The Sun.
London, England, 1867-06-21 00:00:00

MATCH.

Tho Nun, Bat 71b
-
2

Jessie of Dunblane, Bst 71b

Betting opened at 6 to 4 on Jessie of Dunblane, and
closed at 6 to 5 on The Nun, who won by two I engths.
The Hull Stakes of 5 sovs oach, with 30 added; two year
olds Est 121 b, three Bst 121 b; fillies and, geldings
allowed 31b; winners once in 1866 or 1867 416, twice or
of 200 soya 71b extra ; the second to saves his stake ;
Kingston Course ; 7 subs.
Mr. J. Osborne's fby Newcastle—N Minus 1, 2 yrs,
6st 131 b (Weikel 1
0.1
Mr. Anderson's The Gleaner, 2 yrs, Est 91b.... Noble 2
Capt. Horton Ryhs's Paradise, 2 yrs, 6st9lb....(Cameron
The following also ran:—Cape of Good IDope and Eliza.
Betting-5 to 2 agst Newcastle filly, 3to 1. agst Gleaner,
sto 1 agst Cape of Good Hope. Won by two lengths ;
same between-second and third. -
The Westwood Cup of 50 sops (handicap); winners of
any handicap amounting to 50 sovs after June 11 (at 10
a.m.) 71b.; of two of that value, or one of 100_ sovs, 91b

extra ; one mile and a half.
Mr. Glover's Verdi, by Adamas—Don't Come Late's dam
3 yrs, 7st (Cradock) 1
Mr. R. Chilton's Capitols, 3 yrs, 7st 61b —(11. Challoner) 2
Mr. Crawshaw's Dusty Miller, 4 yrs, Bst 41b (Whiteley) 3
The following also ran :—(tayous, Weatlierbit, and
Captain Hogg.
Betting—Even on Capitols, 4 to !I. agst Verdi, 6 to 1
each agst Lapidist's dam filly and Captain Hogg,. Won
by two lengths. _ _ _

The East Riding Handicap of 3 sovs each, with 40 added ;
winners of any handicap amounting to 50 sovs after
June 11, at 10 a.m. 71b, of two of 50 sovs each, or one
of 100 sovs 91b, or of the Beverley Cup on the previous
day 121 b extra; the second to save his stake ; one mile
and a quarter ; 13 subs.
Mr. J. Warneford's Rel-tub, by Leamington—Princess
Beatrice, 3 yrs, sst 121 b (M. Noble) 1
Mr. T. Masterman's Fitzroy, 4 yrs, 7st 101 b ...(U►:adock) 2
Mr. Falshaw's Ladylike, 3 yrs, sst 121 b (G. Platt) 3
The following also ran : Vernon, Miss Boswell f, and
Rabbit Trap.
Betting-5 to 4 agst Fitzroy, sto 2 each agst Rabbit
Trap and Miss Boswell filly, and 6 to 1 agst Ladylike.
Won by a neck ; two lengths between second and third.
The Holderness Hunt Stakes of 3 sovs each, with 25
added; certain penalties and allowances; non-profes-
sional riders ; second to save his stake. Two miles. 21

subs.
Mr. R. Calder's Aurora Leigh, by Tho Trapper—dam by
Harkaway, 4 yrs, lOst 81b (Owner) 1
Mr. Davy's Wings of the Wind, 5 yrs, list 71b
(Hr. G. Walker) 2
Mr. J. Simpson's Helen, 5 yrs, list 71b (Mr. R. Walker) 3

The following also ran :—Wild Huntsman, Carperby,
Miss Polly, Owstwick, Philosopher, Volunteer, Torn
Moody, and The Rejected.
Betting-5 to 4 agst Aurora Leigh, 4to 1 each agst
Carperby and Owstwick, 6 to 1 agst Wings of the Wind,
and 7 to 1 agst Volunteer. Won by two lengths; bad
third.

Voting Papers.

(From the Times.)

