The Sun.
London, England, 1861-10-25 00:00:00

TEM SUN, LONDONA PRIDAY HYMNING, OfiTOTIER IS, Mi.

of the Armstrong breech is removed and replaced
at each shot is on the top, not at the end of the
barrel, and thus the plugs themselves, when blown
out whole, or their fragments, when broken to
pieces in the seating, have undergone these frequent
operations hitherto without occasioning loss of life.
Four of these breeches were thus blown out in ser-
vice against the enemy during the 3,800 rounds de-
livered in all from the Armstrong batteries in China,
being at a rate of loss at that time of only one per
1,000 shots, which is about the number that a good
grouse moor in a good season will afford per week
to its owner; but after thus exploding a gun breech
per week for the first month of his sport, there are
few owners I think who would become so enamoured
of so new-patterned a gun as to employ its maker
any further. Nevertheless, the great national mann-
factories employed to produce the weapons destined
to destroy, not our grouse, but our enemies, have
received even increased patronage since this first
proof of their powers of delivering shot at both
ends ; only that by a very ingenious device the plug
itself, as suggested by the China practice, is now
' prevented from flying out at all, and seems to re-
sent this improvement in restricting its liberty by
a practice, as we see, 120-fold more frequent, of fly-
ing to pieces where it is, besides disabling the gun
itself as it does so.

Without following your contemporary into the
cause he assigns for this constant destruction of
Armstrong breeches, in which I believe him to be
quite right, and to which he might have added one
more equally as apparent and cogent, and without
seeking to support from my own observations all he
says and fears in respect to shot and shell and fuses,
all of which are delicate and complicated chemical
and mechanical compounds, combined and propor-
tioned under their present conditions for the first
time, and only to be confirmed therein as they may
stand the tests of durability in all atmospheres, at
all temperatures, throughout all changes of climate
and all modes of treatment and transport, such as
years of watchful study can alone furnish—without
enlarging on any of these, I will only offer one
practical illustration more.
At the second shot fired at the Trusty on the
28th of September, 1859, the " right rear man"
at the gun was blown down by explosion from
the plug aperture of the breech, which in that
first gun was at the side. Ho was picked up
scorched, the hair of his face burnt off, and his sight
temporarily injured by what is still mildly termed
" an escape of gas ;" for to this day the 100-pounder,
at least, delivers this rear explosion with equal
force as it did then, notwithstanding that the two
years' interval has been employed on every device
which promised a remedy. That remedy was hoped
for by the adoption of what are termed "expanding
cups"—perhaps "saucers" would be more descrip-
tive—by what the joint at the breech-plug is sup-
posed to be kept firetight, but with what success
may be judged of by the fact that when recently
firing at Mr. Jones's target the sides of the "saucer"
itself, which is of ordinary tin, were doubled up and
blown out in considerable pieces at the breech aper-
ture, notwithstanding that at each shot the breech
screw was carefully hove tight upon the back of the
plug. Meantime, with the warning given by the
first accident I have quoted, the aperture itself has
been removed from the side to the top of the barrel,
that the explosion may take place into the air, but
with the following consequences :--IThe plug itself
(rent-piece) is of that weight to require two men to
lift it out and in, and its position is so awkward
that in order to do so they must stand up on the
gun-carriage, their shoulders reaching to a height
of not less than 7 feet. The operations they have to
perform are essential, and require much care, both

