The Sun.
London, England, 1867-01-31 00:00:00

E SUN, LONUON, THURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 31 1867.

Mr. Bright at Rochdale.

ROCHDALE, Wednesday Night.

A public meeting of Mr. Bright's fellow-towns-
men was held this evening in the Theatre Royal,
which was densely crowded, for the purpose of pre-
senting an address to him and testifying their
respect and admiration of his public and private
character.

Mr. Henry Kelsall presided.
Mr. Bright, on entering the platform, accom-
panied by Mr. T. B. Potter, Mr. Jacob Bright, and
the leading Liberals of the borough, was most
warmly received.

'The CHAIRMAN briefly opened the proceedings,
observing that they were met to render a simple
act of justice to their illustrious townsman, after the
recent attacks made upon him by his political ad-
versari, s, who having vainly exhausted their argu-
cnts in answering his speeches on behalf of ad-
mitting a large body of his fellow—countrymen to
their just rights, had resorted to the un-English,
and he was glad to say the unusual, course of as-
persing his private character. He had known Mr.
Bright 40 years, and could bear witness to his un-
ceasing anxiety and his efforts to promote the
welfare of his workpeople and his poorer townsmen.
They could all of them bear the same testimony,
and they all knew perfectly well that on many oc-
casions he could, if he had chosen to desert other
friends, have been returned as their representative
in Parliament. They were proud of his political
fame, and knowing him as they did in all the rela-
tions of private life, they were still prouder to claim
him as a fellow-townsman. (Cheers.)

Mr. W. SHEPHERD then moved that the follow-
ing address be presented to Mr. Bright

" Honoured Sir,—We, your fellow-countrymen, in public
meeting assembled, desire to express the sincere admiration
we feel for your private character and your long and dis-
tingitished career in advancing the social and political con-
dition of the people. All the services you have rendered
to our common country in conjunction with the illustrious
and lamented Mr. Cobden the nation and the world know,
and we are thankful to believe that the great announcement
of " Peace on earth and goodwill toward men" has received
another impetus by your noble efforts to establish friendly
relations between the nations of the earth. As an employer
of labour you have ever manifested the strongest desire to
educate and elevate the working man, and numerous in-
stances testify that you have always been guided by a love
of justice and humanity. We know, sir, that during your
long advocacy of the people's cause your words have been
frequently misrepresented, and your character unjustly
attacked ; and, although we aro assured that you will be
ever sustained by the consciousness that your cause is just,
we cannot but express our sympathy with you and hope
that you may long live to champion the cause of popular
freedom."

The address was then adopted and presented to
Mr. Bright amid loud cheering.
Mr. BRIGHT, when the cheering bad subsided,
said—l am, as I ought to be, very grateful to you
for the address which has just been presented to me,
and for the most kind manner in which you bave
received the observations which have been made in
my favour. If we were all here in the witness-box
to-night, I must say that I would not undertake to
prove even one-half of that which has been said in
my praise ; but grateful as I am, I confess to you
honestly that the address and the meeting to-night
in prospect have been burdensome to me, for I feel
that I have small claim to the honour which my
townsmen have seen fit to show me, and I would, if
it had been possible, have escaped this meeting alto-
gether—and, as you know, it has been driven
almost to the last moments—to the meeting of
Parliament, partly in the expectation and the hope
that it might have been forgotten. (A laugh.)
I account for your exceeding kindness in this
way—that you have observed that I have been
assailed in the most unusual manner by public
writers and public speakers of a particular party,
speaking and writing in many parts of the king-
dom ; and doubtless you have come to the con-
clusion, which was reasonable from the fact
that some order had gone out from headquarters
that all the miserable writers and speakers of the

mis,,:rable and hateful faction should endeavour i

the interval between the session of 1866 and the
sea-ion of 1867 to defame me as much as possible, in
the hope of injuring in some degree whatever in-
fluence I may have in favour of the great question
of the txtension of the franchise ; and, seeing all this
you thought it but fair and right that you, my
neighbours and townsmen and friends, should give
me such support as was in your power, in the hope
that, placel as I am, by some accident which I can-
not explain, partly in the forefront of this great
conflict, I might, perhaps, derive, as I shall certainly

derive, much strength from yourgenerous sympathy.
(Loud cheering.) Wondering sometimes at these
various and continued assaults. I have just cast a

look over the 25 years of political life which I have
lived, and I have asked myself how it happens that
that is done in political life which is not done in any
other kind of life with which we are acquainted.
(Hear, hear.) A man may be very active and in the
forefront of a religious controversy ; he may hold
the same position in some literary controversy or in

some scientific disputation, but no man living, how-
ever much opposed to him, would think of pursuing
him with that rancorous spirit which, unfortunately,
is introduced into political controversy, and which
has pursued me with an unrelenting animosity, not
for months only, but for years past. (Loud cries of
" Hear, hear.") In looking over these 25 years, I
found, as far as my mental eye could detectf that my
path has been straightforward, not varying, so far as
I know, to the right hand or to the left from any un-
worthy motive. (Loud cheers.) I found that the prin-
ciples upon which I had acted were well defined,were
distinctly avowed, and were easily comprehended,
and those principles were simply these—that the law
and the administration of the law in this country
should regard with just and equal eye all classes of
the people—(cheers)—and that to all questions of
government, all great national questions, we should
bring those simple but sublime principles, the high
and everlasting principles of a pure morality, which
we deiive, or ought to derive, from the religion
which we profess. (Loud cheers.) Now, in these
25 years, so far as I know, I found no divergence
from the principles with which I first set out, but
unfortunately in some respects I have not allied
myself with any political party. (Hear, hear.) The
public men of this country are mainly of two parties.
The public press until recently was of two parties,
and if any politician took a line independent of these
two parties he did not and could not hope to receive
any friendly support from either of them. (Hear,
hear.) Perhaps I have held a peculiar position on
another ground. I am, as you know, a member of
a small but somewhat remarkable religious sect, a
religious body which had a remarkable origin, and
which, in its early days at least, had a somewhat re-
markable history. Of all the religious sects which
have appeared in the world, certainly since the cor-
ruption of the Christian Church, it is that which of
all others has moat taught the equality and equal
ights of men, and I venture to say that it is re-
markable for another thing—that, probably more
than any other body, within its borders and in its
service personal ambition is practically unknown.
(Hear.) I think that many of my opinions and
much of my course of life have been determined, or
at least greatly influenced, by the training I received
in that body. The belief in the equality of all men
in the sight of Heaven, and of the rights of all men
before earthly Governments, usually leads to a strong
sympathy with the great body of the people. (Loud
cheers.) I look upon the multitude, the Inillions who
form a nation. In the social rank they may be called
of the lowly. They labour more, they suffer more
than the ranks above nem. They have less of what
we consider enjoyments of life, they have fewer of
give to us who are betterthose compensations which
off the many charms of life, and I have karat
from my earliest youth to feel for those men—(loud
cheers)—to feel for them a sympathy which I have
never been able to express in words, and for which
I can find no proper exhibition of outward conduct
which I can manifest towards them. My belief
is that the condition of this vast body of the
people might be immensely improved and raised.
I believe they might have less toil, more joy in their
lives, and more of all that without which to per-
sons in another state of life it would appear to be
hardly worth haying. (Hear.) Well, with this
symrathy it was not wonderful that 25 years ago I
should find myself called out into active political life.
Many of you will recollect the state of this country

