The Sun.
London, England, 1859-04-14 00:00:00

GREENWICH.

Last evening a numerous and enthusiastic meet-
ing of the electors of this borough was held in the
hall of the Literary Institution, Greenwich, for the
purpose of hearing an address from Mr. Alderman
Salomons, one of the present representatives of the
borough.
The chair was occupied by Dr. Purvis, of Black-
heath, who briefly addressed the meeting upon the
occasion of their again assembling so soon after the
recent contest.

Mr. Alderman SALOMONS, who was loudly
cheered, said they had met together under circum-
stances of a peculiar character, the country being
on the eve of a general election. It was scarcely
two months since he was returned as their repre-
sentative, and he now appeared before them as a
candidate at the approaching election and to ac-
count for his conduct in Parliament. (Cheers.) In the
two months he had been their representative ques-
tions of great importance had come before the at-
tention of Parliament, the first of which was that
of church rates. The next question, which was
second only to that of peace or war, was the Reform
Bill introduced by her Majesty's Government, and
the defeat which the Government had sustained
upon it had led to the present intended dissolution.
In that bill there were two great and leading de-
fects—the disfranchisement of county voters and
no reduction being made in the borough franchise.
(Hear.) These were the two leading defects in the
bill, by the first of which no fewer than 826 county
voters in that borough would have been deprived
of the right they now possessed, and if they took
the whole of the boroughs in West Kent no fewer
than 2,256 voters for the county would suffer in a
similar manner, It was this element which had
rendered West Kent a Liberal instead of a Tory
county, which it was 10 years since, and he would
like to ask whether the present representatives for
West Kent—Mr. C. W. Martin and Mr. T. What-
man—were not as good and respectable representa-
tives as the former Tory representatives, Mr. Smith,
of Gravesend, and Sir E. Filmer. (Hear.) He knew
well that both Mr. Martin and Mr. Whatman were
greater friends of progress than either Mr. Smith
or Sir E. Filmer. (Hear, hear.) That which
had made West Kent a Liberal county—the 40s.
freeholders—had a like effect on the representation
of East Sussex. In Brighton there was this pecu-
liarity—the builders would not take land from the
freeholders on leases, and no fewer than 1,726 per-
sons resided there ho had votes for East Sussex,
and this had made that part of the county a Liberal,
instead of a Tory constituency. (Hear.) The mea-
sure had been condemned in Greenwich, Deptford,
and Woolwich, as it had been in other parts of the
country. It had been asked why members had not
voted against the second reading of the bill, instead
of Lord John Russell's resolutions. To have done
that would have been to vote against the question
of reform altogether, and although, as a young
member of the House of Commons, he was not in-
clined to quarrel with the Government, yet he could
not but express his deep regret that it had been
determined to dissolve Parliament at the present
moment. (Hear.) He might refer to the speech of
Mr. Deedes in the House of Commons against this
course being adopted, and when that measure had
been condemned both by the friends of the Govern-
ment and its enemies he thought it ought not to
have been treated as a question of feeling, but one
of policy to withdraw the bill altogether. There
was no greater inclination in any House of Com-
mons that had been elected than the present Parlia-
ment to do justice to the question of reform. (Hear,
hear.) He had voted in favour of Lord J. Russell's
resolutions, and in again appearing before them for
re-election at an early date he believed the vote he
had given would meet with their approval. (Cheers.)
A vote of want of confidence had not been passed
against the Government ; but he believed that had
such a vote been put the majority in favour of such
a motion would have been at least 150—(hear)--
and his opinion was that it was rather hard be-
cause the House of Commons refused to take a bad
article nrepared by the national workmen that they
should all be kicked our. (Hear,hear, and laughter.)
If again returned as their member, which he had no
doubt he should be--(cheers)—he would take care
that in any Reform Bill which might be proposed
the rights of county voters should not be interfered
with and taken away—(hear, hear)—that a large
extension of the suffrage to boroughs should be
made ; and, above all for that borough, that the
rights of men employed by the Government, whom
the Government had proposed to disfranchise,
should not be destroyed. (Cheers.) The worthy
alderman then alluded to his votes upon the ques-
tion of church-rates, the ballot, and the Super-
annuation Bill, and resumed his seat, loudly
cheered.

Mr. STONEHAM proposed a resolution approving
the past conduct of Mr. Alderman Salomons in the
House of Commons, and pledging the meeting to
support him at the next election.
Mr. SAW seconded the resolution, which was
carried unanimously : and after the usual vote of
thanks to the chairman the meeting separated.