The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-16 00:00:00

REPEAL OF THE PAPER DUTY.

Last night a public meeting was held in St.
Martin's-ball, "to protest against the usurpation
proposed by Lord Derby to the House of Lords, in
the retention of the tax on paper, independent of
the House of Commons and the Crown.' -4ln order
to attract the attention of passers-by a number of
men were employed to walk about in front of the
hall and: in the adjoining streets, bearing placards,
on which were inscribed such questions as " Is the
House of Lords to govern the finances of the people
and the country ?" "Is the House of Lords to de-
prive the Commons of its privileges ?" By the
hour fixed for the opening of the meeting a nume-
rous audience was collected. Mr. Sergeant Parry
VMS called to the chair. Among those on the plat-
form were Mr. Bright, M.P. ; Mr. Hadfield, M.P.;
Mr. Lawson, M.P. ; Mr. Ingram, M.P. ; Mr. Lea-
tham, ; Mr. Coningham, M.P.; Mr. Craufurd,
M.P. • Mr. Padmore, M.P. ; Mr. Pease, M.P. ; Mr.
Routledge (Eynsham-mills) • Mr. IL C. Rawlins
(Hope-mills) ; Mr. Duncan NPLaren, &c.
The CHAIRMAN said that a meeting had seldom
been called for the purpose of considering a more
interesting or important question than that which
was to engage their attention on that occasion.
One of the most valuable privileges of the people
had been assailed by the rash and insolent menace
of a few irresponsible men. (Hear, hear.) The re-
peal of the paper duty bad been settled long ago,
not only by the decided. expression of the public
mind, but by the consent of the leading - men of
both the great political parties, and by the distinct
vote of the House of Commons. They did not now
require to discuss that question. What they had
to consider was whether, after the representatives
of the people and the Crown had agreed on a finan-
cial scheme, such as the repeal of the paper duty,
any other body in the country had a right to in-
terfere. (Hear, hear.) A threat had been made
by Lords Monteagle and Derby that an attempt
would be made in the House of Peers to reject
the Paper•tax Bill on the second reading.
Using the mildest and most temperate lan-
guage, he could only express his conviction that
if the House of Lords, which was an obvious
anomaly—(bisses and cheers)—among the institu-
tions of a tree country, ventured to usurp any of
the privileges of the House of Commons or of the
people, the days of hereditary legislation were
numbered. (Hisses and cheers.)
Mr. BEAL moved the first resolution, which was
as follows:

"That the Excise tax on paper —an obstruction .to lite-
rature and education, an impediment to commerce and in-
dustry, and a means of, diminishing rather tharriucteasing
the revenue—has been repudiated by the House „of Coln-
mon s, at the suggestion of the Crown. That for the House
of Lords to reject the bill for its repeal would be equivalent
to the imposition, by its sole authority, of, a tax neither
demanded by the Crown nor granted by the Commons,
whose undoubted. right it has always been to be taxed only
by themselves. That such a proceeding, being an act of
usurpation, would be derogatory to the dignity of the
Crown, subversive of the privileges of the House of Com-
mons and of the rights of the people, and would tend to
impair the authority of the House of Lords."
Mr. R. C. RAWLINS (Hope-mills)
motion.seconded the

