The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-10 00:00:00

SU N, LONDo.N, THURSDAY E'VENLING, MARCH 10, 1859.

THE MINISTERIAL MEASURE OF

REFORM.

BIRMINGHAM, WEDNESDAY NIGHT.
A meeting of the townspeople of Birmingham
was held this evening, in the Town-hall, to take
into consideration the Reform Bill introduced into
Parliament by her Majesty's Government. The
large hall was filled in every part, some estimates
of the number present reaching as high as 8,000.
f he chair was taken by Mr. Lucy, in the absence of
the Mayor. The borough members, Mr. Bright and
Mr. Scholefield, were present. r. Ernest Jones,
who had announced his intention of taking up the
zudgels with Mr. Bright on behalf of the working
classes, was accommodated with a seat on the plat-
form, surrounded by a select knot of his followers.
After a few preliminary observations from the
Chairman,
Mr. C. EDMONDS moved, and Alderman LLOYD
seconded, the first taesolution :
"That the Reform Bill introduced by her Majesty's Go.
vernment, while pretending to effect a settlement of the
question, makes no adequate provision for the enfranchise-
ment of the working classes, disfranchises an intelligent
and independent class of county voters, does not provide
the protection of the ballot, and leaves the small, corrupt,
and dependent boroughs in possession of an amount of in-
fluence which counteracts and swamps the real opinion of
the country, is an insult to the people and demands the un-
compromising opposition of all true Reformers."
Mr. BRIGHT, who was received with great cheer-
ing, then stood forward to support the resolution.
The hon. gentleman said,—ln this great assembly
there may be thousands, I think there must be many
hundreds, who were here in October last, when I
had the pleasure of standing before you for the first
time in the character of one of your Parliamentary
representatives. If there be such, they will bear
me out when I say that on that occasion I told you
the cause of Parliamentary Reform was in a trium-
phant, but, at the same time, in a perilous position.
I said it was in a triumphant position, inas-
much as no man now dared to stand up and
openly profess himself to be against all reform; in
a perilous position, inasmuch as for the moment the
conduct and consideration of the question were in
the hands of men occupying high places in the
State, but who had been in all past time consistent
opponents of reform. I took the liberty of warning
you then again placing any implicit faith in her
Majesty's Government. I told you that they had
not professed any conversion on this matter, and
therefore I thought that we ought all of us to en-
tertain a wholesome suspicion, and to watch with
intense observation every step taken by the Govern-
ment in connection with this great question. I am
here to-night to ask you whether the warning
which I gave you was not necessary ; whether the
suspicion which I pointed out to you was not a
wholesome suspicion ? (Loud cheers.) I ask you
whether the Government of Lord Derby, in the bill
which they have produced, have not adhered to all
their ancient practices, and whether they have not
disappointed the hope which existed in the minds
of the people that they would produce a useful and
substantial measure of reform?. (Cheers.) Why
is it that last week any bill was ntroduced into the
House of Commons ? Did the members of the House
of Lords urge upon the Government to proceed with
their question of reform ? (Laughter.) Is a majo-
rity of the House of Commons intensely anxious for
a great improvement of the representation? (Cries
of " No.") But surely somebody asked for it ; and
who and where are they ? How comes it that
Government after Government has put into the
mouth of the Queen a recommendation to the House
of Commons to consider the amendment of the re-
presentation of the people ? Because, with your
present representation, your Government is chang-
ing from year to year. Things are almost con-
tinually at a dead lock, and there is growing up in
the minds of a great and intelligent people the clear
conviction that your constitution, so far as it mostly
affects you in the composition of your House of Com-
mons, does not give youyour just rights, and does not
secure to you that fair defence of your interests
which the constitution intends, if it intends anything,
by the existence of a House of Commons. (Cheers.)
What is it you said when I washere lastyear ? You
said it at least by affirming when I said it—you said
that only one man out of five of all the men in
Great Britain and Ireland had a vote for members
of Parliament. (Cheers.) You said, moreover, that
those who have votes are so placed that a vast num-
ber return few members, while small numbers re-
turned many members, so that not only are four out
of five disfranchised entirely, but the fifth, by the
manner in which members are apportioned, is ren-
dered almost as powerless as if he had no vote at
all. What was it that we asked for ? That there
should be a great many more electors; that what-
ever exclusions should exist hereafter should be
exclusions not directed against any class, such as
putting the men who wear white kid gloves on one
side the line, and the men who don't on the other;
but that all exclusions whatsoever, whether neces-
sary or unnecessary, according to the boldness or
the timidity.of Parliament, should at least not be
directed against one class, and that the most nume-
rous, but should, so far as they acted at all, act with
fairness and justice through all classes of the popu-
lation. (Cheers.) You ask, also, with an unanimity
which has never been exceeded by any people, in
any country, on any question, that when Parliament
confers the franchise it should confer also that
which will enable you to exercise your franchise in
accordance with your intelligence and conviction,
and by, the guidance of your own conscience—(loud
cheers)—you asked not for some miserable, delu-
sive, impudent sham, in the way of voting papers,
but that you should vote fairly by an arrangement
made by the friends of the voter under the shelter of
the ballot. (Loud cheers.) You asked that small,
dependent, helpless constituencies of 200, 300, or
400 electors, who are not their own masters in an
election, should to a considerable extent cease to
return members to Parliament in their own little
circles, and that their members should be distri-
buted among the great populations of the coun-
try. Everybody who asked for a reform asked
for what I have described. I don't pretend
to draw an exact line either as to the suffrage
or as to the distribution of members, but
what I have generally described is to a greater or
less extent the demand of every man in the king-
dom who is in earnest in urging the Government or
Parliament to bring in a Reform Bill. If any man
had come from abroad, and had heard that there
was this general demand—a demand so general that
Government after Governmentthought it necessary
to act upon it—he would, of course, have expected
that when the leader of the House of Commons
stood up to speak for three hours and a half on this
question, and to introduce a bill, that bill would
have had some remote resemblance to the demands
which the people had made. Well, in the midst of
this general expectation we have a bill that offers
several things that not only nobody wanted—
(laughter)—but which men stand aghast at, and
which refuses with the most insolent contempt
netirlyeverything that you demand. Will you allow
me for a moment, as probably all of you have not
carefully read the bill, to describe to you two or
three of its main points ? The only particular in
which it appears to make a concession to the popu-
lar demand is where it deals with the county fran-
chise in regard to occupiers of £lO value, and from
£lO up to £5O. You know that farmers or house-
holders in counties, if the rental or value of their
occupation be £5O a-year,have a vote for the county.
This bill proposes to reduce that franchise to accu-
piers of a rental of £lO. I presume this concession
is made in consequence of previous votes of the
House of Commons, and the belief in the minds of
the Government that there was a majority in favour
of that proposition. Now, what is the effect of that
reduction ? Mr. Newmarch, a great authority on
matters of figures, says that it will add to the county
constituencies, now numbering 500,000 electors,
about 100,000 more voters. This appears tobeanextension of the franchise, but it is only an appa-
rent extension; there is a giving with one hand
and a snatching away with the other. I can show
that the county electoral body would be worse under
this bill than it is under the existing system. Are
there any of you here who live in the town of Bir-
mingham and have qualifications for the county of
Warwick? You know that within the limits of the
borough there is a considerable division of freehold
property, many lots of freehold, and many freehold
houses. Throughout the whole of England and
Wales there are not fewer than 100,000 of these
county voters whose qualifications are to be. found
within the boundaries of boroughs. By this bil!,
if it should pass, all these voters will be disquali
fied for the counties, and will be required in future
to vote only in the borough in which these qualifi-
cations lie. At first sight you might suppose that
it does not make much difference whether a man
votes for the county or borough ; but in this case it
makes a great difference, inasmuch as, probably,
60.000 men out of the 100,000 have at present
votes for the bororghs, and would not get any.addi-
tional votes for the boroughs, but would simply-
have their existing county franchise utterly de-
stroyed and abolished, being left merely with the
borough franchise which they now enjoy. This
bill, therefore, proposes to do the most audacious
thing which has been attempted in our time—
namely, to disfranchise about 60,000 men, the most
independent portion of the entire constituent body
in the United Kingdom. And the measure also
seeks to do another thing, which I must just men
tion, to show the animus with which, this art of it
is drawn. It is intended now to a ) -
D
pi appoint a com-
anission to go over all the boroughs in England and
"Wales, and ascertain whether there is any portion
)f a borough left out—any suburb or adjacent vil-
j age, in order that the boundaries of those boroughs
n lay be extended so as to-include the neighbouring
di.. 4 icts and for what purposes think you is it to be
d on e ? Simply
to cut.
in
those
off. from the counties the £lO
I Lout leholders who live those villagesand suburbs,

