The Express.
London, England, 1859-01-29 00:00:00

MR. BRIGHT, M.P., AT AOCHD4LII.

(IT ziscrnuo AND DITUXATIOXAL TILBOSASIL)
(Molt OIIS OWN 111701111114

ROCHDALE, FILIDAT NIGHT.

This evening a grand soiree was given to the Ikon.
member for Birmingham by his fellow tower% is the
Public Hall, Rochdale. The large room we dewily peed,
ae the greatest anxiety was manifested to hear the address
of t e hen. gentleman. The MATOS (W. A. Bletreat) no.
cage the chair, and among the paean ea the Oedema
woe Mr. Jacob Bright, Alderman Heaps, Aermas Lee,
Mr. G. J. Holyoeke, Mr. R. Taylor, Mr. H. xa.ai, Mr.
John Petrie, and a large number of the most levee gen-
Rama of the district. On Mr. Bright's seance be wr
geoid with loud sad enthusiastic cheering.
The MAYOR having opened the proceedings, the tohowilsg
per from Kr. Cobden, declining to attend the isseg, wee
wad:

Midhorat,. hammy Ilk
"Dear Bir,—Ciretunstanom which I broil Jestified my se
dloin, led me to the determination to withdraw too asows
tram public life. In order to falai this reeolstlan.
I was obliged to adopt a rigid rule of stoptololog tram
all political meetings for a tints ; it mold have
boos very *mat to have sods eiceptioso, sod Iliad
sot tell yea tire rot oppr _ osoldag meeting have bon
one of time ploomolootjai& ; I should no loop" bows the ploo
Wadi I ole to ta declining oast
toolioa, golly be wanting in tometalog 111:1=
ff I tom sow to wpm it a public meeting, afar the WINO
width I ply lo Ws invitations from Msachechr sod &or
whom Yoe will. I sin sure, therefore, not mhoeseirme my
madras to dealkdag to partake of the pleasure of roar sp-
teessies; and with many thanka for the kind
=biliVirldek yea have conveyed the invitatioai I remain,
twy truly yown, "B.COBDEN.
.• Robert Mills, Esq."

Letters of apology were also read from Mr. 0. Mull, Mr.
Darman Crafted, Mr. W. J. Fox, M.P., and Mr. Barley,
M.P.

Mr. W. PINTO' then moved the following resolations:
" That this =slim &eine to place on record the high
esteem entertained for John Bright, Eq., M.P., by his
fallow-townsmen. Born and educated amongst us, a mem-
bee of a faregy noted for liberality, and the can bestowed by
Ittem on the physical and intellectual improvement of theta
numerens workpaople, he early developed in the defame seed
advancement of local interests those great talents and that
high-minded integrity which have since in a more intended
sphere, and on questions of national importance, gained him
a world-wide and lasting reputation. Recognising those
services, his fellow-townemen have aeoembled ontll cow
elm to mews him of the sympathy they felt for him in his
affliction and temporary exile. How greatly they rejoice la
his restoration to health and a seat in the British parliament,
end to expose their fervent hope that Its may be spared cot
only to being te • anoreastal issue the great measure of per-
Beasatisry mime wedded to his care, but to reap the only
reward he seeks in seeing it contribute in future years to the
pooh happioess, and prosperity of his fellow-countrymen."

The Neelntim was seconded by Mr. 0. AA/MOUTH, end
carried by acclamation.
Yr. Shoat, M.P., then rose &Mid the most deafening
theses, which lasted for some minutes. When they hid sub-
sided, the ben gentleman proceeded to review the agitation
for parliamentary reform during the last three months,
claiming consistency for hie own conduct, sad ebargist •
portion of the pries with an opposite course. He enlarged
upon the advantage, of his proposed form of • rating fran-
chise, the moderate nature of a 101. county franchise, end the
Inevitable adoption of the ballot. And now (he continued) I
come to a question even much more important than either
of the others, but which bee been very little dinuesed of late
at public meetings, and that is as to the mode in which the
members' sesta should be distributed among the cemstituencies

of the country. Let me tell you, as I have told other meetings
—end working was not enfranchised should particularlystudy
this point—that although to give a man a vote may be to
please hit sentiments of independence and equality,
for a government to give to a man a vote or a million of votes
may be of no conrequenoe and of no value whatsoever, Woes
this which I all the soul of the representative system be
fairly eassidered and adjudicated upon. The other day, at
Bradford, I laid before the meeting and before the public,
certain statistics 'bowing what number of boroughs I should
propose to disenfranchise, and how their seats were to be

distributed. lam bound to say thrt the reception which my
scheme has met with generally from the public has been
much more favourable than otherwise. You know it was
said that I was going to turn everything upside down, and
those who said so now pretend remarkable astonishment,
and oven aatisfection, that they are not about to be turned
out of the windows. (Cheers and laughter.) They say,