from the year 1838 to the year 1842, during the
period of bad harvests, when starvation visited
hundreds and thousands of homes. Now, I became
convinced that the origin of that fearful suffering
was the landowner's monopoly in the supply of food
to the people. (Hear, hear.) In this beautiful
address there is a reference to the services which
you are kind enough to say I have rendered in con-
junction with the illustrious and lamented Mr.
Cobden. (Cheers.) This reminds me of an inci-
dent which had something to do with my after
career. In the year 1841 I was at Leamington,
and spent several months there ; it was near the
middle of September, when there fell upon me one of
the heaviest blows that can visit any man. I found
myself left there with none living of my house but
a motherless child. Mr. Cobden called upon me
the day after that event, so terrible to me and so
prostratir•g. After some conversation he said,
" Don't allow this grief, great as it is, to weigh you
down too much. There are at this moment in
thousands of homes in this country wives and
children who are dying of hunger--of hunger made
by the law. If you will come along with me we
will never rest till we have got rid of the Corn
Laws. (Loud and prolonged cheers.) We saw the
colossal injustice which cast its shadow over every
part of the nation, and we thought we saw the true
remedy and the relief, and that if we devoted our-
selves in conjunction with, as you know, hundreds
and thousands of good men in various parts of the
country, we should be able to bring that remedy
home and afford that relief to the starving people
of this country. (Cheers.) 1 recollect in some of
our labours when I looked forward to the day I
could not but see and know that was coming when
that injustice would be removed, and law-made
hunger would be for ever after prevented (loud
cheers)---I recollect at that time I took to myself
something of prophecy from the lives of one of our
poets. When that day shall come I thought that
then—

"Shall misery's sons and daughters
In their lowly dwelling sing—
Bounteous as the Nile's dark waters,
Undiscovered as their spring,
We will scatter o'er the land
Plenty with a secret hand."
And so exactly was that prophecy fulfilled tbat, if
you will turn to the Parliamentary books, you will
find that from the year 1846 to this year in which
I speak more than four hundred million—l believe
near five hundred million—pounds' worth of food,
which the corn laws were intended to prohibit, has
been imported into this country, and has been eaten
upon the tables of the English poor—(cheers)----and,
as you know, trade has so far extended within 20
years that it has surpassed beyond all calculation its
extension in the previous history of England.
(Cheers.) Wages have been increased—l was going
to say everywhere ; I believe there is scarcely a re-
mote agricultural parish in which they have not in-
creased ; but in this district, as I could show from
the books of my own business, wages have increased
from 30 to 40 per cent., although the actual pro-
duction of work in many respects has not been in-
creased at all, but has been diminished, by the
shorter hours of labour. Those who were readers
of newspapers and who attended public meetings 20
years ago will recollect that during the contest, in
which the facts and arguments were on one side—a
contest which has ended so triumphantly for us, and
with such stupendous advantage to the people—
those same writers, same speakers, the same politi-
cal party, led by thevery man who is now the Prime
Minister of England—they were just as busy against
the reputation of your late illustrious representa-
tive, now no more with us. Their calumnies are
now steadfastly levelled against me at this very
hour. (Loud cheers.) And when that one ques-
tion of the importation of food was disposed of, why
a whole brood of evils perished With it ; the mono-
poly in sugar ; the monopoly in shipping ; the
import duties upon 1,200 or 1,400 articles coming
in at our ports were all swept away. In commer-
cial affairs, as far as the monopoly of protection
was concerned, there was a complete revulsion esta-
blished in the country. The whole country rejoiced
at the deliverance, and breathed freely that one
great step in freedom never to be retracted had at
last been ac..:ounplishecl. (Cheers.) But this great
party and the Parliament which would net let the
people get their bread from the best markets in the
world were equally opposed to the supply of food to
the mind. You, who now can get for a penny as
good a newspaper as is published in the world—
many of you have not an idea of the trammels in
which, I suppose almost from the days of Queen
Aune until within the last few years, the press of
the country was fettered.
,The papermaker could
tell you that before he could sell a sheet of paper
big enough to print the Manchester Examiner upon,
for example, he had to pay an Excise duty of 30 per
cent., and there was a Government officer going in
and out of his works with equal authority with him-
self, but when he had paid his 30 per cent. and sent
his paper to the office of the Examiner in Man-
chester, or the Observer here, what followed? Why
that the editor, could not print it until he got a
stamp put upon it, which stamp cost him as much
as the whole value of the paper. The stamp was 100
per cent. on the value of the paper, and when he
began to print his newspaper and to fill the columns
with those things which newspaper proprietors so
much like, what happened ? If the advertisement
was one line or two lines only—a lufusemaid want-
ing a situation, a gardener wanting employment, a
clerk wanting a new engagement, or an estate for
sale that took a column to fill, the price was all the
same. Big and little, each advertisement paid 18d in
shape of taxation to the Government. The result
was that you had very few newspapers, and they
were dear, and I must say, taking them all together
that they were not nearly so good as they are now.
Now, what is a newspaper in this country ? It is a
tremendous power. I wish every newspaper was in
the hands not only of an intelligent, but of an
honest and good man. If that were the case it
would not so often be made the vehicle of slander
and the instrument for diffusing errors among the
people. But we must have a fair stage, and we hope
and believe that that which is true in the newspaper
world will finally prevail. But I doubt whether
your school system, which is a very bad one, or
your pulpit, which doubtless might be improved—
(laughter)—or your platform, which assumes great
freedom in this country—l doubt whether any one
of these can measure itself along with the newspaper
power in the influence which it every day exerts on
the people, and on the interests and prospects of the
country. (Cheers.) But all this was-being strangled
by these taxes, and after we had got the advertise-
ment and stamp duty off, there came a desperate
fight, as you remember, about the paper duty.
When the House of Commons, carrying the Budget
of Mr. Gladstone, repealed the paper duty, the
House of Lords, following the rash counsel of Lord
Derby, resisted that repeal—they rejected that bill.
They brodsoot ftelnselves into partial collision with
the House of Commons, and in consequence of that
vote, for another year the tax was still collected.
But there is not in the world a class of persons who
really, if they knew it, were more interested in the
abolition of these taxes than the Tory party. I.
know no class of men who are so wanting in good
information of every kind. (Laughter and cheers.)
As I have said that the repeal of the corn law
was felt in every hamlet and in every family, I
say that the repeal of the taxes on newspapers has
been felt in every part of the country, and there is
not a single village in the United Kingdom in
which the average intelligence of the people has not
been raised by that great act of legislation. There
is another subject on which I wi:l touch for a =-
moment rcmotc from this, but still of great im-
portance to the interests and character of the nation.
You know that Great Britain and Ireland, or rather
the Crown of these realms, holds sway over a very
large empire in the East Indies, an empire so large
that its population is probably more than double
the population of the most populous of the other
empires of the world, excepting only that of China.
I took a great interest in the government of India.
I objected to an empire of 120,000,000 or more being
confided to 24 directors of an antiquated commer-
cial company sitting in Leadenhall-street and who
were mostly elected by a systdm of corruption at
.least equal to that by which a large number of
members of the House of Commons got their seats.
I was against the Company, and insisted that that

