The Sun.
London, England, 1860-11-20 00:00:00

THE SUN,, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 20, 1860.

UNITED_ KINGIOITI ELECTRIC TELE-

GRAPH COMPANY.

The opening operations of this company, the ob-
ject of which is to reduce telegraphing throughout
the kingdom to as;iillingrate, and to carry the
principle out through the agency of the canals
running through the country, commenced yester-
day morning by the planting of the first poles in
connection with the telegraphic wires in th 9.
neighbourhood of Shepherd's-bush, on the Uxbridge-
road. The poles were planted respectively by
Lord Alfred Churchill, E. W. Chenley, Esq., and
Col. Elsey, and after the ceremonial the directors
and their friends dined together at St. James's-hall,
Re,gent-strect, to celebrate the commencement of
the works.

It appeared that the system of a uniform shilling
rate of telegraphy was originally suggested by Mr.
William Andrews, then in the employment of the
Submarine Telegraph Company, and was carried
out by him between London and Dublin. Mr. Allen,
proprietor of the Caledonian Mercury, had obtained
a bill for the construction of the underground wires,
and Mr. J. Robinson, C.E., had a concession from
all the canal companies in the kingdom for the use
of the banks. The result was that a company was
formed to carry out the uniform shilling telegraphic
system through the instrumentality of Mr. Alex•
ander Crossley, one of the late Under-sheriffs of
the city of London.
Admiral Sir H. Leeke, the chairman of the com-
pany, presided at the dinner. He was supported
by Lord A. Churchill, Colonel Elsey, A. A. Croll,
Esq. ; F. Doulton, Esq.; the Rev. Walter Mitchell,
Dr. Mackay, G. A. Sala, Esq. ; J. Robinson, Esq.,
C.E.; Wm. Andrews, Esq. ; Alexander Crossley,
Esq. ; Admiral Fitzroy, Henry Pownall, Esq. ; R.
Smith, F.R.S., of Manchester; — Chater, Esq., &c.
Upwards of 50 gentlemen sat down to dinner.
The cloth having been removed, and the usual
loyal toasts having been proposed and duly
honoured,

The toast of " The Army and Navy" was re-
sponded to by Col. ELSEY and Admiral FITZROY.
Mr. POWNALL, in proposing the toast of the
evening, namely, " Prosperity to the United
Kingdom Electric Telegraph Company," observed,
in allusion to some remarks by Admiral Fitzroy,
that he had been so unnerved by the startling
statements he had heard with respect to iron-
coated vessels, terrible arms and projectiles,
which were to supersede or destroy the vaunted
wooden walls of old England, that he was hardly in
a frame of mud to treat of matters relating to the
peaceful affairs of life. (Hear, hear.) But he
must endeavour to compose himself in order to
consider a matter which had nothing to do with
the destroying of 100 men where formerly only a
dozen were wounded, but was designed to promote
civilisation and humanity throughout the world,
and which could only be said to interest the army,
the navy, or even the volanteers in so far as it
would afford them the means of communicating
with those who were dear to their affections, or
with whom'theyhad business to transact. (Cheers.)
The original plan of the company was to apply to
telegraphy the principle which was sanctioned by
Government when it applied it to the postage of
the country with the most gratifying results. As
the uniform postage had made letter writers of the
million hitherto unaccustomed to correspondence,
so he trusted that the uniform is rate of telegraphy
would introduce the habit of corresponding by
telegraph amongst all classes of the people. He
only feared that it might excite the jealousy of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, who would say, " But
your net will not only catch all the large birds—
the shilling messages—but you will rob me of my
penny letters." (A laugh.) In conclusion, he
begged to propose " Prosperity to the United
Electric Telegraph Company."
The toast was drunk with enthusiasm.

The CHAIRMAN, in returning thanks, remarked
that Mr. Pownall had taken a toast that belonged
to him, but he did not regret the change, as much
more had been said in favour of the company than
he (the chairman) would have ventured upon. He
congratulated the company on their prosperous po,
sition, and he gave full credit to Messrs. Robinson
and Andrews for their respective ideas upon which
the company",was founded. The gallant chairman
having recounted some instances of the hardships
of dear telegraphy, concluded by expressing his
sanguine hope that the present undertaking would
be s. complete success.