" Why, this is not at all like the violent speeches mat at
Birmingham rind Manchester." Why there never were say
violent speeches made. (Cheers and laughter.) The rte.
lance, and the misrepresentation, and the misstatements of

fate' and all the illogical arguments., were found day
after day in the lading articles of newspepers. (Laughter,
and "Bear.") I shall refer only to those contained
in the Times. (Signs of &approbation ) Now I could not
exhibit any disapprobation, because no doubt after all the
Tinter newspaper will do your cause great serrice, and it will
begin to do it the moment you are in earnest. (Hear.) The
Tutu said the other day that it did not Bad so much fault
with my echemeof diatranchisement but to ray redistribution,

said I think it said it was a gigantic fraud to take 87 mete, as
I proposed, from boroughs in schedule A, from one side of the
house and interests and put them on the other side, meeuing
the commercial or popular interest, ; that it would make a
difference on a division of 174 votes ; and the Times steamed
that them Si seats were mete in very small towns connected
with the Isodowners in the neighbourhood. Now the Times
hes a short memory, for but six weeks ago it proposed—what
I thought was a little extreme—to disfranchise every bo-
rough under 10,000, and that no boroughs under 23,000
should return more than one member. If I had carried out
that plan I should have obtained from disfranchised seats not
►ee than 47 seats mom than those which I have obtained.
Now that I call means, and I say that my plan is more
reemeable, foe I only go up to 8,000, and I take 120 seats;
where", the Times would take 170, and forgo ting what it
hod written six weeks before it condemns my plan as very
extreme and happily for us introduces a rival scheme of Its
own. I am told that in the Times of this day there is &con-
siderable correction of this rival scheme. That echeme was
what is called a plagiarism. I don't wish to speak offensively,
but the scheme was stolen from my schedule. (Cheers and
Maher) They took my child and stripped it of its decent
clothing. (Cheers and laughter.) They put on it rags of
their own and they marred its countenance in order ,bat
ft might excite pity. (Laughter.) A leading article
may be written slmcst anyhow. It is published
this morning and forgotten to-morrow morning; and
it does not always matter whether everything in
these articles is correct. But when they come to figures,
sad give us tables, there is truth in the multiplication table
which even great authorities like the Times, cannot wholly
dispute. The limes complains of this—that in my distri-
bution, obtained from disfranchised boroughs, I give too
large a proportion to the towns and too small a proportion to
the counties ; and the Hews says in its scheme that It gives
to every county containing more than 110,000 inhabitants
an tetra member. The WW2 tifil of Berkshire, Buckingham-
Mint, and Oxfordshire, are touch under the population to
which the Times proposes to give an extra member. And
does the writer makeup that amount P He forgets that the
boroughs in these counties are npreseeted, and he includes
them in the populations of the boronghe. (Laughter.) Foe
temple, Berkshire, in which the principal proprietor of the
Times has an estate—and I very touch congra.tilste him on
the fact—(laughter)—the county, t xclusive of boroughs,
lama population of only one hundred and thirty thousand.
But the Times puts down the population at 170,060. Berk-
' shire has a population of 129,000, which the Time, calls
161,000. The population of Olouceaterahire, exclusive of
boroughs, is only 250,000, but the Times cell, it 458,000.
A man may make a mistake in a figure, and one would not
complain or condemn a great scheme on that account, but
when such an absurd blunder as that has been made through-
out the whole of the Times tables, I must my that as fa as
proposing schemes of reform goes, the Times had teem take
to some other occupation for which it is better suited. (Loud
laughter and cheers.) I will show you a great many other
' hulls in the scheme, The town of Chatham, to which I
give an additional member, and Rochester, to w►ich I give
ea additional member, an within some two thousand of the
same population ; but It appears that Rochdale is the more
populous oleos of the two. The limes, however, drops one
member for Rochdale, mud keeps the additional member for
Chatham. Now, Chatham ia to a large extent a governmast
borough. You had mush better have one member for
Chatham and on. for Rochdale, than for you to

DR
IL a CULVERWELL, Brother sad solo
*a boo IL J. Cub.rwill. with lams psalm
Ariir, he or isinesied tar H pwas. obi Wt A. et .RU!
1•••• =Unit wiKe him rocnedbiLlV-iii

8LD0R01731141.11111%
"bun Is elksaw .
vAs- tivisv ma be alialled. Omit&
N.
Ilan boalloun
gra, Is. rt. 13 • an" Li mini.

