The Sun.
London, England, 1866-04-17 00:00:00

The Cattle Plague.

Yesterday the Right lion. Earl Granville, K.G.,
and President of the Council, appeared before the
Edgware magistrates on a summons charging him
with contravening the Cattle Diseases Act of 1866.
The charge was " That you, the Right lion. Geo.
Leveson Gower, Earl Granville, K.G., did on the
Bth March last bring into the jurisdiction of the
justices of the peace for the county of Middlesex,
to wit, in the parish of Hendon, from some other
part of Great Britain beyond the said jurisdiction,
certain cattle, to wit, eight cows, in contravention
of a certain order made by the local authority for
the said jurisdiction, in pursuance of the Cattle
Diseases Act, 1866." On the bench were Mr. A. W.
Cox (chairman), Mr. L. D. Flood, and Mr. Belk.
The prosecutor was the local inspector, Mr. Dale,
who was represented by Mr. Peckham, and Mr. G.
Lewis, jun., of Ely-place, represented the noble de-
fendant. Mr. Sleigh appeared for two other defen-
dants, the one a butcher, the other a cowkeeper,
charged with the same offence.
Mr. Peckham, in opening the case, stated that
this was an offence -not personally committed by
Lord Granville, but by his servants or agents, for
whose acts there could be no doubt he was respon-
sible. The facts of the case were that beasts brought
from Holland had been driven from Black-farm at
Hendon, which was out of the district, and under
the jurisdiction of the magistrates, whose regulation
that no cattle should be moved from place to place
had thus been contravened, and a very heavy penalty
incurred. This contravention had taken place in
two instances, and the cattle had either died or been
slaughtered through having the plague, and though
Lord Granville might not have been personally cog-
nisable of the circumstances, yet it must be held that
he was answerable for his agents. He then called
Mr. Panter, the steward of Lord Granville at the
farm, near Child's-hill, Hendon. From the opening
question it appeared that there were two summonses,
the defendant being charged on one summons with
bringing five cattle on Marsh 1, and an another with
bringing eight cattle on March 8.
Mr. Lewis said there was a mistake, and to shorten
the case, he would inform the court the real facts of
the case with respect to five cows brought on to the
farm on March 8.

The first summons was then abandoned, and • j
Mr. Panter was examined on the second. Ile said
that, on March 8, on returning to the farm, he
found that five cows had been driven on to the pre-
mises by Mr. Roche, a cattledealer, who had bought
cattle for Lord Granville for many years, and who
occupied the next farm. The cattle were driven on
the premises without Lord Granville's knowledge,
and in obedience to an order which witness had
given to Mr. Roche to buy some cattle if he could
legally do so. Lord Granville's instructions always
were that the law was not under any circumstances
to be infringed, and witness had given these in-
structions to Mr. Roche, who told witness that he
had complied with the law, inasmuch as he had a
permit to drive the cattle on the farm from Sir R.
Mayne. The cattle when seen by witness werequite
healthy, and continued so for three days, when they
were taken ill with some disease, which witness did
not believe to be the plague.
Mr. Peckham asked whether any other cattle on
the farm had died of the plague which had been
ordered to be slaughtered—a bull which caused roars
of laughter.
Mr. Roche was called, and he stated that his in-
structions from Mr. Panter were to comply with the
law, and he thought he did so when he obtained the
police permit. This permit enabled him to drive
them on to his own farm, and he then drove them
across the fields to Lord Granville's farm—the two
farms adjoining.
The Chairman asked whether the cattle had been
driven through a hedge or gate.
The witness replied, " The hedges are very green
in our part of the country, and there is no trouble
in getting through them." (A. laugh.)
It was further elicited that witness's farm was in
the metropolitan police district, while defendant's
farm was over the boundary, and that the witness
thought if he did not take the cattle over a road he
should not be breaking the law.

Mr. Lewis said his instructions were not to plead
any technical objections, for his lordship was quite
ready to take the responsibility of any act of his
servants. But it must be apparent to the magis-
trates that his lordship was neither morally nor
legally answerable in this case, for his servants had
received instructions not to act illegally ; they had
not acted illegally, and the only person who had
acted illegally was Mr. Roche, who ought to have
been summoned instead of his lordship. The sum-
mons charged Lord Granville with ‘, bringing" the
cattle within the jurisdiction; hut he had nct brought
them, his servants had not brought them, and there
was no pretence for summoning him.
The Chairman, after consulting the Bench, said
the magistrates had come to the unanimous conclu-
sion that this was not a " bringing" of cattle within
the meaning of the order by the defendant, and
was Lord Granville in
lfeograiltlyhad been proved that he
tnheiist neither
emroersaplol morally
sni
bolre,

Lord Granville said he desired to state publicly
;hat he should not make any claims for compensation
the cattle which had been slaughtered under
,hese circumstances.

