The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-19 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

Mestiv Scholefield and Bright at Bir-
mingham.

BIRMINGHAM, Wednesday Night.

This evening Messrs. Bright and Scholefield paid
their annualvisit to their constituents, and addressed
a densely crowded meeting in the Town-hall. Both
the hon. gentlemen met with an enthusiastic recep-
tion.

The MAYOR briefly opened the proceeding's.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD said it was not often that he
had had the honour of addressing them on the last
occasion of an expiring Parliament.
i It was impos-
sible for him to say what were the intentions of her
Majesty's Government. They might content them-
selves with the Budget and the usual odds and ends
of legislation. They might, on the other hand,
bring in, if not a great measure, at least some mea-
sure of reform, for the purpose of going to the
country with an election cry. He considered that
the Government had culpably neglected their pledges
in 1859, but he still felt for them a vague respect
for what they had previously done, and trusted that
they would at least endeavour to meet the exigencies
of the coming election. (Cheers.) He must admit
that the Government of Lord Derby boldly and sin-
cerely brought in a reform bill, dangerous as it was
in many respects, on which they staked their exis-
tence, whilst the present Government, in spite of
their loud professions, had abandoned their bill,
alleging the apathy of the people as their excuse.
He believed, however, that if Mr. Gladstone would
act up to the views which he had expressed last ses-
sion the people would at once rally round him in
spite of this alleged apathy, which some ascribed at
the time to the example of France and America.
He deprecated any measure of ingenious contri-
vances, and with this opinion he had always voted
for the bills of Mr. Locke King and Mr. Baines,
rough and ready as they were. What they wanted
was an extension of the franchise within the boroughs
and counties, and a more equal distribution of elec-
toral power, the transfer of seats from insignificant
places to places of greater wealth and population—
and he would advise them to accept any measure
which met these two points, although in a less degree
than they might desire. He deprecated an extra-
vagant expenditure on the army and navy, but he
did not want a narrow expenditure, which required
ten times the outlay when an exigency arose. He
looked at the attitude of America, which was not
merely shown by popular demonstrations, but by
the despatches of Mr. Seward and the language of
persons in office. The Americans threatened to re-
peal the reciprocity treaty with Canada, in. violation
of every sound principle of commercial policy. They
had also given notice to put an end to that excellent
arrangement (which he should like to see estab-
lished in principle in-Europe) for the regulation of
the naval force on the- American lakes. Looking,
therefore, at these things, whilst he desired economy
he was not prepared to abate one jot of what was
necessary for the security of the country. With re-
spect to intervention in foreign affairs, he was pre-
pared to lay down the rule that they ought not to
interfere in the internal affairs of other countries ;
but he would not advocate - the principle that this
rule should be adhered to solely- for commercial con-
siderations. There was another subject which he de-
sired to avoid discussing on the present occasion,
but in order that there might be no mistake, he must
reserve his discretion, if there should arise a neces-
sity for taking Parliamentary action on the question
of recognising the Southern States. (Cheers and
hisses.) In conclusion, he thanked the constituency
for the confidence in him which it had so long re-
posed, and which he hoped he should continue to
enjoy. (C heers. )
Mr. BRIGHT, Who was greeted with several rounds
of enthusiastic cheering, said—When my colleague
and myself had the pleasure last year of meeting
you in this place, there was one subject which was
pressing upon the minds of all of us, Ad causing
no small disquietude. We were encompassed by ru-
mours of war ; a small state in the north of Europe
was surrounded by difficulties, mainly, I am afraid,
of its own creation, and yet was assailed with
what was considered almost a savage vindictive-
ness, by a powerful people comprising one
great empire and several kingdoms. We were
disposed to go into that contest, and to mingle in
the war, and my hon. colleague spoke in the most
emphatic language against the idea that we should
enter into a war first with Germany, and perhaps
afterwards with some other states in Europe on
behalf of Denmark and I said that any Government
in Europe that plunged us into war for the sake of
the integrity of Denmark, deserved not only the
condemnation, but the execration of the people.
(Cheers,) Although we took so decided a view, we
cannot conceal from ourselves that there was a cer-
tain restlessness in the public mind. The newspapers
in London, particularly those which are supposed to
represent the Government, were strongly urging the
country to war, and the papers which were supposed
to represent the Opposition were urging the Govern-
ment to pursue the same course, no doubt with the
kindly intention of embarrassing and destroying the
Ministry. (Cheers.) But we had to recollect that at
the head of the Government are two very ancient
statesmen— the Prime Minister and the head of the
Foreign-office—and remembering that about ten
years ago they were the Ministers mainly responsible
"for the war with Russia, we could not but feel that
the danger which impended over us was not entirely
imaginary. How we escaped it we hardly yet know.
Some say the Queen was very much opposed to the
war, as doubtless she would be opposed to any war
'which she believed could possibly be avoided ; for
that lam grateful to the Queen. (Cheers and
la)ighter.) It has been said that we owe peace to the
younger members of the Cabinet, chiefly to Mr.
Gladstone. (Cheers.) If that be true, I tender my
thanks to the majority of that Cabinet. (Cheers.)
Some say that the unusual speculative monetary en-
gagements and investments of last year made all the
moneyed interests of the country look on the pro-
spect of war as something absolutely appalling and
ruinous. If that be so, I tender my thanks to the
moneyed interests of the country. (Cheers and
laughter.) During the session the question was in-
cessantly discussed, and the Government exhibited
its usual feebleness, and the Opposition its usual
folly. (Cheers and laughter.) If a question was
asked about the destination of the fleet, an
gi
answer was ven which might be read one way
or the other. If the Opposition were not in favour of