Mr. DANIELL then gave " The Canal Interests
of the United Kingdom," to whicti Mr. R. Smith,
of Manchester, responded.
Sir S. DONALDSON then gave " The Health of the
Chairman and Directors," to which Sir Henry
Leeke responded.
Mr. Doulton then gave " The Press," to which
Dr. Mackay responded in an effective speech.
Lord A. Churchill gave " The Officers of the
Company," which Mr. Robinson, C.E., acknow-
ledged.

Admiral Fitzroy then proposed " Mr. Allen's
Health," as the promoter of the company, which
that gentleman responded to; and thus ended the
proceedings of the evening.
The dinner was of a superior character, and the
manner in which it was served up reflected the
greatest credit upon Mr. Donald, the proprietor of
the establishment.

SIB JOHN TRELA WNY AND BIS CON-

STITUENTS.

On Saturday evening Sir John Trelawny, one of
the members for Tavistock, addressed his consti-
tuents at the Bedford Hotel. Mr. TimmAs
Nicuou,s was called upon to preside.
Sir JOIIN TRELAWNY, on coming forward, was
received with loud cheering. He spoke at consider.
able length, and we have only space for an abstract
of his address. He said : It has been often remarked
that the House of Commons does nothing but talk,
and very little in the way of substantial improve-
ment. I think this is not quite reasonable, as after
all you must not say that because there has been
little legislation there has been no success, Parlia-
ment is a sort of mill of ideas, in which there is found
chaff as well as grain ; and perhaps after all it would
be wrong if you said no speeches are useful but those
which are rhetorical and amusing ; It would be a mis-
fortune to lose speeches in a short compass containing
good counsel, calculated to carry weight when
brought to bear upon public opinion I see sometimes
carpish criticisms in public papers cn such speeches ;
but really unless Parliament:were to.pay attention
to some of the hints given in matters of detail in
short speeches before measures were carried
through Parliament, we should have very bad
legislation. After all you ought not to feel dis-
heartened that in the late session so much was not

done as you were perhaps sanguine enough to ex-
pect. I observe in looking at the list of the
statutes that there were no less than 154 public
general acts passed during the late session of Par-
liament. I know some of them ware measures of
detail and routine, and could hardly pretend to be
deemed measures of great importance or originality.
Still there were a considerable number of measures
which you would have been very sorry to miss, and
the country would have been injured if these acts
had not been passed. Among these acts are the
acts relating to the budget. It was considered that
the budget introduced by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer was a very important one ; there were
circumstances connected with it which were cer-
tainly very much to be regretted, and disputes
arose between the two Houses of Parliament with
regard to the repeal of the paper duty. The French
treaty, for instance, some persons think, was a
compromise of the doctrines of free trade, though I
must confess that it did not strike me in such a
point of view. I think you will bear me out that
on my former visit I said it would be well for the

two countries--France and England—if some
steps were taken to increase the trade between

them, and thus prevent the wars which we so
much deplore, and I then mentioned the article of
wine. It did so happen that we had, shortly after
this, an intimation that there would be an alteration
of the wine duties. I was one of those who sup-
ported her Majesty's Ministers not only with re-
gard to the wine duties, but throughout the
budget, not taking exception to mere details, in
which there might have been small errors, but
taking the scheme as a whole, and the result is that
neither I nor those of my constituents with whom
I have been in communication have had occasion