to throw them into the boroughs, to weaken the
popular party in the counties, and to make the
county representation even more exclusively terri-
torial than it already is. Now, have you not ob-
served that in the House of Commons, e er since
the Reform Bill, you have had a phalanx f men 200
or 300 strong, landed proprietors or the direct re-
presentatives of landed proprietors ? You have
150 of them now sitting behind this very Govern-
men. They are exclusive, so dull at learning
anything of reform, so careless of extending any-
thing like political rights to the people—they are
so united in defence of every political, and, as long
as they can hold it, of every commercial or landed
monopoly, that their Government can do nothing
in the reform or improvement of our legislation.
You recollect that in 1852 Lord Derby's Govern-
ment was turned out because Mr. Disraeli brought
in a budget which the House of Commons would
not`agree to. That budget was introduced in obe-
dience to the wishes of the 150 landed gentry who
sit behind him, and now, though there are a great
many Conservative members in the House of Com-
mons representing towns and boroughs who can
have no sympathy with this bill, it is in obedience
to the majority in the House of Lords, and to the
150 territorial proprietors who sit behind him, that
he has offered you the £lO franchise in the coun-
ties, giving 100,000 more votes with one hand, and
with the other taking away 100,000 freeholders to
balance them. (Shame.) Why, it is not my inte.
rest or your interest alone, but that of every man
in England, that this system, exclusive and mono-
polist legislation, should he broken up ; and every
county member whose constituency is composed
partly of landed proprietors and partly of manufac-
turers, of shopkeepers, and of artisans, will be a
better member for the present, and still more for
the future of the country, than if he sat in the
House of Commons, as most of them now do, simply
as the stolid and unconvertible representatives of a
dozen territorial proprietors. We come next to the
question of what the Government has offered to the
population and to the constituencies of the boroughs.
At present in the boroughs of England and Wales
there are about 430,000 electors, exclusive of that
class called freemen. To this body the 100,000 free-
holders are to be brought in; but, as I believe more
than one-half of them already have votes for the
boroughs, the bill would in reality not bring in
more than 50,000. But of this 50,000 a very large
proportion do not live in the boroughs. For ex-
ample, the freehold properties in Birmingham are
not held by persons living in this borough and
voting for it. I undertake to say there is not a
county in England—probably there is not one in
Scotland either—in which there is nobody residing
who is not the owner of some freehold property in
the town of Birmingham ; and by this bill, whether
such a person lived in Caithness or in Cornwall, he
would vote for the borough of Birmingham ; but
suppose Birmingham were a place, not of 300,000
inhabitants, but of 5,000, and had only from 250 to
300 electors. Let us see how this would act ; let
some half-dozen country gentlemen living in this
neighbourhood, each having a freehold house
worth, say £2OO ; let him divide it into ten shares;
or, I take the house to be worth £2O a year ; and
he will have ten votes of 40s. each. Let him put
his friends and dependents upon the electoral list
for the borough as owners of this house—in these
small boroughs you know the majority go by tens
and twenties, not by hundreds and thousands, as
they do here, and it would not require the buying
of more than three or four, or, at most, half-a-dozen
moderately-sized houses, and their division in the
mode I have described, all of which could be easily
done by persons living in any county of England,
Scotland, or Ireland; it would not require more
than three years of this bill to make it perfectly
competent for half-a-dozen gentlemen, setting to
work with such small boroughs, to make every one
of them as completely nomination, dependent,
pocket, and Totten boroughs as any one of those
that were disfranchised by the Act of 1832. (Cheers.)
They are not, then, going to improve the county-
constituency ; they intend if they can only to trans-
fer the members from the little boroughs to the
great ones, but so to manage the law as that these
little boroughs, now sadly too dependent, shall lose
everyparticle of independence which they now pos-
sess, But this is not all. There are some remark-
able concessions which I have previously termed
" fancy franchises." We won't discuss the ques-
tion of the lawyers, because everybody knows
that, whether they should have votes or
not, they have them, and will have them.
(A laugh.) We won't discuss the question
of the clergy or dissenting ministers, or the doctors,
or the schoolmasters, or even the pensioners.
cLaughter.) What we will discuss is this—is there
in this bill the shadow of a shade of an inclination
to extend the franchise to the people. I see in a
newspaper which I suppose very few people read—
it is one of the supporters of this bill—(laughter)—
the statement that everybody may have a vote be-
cause everybody may have £6O in a savings-bank.
(Laughter.) If this were only true—if I could
announce this to-night as a great fact—why it
would be the most welcome intelligence that ever
reached the ears of the million. (Cheers.) I had
a letter the other day from somebody in Birming-
ham, who told me that he had £lOO in a bank of
which your esteemed member and my colleague is a
director. The writer said he had as much faith in
that bank as he had in any savings-bank, and he
asked me to be good enough to ascertain for him
whether it was necessary for him to withdraw his
money from that bank and place it in a savings
bank, in order that he might have the franchise.
(Laughter.) I received another letter from a person
living in London, who states that as Mr. Disraeli
says one illustration is better than a heap of argu-
ments he will furnish him with one. He observed
that he is one 'of those fortunate working men to
whom the Government propose to give the franchise
by the savings bank clause in their bill, and yet
that there are none who can feel themselves more
insulted than he does by this provision. He goes
on to say that he has been married 12 years, and
has a family of six boys and girls grown up, as he
hopes, to be respectable men and women, able and
willing to fulfil all the duties of citizenship. He
thinks the bringing up of a family in respectability
and giving themthe advantage of as liberal an edu-
cation as his means will allow is something in his
favour, if it be not also commendable. He continues,
" On referring to my bank book (for you see he
speaks quite in .commercial language), I find the
first deposit, which I paid in 1849, amounted to £5,
in 1851 it reached £10." Now, listen. Then came
a time for falling back on his little hoard, and
the sum is reduced to £4. You can imagine
this strong-hearted man' labouring from morning
till night, putting scanty savings by, denying him-
self many perfectly innocent enjoyments, at length
succeeding in scraping together £10; then sick-
ness of a child, or perhaps the loss of employment
from a commercial panic, shrinks his little fund to
£4. You see his anxiety, and almost his agony,
as it is gradually being extinguished. He adds,
" And so it goes on decreasing or increasing as our
family necessities compel us to draw upon it, until
after many struggles it rises to £30." Then he had
a piece of good fortune which does not fall to every
body. A relation of his who died left him a small
sum, just enough to bring him within the pale of
this new constitution. (A laugh.) Then he says, " I
am bold enough to assert that I was as capable of
exercising the franchise when I had only £5 as I
now am when I have £60." (Cheers.) He pro-
ceeds :—" Another objection is this—that if I think
proper to withdraw that amount and place it in a
building society or in some other eligible invest-
ment I lose my qualification as a citizen ; if a
friend should want to borrow a few pounds from
me—as often happens in all classes of society—if I
oblige him I shall also be disfranchised." This is
his moral, " The whole thing (he says) appears to
me simply absurd and insulting to common sense,
which seems to be a scarce commodity where such
a proposition came from." (Laughter and cheers.)
I had another letter from a man living either
in Portsmouth or Plymouth, who tells me he hap-
pens to have as much money in the savings bank
as will qualify him under the bill. " Nobody," he
says, " beyond you and myself knows of this fact.
is it necessary that my small pecuniary transactions,
my condition with regard to my savings, should all
be published to my neighbours in this town ? Sup-
pose you were to carry this rule through all the
different classes of society, I say it is an insulting
u
and absurd proposition
svoice
which ought to be rejected
by the unanimo of the country." (Cheers.)
A few days
memberspeech
dissected the savings-
bank of the late Government,
agoin a a
eh
Sir B. Hall,
therebank werebo o k
onoef
htuhnedtrzof Newport. He said
contributors already elec-
torsdid he find that this wonder:
remainedconstituency
would of
be just one
simple voter added to the register. Onehair'sNewportbreadth,
might in
vent 100 qualifications quite as good as this. This
is not a qualification to admit you; it is to give you
the show of admission with the reality of perpetual
exclusion, When I think of the vicissitudes to
which every man is exposed who lives upon wages,
and depends for his weekly earnings upon the capi-
tal of another man, and the success or continuance
of that other man's trade, I say there could not be
a proposition more utterly fruitless for good, indi-
cating greater ignoriince of the condition as well as
of the wants of thefpeople, or more insulting to the
common' sense and !intellect of the nation. (Cheers.)
If you revert to the years 1831 and 1832, you will
find that a very 4elebrated and then most powerful
individual, who now lies beneath the dome of St.
Paul's—the Ditke of Wellington—declared that
there was no need of any reform. It is said that he
I even doubted whether if some one descended from a