Mr. BRIGIIT, in supporting the resolution, said
it was several years since he addressed a public
meeting in London ; but he recollected that the
last time he did so they were assembled for the very
same purpose, as far as taxation was concerned, as
that which had now called them together. Looking
back to that time, and reflecting how slowly every-
thing good travelled in this country, they might,
perhaps, congratulate themselves on the progress
which they had made, for at that time so unjust
were our laws with regard to the press that every
labourer, however humble, who advertised for work,
was obliged to pay a tax of ls. 6d. before his ad-
vertisement could appear in a newspaper, while not
a farthing more was levied on an advertisement of
a column in length and concerning the sale of an
estate worth £lO,OOO a year. That tax had been
abolished, and the practice of advertising had greatly
increased. After that the newspaper stamp was
surrendered, and the result had been that in Lon-
don there were now three principal penny journals,
together with smaller and less important newspapers
in almost every parish, and that throughout the
country a complete revolution had taken place with
regard to periodical literature. There remained,
however, an important branch of the taxes on
knowledge, which still remained unsettled. The
raw material of all our books and newspapers, that
which was, as it were, the basis of our educational
system, still remained taxed with a duty which one
would suppose could only be proposed and main•
tained in a period, of utter barbarism. That tax
yielded a net annual revenue probably under
£1,200,000. That tax had been condemned by a
Royal commission, by the express decision of the
House of Commons, passed unanimously under the
D
weren i s t r
a i o
e• and by the Government offi-
c i aelr
driven to acknowledge that it was
from day to day becoming more untenable, and that
it ought to be repealed. (Hear, hear.) It had been
condemned by a united Cabinet through the mouth
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and a bill had
sb,
been passed by the House of Commons declaring
ywAhodeii
that it should cease on an early day. (Hear, hear.)
Now, there was a party in the House of Comnions
which was in intimate connexion with a party in
the House of Lords, and though the party in the
,
Commons was in a minority, it was alleged, he
knew not with what truth, that their confederates
were in a majority in the other house. When Mr.
Gladstone brought in his budget it was received
with such enthusiastic favour throughout the coun-
try that a far larger majority of the House of Com-
mons than was at first anticipated voted in support
of it. Not long after the introduction of the budget
an amendment was moved by Mr. Du Cane, one of
the members for Essex, the gist of which, though
it was rather roundabout in its terms, was that it
would be improper to remove or reduce the duties
on wines, silk, paper, and so on, and to make up for
the deficiency thus created by an increase in the
direct taxation on property. On the 24th of Feb-
ruary the House of Commons, by 339 against 223,
decided in favour of the reduction or repeal of these
duties, and against the lowering of the income-
tax. On the second reading of the Paper-tax
Repeal Bill, on the 12th of March, an amend-
ment was moved by Sir W. Miles, to the effect that
the •repeal of the paper duty was inexpedient
at the prelent tiem, as it, would entail the addition
of 10d. in the £1 to the income and property tax.
The whole of that debate turned upon the question
whether the income tax should be 9d. with the paper
duty continued, or 10d. with the paper duty re-
pealed ; "Irby 245 against 192 the House of Com-
mons declared in favour of a 10d. tax on the owners
of property, and the total abolition of the most
odious of all forms of tyranny and taxation upon a
great and important branch of industry. (Hear.)
Afterwards, on the third reading of the bill—when
most persons believed there would be no strenuous
opposition to it, for none had been made in com-
mittee, and it was rare, after a decisive division on

