The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-21 00:00:00

THE SUN; LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 21, 1861.

more especially to the question how they could ob-
tain that increase of the suffrage which Mr. Baines
had shown so convincingly that it would be safe to
confer on the working classes. Their member had
introduced to their attention the statistics of the
whole country, but he wished to bring them to their
own borough and the neighbouring borough of
Bradford, and to speak upon their position in rela-
tion to this question. Since he had represented
Bradford he had had a very careful inquiry made
as to the number of working men who had votes.
The constituency numbered 3,450, but of these
there were only 302 in receipt of weekly wages,
of whom 32 were factory overlookers, and, with
the exception of one or two mechanics, included
in the 59 artisans, there was not a single factory
operative in Bradford who had a vote. (Cries of
" Shame.") Leeds and Bradford would not be
what they were if they had not working men who
were worthy of votes, and a representation of the
people which deprived those working men
almost entirely of votes was not a representa-
tion of the people, but a mockery and a sham.
(Applause.) But how were they to get this in-
crease of the suffrage ? The aristocracy would not
give them that increase of the suffrage. The middle
classes could not if they wished give it to them, and
he did not know that they would even wish to give
it to them. It they helped themselves, others would
help them. (Hear, hear, and applause.) He was
of opinion that the failure of Lord John Russell's
Reform Bill arose mainly from the desire of the
working classes for the suffrage not having been
expressed with sufficient earnestness and sufficient
persistency. He slid not say that in excuse of the
present Ministry or the House of Commons. If the
Ministry came pledged to a Reform Bill, they ought
to have fulfilled those pledges or given up their
offices, There was great probability, however, if
they set heartily to work, that they might got a
considerable share in the Government and a very
considerable share in the representation. W hat sort
of agitation were they to have by which they could
get some real measure of Reform ? They must work
hard for it. Petitions were good things in them-
selves, but they would do very little by them-
selves. They were useful things if there were other
organisations and other expressions of feeling, espe-
cially if they came from different parts of the
country. But mere expressions of feeling would
not do. They wanted an active organisation which
would constantly keep at work, bringing all sorts of
legitimate action to bear upon their members. That
was what they wanted; and if they did that con-
stantly and perseveringly they would find members
ofParliament would remember mm e accurately what
they said at the hustings. (Hear, hear.) Well, then,
if they wished tohave that final organisation, he did
not think that they could do better than join the
Leeds Working Men's Reform Association, and per-
suado the working men of other towns in the cram-
try to form similar associations. He was sorry that
Mr. Bright had recommended that the trades unions
of the country should be the organisations for carry-
ing on the agitation for Reform—first, because he
thought the objects of these unions should be to
watch over the interests of trade ; and, secondly,
because suck a step would give some semblance of
truth to the absurd objection that it might lead to
a difference between labour and capital. If a now
Reform Bill did result—as he trusted it might—in
the return of some working men to the House of
Commons, there would be no harm to the employers,
but, on the contrary, there would be great good.
(Cheers.) The very essence of a representative Go-
vernment was, that all classes should be represented,
and that every discussion which occurred in the
country should be represented by a similar discus-
cussion in the House of Commons. In conclusion,
Mr. Forster said that if in the management of as-
sociations similar to that just established they were
determined, and yet moderate, they might feel sure
of a Reform Bill, if not next session, at least within
two or three years, which should embrace within it
that most important class in the community now
excluded from all share in the Government of the
country. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. LEATILIM, M.P., said he should make a few
remarks about what the newspapers called " the
situation." Ho did not think there was anything
in the aspect of home politics which need alarm or
discourage the Reform party. No doubt there had
existed, and still existed, a great and culpable neg-
ligence and indolence among those most interested
in the passing of a Reform Bill. Of this the Go-
vernment had greedily availed themselves in order
to wriggle out of some of the most solemn pledges
which ever were extracted from the leaders of a
party. As to what was called Conservative reac-
tion, he was altogether incredulous about its exist-
ence. (Hear, hear.) What had occurred was this
—the country had been prosperous and busy, and
when a country was busy and prosperous it had
bat little leisure for political agitation. The
ends of those who for selfish purposes professed
an attachment to Reform had been gained by
their instalment in office, and when men were
apparently actuated by no higher motives than
personal ambition, and great popular measures were
made the mere stalking-horses to power, there was
nothing wonderful in the fact that when this was
accomplished they should seek to fling what had
become an encumbrance on one side. If, instead of
placing their confidence in the barren pledges of
public men, the working classes had from the first
braced themselves for the contest which was now
manifestly inevitable, they would not then be
organizing their forces for the struggle, but would
have been in the full enjoyment of its legitimate
results, (Hear, hear.) He regretted that this
movementeaieZy
should be rendered necessary by the
of the middle and upper classes, who should
have granted that to the intelligence which they
• seemed determined only to concede to the agitation
of the people. (Hear.) If that which should Enve
been an element of strength should be turned into
I an element of dissension, whom would they have to
thank ? They would have to thank those who had i
year after year persisted in postponing the settle-
ment of a vital and inevitable question, in the
childish hope that hundreds and thousands of intel-
ligent men, surrounded by everything to remind
them that they were strong yet powerless, could
stoop to the perpetual exclusion from the exorcise
of those rights the aspiration to participate in which
God had
breathed into the breast of every man who
was free. (Cheers.) I
It remained for the working
classes those around
classes to show that the hopes which
I him entertained for their future were not ill-