i

higher sphere to teach a nation how to rule itself,
'or how to be ruled, a better constitution, or a more
admirable system of government, could not have been
chosen than that under which we then lived; and
no doubt, as far as regarded his own order, this was
perfectly true—(cheers)—but the Duke of Welling-
ton himself, with all his courage and all his robust-
ness of denial, never told you that it was necessary
io go back; he never offered you a bill which would
make your representation worse ; he never proposed
to disfranchise clean off 50,000 freeholders in Eng-
land and Wales ; he never said, patting you on the
back, " put £6O into the savings-bank, save £6 a
year for 10 years, excellent citizen of Great Britain
as you are, and at the end of that time your name
shall be written down in the voters' list of Bir-
mingham, and you shall
i have the ten-thousandth
part of a member n the House of Commons."
(Laughter and cheers.) It is a very serious question.
As citizens of a free country we are free to meet in
magnificent gatherings like this; so long as that right
is preserved to us, and men value freedom, so long
freedom cannot be utterly lost. But, I ask you,
are you willing to come to this ? Did your fathers
in 1832 toil; did they run risks ; did they devote
days and nights to the carrying of great questions,
that you should be told twenty-seven years after-
wards that four or five of you cannot have votes—
that the Constitution never intended it—that the

peerage would not be safe—that the Church would
rock on its foundations, and, for anything I know,
that you would have a better Government and be
more lightly taxed ? (Cheers.) Marvellous changes
have taken place within the twenty-seven years of
the existence of the Reform Bill. In the county
of Lancaster there are a million of people more than
there were when the census on which the Reform
Act was based was taken. All your railroads have
been made, 300 or 400 newspapers have sprung up
and are in every house; there is not a single point
to which you can refer, social, commercial, political,
moral, or religious, in which the people have not
not made astonishing strides within the last thirty-
years. (Cheers.) All this was admitted by the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer when he came forward to in-
sult you with this miserable bill. I cannot, in any
language known to me, express the astonishment
and the alarm with which I regard this measure.
(Cheers.) It indicates not only that your rulers
distrust you, but that they despise you. They
might have said they did not believe the govern-
ment would be bettered by any
.Reform Bill ; that
the people were not sufficiently in earnest to justify
them in proposing or to enable them to carry such
a bill. That would have been a fair matter for ar-