preceding and terminating those of loading, during
which their persons as low as the knee are visible
from the level of a small boat on the water ; from a
deck of a similar gunboat their entife persons are
open for rifle aim. No such amount of personal ex-
posure as this has ever yet accompanied the use of
any known gun, and if this 100-pounder be indeed
capable of being fought "between decks" at all, the
decks, and, therefore, ship, must be built of an
especial height for the purpose.
Such, sir, is the new rifled ordnance which Eng-
land has at present " established" for the navy, and
if the exhaustless ingenuity of its author should
succeed to-morrow in finding permanent remedies
for all those "numerous failings," in itself and
missiles, he is now without doubt instantly engaged
on, its " inherent defects" as a great arm for naval
warfare would still remain as follows :
Under circumstances however critical and immi-
nent-Ist, it cannot be loaded at the muzzle; 2d,
it cannot be double shotted ; 3d, it cannot throw an
incendiary (Martin's) shell ; 4th, it cannot be used
with reduced charges for fear of the effects of sir
space ; sth, within certain limits of distance it can-
not be used to cover either troops or boats with
either shot or shell, for fear of the lead which strips
from all its projectiles, as proved on service in
China, and as openly admitted by the author him-
sell
in May last.
The facts thus presented for public consideration
on this grave matter have been acquired under no
special facilities. On the contrary, they have been
gleaned under a full share of those obstructions by
which our present official system deems it a duty to
impede the efforts of all officers desirous of occupy-
ing unemployed time by acquiring practical know-
ledge in those great professional changes now so rife.
But that even an approach to such facts can be
gleaned and stated at all of our present position,
after at least two years of unlimited expenditure,
and the devoted aid of so much professional talent,
military and naval, may perhaps be held to indicate
that possibly the time has now arrived to draw
breath and look around us, lest by a blind continu-
ance of this full-mouthed chorus after the great
Armstrong system we find ourselves pursuing far
less directly towards a national triumph than into
the humiliation of a great national delusion.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
E. PELLEW HALSTED, Captain, R.N.
Talladh-a-Bheithe, Perthshire, Oct. 15.

211 E ARMSTRONG GUN.

(From the Mechanics' Magazine.)

If any doubt had existed as to the necessity of a
full and impartial investigation into the alleged de-
fects of the Armstrong gun, Sir William Arm-
strong's letter, published in The Sun of Friday
week, would have settled the question. Such in-
vestigation is the more necessary, as Sir William
declines to continue the controversy. No doubt this
controversy has been needlessly embarrassed by
personalities foreign to the matter under debate.
This, though to be regretted, is hardly to be won-
dered at, as it has been the fashion for artillery con-
structors to appropriate, readily enough, whatever
amount of fame and eclat their advocates and friends
might be pleased to award them. This involves
antagonism, and to some extent implies personality.
But the time is now come for investigating this
matter without personality. If the inherent defects
of the Armstrong gun be as alleged, the public
should know of them ; and, if otherwise, Sir Wil-
liam will derive solace and satisfaction from the
results of the inquiry. There have recently been
many inquiries on subjects of much less importance,
and looked forward to with much less anxiety.
It willbe seen that Sir William Armstrong's letter,
which we reproduce in another column, does not re-
fute the statements made by us a fortnight since.
Sir William, in reply to our allegations, quotes the
results of certain experiments conducted at " Shoe-
buryness last week." Now, the fact is, that the
failure referred to by us occurred within the last
month, not at Shoeburyness, but at Woolwich. It
is to be regretted, in the interests of that fair play
which should characterise all scientific investiga-
tions, that Sir William should, in his letter, have
ignored the occasion on which the experiments
ei
so gdei i agl fat o
to
ot
assume these experiments, x
spoken of by us were made. Possibly, owing to his
numerous engagements, he might not have been
t
psoermimueenh. W
wets,buetbeg o
must
statethe satyhaitt
occasion was official ; the naval and military
authorities were present when the occurrence de-
tailed by us took
place. Sir William Armstrong's
own assistant,Mr. John Anderson, was also present.
The Shoeburyness ex •
pearnents have been need.
lessly introduced into the
discussion. They are beside
the issue, and tend to promote confusion. Since, how-
ever, they have been introduced, it is well that the

public should know a little more about them. The
accidents which occurred to the Armstrong guns at
Shoeburynese were of a graver character than that

of disabled vent-pieces: A 40-pounder and 25-
pounder had their muzzles blown off, while under-
going experiments ; and an artillery officer, Capt.
Hodgson, narrowly escaped being killed by a frag-
ment from one of the exploded guns. We more-
over have to state that the only 100-pounder
which seems to have been tested to any extent
was rendered unserviceable by cracking of the
breech. It would be an interesting paint in the

contemplated inquiry to ascertain if possible the
number of Armstrong guns which have burst, or
have been otherwise rendered useless during expe-

rimental trials.