to regret the course so pursued. (Cheers.) With
regard to the census, you will recollect there was a
great deal of excitement, and I was one of
those who did not agree to the clause calling on per-
sons to state their religious creed. (Hoar.) It•
seemed to me to be contrary to the genius of the
British nation that people should be called upon at
the point of the bayonet to state what form of reli-
gion they held. (Cheers.) There was another act
—the Annuity Tax—the principle involved in
which is very much the same as in the case of the
church rate. I very much doubt whether the act
passed to settle the annuity tax difficulty will be a
success. My opinion is that fixing the rate as a
police rate in Edinburgh will not be satisfactory.
There will be just as much objection to the annuity
tax as before, because the principle objected to
will not be touched; already the banner of opposi-
tion has been raised, and I am afraid that law will
not be a success. With regard to the failures—we
had among these the ballot, the repeal of the paper
duties, and the church rates. Now, with regard to
the former, I voted for the ballot as usual. (Cheers.)
I voted also for the application of the ballot speci-
ally to the two boroughs—Wakefield and Glou-
cester; that was on the motion of Mr. Duncombe,
so that I had two opportunities of voting for secret
suffrage. (Cheers.) With regard to the paper
duties, it is really a very serious question, and one
which produced a great deal of discussion, and will
do so again. It is a most grave and important
matter, and it seems to me it was passed over too
lightly. We are at present paying about £4,000
daily in taxes by the authority of the House of
Lords. The House of Lords thought fit to reject a
material part of a budget passed by the House of
Commons, which, I believe, had not been done for
400 years before, except in matters of trifling im-
portance, and this will certainly produce a great
deal of ill feeling, which I am afraid will last for
a long time to come. It produced its points in the
last session of Parliament, because, towards the
end of it, several measures came down which were
not passed in consequence of the feelings engen-
dered between the two houses. The House of Lords
has assumed the office of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer ; the office of dealing with finance no
longer pertains exclusively to the people's house,
and Mr. Gladstone ceased to be Chancellor of the
Exchequer, the House of Lords usurpinf, the func-
tions which belonged to him. Now that is indeed
. _

to oppose the British constitution. If that course
be tolerated, if we do not next year retrace that step
and get that precedent obliterated, the British con-
stitution is at an end, as there is no saying to what
length such precedent may be carried in the future.
(Hear, hear.) I would advert shortly to the subject
of church rates. (Cheers.) This subject, I may say,
is one upon which I most honestly and sincerely
endeavoured to bring the litigation parties together.
I endeavour to deal with the subject in all points
of view, so as to see whether a measure may be
passed such as would obtain the assent of all classes.
After a deal of conversation with different parties,
the idea was found to be totally impracticable, and
it seems to be hopeless to think of carrying any
other measure but that I presented. We carried
the measure through the House of Commons, but
were defeated in the House of Lords. You recollect
how many times tkis has passed through the House
of Commons, and how very decided the opinion of
the public has been that church rates should be
abolished. Then I must notice the inconsistency of
those who take an opposite line to me. What do

they do ? They put up an Irishman—Mr. White-
side—to oppose me upon church rates, on the alle-
gation that they are a fixed part of the inheritance
of the church, as sacred as tithes, and on no account
to be touched ; and then they themselves propose a
bill to exempt Dissenters from payment of church
rates. If the law were that of the Medes and
Persians ; if it be true that every man is bound to
pay a church rate, why bring in an act of Parlia-
ment to exempt any portion of the population
from obeying such law ? That is what the
Derbyito Government did; bit that is not all.
My. Lord Derby was at the head of the Government
which abolished the whole church rate in Ireland
in the name of vestry cess, confiscated the incomes
of ten bishoprics, and altered the tithe system
by giving up to the Irish landlords one-fourth of
the tithes. Take, I say, one ground or the
other, but not grounds manifestly inconsistent.
If church rates are an inheritance of the church
why exempt any one ? If not an inheritance, why
maintain them ? I sayithe position of Lord Derby's
party is not tenable in argument; there is no argu-
ment in it. Then, again, how can you say that the
church rate was a fixed portion of the inheritance
of the ehurch, and not to be touched on any account,
when the House 91 Lords, as it did on appeal in
the great Braintree easel, solemnly affirmed that no
person was bound to pay a particular church rate
unless it was carried by b: majority of the
made P If
parishioners present at the time it 11:-.." . fj.,.1;..A
it was a law that could not be opposed, till ''-':"bi-
tion falls on every man equally, and yet the .1.J..7 S
say the majority may refuse to pay, and the tax
would not be legal unless the majority enforced it.
That then is the unsoundness of the position held
by those who oppose me on this matter of church
rates. I suppose we shall have to fight the good
fight as before, and I suppose by degrees they will
find out there is no way of dealing with the subject
except that I have presented, and I dare say we
shall succeed. But no doubt some bickerings will
arise. It is said that Dr. Foster and the Liberation
Society were the cause of my not getting a larger
majority. A great deal has been said about this in
the House of Commons, and sometimes these gentle-
men have been abused for their exertions. I think
they deserve a great deal of gratitude, for, after all,
they have been candid and out-spoken men, and
although, perhaps, they have not taken the most
politic course, yet no one ought to censure them for
straightforwardness. They openly stated that they
desired ulterior measures, and they stated what
they were. Well, I think that ought to receive
some praise ; in that they expressed exactly what
their views were, and there was no deceit about
them. You have heard that we have lately had in
Parliament a discussion upon the salary of the Dean
of York. As well as I can recollect, he had about