war, they showed an incessant attempt to drive the
Government to some act which would make hostili-
ties inevitable. (Cheers.) Towards the end of the
session there was a long debate, and then the feeble-
ness of the Government and the folly of the 0P -
a:ncl the two sides of the house
sition were manifest,
had to make some ridiculous revelations of all the
policy that in past times they had appeared to hold.
(Cheers.) While the debate was going on I thought
of the opposition of the ancient statesmen to whom
I have referred.
(Laughter.) They have in times
past held and professed opinions which I consider
altogether unsound and pernicious to the nation.
In the year 1853, speaking
on the subject of our
foreign relations at Greenock, Lord J. Russell said,
It is likewise to be considered, and I trust we shall
none of us forget it, that the country holds anim-
portant position among the nations of the world,
that not once, but many times, she has stood for-
ward to resist aggression, to maintain the indepen-
dence of weaker nations, to preserve to the general
family of nations that freedom, that power of govern-
ing themselves of which others have sought to deprive
them. I trust that character will not be abandoned by
a people which is now stronger in means, which is more
populous and wealthy than it has ever been at any
former period. This, then, you will agree with me,
is not the period to abandon any of those duties to-
wards the world—towards the whole of mankind,
which Great Britain has hitherto performed." Now,
you see what Lord Russell at that day proposed for us
to do. You have heard that the hard-working man,
and every one who receives his wages at the end of
the week, was pledged by Lord Russell not to aban-
don
any of the duties to the world which Great
Britain had hitbarto performed. We were to
defend all weaker nations, and to take care that
nobody was molested in any part of the globe.
I merely read this to show you what sort of
language was used by a Cabinet Minister only
9 years ago at a meeting of sensible Scotchmen ;
but if I were to take speeches of Lord Palmerston,

I could find a cartload of rhetorical rubbish of this
character. (Cheers,) During all these years these
very statesmen having been using such language as
this, and their newspapers have been reviling espe-
cially Mr. Cobden and myself for holding different
views ; but now I find that Parliament by a unani-
mous vote has discarded, overthrown, and sent the
whole thing—lie and superstition—to that recep-
tacle to which all lies and superstitions must ulti-
mately 'go. (Cheers.) I think that Lords Pal-
merston and Russell, in their mature age, must feel
that they have either been greatly deceived them-
selves, or that they have done much to deceive
their countrymen, and I hope they will learn from
this lesson that it does not always happen that
men are great statesmen because they fill great
offices. (Cheers.) If Denmark was allowed to
be dismembered, I do not see how other countries
are to be protected, although I agree with
my hon. friend that this country has other
than commercial interests, and that it is a mean
thing to do—as lam sorry to say our Government
has often done—to count the exact cost and value
of an island before it went to war or determined to
maintain peace. My own opinion is, that taking
the events of last few years, the war in Italy
and Denmark, in which we took no part, coupled
with the debate of last session and the great division
which took place on this question—l think that I
am rot much mistaken in pronouncing the theory
of the balance of power to be pretty nearly dead, if
it is not quite dead and buried. (Cheers.) It is
impossible to enumerate the sufferings which this
theory has entailed on this country. It rises up, as
I think, upon it as a ghastly phantom which during
the last 170 years, during which its worship has
prevailed in this country, has loaded the nation with
debt and taxes. It has sacrificed the lives of hun-
dreds of thousands of Englishmen. It has desolated
the homes of millions of families, and it has left us,
as the result of the profligate expenditure which it
has cost us, a double peerage at one end of the social
scale, and far more than a double pauperism at the
other. (Cheers.) We may now rejoice that this
foul idol—fouler-than any heathen ever worshipped
—has at last been kicked out, and that one super-
stition the less has hold of the minds of English
statesmen and the English people. If this is true,
my hon friend need not have so carefully guarded
his observations with respect to the diminution of
armaments, for the nation has determined not to send
armies to the Continent or fleets to blockade ports
and people with whom we have no concern. And at
a time when the American colonies are about to unite
themselves into a great confederation in friendly
affiance with ourselves--when the Australian colonies
are so powerful that nobody dare molest them—.
when the people of these islands are better fed, as
I believe they have been for the last five years, and
are more loyal to the Crown and the institutions of
the country,—there is no necessity to maintain an
annual military expenditure which is double that
which the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert
Peel thought necessary 25 years ago. If we are not
next session to have the question of Denmark, nor
the question of Italy, nor the question of America,
what is it that we are to discuss ? It is quite clear
to me, at least, that, whether we have more disposi-
tion or not, we- shall have a good deal more time to
discuss matters of home affairs. What is the ques-
tion which at Torquay, where a number of noble-
men and gentlemen enjoyed a good dinner and
made some very foolish speeches, Lord Devon,
copying the language of his leader, Mr. Disraeli, said
was looming in the not distant future ? What is
that question which will not go to sleep ? Let me
remind you of this, that really great questions which
affect the true and lasting interests of millions of
men can never be laid fast asleep, but that somehow
or other they come up again. There is a striking
example of this in what is now taking place in the
United States. For 30 years past the statesmen of
the United States have voted the negro to be a very
great nuisance. They would not talk about him,
and they swore each other to silence. The negro's
business was to grow rice, sugar, and cotton, and
not to give trouble to Congress ; so they determined
to bury that question, and they congratulated them-
selves that it -was buried. But now you see the North
and the South engaged in deadly conflict, and the
negro standing before the world rubbing the marks
of the branding iron from his forehead, whilst the
shackles which have so long oppressed him are drop-
ping from his limbs, and he is every day becoming
more and more a free man. (Cheers.) So here there
is a question that will not be put to sleep. It is the
question of the admission of the people of this coun-
try to the rights which are guaranteed- by every
principle, by everything which is comprehended in
the Constitution of this United Kingdom. In 1861,
as my hon. friend has decribed to you, this general
question of Parliamentary Reform was voted a nui-
sance. It was betrayed, it was slain, and, as they
thought, it was buried. It has been said that when a
measure of this kind has been submitted to Parlia-
ment, the ministers by whom it is submitted ought to
stand or fall by that measure. Earl Grey made the
declaration, and said that it was their business and
duty fo.bring in another bill if that before Parlia-
ment should be rejected, and that it would not be
less efficient than the measure then under discussion.
(Cheers.) There is not a man who was in the
House of Commons in 1860, there is not a man in
the present Cabinet who does not know that if Lord
Palmerston had said that, on one evening in that
year,- the bill would have passed through the House
of Commons without one single effective hostile
discussion—(cheers)—and I have heard it from au-
thority which cannot err on that question, that the
sagacious leaders in the House of Lords had- re-
solved that if the bill came from the House of Com-
mons they would not take upon themselves the re-
sponsibility of rejecting it. (Cheers.) But 'that
bill and that question are not dead ; it takes shape
again, and somehow or other the Tories and those
Whigs, who are like Tories—(laughter)—entertain
uncomfortable feelings, which approach almost to a
shiver. (Cheers and laughter.) NOw what is this
apparition that alarms them ? -They are afraid of
the five or six millions of grown=up Englishmen,
men who are allowed to marry, to keep house, to
rear children ; men who are expected to earn their
living, to pay taxes, who must . obey the laws, who
must be citizens in all honourable conduct—they are
afraid of these five or six millions who by the pre-
_sent system of representation are shut out—and
insultingly shut out—from the—exercise of-the fran-
chise. (Cheers.) We are proud of our country,
and there are many things of which we have a right
to be proud. We may be proud that England is the
ancient country of Parliaments. With scarcely an
intervening period, Parliaments have met constantly
for six hundred years ; . and there was something of
a Parliament before the Conquest. England is the
mother of Parliaments. I ask you, men of Bir-
mingham, who are a fair representation of the great
Ira of the five or six millions, why you should
e thus treated in your own land ? (Cheers.)
You know our boast of what occurs when a negro
•
slave lands in England One of our best poets says
that—