founded, and that in vanquishing, as he believed
they would do, all opposition they would conquer
for no selfish purposes, but sinking the narrow ob-
jects of their class in the great and paramount claims
of the country, they would carry with them into the
Constitution those principles and those virtues
which became men who aspired to a citizenship the
responsibilities of which were as vast as its renown.
(Loud cheers_)
Mr. R. COOPER said he felt proud to stand be-
fore the meeting as the representative of the work-
ing class. The people had been charged with being
apathetic, but he thought it ought rather to be said
that they had been too confiding. (Hear, hear.)
They had trusted to statesmen who had deceived
them, but there were members of the Cabinet in
whom they had confidence, and tho only wonder
was that these men did not come out when the aris-
tocratic element refused to abide by Reform, and
thus compel one of the most treacherous Ministers
of modern times to retire from office. (Applause.)
It had been said, he continued, that the working
classes would never get reform until they were in
earnest; he asked what was to be the test of
earnestness ? Was it to be tumult and violence, or
was it to be the calm and intelligent demand for
the concession of that to which they were entitled ?
(Hear, hear.) If the aristocracy wished to delay
reform until the former was the case, it was they,
and not the people, who must be charged with in-
citing to physical force; if the second ground was
to be the test, let them at once concede to the
people that which it had been proved beyond all
question they were fully qualified to exercise. (Ap-
plause.) They were told that Reformers were'
afraid of their own principles, because of the state
of things in America. It was not just or true or
honest to say that democracy in America was upon
its trial, when the only cause of disruption there
was despotism. (Hear, hear.) Despotism was
trying to destroy the constitution there ; but let
Englishmen hope their American brethren would
rise equal to the crisis, and snap for ever the chains
of the slave. (Loud and long continued cheers.)
After energetic speeches by Mr. 'loosen, of Man-
chester ; Councillor It. M. Carter, of Leeds ; and
Mr. Nield, of Oldham.
' Mr. SAMUEL POPE said it was an important cir-
cumstance that the leaders of this movement were
those who knew most about the working classes.

(Applause.) Labour eould not be hostile to the
other great interests of the country, and therefore
he looked without a shad9w of fear on an increase

in the power of those who represented the interests
of labour. He believed the curse of Liberalism at
present was, that there were a great many among
them who had no sincerity in the principles they
professed, but if the working men would bring to
bear upon this movement a deep energy and deter-
mination, they would succeed in wresting all they
asked from an unwilling House of Commons.
(Cheers.)
Mr. BARNES, M.P., said that in the House of

Commons any member who was anxious to support
a measure of Reform found himself surrounded with
influences of all kinds opposed to him. Nothing
could be done by members of Parliament unless they
were supported heartily and energetically by the
people outside. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) lie be-
lieved the Whig side of the House of Commons
rather rejoiced in what they called the indifference
of the people. The present meeting had done some-
thing towards contradicting that libel, and he
trusted they would continue to use every legitimate
means in their power to give expression to their
opinions, and not desist until they obtained a full
measure of Reform. (Cheers.)
The proceedings then terminated with a vote of
thanks to the chairman.