the second reading of a measure, that any great
effort was made to contest its further progress—the
third reading, he admitted,was carried by a majority
of only ten. (A Voice—Nine.) No, ten in reality.
(Much laughter, in which Mr. Ingram joined.)
Well, Whether a, nhjoiity of nine or ten, seeing that
a majority of 13 sufficed last session to overthrow
the Government, he hoped it. would be sufficient to
overthrow this most hateful and injurious tax.
(Hear.) It was important to recollect that not only
had the House of Commons condemned the tax, bat
it had provided a substitute. (Hear.) Both bills
had gone up to the House of Lords, and everybody
believed that this question was settled. Were the
papermakers criminals who had broken our laws,
who had forfeited our sympathy ? Were they to
be made the objects of the experiments of a House
of Parliament which for 200 years had had no ex-
perience in questions of trade or taxation ? (Hear.)
When a resolution passed the House of Commons
for the imposition or repeal of a tax, the usual
course was that the new system came into immediate
operation. Why, then, was it that in this case,
after the question had been settled by public opinion
and the House of Commons, this great trade was
again to be put on the rack and submitted to Go-
vernmental torture ? He knew a papermaker, who,
relying on the repeal, had undertaken the building
of a large mill. Another had bound himself to
provide paper at a decline of £l4 a ton the day
after the bill became law. Mills which had been
abandoned for years past and allowed to fall into
ruin were now beginning to assume a lively air and
tol'exhibit signs of renewed activity. The repeal
gave promise of more employment and better wages
for the people, of the development of civilization,
morality, religion, and everything a people ought
to cherish. All those-who worked to supply the
literary appetite of. England were enlarging . their.
journals and magazines and bringing out new
works at an unheard of cheapness in price, and all
this was being done under the belief that 200 years
of practice had settled the question. When the
Crown and Commons were agreed upon the repeal
of a tax, why should the House of Peers, which
during the whole of that period had never meddled
with such questions, step forward and dash the cup
from the lips of the people who were eager to satiate
their thirst ? (Cheers.) In comparison with this
question, a million of revenue or the existence of a
particular tax was of no consideration whatever.
He had been very much abused and occasionally
ridiculed—(a laugh)—for having said that the con-
stitution of England was something which one could
not very well know where to find or how to lay
hold of—that it was not written down in any book
like the constitutions of some other more or less
favoured nations. - But they did know some certain
things which all Englishmen had agreed to acknow-
ledge as principles of the English constitution. For
example, by the constitution, the people were not
to be taxed except by and through our representa-
tives in Parliament, (Hear, hear.) By the consti-
tution all supplies to the Crown for the service of
the year were gifts of the Commons. (Hear, hear.)
All bills with reference to taxation which were
brought into Parliament must make their first ap-
pearance in the House of Commons. That portion
of the Queen's Speech at the commencement of the
session which related to taxation was addressed,
not to the Lords, but directly and exclusively
to the Commons. The Chancellor of the Exche-
quer was always a member of the House of Com-
mons. He never heard of one sitting in the
House of Lords—if he did, he was afraid their lord-
ships would not always be able to rise in time for
dinner. (Hisses and cheers.) The estimates were
prepared for the information .of the Commons ; the
Lords had no official knowledge of them whatever,
or of the votes which were passed by the Commons,
till the grants were embodied in bills and sent up
to them in order that they might take the form of
law. In the present instance the House of Com-
mons had sent up to the other House of Parliament
two bills. The first of these was that which added
ld. to the income tax; and the Lords having made
no objection to it, it had received the Royal assent.
The second was the Paper Duty Repeal Bill, which
their Lordships now threatened to reject, although
they had already passed the substitute for that tax.
(Hear, hear.) He must say he thought such con-
duct very like what was called a " take in." (A
laugh, and hear.) It WS very like a fraud on the
people, and sharp practice to the House of Com-
mons. (Hear, hear.) Even supposing that --the
privilege of the Lords to repeal or impose a tax had
never been disputed, and that they had an un-
doubted right to do what they now proposed, it
would be, under the circumstances, a most unjust,