One of two cases which were defended by Mr.
Sleigh was similar in the circumstance that the
cattle were driven from one farm to another ; but
they were thus driven into the magistrate's jurisdic-
tion by the defendant himself, who was fined 505.,
a mitigated penalty. A butcher was fined 20s. for
each beast for having cattle driven out of the police
district ; and the proof of the driving was held to
be by the drover having been paid by his servants.
In this case the police had given a permit to the
farm, which was out of the district of the metro-
politan police.

PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S PROCLAMA-

TION.

The following is the text of the proclamation
issued by President Johnson :

_
" Washington, April 2.
Br THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—A

PROCLAMATION.

"Whereas, by proclamations of the 15th and IGth
of April, 1861, the President of the United States,
in virtue of the power vested in him by the constitu-
tion and the lem‘declared that thelaws of the United

States were opposed, and the execution thereof
obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia,
Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas,
by combination too powerful to be suppressed by
the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by
the powers vested in the marshals by law ;
" And whereas, by another proclamation made
on the sixteenth day of August, in the same year,
in pursuance of an Act of Congress, approved July
13, 1861, the inhabitants of Georgia, South Caro-
lina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama,
Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and
Florida—except the inhabitants of that part of the
State of Virginia lying west of the Alleghany
Mountains, and to such other parts of that State,
and the other States before-named, as might main-
tain a loyal adhesion to the Union and the consti-
tution, or might be from time to time occupied and
controlled by the force of the United States en-
gaged in the dispersion of insurgents—were de-
clared to be in a state of insurrection against the
United States ;
" And whereas, by another proclamation on the
Ist day of July, 1862, issued in pursuance of an
Act of Congress, approved June 7th, in the same
year, the insurrection was declared to be still ex-
isting in the States aforesaid, with the exception of
certain specified counties in the state of Virginia ;
"And whereas, by another proclamation made on
the 2nd day of April, 1863, in pursuance of the
Act of Congress of July 13th, 1861, the excep-
tions named in the proclamation of August, 16th,
1861, were revoked, and the inhabitants of the
States of Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Arkanas,
Mississippi, Florida, and Virginia, except the forty-
eight counties of Virginia and the ports of New
Orleans, Key West, Port Royal, and Beaufort in
South Carolina, were declared to be in a state of
insurrection against the United States ; and whereas
the House of Representatives, on the 22nd day of
July, 1861, adopted a resolution in the words fol-
lowing, viz. :

" by the House of Representatives
of the Congress of the United States, that the
present deplorable civil war has been forced upon
the country by the disunionists of the Southern
States now in revolt against the constitutional Go-
vernment, and in arms around the capital ; that in
this national emergency Congress, banishing all
feelings of mere passion or resentment, will recollect
only its duty to the whole country ; that this war is
not waged on our part in any spirit of oppression,
nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation,
nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering
with the rights or established institutions of those
States, but to maintain and defend the supremacy
of the constitution, and to preserve the Uuion with
all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several
States unimpaired ; and that as soon as these ob-
jects are accomplished the war ought to cease;'

" And whereas the Senate of the United States,
on the 25th day of July, 1861, adopted a resolution
in the words following, viz. :
"Resolved, 'that the present deplorable civil war
has been forced upon the country by the disunion-
ists of the Southern States now in revolt against the
constitutional Government, and in arms around the
capital; that in this national emergency Congress,
banishing all feelings of mere passion or resentment,
will recollect only its duty to the whole country—
that this war is not prosecuted on our part in any
spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of con-
quest or subjugation, nor for the purpose of over-
throwing or interfering with the rights or esta-
blished institutions of those States, but to defend
and maintain the supremacy of the constitution and
all laws made in pursuance thereof, and to preserve
the Union with all the dignity, equality, and
rights of the several States unimpaired, that as
soon as these objects are accomplished the war
ought to cease ;'

And whereas these resolutions, though not joint
or concurrent in form, are substantially identical,
and as such may be regarded as having expressed
the sense of Congress upon the subject to which
they relate :

