The Express.
London, England, 1867-03-06 00:00:00

MINISTERIAL EXPLANATIONS.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER donut-Ted to
Mr. Gladstone's criticism the previous night on his phrase
" recurring to the original policy," reminding him that he
had stated on the 2.'itb ult. that the government had
originally contemplated a measure different from that
which he was then explaining. Neither was there any
better foundation for the remark made in the House of
Lords—that the government had neglected the subject for
* long period, and had taken it up all of a sudden, for
early in the autumn Lord Derby hail imparted to him
his deliberate conviction that the question must be
dealt with in no nigeani spirit, and hail re. nested
him to give hie serious aeoution to it. The Cabinet
had hoped to submit a measure conceived in this spirit
with the full assent of all their colleaguei ; but, un-
happily and unexpectedly, in that hope they were disap-
pointed, aka the result wan that he was empowered to
submit to the house the smaller scheme which he
explained on the 27411, and which had before been
considered by the Cabinet as an alternative. It was
not the measure lie should have preferred. hit it was one
he could honourably and cooeietentlydefeed as being based
on a principle—that it would restore the labouring classes
to the position in the electoral body from which they were
excluded by the reform act; that it would have
given them one quarter of the constituencies, while one
quarter was given to the agricultural interest, and a half
to the middle classes. But that bill did not give satis-
faction to the conservative party. The government
had received numerous protests against it from persona of
rank and influence among their own friends. and though
they had reason to believe that it would be favourably
received by many influential members of the libeml party,
it was decisively condemned at Mr. Gladstoue's meeting,
where there seemed to be a general preference for a 5/.
franchise. (Here there were loud erica of " No" from
the imposition.) It seemed then as if the question was
fast relapsing into the unsatisfactory condition of last year,
anal under these circumstances Lord Derby called his
colleagues together again, and expressed his strung opinion
that iu the policy he hail originally suggested lay the solution
of the problem, and the iuloption of that policy by the
majority of the Cabinet leaf to the resignation of Loot
Caniarvon, Lord Crauborne. and General Peel. After
expressing his regret at the leas the government hail sus.
tained, Mr. Disraeli added, with much emphasis, that if
hie own resignation could h...ve averted this secession it
was at lard Derby's command, for, in or out of office, he
had always expressed himself ready to consent to any
personal ...orifice to maintain a united party and Cabinets
But the case would not have been bettered by hi. resigna-
tion, and it would be his duty at the earlie-t moment to
bring in A bill which would be free from evasion, epIiVOCII•
tion, and vacillation, by which the govenucent would
stand, and which, notwithstanding Mr. Gladstone's gra-
tuitous veticinations on Monday night, would net perplex
parliament, and would be intelligible to the country.
General PEEL (who was meeived with loud cheers)—
Sir, I hold everybody responsible for the maintenance of
his own honour, whether it be personal or political. I do
not know whether he is at all tones himself the hest judge
of what that honour may require of Lim, for there is a
species of false honour which may sometimes induce him
not to apologise. although be knows lie is wrong, and to
persist in a course although he has begun to doubt
whether that course is right. I hope and trust that I
have not been influenced by this principle of false
honour. On the contrary, when a person has changed
his opinion, II honour him for expressing that
change and acting upon it, Now, me, I confess
to having altered my opinion with regard to the great
questi as which we discussed last year. It is perfectly true,
as state,' by my noble friend, that when Ms government
was formed no pledge was given on the tvart of any of
its members to bring in a reform bah If there had been
such a pledge I certainly aboudd not have accepted office.
Since that time, however, I here changed ley opinion.
I changed it as to the indifference of the great
mass of the people—(opposition cheers)—and I thought it
was absolutely necessary that the government should
bring in a reform bill, +mil that the question should be
settled as soon as possible. Having come to that concha-
Ilion, I was 'satisfied that it could only be carried into effect
by everyone with extreme opinions on the me side or the
other being prepared to sacrifice those extreme views. I
wa.s, therefore, prepared to unite wish nay colleagues, if