form of government should be abolished, that the
government of India, so long as India was a de-
pendency of this kingdom, should be direct from
the Crown, and that there should be in this country
an omnipotent Indian Minister responsible to Par-
liament. The old system which prevailed was about
as bad as it could be. It was good for conquering
and taxing, but for nothing else, for the law was
bad and the administration was bad, and through-
out many parts of India I believe the government
exercised by the East India Company partoo'k
rather of the nature of a Turkish government than
of a Christian administration. (Cheers.) Yet
we have seen the Indian Minister for two, three,
and four hours at a time get up and defend that
system. But there came an event (laughter and
cheers)—there will come another event before long
(cheers) —there came the great Indian Mutiny, when
it was within a hair's breadth whether the power of
England should not be driven absolutely from India,
and what happened? Why the Indian Minister was
converted to my view of the case. It was not only
my view, but the view of men of far more Indian
experience than I had. The Cabinet was converted,
the Houses of Parliament were converted, and this
company that just before had been described as the
most ingenious and admirable system of government
was swept away, perhaps not without remorse, but it
was swept away, and the Government of the Queen
succeeded in its place. There was one recommenda-
tion of mine which was not followed, to which in
one sentence I will refer. I urged that this great
empire in India should be divided into five or six in-
dependent Presidencies or States. 1 argued that the
20 millions of people in the Presidency of Madras
could be governed farbetterfrom the city of Madras
than they could be governed in conjunction with all
the other Presidencies of India by a Government
sitting in Calcutta, and I urged that this division
should take place on two grounds—first, that India
could be governed better by a series of Presidential
Governments than by one central authority ; and,
further, I used an argument of a more far-reaching
character, which is this, that the time would come
when the power of England would be withdrawn
from India, and that it is our duty to that country,
to which we owe so much, to endeavour, if possible,
to build up there a series of nationalities, so that
when the all-controlling and dominant power of
England ended there should remain in each Presi-
dency a distinct organised nationality which should
be able to sustain for itself a government, and.to
perpetuate order where, if something of this sort be
not done, chaos, I am afraid, must come. There
is no such thing permanent as universal empire.
If you turn to history you will find that the great
empire of Alexander fell to pieces after Alexander's
death ; the great empire of Charlemagne fell to
pieces after his death ; the First Napoleon appeared
as if he was to establish a continental empire,
but when his hand was withdrawn that empire
separated into several States, and when the hand
of England is withdrawn from India, instead
of 120 or 150 millions in one nation, in all proba-
bility you will have a break up and a separation and
a chaos, and, it may be, no end of civil strife ;
whereas, if we have the power, with creating five or
six separate nationalities of a reasonable size, in all
probability when the time came for England to
withdraw from India, that great country might be
resolved into five or six several States, in which
there ought to be good government and order, just
as much as there is at least among the various
nations of Europe. I must speak of another coun-
try, which, though geographically not so far from
us as India, is still unhappily partly in the condition
of a foreign, and even of a hostile, country. I
allude to Ireland. (Hear, hear.) There is a party
in England which speaks of justice to Ireland as if
it were merely a catch phrase for the popular ear
in that country, and as if it had no real meaning.
Now, I hold that to sustain in a country a foreign
and a hostile Church, and to confiscate all the
ecclesiastical revenues of that country to that
Church, and that Church enclosing within its bor-
ders but a very small minority of the people—l say
that that is an act of injustice such as I believe
statesmanship or mirstatesmanship has never yet
committed in any other country—(cheers)—and I
say, further, that to maintain laws which are
adverse to the national division of the land where
the whole soil has been confiscated, as it has been
within the last 200 years, is to perpetuate the exclu-
sion of the people from the possession of their own
soil, and to create and make perpetual pauperism and
discontent. If that were done in Poland, in Hun-
gary, in Venetia—if it had been done under the in-
fluence of a conquering Government, I believe there
is not a single man or woman iu England who
would not have been ready to condemn such
a state of things. (Cheers.) I have raised
my voice on many occasions —I believe on
every fitting occasion—against a state of things
which is absolutely destructive of content and loyalty
in Ireland. With regard to other subjects, you
know that I have on some occasions spoken against
the existence of laws of this country favouring the
preservation of game. I believe them to be most in-
jurious to the farmer and most demoralising to the
labouring population on the farms. You know that
11 have been opposed to what I considered an ex-
cessive cruelty in our penal code, and specially I
have been opposed to that most barbarous return of
heathett times—the infliction of the punishment of
death. You know, further, that I have urged altera-
tions in our laws with regard to land, leaving natural
circumstances to interfere with that injurious ac-
cumulation of land which is constantly proceeding
in this country, and that I have recommended that
common sense and common justice should deal with
property when it comes from some owner who has
died intestate—that is, without a will. (Cheers.)
And you know that on many occasions I have argued
that it was for the direct and obvious interests of
the nation that there should be esi ablished univer-
sally a system of education which should be under
local direction, and supported by local rules.
(Cheers.) You know, also, that with regard to a
point referred to is the address as to peace between
nations I was greatly opposed to the war carried on
12 years ago for the support of the Mahomedan
Empire, in which, as I believe this country had not
the remotest interest, as at various times I have
argued with the people of this country against those
foolish panics with regard to France, in favour of
peace for ever with this country, and more recently
in favour of the most cordial friendship with the
English nation beyond the Atlantic. (Cheers.)
I have merely mentioned these subjects to show
you what are the points which I have felt it
my duty to touch during the 25 years of my
political career. On looking back I do not con-
demn myself for anything I have done with regard
to any one of these questions, and I believe now,
when I stand before you thus to recapitulate
them, that you will not condemn me. (Cries of
" No !") Nor will you say that I have knowingly
swerved from the great commanding and direct-
inghich when I first came before
til e principlepublic
131)(3n
intended' to base my political life.
(Cheers.) There is one thing, it is true, that I
greatly regret in this retrospect,and that is the small
success that has attended any efforts that I have
been able to make—(no, no)—with regard to many
of these subjects. And now, when I ask a very rea-
sonable thing, that the millions of my countrymen
may be freely heard in that Chamber which for so
many hundreds of years has called itself the Com-
mons of England, when I ask that they shall be
heard, when I have said that it would be a good
thing for the United Kingdom, and good for free-
dom everywhere, that they should now seize the
sceptre which for the last 200 years has been
wielded by a class—when I say this I am subjected
not only to opposition—for that I could understand
—but to an opposition conducted with a falsehood
and a malice which know no scruple, and which, if
I were not supported by the honest sympathie.4 of
millions of my countrymen, might overwhelm me.
(Cheers.) What is the end proposed by these
changes ? It is not to destroy our institutions, it is
not to change a dynasty, it is not to seize the pro-
perty of the rich, it is not to give to ignorance and
to vice the disposition of great national affairs, but
it is. to give power to Parliament from that source
from which its only power can be received, so that
Parliament may have power to remedy abuses which
are acknowledged to exist on every hand in the de-
partments and thelegislatiun of the State. (Cheers.)