Roam. itArral'a4Z Loxosvrrs.
iLAZZLAOS Cti tlt to!. BID.
13. 1

ON INONMATOILLTZ: ; or. Tw Ou• Boot.
ast
T OrbllAT"."'".a X 'all
ft'"":171)Illd 97..":991:1"a1.4
NUNCOL W mil SOL No et ihe "Z
99.
Aariro= 9141=9171,71419199 in 99
9 911.

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JANUARY 29, 1869.

have CS% end Chatham two. (Hee:, hear.) The object
no doubt of CMS( the additional member to Chatham, sad
takieg it hoes Rochdale, is that the poetical the =blister of
the day, and net the power of the people, should be con-
served. Throe is another borough favoured In this echos%
end that is the borough of Nottingham. I cannot say with
any soma= whence this scheme comes, but when I find
that the oonntry of Berkshire, where the proprietor of the
Tiosa has a fine estate, end the town of Nottingham, which
he represent', is favoured, one cannot help thinking that,
somehow or other, the person who concocted that scheme is
not so impartial to all the towns and interests as I have been.
(Cheers.) There is another greet error in this propsitios
that has appeared in the These to which I most call your
attention, and which is of a much more serious character.
The writer distrandaisis all these boroughs in England and
Wales, end distributes the sr store in Ragland and Wake.
He has made no provides for the extemion of the number of
mieshme to be granted to Scotland and Ireland. He gives
to Liverpool and Manchester six iambs= each, but he dose
not propose to give any additional ambers irons the disfran-
chised places to the city of Glasgow, baring 400,000 inhabi-
tants; and I apprehend that cities like Edinburgh and
Glasgow are parts of the United Kingdom of as much im-
=elutes as Manahan= and Liverpool. I propose to disfran-
chise more please than the riAMI, and to give to Scotland
shout sixtein or seventeen additional membere—(bear, hear)
—and the *deo that I would do to Scotland touches
the Jamb al &Manias everywhere. (Chasm) Do
you • think Ihr a asemme that the three riellons of
intelligent people north of the Teresa who pay in proportion
to the population, as much of the taus of the United King-
dom as any other portion of the kingdom pays, will be
content with • proposition that leaves them in the position
have pointed ont I' Now, I cane to the reel gentian of the
propositka which I mate; that is, whether I have dealt cur
fairly by the counties in England and Wales, or the counties
of the United Kingdom. I assure you that this is the whole
pith and marrow of the question. The objection of the Times
is, that I disfranchise a great number of small boroughs, and
which it Is generally admitted ought to be disfranchised, and
that I get in England and Wales, having out ot
view Ireland (in Scotland no borough is disfranchised),
121 members which it is Dearesary to find oonatituen-
nee for, and in finding those °montane's" I show

great partiality to the-towns, and do a great Woe-
ties to the counties. That in the case against me. Now
in England and Wake tam are about 62 counties and 81
divisions, some of the counties being divided by the Reform
Bill of 1832 into divisions. In respect of the counties I
made a distinction of this character. I have tabu those
which are purely agricultural—for it is the peat landed
intermit that complains—and separated than trees the..
which to a great extent are manniecturieg and mining,
taking the county of Lancaster and the West Mang of
Yorkshire as exceptional, to all others on account of their
vast population, and their enormous manufacturing Interests.
Of the purely agricultural divisions there are 62 out of 81;
by my schemes which has been pronounced unjust, they
would return 128 members, and taking the population, men,
women, and children to every member, there would be just
66,000 to each. I come then to the manufacturing and
mining counties, of which there ere 16; they return 36 mem-
bers, and the average population is 66,000 to each
member, therefore the purely agricultural divisions
snore& better represented than the manufacturing or mining.
blamer in the one cue the.. are 66,000 to a member, while in
the others there are 66,000. When I colts to Lancashire and
Yorkshire, of each of which I make three divisions and pro-
ms that they shall return 19 members, I find that the aye•
rage population to each member would not be 55,000, nor
even 66,000, but an high as 137,000. You will therefore see
at once that I have not shown any partiality in the three
divisions of North and Bonth Lancashire, and: the West Ri-
ding of Yorkshire. Now compare these with the boroughs.
The purely agricultural counties are much better represented
than the manufacturing, and I Dave shown that Lancashire
and the West Riding are lass represented than either. I now
take 17 of the largest boroughs, 12 of which by my scheme
were to receive 4 members esoh, ank6 will received members ;
in all theta would be 78, and every member would
represent on the average . popalsivo of 02,000 as
against 55,000 which the county members each
represent. Yen will then are that I have not
given to large boroughs an amount of representation equal to
that of the counties ; and so far my answer to the objection
of the Times I. complete. When, however, we come down
In the lint of boroughs in Bogland and Wales, we find that
many of them have much fewer populations than the large
. .