" I
Tf
htheir lungsomen tbtuhteobyrrae
raeht
cf eor
euoen7
ray and theiri r,
(Cheers.) They touch u
shackles fall. But what is the case with
groeessPet oettht
o
an Englishman ? An Englishman, if he
e
Cape, can vote ; if he goes to Australia he can vote ;
if he goes to the Canadian Confederation, or to our
grandest colonies, he can vote. It is only in his own
own soil, where he was born, the
vcoeryuntsryoil,
onhis
which he has enriched with his labour and
the sweat of his brow, thathoefisEdnegniiisehdintehin sinrigthhte
which in every community
world would be freely accorded to him. (Cheers,
and prolonged cheering.) I agree very much with
the gentlemen at the Torquarhhope dinnerdi dasnotot theapparition which alarmed, but
dis-
turb, their formidable and robust digestion
on. e (Laugh-
ter.)this This apparition is not a pleasant ,
state of things is dangerous, and one which cannot
perpetually last. It may happen that the eyes of
the five or six millions all over the kingdom may be
fixed with an intense glare on the doors of Parlia-
ment. It was so in the years 1831 and 1832. There
are men in this room who felt then, and who know
now, that it required but one spark to the train and
this country would have been in the throes of a re-
volution ; and these men who are so alarmed at the
proposition to give a £lO vote for counties and a
£6 vote for boroughs would have repented in sack-

cloth and ashes if they had given a vote against Earl
Grey's Reform Bill. Accidents are always happen-
ing, not only to individuals, but to nations. It
was the accident of the French Revolution in 1830
that precipitated the great movement in this coun-
try. There may be accidents again, and I don't
hold that to be statesmanlike which allows the se-
curity, the tranquillity, the loyalty of a people to be
disturbed by any accident over which they have no
control. (Cheers.) If these five or six millions of
people once unitedly fix their eyes with an intense
look upon the doors of the House of Commons, I
ask who shall say them nay ? (Cheers.) Not the
mace upon the table of the House—not the 400 easy
gentlemen who lounge in and out of that decorated
chamber under the same roof—(laughter)—not a
dozen gentlemen who call themselves statesmen, and
who dose in Downing-street, not even a power ap-
palling and more menacing that have their lodge-
ment higher up Whitehall. I say that, as opinion
now stands, there is no power in this country that
can say nay for one single week to the five or six
millions if they are intent on making their way
within the walls of Parliament. (Cheers.) This is
the apparition which frightened the gentlemen at
Torquay ; but it also gives trouble in other quarters
Ito which I would pay more respect. It is evident,
from the pamphlets and letters which are written,
and the speeches which are made, that every one
who does not want Reform says that nobody wants
Reform, and that people do not like it to be talked
about. And yet they begin and make this subject
the chief staple of their speeches. (Laughter.) Mr.
Charles Buxton, a very amiable person, but I should
be loth to affirm that he is a robust politician—
(laughter)—puts forward a scheme, the effect of
which would be that two of your townsmen would
poll at the next election, one of whom might vote
for Scholefield and myself, whilst the other :would
give two votes to each of the candidates whom he
might prefer ; the only justification for such a course
being that this one lived in a house rated at more than
£lO a year, whilst the other lived in a house under
that sum. Mr. Buxton has found that nobody was
in favour of his scheme, and as I understand he has
withdrawn it ; and I hope he will keep it in the dark
until it is asked for. The other person to whom I
alluded is amember of the House of Lords, son of that
Earl Grey to whom I have referred. He is an eminent
and very capable man ; anything that he says de-
serves every consideration. I have a very great re-
spect for Earl Grey for two especial reasons. I heard
him as Lord'Howick in the House of Commons