The House of Commons discussing, or attempting
to discuss, an abstract question is not. an edifying
spectacle. All the faults of our national character,
which, as well as its virtues, arc admirably repre-
sented in the Lower House of Parliament, are on
such occasions made strikingly apparent. It would
almost seem as if we- could not deal with any
matter which did not come before us in a concrete
form and illustrated by a thousand prectldents.
The language of our legislators, deprived of the
aid of experience, becomes vague and uncertain ;
theidebate as men who beat the air ; they seek to
hide their mental nakedness by weaving words into
sentences which convey nothing but a sense of
sonorousness. There is a ludicrous side to the ex-
hibition, . yet every sympathetic mind must be
touched by the distress too evidently manifested ;
except, indeed, when—a not uncommon spectacle
—an honourable member who suffers from this
unusual cause of embarrassment betrays his impa-
tience, and tosses aside with contempt the subject
which gives him the trouble of thinking.
The House of Commons has made such swift
progress with the Reform Bill that the 29th
clause, enabling electors in all cases to vote by
voting papers, came on for discussion yesterday,
and the Committee showed all the well-known
symptoms' of distress in dealing with the subject.
The " unerring instinct" of the House came to a
sound conclusion in rejecting the clause, but the
decision was in its most emphatic sense one of in-
stinct. Not, indeed, that voting papers are an en-
tirely new suggestion. They have been in use for
many years in elections under the Poor-law, and
six years ago an Act was passed enabling the elec-
tors of the universities to vote by their means. It
was proposed by the Government that the provisions
of the University Elections Act should be applied
to all elections. But university elections are mat-
ters of so little moment that though a large number,
if not a majority, of the members of the House of
Commons may have votes for the universities, the
provisions of the Act were almost unknown to the
committee, and those who took part in the debato
felt like voyagers in unknown seas. It would, per-
haps, have been as well if some of them, before
entering on the discussion, had made themselves
better acquainted with the statute the operation of
which the Government proposed to extend. Mr.
M'Cullagh Torrens, for example, who led the Op-
position, showed himself absolutely ignorant of the
machinery against the use of which he argued. By
the Act of 1861 any university elector can, after
notice has been given by the returning officer of
the day of election, fill up before a magistrate
of the place where he lives a voting paper, giving
his vote to some candidate or candidates, and
also nominating some one to deliver the voting
paper at the poll. The magistrate must attest the
signature to the paper, declaring that the voter is
personally known to him, and the person who is
authorised to tender the paper at the poll must also
be an elector, and must at the time he gives in the
paper make a declaration that he is personally ac-
quainted with the voter. These are the provisions
which the Government embodied in their bill, and
it
is plain that the policy of adopting them is one
be decided only after grave and careful comp,ar.ison
of arguments. If all electors were perfectly virtu-
ous, if every landlord respected the opinions of his
tenants, if election agents were unknown, the use of
voting papers might be at once introduced. The
suggestion could not, however, even out of Arcadia,
be disposed of by the mere assertion that voting
papers at% unconstitutional, or that their use would
be destructive of the local principle lying at the
root of our electoral system, or by any other vague
phrasewbich might serve to indicate the uncertainty
and distrust of the speaker. Sir R. Palmer candidly
admitted there was much to be said on both sides of
the question. The arguments in favour are, indeed,
obvious, and they are very little diminished by the
legal, difficulties Sir R. Palmer urged. The inten-
tion of the Legislature in conferring votes on elec-
tors by former bills or by the present Reform Bill
is to have the judgment of the persons enfranchised
represented in the Legislature, and it was never
intended that any accident not connected with
the faculty of choice should prevent the voter
from taking part in an election. The mere fact
that it was convenient or inconvenient to an
elector to attend at the polling booth could not be
admitted as a reason why his vote should or should
not be recorded ; and the objection urged by Mr.
Bright that non-residents would be able to vote,
perhaps, in a different direction from the majority
of the residents is a reason why non-residents should
not have a vote at all, and not against giving them
facilities for voting. The arguments in favour of
' Toting papers are, indeed, unanswerable, if we could