if not imprudent and insolent prop,sition, for them
to refuse to repeal a tax after having passed the
substitute for it. (Hear.) If the House of Lords
insisted en assuming entirely new functions, how
could the Commons conduct their business ? How
would the House of Commons know, when they
passed any of the votes in supply, that the Lords
would not reject it ? Such behaviour on the part
of the Lords would throw the functions of Parlia-
ment into inextricable confusion, and introduce un-
certainty of the most perilous kind into everything
connected with the taxation and expenditure of the
country. (Hear, hear.) The House of Commons
had provided £70,000,000 for the service of the
country. The Crown, through its responsible
advisers, had expressed perfect satisfaction with
the amount, and declared that more was un-
necessary, and yet the Lords, who had never
had the estimates before them, who could not
possess so much knowledge of the subject as
the Commons, stepped in and insisted that the
sum was insufficient by £1,200,000, the precise
amount of the paper duty. Seven years ago, when
Mr. Gladstone was formerly Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, he carried through the House of Com-
mons a Succession Duty Bill, which was intended
to abolish an exemption, which the owners of free-
hold property had enjoyed for nearly 70 years,
from paying the tax on the passage of property on
demise. The bill went up to the House of Lords,
and Lord Derby denouncing it in all the power of
language, threatened its rejection ; but still it
passed. On the 25th July, 1853, on the second
reading of the bill, Lord Derby said," he was quite
ready to admit that the House of Commons was
quite right in vindicating its technical privileges,
as well as guarding its bone fide control over the
money of the country." He would like to know
what would become of their bone fide control over
the money of the country, if, after the House of
Commons had decided there was no necessity for
the paper duty, the House of Lords should con-
sider itself competent to maintain that iuty, and
justified in doing so ? The bone fide control of the
House of Commons would then have vanished en-
tirely, and the country would be handed over for
future taxation to the House of Peers, which was
not elective, and had heretofore never shown any
desire to accommodate the expenditure of the State.
(Cheers.) That no one might accuse him of con-
cealing the rest of Lord Derby's observation, he
would read the whole of it. His lordship con-
tinued—" But, at the same time, he would say
this, that if measures were to be introduced into
the House of Commons altering the whole financial
arrangements of the empire"—it could not.be said,
at all events, that the abolition of a single Excise
duty would have that effect—" measures imposing
new and unheard of taxes on new and extraordi-
nary principles of taxation—and it was asserted
that their lordships would have no power of alter-
ing a single word, of correcting even a mistake,
or of rectifying errors into which the House of
I Commons might have fallen—that was in effect
to say their lordships' house was a useless por-
tion of the Legislature"—(laughter and cheers)—
" and that as far as financial measures were
concerned, they had only to record the bills
framed by the other House of Parliament."
Leaving the particular grievances of the
papermakers, he asked them to consider whatwould
be the consequence if the principle established by
the sacrifice of many English lives 200 years ago—
(cheers)—were now tamely surrendered to the House
of Lords, which for the first time in our modern
history had affected to deal with the taxation of the
kingdom. It was bad enough in all conscience to
find that the House of Commons, though, of course,
sympathising to some extent with public opinion,
yet in many respects most inadequately represented
it, especially on the question of taxatiou ; but, at,
least the mien returned by the people, if their votes
had not the influence which they ought to possess,
could protest in the name of their constituents
against any injustice which the Government, or a
majority of the House, might attempt to inflict on
them. But where were the representativos of the
people in the House of Lords ? There was no man
in that assembly with any sense of that responsi-
bility which he necessarily felt to the constituency
who honoured him with their confidence in the
House of Commons. We boasted of our love of
freedom, our newspapers filled their columns every
day with details of what men were doing in other
parts of the world, some in overthrowing, some in
building up noble fabrics of human liberty. The
people read these accounts with interest; some-
times he almost feared they allowed their feelings
to be excited even beyond what was good and rea-
sonable, but he besought them never for a single
moment to forget what was being done, and what it