make a speech against the corn laws, in which he quoted a
grand and solemn passage of Scripture against that atrocious
system, on which the Protectionists said that it was very
vulgar to quote Scripture on such a subject. Earl Grey
again made a great speech in the House of Lords against the
Russian war,' which shoWed not only great moral courage,
but also, in my view, great intelligence and patriotism.
Therefore I come to the consideration of anything Earl Grey
proposes with most favourable feelings towards him. He
has undertaken to reconcile, with something like justice, the
people to the existing supremacy of his order. It is not pos-
sible to attempt great political change without some disturb-
ance.- The object is to change something. The bill of 1832
disturbed the borough-mongers in a remarkable degree, and
the repeal of the corn laws disturbed landowners and far-
mers, whilst it did them nearly as much good as it did the
people. I don't care a bit about political changes because
they may make some disturbance ; that is precisely what
we want. What do you think Earl Grey proposed ? I wish
you to see what one of the most accute minds in the coun-
try can suggest in opposition to the simple measures to
which my hon. friend has alluded. He proposed to adopt a
plan of cumulative votes; so that if there were two mem-
bers, each elector could give his votes for either candidate.
Now the result -f this in Birmingham would be, that if Mr.
Arland had a body of 3,500 supporters who would stick close
together, they could give him 7,000 votes ; whereas if Mr.
Scholefield and myself had 6,500 supporters, and were in
equal favour with them,:we should have 6,500 votes apiece;
and if Mr. Scholefield had one morevote than me, 1 should
lose my seat, and Mr. Acland would have a large majority
over both of us. I have heard of a race between donkeys,
n which the last won—(cheers)—and in this case it would
be the slowest animal that would bear away the prize.
(Cheers.) Earl Grey also proposed to create more univer-
sity or similar constituencies ; but I don't think that for the
last 70 years any university would have taken either his
father or himself as their member. He also proposed that
the professions should return members, not as citizens, but
as lawyers and doctors. Now, I have had the misfortune
to fall into the hands of the lawyers, and nothing can be
more costly or more painful, except to fall into the hands
of the doctors. I have a great respect for them in their
professional capacity, but I object to placing political power
in theirhands because they are lawyers or doctors. I know
nothing like it, except the advice of old Mr. Weller, who
recommended his son to consult a friend of his on a matter

of law because he was a good judge of a horse. Earl Grey
proposed that a certain number of eminent men should be
nominated by the House of Commons to permanent seats ;
and he also proposed that others should be elected by cer-
tain trades, enough to speak, but not enough to rely on to
influence the divisions. I had always thought it was the
duty of a statesman not to separate classes, but to unite
them into one body, equally treated by the law and equally

loyal to the Government and theircountry. Beyond these
Earl Grey proposed some things that were right. He
would extend the suffrage, and abolish many, if not all, the
small boroughs. But, having made these concessions, he
takes care to neutralise them in the way that I have just de-
scribed. I warn you again to look with great suspicion on
all fancy propositions. The question is a plain and simple
one, and if any man comes before you with a complex and
involved scheme difficult to understand, take note of it that

he does not offer you valid coin in payment of your claims,
with the impress of the English constitution upon it, but he
offers you either flash notes or coin of an inferior workman-
ship. (Cheers.) I am charged, as you know, with having too
little reverence for the authorities of this country. Some
have even dared in the public newspapers to charge me
with disloyalty to the head of the Executive of this country,
but there is one disloyalty which I hold to be worse than
this, worse than turning back on the Crown and on the

peerage, and that is disloyalty to freedom and the people.
If representation be not an art—and who in this country
shall say that is ?—what is the use of all these tricks not
to complete representation, but to evade and escape it ?
(Cheers.) What is the representation which we consider
the foundation of liberty ? If all the five or six millions
were assembled on Salisbury Plain to decide a public ques-
tion, the body would be too large for business, and chaos
would come. It has, therefore, been resolved that people
in different localities shall send men to meet at a certain
time and place, and to act honourably in the face of God
and the country on behalf of the true and solid interests of
the nation. But if you decided a question on Salisbury
Plain, the majority must carry the day ; and if you split
the nation up into constituencies, the majority must carry
the day. (Cheers.) There is a great fear of majorities
amongst certain people. Why, what is a majority in Bir-
mingham ? It holds one opinion, and we are supposed to
represent it. The majority in Liverpool holds a different
opinion, and sends one man who agrees with it, and one
who always contradicts him. (Laughter.) Surely the
minority of Birmingham is represented in a certain sense
by the majority of Liverpool; and taking one district with
another, if there be an opinion that is held by any consti-
tuency it has a representative somewhere; who can speak

in its behalf. (Cheers.) But surely no one would ask thaii

minorities should send members to say "no" when the
majority send members to say "aye." What is this fear of
the people ? In Australia the franchise is lower than it is

in this country; but still the Government legislates in ac-
cordance with the wishes of the people. Take the case of
our North American colonies. They are going to form a con-
federation under the authority of an act of Parliament. Mr.
Brown, one of the most eminent of the Canadian Ministers
states the proposition to be, that the duration of their Par-
liament will probably be limited to five years—that it will
be composed of a legislative Council appointed by the Go-
vernment of the day, and a House of Commons in which
they are to obtain, what they desire to obtain, representa-
tion on the basis of population. Therefore the Parliament
is going to pass a bill with regard to our British American
provinces which those gentlemen say would be wholly de-
structive if applied to this country. (Cheers.) In the State
of New York alone 700,000 men voted at the last Presiden-
tial election, and throughout the whole of the Free States
not less than 4,000,000 of votes were given with, the most
perfect order and tranquility. Our opponents may say, look
at the legislative results of this wide extent of the franchise.
I =ready to test it by those results, and I say, whether you
go to South Africa, to Australia, to the British North Ame-
rican Provinces, or the Statesof the Union(excluding those
States where slavery injures the state of society), you will
find that life and property are as secure—that education is
much more extended among the people—that there isquite
as good a provision for their interests--that the laws are
as merciful and just—that taxes are imposed and levied
with as great equality—that the millions of our country-
men established in those countries aro as well in all cir-
cumstances of life as are the people of this country whom
they have left behind them. (Cheers.) I will ask you to
tell me what the people of Torquayare afraid of ? Inalmost
every sentence uttered there something is said of our in-
stitutions, and it comes out that " our institutions " are
Church and State. Now a man must be a blockhead be-
yond all power of argument to suppose that in this great
community the ministers of our free churches and of the
Dissenting sects would be less thought of than they are
at present if their fears should be realised. What they fear
is this—they seem to have a notion that some institutions
which have come clown from mediteval ages, from what
some people call the dark ages, may not permanezsy har-
monise with the intelligence and necessities of the 19th
century in:which we live. Our institutions are safe enough
if the Government be in the bands of the institutions; and