£l,OOO a year, and the Church Commissioners, seem-
ing to think his case was a very hard one, with
only £l,OOO for doing very little, were so very kind
as to give him out of the inheritance of the poor
£l,OOO more. (Disapprobation.) He is now enjoying
a good sa'ary, and I dare say he would raise his
voice for a state of things which had afforded him
so liberal a share out of funds designed for the bene-
fit of the poor. (Cheers and laughter.) /'his is an
argument which is of a dangerous nature, because
there is the case of our poor clergy. I pointed out
scme time ago that a million of money may be
raised towards the increase of small livings. We
find there are a number of stipends between £5O
and £2OO a year, and these may be all increased to
£2OO by a very simple plan ; and still it has not
been done, and year after year attempts have been
made to obtain such a measure, but in vain ; and I
suppose the reason is that some money is wanted
for Deans of York, and those in his position, who
like him hold sinecure offices paid out of the inheri-
tance of the poor. (Hear, and laughter.) Perhaps
I may refer to certain measures which have been
postponed, and which cannot be said to have failed.
Amongst these is the measure of reform, which has
been rather an unfortunate one. In 1852 we were
tolsl another Reform Bill was to be introduced, and
the working classes were to be regarded as being
amongst those worthy of being citizens. Last
year the bill was brought forward, but rejected
with some degree of contumely. And why did it
fail ? I believe for this reason ; because it did not
seem to offer anything which would go to the hearts
of the people. The measure ought, in order to suc-
ceed, to be one which would embody a great prin-
ciple, and I have always contended in this room
that household suffrage is the true solution of the
difficulty. (Cheers.) • I don't say I-warttld extend
the suffrage to every man, but you should adopt a
principle which gives something to the working
men that would induce them to rally round that
bill. I don't think that bill contained anything
that would be likely to raise the enthusiasm of
working men. What the working man says is
" that a man is a man ; " and they think because
that is so that he is deprived of something he ought
to possess. I don't go so far as that, but I under-
stand their feelings about it. It is rather a
matter of sentiment with them, and being such
I say that if you are ever going to carry your
bill you must lay hold of some broad principle,
such as the principle that taxation and representa-
tion should go hand in hand. That doctrine comes
right home to their hearts. Now, if yen wish to
reconcile them to a modification of the franchise,
you should show them that if heads of families are
entitled to vote, you virtually carry out the doc-
trine alluded to. I don't think you would carry
your bill so long as it is only a difference of £7 or
£B. That would not excite their interest in it.
Take the case of a man who has a house of £5 and
another holding a£6 house. The working classes
would not understand why they are excluded, but
they they might be satisfied with the representa-
tions by heads of families. It seems to me you
would thus virtually introduce the principle of
taxation and representation going hand in band, if
all those persons being heads of families were al-
lowed to vote in respect of their families and ap-
prentices. That is why I stand upon the household
suffrage, and in doing so I have the authority of
Charles James Fox and several members of the
Whig party. There was another bill which I had
something to do with, viz,, County Rates. That
is one which I hope to carry. During the recess
I have read a large pile of blue-books about the
county rate and expenditure. I hold in my hand
a paper which shows the actual amount of county
rates now to be £1,162,878 a year assessed upon an
income of £66,364,439. Now, it may be said that
that sum is not a very great one. The sum was not
a very great one in the case of ship money, but
though the sum was small, the principle was a very
great one. So it is in the case of county rates. It
ought to be recollected it is a great benefit in the
constitution that every citizen should have func-
tions and learn to use them. It is very important
he should cultivate the quality which enabled him
to understand why he votes. In the case of county
rates, they are imposed on the ratepayers by ma-
gistrates, who are responsible to none but them-
selves. In many cases they are clergymen who
have not a stake in the hedge. If a clergy-
man has a large stake in the property, we can
understand why he should have a voice
among others in proposing these taxes. But many
a clergyman voting county rates has just come into
the county, and has no property in it whatever. It
bears hard, too, in the case of tenants. A man
may have taken 'a lease for 21 years, and he knows
he has to pay so much for county rates, but by and
bye 'the magistrates meet at Bodmin or Exeter, and
then he has to pay a larger amount of rates than
he expected. The rates bear hardly upon tenants,
and although some of them are not imposed by
magistrates but by Parliament, still the magis-
trates have a great deal of power in the case of a
large part of the county rates ; and in respect to
that power they are responsible to themselves
alone, and I am afraid there is A great waste of
money by them, so that the ratepayers suffer. I
think such a measure is desirable if it were only to
limit the operation of the principle of centralisa-
tion. I propose to continue to advocate the passing
of the County Rates and Expenditure Bill. The
bill is as near as possible that of Mr. Milner Gib-
son's, and I intend, as at present advised, to do my
best to support it. With regard to France I have
very little which it is consolatory to offer you.
How do we stand ? We are now spending thirty-
five millions a year for our army, navy, and ord-
nance. Within my time we were grumbling that
we should be spending thirteen millions a year,
with which the Duke of Wellington was satisfied.
I don't know where it is to end. We have had
£10,000,000 expended on the China war. Indeed,
the amount voted thus far has been £9,168,240.
The amount for fortifications is supposed to be
eventually £12,000,000. The Indian debt is
thought to have approached £100,000,000, and it
is thought sooner or later the British public will
be called to make itself responsible for it. (Hear.)
The total Indian deficit for 1860 was £9,881,000,
and the estimate for next year is £7,472,000.
Soon it will come to be a question, what is the
advantage of retaining our Indian dominions.
Now, I see nothing in that which is consolatory.
With regard to foreign politics, I think there is
some reason to be satisfied. In the case of
Italy we have seen wonderful results produced
by Garibaldi—(cheers)—but let it not be considered
that he did it all alone, or that Count Cavour, or
Lord Palmerston, or Lord J. Russell did it; but it
was accomplished in a great degree by the British
people—at least in my opinion they had a good deal
to do with its success. (Hear.) There was on all
sides—even among Conservatives—a strong feeling
that the abominations practised by the King of
Naples should not be allowed to continue, for they
were disgraceful to human nature. My hope is that
Austria will give up Venetia, and if she give it up
in time it may be possible that Austria, existing as
a power in the centre of Europe, may prove a barrier
to Russia ; but unless Austria gives up Venetia
soon, I think it will end in a great European war,
and Austria will deserve to be extinguished.
(Cheers.) The Volunteer movement has this great
merit—that all parties coalesce in it. Party spirit
seems to be where the Volunteers are concerned
effete, and a man is as proud to be a private as he
would be were he an officer. I believe it will also
have this good effect, that in another generation
men will be taller, stronger, and stouter, and indeed
they will be more fitted to defend their country. I
am quite sure it will add to the strength and health
of the next generation, and I know that is the
opinion of many persons who are acquainted with
the laws of the health of the human body. The hon.
baronet having referred to almost every topic that
had come under the notice of Parliament during the
late session, resumed his seat amid loud and pro-