Sir William admits that the vent piece is the weak
point of his gun ; but he says the weakness is one
of construction, and not of principle. Now, is not
this altogether begging the question ? The state-
ment is at all events unsupported by any proof, and
mechanicians consider they have good grounds for
disbelieving it. Let us examine the limits of the
question. These are evidently cohesive force of
material, and mass or weight of material. Now,

with regard to the first, it is not competent for Sir
William to invent a new metal. He began by
making his breech-pieces of wrought iron; that not
succeeding, he used gun metal;, then he used steel,
and now he proposes wrought iron again. With
regard to compensating for deficient cohesive force
by weight or mass, convenience of handling the
breech-pieces imposes a limit soon reached. If a
_ _

return were made of the various mutations these

breech-pieces have undergone, and the number
which have been destroyed, some important light

would be thrown on this part of the subject. The
fact that these pieces are still defective after five
years' experience, during which time Sir William
has had all the resources of the Government to aid
him in his experiments, goes far to prove that the
admitted weakness is one of principle and not con-
struction. The letter referred to says—" There is
reason to believe that the breaking of the vent-

pieCes in the Trusty experiments arose from special
causes." The writer believes that by improved
manufacture and other means the liability to fail
in future will b© entirely obviated. But what if

future experiments should disturb his calculations

At present we are in a state of uncertainty and
suspense. We have, at the expense of millions
sterling, been reconstructing our artillery system t
we have been told to rely on a new arm of strength
which, in the hour of emergency and danger, may
fail ; 6,000 men are daily employed in the manu-
facture of Armstrong guns ; these guns are being
distributed for service in the navy, and on shore
batteries, and now we learn, from experiments
recently made, and from admissions of the
inventor himself, that the Armstrong gun has not
passed through its initiatory and experimental
stage. Would it not have been better to have ex-
perimentalised and demonstrated first, and then
proceeded with the manufacture ? We have been
taking something like a leap in the dark, and the
sooner the best available light be thrown on the
subject the better.
Passing from a consideration of guns to shells,
Sir William states that the attention of the Ord-
nance Select Committee and the superintendent of
the chemical department of the Arsenal having been
directed to the condition of 40,000 shells now stored
at the wharf at Woolwich, the result proves the
shells to have undergone no deterioration. This, if
correct, is so far satisfactory ; but the question is
suggested why did the Ordnance Select Committee
and the chief of the chemical department specially
direct their attention to the condition of these
shells ? Why, moreover, have they ceased to make
shells at Woolwich on Sir Wm. Armstrong's prin-
ciple, and adopted the plan patented by Mr. Bash-
ley Britten—that of introducing zinc between the
lead and iron ? At Elswick, however, where Sir
William reigns supreme, the zinc coating is not yet
applied. Since, however, the plan of introducing
zinc between lead and iron has been adopted we
should be glad to know whether Sir W. Armstrong
could find any chemist who would speak on theo-
retical grounds to the competence of this expedient?
If voltaic laws mean anything the zinc should
perish more rapidly than the iron does now.
There is strong a priori ground of objection to the
lead and iron combination; stronger still if zinc be
superadded. Ordinary iron railings in the streets
illustrate the action of galvanic deterioration. Iron
railings are fixed in their bedding sockets by mol-
ton lead, and common observation testifies that in
the course of a. few years ordinary atmospheric
agencies assist in the destruction of the iron. The