ion
eche
aucvor
eint yv
justified
thatt
tth they would
they
adoptionu
wl dou bkie
anhh;actlncl etebisoetali tlynnsy: sused,atilsiedl sufficientl
justifiedavoludldtl their adoption in university
ir
olifveeldecatsiona.ruTlehweiirtieliffnecat
setvoctille'isf tuhurlovievr os iftYt heel epel taocres
in the single instance in which they have been put
into force was to substitute Mr. Hardy for Mr.
Gladstone in the representation of the university
of Oxford, but if we believe in representative Go-
vernment we ought not to regret even this conse-
quence. The choice of electors may be bad, but so
long as it is a free choice we must acquiesce in it.
The very consideration however which justifies the
use of voting papers in university elections furnishes
a conclusive reason for rejecting their use elsewhere.
We should not only be without a guarantee that
the result of an election represented the free choice
of the electors : all experience tells us we should
have positive grounds for believing the contrary.
The speech Lord Stanley made ten years ago,
when Lord Cranborne first moved for a select com-
mittee to inquire into the possibility of introducing
voting papers into Parliamentary elections, contains
such reasoning against the experiment that it is to
be regretted he did not last night enlighten the com-
mittee as to the grounds which now induced him to
support a contrary conclusion. If he had explained
the motives of his conversion, he might have con-
verted the committee; Jut until he did so, the
majority prudently determined- to abide by the
opinions he expressed when out of. office.. Like
Sir Roundell Palmer yesterday, Lord Stanley
recognised a balance of arguments on the question.
It was perfectly true that voting papers would
diminish rioting and neutralise the intimidation of
a mob ; but if they would destroy the power of a
crowd over an elector, they would add indefi-
nitely to the power of individuals. The intimi-
dation of a landlord or an employer, practised
an
agent
col-
lects rents, and many a county election would be
might collect
llet would
votes
as be
he le ga
determined by a comparison of lists of tenants.
upirosebda. byA
man's
throughan,s
The facilities which voting papers would afford to
bribery are also evident. They would remove, as
Lord Stanley pointed out, the insecurity a briber
now has, as to whether the vete be has purchased
will be given, by enabling him to secure at once the
vote itself, instead of a promise of it. The offer of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to allow the use of
voting papers to be restricted at the outset to
county elections found no favour with the com-
mittee. It is impossible, indeed, that the conces-
sion, far from diminishing the feeling against the
use of the papers, aggravated the sense of distrust.
It was too plainly consistent with that dominant
conception, to which Mr. Disraeli has adhered
through all apparent changes, of making the coun-
ties the stronghold of the Conservative party, by
increasing the number of county seats, by subtract-
ing all urban elements from county constituencies,
and now at last by introducing a machinery to
enable a landlord to hand in his tenants' votes at
the polling booth in a compact bundle.
It was, as we have said, the instinct of the
House which foiled the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer. Members knew the stuff of which electors
are made, and dared not trust themselves with
the perildus power voting papers would give
unscrupulous men. It may no% be easy to express
in words the grounds for these conclusions, without
suggesting the existence of things which we are all
agreed to treat as non-existent ; but, amid all the
uncertainty and inconsequent reasoning of indivi-
dual members, their distrust of the practical work-
ing of voting papers in a wickel world was appa-
rent. Mr. Bright might declare that the arguments
in favour of their use ten led directly to the ballot,
and Sir Roundell Paliner'conla say more ace irately
that the system was the exact antithesis of the ballot,
but their conclusion was the same. Their meaning,
and the meaning of the majority, was simply that
they had no confidence that the proposal would, if
adopted, be carried out honestly and in good faith.
It might have been as well if members had contented
themselves with a declaration of this feeling, au .1
have abstained from an appearance of reasoning
which occupied much time with very little increase
to our enlightment ; but if the strength of the ar-
guments advanced was one way, the sounder judg-
ment of the committee was the other, and a deci-
sive majority in a very full house refused to sanc-
tion the introduction of a machinery fraught with
so much danger.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.

(Before Mr. Payne.)

Isabella Scott, 40, a lady's maid, respectably
dressed,.and evidently above the ordinary class of
persons tried at this court, was arraigned before
Mr. Payne, charged with stealing five £5 Bank of
England notes, the property of Andrew Benj titan
Castier, in his dwelling-house.
Mr. Cook prosecuted.
The prisoner, who was unrepresented by counsel,
pleaded not guilty, and was much agitated during
the proceedings.
Mrs. Catherine Castier said she lived at No.
10, Clarges-street, and the prisoner lodged in the
house, and was lady's maid to a person who lived
there. On the 3rd of June the prisoner came to her
and complained of being very ill, and witness gave
her some brandy which she took out of a cupboard.
She opened the cupboard in the prisoner's presence,
and she saw her place her purse containing the
money on a shelf in that cupboard. On the follow-
ing day the notes—the numbers of which she had
procured—were missed, and suspicion fell upon the
prisoner. Witness charged her with the robbery,
when she stated she had changed one of the notes,
but had it in her possession some three months.
In cross-examination by the prisoner the witness
said she bad never known any charge of dishonesty
against the prisoner before this. She knew she had
been in the service of Lady Erskine for several
years, and had borne an unblemished character.
Gawley, 144 D, apprehended the prisoner. She
said she knew nothing of the property.
Mr. Watson, a draper, living at No. 11, Cran-
bourne-street, proved that on Tuesday morning—
the day after the notes were stolen—the prisoner
came to him and bought goods, and gave a £5 note
(produced) in payment.
Mr. Richard Deere, a cashier in the City Bank,
identified the note as one of a number paid to the
prosecutrix.
Mr. Payne—This is a serious case against you ;
what have you to say in answer to it?
• Prisoner—l picked up the two notes in the
street.