gument. But nothing can explain the effect of
their having offered you such a bill, but this—that,
though they distrusted you as much as ever, they
despised you more than before. (Loud cheers.) If
the Government of this country be good, just, and
economical, why should they fear to admit the
people, of whom they speak so highly when it is
not a question of the extension of the suffrage ?
(Cheers.) Do they mean to say that you are to keep
so ignorant, so brutal, so destructive, that, if you are
admitted within the pale of the constitution, you will
tear down or break up the sacred ark ? They know
that the power in this country—the power of tax-
ing and the power'of living on the taxes is a mono-
poly in the hands of a few hundred families. They
believe, and with reason, that if there were a fair
representation of opinions in the House of Commons,
that monopoly which has existed for the last 200
years would be broken up—that the public eye
would be upon every part of it—that the hand of
a strong, intelligent people would have hold of the
reins—and that the fattening of those few hun-
dreds of families upon your £70,000,000 of annual
taxation would be put an end to for ever. (Loud
cheers.) Let me call your attention just to one
point on this matter. You have seen in the news-
papers, in the course of the last fortnight, that the
First Lord of the Admiralty, without any dissent
on the part of the house; has proposed to add an-
other million during the present year to the expen-
diture on the navy. I am not discussing in the least
whether that addition is or is not proper at this mo-
ment ; but it is a fact worth knowing that within
the last 20 years no less than £170,000,000 ster-
ling has been cast into that insatiable maw which
we call the navy. While all this tremendous sum
has been spent in building ships, in manning them,
in feeding the men, in selling old stores and buy-
ing new ones to replace them—(laughter)—not a
single ship of the English navy has been destroyed
or seriously injured in a war, and there has been
scarcely one loss by the violence of the elements or
by any mistake or clumsiness on the part of the
crew or captain ; therefore, whatever may have
been your stock of ships twenty years ago, when
they told you that you had the finest navy in
Europe, they have been adding to it since to the
tune of £170,000,000, a sum the magnitude of
which the best head among you cannot in the
slightest degree comprehend, and now they tell you
that the country is in a state of absolute defence-
lessness, and that he is a credulous and dull Eng-
lishman who dares to go quietly to sleep without
fearing that somebody may not land on our
shores, and take possession of us before morn-
ing. (Laughter.) If the people of England
had been fairly represented in the House of
Commons long before this we should have
had a ransacking of everything connected with the
navy and Admiralty. We should have had honest
commissions or honest committees who would have
gone faithfully through the estimates year by year,
and whatever we had expended we should have
made sure that it was not more than was necessary,
and that what it produced was of the very best ser-
vice of its kind. (Cheers.) You can do nothing of
the kind. Now that the House of Commons has no
interest in economy it consents to no fair committee,
it insists upon no fair commission; and so long as
you are content to toil, and sweat, and pay, this
will go on, if you have not a reformed Parliament.
(Cheers.) This bill which we are met here to consi-
der, and which is so little worth consideration, can-
not by any possibility pass into law. (Cheers.) If it
could pass—if the House of Commons could behave
so ill as to pass it—and if the people of this country
were so lost to absence of shame, to all love of free-
dom, as to permit it to pass as it has come from the
hands of the Government, I should abandon all
hope of the future for this country. (Cheers.) Not
one single week longer would I take my seat in the
House of Commons as your representative. (Loud
cheers.) I should say the highest class among us is
corrupted by a long tenure of power. Our middle
class has no patriotism; it is engaged in domestic
or commercial affairs, and disregards the interest of
the country. The great body of the country, the great
body of the working classes, have been so long ex-
cluded from every right that they have lost even
the appetite for freedom. (Loud cheers.) I can pro-
mise you little from the earnestness of Pailiament.
I believe the bill will be rejected. It is necessary for
all earnest reformers—and there are some in the
house, of course—to reject it. It is necessary, also,
for the exigencies of Parliament, that it should be
rejected. I believe that very soon it will go the way.
of several other reform bills, and I hope for the credit
of its authors that nobody will take the trouble to dig
it up again; but there is a future. This Government,
as you see, is shattered by dissensions in its own ranks;
it is shattered, too, by the enormous—shall I call it
blunder or crime, of proposing this bill. I, as you
know, have never said one syllable that could be
called factious against the members of this Govern-
ment. I knew from what we had escaped when
this Government was formed. I was glad to see it
formed, and I have treated it on all occasions with
all the forbearance and all the fairness that, if I
were a Minister, and the Mintsters were in my
place, I should ask from them ; but the aspect of
things has changed. They have dared to meddle
with this question in a manner which no one with
a spark of respect for the reform cause can for one
moment tolerate. (Cheers.) I believe that nothing,
not even the dislocation of their opponents, nor the
unsavoury character of the preceding Government,
will avail to prevent this Government from coming
to them ; but if Lord Derby resigns, there will be,
as there always has been, a successor. There are
two men to whom little sections in the House of
Commons look up with anxiety and with hope.
Both of them cannot be sent for at the same mo-
ment, and, judging from the state of the house, and
judging from the fact that the crisis has occurred,
or is likely to occur, on the question of reform, I
presume that that Minister whose name is most
associated with this question is most likely to be
the future Minister. But now, although I have
admitted before that I believe the sympathies and
opinions of Lord John Russell are distinctly in
favour of popular liberty and in favour of some real
improvement in our representative system, yet bear
in mind that a Minister is not a Minister of the
Crown nor a Minister of the people. He is the
Minister of the aristocracy, whether it be Lord
Derby with his followers, or Lord John Russell
with his. If he were anxious to give the people a
real, substantial, undeniable measure of reform as I
myself am, you must bear in mind that all those
around him in the same rank and class do not feel
on this question as I feel, or even as the noble
lord feels. It is not in the power of any Minister
to do even what an honest Minister might wish to
do, unless there be an uprising of opinion through-
out all classes of the population. (Cheers.) You men
of Birmingham, you men of the midland counties,
united with the population of the metropolis, of
Lancashire, and the West Riding, and with the
cmaanntuufarne tu rin
minogriatineds
npopulousto m majorities
districts
measureso of Scotland,which
now they insolently tell you are revolutionary, you
can make extremely rational and beneficial, even in
othaethopisincluonestoifon here the most timidr ekairni
gs t oocnrea
o; t
ai no
of the
is nothing that you cannot
do : you can do it without ba
laws of your country, or of that which ought to be
the highest of all laws—the moral law. -(Cheers.)

You can meet ; you can discuss the question ; you
can send petitions within a fortnight, which Mr.
S cholefield and I can scarce carry into the house.
All the, great populations can send great petitions ;
you did it in 1832. The very countenances of your
distrustful opponents in the house change per-
ceptibly as these great petitions are brought up. If
we have laid aside the barbarous weapons with
which men in this country in past ages, and men in
other countries now, carry great political changes—.
if we shudder at turmoil and abhor bloodshed—the
more are w.e called on to use, unitedly with every
power of combination and resolution, from one end
of the kingdom to the other, those great legal and
moral weapons which the constitution of our coun-
try permits us to wield. (Loud cheering.)
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD, M.P.,rose also to support the
resolution, but he was interrupted by an attempt
on the part of Mr. Ernest Jones to address the as-
semblage. A scene of indescribable confusion ensued,
in the midst of which Mr. Jones, in spite of some
rough handling from persons near him, persisted in
his efforts to obtain a hearing, and at length found
his way to the front of the platform, where he took
refuge behind. The question whether Mr. Jones
should be allowed to speak was then put to the
sense of the meeting, and was clamorously decided
in the negative.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD then concluded his remarks,
which were generally condemnatory of the Govern-
ment bill.