possible, in framing a reform bill • an,' with that view I
wax prepared for all the aacrifices i niightllV called upon to
u nay rgo. I was perfect ly premiro I to lave pa asages con sta ntly
qaoted against me from my speech of last year, and re-
caved with cheers from bon. members opposite. lam
exceedingly sorry that by the course I have taken I am
depriving any bon. gentleman of the speech which he may
have been prepariug. (Laughter.) There are some ex-
pressions in that speech which I deeply regret. (Cheers.)
There is one espeeially, with respect to the Thames flow-
ing with blood, which I have never ceased to regret. I
was also prepared for another punishment, which the hon.
member for !Lambeth very good natureilly acid was the
only. one he wished to see inflicted upon me. that of walk-
iug into the lobby in support of a reform bill. I was fully
prepared to undergo even that. (A laugh.) But when it
came to the fifth resolution—that fatal fifth resolution—
by which it was proposed to extend the franchise down to
household suffrage, then I at once said I could not agree
to that, and I then and there tendered my resignation.
I objected to it on the ground, in the first place,
that it could not be carried out in conformity ((with the
fourth resolution, which said that no class ought to have
a preponderance in the representation. I aLso objected to
it, because I thought that in many cases it would entirely
overwhelm and swamp the old constituencies, particularly
'in small boroughs. 1%-hen that subject was discussed in
the cabinet I must say that the opinion of my colleagues
was unanimous that it wags mere matter of figures, a mere
question of compensation, although I must say with
respect tocompeusation derivedfrompluralityof votes, that
I have no very great faith either in securities or in pledges.
(Loud cheer,.) My experience of forty years in this house
has led me to the conclusion that a security as a security
is of no use whatever. If it is right in itself it may be main-
tained, but as a security it is of no value. (Cheers.)
It was, therefore, upon that ground that I objected to the
extension of the franchise to household suffrage ; but
when! was assured that it was a conservative measure—
(a laugh)—l fully believed it, and I consented to become a
party to bringing in the hill. It was not that I hail
changed my opinion, but knowing that everybody mitt°
some extent sacrifice his own opinions in carrying out a
great measure like this, I consented to sacrifice my feel-
ings to what I believed to be the unanimous opinion of my
colleagues. It was not until Monday morning week, or
very late on Sunday night, that I heard fur the first time
that two of my colleagues, in whom I had placed the
greatest confidence, and with whom I hail acted with the
greatest cordiality, had, without any communication with
me, and without any reference to me, come to the same con-
clusion as I had done. On an analysis of the figures they
had come to the conclusion that the effect of our measure
would be, what I had always felt would be the case
namely, that in sonic of the smaller boroughs it would
entirely swamp the present constituencies. I therefore
refused to take any share in the responsibility of the
measure. The ground upon which I hail consented to it
was entirely removed, and I could no longer take upon
myself the responsibility of any share in bringing in that
measure. (Cheers.)
Viscount CRANBORNE (who was also received with
cheerd—Since I gave that answer to the hon. member for
Nottingham Yesterday, I have received the permission,
through Lord Derby, which enables me to speak upon this
subject. The details into which my right hon. friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, and, still more, the details
into which my right hon. friend has just entered, impose
upon me the necessity—although I dislike as much as any
man the disagreeable egotism of these diecursions—the ne-
cessity of briefly stating what my own course has been,
and what the circumstances were under which I felt myself
bound, on Monday week, to tender my resignation. At
that time, when the resolution—the fatal resolution, as
my right hon. friend has called it—was laid on the table,
as I understood it, no detailed or definite agreement hail
been come to. A general view was entertained, but the
actual figures were not arranged as to the mode in which
it should be applied. (Hear, hear.) It was to be applied,
as I then understood it, according to principles which
I believed to be just, although I confess I did not at the
time think the house would accept them. That, however,
seemed to me to be a small matter. My only business in
assenting to the proposition was to ask myself, " Is this
just, or not?" It was arranged on a principle which seemed
to be just, as it would give an opportunity of admitting
to the representation a very large class of those who
did not posses the franchiae. My right hoo. friend ob-
jected to that premise', as he has told you. I bad hoped that
the figures might be so arranged that the desire of the
great majority of my colleagues might be car-
ried out with perfect safety to the constitution,
and in a manner to settle this moat vexed and very diffi-
cult question. I was one of those who urged him to re-
main with us ; but after the speech of my right hon.
friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the 11th of
February, it became evident—at least it was the belief of
many of my colleagues—that our original view of the ap-
plication of the fifth volution was untenable ; and pro-
posals which to me—l only say, to me—were new,
were then entertained by the government. I wish to be
particularly understood here. I don't for • moment wish
to suggest that my colleagues acted in a hasty or precis
pitate manner. Any one who knows the working of a
cabinet, which is a verylarge body , knows that certain matters
are considered in the first instance by a small number of
its members, and that many of them, especially those who
hold offices which have heavy departmental work—as