tracted cheering.
The meeting passed a resolution expressive of its
unabated confidence in the political principles and
, 2
rliamentary conduct of Sir John, and terminated
with the usual compliment to the chairman.

WATCHES AS A BRANCH OF FINE ART MANUFAC-
TURES.—" Having extelisded our search through the West-
end and the City, after an ordinary good English watch,
possessing an artistic design, we have come to the conclu
sion that but very few of our English watch manufacturers
have yet properly appreciated the advance of the public
taste for a higher order of ornamentation from improved
designs. Small though the watch is, it yet affords ample
scope for the display of the genius of an artist. It is,
therefore, with much pleasure that we can mention one
manufacturerlwho has given especial attention to the
mani-
artis-
tic ornamentation of watches, and whose productions
fest a decided advance in regard to rules of art and the re-
quirements of an educated taste. The manufacturer here
alluded to is Mr. J. W. Benson, wehos recently enlarged
show-rooms, at 33 and 34, Ludgate-hill, form one of the
conspicuous features of this great City to
ormolu
. The
display of gold and silver watches, together with
clocks of rare designs, is quite imposing to the passer-by.
Here the purchaser of a watch is afforded every facility of
choosing one suited to his purpose and means, and pos.
sessing at the same time all
Benson's illustrated Pam
that can e desired: in finish,
taste, and design.—Globe.—_
phlet, post free for two stamps, is descriptive of every
construction of watch now made. Watches safe by post
. to all parts of the globe.