The resolution was then carried by acclamations,
as were also subsequent resolutions in favour of a
larger extension of the borough and county fran-
chise, the ballot, and a re-distribution of seats.
The meeting then separated.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

CRIMINAL COURT-WORCESTER, MARCH 8.

(Before Mr. Justice Crompton.)
William Edwards, a. labouring man, 52 years of
age, was charged with a rape on a girl between 14
andls years of age, named Susannah Mason, on the
18th of December, 1858, at Kidderminster.

After a lengthened trial the jury found the pri-
soner guilty only of the attempt.
Mr. Justice Crompton, in passing sentence, said
the punishment which he was able to give the pri-
soner was wholly disproportioned to the crime
which he had committed, but, as the jury were uot
satisfied that the complete offence had been com-
mitted, the sentence was that he be imprisoned with
hard labour.for two years.

William Checketti surrendered to take his trial
on a charge of indecently exposing himself in a
public place near to a public highway to divers
persons then and there passing and repassing, &c.,
on the 13th of October, 1858, at Pershore.
Mr. J. J. Powell appeared for the prosecution ;
Mr. R. Kettle defended the prisoner.
It appeared from the evidence that the prosecu-
tor, Charles Lane, kept a publichouse at Pershore,
and that the exposure in question was committed
by the defendant in the bowling-green belonging
to the house, and was seen by the prosecutor and
wife from an upstairs window. No other witness
was called, though it appeared there were several
people in the bowling-alley at the time.
At the close of the case for the prosecution,
Mr. Kettle submitted that the indictment was not
proved, as it was necessary on this indictment to
show that there was an exposure to persons passing
along the highway.
Mr. Powell contended that the words which re-
ferred to the highway might be rejected as sur-
plusage, and then the indictment would be proved,
and the words " then and there," &c., would refer
to the public place.
Mr. Justice Crompton consulted Mr. Baron
Channell, on the point, and held that the defendant
must be acquitted, as it was not shown that there
was any exposure to persons on the highway. His
lordship, however, wished it to be known that the
difficulty was only a technical one, which would
probably not occur again.

WESTERN CIRCUIT.—DORCHESTER, March 9.

CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Watson.)
Mary Ann Waters was indicted for stealing a
brooch from a post letter at Sherborne, on the 30th
of July..

Mr: Slade and Mr. Poulden were counsel for the
prosecutor, and Mr. Ffooks defended the prisoner.
The prisoner was a young girl in the service of
the postmaster at Sherborne. On the 30th of July
a small box, containing a pearl brooch, was posted
at London for Mr. Gooden, at Sherborne. Mr.
Gooden received the box, but it did not contain
anything. Some suspicion existed in the postmas-
ter's mind about the prisoner, and on the 4th of
August he called her into the room, and asked her
to produce the contents of her pockets. She first
produced a silver pencil case, which she said she
had found. She then produced a pearl brooch,
which she said her aunt had given her. The
postmaster sent for her mother, and asked her if
she had ever seen the brooch before. She said she
had not, and then he turned her away. A few
days afterwards, on hearing of Mr. Gooden's loss,
the police were sent for, and upon going to the
girl she said she had picked up the brooch from her
master's floor. The girl was only fifteen years of
age. The box had been opened, and resealed with
post-office wax, and stamped with the pencil case
which the prisoner had in her pocket.
Mr. Ffooks addressed the jury for the prisoner,
suggesting that there might have been irregula-
rities in the office, and that the box might have
been on the floor.

The jury found the prisoner guilty, but recom
mended her to mercy.

The learned Judge said it was a sad case, but it
could not be passed over lightly. She must be
imprisoned and kept to hard labour for fifteen
months.

NISI PRIUS COURT.

(Before Mr. Justice Crowder and a Special Jury.
_ _

FRY V. BRYANT.

Mr. Sergeant Kinglake and Mr. Stock were
counsel for the plaintiff; and Mr. Slade and Mr.
Barstow for the defendant.

Acccording to the statement of the plaintiff's
counsel, it appeared that this was an action to re-
cover against the defendant for having written a
letter containing a libel on the plaintiff, who was
the son of a respectable farmer residing in this
county. It would seem that the plaintiff was en-
gaged to be married to a young widow of fortune,
Mrs. J. Foot. In June last Mrs. Foot was on a
visit to her uncle, Mr. Good. On the 20th of that
month a letter came to Mrs. George Good. Mrs.
Good opened the letter, which was to this effect :

"My dear Madam,—Excuse me for addressing you,
having a great respect for yourself and family, respecting
T. F. His private character is infamous. He keeps a
woman. I wish you could see him.
" Yours, " J. F."
Mrs. Good handed the letter to Mrs. Foot. Mrs.
Fry, the mother of the plaintiff, and Mrs. Bryant
were related. After the receipt of this letter the
engagement between the plaintiff and Mrs. Foot
was broken off. The plaintiff took every step to
discover wlio was the writer of the letter, and, from
comparing it with different writing's of the defen-
dant, persons were of opinion that this letter was
in the handwriting of the defendant. The letter
had also been submitted to different experts, and
they were of opinion that the defendant must have
written it.

Witnesses were called to make out the plaintiff's
case, and he himself was called, and it appeared
that he had been paying his addresses to the widow
for four years. The widow herself was called, and
she stated that she had allowed the plaintiff to pay
his addresses to her, but she would not admit that
they were engaged. Several experts and fac-
similists were called, and they gave the usual evi-
dence that the turns of the " d's" and the " f 's"
were the same upon looking at the writing through
a glass of extraordinary magnifying power.
The defendant was called, and swore most posi•
tively that he had not written the letter, and that
he knew nothing of it.
The jury, after a trial which lasted nearly the
whole day, found a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, one farthing.
The judge certified for the plaintiff to have his
costs.

NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—YoRK, March 9.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Byles.)
Guilliers Heron, aged 23, a gipsy, was indicted
for having, along with another man, assaulted and
robbed Richard Gillbank of 25., at Bickerton, near
Thorp-arch, on the 16th of January last.
The Hon. A. Liddell prosecuted, and Mr. Shep-
herd defended the prisoner.
The prisoner, it appeared, was one of a tribe of
gipsies encamped in a lane near Thorp-arch, and
the prosecutor is a boy acting as farm servant in
that neighbourhood. On the afternoon of the day
in question he was going home from his work about
half-past four, as it was getting dusk, when he saw
two men seated on a style. They advanced towards
him. Both were dark complexioned, and one had
long black hair. The latter had a knife in his hand.
On coming up with him they demanded his money
or his life, and one of them, whom the prosecutor
confidently swore to be the prisoner, put his hands
into the prosecutor's pockets and took out 2s. The
men then made off towards the place where the
gipsy encampment was, and the prosecutor set off
to find a policeman. Having obtained a constable
they entered the encampment, which consisted of
three or four tents, and the prosecutor identified
the prisoner, who was brought out of one of them,
as one of the men who had robbed him. The de-
fence set up was that the prosecutor, who was much
alarmed at the time, was mistaken as to the identity

of the prisoner, and witnesses were called to prove
an alibi. These witnesees were all of the gipsy
tribe, and some of them were women, with the real
dark skins and black eyes and hair of their race.
The cleverness and adroitness with which they
fenced with the questions put in cross-examination
excited much amusement in court. Their story was,
that the prisoner was the youngest of six brothers,
and that they were all in their tent at five o'clock,
the time the robbery was said to have taken place ;
that they were in their tent receiving a visit from
some of the tribe in another tent from three o'clock
till seven, when the policeman came. A cousin
and some of the prisoner's brothers were called, and
were so like him in appearance that a mistake as to
the prisoner was far from impossible. They all
had, as one of their women, who was dressed in a
red shawl, described it, " black eyes, black hair,
and dark skin—a good standing colour that would
neither wash off nor wear off.' One of the pri-
soner's brothers said they were all at tea with the
prisoner at five o'clock in their tent, and when
asked what they had to eat, said they had a " hod-
gun" cooked, which is the provincial name for a
hedgehog.
His Lordship—What do you say you had—
cooked urchin ?

Gipsy—Yes, cooked hodgun. I'm very fond of
cooked hodgun (with a grin).
His Lordship's mind seemed to be filled with
horrible misgivings, when the meaning of the
provincialism was explained amid much laughter.
His Lordship having carefully summed up the
evidenee;the jury acquitted the prisoner.
A number of gipsies were in court, who appeared
to be in a state of great excitement during the trial,
and watched each turn of it with the keenest
anxiety.

POLICE IN2ELLIGENCE.—March 9.

MANSION-HOUSE.--James Charles Vaughan,
a respectably dressed man, was charged with annoy-
ing Sarah Grierson, a widow residing in Love-lane.
Complainant stated that she rented some premises
in Love-lane, which, in consequence of the death of
her husband in July last, she had sub-let to the
defendant at a rent of 14s. per week. She had since
given him notice to quit repeatedly, but he refused
to leave, and it was only with the greatest trouble
that she at last succeeded in getting possession.
More recently she had let the place to another per-
son, but the defendant so annoyed them by going
there whenever he was drunk, and threatening to
break in the door, that that person had refused to
enter upon possessian. On Tuesday defendant re-
peated this conduct, and she gave him into custody.
The Lord Mayor—l suppose he paid you the
rent?

Complainant—No, my lord ; I wish he had.
The Lord Mayor—Then how do you know that
he did not come on purpose to pay it ?
Complainant—Oh, I am quite sure about that.
He was there seventeen weeks, and he owes me
more than Ll 4, for he never paid me anything.
A police-officer deposed to the fact of taking the
defendant into custody, and that a considerable
mob was collected round the place, as the defen-
dant was swearing loudly, and throwing himself
against the shutters with great violence.
The Lord Mayor—Well, defendant, what have
you to say ?
Defendant—l went there by the advice of my
solicitor, as I still hold the key ; but I am willing
to give up possession.
Mr. Goodman (chief clerk)—Oh, don't talk about
your solicitor. This poor woman came here twice
for advice, and I told her to take possession, for I
am sure no judge would give you either damages
or expenses.
The Lord Mayor—Where is the key?
Defendant—The police have it at the station.
_ _

The Lord Mayor—Very well, then, let them
give it to the complainant; and as to you, you
must find one good security to keep the peace for
six months, for it is quite intolerable that such
fellows as you should take premises of a person like
this poor woman, and then refuse to pay rent.
Defendant, who was not prepared with bail, and
was apparently astonished at the result of the
" advice of his solicitor," was then locked up.

GUILDHALL.—George Lewis, a seafaring
young man, was placed at the bar before Alderman
Salomons on the following charge :
Francis Stateman said—l am captain's steward
on board the Admirable, lying off Sheerness. I
met the prisoner on Tuesday in Farringdon-street,
and he accosted me with " Good morning, mate,"
after which we got into conversation about ships,
and he asked me if I knew of a " billet" for him ?
I mentioned several ships lying off Sheerness
in commission, and he then asked me to take
a glass of ale. We went into a house in
New Bridge-street, and while there a third
person came in, and began boasting of his strength,
and offered to bet the prisoner a dozen of wine he
would throw a half hundredweight a certain num-
ber of yards. The prisoner said he could not afford
so much, but he accepted the bet for half a dozen
of wine, and then proposed that we should go to
some skittle-ground to test the strangers's strength
and decide the wager. We accordingly went to a
house in Fetter-lane, but k having no money I
pawned my watch and chain, and when we got into
the skittle-ground they forgot all about the wager
and began playing at skittles.
Alderman Salomons—Did you play with them ?
Witness—Yes, sir.
Alderman Salomons—What for ?
Witness—£l a game, sir.
Alderman Salomons—Of course you lost ?
Witness—Yes, sir ; but they let me win the first
game or two when we played for ls. 6d., and from
that we got to 55., and then to £1 a game.
Alderman Salomons—How much did you lose ?
Witness—£l 55., sir, for that was all the money
I had about me ; I afterwards thought I had been
sharped out of my money, and returned and gave
the prisoner into custody.
Alderman Salomons—To which did you lose
your money ?
Witness—The stranger, sir, but I considered the
prisoner had drawn me into it.
Alderman Salomons—l am afraid you must at-
tribute your loss to your own folly.
The officer said—l searched the prisoner, and
fonnd on him £3 3s. Hid., a " duffer" watch and
chain, and a " Bank of Economy" note for £5.
Alderman Salomons said the " flash " note pro-
duced was so close an imitation of the bank note,
that he thought the Bank could prosecute as it bore
the printer's name upon it. However, he would
remand the prisoner for a few days.

WORSHIP-STREET.—Thomas Davis, 30, was
charged before Mr. D'Eyncourt with stealing from
the person, and also with an assault.
Donoway, 129 11, said that at an early hour that
morning, while in the High-street of Whitechapel,
he heard the screams of a female on the opposite
side of the road, and hastening across perceived the
prisoner with his right hand on the breast of a
gentleman, while his left was drawn out of his
trousers' pocket. The ring of money falling on the
pavement followed, and prisoner ran off as he
swung his arm round and struck the gentleman a
terrible blow with his fist in the face which felled
him to the ground. Witness pursued and took
prisoner into custody with a handkerchief in his
possession, and some trifling amount of money.
The proSecutor, Mr. Wm. White, of Mile-end,
said he was in company with a female at the time
in question, having just left the spot where a fire
had occurred in the neighbourhood, when the pri-
soner came boldly up to him and acted as described
by the constable. Prosecutor, after recovering from
the immediate effects of the blow, pursued and he
believed should have taken the fellow, but for the
constable, in his greater speed, falling over him.
He did not know the amount of money he had lost,
but identified the handkerchief.