was their Puty to do, at home. If liberty were ex-
tinguished in England, how much would liberty
have to mourn throughout the whole wide world !
But what would become of the liberty of England
if any irresponsible, unelected, hereditary House of
Parliament was to be permitted, without check, to
rifle the pockets and tills of the industrious popula-
tions of this country ? (Cheers.) If each branch
of the Legislature, with due moderation, with due
regard to the rights and interests of the other, per-
formed its just functions, then real and permanent
freedom would be secured to England, and it
would be said for generations to come that we,
of all countries of the world, have been longest
without turbulent and violent revolutions.
It was not more necessary for the House of
Commons than for the House of Lords or the Crown
to observe its true functions. But what was it that
a party in the House of Commons asked the House
of Lords to do this session ? They were expected
to reject a bill for the abolition of church-rates, a
bill for the repeal of the paper duty, and a bill for
providing a very moderate extension of the franchise
to the people of the United Kingdom. (Laughter
and cheers.) Though he had criticised with, he be-
lieved, no unjust severity, the conduct of the aris-
tocratic class, he never laid upon them burdens so
onerous, he might say labours so perilous, and even
fatal as those which they were now desired to per-
form at the bidding of an exasperated and baffled
minority in the House of Commons. Mr. Bright
then proceeded to express his conviction that at this
moment the educational institutions towards the
support of which many hundred thousand pounds
were voted by Parliament were not to be compared,
in point of the information and instruction commu-
nicated, to the results achieved by the abolition of
the newspaper stamp—results which 11/01114
Anensely increased when the papv.4ol3.
finally abolished. There was -tOo nine
House of Lords an unreasoning and ignorant alarm
at the spread of the newspaper press in so cheap a
form. and with so extensive a circulation as to per-
meate even the very lowest class of society in this
kingdom. Ho hoped that the kill would not be re-
jected through the rash menace of Lord Derby;
but, if it were, it must not be forgotten that it was
introduced on the responsibility of the Cabinet.
This must be treated, therefore, as a Cabinet ques-
tion. If the Government submitted to surrender
their own dignity and the rights of the House of
Commons to Lord Derby and his friends, then the
Government would be degraded, the exalted office
which Mr. Gladstone filled would be debased, and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be no more
than a mere clerk conjointly of the two houses, in
no degree independent, and unable to do those
things which in his conscience he believed to
be essential to the welfare of his country. The
House of Commons also would be humiliated to the
last degree. What would be said by all the great
men who had adorned the pages of our history
from the days of the Revolution to the present time
if they could come back to behold the English
House of Commons in its most triumphant position
and in the height of its honour surrender one of its
privileges for which they shed their blood and
spared no sacrifice ? He did not, however, believe
that the Government would trifle with this ques-
tion, or tamely surrender the great interests com-
mitted to its care. (Cheers.) But, if they did so,
then the Government was irretrievably lost—not
by the ordinary fiat of a majority before which the
Government can retire with a hope of some time
rettrning to power, but with an amount of odium
—he might almost say of execration, or at least of
contempt and pity, which would render it impos-
sible for those statesmen ever again to poisess the
confidence of the people. What would happen
then ? The old thing over again, he supposed.
(A laugh.) Lord Derby in one house, and Mr.
Disraeli in the other.; men in power who had no
principle. (Hisses and cheers.) Wherever they
seemed to be travelling, if they studied with
minutest investigation the pages of their political
Bradshaw, they would find that every line con-
verged to one paint, and that was Downing-street.
(Cheers and hisses.) With such men in orrice, Par-
liamentary Reform would inevitably be postponed,
and our foreign relations would, he feared, run
great risk of embroilment. There could be no doubt
that over Europe, if Lord Derby were to come into
office now, there would pass a shudder of appre-
hension, and, instead of the growing tranquillity
for which they all hoped, and he trusted at times
all prayed, there would be an increase of excitement
gathering to terror, and he did not believe the peace
of Europe would be worth twelve months' pur-
chase. Ho hoped, however, that all this threat of
rejecting the repeal of the paper duty would come
to nothing, and that wi:er heads than Lord Derby's
in the House. of Lords would temper his passion
and advise him to moderate courses. They would
then have the satisfaction of seeing that harmony
was preserved between the two houses—that re-
spect for our institutions was not diminished—
that the great industry of papermaking was set free
—that the press was no longer to be bound down
by taxation ; and everybody in the United King-
dom would feel that in regard to great fiscal ques-
tions the present session was one of the best and
noblest the Parliament of England had ever seen.
(Cheers.) The hon. gentleman concluded by ex-
horting his countrymen to uphold the privileges of
the House of Commons which their fathers had
contended for, and which they would be recreant
and unworthy children now to surrender.
Mr. W. WILKs moved that a petition should be
seat to the House of Lords, setting forth the objec-
tionable character of the paper duty, and that for
their lordships to refuse their consent to the repeal,
after the House of Commons and the Crown had
sanctioned it, would be an usurpation of the privi-
leges of the House of Comnyens and of the rights of
the people, and praying that their lordships would
therefore consent to the bill.
The motion was seconded by Mr. W. C. BEN-
NETT, and carried by the meeting, as was also a
third resolution appointing a deputation to present
an address to Lord Derby entreating him to re-
consider the proposal he had made to the House of
Lords.
The meeting then broke up.