ti And whereas, by my proclamation of the 13th
of June last, the insurrection in the State of Ten-
nessee was declared to have been suppressed, the
authority of the United States therein to be undis-
puted, and such United States officers as had been
duly commissioned to be in the undisputed exercise
of their official functions;
4, And whereas there now exists no organised
armed resistance of misguided citizens or others to
the authority of the United States in the States of
Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missis-
sippi, and Florida, and the laws can be sustained
and enforced therein by the proper civil authority,
State or Federal, and the people of the said States
are well and loyally disposed, and have conformed
or will conform in their legislation to the condition
of affairs growing out of the amendment to the con-
stitution of the United States, prohibiting slavery
within the limits and jurisdiction of the United
States ;
" And whereas, in view of the before recited pre-
mises, it is the manifest determination of the Ame-
rican people that no State of its own will has the
right or power to go out of, or separate itself from,
or be separated.from the American Union, and that
therefore each State ought to remain and constitute
an integral part of the United States ;
" And whereas the people of the several before-
mentioned States have in the manner aforesaid
given satisfactory evidence that they acquiesce in
this sovereign and important revolution of the na-
tional unity ;
" And whereas it is believed to be a fundamental
principle of Government that people who have re-
volted and who have been overcome and subdued
must either be dealt with so as to induce them
voluntarily to become friends, or else they must be
held by absolute military power, or devastated so
as to prevent them from ever again doing harm as
enemies, which last-named policy is abhorrent to
humanity and freedom;
" And whereas the constitution of the United
States provides for constitutional communities only
as States, and not as territories, dependencies, pro-
vinces or protectorates; and whereas such consti-
tuent States must necessarily be, and by tile consti-
tutioni and laws of the United States are, made
footing as to political
equ4ls, and placed on a

rights, immunities, dignity, and power with the
several States with which they are united ;
" And whereas the observance of political equality
as a principle of right and justice is well calculated
to encourage the people of the aforesaid States to be
and become more and more constant and persever-
ing in their renewed allegiance ; and
" Whereas standing armies, military occupation,
martial law, military tribunals, and the suspension
of the privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus, are,
in time of peace, dangerous to public liberty, incom-
patible with the individual rights of the citizens,
contrary to the genius and spirit of our free institu-
tions, and exhaustive of the national resources, and
ought not, therefore, to be sanctioned or allowed,
except in cases of actual necessity for repelling in-
vasion or suppressing insurrection or rebellion ;
and

United:States,
proclaim ItoVhitesreoaysertthifie policy of the Government of the
overthrow
the beginning of the insurrec-
,wShoi which
h C
Anwdarenwd
Johnson, President
rpersesisoidne,nhtasofbethene
tinio:cOnformity with the prahlliLs,
North
hn
Carolina,
Virginia, and enumerated ;
"Therefore, I,
asee, Alabama,
United States, do hereby
heretofore anedxidsteecdlarien thatfile
Florida is anuisiana, Arkansas,
at
the.‘,ST:
iiarstgsieissnoiapf,
pTGi,insurrectionTennessee,
nrngdeis
end, and hence-
forth to be so regarded.

"In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my
hand and caused the seal of the United States to be
affixed.

" Done at the city of Washington the second day
of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and sixty-six, and of the independence of
the United States of America the ninetieth.

"ANDREW JOUNS ON."