mine had—are not in the first instance consulted as to
the measures to be prepared by the cabinet. It was on
Friday, the 15th of February, that I fist heard of the
proposition, which, I believe, has now received the formal
sanction of her Majesty'sgovernment. I statedat once that
it was a proposition which to my mind was inadmissible. I
believed at the time that it had been abandoned ; but on the
following Tuesday, the 19th, I think, the proposition was
revived, and revived with the statement of certain statistics.
Now, the house will perhaps allow me to point out
the special value of statistics in this matter. The idea of
the fifth resolution was a great enfranchisement with a
certain compensating and counterpoising arrangement. Of
*own the whole value of any arrangement with a counter-
poise depends upon the accuracy of the calculation upon
which that counterpoise is made. The figures on Tuesday,
the 19th, were imperfect. After considerable discussion it
was understood as agreed that the matter Rhombi be re-
sumed, with fuller information from the departments, on
Saturday, the 2:3riL The statement of the =assure to be
proposed was to be made on Monday, the rah. On
Satunlay, the Zlrd,. the figures were produced. I
Vial asked if I desired further discussion of them.
I said that they seemed to me to be favourable ;
but I am not aware that I gave any further assent to the
proposition than was conveyed in those words. I say
this on account of expressions in which I can hardly
acquiesce that have been used elsewhere. On Saturday,
the Zird, after we had separated, I naturally gave my-
self up to the investigation of the figures. The position
was one of extreme difficulty. The materials that I bad
were in my opinion, extremely scanty. The time I had
for decision wan aft hours. On Sunday evening I came
to the conclusion that although the figures en the whole
had a fair seeming, and although it appeared that when
stated en block the proposed reduction of the franchise
might be safely adopted, it nevertheless appeared to me
that with respect to a very large number of boroughs
it would scarcely operate otherwise than as household suf-
frage pure and simple. (Cheers.) As soon as I hail come
to that conclusion I consulted one or two of my colleagues
who happened to be near at hand ; and then I wrote to
Lord Derby, stating that with those figures before me it
was utterly impossible for me to concur in the measure
which he proposed. As my right hon. friend stated, on
Monday morning we assembled somewhat hastily. I natu-
rally tenderol ray resignatiou, and implored my noble
friend to accept it, because, as I urged upon him, a govern.
ment in which there was dissension was not a government
likely to satiiefy either the house orthe country. Lord Derby,
actuated by a kindliness of feeling for which I certainly
ought not to be ungrateful, but which I thought mis-
taken, rather preferred to put it, we and the others who
were dlissatisfied, whether we would consent as a coinpro-
mise to that other less extensive measure which had been
considered by the government, and which was ultimately
brought forward by my right hon. friend on the 25th of
February. In the course of last week Lord Derby again
rune to the conclusion that what I had originally sug-
gested was correct, namely, that it was not expedient to
goon with a divided cabinet. The result was that the pro-
position which he hail prariorisly urged was accepted, and
I then and there tendered my resignation. I am
very glad to have the opportunity of making this explana-
tion to the house, because from some worth, dropped inad-
vertently, both in this house and elsewhere, I :can afraid
the impression may gain ground that we had acted ',reel.
pinta,/ ; that we had consented to a measure prepared a
long time, and then at the last moment we hail unfairly
come forward with our objections. I hope the
house will feel that under the circumstances it was im-
possible for me to act otherwise than I did. (Cheers.)
I need not say to three who have undergone it, how
painful a thing it is to part with friends with whom one
has acted, and to appear in the position of even temporary
antagonism towards those with whose convictions one in
general thoroughly sympathises. (Cheers.) But I felt
I never could consent to a measure which appeared to me
to be introducing into all boroughs, uniformly and with-
out distinction, practically, household suffrage. In saying
this, I do not wish to give an impression that I am insen-
sible to those considerations which have operated so
deeply upon the n.ind of my right hon. friend. Lord
Carnarvon expressed the sentiments which he
entertained on this question in language which I
would willingly adopt as my own. I shall be very
glad if it should be possible, in spite of these unfortunate
discussions, to pros during the present session a measure
which shall give satisfaction to those who undoubtedly are
not satisfied, and which shall remove from the arena of
party politics a matter of much fierce and dangerous con-
troversy. (Cheers.) lam sure, however, that this measure
never would be settled if any who entertained a sincere
convictiou against the propositions that were made,
allowed the suspicion to fall upon them that for any
party or personal consideration they were supprosing
those convictions and acting against them. (Loud cheers.)
It is only by the most perfect sincerity—(opposition
cheers)—and by earnestly striving as much as we can to
remove this from the category of those which are subjects
of party cries and party struggles, we can get rid of a
difficulty which has become serious, and remove that
which has become, in fact, a disgrace to the efficiency of
the House of Commons. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. D. GRIFFITH then row, and amid much laughter
read a statement in the darning Ad rertiser to the effect
that Mr. Gladstone and the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had met in the retiring room behind the Speaker's chair,

THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 6, 1867.

and there agreed with him that no attempt should be
made to turn out the government.
.--....

Mr. GLADSTONE 'denied that there was any founda-
tion for the statement referred to. Then, referring to the
ohaervations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he said
it was the first time he had heard it said in that house
that to admit the working classes to the franchise to such
an extent that they would form one-fourth of the consti-
tuency was establishing a principle. The measure of the
teat session was opposed by the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer on the ground that it contained no principle, and
yet it would have admitted more of the working chimes
to the franchise than the measure of the present govern-
ment. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said he expected
that the W. rating franchise would be accepted on the op-
position side of the house ; but bow was he justified in
that expectation when the late government, when it was
proposed last session, stated that they could not accept it.
Then the statement of the right hon. gentleman that at
a meeting of the liberal members it was determined to
support no franchise less than a 5/. rating, was also utterly
groundless. lie feared that the constant iteration of these
collateral discussions must tend to interpose, both on the
mind of the government and on the:minds of the opposi-
tion, an obstacle to the attainment of that which they

-fir. LOWE, speaking on behalf of the majority of last
year, which had combined to resist a 71. rental franchiae
(which Mr. Disraeli had now discovered to he based on a
principle), because it was a step towards household suf-
frage, inveighed with great force and effect against the
new alliance between Mr. Disraeli and Mr. Bright, whom
he likened to the " °feat Twin Brethren" of Lord Macau-
lay e
" Lay." The one approached household suffrage
from above, the other from below ; but there was no
practical distinction to be drawn between them—they
were both travelling on the high road to democracy. The
conflict of last year had now become a race which party
could underbid the other. He suggested that Mr. Dis-
raeli should lay on the table the figures spoken !of by
Lord Cranborne, that there might be no further delays
for want of information.
Mr. HOILMMAN also made some caustic observations on
the position of the ministry, which he characterised as the
weakest which had ever attempted to handle the greatest
of questions. Though the liberals were anxious to assist
the government in 'taming a bill, every speech of Mr. Dia.
meh made it mote difficult, and that night had made it
patent that a conservative government was about to launch
a democratic reform bill. When the Duke of Wellington
and Sir B. Peel abandoned the traditions of their party on
Catholic Emancipation and the Corn Laws they were not
only at the head of a majority, but they were sincere con-
verts, and would have struggled for those changes in
opposition ; but when Lord Derby's government left power
in IMO, they immediately became anti-reformers, and,
having once more abandoned all their old opinions, if now
unsuccessful, they would doubtless relapse into the same
course.

Lord STANLEY, who upon thing was received with
loud cheers, said—l do not wish to engage the attention of
the house for more than one or two minutes. The speeches
of the right hon. gentleman who has just sat down and of
the right hon. gentleman the member for Caine bays both
been founded upon the same idea, which I will venture to
say is an utter miaapprehension. They have both
spoken as if they behoved that it was the inter!,
tion of those who sit upon these benches to
go farther in a democratic direction than those who sit
opposite to them, and to bring in a bill framed and in-
tended in that spirit. Now I say plainly and distinctly
that I cannot conceive any circumstances under which, in
our position and with our opinions, that would be an ex-
pedient course to adopt ; and whether expedient or not, I
am sure it would not be an honourable course. Neither I,
nor as I believe any of those who sit on this bench, would
be prepared to adopt it. I say that now, because I want to
save, it may be, some members of this house from disap-
poiniment. If the member for Caine, or any of those who
think with him, believes seriously that it LI the in-
tention of the government to bring in a bill
in the sense of that policy which has always beeu
very ably and very consistently advocated by the hon.
member for Binningham, I can assure him that he is utterly
mistaken. (Hear, hear, and murmurs.) I hope that hon.
members will recollect that they are discussing a measure
which is not. before the house—(hear, hear)—of which
they have heard no statement whatever, of the general
effect and purport of which it is impossible they can know
anything, and of which they cannot form an accurate
judgment merely from some fragmentary expressions
which have been used relating to some portion of it
by gentlemen who have spoken in this debate. We are
quite ready to stand or fall by the judgment of the house
upon the measure we shall bring in. We only ask for
ordinary fair play, and that the house will know what
that measure is before it proceeds to debate it. (Cheers.)
Mr. BRIGHT—I shall not prolong the discussion more
than two or three minutes, but I cannot help. saying that
I think we have had a very instructive evening. (Hear,
hear.) I'robably, if hon. gentlemen opposite, and perhaps
some right hon. gentlemen here could have seen in a
vision a year ago what they see to-night, the results of
our deliberations in the last session might have been very
different. (Hear, hear.) The member for Caine admits
that he is pretty much out of court, and ought not to be
here at all—(laughter)—but he was tile greet adviser
last year of certain weak-minded gentlemen and certain
passionate and fierce politicians who now sit
in a very meek spirit opposite me. I recollect
his speeches from that bench ; the violent, and I will say,
even after the laudation of his speeches, the illogical
things which he said—the things he must regret to have
said. [Mr. Lowe—" NO."I (Laughter.) Then the things
which I regret that he said. The right hon. gentleman
made those speeches, he fanned the f:iin,e of the discon-
tent of a number of gentlemen--somehow or other nearly
all the leaders of that party who followed him had in
former times been in office—he fanned the flame of a
certain discontent, and combining that with your party
spirit threw out a government which had offered to the
country a measure of which the country distinctly ap-
proved. (Hear, hear.) When I say the country,
understand me, I mean that if there were any who
did not approve they did not signify their disapprobation ;
but the multitudes at whose request and dementia your
government now proposal to act, did, in many hundreds of
public meetings, signify their approbation of that bill.
Now, I ask hon. gentlemen opposite to dismiss for ever
from their councils the right hon. gentleman the member
for Caine. (Laughter.) He has once led you into a very
great difficulty, and if you take his advice now he will
greatly increase that difficulty. (Hear, hear.) Ho is
against extending the franchise by any reduction of it to
any portion of his countrymen. That is not an opinion, as I
understand, and as ho admits, held by any other individual in
this house. If that beim, clearly on this, which is our question
of to-night and of this session, he is out of court as an
adviser, and if he does not withhold his advice in future I