Donoway told the court that two years since pri-
soner was pointed out to him as a returned convict,
and had since been constantly in the company of
thieves.

Prisoner—This is spite of yours. You promised
me three months the first opportunity.
Mr. D'Eyncourt—lnstead of which you will go
for trial.

LAMBETll.—Richard Davis, a journeyman
carpenter, who gave his residence in Kent-street,
Borough, was placed at the bar before Mr. Elliott,
on a charge of breaking into a house near Ken-
nington-oval on Sunday evening last, and stealing
therefrom £1 17s. in cash. _ _

From the evidence it appeared that during the
absence of the occupants of the house on Sunday
night last, it was entered in the first instance with
picklock keys, and on the thieves obtaining an en-
trance they broke open the door of a lodger's apart-
ment, forced 'open all the cupboards and drawers,
turned out and ransacked all their contents, but,
singular to say, all the property they carried away
was £1 17s. from one, of the drawers, and the
remains of a leg of mutton upon which the family
had dined. Suspicion first fell upon the prisoner,
from the fact of his previously calling at the house
to see the servant, and passing himself off for her
uncle, when in fact he was her father, and from the
fact also of his having been seen by a constable to
leave the house where the robbery was committed
on the Sunday night.

The prisoner stoutly denied the charge, and said
he spent Sunday evening and night in Southampton-
street, Camberwell, some distance from where the
robbery had been committed.
He was remanded to a future day.

RED IJEER.—Last week there was an arrival of
red deer at Arran, from Knowsley Hall, the seat of the Earl
of Derby. There were 20 in number, and aro the purchase
of the Duke of Hamilton,

DREADFUL MURDER AT ALDER-
SHOTT.

On Sunday afternoon, about three o'clock, a
dreadful tragedy was committed in a house in
North-lane, Aldershott, by a soldier of the 9th,
named Henry Benjamin Haynes. The house in
question was once a beershop called " the London
Tavern," but, inasmuch as the soldiers were har-
boured there after the time allowed them, pickets
were placed at the doors to prevent soldiers enter-
ing, since which the place has been what " unfor-
tunate girls" call an " accommodation house." On
this occasion some soldiers were in the house, and,
loud screams being heard from one of the many
rooms, a rush was made to that room, and there
was laynes seen with a razor in his hand, and a
young girl named Mary M'Gowan, a native of
Leeds, on her knees exclaiming, " Lord have mercy
upon me ! I hope my poor mother will forgive
me for what I have done ; I have been a
wicked sinner !" and in a minute or two
she died. The soldier Haynes was taken by
some other soldiers, and on Tuesday an inquest
was held on the body before Mr. Chandler, of
Basingstoke, deputy-coroner.
The first witness, Charlotte Davies, a girl living
in the same house, said—l am a single woman. I
lodge at the London Tavern, and knew the deceased,
Mary M'Gowan, for about three days. She had
been staying some time before at the house. On
Sunday afternoon, about three o'clock, I was in my
bedroom, when I heard loud screams of " Murder,"
and I ran to the door of the room they seemed to
come from, which was the next room to mine, and
I saw a soldier named Henry Benjamin Haynes
take his hand, in which there was a razor, from the
throat of the deceased, and put the razor on a table.
The deceased was then standing against the win-
dow' and just as I caught, sight of her she fell on
her knees, with her hands clasped together, and
exclaimed, " Lord have mercy on me ! I hope my
poor mother will forgive me for what I have done ;
I have been a wicked sinner." As soon as Haynes
had put the razor on the table he went out of the
room and leant against the bannisters at the top of
the stairs. I then saw him go into the further-
most room—not where deceased was. I believe
Haynes to have been sober. I only saw him drink
two glasses of ale all the day. I last saw M'Gowan,
before hearing her scream, at half-past one o'clock.
Henry Ferris, of the North Down Rifle 4, a very
young man, said—On Sunday afternoon, about three
o'clock, I went into Charlotte Davies's room, and
stopped while she was dressing herself. I heard
screams of Murder" from the next room, and we
rushed out, and saw Haynes standing near the de-
ceased with a bloody razor in his hand. The de-
ceased was on her knees and exclaiming " Lord
have mercy on my soul ! I hope my mother will
forgive me ; I know I have been a wicked sinner !"
I saw Haynes put the razor on the table, and the
case into his pocket as he was walking out. I
went into the lobby to prevent his running away,
but he made no attempt to escape. A man of the
Ist Royal Artillery and some of the Military Train
assisted to take him into custody. I never saw
Haynes before, and never was in the house before.
I saw blood running from the woman's throat, and
a pool of blood was on the floor. Haynes looked pale,
but sober, and walked steadily out of the room.
Wm. Trevanner, of the 4th Battalion of the
Military Train, said—On Sunday afternoon last I
was walking near the London Tavern about three
in the afternoon, when I heard screams of " Mur-
der" coming from a room upstairs. I ran into the
house, and upstairs, and saw a woman lying on her
back with her throat cut. Sbe was not quite dead,
and the wound was bleeding. She died soon after,
while I was looking for the provost. A girl named
Charlotte Davies was in the room at the time, and
when I asked who had done it she pointed out the
man Haynes who was leaning against the bannisters,
and I told his comrades to take care of him while I
went for the provost. We took him to the police
station, and as we were going he said his mind had
not been easy since he came from America, for what
he had done there. I asked him his reason for
murdering the girl, when he replied, " Poor girl !
she didn't do me any harm, and I didn't do her any
harm." He said she never spoke to him, and he
never spoke to her. I told him it was his intention
to kill somebody, because he had his razor with
him ; and he said his reason was she had caused
him to have a bad disease, and sent him to the
hospital, and he meant to have his revenge, but
that he meant to murder Margaret Chilton. I then
asked him what made him murder another one, and
he replied, " The Devil done it." He appeared
quite sober. I thought at first he had been drink-
ing, but afterwards he appeared in his right senses.
I know there is such a girl as Margaret Chilton.
Mr. John Shoolbraid, surgeon, of Aldershott,
said that he was sent for to see the deceased on
Sunday afternoon, and he found her lying on the
floor quite dead, and the room covered with blood,
A wound was in her throat, commencing underneath
the chin at the left side of the windpipe, extending
to the right side in a direction downwards about
four inches, and cutting the principal vessels on the
right side of the neck. There had been excessive
haemorrhage, from which death resulted. Deceased