Admiralty have noted this defect in compound
Armstrong shells, and the inference is that given
a sufficient time the effect will be general. Let a
dozen of these shells be deposited in the South Ken-
sington Museum, in a steam-moist chamber, so as
to imitate the conditions of storage in a trying
climate. If no deterioration takes place, so much
the better for Sir William Armstrong. Let the
public, who are quite competent to form an opinion,
judge for themselves.
Sir William seems to expect much advantage
from the lengthening of his cartridges, so that they
may completely fill the chamber. It is to be hoped
that the safety and efficiency of the Armstrong
artillery will never have to depend on a small mat-
ter of detail like this. Cartridges are often required
to be made up during the heat of action at sea. Is
it well that the efficiency of a cannon should have
to depend on the exact fastening of a flannel bag ?
Sir William Armstrong observes that the alle-
gation of the lead stripping away has often been
answered; and he thinks that no inefficiency in
regard to it remains to be dealt with. Whether
the lead be sufficiently fixed or not is a point on
which great diversity exists, and one that ought to
be definitely settled. It is alleged that during the
Chinese campaign two vent pieces were disabled,
and the guns put hors de combat ; and, moreover,
that the lead flew off and inflicted casualties on the
skirmishers of the 44th. Would not a surgical re-
turn throw some light on this point ? Sir William
has himself suggested grounds of doubt as to the effi-
ciency of the lead covering, by his known persistent
endeavours to construct projectiles without any lead
covering at all. But it must never be forgotten that
for weal or for woe, his system of breech-loading
absolutely requires a lead-covered shot, and if plain
iron projectiles be perfected and adopted, Sir Wil-
liam only contemplates using them with muzzle-
loading guns.
When last referring to this question we inciden-
tally alluded to certain alterations recently made in
the construction of tile 12-pounder Armstrong gun,
and though we stated such alterations were compa•
ratively insignificant, Sir William, in his letter,
seemed to regard them as among the principa
charges we have brought against his system. This
was a misconception on his part. He should be the
last man to look with contempt on details. We have
from the first regarded his gun as a complex machine
of great delicacy, rather than a simple weapon, and
the public are not aware of the confusion and waste
occasioned by incessant alterations. Hence our in-
cidental remarks on alterations in his 12-pounder.
When some nine or ten months since we informed
our readers that each Armstrong gun produced cost
the public about £2,000, Sir William, in a letter
which appeared in Yhe Sun, emphatically, and
almost contemptuously, denied the fact. A short
time after Mr. Baring, the Under-Secretary for War,
in his elaborate speech on the War Estimates in the
House of Commons, showed that each Armstrong
gun had cost on an average £2,160, thus proving
that we were sufficiently guarded in our statements.
We have been equally guarded in what we have
said on recent experiments, and though Sir William
has again denied the accuracy of our information,
we are quite content to awaitkhe testimony of time.
Either the allegations raised against the new
artillery are valid or untenable. If valid, the
country has an interest in being made aware of
them ; if untenable, the inventor's position will be
all the stronger after the ordeal. For a long time—
perhaps, too long—the new artillery has been re-
garded by the public somewhat as an Elensinian
mystery ; the public, not knowing the construction
of Armstrong guns, are beginning to contemplate
them as an association of mechanical parts amenable
to mechanical laws. If Sir William desires to
maintain that high character for scientific intelli-
gence now awarded to him, and which, indeed, be•

longs to him, he will be ill-advised if he does not
welcome the fullest investigation.