recommend you at least not to follow it. (Hear, hear.)
The right hon. gentleman the member for Stroud is very
angry with the government. Nobody has so much reason
that I know of to be angry with the government as I
have, because I believe nobody grieved more over the con-
duct of parliament last session in causing the failure of the
bill which I greatly wished to pass. But what did the
right hon. gentleman expect when he combined with
gentlemen opposite and drove out the government of
Loral Russell to put in the government of Lord
Derby? Had he so little knowledge of the state of
public opinion that be believed Lord Derby could hold
office and refuse to deal with the question of reform?
Why the Chancellor of the Exchequer knows, Lord Derby
knows, every man in the house knows, perfectly well that
if the government had met parliament this session and had
declared that they had no measure of parliamentary re-
form to offer, and would resist any proposition for the
extension of the franchise, the first week of the session
would have been the week of their extermination as a
government, and there would have been an end of them
now and for ever. (" Hear," and a laugh.) But then the
right hon. gentleman is very angry because the term
household suffrage" has been used. It hasbeenrumoured
on these benches that the right hon. gentleman had
a household suffrage bill in his pocket. I came down to-
night iu the expectation that it was to be brought on. In
=of fact, under the leadership of the members for
and Stroud we scarcely know where we are or
where we shall be. The right hon. gentleman has a bill
for household suffrage, with certain limitations. I am
not sure whether it has not been under examination by
the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord Derby. The
right hon. gentleman ha. been hawking his bill about, first
to St. James'a-square, and then, I believe, to Carlton-
house-terrace, and there being no market for the article—
(loud laughter)—l am not in the least surprised that he
should get up in this house and try to damage the wares which
the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer
is offering for male. Now let me say one or two words to
gentlemen opposite. You know that what the right hon.
gentleman the member for Caine has said is true ; that
although I have always, so long as I have discussed this
question, thought that household suffrage was in borough.
the true basis of the franchise, I have been willing to sup-
port measures in that direction. I am willing now, if the
house cannot agree upon that, to support a measure short
of it ; but I believe that that is the just foundation of the
borough franchise in this country. You have been &MN-
towed to have a dread of votes and numbers of votes.
You have had a constituency so narrow and contracted,
that you have some sort of idea that things
which are safe in the hands of a million of electors would
be unsafe in the hands of two millions ; as if the second
million of your countrymen were not filled with very
much the same ideas as the first million, and as if they
had not precisely or almost altogether the same interests.
There is no other country in the world in which the
aristocracy, where there is one, or the wealthy class
is afraid of votes. Whether you go to America or
Australia, or to nearly any of the kingdoms of Europe,
you never find discussions in any legislative body such as
are held from night to night in this house. People in
other countries have no dread of their countrymen, and no
fear that giving them votes would be destructive of any
order of society or of the constitution under which they
live. Now I ask you whether last year the great body of
the working people who met to express their opinion of
the measure of Lord Russell's government were not mo-
derate and judicious—(bear, hear)—in the course they
took with regard to that bill, and in the judgment they
expressed upon it? I venture to say that they took a part
that was much more patriotic in its results than that you
were unfortunately advised to take by the right hon, gen-
tleman behind me (Mr. Lowe) ; and I will undertake fur-
ther to say that, such is their moderation and such is their
comprehension of this question, that they will judge with
great fairness any measure which the present govern-

went shall lay before the house, or, if they
should fail, any that may be placed before us by the
government which may succeed them. (Hear, hear.)
But now I implore you—and you know I am not speaking
in the interest of the right hon. gentleman the immix'.
for South Lancashire, nor his friends, who may hereafter
occupy those benches, nor in the special interest of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. with whom I have no poll.
Heal connection—(a laugh)-1 speak In the interest of a
great cause, and of the millions of people who
day by day read every syllable that is uttered in
this house, and I ask you to deal with them as one class or
one party, or one section of a people should deal with every
other section of that people, with a generous and liberal
estimate of their character and that which is due to them.
Don't try now—don't try by any tricks—Haughterl—to
cheat them of that which they have a right to expect from
the declarations you have ueule. If you cannot go as far
as I could wish you to go try sonsethin_lexs, but let us
have it Pimple and distinct—(hear, hear sothat they shall
know that what you profess to give they will rosily re.
mice. (Cheers.) I recollect in the demonstration, as it
was called, which met here the other day the right hon.
gentleman (Mr. Lowe) says: the great demonstrations have
left no echo behind them. Lord Derby could tell a very
different story. If I understand rightly the measure which
the right lion. gentleman intends to introduce is rather the
Derby
of the brain of Lord Derby than of his own. Lord
Derby himself, who is not supposed to be rash in his pro-
irensity as en innovator upon the institutions of his
country —Lord Derby is in favour of that wide extension
of the suffrage to which it is hoped hon, gentlemen oppo-
site may by-and-bye consent. But in that demonstration
there were flags carried along the streets, and upon one of
them—that carried by the carpenters—there was the
motto which, though it is not in the choicest English, will
still be understood by many present, and I commend it to
the attention of hon. gentlemen opposite and to the house,
as conveying in it all the wisdom which I could possibly
hope to put in any number of words I might utter. They
said, " Deal with us on the square ; we have been chiselled
long enough." (Loud laughter, and cheers.)
Mr. SMOLLETT wondered why the great liberal party,
seeing the unsatisfactory manner in which reform had been
dealt with by the conservatives, did not themselves take
the matter seriously in hand, and move a vote of want of
confidence in the government. Surely their disinclination
to assume office ought to be ex) lained, for rumour stated
that there was a want of unanimity in the party, that the
leaders were distrusted, and their followers had no conn-
' dente in them.
After a few remarks from Mr. B. STANHOPE, the mo-
tion for adjournment was agreed to.
(in the motion of Mr. WATKIN, after some discussion,
and with the approval of the government, a select cora-
-1 mittee was ordered to be appointed to inquire into the
operation of the Limited Liability Act.
Leave was given to Mr. WLAGAS to bring in a bill
to amend the game laws in Scotland.
The adjourned debate on the second reading of the
Sale and Purchase of Shares Bill was resumed. In
the course of the discussion Mr. Cave pronounced the
measure to be of an exceptional and retrograde character ;
but upon a division the amendment of Mr. Fildes,
moved ou the 27th of February, that the bill be read a
second time that day six months, was negatived by 136 to
IL The bill was then read a second time, and Mr. CRAW-
roitn gave notice of his intentions to move that it be re-
ferred to a select committee. _ _