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.--There -is very tide a phase called
" slack water," which was very accurately repro-
duced in last night's debate. For a little while it
seems uncertain whether the sea-level will continue
to rise or begin to recede, and only those whose
long experience has made them cognisant of the
signs of the times can tell which way the water will
incline. This is theparallelof yesterday's experience.
Reform stands precisely where it was. We know not
whether it was the weariness of the House of Com-
mons, or the feeling that a day's interval took away
from the reality of the contest, but last night the dis-
cussion was all make-believe. Sir Fitzroy Kelly and
the Malt Duty occupy the house this evening, for as
Mr. Gladstone refused to promise him another night
to air his crotchet, Sir Fitzroy refused to give way
to the Franchise Bill. The discussion cannot be re-
sumed till Thursday, and the interval was fatal to
any vivacity which might otherwise have been mani-
fested in the debate. The defence of Ministers
was yesterday committed to amateurs and Under-
Secretaries. Mr. Layard displayed his wonted com-
bativeness, and Mr. Forster tried to be concilia-
tory. On the other hand, Lord Dunkellin followed
in the track of Lord Stanley in pointing out the
inconvenience which must necessarily follow the
consideration of a bill restricted to the single object
of extending the suffrage, and recalled to the con-
sideration of the house the points which the speakers
on the side of the Government have found it con-
venient with one consent to avoid. He did his
work well ; but it has been done so often and so fully
that we almost sigh for some one who will really
undertake a defence of the Ministerial policy.
The most fatal advocacy the Government has
yet received was, however, that of Mr. Forster last
night. He argued with great force against enter-
, taining any distrust of the effects of enfranchise-
ment, but he forgot that no one has shown such
practical distrust of Reform as Lord Russell's Ad-
ministration. They have been afraid of their own
proposals. The Ministers of the Crown have, for
the first time in living experience, shrunk from
showing their hands. We do not pay them the ill
compliment of supposing they have not made up
their minds as to the principle which should guide
the measure of redistribution to be laid upon the
table at some indefinite time in the course of the
Session. Lord Russell has often been credited with
audacity, and by none in happier terms than by
Sydney Smith, who told us that he was ready to
undertake at a moment's notice the command of the
Channel fleet, not to mention still more responsible
duties, but we do not believe that even Lord Russell,
as First Minister of the Crown, could have been
guilty of the incredible imprudence of having fixed
upon the limit of the Borough qualification without
having considered the redistribution of Borough
seats. Mr. Gladstone refused to enlighten Mr.
Marsh last night on the principles of redistribution
adopted by the Government, but we may reasonably
presume that they have agreed upon some principles.
They are, however, afraid to acknowledge them.
It is the height of rashness, to call it by no worse
name, therefore, in Mr. Forster to comment on the
unwillingness of the supporters of Lord Grosvenor's
Amendment to trust themselves blindly to the
guidance of the Government. The Government
will not trust them, and why should they trust it ?
The members of the Cabinethave no such confidence
in their own principles as to be able to appeal to
Parliament and the country to adopt them, andthey
now accuse their opponents of distrusting the work-
ing classes, whereas the only real accusation which
can be brought against them is at the most that of
distrusting a fute policy over which the Govern-
ment itself can have but little control. This is the
argument brought with unequalled force by Lord
Stanley on the first night of the debate, and it has
never yet been touched. The issue now before it is
under the control of the House of Commons ; if it
once escapes from its control it cannot be recalled.
Suppose a Franchise Bill passed, and what is then
the condition of the Reform question ? It is con-
ceded, almost without dispute, that a Franchise
Bill, and nothing more, would leave things worse
than they are at present, even supposing no agita-
tion should follow. But agitation must follow. A.
Redistribution Billof some sort—whether the skele-
ton bill promised to be submitted for inspection
this session or not, nobody can tell—would be
brought in next session. The Government declares
it will stand or fall upon it. It follows that, in the
event of a disagreementarisingbetween the Govern-
ment and the house, an appeal will be made to exist-
ing constituencies upon the simple question whether
some of them shall be disfranchised or not. It is
impossible to conceive a worse plan of settling
the question. We have a Parliament now not
elected upon any reform question, but upon a dis-
tinctly Liberal issue. There are some members of
it returned for small boroughs willing to support a
Redistribution Bill. But if a dissolution took place
for the purpose of determining the simple point of
redistribution' it is impossible to believe that the
result could be otherwise than unfavourable to it.
In no boroughs could the supporters of redistribu-
tion gain strength, and in many they would lose
it. The question of redistribution, which Mr.
Bright justly described years ago as the cardinal
question of Reform, without which any reduction
of the franchise would be illusory and contemptible,
would thus be postponed indefinitely, and the latter
end of the agitation would be worse than the first.
It may be—in fact, it must be—that at some distant
time a redistribution would be made, but it could
not be carried until some extraordinary event had
occurred stifficient to overpower the instinct of self-
preservation felt in a small borough as elsewhere,
and though in such a case some solution of the ques-
tion would doubtless be accepted, we should only
have to thank the pusillanimity of the present Go-
vernment for having deferred a period of tumult
that which ought to have been settled, andnanht
has
have been settled, in a season of quietness and aeech
con-
tentment. As yet only one independenttl3,l3
It speech,
been delivered in favour of Reform, andr
0 of the pro
critically examined, was not ini
favour justified his
posals of the Government.
how did that argu-
argument on Friday
night, but by Lord Grosvenot's
reputation in the house andiimil‘itrihe country by his
ment affect the question
Ir.
lire go further, and ask
question of accepting or
Amendment? Not
.aa
how it affected simpletheern
Government Franchise Bill, and we
rejecting the
aGs°v before—not at all. He proved,
declared, that it • d •
consistently desir-
able we have
now unenfranchis d
e should be
must answer
able many Classes
of
representatives of the working classes
admitted to the privilege voting, that it would
if only by way of a f
sa ety-valve, to
into the house of Commons ; but if it be asked how
wbeelNic,oofnteh
he connected this argument with the conclusion
that the Franchise Bill of the Government stand-
ing alone was worthy of adoption, we should be at
a loss for an answer. It is obvious that Mr.
Mill was speaking of schemes of Reform for which
much may be said, but which were not before
the House of Commons. He was the eloquent
expositor of ideas which are not found in the
Government Bill, and which hitkerto have been