(From the Times.)
It is said that Sir Cornewall. Lewis has suspended
for the present the issue of 100-pounder. Armstrong
Guns, and has directed such experiments to be made
as will bring the efficiency of this new ordnance to a
decisive proof. This resolution will certainly be satis-
factory to the country. It was impossible that
doubts should have been permitted to circulate
without notice on a subject of such high national im-
portance. We have not the slightest wish to pre-
judge a question which will now be practically
solved, but we are certainly of opinion that aprima
facie case for inquiry had been established.
In our columns this morning will be found a
second extract from the scientific periodical which
has taken this controversy in hand. We do not
think it adds much to the strength of the attack,
but it indicates what was undoubtedly a weak
point in Sir William Armstrong's defence. It will
have been obvious to all who compared the state-
ments of the conflicting parties that the answer
made by Sir William in our pages was so far
inconclusive that it advanced a case for himself
without impeaching the case on the other side. His
opponent had appealed to the results of certain
experiments as demonstrating the insecurity of the
Armstrong vent-piece. Sir William replied by ap-
pealing to experiments giving no such results,
but it was evidently possible that the disputants
might be speaking of two different transactions, and
this proves to have been the fact. Sir William spoke
of certain trials at Shoeburyness • his adversary of
other trials made previously at Woolwich. It may
be urged, however, that the latest ordeal was the
most important one. The gun might have been im-
proved between the two experiments, and if it
finally came out in a satisfactory form its past
failures were of little consequence.
It will be seen, however, that graver defects are
now said to have been discovered in the piece ; that
muzzles as well as vent-pieces have been blown away,
and that the Armstrong Gun, in fact, is alarmingly
liable to fracture. But these charges seem advanced
solely on the evidence of experimental trials, and
there is probably no gun of any description which
might not burst under those peculiar conditions of
practice. The question is not whether Armstrong
Guns may not be now and then imperfectly manu-
factured, but whether the guns actually proved and

issued for service are as serviceable as they ought
to be. If an excessive percentage of fractures occurs
in the process of proving, that would tell,no doubt,
against the economy of the manufacture, but not
against the ultimate efficiency of the gun. A more
general argument urged in disparagement of the
invention is, that instead of having been brought to
perfection it is still almost in its infancy, after
five years of expenditure and experiments. We are
told that these experiments should have preceded
the adoption of the gun as a national weapon, and
that it would have been time enough to establish
Government factories when such questions as are
now raised had been finally determined. We doubt,
however, whether the public would have approved
such a system of action. If such a plan had been
followed, the result would have been that, while
all other States had get rifled cannon, we should
have been left with the artillery 50 years ago.
We should have been acting, in fact, exactly as
we acted in the case of iron-clad ships. We should
have been experimentalising and procrastinating
while other nations were actively employed in
turning the new principle to immediate account.
Whether the Armstrong gun is better or worse than
the Whitworth gun, or the Blakely gun, or any other
gun, may be a question deserving attention, but it
is not the question here implied. That is of a
totally different character. It is simply this—
whether the Armstrong gun was not the most pro-
mising specimen of rifled cannon known five years
ago. We have no doubt that by adopting this gun
we gained a great national advantage. Perhaps it
may not be the best that can be made, but as far as
we can understand, it has undoubtedly been the best
hitherto in use. No rifled gun of any description
adopted in any foreign army appears to be superior
to our own weapon, and that, to the best of our
knowledge, is not only the opinion entertained in
this country, but the opinion of foreign authorities
also. Perhaps we may now get something better
still, but that does not touch the original question.
We hold that the Government acted unquestion-
ably for the best in furnishing the army with a
weapon which, till within the last few months, was
universally believed to be the best obtainable.
It is almost enough to demolish our expectations
from future experiments when we observe that the
actual trial of these guns in the Chinese war is ap-
pealed to with confidence by both parties alike. We
certainly thought that the efficiency of the weapon
had been conclusively demonstrated against our Tar-
tar enemies. The guns were found to bear rough
usage, to be manageable in the field, and to possess
the most formidable powers of destruction. Nothing
could be more satisfactory than the reports received,
while the practice, it must be remembered, took place
before the critical eyes of our allies. Yet it is now
said that, because " two vent-pieces" were disabled
during the campaign, and the lead casing of some
of the shells flew off, the experience acquired in
the expedition tells against the invention. On this
point, however, it is surely possible to bring the
controversy to a practical issue. Were not the
Armstrong guns found to be infinitely superior
to the old field-pieces ? Taken with all their
imperfections—whatever these may have been—
were they not considered by the Artillery and
the army at large to be most formidable cannon ?
Would they have been willingly exchanged for
a battery of old 12-pounders or a battery of any
other guns then known ?
We admit, of course, that there is another ques-
tion behind all these,—viz., whether a rifled gun
may not be producible of a pattern more formidable
still ? Allowing that Sir William Armstrong is a
great Inventor, there may be inventors greater than
he. Others may establish their claims, if not to
supersede him, at any rate to share his privileges.
This, in fact, is the very question now brought for-
ward for decision. If the proposed experiment
should go against the Armstrong Guns, some other
guns must take their place. It would be useless, of
course, to anticipate the result by speculation or con-
jecture, so we will only remind our readers that the
question is essentially one of comparison. What-
ever may be the imperfections discoverable in the
Armstrong Gun, they may be fewer, after all, than
the imperfections found in guns of other kinds. It
may be safely taken for granted that any cannon of
any description singled out for preference will be
attacked with as much pertinacity as the cannon of
Sir William's manufacture. It will be pulled to
pieces instantaneously, from breech to muzzle. All
the old charges will be dinned in our ears over
again. We shall be told that the new weapon is
unmanageable, complicated, ponderous, unsafe, or
' extravagantly dear. The whole affair, in fact, re-
' sembles the struggles for political place. Sir Wil-
liam is in:office, and the " outs" are all against him ;
but they would be equally vehement in their attacks
. upon his successor. If any inventor is to be honoured
. by a monopoly of favour, his invention will infal-
libly be assailed on all sides. All this, however,
we repeat once more, tells nothing against the pro-
posed inquiry. It is indispensable that the country
should know on what it can rely. Possibly the
larger Armstrong Guns may not be so successful as
. the smaller ones ; possibly the invention may be
better adapted to land than sea service ; possibly it
may come out triumphantly in all respects. But
in any case the necessary tests should be thoroughly
and impartially applied, so that the public may
learn both in what degree the Armstrong Cannon
, is really defective, and to what extent it may be
hoped that any rival invention may prove less
imperfect.