if the peerage of theEstablistedChurch are to rule in Eng-
land, I feel sure the peerage and the Established Church in
their present condition will ba permanently safe. (Cheers.)
And so I may say of patronage. If it is to be dispensed per-
petually amongst the ruling •lasses, they :will take care of
the patronage. Many men look upon patronage as a holy
and untouchable thing. HoEea Bigelow says—
" It's something a fulfilling the prophecies,

When all toe first families are in all the.best offices."
(Loud laughter and cheers) But I protest against the
theory that the people of this country have an unreason-
able desire to shake or overturn institutions which they
may not theoretically approve of. Do these parties know
what they admit by the expression of this fear. lam also
told that the people like the House of Lords very much. I
have never thought it worth while to contradict this, for I
am content to live under the institutions which the intel-
ligence, the virtue, and the experience of my countrymen,
partly represented in Parliament, have determined upon. I
have been told that when the present Government was
formed I was to have been asked to take office with my
friends Mr. Cobden and Mr. Milner Gibson. Mr. Cobden
was then in America, and although they do not like him
better than they do me—l suspect they disliked him rather
less—he did not accept the offer, for reasons which were
then made public, and for reasons given to me which came
from Lord Palmerston, too, I suppose to be communicated
to me, that I had delivered opinions with regard to the in-
stitutions of the country which the majority of English-
men deemed essential, and this made it impossible for
him, although he personally had no objection, to offer me a
seat in his Government. I had attended meetings here, at
Glasgow, at Edinburgh, at Manchester, at Bradford, and
the largest towns. Now, as all these places could not con-
tain one half of those who wished to hear something said
on the question which I was then discussing, and the
speeches then made were supposed to be tinged with less
reverence for the institutions of England than some people
thought proper, I was not thought fit to be your represen-
tative, and although thousands of people applauded those
speeches, I was not thought fit to be a member of her Ma-
jesty's Government. Is it true that the people are against
the Church ? Do they fail to hear with respect any one
who acts as a Christian minister ? If it ;is the Church of
the poor man, it is the poor man who ought to know it ;
and can you imagine that the people acting through their
representatives would do anything with regard to that
Church which would damage its utility as a Christian in-
stitution, or make it less honoured or less influential in the
spread of Christianity amongst the people of these islands?
Why are they so afraid of the people if there should be a
million more electors—and I believe that the last bill only
proposed to admit half a million ? Is there any single inte-
rest which deserves the slightest consideration which a
million electors joined with the present million would com-
bine in Parliament to repeal and destroy ? I take it that
the Crown, the most venerable of the institutions, is not
opposed to the admission of this million ; for on two occa-
sions the Queen has signified to Parliament her consent to
it. I believe that the people are grossly slandered, for since
the power of the Crown was limited 200 years ago, and since
the power of the nobles was limited 30 years ago, good go-
vernment has gained greatly, and the people in all circum-
stances are better off ; and I am quite sure that their re-
spect for the Crown is more general by far than it was be-
fore. But our constitution involves a representation of the
people ; and in asking for_this reform we stand upon a
foundation from which no argument and sophistry can ever
remove us. The House of Commons is in reality the only
guarantee we have for freedom. If you looked at any other
country and saw nothing but a monarch—he might be a
good king, and might do his best, but you would say,
" There is no guarantee for freedom," because you know
not who would be his successor. If you saw a country
with no crown, but with a handful of nobles administering
the government of the country, you would say, " There
was no guarantee there br freedom, because a number of
nobles acting together have not the responsibility and the
feeling of responsibility which one man has, and they will
do things which one mat would not dare do." If there be
a man here who feels himself and his, prejudices rise up
against the statements I am making, at least he will
admit that the real and only permanent foundation for
political freedom in any country is the establish-
ment and maintenance of the system of representation in
your Houses of Parliament. At that dinner at Torquay a
nobleman presided whom I had the pleasure of knowing a
little when he was a member of the House of Commons, and
another nobleman whom I have also known made the prin-
cipal speech. Now, what do you think they did ? They had
a number of toasts, which is a thing I do not much recom-
mend, because they do not generally drink them in cold
water, and first after what are called the ceremonial toasts,
they proposed the toast of the House of Lords; and then, after
a long speech from Lord Devon, what did they propose
next ? not the House of Commons, but " The Conservative
party in the House of Commons." (Laughter.) They did
not propose the Conservative party in the House of Lords;
perhaps they thought the whole House of Lords were of
the Conservative party, or else they thought the Liberal
party in the House of Commons were not worth remember-
ing except to wish that it did not exist. (Laughter.) These
gentlemen do not comprehend our Constitution at all. They
do not know, apparently, that it is only because there is
something which the people still believed to boin some de-
gree a representative body, and which stands between them
and monarchical or aristocratic despotism—it is only the ex-
istence of that house which makes the institution they are so
fond of safe and permanent at all, and they are afraid that
the five millions should somehow or other get into it ; and
I beg leave to tell them that five millions will get into it.
They may not get in all at once, and perhaps few men de-
sire they should, for I am opposed myself to great and vio-
lent changes, which create needless shocks, and which are
accepted, if they are accepted at all, with great alarm ; but
I will undertake to say that a considerable and effective por-
tion of that five millions will, before many years are past,
be freely allowed to vote for members of the House of Com-
mons. (Cheers.) It is not democracy, which these gentle-
men are always afraid of, that is the peril of this country—
it was democracy,
in 1839., that was the peril—it was
the desperate
ism of the class that then had power,
antagonism
to the just claims and rights of the people—(cheers)—and
not
at this moment when they dine and when I speak, I tell
them that Conservatism—they give it that name, but it is
worthy of a very different name—Conservatism, be it
Toryism or Whiggism, is the true national peril which we
have to face. (Loud cheers.) They may dam the stream
—they may keep back the waters, but the volume is ever
increasing, and it descends with an accelerated force ; and
the time will come when in all probability, and to a cer-
tainty if wisdom does not take the place of folly, the waters
will burst thir banks, and these men who fancy they are
stemming this imaginary apparition of democracy will
themselves be swept away by the resolute will of a united
and determined people. (Great cheering.) Cast your eye
over the face of Europe—there are only two considerable
States that have not any representative institutions--Tur-
key and Russia—and Russia is making progress in freedom
equal to the powers of any other State in Europe. Repre-
sentation is found in Italy, in Austria even, in almost all
the German States, in the Northern States, in Belgium,
Holland, France, Portugal, and Spain ; it is also a firmly
settled institution. in Australia. Englishmen everywhere
but at home are received into the bosom of this great, per-
manent, undying constitution and safeguard for human and
national freedom. But here they are slandered, they are
insulted, they are reviled, they are shut out, they are invited
to have a hundred ways of amusing themselves ; but if they
stand at the House of Commons or at the poll, and see their
richer brethren go up to vote, they are not allowed to register
their names in favour of principles for which their fathers
before them and themselves have sighed in many bitter hour
of disappointment. (Loud cheers.) I would change all this.
I speak out of no hostility to any class or to any institution.
That man who proposes to exclude permanently five millions
of his fellow-countrymen from the right which the consti-
tution of his country makes sacred in his eyes—l say that
is the man who separates England into two nations, and
makes it impossible we should be wholly and permanently
a contented people. (Loud cheers.) I demand this, then,
which is but the right of the Constitution, that the House
of Commons shall be made freely and fairly to represent the
commons and the people of the United Kingdom. England
has long been famous for the enjoyment of personal free-
dom by her people ; they are free to think, they are free to
speak, they are free to write ; and England has been famed
of late years, and is famed now the world over for the free-
dom of her industry, and the greatness and the freedom of
her commerce. I want to know why it is that our people
should not be free. (Cheers.) Who is that will meet me on
this platform, or who will stand on any platform, and will
dare to say to an open meeting of his fellow-countrymen
that these millions for whom I am now pleading are too ig-
norant, or vicious, or destructive to be entrusted with the
elective franchise ? I, at least, will never thus slander my
countrymen. ' I claim for them the right of admission,
through their representatives, into the ancient and vener-
able Parliament which at this hour exists amongst men ;
and when they are thus admitted, and not till then, it may
be truly said that England, the august mother of free na-
tions, herself is free.
The hon. gentleman resumed his seat amidst loud and
enthusiastic cheers.