Mr. Payne—l am sure there is no one in court
will believe that.

Prisoner--I can assure you—oh, my God, lam
innocent.

The jury found the prisoner guilty.
Mr. Payne-- Do you feel disposed to give any
account of the other notes. It may make a diffe-
rence in the sentence I may pass upon you. I don't
say it will, but it may.
The prisoner again and again denied that she had
ever seen the other missing notes. She only found
two, and they were in an envelope.
Mrs. Castier said the prisoner had borne a very
good character. She believed she was married.
Mr. Hodgkinson, the clerk of the court, told the
prisoner she stood convicted of felony, and asked
her if she had anything to say why judgment should
not be given.

The prisoner (in an excited mauner)-oh, have
mercy, my lord. lam innocent.
Mr. Payne—l am afraid you are a very bad
woman, and had you chosen to give any account of
the other money I should, in consequence of your
good character, have passed a light sentence. For
the sake of honest people you must have a heavy
punishment.

The prisoner—Oh, my lord, I am not guilty ; do
hare mercy.

A large and influential eleptitautpioen
tfheEarl
leotr
membersrespeetio
afternoon,
railwaysp erby ygeshoyttflelrdetl;tetyttleisattiet: 1 to
f t 1) e waitedi
iianre I iDast: coo f. peerstl I 71(1'
State. The Chancellor o
Exchequer, th,,. Mk., of ItiehinDn )d,wiannlidg- other
members of the Government were present the
icift rz.-,.
interview. The deputation included the Duke of
Leinster, the Marquis of Cianricarde, Lord.
Templetown, the Earl of Luca ti, the Earl of
Bandon, Lord Dunkellin, Lord J. Browne, M.P.,
Major O'Reilly, M.P., General Dunne, M.P., Mr,
O'Beirne, M.P., Mr.
Maguire, M.P., Mr. Esmond,
M.P., Mr. Monsell, M.P.,
the Hon. Major Knox, M.P., Right Hon. Colonel
Mr. Price, m p
Devereux, 1 I.
French, M.P., Mr.
The O'Conor Don
..111 Pal p
t.
ai.o'sti‘aler
i • ~
Blake, M.P.,
Tor-
rens, M.P., Mr. Whitworth, M.P'
bdpoaeunol,ye,,mll.lp.P.:, Mr. F. W. Russell,
Sir Patrick O'Bri, M.P.
M.P., the corporations of Limerick,ik
Water-
ford, and Wexford, &c. Letters were alsoi r.
handedßCear
in from 25 absent peers and members of Parliamen 't
expressing their concurrence with the objects of the
depruhteation.
Marquis of CLANRICARDE, in laying before
the noble Premier the views of the deputation, dis-
claimed on their part any interest in the Irish' rail-
ways, and declared that they had come to urge
upon the Government the expediencyothfpautriethwaseiunlad
Ireland,
the
dl
ao nturdea,railways l ely
difficultyfrom t convictionhtehe restrictions
n which
withouta°
hwicehawlderdeenozosroe
gfroeraiktit 'h. aP6e
:'
drawbacksatisfactionAit°r. Mr.
traffic
ia
and tranquillity of Ireland than any other
measure which the Government could de-
odh
of the
b tenhf
eeo
rblel
re i
sh
hi ms arl
railways,
girl
duwsi sah
yi
pts h,
the
eh i
scheme
eht h
ec om
hasne s iafdei err
or aatbdh lTee
lengthvpiu
spurchase
ha
sl aeTi
appeared.
The Earl of DERBY, who, on rising, was greeted
with much applause, said—Her Majesty's Govern-
ment were well aware that this question was one that
had excited the greatest possible interest in Ireland,
being wholly unconnected with party feeling, andoue
that was regarded entirely as affecting the general
prosperity of Ireland, in which he thought it would
hardly be believed that her Majesty's Government
did not feel the greatest concern. (Hear.) It was
also a large and very important question—important
in amount, but more important in point of principle.
With regard to the statistics into which the noble
marquis bad entered, it was unnecessary for him to
go into them now, because if the scheme was enter-
tained at all, no doubt it would be a matter for the
Government to consider in all its details, in order
to know what would be the security for the
money, and what the expenses. But what was more
important was, that the Government should be made
acquainted with the principles of the present pro-
posals, because if the Government should purchase
the railways of Ireland—though he declined to give
any pledge on the subject—that would be only going
a small way in the solution of a large and diffi-
cult question. In the first place, the Government
would like to be informed whether it was intended
that the purchase of the railways should in the first
instance be compulsory or not ; because one of the
greatest difficulties with which they had to deal now
was the multiplication of railway authorities. (Hear,
hear.) If this question were dealt with at all, it was
necessary that there should be no break in what-
ever the Government did so as to defeat the object