The remaining business on the paper having been dis-
posed of, the house adjourned at ten minutes to 12 o'clock
until 2 this day.

LONDON GENERAL OMNIBUS COMPANY.

( LIMITED.)

The eighth annual general meeting of the share-
holders in this company was held yesterday, at the odic. a,
No. 6, Finsbury-square• Mr. F. J. LAW, chairman of the
board of directors, in the chair.
The report, an abstract of which has already been given,
having been submitted and taken as read,

The (:tialamax proceeded to move its adoption, congra-
tulating the meeting that the directors were still lIA a
position to recommend a dividend at the rate of 7) per
cent. per annum. It would be seen from the statement of
assets and liabilities that there was a balance in favour of
the company of 90,000/. ; nor was that balance a mere
myth, as it consisted of 500001, in consols and 40,000/.
in cash. (Hear, hear.) The liabilities, as com-
pared with last year, showed a reduction of 6,000/.,
and the assets an increase of 2,000/. Nor was that all the
advantage derived within the year, because there was the
purchase of the Richmond omnibuses and their goodwill,
which had involved an expenditure of 5,000/., which might
in the regular order of things have been charged to
capital, but which had been borne by revenue.
(Hear.) The revenue account did not quite conic
up to that of the previous year. It showed a falling
off of 15,000/., of which 10,000/. was due to a reduction of
fares, and the remaining 5,000/. to the increase in the
prase of provender, and the diminution of traffic occasioned
by the bad weather of the past half-year. It might there-
fore be said that the company had surrendered something
like 20,000/. a year to the public, and yet the public
did not look upon this as • boon, as it was
said the concession was due to the reduction of the mile-
age duty. The public, he was afraid, did not sufficiently
appreciate the advantages which the company conferred
upon it • but if the company were to cease to exist for a
very short time—nay, even for a day—its want, end the
benefit it conferred, would be felt and admitted in an in-
stant. (Hear, hear.) Since their last meeting deathbed
removed from amongst them Mr. 111'Namera, the manag-
ing director, and the board had appointed as his successor
Mr. Church, the secretary, who now discharged in a most
efficient manlier the duties of the joint of of secretary
and general manager. (Hear, hear.) The interests of the
company were not likely to suffer in that gentleman's
hands ; indeed he had already effected many valuable
changes and improvements, which must ultimately bring
rime money in the shape of dividends to the pockets of the
shareholders. (Hear, hear.) No doubt those whom he
then had the honour to address had seen a letter or ad-
vertisement from Mr. J. E. Bradfield complaining that
he had not been fairly treated by the directors. It was
sufficient for him to state in reply that whereas Mr. Brad-
, field had received 1,236/. for expenses, although he had
only been entitled to 25th., by agreement he was en-
titled to 3,000/. in four yearly payments of 7504 each.
and that of that ,inn he had received 1.000/., although at
the present moment there was only au instalment of 750 f.
due to him. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SPENCER HERAPATH seconded the motion, adding
that no doubt the distress of the working classes ad pro-
duced some of the reduction in the receipts as well as the
bad weather. He also suggested that steps should be
shortly taken to diminish the number of French directors,
whose /ores in quo prevented their giving that attention
to the company which its interests demanded. At present
there were five English and four French directors.
Mr. Nunes, contrasting the accounts with those of
1861, insisted that there must be something wrong in the
management, otherwise the dividend would be double
what it was ; and he therefore interpoeed an amendment
to the motion from the chair, to the effect that the divi-
dend of 7) per cent. per annum be accepted, but that a
committee of investigation should be appointed to detect
the causes of the supposed discrepancies of which he
complained.
Mr. LaicirroN seconded the amendment.