THE CHAMPIONSHIP.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.

Sir,-1n answer to Mr. Heenan's letter which
appeared in the Times of this day, I beg, first, to
observe that I have not been hiding myself as he
would insinuate. 1 called, with my backer, at the
office of Bell's Life in London on Tuesday, the Bth
of May. I told him that my backer and I were
going out of town until Saturday. I visited Tun-
bridge on Wednesday, Maidstone on Thursday,
Tunbridge and Hastings on Friday, and Brighton
on Saturday. My movements were well known,
and a letter or telegram addressed to " Tom Sayers,"
or " The Champion of England," would have found
me at either of those places, but none came to
hand.

The ridiculous suggestion, put forward by Mr.
Heenan, of mutilating the belt, I laugh to scorn,
and could afford to treat it with the contempt it
merits, but that some good friends of mine—of the
Peace Society—have, innocently enough, patronised
the notion.

The belt, sir, I have fought hard to obtain—
striving for that prize I have within the last three
years defeated sonic of the best men of my country
—and, without intending to cast the slightest slur
on my gallant opponent, I say that no American
citizen, nor foreigner from any other land, however
flowery and sunny, shall bear it, or the buckle of it,
from Old England while my arm and heart are ca-
pable of defending it. lam as ready as Mr. Heenan
to fight again, and repudiate with indignation the
insinuation that lam not. In a very short time the
Champion's belt will be mine by indefeasible right ;
and even if Mr. Heenan had defeated me it would
not be his. He would have to do as I have
done—
meet every aspirant to the honour of wearing it for
three years before he would become the lawful pos-
sessor of the trophy. What, then, becomes of the
assertion made in Mr. Heenan's letter, that the belt
is equally owned by both of us ? There is no such
equality ; but I will do him the justice he appears
desirous of denying me, by, admitting his equality
in valour. To t un, swim, or wrestle for the belt of
the prize ring is a challenge so eminently absurd
that one can hardly imagine it emanates from a sane
man, and the evidence of aberration of mind is
greatly strengthened by the proposal to jump off'
a house-top. The same proposition was once made
by a lunatic, who met his medical attendant alone
on the roof of the asylum. "Let us," said the mad
patient, seizing the doctor with a firm grasp, "jump
down ;" but the medical man, with greati)r(en '
presence
of mind, replied, " Nay, anybody could jump
let us go into the street and jump up:, Like Teddy
the Tiler, I know something of the roofs of houses,
and their foundations also, and while I unquestion-
ably admit that Heenan is a " brick," I hope al-
ways tobe able to say with truth, as I do now, that
lam a bricklayer. Ihe offer to fight four men, at
intervals of 30 days, savours of bounce, and is un-
worthy of John Heenan. He should remember that
it might take him the first month to vanquish

Tom SAYERS.
Gordon Hotel, Coventtarden, May 15.

The East India depots attached to the Ist and 3d
battalions at Chatham, selected to occupy the tents
pitched at the Spur battery and Prince Edward's
bastion, did not leave their barracks yesterday, as
had been directed, the order for their taking pos-
session of the tents on that day having been coun-
termanded by General Eyre in consequence of the
representations made by the principal medical
officer that it would be unnecessarily exposing the
health of the troops to allow tVem to go under
canvas until the weather had become warmer and • ,
inure - •••:.•
,•,•; ; ..,„.,. ,z 44.,..! wered fro 1 e
eteidif(k 4- •sa,.Y- g :- ni whs-haitia `,:; , : .„..
The tents are nearly all-waterproof and theiihe-
rior of each is fitted up with every convenience for
the health and comfort of the men. A portion of
the encampment is set apart for the use of the
troops, where they will be allowed to amuse them-
selves with athletic games and sports, which are
much encouraged by General Eyre.
The 2d battalion of the 20th Regiment, under the
command of Lieut.-Col. William P. Radcliffe, arrived
at the Curragh Camp on Saturday last from Dublin,
there to be quartered during the summer.
A detachment of the 3d battalion of the Grena-
dier Guards, consisting of two officers and 63 men ;
another of the 26th Regiment, of two officers and
80 men ; and another of the 76th Regiment, of two
officers and 75 men, arrived at the Curragh Camp
on Wednesday last for rifle practice.

