
Amongst the remahung speakers were—Mr. Montagu
Chambers, Q.C., and Dr. W. Brewer. Mr. Mason Jones, who
was on the platform, was several times loudly called for,
but the chairman intimated that the programme bad better
be proceeded with.
Loud cheers for Gladstone, Bright, and reform, and
groans for Holtman and Lowe were called for and given,
at the close of the meeting.

Similar meetings have been held at Aylesbury,
Bedford, Brierly Hill, Christchurch, Newbury, Peter-
borough, Saffron Walden, Salisbury, Rochdale District,
Walthamstow, West Bromwich, he.

CENTRAL ORIMINAL COURT.-

(Before Mr. dustiee Lush.)
John Wainwright, described es • dentist was charged
with feloniously casting • quanti of n fluid upon
&tab Margaret Pacock, with inten ty
t tondo her grievous

bodily harin.
After our report left yeeterday, the jury in this NMI
returned a verdict of Guilty.
The prisoner, when called up for judgment, said, " I can
only say what I said at first, that I am not guilty."
Mr. Justice Lush, after expressing the detestation with
which the law regarded the atrocious offenoe of which the
prisoner justly stood convicted, sentenced him to be kept
inpenal servitude for the term of twenty years.
Hebert Poole, who had been convicted on Wedneedai
for feloniously setting fire to the premises of the Daily
Telegraph newspaper office, was called up for judgment,
and sentenced to seven years' penal servitude.
Daniel Elmore, who had pleaded guilty to an indictment
charging hint with the manslaughter of Ma wife, warn also
brought up for judment, and sentenced to six months'
imprisonment with bard labour.

(Before Ms. Justice Smith.)
Thontas Brous, 21, pleaded guilty to • charge of assault-
ing John Loveman.
Mr. temp was instructed to prosecute, and Mr. Sleigh
was counsel for the defence.
The charge that was o4inall y preferred against the
defendant was one of minaLughter, and it arose under
these circumstances. The deceased wee one of the drivers
employed by the General Omnibus Company, and, on the
day in question, the prisolier, who was very drunk, at-
tempted to get on the top of the omnibus on which he was
employed. He refused to allow him to do so, on amount
of his condition, and the prisoner suddenly tripped him up
and broke his leg. He was taken to the hospital, where,
for some time, he appeared to be going on well, but unfa-
vourable symptoms set in, and death was the result, the
immediate muse of that event being' disease of the heart,
accelerated by the shock be bad received. The grand jury
ignored the bill for manslaughter, and the prisoner now
pleaded guilty to the charge of assault.
He was sentenced to six months' hard labour.
Henry 'feeble, a respectable looking elderly man ear-
rendered to take his trial for feloniously smutting and
wounding his wife, with intent to do her grievous bodily
harm.
Mr. Brook prosecuted, and the prisoner was defended by
Mr. Rilyton.
This was a very singular case. The parties lived at
Southwood-terrace, Hornsey, and on the night the affair
happened they had been out together, and returned home
on good terms, the prisoner being at the time slightly the
worse for liquor. At an early hour on the following
morning the prisoner went to the house of a neighbour in
a state of great excitement, and he represented that there
were thieves in his house,and he said he had had a struggle
with one of them for nearly two hours, and that he ha.d
marked him, and had cut him about the arms and
legs. Upon the police going to the prisoner's
house, they found his wife nearly insensible, and with a
great number of wounds upon different parts of her per-
son. A knife was picked up which the prisoner aid was
the weapon he had used against the thieves, and the only
answer he appeared to give, when he was asked to account
for his conduct, was that he found his wife was one of the
thieves who had, as he supposed, broken into his house.
The proseantrix was unable to attend and give her evi-
dence, partly on account of the Injuries she had received.
and partly on account of other ailments, but there did not
appear to be anything to show that she and her
husband had been on bad terms, and the account
she herself gave of the transaction was that some
man tome into the room, put out the light, sad imme-
diately attacked her. She slim stated that she thought
the man who vaulted her was a shorter man than her
husband. On the following day, and when it had been
clearly ascertained that no robbery bad been committed,
the prisoner stated that he must have been under a de-
lusion as to thieves being in the house, and that it was
himself who had made the attack upon his wife. There
was this additional fact in connection with the case, that
the prisoner represented in the first instance that he bad
taken two sovereigns out or Ids pocket, and offered them
to the supposed thieves, and one sovereign was found on
the floor, and the other had altogether disappeared.
Mr. Ribton, in his addrem to the jury for the defence,
mid that the case was really one of such an extraordinary
character that he hardly knew how to deal with it. He
said it was quite dear that there was no motive of malice
or ill will operating upon the mind of the prisoner, and he
urged that he must be labouring under some extraordinary
delusion that thieves were in the house at the tune he
made this attack upon his wife.
Evidence was then adduced to show that the prisoner
and his wife bad been married • great roan 7 years, and
that they lived on the most kind and affectionate terms,
and that the prisoner was slways regarded as a most re-
spectable man, and of • kind and humane disposition.
The learned judge, in summing up, said that the cam
was undoubtedly • most extraordinary one, and it was
difficult to find a motive for the commission of the set by
the prisoner. It was said in his behalf that he was labour-
ing under a delusion that thieves were in the house, and
that he had no intention to do injury to his wife, and the
jury, after considering all the circumstances, would say
whether this was or was not a reasonable explanation of
the transaction.
The jury, after a very short deliberation, returned a:ver
diet of Not Guilty.

(Before the Common Serjeant.)
George Boreton, alias Terrill, was convicted of obtaining
by false pretences a quantity of butter from the arm of
Messrs. Beer, the wholesale merchants in High-street,
Borough.
Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted, and Mr. Collins defended the
prisoner.
The accused has frequently been prosecuted in this and
other courts, and was the head of a gang of swindlers,
who were designated as the " Borston Gang.
The Common Serjeant sentenced him to twelve months'
imprisonment, with hard labour, in the House of Correc-
tion.