MORTALITY AMONG INFANTS IN FRANCE.—At a
recent sitting of the Academy of Sciences, Dr. Douchnt
presented a statistical account of the mortality of children
within a period of 20 years, viz., from 1839 to 1859, taken
from the registrars of the Administration of Public Assist-
ance. One of his tables comprises 48,525 children deposited at
the Foundling hospital; another table comprises 21,169
children sent to nurse by the Administration. The principal
results at which our author arrives are as follows :-1. Mor-
tality among children in France amounts to one-sixth dur-
ing the first year of life, whilo formerly it was one-
fourth. 2. Within the same period the mortality among
males, taken alone, is one-fifth ; among females, one-sixth.
3. Mortality is greater among the children of the poor than
among those of the rich. 4. Cold weather increases the
mortality of newly-born infants ; and in winter children
cannot without danger be taken either to the mai rie or the
church. 5. Among foundlings, the mortality is 11 per cent.
during the first ten days of life, and 55 per cent. within
the first year. 6. Thy-nursing or bringing up by
hand greatly increases the chances of death among
foundlings. 7. The mortality among children of the middle
classes sent out to nurse is 29 per cent. within the first year-
8. Within that period mortality is greater in tho 13 de-
partments which lie around Paris than in any otherdepart-
ment of France, and this is probably owing to the greater
number of foundlings they contain, to the want of neces-
sary care by the nurses that receive the children, and to the
influence oldie endemical or epidemical disorders that pre-
vail in the capital.
[A DVEUTISENIENT.I Holloway's ring.—Saved from
Destruction.—The most serious diseases which can afthct
mankind first manifest themselves by trifling signs. ..I.is
wisdom to meet and subjugate the first disordered
or action.
Holloway's pills will etrcut this without risk, pain, other
drawback. These well-known and universally appreciated
pills relieve the circulation from all difficulties, expel all
impediments to the natural action of any organ, and pre.-
vent undue "wear and tear" to the system.. BT their
purifying power over the blood the whole body is.retre.shed
and each individual function; roperly and healthily stimu-
lated. The child, the adult, the frail, and Infirhe surest m may re-
Isort to these pills with confidence ; they aro t .
terminators of all constitutional taints, and the reatilVit be-
getters 9i health and spirits.

MR. ONSLOW, M.P., AT GUILDFORD.