Parliament has not power now to save the public
money. We would give it power to save the public
money ; to make the law something felt of justice
and benevolenee throughout the whole land ; and
also that it should be able to raise the people to the
highest level of comfort and instruction, of morality
and freedom. (Cheers.) At this moment, notwith-
standing that the omnipotence of Parliament exists
as it has ever existed, Parliament is paralyzed. You
hear some talk about the reorganization of the army.
Ido not know what that is or means. It generally
ends in a large additional vote of money. You
hear some talk of the reconstruction of the navy.
This will end in another million or two being voted
beyond the excessive votes of past years. Every-
body says that the Board of Admiralty wants re-
forming ; but there is no power in Parliament to re-
form it. Everybodyknows that the laws of England
are a chaos hardly equalled in the world besides, and
that it remains very much like what Cromwell de-
scribed them 200 years ago when he said that they
were a " tortuous and ungodly jungle." They re-
main very much so now in this country; while in
the various States of North America the whole legal
s} stem has been codified, so that some men, at least,
can understand the law. The law of England stands
such that no man, not even the greatest luminary on
the Bench, can tell you what the law of England is
on 50 questions. Take the question of education,
you will hardly talk to a man in the House of Corn-
mons who will not tell you that education is a great
question, and admit that what has been done has
been done awkwardly and expensively, and that
somethingmore is required; but I do not believe that
it is in the power of any Government to pass any
decent or satisfactory measure through that house.
Take the caseof the Church. Onedoes not like to say
much against the Church, because the Church always
says that she is in danger, and I would not add to
her fears ; but the Church just now reminds me very
much of that old woman of whom the doctor asked
what was the matter with her, and she said that she
did not know, but she felt very badly in her inside.
(Laughter.) I am not referring to anyassaults upon
the Church from the outside ; but I see every day
in the newspapers accounts of the fearful conflicts
waging within the borders of the Church itself ; and
when anything comes to a crisis it goes to a court of
law, to the Committeeof the Privy Council, or some-
where else, and a number of judges with wigs on
decide what is or what is not orthodox in the Church
of England. lam glad to see zeal in the Church of
England, but if any Churchman gives himself the
trouble to read what I am saying, I beg to remind
him that nothing is so perilous for an Established
Church as religious zeal, and I should not be sur-
prised if some within this building who are now lis-
tening to me will witness a tremendous catastrophe
in that venerable institution—the Established
Church of England. But Parliament cannot meddle
with the Church of England. It has not the power,
of course. If everybody is willing, Parliament could
upset the Church of England, like the Parliament
of Florence is just doing in Italy ; but, at present,
Parliament has not the power to do anything with
regard to it. Take the question of the accumula-
tion of land. Why, if a man rose from the dead on
the floor of the House of Commons to point out the
terrible consequences of the land laws to the great
bulk of the population labouring on the land, to the
great and small landowners, they would say he was
an impostor, and tell him to begone to the realms
whence he came. (Cheers.) Take the question of
Ireland. There is no man in the louse of Commons
who takes more interest in, or who is more friendly
to a'just goverment of Ireland than Mr. Gladstone ;
there is no man either in the Ministry or the Oppo-
sition who can prevail on the House of Commons to
do anything substantial to remedy the grievances of
the Irish people. In fact, it has been so for a long
time in the Parliament of England, from the time
of the Revolution down to the time of the Reform
Bill, a dreary period of 140 years. You will look
in vain for any considerable, wise, or good legisla-
tion in that House. Immediately after the Reform
Bill, on the wave of a great popular commotion,
there were many useful measures passed, and fol-
lowing the agitation for free trade, aided by the
famine in Ireland, a commercial revolution was ac-
complished, but since then nothing has been done
and nothing can be done at this moment. I ven-
ture to say that the corruption of Parliament and
the class interests there represented are dominant,
and that the House of Commons is paralysed for
good. You hear in the Tory papers, which are
s thea
said
peoplecanno
to n
agreebehalf
doof
aan•Gy
tobvi
ne rgn
one nt
the e q.wul si ethi oni t oins
looking around for some kind of excuse to offer to
which the people want something to be done, that
they are going to offer a whole batch of measures
of administrative reform. Some measures may be
proposed, and one or two probably passed, but it
majority of that
body will be something very small, for you can have no
idea, who have not sat in the House of Commons,
how
yt
o g
difficultaree to
a
i ist toy g
o pr
ood
on a
measurewhatsoever; and
I say neither Lord Russell, nor Mr. Gladstone, nor
week can prevail
Lord Derby, nor Mr. Dmiseraaseulir,esnoorfanyamotehlieorramtioann
next
td
honestly to the
considerationownhoi
tw tilol
smeetet itselfinofth
any
ys
Holuoutesley
and improvement which the people have a right to
demand, and which nearly every man in Parliament
will admit call for its attention. (Cheers.) I say
that there is only one power in the country which
can do anything in these matters, and that power is
that the people
that in this country,
saying
gt
never was more
ittsrhuet
ehpetehosaopnul people. There
osTf
ahpteortlehi
amalnopmoo lledvnestra.
is
at any rate, there is no other source of political
power to be exerted on behalf of the people. There-
fore, I say, without fear of contradiction, that the
extension of the franchise, and the improvement of
the representation of the people, which I have for
gmaenssyayneda
by thertshdemanded,
safety
loudinevitableis as necessary for the pro-
gathering and the almost

