The Sun.
London, England, 1865-12-08 00:00:00

THE LATE LORD PALMERSTON.

From its position on the paper of business the
Court did not reach the motion of Mr. Rudkin for
referring it to the City Lands Committee to consider
what mark of respect should be paid by the Cor-
poration to the memory of the late Viscount Pal-
merston.
The Court then adjourned.

Sunday Opening of Museums and Galleries

A meeting of working men was held yesterday
evening in St. Martin's Hall, to advocate the open-
ing of the British Museum and public galleries to
the people on Sundays. The hall was quite filled.
The chair was taken by Sir J. Walmsley, who re-
ceived a most enthusiastic greeting, mixed with
some dissent.

Sir J. WALIISLEY, in opening the proceedings,
said that although announced as chairman on the
placard, he should be most willing to give way to
any one else they might select. (A universal accla-
mation at once confirmed his chairmanship.) He
remindedthem how longhe had beenknown to work-
ing men, and he appealed to them whether he had
ever acted otherwise than impartially in the chair.
(Cheers.) He was informed that the meeting con-
sisted mainly of friends of the working classes.
(Hear, hear, No, no, and confusion.) He under-
stood it included delegates from all the trades of
London (Tremendous cheers, No, no, and confusion).
The meeting had been called in consequence of asser-
tions which had been made in other places, to ascer-
tain whether or no the working men were in favour
of opening our public galleries and museums in the
afternoon of Sunday, the only day—(great cheering,
hissing, exclamations, cries of " Turn him out,"&c.)
—whether the working men--(order)—whether the
working men of this metropolis were in favour of
—(order, cheers, question, hisses, no, no). The first
thing they wanted to know was whether the work-
ing men were in favour of a religious moral oppor-
tunity to enjoy the Sabbath, or whether they were
willing to submit to a small section of the commu-
nity. (Tremendous cheers, and cries of " Turn
out the city missionaries.") He believed that the
objects of the Sunday League were in unison with
the feelings of the great mass of the community.
(The uproar here became so general that nothing
reached the reporters from the platform for several
minutes. After a lull Sir Joshua resumed.) He
believed that the principles of the league were con-
sistent with the true tenents of Christianity. (More
uproar, during which the chairman resumed his
seat), and
Mr. T. HUGHES, M.P., came forward to implore
a hearing for both sides of the question. The meet-
ing, he thought, seemed inclined to hear neither
side. (That's it.) He suggested that they should
hear what the Sunday League had to say, and then
he had no doubt he and others would in their turn
get a fair hearing.
The CHAIRMAN resumed. He had been saying
that the objects of the Sunday League were consis-
tent with the pure tenets of Christianity. (No, no.)
He did not ask them to believe—he believed it. He
believed that the opening of the British Museum
would be a boon to the artisan. (A scuffle at the
lower end of the room here turned all attention from
the platform.) He understood that persons were
present who differed from him, and he trusted they
would come forward and show him his errors. He
knew there were men who would make the Sabbath
what it was in days of old, namely, an oppression.
(Cheers.) A pharisaical hypocrisy had fenced the
Sabbath about until it looked like a religion, but was
with them, in reality, a vice and an oppression. He
was bound to say, on behalf of the Sunday
League, that the working men of London were the
first to commence the league. (" No such thing.")
Yes, and they were the first to announce their
grievance, and their announcement led to the peti-
tion to the House of Commons. (Much interrup-
tion and cheering.)
Mr. LANGLEY rose, and was received with mingled
cheers and disapprobation. After considerable con-
tusion ana interruption, Mr. Langley was allowed
to defend himself from the imputation of having
misrepresented the working classes to Earl Gran-
ville. The question was whether lie was to be
charged with deliberate lying, or whether Mr.
Murphy and his friends had misrepresented him.
Mr. Murphy and his friends had asserted that the
Sunday League did not, in asking for the opening
of public places on the Sabbath, fairly represent the
working men. Now, what were the facts? In 1864
the Sunday League invited all the trades to send
delegates to meet them at the Whittington Club.
About 60 came, and many more were prevented at-
tending by unavoidable circumstances. (Interruption
and cheers, the Rev. Newman Hall having appeared
on the platform.) The delegates present were una-
nimous in pronouncing in favour of the principles
of the Sunday League. (Cheers and dissent.) There
were represented at the meeting carpenters, tailors,
turners, watchmakers ; in short, every one of the
working trades. The way in which Mr. Murphy
and his friends met this was to put up a single tailor
or carpenter, who said, " I know nothing of that
deputation ; I'm not represented." It was, then,
Mr. Murphy and his friends who were guilty of mis-
representation. (Cheers and hisses.) Mr. Langley
continued, amid incessant interruption, to defend
the Sunday League, and was proceeding to quote
some observations which had been made by Mr.
Whitmore, when that gentleman suddenly appeared
in front of a gallery and received a tremendous ova-
tion from his friends. For some moments the question
with the meeting seemed to be, " Whitmore or no
Whitmore," and the noise reached its climax when
Mr. Whitmore descended from the gallery, and,
accompanied by some friends, made his appearance
on the platform.

Mr. LANGLEY_ continued—The Rev. Newman
Hall condemned the way in which he (Mr. Langley)
had been treated at Lambeth Baths.
Rev. NEWMAN HALL—What he had said was—
(hear, hear, cheers, question, hisses, knocking of
sticks against the floor, &c.) He wanted to hear
both sides. Mr. Langley had misunderstood him.
What he said was that the meeting at the Baths
should have given him (Mr. Langley) a hearing.
If any one in that meeting was his friend, let them
keep good order. If there were costermongers from
the New-cut, let them be quiet ; if they were Chris-
tians, let them keep quiet. A sudden expression of
opinion was justifiable, but this continued interrup-
tion was irrational.

Mr. LANGLEY proceeded to defend himself and
the Sunday League. Mr. Whitmore had accused
him of being opposed to the half-holiday movement,
but he emphatically denied the accusation. He had
always been an advocate for shortening the hoursof
labour, and was not going to " rat" then ; what he
had said was that if the Saturday half-holiday
movement prevented the opening of the museums
on Sundays, the Sunday League could not support
it. The petitions against the opening of public
galleries on Sundays to the House of Commons
were thus described in the report of the petitions
committee. They were signed first by Sunday
school children. (Great interruption and cheers.)
Secondly, Sunday school teachers. Were these
working men ? (" Yes," " No," cheers, hisses.)
But the worst was yet to come. The committee
sin reportedatnresthwaetre niningeanllthee,se petitions the first ten
were in the same handwri
at
inndg , all(G
rt
ehaatt
cof onllf
swi
oe
nd
chapel accommodation of L
and cries of Time.") " To
nh
de nc h
wu racsh
oannl
yd
population,enough for 30 p
and
theer cent,
question o ti
f which
church-going
League asked was what was to be done on Sundays
with the remainder. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Langley
concluded with a short recapitulation of his argu-
ments, and contended that he had defended the
Sunday League triumphantly against all the charges
which had been made against it. Mr. Langley re-
sumed his se mid great cheering.

Mr. HUGHES, M.P., who was much cheered, said
he had been summoned to this meeting to eubstan-

tiate a statement made by him to Lord Granville,
when introducing a deputation from his own