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

Ti E SUN, LOiNUON, 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 recoived.

The CHAlnm.tx bri( fly 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-
verFari, s, who having vainly exhausted their argu-
irents 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 work people 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-
tinguished 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 are 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 had 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 have
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 shot 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
miserable and hateful faction should endeavour in
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 ti xtension 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 es was in your power, in the hope
that, place 1 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 your generous 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 detect, 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,

anal those principles were simply these—that the law
and the admiristration 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 derive, 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 most taught the equality and equal
rights 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 millions 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 them. They have less of what

we consider enjoyments of life, they have fewer of
those compensations which give to us who are better
off the many charms of life, and I have learnt
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 having. (Hear.) Well, with this
sympathy it was not wonderful that 25 years ago I
should find myself called out into active political life.
Lany 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 Leavie3t 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
prostrating. After some conversation be said,
" Don't allow this grief, great as it i 3, 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 that, 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-LI 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 the very 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 accomplished. - (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
Anne 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 housemaid 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.) Butall this was being strangled
by these taxes, and after we had got the advertise-
ment and stamp duty off, there came a desperate
light, 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 brought themselves 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 wbo
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 will touch for a mo.
moment remote 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
thelarg e
Crown of these realms, holds sway over a very
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 system of corruption at
least equal to that by which a large number of
members of the House of Commons got their seats.
I waa 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
au omnipotent Indian Minister responsible to Par-
liathent. 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 partook
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 au 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 andadmirable 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 mhstatesmanship has never yet
committed in any other country—(cheers)—and I
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 in 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.l 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
I 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
heathen 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 established 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 in 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-
ing principle upon which when I first came before
the public I intended to base my political life.
(Cheers.) There is one thing, it is true, that I
greatly regret in this rettospect,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 sympathies 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 theleisislation 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 benevolence 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. Everybody knows 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 3 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 Com-
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
something more 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 case of the Church. One does 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 any assaults 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 Coramitteeof 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 House 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
thes
aglsoano
oidodid
that
aagans
ytsan
therooi:nut
ut
aenirh:reoeesfauetorssr
to
oits
nhoodiemor
teeci rkeon epmyi
nTtmdrhoe
orsonyenfgi
papers,
axnsdpc t
uehaprsresaee,cir
tauwol
eyhsostiffoic question
nr dominant,afootrnoer
the people on behalf of a Government which it is
which the people want something to be done, that
they are going to offer a whole batch of measures
of adinini,trative reform. Some measures
may be
proposed, and one or two probably passed, but it
will be something very small, for you can have no
idea, who have not sat in the House of Commons,
how difficult it is to prevail ou a majority of that
body to agree to any good measure whatsoever; and
I say neither Lord Russe,, nor Mr. Gladstone, nor
Lord Derby, nor Mr. Disraeli, nor any other man
who will meet in that House neaxntdwheoenkesctalny ptroevtahiel
rosvetement which the people have a right to
itsoeflf
arneysolumteelaysures
of
amelioration
aoconsideration
diti mt improvement
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
the people. There is an old saying that the people
is the source of political power. It never was more
true than it is at this moment that in this country,
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
many years demanded, is as necessary for the pro-
gress and the safety of the nation as it is rendered
inevitable by the loud gathering and the almost
unanimous cry of a great people. (Cheers.) lam
possible,
Isibbelleieve it to be necessary for
, more than ever in favour
ot therefore, etrheifso re,
Reform,if it be
aid
:do
the House of Commons, necessary for every insti-
tution of the country, and as absolutely necessary
for the contentment of the people. (Cheers. .I do
not intend to make a speech to-night, and, indeed,
I have not made a si;cech 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.)
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 Inc. 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.l 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, and substantial
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 Chilian,
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 durgery 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?
"'Phis 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
homceopathic., 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, wolttld have their faith
strengthened, and unbelievers in the system might
be converted.

Foreign Mail Packet List.