. .
ODIN to which I have referred, and the representation appears
to be in excess. I stated that the Times asserted that the
seats from the disfrancbleed boroughs were taken from the
landed Interest and transferred to the commercial interest. I
do not know whether there are not boroughs left which are
just as much county seats, and connected with the landed
interests, as those I propose to disfranchtee. Take the county
in which we live. Many of you know the town of Clitheroe;
it is • small town; it bas not improved much
for many years ; it returns • member ; but I say
If dims not return a member for Clitheroe, for I
saw yesterday, in a very influential paper, the
Praises GeorViare, an article in which it woe stated
that the borough d Clitheroe is fourteen miles long, and
that than ass in the borough not less then five
landed proprietors whose united Income from the
land is 45,0001. a year, Including all the land along
which this little town of Clitheroe lies. It is plain
that the member for Clitheroe is a member as much for
the county interest as a member for any county division in
England. Take the borough of Lemmata., which the Times
proposes to treat much more harshly than I do, for it proposes
to take one member from It—the borough of Lenceeter is
united with about twenty township.. Therefore the landed
interest has greeter interest In the elections for boroughs
than the commercial and manufacturing interests; and
although in the vicissitudes of party struggles you
will find generally that the land is predominant, at
the same time there are occasion upon which the
independent population make head against the lend,
and you have members of smother description returned.
I have looked over Schedules B, C, and I) in my scheme,
and I have carefully marked not less than 47 seats that will
be left as now If it becomes law, sad every one of those
members may be considered to be directly connected with the
landed interest. The Times Ignores that fact, and charges
me with transferring all these little boroughs and their seats
from the lane to trade. I sal not, however, told that I tears
47 mats—and I believe tearer 60—in small boroughs con-
nected with the landed interest. Let us see how the figures
stand. If I take the whole population of the counties in
England and Wales, exclusive of Late whirs and the West
Riding of Yorkshire, taking into consideration them 47 seats
and dividing the population represented by the members for
counties, I find that there is one member for every 4.5,400
persons. I will not oonilee myself to the great boroughs
in making these comparisons. I take the boroughs
with six members, those with four, and those
with three, and, adding to the counties the increase of
population since tholest census, it is capable of demonstration
that these 117 members represent each a larger number of the
population than each of the county members and small
borough members to whom I have referred. How do the
counties stand? Thus. There are six, and of forty-two
that have their exact number of members, there are nine that
have somewhat lees then they ought to have, there are
twenty-three that have more, some of them considerably
mare, than they ought to Dave, and there are forty-one which
are greatly deficient. Lancashire, in my scheme, would be
still eight members deficient, Middlesex would be alas
deficient, Surrey six, and the West Riding of York-

shire eleven. ,Bo that there are four populous coon-
ties which would be deficient thirty-four member,,
which are distributed among twenty-three other counties. ,
It will be said is reply to this statement that It ht not fair to
take any county with the boroughs le It, and, adding the
inemben together, my that county is fairly represented. But
I ark you to look over the counties of England, and you will
Sad that there is a great unity of interest between say parti-
cular county and the boroughs in that candy. Is there no
great union of iaterset between the agriculture of Lancashire
sad the manufacture? I say there is a very stroug bleeding
of interests. We dad it everywhere, and it is eo with impact
to Lancashire. But now there is another point. The lauded
proprietors may be styled the leisure class of England—they
are sot ball so busy as the merchants and manufacturers, but
they are those who offer the greeted number of their mem-
bers ea candidates for parliamentary honours, and la a
great number of boroughs which are a sort of
neutral territory, became you do not know whether
they are for trade or lead particularly, you find