Mr. Alderman THOMAS LLOYD then nfOvad the following
resolution :—" That the best thanks of this meeting are due
and are hereby given to Messrs. Scholefield and Bright for
their addresses; and this meeting also desires to express its
unabated confidence in them as their Parliamentary repre-
sentatives of the borough."
The motion was seconded by Mr. J. S. WRIGHT, and
carried unanimously.
The meeting then separated.

CRYSTAL PALACE.—ONE SHILLING DAY, Wed-
nesday.—Admissions on payment, 1,677 ; ditto by season
tickets, 1,192. Total visitors, 2,869.

• [ADVERTlSEMENT.]—Holloway'sPills.—Enfeebled Exist-
ence.—This medicine embraces every attribute required in
a general and domestic remedy—it overturns the founda-
tions of disease laid by indigestible food and impure air.
In obstructions, congestions of the liver, lungs? bowels, or
any other organ, these pills are especially serviceable, and
eminently successful. They should be kept in every family,
as they are a medicine without a fault for young persons
and those of feeble constitutions. They never cause pain
or irritate the most delicate nerves, or most tender bowels.
Holloway's Pills are the best knOwn purifiers of the blood,
and the best promoters of absorption and secretion from
both solids and fluids.

The English Salmon Fisheries•

WORCESTER, Wednesday.

The annual meeting of the United Association for
the Protection of the Fisheries of the river Severn
and its tributaries was held here this afternoon. Sir
E. A. H. Lechmere presided, and among those pre-.
sent were Mr. Eden, one of her Majesty's inspec-
tors of fisheries.

The report of the central committee (the 21st an-
nual report) stated that the past season has been an
unprecedentedly dry one, so much so as to prevent
the fish leaving the tidal waters. There was scarcely
a fresh on the river throughout the summer, and
the consequence was a scarcity of fish again in its
upper waters during the latter part of the season,
but in the tidal portion of the river it was univer-
sally admitted that never in the memory of manhad
there been such a take of fish as was made during
the last season, especially during the summer months
when fish sold there as low as 6d. per pound and
agents from various parts of the kingdom came over
to buy. The report received of the quantity of
breeding salmon which have ascended the Vermew,
Severn, and Teme during the autumn freshes are
greater than ever. The number of fish in the spawn-
ing bed on the Teme at Powick is unusually large.
The passes on the Severn navigation weirs are now
complete, and passes have been placed on two weirs
on the Teme, namely, at Powick and Martley. The
number of prosecutions instituted by the associa-
tion in the year was 37, of which there were 27 con-
victions. The report expressed general approval of
the new Salmon Fisheries Bill, but suggested cer-
tain alterations.