.17? ELAND.

DUBLIN, WEDNESDAY.

The Chief Secretary is still the principal topic of
discussion with the newspapers and in political
circles. It is an interesting fact that the motion
in the Town Council of Derry to present an address
to Sir Robert Peel was seconded by Mr. Foy, a
Roman Catholic, who for many years has taken a
prominent part in local politics, in the interest of
his own communion. In Belfast, in like manner,
the adoption of the address was seconded by a
Roman Catholic, Mr. John Hamill, who is a leading
member of the Roman Catholic party in that town.
In connexion with him an interesting little episode
occurred in the Town-hall. Mr. Hamill, after the
presentation of the address, approached the Chief
Secretary, and said, "Will you permit me to grasp
the hand of the son of the statesman who made me
a freeman ?" Sir Robert Peel shook hands with him
in a very cordial manner, seeming, says the Banner
of Ulster," much gratified by the incident."
The Daily Express no longer stands alone among
the Dublin Conservative journals in its defence of
the Chief Secretary. There is only one which now
assails him. There is so doubt, indeed, that the
Chief Secretary has carried with him the Protestant
feeling of the country, as may bo seen from the fol-
lowing extracts selected from the provincial journals.
Such popularity enjoyed by a member of a Liberal
Government is an unprecedented phenomenon in
Ireland:—

(From the Belfast News Letter.),

" It is impossible to read the speech Of Sir Robert
Peel, in reply to the address of the Town Council of
Belfast, without feeling the highest admiration for
the manliness and courage, as well as for the ability
of the right hon. gentleman. When have we had a
Chief Secretary who could venture openly to accuse
Dr. Cullen of Jesuitical ingenuity,' and of hurling
against him blasphemous denunciations ?' Every
word of the large portion of Sir Robert Peel's speech
devoted to a counter-attack on Dr. Cullen is manly
and telling, because it is truthfal and honest. There
is neither disguise nor exaggeration ; and we cannot
but believe th it the straightforward and chivalrous
manner in which Dr. Cullen's challenge has been
taken up will produce a most beneficial effect upon
the minds of all sensible Roman Catholics."
(Newry Telegraph:).
_ _

" The speech delivered by the Chief Secretary at
Belfast, in answer to an address from the corpora-
tion of that borough, has the ring of the true metal,
and the promise it holds out—the assurance of im-
partial government—will be hailed by all classes—
the intelligent and independent thinking of all
parties, creeds, and denominations, averse to that
coquetting with the Ultramontane section' which
Sir It. Peel, in so manful a spirit and tone, scorn-
fully repudiates, and indisposed to ' place faith in
acts or language which savour rather of the monkish
superstitions of the middle ages than the bold fea-
tures of religious toleration.'"

(Derry (Mardian.)
"The rebuke which Sir Itobcrt administered to
Dr. Cullen met with the cordial sympathy of his
hearers, and if he shall only act in the frank and
fearless spirit which characterises this portion of
his speech, and which was still more emphatically
manifested by the right hon. baronet at Belfast, he
will secure for himself the approbation and support
of every person whose good opinion is worth hav-
ing in this country." _

(Bannor of Ulster.)

"The admirable address presented by the corpo-
ration is eminently creditable to their liberality,
while Sir It. Peel's own manly and magnanimous
words in reply have struck a chord that seldom
vibrates under the dexterous touch of ordinary
statesmanship. There is an openness, a breadth,
and a determination in the bearing of this man that
are quite refreshing in an age of trimmers and
diplomatists, while there is withal a Cromwellian
ring in the tone that proclaims defiance. Too long
has the ' concession' policy been the order of the
day, and it is well that Archbishop Legates and
their myrmidons should understand that they shall
in vain hurl their anathemas against the friends of
liberty and progress. A timid and temporising
course has only given new boldness to the demands
of Ultramontanism in Ireland, and it is a subject of
congratulation that from such an influential quar-
tet a voice has gone forth to rebuke its insolence.
All that is enlightened' and iudependent in public
opinion will sustain the Irish Secretary against his
umerupulf.ari antagonist U."