Mr: KAMIER, adverting to the suggestion of Mr. Hera-
path, inquired s hat was the proportion of shares held in
this country and in France?
The CHAIRMAN said' 4,000 shares were held in England,
and 54,000 in France. The number held in France was
annual,' decreasing. He pointed out that Mr. Nudes was
mistaken in his figures and calculations.
. .

Major COI IrriE.T asked whether some more efficacious
plan could be devised to atop the peculation' of their
omnibus conductors.
TheCumuusw wile afraid not. If the losses from such
dishonesty could be entirely prevented, their dividends
might dm doubled. (Hear, hear.) Every check possible
had been tried, but without success, so far as bringing all
the fares received into the coffer* of the company.
. .

The amendment was then put and negatived-by a large
majority, only five bands being held up for it, and the
original motion for the adoption of the report and
accounts was carried.

A dividend of 3a. per .hare, equal to 7i per cent. per
annum, was then declared, payable, free of income tax, on
and after the 12th instant.

The retiring directors and auditors were re-elected,
and a resolution of regret and condolence for the less of
the late Mr. passed.
A cordial vote of confidence in Mr. Church, the new
manager, with which the chairman said he heartily con-
curred was then passed, and the proceedings concluded
with the usual compliment of thanks to the chairman and
directors.

Kids interitstnce.

HOUSE OF LORDS-M./Am 5.
APPEALS.

The noble and learned lords present were the Lord
Chancellor and Lord Cranworth.

THE WESTERN BANE OF SCOTLAND AND oTans r. ADM.

(Bill of exceptions.)
THE SANE r. BANE, ET 2 CONTRA.

This was an appeal from the first division of the Court
of Session in Scotland, and had an important bearing upon
the numerous class of cases in which shareholders in joint
stock companies have sought to be released from liability
in consequence of alleged false and fraudulent represents.
tions of directors.
The Attorney-General, Sir Roundel' Palmer, Q.C., and
Mr. Shand of the Scotch bar, were counsel for the Western
Bank of Scotland, who are the appellants, and Mr. Giffarti,
Q.C., Mr. Moncricff, and Mr. Balfour of the Scotch bar,
appeared for Mr. Addle, the respondent.
It appeared that the Western Bank of Scotland was
established in 1102, and carried on business in Glasgow
and elsewhere until November, 1857, when it stopped
payment. The capital of the oompany, which had all been '
paid up, was fixed at 1,580,0001., and was divided into
30.000 shares of wt. each. In November and December,
1855, the respondent, Robert Addie,of View-park, Lanark-
shire, and coal and iron master at Glasgow, purchased two
parcels of 71 and 64 shares in the bank, for which he paid
a total sum of 10,313!. 10s. 2d. Two years after the stop-
page, viz., in November, 1856, he brought an action against
the bank, which it may be mentioned was registered
under the Joint Stock Banking Companies Act, 1857, to
recover not only that sum, together with the
amount of stamps and registration fees connected
with the transference, with interest at the rate of 5 per
oent. per annum, but two sums of 1,687!., and another sum
of 13,4)01. which he had paid in the shape of calls in 1858,
with interest at the rate of 5 per cent., but subject to the
deduction of 1,1311. 17s. 9d., being the amount of divi-
dend he had received on his shares. In the alternative,
he claimed 26,0001. damage.. The ground of his claim
was that he had been induced to purchase the shares by
the false and fraudulent representation of the bank as to
the state of its affairs, and he relied chiefly on the half-
yearly report issued in June, 1855, ureviously to the pur-
chase, in which it was said that the net profits of the
past year, after payment of all expenses, and
providing for bad and doubtful debts, were
Os. 44., out of which the directors proposed to
pay a dividend of 8 per cent. per annum without deduc-
tion for income tax. That dividend, it was said, would
require 120,0001., leaving a surplus of 13,892 f. Os. 4d. to
be carried to the " rest," which at the last annual
balance was 150,9481. 175., and would now stand at
184,840/. 1.. lid, The directors then expressed a hope
that the shareholders would be pleased with this state-
ment, and with the satisfactory way in which the general
business of the bank was going on. "In conclusion,"
1 they added, " the welfare and prosperity of the bank de-
pend muchon the friendly co-operation of its customers and
shareholders, and the directors, therefore, call upon them
for their active influence and support." The trial took
place before the Lord Pnisident, and the jury found a ver-
dict for Mr. Addle, the pursuer. On behalf of the bank,
the defenders, a bill of exceptions was tendered to the
Lord President's charge to the jury, and it came on for
bearing before the lords of the first division. The part
of the charge chiefly objected to was that in which the
Lord President said that "if the case should occur of
directors taking upon them to put forth in their report
statements of importance in regard to the affairs of
the bank false in themselves, and which they had no
reasonable ground to believe to be true, that would
be a misrepresentation and deceit, and in the esti-1
caution of the law would amount to a fraud." '
In June, 1865, the lords of the first division
pronounced au interlocutor disallowing the exceptions, and
it was from their judgment that the bank now appealed to
this house. One element in the case which distinguished it
from nearly all others which had been before the courts
was, that previously to the purchase of the shares in 1855,
Mr. Addle was the holder of 15 shares in the bank which
he had held for about seven years, and on which he had
received dividends. On behalf of the appellants it was con-
tended that whatever fraud there might be on the part of
the manager or directors none could be alleged against
the company, and that this fraud must be shown
to be the immediate and proximate cause of the
respondent buying the shares. It was further argued
that having been a shareholder previous to the
purchase in question, he must, if there wax fraud, be
treated as a particepscriminis ; but that in any case he
now sought relief against other shareholders, who were as
innocent as himself. It also seemed that though the com-
pany stopped payment in 1857 he assented to the volun-
tary winding up, paid the calls, and conunenced no litiga-
tion until two years afterwards.
. . .