There is at present before Par,
one issue, and at the most tw,
it is consistent with the duty
the people to commit themsel.
of one branch • of a scheme
whole of which it is a part ; if
whether a Franchise Bill is by
provement of our existing systen.
of adoption. Sir Hugh Cairns put these questions
yesterday with the dialectic skill of which he is a
_master. 'We believe the dispassionate answer to
both mast Le in the negative, and certainly there
was no reason adduced last night which could make
any one waver in this conviction. 111 r. Maguire
and Sir Francis Crossley are, in a different sort of
way, both estimable men, andi we should be the last
to accuse either of them of a lack of intelligence,
but the Government must be indeed ill supported
whose best defenders do not appear to understand
the arguments it is incumbent upon them to meet.
HERALD.—The speech of Mr. W.
_E. Forster, yes-
terday evening,was directed with good effect to one
of the most mischievous delusions which have ever
obtained a place among political ideas. He assailed
the error of those who in looking on England can
see only the division of classes. The theory of re-
presentation which finds favour with Sir Bulwer
Lytton, Mr. Adderley, and other leading members
of the Opposition ; which supplies the basis of most
of the arguments used in the press against the
Franchise Bill, and which is likely to become the
received Conservative doctrine on the subject, dis-
tributes the population of England into a hierarchy
of social orders, to each of whom it would assign
power in the inverse ratio of its numbers, and, so
far as the essentials of national life are concerned,
of its importance. The many, on this theory, are
to be allowed but slight direct influence on the
course of affairs, because they are many ; the few
much, because they are few. The strong aro to be
artificially weakened ; the weak to be artificially
strengthened. The object of these provisions is
avowedly to prevent the many from gaining the
objects which it is thought they desire. If the motive
and the process could be kept secret, it is possible
that the experiment might succeed. But openly to
ask the majority of the English people to allow a
few timid theorists and landlords to tie their hands
lest they should reach out for things which, by
assumption, they wish to have, does not seem a very
promising business. If they wish for these things,
they will have them. If they do not desire them,
where is the need of these elaborate precautions ?
strong
which
To enter into the strong man's house and- bind
make manEtrionegani
him is a task which can only be effected if the
ninacnedoge
countenance
nsenossticapoei r ynleui
cats 3:
natciOi
eya
expedientsnbtlddi
d rhe
aei
recent submissiveness
aatti
expe-
rience a
artifi-
cially I
is
England,
oeanp, unnecessary
or
Dnecessaryoes eo
adjusting the claims of classes, so as to pre-
ventw
tr
Sincehi theheror Reform orders rrommAbeing f overridden by
declinethe
lower
of merely sectional feeling, and the growth of a con-
viction that all classes from the highest to the lowest,
have common interests, so that the well-being of any
is inseparable from the well-being of all, has been
conspicuous. The sentiment of social and national
unity is characteristic of the age. If tide animosities
and rivalries of a former period still subsisted, if the
lower classes were eager to obtain mastery over the
higher, and numbers were bent on swamping pro-
perty and intelligence, the calamity which a few
apprehend would already have befallen us. The
Reform Bill of 1832 affords the means of doing all
that is feared from the Franchise Bill of 1866. As
Mr. Forster pointed out, an absolute majority in the
borough constituencies consists of the lower middle
classes, occupying houses of from £lO to £2O annual
value. Yet we do not see them combining against
the rest of the community. With the power of
taxation and of legislation entirely in their own
hands, we do not find them only taxing their neigh-
bours and legislating solely for themselves. The
working classes have even now an absolute majority
in certain boroughs. Yet they do not unite to send
mere delegates and spokesmen of their own order
to the House of Commons. The Reform Act of
1832 did not attempt any invidious discrimination
between different classes; and hence none of these
classes have attempted to assert its own electoral
predominance. If the theory of class-represatation
recommended now had been acted upon then, the
result might have been very different from that
on which we now congratulate ourselves. If the
course wisely adopted in 1832 be followed in 1866,
the same merging of class distinctions for the pro-
motion of the common weal may be confidently.
anticipated ; but if, neglecting experience, and at-
tending only to h priori forebodings, the upper and
middle ranks discriminate against the working
classes, the working classes will certainly discrimi-
nate against the middle ranks. Sir Buiwer Lytton
and Mr. Adderley seem trying all they can to put
into the heads of labouring men that idea of class
ascendancy which, iu their own interest and that of
the country, they should carefully avoid suggest-
ing. The misgovernment of the territorial aris-
tocracy in its days of power, whielOs sometimes
urged as a reason against giving supremacy to any
class, is scarcely to the point in the present dis-
cussion, into which, however, it is habitually
dragged. The abuses of an oligarchy ,cannot be
properly converted into au argument against popu-
lar self-rule. The interests of the few may some-
times be, or appear to be, distinct from those of
the nation at large. The interests of the many are
inseparable from the:well-being of all. The con-
trast between the aristocratic legislation which pre-
ceded the Reform Act and the popular legislation
which followed it, justifies and compels this dis-
tinction. The landlords did combine, but the £lO
householders have never acted together as a class,
and the £7 householders are not in any way more
likely to do so, except as a consequence of the dis-
cussion of theories of class representation, and of
attempts to reduce those theories to legislation. If
they were really animated by the desire for predo-
minance they would achieve it far more readily
by accepting the separatist doctrines of Sir Bul-
wer Lytton and the Liberal-Conservative press,
than by acquiescing in a measure which will blend
them with the rest of the community. The
complete and exhaustive social statistics which
Mr. Adderley demands, as the necessary condi-
. tion:of a satisfactory Reform Bill, are not likely to
really help in its manufacture. John Bull would
probably be as ill-fitted with a constitution framed
' from these data as Gulliver was by the tailor in
' Laputa, who proceeded about his business with an
affectation of scientific method and precision worthy
of the most deeply-thinking Liberal. " This officer
did his office after a different manner from that of
his trade in Europe. He first took my altitude with
a quadrant, and then, by rule and compass, de-
scribed the dimensions and outlines of my whole
body, all which he entered upon paper, and in six
days brought in my clothes, very ill made, and
and quite out of shape, by happening to mistake a
figure in the calculations." In the Laputan tailor
there seems to be a prophetic satire on the political
projectors of our own day, who model constitutions
on electoral statistics. One thing is quite clear to
hatsheMmr.
oAstdnduermleeyrosnsuggthesetisr,
stthreenegfftehct; will
us, that if classes are to be numbered, for political
pbue rtpootseaesc,
whatever the first arrangements of our constitu-
tion-mongers, the end of such class-representation
will be to ensure the untempered predominance of
the largest class. With characteristic blindness,
the now ruling orders are, by their conduct, inviting
the calamity which in words they deprecate.