Independent.).

" Bravo, Sir Robert The good sense and honest
feelings of the true-hearted Irish people will know
how to respond to such an appeal against the unfair,
discourteous, and unmanly attempt of Paul Cullen
to misrepresent our noble-minded and generous-
hearted Chief Secretary, and to stir up against him
the religious animosities of a sensitive people. The
people of Ireland owe a debt of gratitude to Sir
Robert for his tour of inspection."
(Cork Constitution.)
" After all, we are inclined to be grateful to Dr.
hitthia
him
miat all it
Cullen. placard has brought Bit. Robert out,
He is speaking with the pluck which becomes a
thheat acts
i worth ashe
ip
40
I Alk, rhde N
will carry eatitelly

having of the Doctor's creed. The Ultramontanists
are wroth. Of course they are; they will be wrothr
with any one of whom they cannot make a tool.
But let Sir Robert be of good cheer ; the country
will sustain him, and with that at his back, and
with right in his hand, and with truth on his
tongue, ho need not care for all the Cullenites at
this side the Flaminian Gate. We are glad he has
come to us."

The Evening Mail, Warder, Packet, 'Western
Star, Derry Sentinel, Dcrry Standard, and other
Conservative papers have articles to the same effect
as the above.

LAW IN TELLIG ENCE.—Nov. 20.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)
BUTLER V. BUTLER.
The hearing of this petition by a wife for a disso-
lution of marriage on the ground of her husband's
adultery and cruelty was resumed at the sitting of
the Court. The evidence was taken on Friday and
Saturday last.
Mr. Sergeant Pigott (with whom was Mr. G.
Browne), for the respondent, commented upon the
evidence of the petitioner in support of the allega-
tions of cruelty, and submitted that her statements
were in many respects untrue, were very much
exaggerated, were uncorroborated, and were con-
tradicted in many points by independent testimony.
The learned sergeant then. contrasted the evidence
of the petitioner and of the respondent with respect
to the four occasions upon which. according to Mrs.
Butler's version of the transactions, she had been
assaulted by Mr. Butler, and contended that Mr.
Butler's account of them was not only the more
probable, but was also corroborated by trustworthy
witnesses. He also referred to the evidence of Han-
nah Sims, the only witness in support of the charge
of adultery, and contended that she was unworthy
of credit. The result was that the petition ought
to be dismissed.
Dr. Spinks (with whom was Mr. Murray) replied
on behalf of the petitioner. He admitted the diffi-
culty of establishing a charge of adultery by the
evidence of such a witness as Sims, but it was not
denied that she was a notorious prostitute, and that
she was employed to do some work in Mr. Butler's
house during the absence of his wife. That circum-
stance raised a presumption that her evidence as to
the adultery was true. With regard to the charge
of cruelty, the learned counsel reminded his lord-
ship that it was admitted that Mrs. Butler had on
more than one occasion left her home, and com-
plained to the husband's relatives of his conduct,
and that she had been ill after some of the quarrels.
There must therefore have been some substantial
ground for her charges. He accused Mr. Butler of
continuing his cruelty to Mrs. Butler in this court
by false imputing to her that she was in the habit
of taking too much to drink.
His Lordship said he thought there was no
ground for that imputation.
Dr. Spinks continued his comments upon the
evidence in support of and in answer to the charge
of cruelty, and submitted in conclusion that the
charge had been completely established.
The Judge Ordinary said, that if he had been of
opinion that the case depended on the charge of
cruelty, he should have taken further time to examine
the evidence, after the able argument of counsel.
But as the case did not depend on that point, he
would state at once that he was not satisfied that
the respondent had been guilty of cruelty to his
wife. It was very apparent that the lady was a
person of hysterical and excitable temperament.
The husband was also somewhat excitable, and he
was afraid that they had allowed disputes about
trifles to arise between them, which had, no doubt,
led to a great deal of unhappiness. There were
indications about the case that most of these dis-
putes had been founded in jealousy. his Lordship
then briefly reviewed the evidence on both sides
with respect to the charge of cruelty, and said he
could not safely rely on the petitioner's evidence in
support of that charge. With regard to the other
charge, he thought it would be the rashest thing in
the world to find any man guilty of adultery upon
the evidence of the miserable, wretched prostitute
who had been examined. There was nothing to
corroborate her evidence but the fact of her having
been in the respondent's house, and she was not
taken there secretly and at night, but was employed
openly in cleaning the doors and windows, and was
exhibited to all the neighbours, and attracted the
attention of one of them, who remarked that she
was particularly dirty. It was impossible to sepa-
rate a man from his wife on such testimony. The
adultery not having been proved, there had been
