The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-03 00:00:00

though his hat was brushed off by a ball that then
split the after-cabin door just in front of him.
Lastly, two men whom 1 had in the morning ap-
pointed to push off closing pirates with the long
bamboo boat poles, so that I might have more op-
portunity to use my revolvers, did come forward
with the poles just at the time when a close of the
pirate craft seemed imminent.

The short flood of that portion of the river having
soon ended, it was quite dark before we reached
theKeang-yin hills, and about 9 p.m. I was obliged,
by the sinking of the wind and a heavy rain, to
anchor for the night close to the north bank,
opposite Keang-yin itself. At daybreak on the
following morning we descried, lying along the
opposite bank of the river, nine heavily armed
southern lorchas and west coast junks, and, steal-
ing away from them—with the very first of the day-
light and up the river in advance of me—our three
foes of the day before. I had no longer any doubt
of what I had concluded on the preceding day,
that these pirates were a light squadron detached
from the piratical southern craft hired by theim-
perialist authorities to oppose the Taepirmr rebels.,
The country people of the left bank, no friends of
" long-haired" rebels, had positively denied that the
three pirates belonged to these latter. 'They were
keang-taou, not chang-maou, they said.
Now in going on and leaving my assailants
behind me, I had been willing to meet the same men
again in returning, should they think fit to attack
me. But viewing the objects which were taking
me up the river, I did not feel bound to incur the
risk of fighting a succession of reinforced or fresh
crews, drawn from 200 or 300 of the greatest ruffians
in China. Further, a strong northerly wind was
setting in, and it was quite clear that my projected
excursion would require many more days than I
could spare from Shanghai. I therefore turned,
left both lorcha fleet and the flying squadron behind
me, and reached Shanghai without further adven-
ture to myself. But on the afternoon of the follow-
ing day, while lying at anchor off the mouth of the
0 Tung-chow creek, I saw a trading junk hotly pur-
sued by a pirate away down the river, in the direc-
tion of Lew-ho and AVeosung. The pirate was first
firing at her from the windward, but the trader
having cast off her boat, must, I believe, have even-
tually escaped, as she seemed rather increasing the
distance between the pirate and herself, when both
disappeared below the horizon.

MR. HORSMAN1 ••t M P AND 1218
_ _

coirsTITUENI;S.

STROUD, WEDNESDAY.
The Right Hon. E. Horsman, the member for
this borough, met a large body of the electors and
non-electors this afternoon in the Subscription
Rooms for the purpose of giving an account of his
stewardship, and defending himself against the
various charges of inconsistency which have been
brought against him in connexion with the course
pursued by him during the last session;
Captain HALLIWELL presided, and briefly opened
the proceedings by requesting that a fair hearing
should be given to the hon. member as well as to
any other gentleman who might desire
.to address
the meeting.
The right hon. gentleman commenced his speech
by observing that since he last had the honour of
meeting his constituents political events of unusual
importance had occupied the public mind, and
events of still greater importance might occur
before the lapse of another year. At home we had
many unsettled questions to deal with—financial
difficulties, increased taxation, a disorganised Par-
liament, a Ministry entirely divided against itself,
and as a consequence every great question of prin-
ciple or policy was degraded into a compromise.
(Hear.) Abroad we had every cause for thankful-
ness that we had just ended the calamitous Chinese
war. But there was another war nearer home for
which the note of preparation had already been
sounded, and when that war should break out the
interests of England in the Adriatic would take her
into the thickest of the fray. Never did he remem-
ber a Parliamentary recess in which it had been
more the duty of representatives to meet and take
counsel with their constituents, not only as to the
past, but with regard to the future, in order that we
might reaffirm the principles on which our admi-
nistration should be conducted at home„ and, what
was not less important, declare unmistakeably the
policy by which in the face of Europe every elector
should support the discharge of England's high
responsibilities abroad. In reviewing the business
of the last session it was his intention to notice the
events in the order in which they had occurred.
When he last had the pleasure of meeting the
electors the all-absorbing question was that of
Parliamentary Reform, That was a question on
which candidates and Cabinets were alike to be
tested. On Parliamentary Reform the Ministry
of Lord Derby was defeated and expelled ; on
Parliamentary Reform the House of Commons was
dissolved ; on Parliamentary Reform the new
Cabinet wes constructed. Parliamentary Reform
was the special mission—a comprehensive Reform
Bill—that was the slang phrase. A large and
comprehensive Reform Bill, that should throw into
the shade the lilliputian measure of Lord Derby,
was the one pledge and purpose of its creation,
and the condition and end of its existence. Two
sessions had now passed away, but where was the
Reform Bill ? In what corner of the constitution
were the promised thousands of new electors to be
found? What service to the cause of Reform had
been rendered by Lord J. Russell's cunningly-de-
vised legislation, unscrupulous machinations, and
successful manoeuvres, by which the public inte-
rest had been sacrificed to personal and private
ends, wore fresh in the recollect ion of all present.
Perhaps some of them might be still weeping over
the grave of their buried hopes, and those feelings
he gesired to spare as much as passible. (Cries of
Oh! oh ! and laughter.) The second question of
importance in the session was the commercial treaty
ith France, and on that subject he had exercised
the same independent judgment as he had done on
the question of Reform, and with the same result,
for many of those who at the outset most strongly
condemned his opinions had since seen reason to
modify their own. (Laughter, and hear, hear.) He
need not make any apology for alluding to that
treaty, although he believed that many of his
constituents had already forgotten all about it.
(No, no.) He was certain that a large number
of them remembered it with perfect in-
difference ; but, as he was addressing a commercial
community with whom the treaty had been a mat-
ter of some interest, he would endeavour to point
this moral, that on questions of trade as well as of
Reform it was very dangerous to rush too impul-
sively into action on first impressions. (Hear.)
That the treaty was recommended on two grounds
—first, as a commercial transaction in the interest
of free trade, and next as a political transaction in
the interests of peace. Now, he had objected to it
on both these grounds. As a treaty of reciprocity,
he held it to be a departure from the principles of
free trade, and therefore an abandonment of our
national policy (" No, no," and " Hear, hear"); and
as a means of strengthening the alliance with
France, and winning that great military Power
over to a policy of peace instead of war, he held it
to be a practical delusion. lie did not intend to
fight the battle of the treaty with any arms of his

own, but would cite as witnesses the Ministers o

the Crown by whom the treaty had been negotiated.
Mr. Milner Gibson, in speaking to his constituents,
said that the opponents of the commercial treaty
were animated by the anti-Gallican spirit of the
last century; but he forgot that it that spirit did
exist it was first evoked by Lord Palmerston and

Lord John Russell. (" Oh, oh !") It was a matter

of history that at the end of the Session of 1859

Mr. Bright made the modest suggestion that we

should enter into some arrangement with France

respecting the wine duties, but both the noble lords

whom he had named scouted the proposal. And

on what grounds ? They said iteras a treaty o:

reciprocity that was asked for, and it was inad-
missible because it was at variance with the prin.

ciples of free trade, and they were indignant in
their appeals to the House of Commons to vindi-
cate the principles of free trade against the Man-
chester apostacy ("Oh, oh 1" and laughter.) But
in Jannary 1860, a great change had come over
the opinions of those two noble lords, and they
announced
that they had concluded that very
treaty
which they had previously objected to, and
called upon Parliament to ratify it ; and he was
sorry to say that the liberal party, who cheered
U2° Q°Tulluacut Tama they acid that reciProl