EARL FrrzwiLLlAm's HOUNDS.—In
consequence
of the appearance of rinderpest on a farm at Jordanthorpe,
the meet appointed for Friday last, at Beauchief
hounds
Lbey,
was countermanded by Earl Fitzwilliam. The
will not hunt again this season.
DEATH OF Mn. HENRY floAnn.—Tire regret to an..
nounce the death of Mr. Hoare, banker, of Fleet-
street, which took place yesterday morning at his country
residence, Staplehurst, lieut. It will be remembered that
in the month of March, 1865, the deceased gentleman met
with a serious accident, which caused a concussion of the
brain, while travelling on the Great
lEastern
Thursday last he
London to Cambridge, from the effects of however,vilithil,wayf
rom
it was thought he bad recovered.
came to London for the first time since the accident, and
Saturday, when he returned to
accompaniedH wentoare
at ot()nhei his
brt town
resorted
hist house, New-street,
sVitahraeerlieurhstSe.larerionmngain-igarveadcdheipg
of no avail, for he took
keenly felt by the poor, daughter,
medical
lhe aid,h ebaudt,
human
aLna
skilldy 11
wasai
there he complained of •
towards whom to his bed and gradually sank. His
ed ptoalnmsedini
deep regret, and his loss will be
death had occasioned
0 poor, both in London and Staplehurst,
he always evinced a kindly and benevolent
disposition.

an NExTRAOMINARY INQUEST.—Dr. Lankester
held
inquest in Great Wild-street, St. Giles's, on
Saturday, at which there were some incidents of en extra-
ordinary character. The inquest was on the body of a
child nine years old, named Toovey, who in September last
swallowed the part of a bond needle case. The evidence
showed that ho retained this until February, when ho one
day coughed it up. Death was caused by en abscess in
the right lung, this arising from the wound made by the
portion of needle case. After the death of the child a
to mobtaileectaed,P°astn-din"tenl
medical man was instructed
examination ; but the parents even
threatened to stab the policeman and le surgeon if they
probeeded with their work. It was only at the pressure of
a priest that they consented to the examination being
made. At the inquest, the mother was very violent, and
such a crowd gathered about that something like a riot
was anticipated. The mother was with some difficulty
persuaded to give evidence of identity, &c., but insisted,
and loudly, that she would have back the bit of bone that
her child had thrown up. The jury returned a verdict of
"Accidental death."

THEATRE ROYAL, lIKYMARKET,
Sole Lessee and Manager, Mr. Backstone.
TFIIS EVENING, A. ROMANTIC ATTACHMENT :
Mr. Compton, Mr. W. Farren ; Miss Ada Cavendish.
After wh T fl F. FAVOU KITE OF FOR ruNE : Messrs.
F. othern, Buckstone, Chippendale, Rogers, &c. ; Mesdames
Chippendale, Saville, Moore, Fitzwilliarn, hill, Lindley, &c.
Concluding with A DACTURTER ro MARRY : M.r. W.
Farren and aliss ilelen Ilowari.
Commence at Seven.