plenary condonation of all the previous cruelty,
even if cruelty had been committed, and the ques-
tion of cruelty was therefore immaterial. He hoped
the lady would now be convinced that her suspicions
against her husband were unfounded, that she
would put a little more control upon her temper,
and that they would hereafter live together more
happily than heretofore.—Petition dismissed.
BAILEY V. BAILEY AND DELLA ROCCA.
Thomas Farmar Bailey prayed for a dissolution
of his marriage with Eufrosina Falcini Bailey on
the ground of her adultery with Luigi Della Rocca.
The respondent denied the adultery, and charged
the petitioner with having committed adultery with
Emma Courage.
Mr. Sergeant Shee and Dr. Spinks appeared for
the petitioner; Dr. Phillimore, Q.C., and Mr.
Pritchard for the respondent.
Mr. Sergeant Shee applied that the case might
be postponed, on the ground that the evidence of
the marriage and of the identity of the parties was
not complete, and also that the petitioner wished
for an opportunity of producing further evidence
of adultery.
Dr. Phillimore opposed the application.
His Lordship said it would be a great hardship
to keep a charge of adultery hanging over a lady's
head, unless some necessity for doing so was proved.
He would hear the evidence which the petitioner
was now prepared to produce, and then, if he were
satisfied that there was reasonable ground for ad-
journing the hearing for further evidence, he would
order the adjournment.
Mr. Sergeant Shee then opened the case. He
stated that Mr. Bailey was a gentleman of fortune
residing at Hall-place, near Leigh, in Kent, and in
January, 1843, he, being then very young, privately
monied the respondent at Naples. They cohabited
first at Naples, then at Rome, then at Hall-place,
and afterwards returned to Rome, where Mr. Bailey,
purchased a villa. In 1847 they returned to Eng-
land, and, after staying at Hall-place fur a short
time, went back to Rome. They then made a tour
in the Holy Land, and returned to England. In
January, 1850, Mrs. Bailey insisted upon sepa-
rating herself from her husband. He escorted her
to Marseilles, and she went to live at his villa at
Rome. She continued to occupy that villa—the
1853
, occasionally visiting
ViFrascati,lla Strozzi—until
Albano,
end other places in the neigh-
bourhood. During those years she carried on an
adulterous intercourse with Luigi Della Rocca, a
resident at Rome. All that they knew about him was
that he was a person " about town," so to speak,
at Rome, and a Jew. Evidence would be given of
familiarities between this person and Mrs. Bailey
which would leave no doubt as to the criminal
nature of their intimacy. Some of the evidence
related to other persons, chiefly officers in the
French army who had become acquainted with the
respondent, and were frequently in her society, but
he could not say that the evidence as to these per-
sons was of such a character that the Court would
bn warranted in inferring that they had been guilty
of adultery with her.
The affidavits of Giuseppe Romano and Luigi
Landolf were read to prove the marriage at Naples.
The evidence of adultery was contained in tl.
depositions of some witnesses who had been exa-
mined at Rome before Mr. Therry, under a com-
mission from this Court, in which the petitioner and
the respondent joined. These depositions were
very voluminous, and contained a great deal of
irrelevant matter, but their substance may be
shortly stated. The first witness, Felice Stella, had
lived in Mrs. Bailey's service shortly after the
separation from her husband. Mrs. Bailey was
then staying at Albano, fourteen or fifteen miles
from Rome. Luigi Della Rocca and a friend came
to stay in the same house and slept there. There
was a door of communication between their bed-
Mrs. Bailey's room and that of Nina, her confiden-
tialrooms, and another door of communication between
servant. Mrs. Bailey and Della Rocca used to
walk and read together in the garden, and Stella
had seen Della Rocca in Mrs. Bailey's bedroom at
eight in the morning, when she was making her
toilette, and had a bedroom dress on. She never
saw any lady visitors at Albano. A French officer
also visited Mrs. Bailey, and Mrs. Bailey's sieter
frequently stayed with her. Stella admitted that
she had been dismissed on account of a dispute with
her mistress about the supply of water. Vinceeza
Sordine, who had succeeded Stella as Mrs. Bailey's
general servant at Albano, proved that she once
saw Della Rocca in her mistress's bedroom at seven
in the morning, when her mistress had on a che-
mise, stays, petticoat, and a loose dress. They often
breakfasted and dined together, but she did not
see any familiarity between them. Nina was always
present on these occasions. Giovanni, called "tile
Turk," was also in Mra Bailey's service during the
period to which this witness's evidence referred.
Valentine Polombi, a coachman formerly Mr.
Bailey's service, who .eft England and went into
Mrs. Bailey's service at the Villa Strozzi in 185 s,
proved that sae was frequently visited, both there
and at Frascati, and at Albano, by Della Rocca and
some French officers. Michelina Lollabettista and
and Lorenzo, Lollabatsista, who had also lived in
Mrs. Bailey
service at different times between