unanimous cry of a great people. (Cheers.) lam
therefore, if it be possible, more than ever in favour
of this Reform, and I believe it to be necessary for

the House of Commons, necessary for every insti-
tution of the country,_ and as absolutely necessary

for the contentment of the people. (Cheers. Ido
not intend to make a speech to-night, and, indeed,
I have not made a speech on the subject of Reform.
I have rather contented myself with looking.back
over 25 years since I have been confronted openly
and prominently with the politics of the country.
I have pointed out to you many of the great ques-
tions in which I have taken any interest. In some
of these questions a great progress has been made ;
in some others, in many others, very little has been
done. I plead before you as a
fair tribunal of my
countrymen against the charges which have been
brought against me of anti-national feelings, of a
disregard for the true interests and the real and
valuable institutions of the nation. (Cheers.) I

judge by this meeting, and by this kind address that
you have presented to me, that you admit my plea,
and that you freely and unanimously acquit me. I
thank you from my heart for this address, and for
your manifold kindness to me. lam overpowered
with the sense of how little it is possible for any
man to do to merit this kind of confidence and the
amount of commendation which you have shown
and expressed to me to-night. You judge favour-
ably of my services. I have not worked, as you
know, for honours or the emoluments of office. I
have striven for the substantial good of the millions
of my countrymen, and I can rest content with the
feeling that my country will do me justice.
The hon. gentleman,
having spoken more than an
hour, sat down amid enthusiastic cheering.
On the motion of Alderman Thomas Ashworth,
—"
seconded by Alderman E. L. Ashworth, and sup-
ported by Mr. Councillor John Petrie, it was re-
solved That this meeting, regarding Parliamen-
tary Reform as the political question of the day,
thoroughly- approves Mr. Bright's course in refe-
rence to it, and assures him of its hearty sympathy,
and pledges itself to give him and his colleagues its
earnest support until a good, honest, andsubstantial
Reform Bill becomes the law of the land."
The usual vote of thanks was then given to the
chairman and the proceedings terminated.

ARRIVAL FROM JAMAICA.--The steamer Chian,
with dates ,from Jamaica to January 4, arrived at Liver-
pool yesterday. News had been received of a rising of
Indians at Honduras, and troops had been sent from Kings-
ton to Belize to suppress the revolt.

Our Holiday at the Hayes.
BY GEORRE STRONG, M.D.
(From the Anglo-American Times.)
Dr. Strong's object in giving this little volume
to the world is clearly to treat an abstruse
subject in a pleasant and popular style. In his
opinion homoeopathy is the path in medicine
which leads the physician to the true system of
treatment, and he brings out forcibly the ad-
vantages of this practice and in a conversational
style, which, may be generally read and understood
by the world. He takes his readers with him, and
a party of medical men, to a pleasant country
house, and he is careful to introduce an allopath
army surgeon and a well-read country squire to
maintain the argument. Those who know little of
homoeopathy, and desire to know more, may here
gather the honey of much labour in a couple of
hours' agreeable reading. A lecture is playfully
introduced, in which the party is carried into a
century hence, when all the errors of the present
and past are exposed. From Harvey's discovery
of the circulation of the blood, which proved a
greater triumph for surgery than for medicine, the
lecturer traces the successive blunders which
followed from phlebotomy with its leeches, cup-
ping, and lancet, to the thriving trade of the
chemist, when the wholesale consumption of drugs
was the order of the day. Errors are discovered
and dismissed, after hundreds of thousands have
fallen victims, till, at last, science strikes into the
right and onward path leading to the golden age of
medicine, which, according to our author, is the
homoeopathic system of treatment. It would be
presumption in us to do more than state Dr. Strong's
opinion, which he backs with able arguments
and strong facts. In this free land, people can
choose for themselves, and such works, which have
every appearance of an open and honest discus-
sion of the subject, can easily be procured by all.
We quote from his work :
" Dr. Jones resumed :—You are a friend to Dr.
Billing, and I daresay you remember the opening
sentence of his clever principles of medicine ?'
" The first step towards treating disease success-
fully is to ascertain, as free as possible, the nature
of the alteration which has taken place in the seat
of the disease, or what has been called technically
the proximate cause. How if this step prove a
false step ? Nothing in life is more common. A
patient with an obscure and obstinate ailment
runs up to town, and takes the opinion of half-a-
dozen of our leading physicians, and I will lay you
any amount of odds that not even two will agree
in the opinion and treatment. Thus a notable
fallacy generally underlies the first step. Here is
one of our greatest triumphs : our treatment is quite
independent of the proximate cause.
Here are a score of the most formidable known
diseases, all arising from infinitesimal poisons.
The nuMber is so large. as to lead us to infer that
most diseases spring from causes more highly sub-
tilised than the common minerals of our globe.
Further, moisture, heat, and cold—subtle agents
still, are the prolific source of the next great class
of acute attacks. Now,. Mr. Carlyon candidly
admits that many of our drugs may be considered
as poisons too. Ought not, then, a shrewd intel-
ligent mind, to catch a hint from this obvious
analogy, and strive to work out hence some simple
and practical method of employing the one to com-
bat the other ? Why persist in carrying gross
drugs against mtherialised poisons, or powers
ranging at large in our bodies ?
" This idea of a drug poison and a disease
poison, carrying on a combat a l'outrance with each
other, and the battle-field being a man's body,
has many an analogue in nature or in art."
* *
The knowledge that the exciting cause is virulent
poison does not very much assist the homoeopa-
thist in the cure. We may learn this from the
study of another exciting cause—cold. If the
present company at this moment were exposed to
cold, one of our number might be attacked with
catarrh, another pneumonia, a third with pleurisy,
rheumatism, or erysipelas ; but appropriate reme-
dies would have to be sought according to the
homoeopathic law. The medicine chosen must
agree with the symptom, not with the cause,
otherwise we might have a panacea or universal
remedy for all the varied effects of cold. From
this subject the conversation goes on to discuss
a case in which the drug was given as a cure,
which would produce the symptoms under which
the patients were labouring, which is in accordance
with the law of homoeopathy. Formerly, in allo-
pathic days, says Dr. Strong, with doubt and
quaking, I used to knock at my patient's door ;
now I have no fears. I walk in confidently, and
it is an exceptional occurrence to find a patient
unexpectedly worse, or suffering a relapse. There
is a great change. Illnesses are shortened ; the
dangers and horrors of the old system are vastly
mitigated. Think, too, what a gain, what a relief,
to the mind of the physician, that he now follows
one rule, one law in prescribing, instead of hesitat-
ing between half-a-dozen fine-spun speculations !
He quotes from Dr. Lardner's discourse on the
study of Natural Philosophy the following
sentence :
"So far as our experience has hitherto gone, every
advance_ towards generality has at the same time,
been a step towards simplification. It is only when
we are wandering and lost in the mazes of par-
ticulars, or entangled in a fruitless attempts to work
our way downwards in the thorny paths of appli-
cations, to which our reasoning powers are incom-
petent, that nature appears complicated ; the
moment we contemplate it as it is, and attain a
position from which we can take a commanding
view, though but a small part of its plan, we never
fail to recognise that sublime simplicity On which
the mind rests satisfied that it has attained the
truth." Several medical questions of absorbing
interest are discussed, but the author as far as
possible adheres to his plan of making the subjects
intelligible to the ordinary reader. Those who
have faith in homoeopathy, would have their faith
strengthened, and unbelievers in the systeth might
be converted.