ROYAL LYCEUM T REATRE.-
Under the sole Management of Mr. Fechter.
The Last Four Night' Rap earance of Mr. Pechter as Edgar
nswood.
TINS EVENING, SIM t'SON AND CO. Maws. S.
Emery, C. U orsman ; Mesdames Ebworthy, Henrade, Hors-
inan, atd E. Boy
Alter which. ce. THE MASTER OF RAVENSWOOD.
Mr. .Fchter ; Messrs. Jordan, Emery, Widdicomb, Vezin,
J. FL Fitzpatri&, D. Evans ; AesdamesTernan, E.sworthy
Lavenu, and C. Leclercq.
Box Office open daily from Eleven till Five.

NEW THEATRE-ROYAL DELL 111.
Sole Proprietor and Manager, jrN. B. Webster.
TI EVENING. ICI ON PAULY, FRANCAIS.
M
Messrs. J. L. Toole, Billington, Phil ips ; Mesdames Kate
, carnal], and Godsall.
- Alter which, 2nd time, a new Opera Bonffe, entitled
CRYING JENNY A\ D LAUGHING JOHNNY• Mtasrs.
,J. L. Toole, Eburne, Mi,s Furtado, Mrs A. Mellon.
To conclude with THE -WRECK ASHORE : Messrs J. L.
Toole. P. Bedford. Stuart, Isillingtcr, Ashley; Miss Woolgar
Miss 11. Simms.
and

0 y RIN C ESS'S THEATRE.
Itsole Lessee and Manager, Mr. Geo. Pining.
BIS EVENING, A GHOST IN SPITE OF HIMSELF.
Alter which, at a quarter to Eight, THE STREETS OF
LOS DON. Messrs. Ninlng, T. Mead, D. Murray, Shore,
Villiers ; .Ors. H. Marmon, 3E03 E. Barnett, and Miss K.
Rodgers.

OPAL STRAND THEATRE.
Jai Sole Lessee and Manageress, Mrs. Swanborough.
THIS EVENING, at Seven o'clock, PERFE TION.
After which will be produced grand Easter Burlesque,
PA KIS ; or, Vive Lempiere : Mes-q.s. Stoyle, lhorne,Jameb :
Mesdames A. Swanbovougb, Raynham, Simpson. Johnstone,
Kanoe, and Holt
To conclude with DEAF AS A POST : Mr. Belford.

ADLER'S WELLS THEATRE-
SUnder the Eole Management of Mr. W. H. C. Nation.
THIS EVENING, F. C. Burnand's pathetic drama, THE
DEAL BoATMAI:. Mr. Be:more and Miss F. Gwynne,
Followed by Douglas Jerrold's nautical Draml, BLACK-
EYED SUSAN. Messrs. T. Swinbourne, Barrett, Belmore,
Misses Ada Dya., Harland, L. Wilmot e, &c.
Concluding with Burnand's Burl,,sque of IXION : Misses
Lizzie Willmore, Hudspeth, ratllly Gwynne,Harland, Hetty
Tracey, and G. Belmnre.
Commence at Seven.
Acting Manager, Mr. NYE CHART.