Mr. E. Onslow, M.P., attended a public meeting
held on Wednesday, at Guildford, and addressed
his constituents in a speech reviewing the events

of the past session.
Mr. ONSLOW, having been received with much
cheering, said he could assure them he felt great
pleasure in muting them for the third time to ren-
der an account of his stewardship. He begged to
say that he sincerely thanked them for having
placed him in such a proud position. His family
had represented that borough for the long period
of 166 years. (Hear.) He was, he could assure
them, highly proud to represent what he believed
to be one of the oldest boroughs in the kingdom.
He had been told it was always open to be bought,
but he did not believe it, as they had returned him
rather than a millionnaire. (Loud cheers.) He had
nothing to offer them but his political sentiments,
yet they preferred him, who was, as it were, a
stranger to them. (Hear.) The first night of the
session nothing was promised and nothing had
been done. (Laughter.) He was one of those who
were called the FortyThieves—(laughter)—as they
protested about nothing being said about Reform.
He voted for the amendment on that occasion,
and received the thanks of the constituents of
Brighton for so doing. He was one who was
of opinion that their representatives ought to
look out for the expenses, and the only chance
he saw of curtailing them was a better repre-
sentation. (Hear, hear.) The expenses were
enormous, and tended greatly to oppress the
poor, and he felt satisfied that they wished the
shackle removed. (Hear, hear.) He was glad he
was in the minority on the occasion to which he
had alluded, and he had no hesitation in saying
that Reform was shelved for the present. The hon.
member then alluded to the bills brought in by
Mr. Baines and one of the members for the county
on the subject of Reform, adding, that they shared
the same fate as the Reform question. Mr. Onslow
next alluded to the question of the ballot. Its
enemies had pointed to America and France, and
said it was a failure ; but he denied it, and felt sure
that in this happy country there was no fear of the
honest artisan going wrong with regard to the
ballot. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman next
alluded in humorous terms to the various parties in
the house, and spoke in high terms of praise of
Messrs. Cobden and Bright, both of whom, he said,
were good statesmen. It was to the Liberal party
they owed all they possessed, and he dreaded going
back into the hands of the Tories. (Hear, hear.)
He hoped the Liberal party would remain in power
till the dissolution, and he said the sooner it took
place the better. The hon. member then alluded at
some length to Mr. Gladstone's budget, which he
observed, in spite of all the bad omens which had
been predicted, pleased everybody ; and, in his
opinion, that gentleman well deserved their confi-
dence, as not only having provided for a large de-
ficiency, but one penny in the pound was taken off
the income tax, and the tax was taken off paper.

Church-rates had been the last party fight. He was
of opinion that every church ought to support itself.
It was said if the church-rate was abolished the
Church would be in danger. He was, however, of a
different opinion, or he would not leave it ; and he
considered that under the voluntary system it would
become brighter than ever. The contest on the
question of church-rates was one of the most extra-
ordinary dead heats on record, the Speaker giving

his casting -vote with the minority ; but he trusted
they would prevent such an occurrence from again
taking place. (Hear, hear.) With reference to the
new Bankruptcy Bill, he had his doubts whether it
would answer the expectations which were antici-