Foreign Mail Packet List.

MAILS DUE.

n.ustralia and New Zealand, via Southampton. --Feb. 19
Ditto, via lifarseilles .......... Feb. 3
Brazil and Capa Verdi. by British packet. Ycb.
Ditto, by French packet
Cape of Good Hope, Asoension, and St. Helena Feb. 27
China, Penang. and Sing4pore, via Southampton Feb
Ditto, via Marseilles Feb. 13
Faikland Islands

Gibraltar, via Southampton Feb. 2.
India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Bouthampton 1%_1) 2.

Ditto, via Marseilles
India (Bombay), via Southampton. Feb. 2
._ .

Ditto, via iarseillee Feb 7.
Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton Feb 2.
Ditto, via Marseilles Feb 7
Mauritius, via Southampton
Ditto, via Marseille 3... Fr b. • 3
Newfoundland
Portugal
•
Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon..
United States and British North America, by Bri-
tish packet.
Ditto, by United States packet, via Southamp-
ton
Ditto, via Cork
Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderry .. Feb 1

BEDS IN SPAIN.—Next to the cuisine, beds became
perhaps the most important consideration to a
traveller; and of those provided by our amo, we can-
not speak too highly. They were soft,
_springy, and
beautifully clean, and cradled us most snugly till about
seven o'clock next morning, the early dawn of Madrid ope-
rative life. It has become a conventionalpractice to impugn
-the cleanliness of the Peninsula in the matter of domestic
vermin, but whatever its deficiencies in other respects, we
must speak of it as wo found it in this. Although it certainly
was our lot at Cordova " males pati culices," this was the
solitary instance in which we ever saw any of these
uninteresting entomological specimens. Victor Hugo's
mother, during her husband's diplomatic career in
Madrid, describes with unpleasant minuteness the
" swarms" of those creatures she encountered in the
folds of the blue and unit= satin draperies of Prince
Masserano's Palacio. All we can say is, we were 1010.3.1
in a thimoughly Spanish house (certainly sixty years later
than the time to which Maclaine la Gdn6rale alludes), and
never saw the ghost of a " Norfolk Howard." After all
Spain is not so vary arriere, and we may blush to read in
" Pepys' Diary," at the date of 1668, the following plain-
spoken ;entry " 12th, Friday.—Up, finding our beds
good, but lousy: which did make us merrie !"—Colas de
Espana.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—On the eve of the session there is an ever
increasing difference to be observed between the
political public and political personages. The former
are all curiosity and zeal. Nothing will satisfy them
but they must know at once what foes as well as
friends are about to do. They assume that every-
thing has been decided ; yet, somewhat inconsis-
tently, they wish to feel they are strengthening re- ,
solution and contributing advice, and so entitling
themselves to share the triumph at hand. On the
other hand, the personages have but little to say,
and don't wish to say it. Their great anxiety is to
keep themselves perfectly clear for any course that
may be found best. They are aware that their
words are not only heard by their admiring consti-
tuents, but are also put down by truthful reporters,
printed, dispersed over the world, and carefully scru-
tinised by clever antagonists in search of rash pro-
mises, unsound principles, or foolish admissions.
They are, or ought to be, masters in the art of
" reticence"—the new name for what was once
called the use of language to conceal meaning. So
nobody of any sense would expect to learn much
from a speech by Mr. Milner Gibson, a letter in-
stead of a speech by Mr. C. Villiers, or an address
by the noble and youthful M.P. for Nottingham.
We should be really sorry to think that we pos-
sessed even the outlines of a policy in the ingenious
compositions before us ; and, in fact, they are stu-
diously wide of any mark that might be imagined.
Mr. Milner Gibson favours his constituents with a
neat speech on the restoration of peace in the
United States, on the working of the French treaty,
the Reform debate of last session, and the advan-
tages of popular Government, with nothing nearer
the approaching crisis than replies to one observa-
tion in a Conservative journal, and another by a
=Conservative acquaintance. Mr. Villiers reminds
the people of Wolverhampton that he has always
been a Reformer on all subjects whatever, and
may, therefore, be trusted to do what is best
when the time comes, but that, as he wishes to
give every proposal the fairest consideration, he
would rather not drop a word that might
prejudge the question. Lord Amberley dis-
courses at large about the Constitution, the proper I
place and composition of the House of Commons.
the licence to be accorded to the working classes in
the choice of their own political methods, the can-
dour due from one class to another, and the exag-
gerated estimates apt to be formed of all political
reforms. The people of Nottingham must have
thought him exceedingly clever in concealing some-
thing or other, but whether that were knowledge or
the contrary would not be so clear. It is a very
pretty speech, nevertheless. Mr. Milner Gibson
may be considered the proper representative of ex-
treme opinions in the late Cabinet, and on that ac-
count alone would be worth the sort of eaves-drop-
ping attention now given to many a man of less
consequence. When he tells us, in reply to some
observations he has seen and beard, that any mea-
sure introduced by a Conservative Government will
be either a good one or a bad one, and that in the
former case it will split the party, in the latter ex-
pose it to certain defeat, he says only what has
been said before, and is so probable as to occur to
most people without high and authoritative sugges-
tion. Indeed, it is the confessed dilemma of Go-
vernment, which, like every Conservative or Tory
Government there ever was, contains men only held
back by their colleagues. Reform, however, must
come, he says, even in the case of a Conservative
break-up, as in that case there will, he says, be two
" Caves," the one of which might be paired against
the other. We don't quite see how the four parties,
great and small, supposed in this double succession,
are to sort themselves so as to form a convenient ar-
rangement for the passage of a good measure.
Unless a millenium is even nearer than our sages
predict, we can scarcely hope to see five hundred
sensible Whigs and Tories agreeing upon a bill,
condemned by the recondite reasons of a hundred
crotchety bigots or philosophers. We have no wish
to see honest independence of opinion trampled
under the feet of so overwhelming a majority,
however wise and patriotic. But such specula-
tions only convict themselves, for in the high game
of politics the only thing that comes to pass is the
unexpected, and that which never comes to pass is
the nice little scheme that is to make everything
straight and square. There is more faith to be
placed in the restoration of ex-Monarchs to their
lost thrones than the easy, pleasant, and honourable
accomplishment of great reforms. On this point,
then, we cannot quite go along with Mr. Milner
Gibson. He has more claim to our acquiescence
When he says that all the reasons alleged for the
postponement of Reform—indefinite as that post-
ponement must inevitably be—are, in truth, the
best reasons for its immediate settlement. The
supposed four-fifths now wanting representation
cannot reasonably be desired to wait till our diffi-
culties and arrears have been disposed of by the old
Parliament. If they have a right to more place and
might in the Legislature, the right is as good for
one set of measures, or one branch of legislation, as
another. Least of all can the existing House claim
to do all that ik.has left undone, and mend all that
it has done ill. A domestic servant is dismissed
because he wont do his work and leaves it in arrears;
and he certainly would not gain a respite by point-
ing to the disorder, the confusion, the accumulation,
and the dirt visible in the whole range of his depart-
ment, and calling for immediate attention. The
principal objection that presents itself to Lord Am-
berley's remarks, where they approach the great
question, is that they were Lord Amberley's. He
is of opinion that there are too many sons and re-
latives of peers in the House of Commons, and that
there is too close an alliance between that house
and the aristocracy, The result is that it does not
represent the people. He would rather a less repre-
sentation of the nobility, and more of the working
class, and he goes so far as to recongnize iu the
Trades' Unions a sound and safe embodiment of the