in view—that there should be no power left to a
company by standing out to interfere with the con-
tinuity of the line, which, if it were the case, would
destroy the advantage otherwise to be gained. That
led the Government naturally to ask whether they
proposed the purchase to be compulsory upon every
railway in Ireland_? If _not, a single railway might
impose exacting an extravagant terms, which
would be a rerious obstacle to the proceeding.
Then if they proposed it to be universal and
compulsory, how purchase
money might he d
estimated they suppose
imated And,?sethe
in the next
place, in whom did they propose to invest all
the authority of the management of the rail-
ways ? Will they place such an amount of
patronage in the Government ? On the other hand,
would they leave the management to the different
companies ? But the principal difficulty appeared to
be this—that while many of the railways were of
opinion that lower fares might be ultimately ad-
vantageous, the present shareholders were not
disposed to make any sacrifices in the amount of
dividend for the purpose of securing a respective ad-
vantage. And now, supposing that they came to
thereforeway s , howb
od icdo theyndue
tperdo ;
1 terms stlatantdthobe ttarianinede tslitieourladil
Under Government authority ? Or was it to be done
by the Government letting out the railways on lease?
(Hear, hear.) By their expressions be understood
that they were to b.: let out. But then companies
could be established just as they are now, having
the same interest. But if they said the Government
should lay down terms, and insist that the railways
should carry at certain fares, and pay a certain
amount to the Government—(hear, hear)—then the
question assumed a different aspect. Where did they
propose to appropriate any surplus, or obtain any
deficiency arising from the Irish railways ? It was
of the essence of this question to consider what is to
be the mode of carrying on these railways. If it
was merely to advance money ou the security of the
Irish railways, he understood it—though he did not
think it a valuable security. He had seen another
proposition to buy up all the Irish railways at the
amount of the original shares, &c. No doubt that
would be an advantageous proceeding for the com-
panies. But the Government must see that they do
not run the risk of involving the country in any
expenditure which did not properly belong to it.
Therefore, before they gave any answer to the ap-
peal of the deputation, the Government desired to
have fully before them what was the precise proposi-
tion submitted on the part of the Irish railways and
the noblemen and gentlemen who felt an interest in
this subject. When they had that, the Governmen
not being at all unwilling to enter into the subject,
provided it was understood that they did not bind
themselves to any action in the matter, would fully
consider the propositions laid before them, and pro-
bably appointwithsomeex a small
perience co
d finmanincietrtse,etoof
intvheestCigaabteinet,
the
subject. (Applause.) But above all it was neces-
sary that they should state what are the principles
upon which the details are to be founded. If, then,
the Government could see their way to the adop-
tion of the proposal, it would give them great plea-
sure to do so. (Applause.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE, on behalf of the
deputation, expressed their unanimous satisfaction
with the assurances of the noble Premier, and ob-
served, in reply to his lordship's inquiries, that the
deputation intended that the purchase of the Irish
railways should be compulsory, and that they
should be leased to the best bilders. The deputa-
tion then withdrew.

BRADFORD, June 20.—The wool trade is still
without much animation. The operations are
scanty, and only to supply immediate wants. The
tendency of prices is downward. The new clip of
wool is ascertained to be heavy, and the stocks of
last year's growth are still partly unsold. Staplers
and spinners are consequently exceedingly cautious
in their transactions. Thera is no appreciable
change in worsted yarns. Export merchants are
buying as sparingly as possible, and the orders given
out for home consumption are of the most limited
description. Some spinners of genappe Yarns and
superr Prices
ceef
st
area e still
3t
roa' sc
t s.unaltered.to
A few
orders, but
tolerably b
Littlebu s
has taken place in pieces during the week.
manufacturers have taken some fair
A good deal of these are exceptional cases• yimoProovldemeenn;
woes:.
are ranch the same as ma-
chinerylast is still standing or working to stock, Maces