The report having been adopted,
Mr. EDEN, her Majesty's inspector of fisheries,
addressed the meeting on the proposed new Salmon
Fisheries Bill. Alluding to the proposal to raise
funds for the protection of the rivers by taxing all
engines used for the capture of salmon, he said the
Shannon, a river about the size of the Severn,
had last year produced £1,300 by a tax
of a like nature, and this year's tax
would exceed £1,400. With regard to the pollu-
tion of rivers, he agreed with Sir E. Lechmere
that it was most desirable that they should be
cleared of their noxious stuff, but he thought a sal-
mon fisheries bill was not the best way of endea-
vouring to purify them. He had reason to believe
that this matter was under the serious consideration
of the Government, and he believed that a compre-
hensive measure would be introduced by them next
session dealing with the whole question of the sew-
age. With regard to the proposal of a rate in aid
where the funds raised by taxing salmon engines
were insufficient for the requirements of the Board
of Conservators, a difference of opinion had been
. expressed as to the proper mode of levying it. It
had been objected that a frontage rate would press
unequally. The Severn had 70 or 80 miles of water
free for everybody to fish. He was himself of opin-
ion, too, that water bailiffs ought to have power not
only to examine fixed engines, but also to pass along
any part of the river bank. At present they had not
that power, and he could be warned off by any
owner. He knew a case in Wales where a proprietor
who owned a fishery warned off the water bailiff
and carried on poaching to a great extent. He con-
sidered the sale of salmon spawn should be discoun-
tenanced. The act of 1861, in giving permission to
take salmon for the purpose of obtaining spawn for
scientific purposes, did not contemplate the removal
of spawn from one river to stock another. He saw
no reason, too, why the protection given to salmon
should not be extended to trout. It would give great
assistance to salmon protection, and would enlist
the co-operation of many persons. He was glad to
be in a position fully to corroborate the statement
in the report about the increase of salmon in the
Severn, and he attributed this result to the success-
ful, energetic, and spirited manner in which this as-
sociation had aided the carrying out in this district
of the act of 1861. In conclusion, he would advise
the association not to relax in their efforts, but en-
deavour, now that public feeling had been fully ex-
cited, to obtain such amendments of that act as would
make the law efficient. The Government was anxious
to give every assistance to the object in view, which
they regarded as one of national importance, and both
Houses of Parliament had shown their anxiety to
devote their time to its full consideration. (Ap-

plause.)
Mr. COOKE, agent to Earl Fitzhardinge, com-
plained of the hardship of the weekly close time on
the firth fishers.

Mr. EDEN said there was no probability of the
regulation being withdrawn, but thought inquiry
should be made about it. The feeling of Parliament
was so strong against fixed engines in the estuaries
of rivers that there was a probability of their being
swept away altogether.

Resolutions were then adopted re-electing Lord
Coventry as president, and reappointing the officers
of the association, to all of whom thanks were voted.

Mr. EDEN, in seconding a vote of thanks to the
honorary secretary, spoke in the highest terms of
the services rendered by that gentleman to the move-
ment of the preservation of our salmon fisheries.

A memorial to the Home Secretary, pointing out
the defects of the Salmon Export Act, was adopted,
and a resolution approving of the new bill generally,
but suggesting certain alterations, was also passed.
The meeting was then broke up.