pated. In consequence of a domestic affliction he
was unable to be in his place for a short time, and
in the meantime the bill passed for the appropria-
tion of seats. The hon. member then alluded at
some considerable length to non-intervention, ob-
serving that the ways of England were ways of
peace, and alluded in a very touching manner to the
reaction which had taken place in Italy by Gari-
baldi, adding that both England and France were
ready to lend their aid. (Hear.) He saw on all
sides signs of war, but not to England. (Hear.)
He was of opinion that war would break out in
Hungary in the spring, but that England was des-
tined to enjoy peace. In his opinion the present
war in America came about from the Tories. He
had given his support to the bill which was brought
in for the better government of India, and had no
doubt of its success. With reference to the com-
mercial treaty with France, he was in favour of
believing it would be ono of the means of prevent-
ing war with that country. (Hear, hear.) The
Emperor of the French had done great good in
Italy, and he was deeply, sorry that his honest
intentions to this county were not properly
received ; and it was owing to such distrust that
we were called upon to spend so much
money. The hon. member then read an extract
from a work called The Money Market Review,
which stated that in various countries there were
nearly four millions of men under arms, the cost of
which was no less than 150 millions per annum.
He considered they had been spending twelve mil-
lions uselessly in fortifications. In former times they
could blockade the French coast. The public ex-
penses were enormous—if not checked they would
lead to serious results ; but he was happy to say that
the remedy was in their own hands. l'irith refer.
ence to the grant to Maynooth, he voted against it
as he had, whilst in Italy, seen the bad effects of it
He considered to the Pope of Rome was to be attri
buted the shedding of so much blood, adding, that
he (the Pope) was propped up by bayonets. (Hear.:
The last topic touched upon was a bill for the better
management of Archbishop Abbot's Hospital in
Guildford ; the whole of the persons appointed were
Tories. It was understood that the Liberal side
should nominate four, which was agreed upon; but
he did not approve of the choice, as not one of the
number resided in the town. In conclusion, the
hon. gentleman said he returned them his warmest
thanks for the kind manner in which they had re-
ceived him, and assured them that so long as he had
the honour to represent them he would never break
the promises he first made them. He resumed his
seat amidst loud cheers.
JOSEPH HOCKLEY, Esq., addressed the meeting
at some length, speaking in high terms of the hon.
gentleman's services, and concluded by moving a
cordial vote of thanks to Mr. Onslow, which was
unanimously agreed to.
The Hon. Gentleman briefly returned thanks.
A vote of thanks 'was given to the chairman, and
the meeting separated.

THE EXPEDITION UP THE YANG
TSE-KIANG.

The Friend of India thus summarises the " Notes
on the Yang-tse-Kiang from Hankow to Pingshan,
by Lieutenant-Colonel Sarel, F.R.G.5.," one of
Captain Blakiston's exploring party, who failed in
their efforts to reach Lassa ;—" The expedition left
Shanghai on the 11th of February. From Yochow
to Pingshan the river has been carefully surveyed
by Captain Blakiston. Specimens of mineralogy,
ferns, and insects have been collected and forwarded
to England. At Ichang, 1,100 miles from Shang-
hai, up to which steamers can go, the party engaged
a boat fit for the ascent of the rapids. Above this
the scenery is very grand, coal abounds, and gold is
found in the streams. Poppy and tobacco are
everywhere grown. Except for 80 miles between
Ichang and Ruaichow, and even that is practicable,
the river is navigable as far as Pingshan, where
the expedition turned back. There the river begins
to be called Kin-cha-Kiang, or river of gold. The
boatmen call it the Yunnan river, the boundary of
that province being just below Pingshan. To the
west are the Maoutse, or indepenwdenitchtrtihbeees
h; tnheesye
are a totally different-looking race from the Chinese,i
their faces being open and honest, h
faces certainly are not. The rebels in the country
are not the rasp-ings, but robbers encouraged by
the weakness of the Tartar Government,
the Mussulman population of Yunnan Part of
insurrection under the leadershipa isri aadlsjo, by
n of
name Ma Yussu ; his head-quarters are at Ta-lif,
on the high road leading from h
to Yunnan, the capital of thee province,urmese frontier
to
Chingtu, the capital of Sz'chuen. China, to the
south and west, may be said to be out of the hands
of the Government.p enCeotrloantlee
tibmiul
itpteyo,soseuinbr
impossibility
failure
orttboteafi
la i u
the i
uS
taor Sarel
hs
tojabyest— "
nloathloris:
pauthorities,eebemutpatnoythues
through a country
chance of having theirw hefre they had a very goet
affected towards foreigners; is the Governor oflht.hroats cut. The Viceroy
ibet, and is
sisas
newly-made Minister . brotheraid to
b eo
f ;wellhe
for Foreign Affairs at Pekin,
and resides at Chingtu.'"