TEE GUNBOATS.

The Messrs. Green, of Blackwall, in a letter to a
contemporary, says :

The statements made in the House of Commons
on Friday last respecting the defective state of the
gunboats, together with short bolts having been
driven, being calculated to lead the public to be-
lieve that these short bolts would endanger the
lives of the officers and crews of those vessels, we
feel compelled to observe that during the Russian
war we built 25 of those vessels in a short period.
About three weeks back we received a:letter from
the Admiralty, stating that upon removing the
whole of the outside planking of one of those vessels
built by us, the frame was found to be defective,
and that 100 bolts out of 2,302 were five inches
short, thereby showing they were only driven
through the outside plank and timbers.
As to the vessels being defective, we are rot sur-
prised, as many of them were built of unseasoned
timber, although the best that could be got at the
time, and the air excluded when they were hove up
out of the water at Haslar, instead of having a
plank taken out fore and aft for ventilation, which
ought to have been done.

With regard to the short bolts, we beg to state
that during the progress of the work we were
pushed very hard by the Admiralty to complete
our contract, and even threatened with legal pro-
ceedings if behind time, which compelled us to em-
ploy a large number of strange shipwrights, who
worked -very often night and day, and it would
therefore be impossible for us or the Government
inspector to be answerable that every bolt was pro-
perly* driven.

-It is admitted by the Admiralty, in their report,
that 2 202 bolts were properly driven through, and
we maintain, as shipbuilders, that planks fas-
tened with one through bolt in every other timber,
with a short one between, are quite sufficient
to secure the safety of any vessel of war. Lloyds
require one through bolt and one short bolt itt
every butt, and not less than half of the treenails to
be driven through in building their highest class
ships, calculated to carry heavy cargoes; and,
should the ship be copper-fastened, they require
only one half of the bolts to be through bolts, and
all the rest short bolts.

We complain of the Admiralty for not giving the
contractors longer time to build these vessels, and
for not having a larger staff of inspectors to super-
intend the work, and also for not taking proper care
of them after they were duly delivered up into the
charge of their authorities, according to contract,
with the necessary certificates.

LICENSED VICTUALLERS' ASYLUM.

The thirty-second anniversary of this institution
was celebrated yesterday at the Crystal Palace,
Sydenham, James Watney, jun., Esq., in the chair.
About 1,400 gentleman sat down to the dinner,
which was amply provided by Mr. Strange.
The grace having been sung, the CHAIRMAN, on
rising to propose the usual loyal toasts, was received
with vehement cheering. He took occasion to ad-
vert to the fact that the Prince Consort had always
shown himself to be the patron of the arts, and that
to him they were indebted for meeting under the
roof of the Crystal Palace. Moreover, his Royal
Highness had laid the foundation stone of the
Albert and Ladies' wing of the almshouses. The
toast of " The Army and Navy" followed.
The Rev. Mr. MARTIN then read the report of
the committee, which was of a most satisfactory
character, and alluded to the generous subscriptions
of the firms of Messrs. Watney and Elliott. It ap-
peared that the sum of £20,000 was required to
effect the especial endowment of the asylum. There
were many in the trade who were in a position to
subscribe who had never contributed one farthing
to this fund, and as the prosperity of the society
depended in a great measure upon the annual fes-
tival the committee urged the necessity of liberal
contributions. _ _ _