TIMES.—When the Greek Constitution at last saw
the light, we took the liberty of commenting on the
folly which led the Assembly of Greece at so critical
a time to spend a year in discussing the abstruse
principles of representative government, instead of
addressing itself at once to the task that imperatively
required its attention—the reform of the local insti-
tutions and the regulation of the finances of a country
yet palpitating and heaving under the throes of an
unfinished revolution. Many, perhaps, thought
that we bore too hardly upon a young people
struggling into existence after centuries of slavery,
succeeded by many years of gross bureaucratical
corruption and oppression. Everything that has
happened since, however, has tended to confirm the
view we then took. No questions have arisen, or
are likely to arise, calculated to test the wisdom of
those minute provisions which the Constitution em-
braces, but we learn from the letters of our able and
experienced correspondent in Athens that there is no
want of subjects on which the power of the wisest
statesmen and the most patriotic Legislature might
very profitably be employed. He does not believe
the Greeks to be, as is generally thought, a people
difficult to govern. On the contrary, he seems dis-
posed to think that their capacities in this respect
have never been tested, since, from the days of the
Roman Empire up to the present time, Greece has
never enjoyed a tolerable Government. So far
from the revolution having done anything towards
remedying the real evils of Greece, it has in
some respects considerably aggravated them. The
crying evils of Greece are corruption in all the
branches of the Government, brigandage, and that
which is closely connected with brigandage, the op-
pression practised on the inhabitants of the rural
communes. From these causes combined follows the
desolation of the country. The state of things may be
compared to that which contributed so materially to
the subversion of the Roman Empire, where the rural
districts were depopulated because, from the want of
police and the oppressive nature of the taxes, it was
impossible to cultivate them. Thus the Roman Em-
pire died out for want of Romans, just as Greece is
in danger of perishing for want of Greeks, who seem
to possess the faculty of success everywhere but in
their own country, simply, we suppose, because every
other country is better governed than their own.
Let us see how the Government of King George
contrasts in these respects with the Government of
King Otho. On the question of Ministerial corrup-
tion we will not enter, but content ourselves with
remarking that we have observed no inclination on
the part of the Ministries who have suceeeded each
other in Athens to reduce the overgrown establish-
ments upon which the public revenue is lavished.
In a country requiring perhaps more than any other
in the world an enlightened and liberal expenditure
on public works, not only the central but the local
funds are absorbed in useless and superfluous offices.
The Government is as completely centralised as
that of France itself, and the patronage of every-
thing is entirely in the hands of the Minister of the
Interior. In the latter years of Otho, brigandage,
at any rate, had ceased to play the prominent
part which it used to occupy in the rural history of
Greece. The roads were comparatively safe, and
such traffic as did take place in a thinly-peopled
agricultural kingdom was attended with no serious
risk. This state of things continued for some
time after the revolution. It has now, how-
ever, totally changed. We learn that Attica is in-
fested by a celebrated robber and murderer named
Kitzos, and the Greek papers announce the disper-
sion of seven bands of brigands in the Peloponnesus.
Gratifying intelligence certainly, but leading to me-
lancholy reflections on a state of things under which
seven bands of brigands could find existence in a
country so small and so poor as the Morea. But
worse even than the miseries inflicted on the people
by their own hands seems to be the obstruction to
internal improvement offered by the Government.
Greece, as we have often remarked, is really very
much in the condition of a newly-settled country.
Its old civilisation has long died out, and its newly-
constituted society has not seriously set itself to
contend with the bad legacy which 1,300 years of
barbarism have bequeathed to it. j The marshes are
undrained, and have become a fruitful source of
deadly fevers; the quarries and mines are unworked,
and, worse than all, there are no roads to connect
the inland districts with the sea. " When we want a
bridge," said an American, "we take a church to build
it with," but the rural districts of Greece are allowed
no such option. As an instance of misgovernment our
correspondent cites the case of a rural commune in
the fertile and beautiful island of Eubcea. The in-
habitants of the communes are allowed by the Con-
stitution the privilege of regulating their own budget
—that is of settlingthe manner in which their money
shall be spent. But, unfortunately, the Nomarch
enjoys a veto upon the provisions of this budget.
Stimulated by the excellent speeches which were
made in the National Assembly in the fervour of
revolution, and really believing that they were
likely to derive some benefit from the change if
they only showed a disposition to help themselves,
these worthy Eubceans set to work to reduce the
amount of their expenditure. We are assured
that, without diminishing in any way the efficiency
of their establishments, and without subtracting a
penny from any object of utility, they contrived to
reduce their Budget one-third. This, however, did
not suit the views of the Minister of the Interior.
It was an evil precedent. The existence of a num-
ber of offices, the patronage of which is vested in
his hands, was threatened, and the prospects of local
improvement were to him as nothing in comparison.
He refused his consent to the Budget, and so the
roads are to remain unmade, and the patronage of
the Minister of the Interior to remain intact. It is
to things like this that the Government of Greece
should look, if it wishes really to reform the institu-
tions of the country. Compared with such a griev-
ance as this, what are constitutional questions,
quorums, and majorities, and dynasties, and all the
paraphernalia of free representative government ?
The first end and object of government is to obtain
forits subjects protection for life and property.
When this has been thoroughly done, when these
things cease to be a matter of speculation and
anxiety, when men feel a thorough confidence that
they will be permitted to reap what they have sown,
and that they may sleep secure from midnight vio-
lence, they will naturally turn their .attention t)
more abstruse political questions, and demand a
voice in the bcpenditure of their own revenue, and
in the nomination of their own ministers. But that
which is necessary must come first, and Greece will
not have made a single step towards real improve-
ment until she has abolished the bureaucratic influ-
ences which now paralyze her rural industry, and
given the people the management of at least the
direct taxation which they raise among themselves
for local purposes. We cannot wonder that in a
nation oppressed. by such miseries there should arise
a strong feeling in favour of a regal, as opposed to
a Parliamentary, regime. They see in their Assem-
bly the stronghold of the bureaucracy that oppresses
them, and in the divided counsels and place hunt-
ing tendencies of their public men, together with the
misgovernment which discourages cultivation and all
honest labour, the cause of the brigandage which
makes their lives full of peril and anxiety. They
look to a king as the only refuge from the plunder
of their fellow-citizens, and as the only power suffi-
ciently strong to coerce the bureaucracy under
which they groan.' Such is the state at which the
third year of revolution finds the Hellenic kingdom.

HERALD.--An influential Viennese newspaper,
bitterly hostile to the present Austrian Administra-
tion, whose policy, especially in foreign affairs, it is
never weary of assailing, has lately published an
analysis of a remarkable correspondence, consisting
of twoldeipatches of Herr Von Bismarck, and two
replies of Count Mensdorff. The analysis is, pro-
fessedly, an imperfect one. The correspondent who
supplied it admits that he writes merely from his
recollection—the documents were not before him
when he summarised thercontents. That his ana-
lysis, however, is substantially correct we have the
testimony of the Austrian official journal, which
declares that the Presse could only have obtained its
information in a very improper
.manner. That
question, of course, is one with which we have no-
thing to do. We are concerned only to know what
are the facts, and must leave our Viennese contem-
poraries to settle amongst themselves whether those
facts have become publici pHs properly or impro-
perly. It appears, then, that on the 13th of De-
cember, more than a month ago, a week after the
vote of the Diet declaring the execution at an end,
the same day that he despatched the scolding and
warning to Bavaria—upon which we have already
commented—Herr Von Bismarck addressed two
despatches to the Prussian Charge d'Affaires at
Vienna. In the first he takes credit for the mode-
ration he had displayed towards the minor states,
andjustifies his opposition to their pretensions on
the ground that they are governed by their Cham-
bers, and that in resisting them Prussia is resisting
the revolutionary principle. We can well un-
derstand that Herr Von Bismarck may have
sought to win Austria to his views by representing
the Saxon and small state opposition as based
mainly upon Democratic support ; but the argu-
ment of the dispatch is, no doubt, carica-
tured by the Austrian journalist, whose object
was to hold Prussia up to the hatred and Austria
to the admiration of Germany. In the second des-
patch of the same date the Prussian Minister, after
intimating that he had desired his colleagues, the
Ministers of War and Com
merce, to draw up the
conditions upon which Prussia can recognise the in-
dependence of the Duchies without danger to her own
safety and the interests of Germany, suggests that
Austria and Prussia should come to a closer under-
standing upon the subject, and points out that
Austria, from her geographical position, has no in-