working classes and a means for their representation.
So far as we understand his lordship, he would
like to see a score or two lords a❑d honourables
giving place to the secretaries, delegates, and other
gentlemen we have heard so much of lately. They
would be able to advocate with authority the claims
of labour, and enable it to fight better its old battle
with land and capital. This would, of course, come
under the head of those fancy franchises denounced
by none so much as the great party to which Lord
Amberley belongs, and it certainly implies a very
different system of representation from that in favour
with high Liberal authorities. But why does Lord
Amberley confine his suggestions to the House of
which he has seen so little, and which, in the course
of nature, he can only be a bird of passage? Has he
no plan for giving more efficiency to the House of
Lords, and making it fitter for its place in the Legis-
lature? Can he not even suggest how it is to be
assimilated to the more numerous, more powerful,
and more energetic body, with which it must always
work in entire harmony? When the lordlings are
eliminated from the Commons, who is to secure that
they shall run well with the Lords, and leave that
House at least worth a seat in it? It is easy enough
to criticise, but not to stop in criticism. Anyhow,
the House of Commons, as it exists, is as good as the
Lords; and if the one is to be reformed,—off the face
of the creation if necessary,—what exemption or
grace can be claimed for the other ?

POST.—Whatever differences of opinion may exist
in respect to the politics of the Earl of Clarendon,
none will deny his title to be considered a fair sample
of an English nobleman. Tories may regret that
be is a Liberal ; but even his great political oppo-
nents would not venture to suggest that he has not
done credit to the aristocracy of which he is a mem-
ber. He has taken a prominent place in the House
of Peers. Ile has done good service to the State.
He has on several occasions been one of the
principal advisers of his Sovereign. In his private
capacity his worth has been no less unequivocally
recognised. lie is a kind and considerate land-
lord, a polished and educated gentleman. His
demeanour is courteous, and those who, when he
held the seals of. Secretary of State, knew him in
the light of an empl9yer, have always rendered a
willing tribute to the kindliness of his character
and' his forbearance. No one, therefore, could be
better fitted than the Earl of Clarendon to vindicate
the peerage from the imputations which it has be-
come the fashion for a certain class to cast upon,it,
and we are glad to see that he availed himself of the
opportunity of doing so at the annual meeting of
the West Hertfordshire Agricultural Society a few

