The Sun.
London, England, 1863-08-15 00:00:00

Sir John. Trelawny, MP., at Tavistock.

Sir John Trelawny, MX , for Tavistock, addressed his
constituents at the Bedford Hotel on Thursday evening,
Mr. ream in the chair. The hon. baronet, after a few
prefatory remarks, proceeded to refer to the question of
reform, and said he thought that it uas useless, especially
in the present disturbed state of public opinion, to expect
from Parliament any extension of the suffrage to the
elite of the working classes. He thought it was unwise to
continue the exclusion from the franchise, as it might have
the effect of driving many of the best of our arlizens, who
desired to exercise their rights as citizens, to a place
where the could obtain that privilege, and thus diminish
the chances of the future prosperity of this country. The
line he would draw for the admission of this class
would be the household suffrage. After alluding to the
ballot, which there was no immediate prospect of being
carried, and reminding electors that the question would be
in their hands at the next election, the hon. baronet re-
ferred to the question of finance, and said there was some
reason for congratulation upon this subject, for there had
been a diminution of the expenditure and an increase in the
revenue of the country. It was gratifying also to find that,
instead of being called upon, as was expected, to make up a
considerable deficit in the Indian finances, the revenue of
that country had balanced itself, and there was a prospect of
a slight surplus. The prospects of our Indian Empire were
rapidly improving, and the introduction of railways and the
system of irrigation would be productive of most beneficial
results. The withdrawal of troops from the lonian Islands
would likewise be a means of further diminishing the ex-
penditure. He blamed Government on both sides for fre-
quently allowing grants of small sums to be passed without
due inquiry. Persons would get up in the House and say
money was wanted for this or that matter, and if the de-
mand proceeded from the Conservative side, the Govern-
ment, if they saw there was a strong opposition, languidly
yielded the point. The sums asked for might be necessary,
but what he objected was, that these demands did not come
before the House in a plain, straightforward way, on the
recommendation of the executive, and after careful inquiry
as to the necessity of the sums asked for. (Applause.) He
objected, as a rule, to mere arithmetical reductions, and
adopted the principle of ascertaining before he voted whe- ,
ther sums applied for were or were not requisite for the effi-
citncy of the service, and would not vote for 75 instead of
80 simply on the ground that it was a reduction. He had
voted against the purchase of the Exhibition building be-
cause he believed it would have led, as in the case of the
Houses of Parliament, to an enormous outlay in addition
to the sum first asked for, the sum in that case having
risen from £700,000 to £3,C00,000. The Galway contract
contract he had voted against, believing it to be a corrupt
proposal intended to curry favour with the Irish represen-
tatives; and he had opposed the Dover contract because it
was a job of much the same character. Sir John next ex-
plained at some length the reasons why he had voted against
Mr. Somes bill for closing publichouses on the Sabbath. He
thought it was carrying the principle of interference with
the liberty of a subject too far. No one more fully appre-
ciated, both on sanitary as well as moral grounds, the vast
importance of adhering to temperance, but it was possible
to ride the hobby too far. If the bill were adopted he be-
lieved that it would give rise to the strongest dissatisfaction
throughout the country, and would occasion a repetition of
those disturbances which resulted from the stoppage of the
Sunday postage—an obnoxious measure that had to be re-
pealed soon atter it passed ; and he believed that if the Sun-
day Closing Bill had been passed not even a fifth-rate Mini-
ster would be able, or would consent, to hold the office of
Home Secretary. Another ground of objection to the mea-
sure was that it proposed to exclude London from its ope-
ration, and for the same reason Liverpool and other large
towns should also be excluded. It would be difficult also to
work it, as no two magistrates would agree as to who was
or who was not a traveller. The committee who, in 1855,
recommended certain restrictions in respect to the sale of
beer recommended, pari passe, the opening of museums and
places of amusement for the working classes on the Sabbath.
it was fairly argued that if the men were deprived of one
source of recreation another legitimate one should ho pro-
vided for them. That was opposed by a great many per-
sons, but if they took one proposition they ought to take the
other. Sir John next referred to the subject of county rates,
and thought some alteration should be adopted as to the
mode in which these rates should be levied and expended.
He thought that those who paid the rates should have some
control over the expenditure of them; and he was also of
opinion that large woodlands and certain dues from mines,
which were sources of great wealth, ought not to be exempted
from taxation, This would not involve any great organic
change that would be likely to frighten Conservatives, and
he counted upon the support of some of these at the next
election. Atter some remarks on the competitive se stern
of nomination for Government appointments, which ought
to be entirely open to any one properly qualified, and not
the
made a matter of secrecy and favour, as i
hon. gentleman spoke of several other meaeurtenseis now,tht session.at
would
be brought before Parliament during !h x
Referring to the Church-rate Abolition Bill,Sir John said
he should leave the conduct of that question in future to
younger and more energetic men, but would be happy to
render any assistance. He enlarged upon the Irish Church
question, which he regarded as a dangerous one, and de-
manding a speedy solution. He reviewed at some length
the aspect of the Polish question, but said we must be care-
ful, while manifesting our sympathy for that oppressed
race, that we did not get drawn into any serious complica-
tions that might arise. The hon. gentleman also explained
his vote in opposition to the Burial Bill, which had sur-
prised many persons who did not understand why he voted
against a bill which gave to Dissenters the right of burial
in churchyards, He opposed the bill on the ground that it
was unnecessary ; for it would simply have confirmed a
right that already existed, Dissenters having the power to
bury children in the churchyard if they had been baptised.
But the bill placed Dissenters in an undignified position by
requiring them to go cap in hand as it were to the minister
and state which form of prayers and service they wished to
be used ; and it would also place the clergyman in a posi-
tion of antagonism with persons in cases where he
might
have conscientious objections to the form of eervice) pr o-
posed to be used.
After some further remarks, a vote of confidence in Sir J.
ely on the
Trelawny was proposed and carried unan lni°uS
Straker.
motion of Mr. W. P. Mitchell, seconded by alr.