appeared about 20 years of age.
A comrade of Haynes, named Robert Kalender,
of the Ist Battalion of the 9th, said—Haynes
worked in the tailor's shop with me. We left
the camp about 10 o'clock on Sunday morning
and went to the London Tavern, and stayed
there till half-past three, and had two glasses of
ale each. He was not the worse for liquor at all
during the day. We were both absent from the
camp without leave. I heard some person scream,
and on going to the spot I said, " For God's sake,
what have you done ?" He didn't reply, but shook
his head. I was acquainted with him in the Crimea.
I have known him confined for being absent from
work, but never knew him do any violence to any
one. He was a well-behaved him.
The coroner shortly addressed the jury, remark-
ing that there appeared a total absence of motive ;
he seemed determined to commit some deed; but
the reason given by one of the witnesses was cer-
tainly not sufficient to account for such an act. It
was very rare that such crimes were committed in
the presence of others, but in this case there was
no difficulty in proving who was guilty. They
knew nothing of the antecedents of Haynes to
account for it, and he appeared rational enough at
the time.
The jury at once returned a verdict of wilful
murder, and the prisoner was committed to take
his trial at Winchester.

BRUTAL MURDER ON THE HIGH SBAS.

LIVERPOOL, MARCH 8.
During the whole of this morning much excite-
ment has been manifested among the seafaring
population in consequence of the apprehension of
the first and second engineers of the mail steamer
Bogota, from Valparaiso, Rio, &c., which arrived
in the Mersey on Sunday last, and who are charged
with the murder of one of the stokers on board on
the voyage homewards. The name of the murdered
man is Thomas Landen, aged 45, and a native of
Cornwall. The names of the accused are John
Buchanan, first engineer, and Archibald Mitchell.
This day, at noon, after the usual morning cases
had been disposed of at the Police-court, the two
prisoners, both of them most respectably dressed,
were placed in the dock before Mr. Mansfield, the
stipendiary magistrate.
Mr. Aspinall, instructed by Messrs. Lowndes
and Co., appeared to conduct the case on behalf of
the prisoners. Mr. Clough, the indoor Superinten-
dent, with Inspector Kehoe, of the police force were
in attendance to watch the case on behalf of the
prosecution. Prior, however, to any evidence
having been taken, _ _ _ _

Aspinall said that he thought it would be
desirable that some legal and professional gentle-
man should be present to prosecute. He thought
it would be an advantage to the prisoners, the pro-
secutors, and the public, as it might prevent the
exaggerations so often made in these cases going
forth.

Mr. Mansfield said that he agreed with the sug-
gestion, and in such an important case thought
that such a course should be pursued.
Mr. Tindal, solicitor to the Board of Trade, said
he had no objection, if his services were required,
to render his professional assistance to Mr. Clough,
although he had not received any instructions from
the Government.

•
It was then decided that Mr. Tindal should
watch the case for the prosecution, and then make
his report to the authorities.
The case was then proceeded with, the first
witness examined being
Inspector Mawdesley, of the Liverpool police.
He stated,—From information I received on Sunday
morning, I apprehended the prisoner Buchanan, the
chief engineer of the mail steamer Bogota. I
apprehended the other prisoner Mitchell, the second
engineer, this morning. I told the first engineer
the charge, and he took me down to the stokehole
of the packet and said, " The man would not work,
and I ordered him to be tied to the ladder." He
then showed me the ladder, and pointed out how
the deceased had been tied. The ladder was about
2 feet 11 inches from the first furnace, and 4 feet 4
inches from the second. It was between two fires.
When the deceased was tied to the ladder he would
be about 2 feet 6 inches from the former, and 3 feet
5 inches from the latter furnace doors.

By. Mr. Aspinall—The men who had to supply
the furnaces would be nearer the fires than the
deceased. There are six fires in the hole. There
is a small passage between them.
William Buchanan (no relation to the accused)
said,—l shipped on board the vessel on the 25th of
December at Valparaiso: d we went from there

to Rio. We left Rio on the 25th of January. I
was shipped as a trimmer or stoker, at £3 ss. per
month. I know the two prisoners. They were the
chief and second engineer on board. On the day
after we had left Rio about five hours the second
engineer sent me for a piece of rope-yarn. I took
it to him, and lie made the deceased fast to the
ladder with it. He put it round his left arm and
waist. The deceased was made so fast that he could
not stir an inch. His face was towards the ladder,
his back and left side towards the fire. There were
six fires going at the time. The ladder is between
two furnaces. lam sure no person could stand the
heat from the furnace for three minutes together.
I heard the deceased praying to his Maker to be re-
leased. At that time I was up on the deck. I saw
the deceased fall. I did not occur to me to go to
the captain, as, from what I had seen before, I be-
lieved that the engineer had the control of his own
men. The deceased was kept to the ladder about
half an hour. I saw him drop down ; before he did
so he appeared in great agony. He was waving
his head backwards and forwards before he fell. I
only heard him praying to his Maker. The two
prisoners were there, and could see the deceased
and his sufferings. The second engineer was walk-
ing up and down, but did not attempt to release
him. I saw him carried to the forecastle. The
heat was very great. When he/ was taken up he
appeared quite dead. He was buried that day. I
did not see him buried. I can't say if the deceased
refused to work. I have heard the deceased say he
could not stand the heat.

By Mr. Aspinall—lf I had gone to the chief engi-
neer I should not have got a civil answer. There
had been frequent complaints of the man's skulking.
By Mr. Clough—When the' deceased rolled Ins
head about it came within six inches of the fire. I
never knew the man to be sick. He was a strong
man, about 40 years of age.
Robert Wilson, a stoker on board, was uider
examination when our report left. He heard the
first engineer tell the second to make him fast to
the ladder.

The case will be remanded, there being upwards
of 15 witnesses to examine.

COUNTRY MARKETS.

NEWARK—MAncu 9.

There was a limited quantity of wheat on offer, and prices
for all descriptions were about maintained. Barley a very
fair show, and at last week's extreme rates. Beans were in
moderate supply, and prices easier. Oats a fair sale, at late
rates.

White wheat, now, 44s to 48s
Red do. 37s to 42s
Old white 44s to 48s
Red do.. 378 to 42s
Barley, malting 38s to 45s

Barley, grinding 283 to 30s
Oats, old, .. 3os to 34s
New do 243 to 283
Beans. 44s to 48s
Peas ....—s to —3

BOSTON-MARCH 9.

The show of wheat at our corn market to-day was
tolerably good, and in improved condition, but the trade
ruled heavy. There was a moderate supply of barley, at
the extreme prices of the previous week. Oats were not
much changed in value. Beans were fully as cheap.
Wheat ..36s to 39s Oats 20s to 24s
White do .42s to 45s Beans —s to —s
Barley .34s to 40s Ditto, old .42s to 45s