days since. Of the merits of societies such as these
it is needless to speak, and the eulogy passed upon
them by the Earl of Clarendon will doubtless be re-
ceived without contradiction. In alluding to the
benefits arising from the meetings of men engaged
in the same kind of business, he pointed out that
community of interest had a tendency to sweep
away class distinctions, and then added that if such
distinctions were created or maintained it was by
those who sought to cause ill will or disunion
amongst the people of this country. " This sin,"
•continued the Earl of Clarendon, " for it would be
a sin if it existed, is generally laid at the door of the
aristocracy, and every now and then a scapegoat 15
seat foith into the world laden with the sin of the
aristocracy, and iy usually prsonitied by souie un-
fortunate peer who is very ignorant, very lloat(d,
and who is au enemy to progress, and who is o
' wealthy and so selfish as to be incapable of sym-
pathising with the wants and aspirations of the
Foor." This is in truth a terse résumé of the
articles of a very curious political creed which !s
now taught, although not for the first time, in this
country, and it may not be out of place at a time
like the present, when a complete recasting of the
national institutions is demanded, to inquire how
far the charges made against the peerage can be
justified. The Earl of Clarendon gave them an
indignant denial, and disapproved the existence of
class distinctions by illustrations of individuals
who, though of the humblest origin, had risen to
the highest places in the State. To a certain ex-
tent these answers may be considered conclusive.
It is not very easy to explain the grounds on which
the extreme members of the Radical party seek to
cast odium on the House of Lords. It is very in-
telligible that any section of a community which is
debarred the exercise of particular privileges should
regard with dislike those who are more favoured
than themselves, and this dislike would naturally be
enhanced if the enjoyment of the coveted privileges
depended upon pure accident. - The case made
against the House of Lords is that its members are
entitled to legislate for the nation, not because they
are more intelligent or more industrious, or more
wealthy than their fellow-citizens, but simply be-
cause they happen to be the legal heirs of
inihvi-
duals who were entitled to legislate before them.
Thus far the case of the Radical party is easy to be
understood. However excellent a hereditary peer-
age may be, it is incontestable that many nations
flourish without one, and it is certainly a fair ques-
tion for discussion whether an individual should be
entitLd to a seat in the T..egi,,lature Ly the mere
accident of birth. But the opponents of the Eng-
lish House of Lords do not stop here. They con-
stantly urge not only that a peer may be an unfit
legislator, but that he must be so ; and they make
it an essential element of their case that he has
direct interest in oppressing his fellow-subjects, and
moreover, that he loses uo opportunity of doing so.
Mr. Bright on more than one occasion has said that
a hereditary peerage was an opprobrium to a civi-
lised State ; and he and those who support his views
assume that no political system should acknowledge
any rank, much less its incidental privileges, unless
acquired by the intelligence or worth of the indivi-
dual. The suggestion that a peer individually, or
the whole peerage collectively, must have interests
antagonistic to the interests of the nation, appears
to us not only gratuitous, but is in fact contra-
dicted by almost every page of English history.
If the unenfranchised choose to consider themselves
the nation they may point to the opposition which
the peers offer to their projects as a proof of the
soundness of their theory, but those who regard the
unenfranchised as only a section of the English
people will probably be of opinion that the peers
may well entertain a conscientious view that in
opposing certain proposed changes they are acting
in the interests of the entire nation. When the agi-
tation for the Reform Bill of 1832 was at its height
the opposition of the House of Peers to that mea-
sure put the House in extreme peril, but few persons
can entertain a doubt that the peers were actuated
by a patriotic desire to maintain a political system
which they believed worked well. If they were mis-
taken in this respect they shared the fallibility com-
mon to mortals. It is, however, their personal even
more than their political character that the peers
have most cause for indignation at finding attacked
by their opponents.' The Earl of Clarendon was jus-
tified in protesting against the practice of invariably
selecting a peer as the embodiment of all that is
selfish and unpatriotic. It is scarcely necessary to
say that no body of ipen could exist in a free cowl-
try whose members were such as Mr. Bright and his
friends paint the members of the English peerage.
And the most conclusive proof of the fallacy of the
assumption on which these gentlemen base thelr
arguments is supplied by the good esteem in which
the members of the House of Lords are, as a rule,
held by those who are brought in contact with thein.
If Mr. Bright, as the representative of the manu-
facturing classes, commands the respect of opera-
tives and mechanics, the Earl of Clarendon, as a re-
presentative of the landed interest, commands the
, respect of those who are occupied in cultivating
soil and rearing stock, and is elected by them the
president of the agricultural society of the count):
in which some of his estates are situated. Surely
agriculture is as well entitled to be represented in a
country as manufacturing labour. The mistake
which the extreme reformers make consists in taking
a one-sided view of a matter which at all events ad-
mits of being regarded in two different lights. the

COUNTRY MARKETS.

SALISBURY.-TUESDAY.

At our market to-day there was an average attendance.
Good wheat ruled dull, at 2s to 3s under former prices.
The trade in barley also slow. Oats made late figures. ,
The following are the quotations :—Wheat realised fro":
to 65s ; barley, 37s to 538 ; oats, 24s to 30s ; beaus, 4"'
to 58s; and peas, 40s to 52s per qr. Tares, from 4i 6d to
5,6 d per bushel ; Best bread, 15d ; household ditto, 1
per 81b loaf. Flour, 45s to 49s per sack.

MONMOUTHSHIRE—TUESDAY.
The supplies at the various markets have boen rod Of
most descriptions of grain, and wheat came to hand in Yeri
fair condition. A good show of barley, mostly foreign;
best malting qualities moved off freely at late rates, an
'_;
grinding sold at enhanced quotations. -English and foreign
beans commanded late values.
The following are the average quotations:—Wheat, red,
7s 3d to 7s 6d per bushel ; white, 7s 9d to 8s Od ; inferior,
Gs Od to 6s 6d ; malting barley, 46s to 52s per qr ;
ing ditto, 31s to 34s Od; beans 44s to 508; white oats, zi
to 28s ; black ditto, 24s 6d to 25s 6d.

TUESDAY.
At this day's market there was a fair attendance of the
trade, but the business done was limited, and quite Of lb
retail character.
English white wheat, 66s to 70s; red, 63s to 665; D3,nt:
sic and Konigsberg, 67s to 72s ; Baltic red, 62s to 60'
Danish and llamburg, 58s to 60s ; Itussian, 55s to 5_.,664
Barley, English, 36s to 50s; grinding, Moditerrane.v•P'
34s to 35s 6d. Oats, new English, 26s to 28s; RUSSIO2
26s to 275. Beans, old English, 58s to 60s• ' foreign,
to 445. Peas, English blue, 42- to 44s Od • foreign
44s to 455; grinding, 43s to 44s Od per qr,

LYNN—MONDAY. •
There was a small market to-day, and a moderate sbc'lrs
of wheat, which mot a steady sale at last week's rate
except damp parcels, which were easier to buy. Malt
and grinding barley was quite as dear. Oats and he
firm.
New wheat, 54s to 58s ; new red, 40s to 48s ; old 'far
67s to 71s ; old red, 59s to 63s per 36 stone. Barley' ;v.'",
malting, 46s to 52s ;secondary, 37s to 38s. Oats, De
24s to 28s per 24 stone. Beans, small, 42s to 445. re‘''
36s to 40s per 28 stone.

GAINSBOROUGH - lIESDAY.
At our market to-day there was a moderate 410°660
wheat, which met a fair sale, at extreme rates—old, 036
to 68s; red and mixed, 61s to 62s per 36 stone. Her
barley rather improved in price. Oats sold at for"'
rates. Beans firm.