Statistics of Wesleyan Iffethodista,

Mond
----4-c—at Sheffield, on
At the Wesleyan Conferen
:rind the numerical statisticsay
the Rev. John W. Groves
churchrep members i
increase or decrease and the
n the various
districts, together with
of the full and accreditectlhe
numbers on trial. •-•-e
Th following, we believe, is a correct
statement : /limbers. Increase. Decrease. On trial.
••
London district 2_1:8478 •••• 334 . BBB
Bedford ii o
5,911 . --- • . 165 .. 656
Kent .. 7,096 *
,7,- •. 10 .. 289
Norwich .
Oxford ..
~.. 65,4,7it :: :.....6 ....
1-89 ....
428389
Portsrnout. •• • • ,f,ro .. e e 32 .. 253
Channel Islands 3,46 . e , 65
Devonport 7;788 64 .. .. 669
Cornwall
.. .. 2,936
Exeter
Bristol
Bath
Swansea
South Wales 4,655 --• • 245 .. 348
North Wales
Birmingham 17,695 .. 757 .. —.. 965
Macclesfield .... 10,764 .. .. 133 .. 527
Liverpool,,,,.. 14,001 .. 743 .. .. 908
Manchester .. 25,624 .. 605 .. -- .. 2,116
Halifax• • 16,108 .. 70 .. .. 875
Leeds 15,915 .. .. 91 .. 970
Sheffield .. 9.401 .. 42 .. .. 417
Nottingham .... 13,915 .. 105 .. .. 972
Lincoln
Hull
York
-Whitby 9,065 .. 141 .. .. 604
Newcastle
Carlisle
Isle of Man
Edinburgh

Total
Last year
4,448

At the last Sinaild conference, 11 years ago, the tots;
number of members was 281,263; the increase since 1553
has therefore been 48,441,