1851 and 1853, the years in which the adultery was
alleged to have been- committed, gave similar evi-
dence as to the visits of Della Rocca and the officers
at Rome, at Albano, and at Frascati. There was
at one time a dispute between the French officers,
which was said to have arisen from jealousy. Two
witnesses, Cesare Valentino, an advocate of Rome,
and Michael Angelo Coetani, Duke of Sermoneta,
had been examined to prove that it was contrary to
the usages of society at Rome for a lady to receive a
gentleman in her bedroom while sue was at her
morning toilette. All objection was taken to the
admissibility of evidence of this nature, and it was
not read.
The witnesses examined before the Commissioner
on behalf of the respondent were Ignazio Silvestry,
a sculptor, and Constantino Somaini, a painter, of
Rome. Silvestry said that Della Rocca was a friend
of his, and a painter. He had visited at Mrs.
Bailey's, and there was generally an agreeable and
merry society there of an evening, but he never
noticed any impropriety in her conduct towards
Della Rocca, or any one else. He added, that on
occasions of festivity it was usual for ladies to re-
ceive visits in their bedrooms at 10 or 11 o'clock,
but it was not usual generally, and he and the other
visitors were not in the habit of visiting Mrs. Bailey
in her bedroom. The other witness, Somaini, also
said it was not the habit of properly educated per-
sons to receive visits !n their bedrooms. He never
went to Mrs. Bailey's bedroom when she was dress-
ing, and he never noticed any impropriety in the
conduct of Della Rocca and Mrs. Bailey towards
each other.
When the depositions had been read,
Mr. Sergeant Shee asked his lordship to adjourn
the case for further evidence in support of the peti-
tion upon the affidavit of the petitioner's attorney
that he expected to be able to procure the evidence
of a material witness.
Ilis Lordship thought that the affidavit did not
show sufficient ground for an adjournment, which
might cause great hardship to the respondent, as
she might be prepared with evidence in support of
her recriminatory charge.
Dr. Phillimore said he did not intend to call wit-
nesses in support of the recriminatory charge.
His Lordship said that might alter his view of the
case. He had supposed that the lady might have
witnesses in attendance. He would take till to-
morrow morning to consider what course he should

pursue.
The trial was accordingly adjourned until to-
morrow (this) morning.
IN TIIE GOODS OF BETTY FARADY, DECEASED.
An application was last week made by Dr. Phil-
limore, Q.C. for probate of the will of Betty Faraday
whose husband had deserted her in 1832, and who
had obtained a protection order a few weeks before
her death. This order had not been registered
within 10 days after it had been obtained, in the
manner prescribed by the 21st section of the Divorce
Act, and the question was whether this omission
invalidated the order so as to deprive the deceased
of the right it would otherwise have given her to
dispose of her property.
His Lordship this morning said he had considered
the question, and ho was of opinion that the grant
might be made.