Mr. 'mum read the first list of subscriptions,
which was headed by that of the chairman and his
friends, amounting to £594 145., the chairman hav-
ing contributed 100 guineas.
The CHAIRMAN proposed the toast of the even-
ing. The asylum was founded in 1826, and in
1827 the committee were enabled to purchase a plot
of ground. The foundation-stone was laid by the
Duke of Sussex in 1828, and he remained the
patron to the time of his death in 1843. The
building was completed, and 103 dwellings were
raised. The Prixice Consort consented to honour
the institution by becoming its patron, and the
board were enabled to increase the residences froip.
103 to 147, and now they contained 177 inhabi-
tants ; but though much had been done much re-
mained to be done. They had £17,000 invested,
the interest upon which was only half what they
required. He had himself visited the asylum, and
had been pleased with the cleanliness of the resi-
dences and of the inmates.
Mr. TTIOMAS WHALEY, the chairman of the
board of management, proposed " The Health of
the Chairman," who responded in most courteous
terms.

subscriptions and donations amounted to
nearly £4,000, among which was a list presented
unsolicited by Mr. Strange, of the Crystal Palace,
amounting to 105 guineas. (Loud applause.)
The remaining toasts, which were very nume•
rous, were of a complimentary character. The
musical arrangements were under the direction of
Mr. George (Menge, assisted by Miss Medora Col-
lins, Miss Ellen Lyon, Mr. J. Howe, Mr. George
Vedder, Mr. Burgess, and Mr. Ford. Mr. Toole
was the toastmaster.

Before the company separated, the CHAIRMAN
PrOpOSed " the Health of Mr. Strange," who had so
liberally provided for so large a company ; to
which• Mr. Strange responded in very appropriate
term".

[ADVERTI:,,EMEYT.]—HoIIoway's Ointment 'and Pills.
—Limbs Saved.—Nothing can be more gratifying than the
numerous testimonials voluntarily sent to Professor Hol-
loway recounting the extraordinary cure of wounds, sores,
and ulcers, effected,by hi;ointment and pills. John Thomas,
far advanced in years, residing at Pcinmainhank, Conway,
suffered severely from a bad leg, which for years:resisted
the treatment of the most skilful surgeons, who ultimately
recommended amputation of the limb. He was, however,
persuaded to try Holloway's remedies,
which effected a
complete cure, affording ease shortly after their first em-
ployment. In glandular and white swellings, tcFvY and
all skin diseases these noble remedies may be relied upon.
They cure the particular local ailment by cleansing and
regulating the whole system.

BENSO N'S ATCHESI
" Perfection of mechanism."---Morning Post.
Gold
Silver 2 to 50 guineas.
Send stemps for Benson's Illustrated Pamphlet, descrip-
tive of every construction of watch now made, with their
prices.
Watches sent to all parts of the kingdom free by post, or to
In dia and the Colonies for ss. extra.
33 and 34, Ludgate-bill, London, E.C. Established 1749.

THEATRE-ROYAL, HAYMARKET.
Lessee, Mr. J. B. Bnekstone.
THIS EVENING, will be performed THE FAMILY
SECRET. Messrs. Chippendale, Howe• W. Farren, Villiers,
Buckstone, Mrs. B. White, Mrs. Fitzwilliam, Mrs. Wilkins,
and Miss Amy Sedgwick.
After which, A CURE FOR LOVE. Mr. Buckstone.
To conclude with THE BOARDING SCHOOL.

ROYAL P R
seelN CE S S'S
Les, Mr. A. Harris.
THIS EVENING, THRICE MARRIED. Mr. Meadows,
Miss C. Leclercq, ,tro•
Followed by THE FOOL'S REVENGE. Bertuccio, a
Jester, Mr. Phelps.
TO conclude with the extravaganza of THE SYLPHIDE.
M 145 C. Leclercq, Miss Louise Keeley, Miss Helen Howard,
Mi,s Rose Leclercq. Mr. Shore, Mr. Saker, and Mr. Frank
Matthews,