The Attorits4-General was heard at considerable length
in support of the appeal, and Si Roundel' Puliner fol-
lowed on the same side.

The argumenta had not concluded when their lordships
rose. and the further hearing of the case was adjourned
until Friday next.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

(Before Mr. Bodkin, Assistant-Judge.)

Thomas Staples, 34, blind-maker, was indicted for steal-
ing 1,500 yards of canvas, value 200/., the property of her
Majesty the Queen.
Mr. Orady (instructed by the Commiaidoners of Woods
and Works) prosecuted ; the prisoner was undefended.
Mr. Inspector Thompson, of the detective department,
Scotland-yard, watched the cue on the part of the police.
James Williams, blind-maker, at the Seymour-works,
Jubilee-place, Chelsea, said he was a general contractor
for the supply of blinds to the office of Works and Public
Buildinga, and the prisoner had been in his employment
on and off for three years up to the sth of November.
He identified four of the blinds aa belonging to the State
apartments. St. James's Palace, and four belonging to the
Office of Works, Whitehall. A portion of the canvas
belonged to the awning to the Houses of Parliament, and
the rest to the public offices. The whole of the canvas had
been cut from the frames. _

The prisoner had no defence to make, and the jury
found him Guilty.

Mr. I% illiams said he always considered the prisoner a
person of integrity, and although he had discharged him
for drunkenness, had be not committed this offence he
would again have been inkisemp!oyment.

Inspector Thompson said that the prisoner had formerly
been a moldier, and was present at the whole of the Indian
mutiny, and took an active part with the troops employed
in its suppression. After that was brought to an end, he
volunteered to go to the Crimea, was present at the whole
of the principal actions there, and returned with a good
character, a medal, and three clasps.
. ' • '

The Asiistant-Jtidge sentenced lam to be imprisoned and
kept to hard labour for 12 months.

John Brimovr, 18, and Gems, Watts, 21, were indicted
fur stealing a leather bag containing wearing apparel, value
31., the property of Simnel Goddard.
John bPeau4 of No. 7, Robert-stmt, Pimlico, said,
as he was returning home on the night in question he
saw the two prisoners running after a cab, and he saw
one get up behind it, take a bag off that was on the top of
it, and hand it to the other prisoner. They passed close
by him, and they went into Warwick-street together. He
followed them, and saw the two constables stop them.
One ran away when the other was stopped, but he was
pursued and caught. After they were taken he told the
officers what he had seen, having followed them about
300 yards before he saw the constables.

Samuel Goddard, of the Park-town Hotel, Wandsworth-
road, Battersea, liceniod victualler, identified the p
as belonging to him, and mid it was on the top of trurer
on the night in question.
The jury found the prisoners Guilty.
There was a previous conviction proved against Brimmer.
The Assktant-Judge sentenced Briunner to be im-
prisoned and kept to hard labour for 12 months, and Watts
for sic months.

(Before Mr. Payne.)

Charges 13oNdAt cabdriver, who was convicted the previous
day of stealing a portmanteau containing property to a
great amount, belonging to Mr. Filmer Phipps. a gentleman
living at 7, Albemarle-street, was brought up to receive
judgment.
Mr. Pater (instructed by Mr. E. A. Froggat, of Aroll-
street, Itegent•street), prosecuted,and Mr.Muody defended.
The prosecutor engaged the prisoner in Piccadilly, and
put his pot tmantenia into the cab. He stopped at a shop
and went inside, leaving his portmanteau in the cab.
When he returned the prisoner had driven off with it, and
neither he nor the property was seen until a week had
elapsed. when he was taken into custody by Con-
stable Dawson, a detective, and charged with the robbery.
The prosecutor said be had bad an interview with the
prisoner that morning, and he had refused to give him any
information as to what he had done with the property.
Its value was more than had been stated in the information
—it was .501.

Mr. Payne, in passing sentence, said it was s very serious
offence, and must be punished severely. The sentence,
which would, no doubt, act as • warning to all cabmen.
was that he be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for two
years.
The prisoner applied that some few shillings which were
taken from him at the police station might be restored to
him.

The court expensed surprise at the impudence of the
reque.t, inaunuch as he had refused to give any informa-
tion about property worth 501. which he had stolen.
The application was at once refused.