..-----
usually followed, and declared that a moderute
enfranchisement of the people was the best
way to avert the peril, " graduallyanchaainusg
time," he argued very sensibly et
la y 13
a,
a •:
we isil le
concessions gracefully given, did not tend to brie ig
revolution. It was the resistance to all chang es,
the refusal to grant reasonable popular demands,
that tended in the end to endanger the institutions
of the country." Referring to the effect produced
by the great Reform Bill of 1832, he asserted that
the tide of the uneducated masses was them rolled
backed for 30 years, and he believed the same thing
would happen now. had not the upper classes
been wise in time something like universal
1 suffrage would have been adopted, and he
believed that the result of lowering the franchise at
the present day would be precisely the same as it
had been then.
In the House last evening the arguments in favour
of the measure were strongly urged by Mr.L..kYARD.
His speech corroborated, though no doubt acciden-
tally, the statements of Mr. BAXTER as to the effect
of the bill of 1832, in rolling back the tide of demo-
cracy. So far from becoming more democratic, he
declared his conviction that England was becoming
more Conservative. The annual motion against
the law of primogeniture had fallen into desuetude,
the Charter was never heard of, and as member for
one of the most democratic constituencies in the
kiragdom he ventured to affirm that it did not
contain a single Chartist. The willingness of the
working classes to refer their difficulties to men of
position instead of to their own immediate associates
had been strikingly evidenced during the great Staf-
fordshire strike, when the men, instead of going
to any demagogue for assistance, applied to
Lord LICHFIELD, a nobleman well known for his
sympathy with working-men, to act as arbitrator.
Although his arbitration was not entirely successful
they afterwards presented the Earl with an address
thanking him for what he had done. This certainly
showed that during a time of irritation and discon-
tent these men entertained no feeling of animosity
against the ranks above them simply because they
were above them ; but they had the good sense to
perceive that a man who by education and po-
sition was entirely removed from the influences
of trade was the most likely to take a fair
and impartial view of the situation. Referring
to the wholesale charge so recklessly brought against
the working men as a class of being open to cor-
ruption, Mr. LAYARD, with spirit and justice, re-
turned the charge upon the heads of those who
brought it. "You have no right," exclaimed the hon.
member with honest indignation, "to throw it in the
teeth of working men that they are unfit to exercise
the franchise because they are corrupt, while you are
their corruptors." This is, in fact, the real secret of
the matter ; and if corruption and bribery, if un-
fair influence and intimidation are to exclude our
artisans and mechanics from the right of voting
for a Parliamentary election, let us at least be con-
sistent in our application of the principle, and deci-
, mate our existing House of Commons.
The great speech of the evening on the Oppo-
sition side was, of course, that of Sir HUGEL
CAIRNS. An able logician, an experienced con-
stitutional advocate, an eloquent orator, Sir
HUGH CAIRNS is always a powerful friend and a
formidable foe, but last evening his address was
more argumentative than impassioned. He went
back to examine the constitutional principle of
representation, and spoke at length upon the
necessity of preserving the balance of political
power. He contended that the bill was a
step towards universal suffrage, but the same
might be said of any extension of the franchise
whatever. He admitted that the working classes
were entitled to a fair representation, but he be-
lieved this measure would give them a predominance
tI
-which no one desired, and which would not be for
their own advantage any more than for their
general good. A powerful reply to all the argu-
ments against the measure was brought forward by
Mr. MAGUIRE early in the evening, when he quoted
the words used by Mr. DISRAELI in 1859, when he
asked, " Is this question of Reform to be suffered
to remain as a desperate source of faction, or only
to be taken up at a moment of great popular excite-
ment, and settled, not by the reason, but by the
passions of the people ? Are we to establish a
chronic irritation in the public mind upon a subject
which, of all others, should not form the staple of
our party contests." This, as Mr. MAGUIRE said,
was a strong opinion, but who can deny its truth or
. , its applicability to the present occasion ?

Sir FITZROY KELLY keeps firm to his post as the
staunch champion for the repeal of the Malt-tax ;
and last night his determinationowas put to the

proof. The Chancellor of the Exchequer asked the

hon. and learned member whether he would postpone

his motion on the subject, in order that the debate
on the Reform Bill might be continued. Sir F.

KELLY very forcibly replied that he would do so on
condition that Mr. GLADSTONE would give him
another day prior to that on a hich the Budget was
brought forward. To this very reasonable request

Mr. GLADSTONE replied by one of his ingenious cir

cumlocutions, respecting the " convenience of the
house," the " exigencies of the public service," &c.,
but wound up by stating that he would not give a
night, because he had already pledged himself to
bring forward the Budget on the first Government
night after the disposal of the motion for the second
reading of the Representation of the People Bill.

According to this view of the question,the right hon,
gentleman had no right to ask Sir F. KELLY to post-
pone his motion, because it was virtually sacrificing
it to put it off until after the consideration of the
Budget. Sir F. KELLY intimated that he should
therefore be obliged to bring forward his motion
to-day, which announcement was received with
cheers. Mr. GLADTSONE, it is true, admitted that
there was an extensive desire for the discussion of
this subject, but his acts did not correspond
with his words. After this unpromising episode it
does not seem that we have good ground for
hoping that the right hon. gentleman has altered
his views on the subject of the Malt Tax, or at all
events modified them. It has long been known
that Mr. GLADSTONE has had a prejudice against
the reduction of the Malt Tax, far more against
a repeal. We may fairly say, however, that the
period has arrived when he must concede some-
thing
this respect. It is all very well to talk
b
in
indirect taxation, but the commerce and
at
lt
interest of the different class
with
should ctoimiamnuntithye
ofre
saheoeounaldpliNsrh.
favourite schemes, and the
emigehn t more
maintenance of particular schemes. The
also
oie
greatly
calamity of the Cattle Plague
changed the aspect of things, and calls imperatively
for some change in this direction. Half of this tax
should be remitted at any rate, and unless this be
done the Opposition will have a right to say that
INir. GLADSTONE'S financial reforms are very elastic,
and can be turned to suit anv purpose. Justice
and reason certainly call for this reduction, and we
hope that the Government will be prepared to do
their duty in this respect. Sufficient has been said
on this subject to show the necessity for the reduc-
tion of the tax, if its repeal be possible, and Mr.
GLADSTONE will find that he has mistaken the feel-
ing of the House and the country if he
persist in
measuring out his financial scheme„ by line and