The Sun.
London, England, 1868-03-19 00:00:00

THE NOMINATION AT HUDDERSFIELD.

The nomination of a candidate to serve in Parliament
for the borough of Huddersfield, the representation of
which is vacant through the death of Colonel Crosland,
took place yesterday in front of a large crowd, and
amid the excitement which Usually attends electioneering
proceedings.

The candidates were Mr. Edward Aldam Leatham,
banker, and M.P. fur Huddersfield from April 1859 to
July 1865, and Mr. William Campbell Sleigh, barrister,
Conservative, and Liberal candidate for Lambeth in 1562.
The two gentlemen shook hands on their appearance on
the hustings—the usual preliminary to a fight, whether
at an election or in the prize ring.
Mr. Leatham, as the candidate first in the field, enjoyea
priority of nomination. He was proposed, amid the
customary noise and interruption, by Mr. C. H. Jones,
and seconded by Mr. Daniel Sykes.
Mr. Slciel was proposed by Mr. Charles Brooks, ana
seconded by Mr. L. B. Starkey. . .
Mr. LEATITAM, On coming forward, was received with
applause from the right side of the hustings, and groans
from the left. He reminded the constituency that he
was not an untried man. He had served them in
Parliament for six years, and he confidently appealed
to his conduct while in the House of Commons as a
guarantee for the future discharge of his trust as a repre-
sentative, should Huddersfield again confer upon him that
honour. Mr. Leatham did not fail to take advantage of
his oppor! unity to make some caustic observations on the
political inconsistencies of his opponent—at first too Radical
for the Liberals, and then a Tory.

Mr. SLEIGH then made a speech which occupied forty
minutes in delivery. He expounded his views at great
length, and defended himselt from the charge of having
been politically inconsistent. He asked whether a
man might not change his opinions and be
honest notwithstanding ? If returned he would give a
cordial, though an independent, support to the present
Government. He approved of its domestic policy, and
highly extolled the manner in which the Foreign Office
had been conducted under the wise administration of Lord
Stanley, of whom he spoke as the most successful Minister
who ever held the seals of that department.
There was a crowd of between 10,000 and 12,000 persons
in front of the hustings, and on the whole the proceedings
were good-humouredly conducted. Of course the inevit-
able baker and the irrepressible sweep were represented.
Each received a bonneting, and with great difficulty dis-
appeared.

The show of hands was in favour of Mr. Leatham, and a
poll was demanded by Mr. Sleigh. There are about 2,300
voters on the register.

THE MANCHESTER TRADES UNION
OUTRAGES REPORT.

The report of Mr. Pickering, Mr. Barstow, and Mr.
Chance, the commissioners appointed to inquire into
trades union outrages in Manchester and its neighbour.
hood, was issued on Wednesday morning as a parliamentary
paper. It is addressed to the Chief Commissioners now
sitting in London.

The examiners commenced their inquiry at Manchester
on the 4th of September last. They found that the mem-
bers of several of the unions of brickmakers and bricklayers
throughout the district had destroyed their books contain-
ing the accounts of their expenditure and the minutes of
their proceedings. In one case five chests containing books
were broken open by order of the commission, but all
documents relevant to the inquiry had been removed.

They then proceed to give an account of the cases
brought under their notice, commencing with the
Stockport Operative Brickmakers' Union. Various
accounts are given pointing to acts of intimidation, out-
rage, and wrong, promoted, encouraged, connived at, and
committed by the unionists. These statements were pub-
licly made at the time, and fully reported in the papers.
Manchester, Oldham, and Bolton were' the other places
dealt with. The commissioners find that within the
past ten years no intimidation or outrage has
been committed in the district by any association
of employers. All the outrages recorded were instigated
and sanctioned by the several trades unions. They were
deliberately planned and executed in furtherance of a
system which had for its objects the subjection of both
masters and men to the rules of the union, and the destruc-
tion of the freedom of labour. When a master had ren-
dered himself obnoxious a meeting of unionists was held,
and if either a resolution or a tacit understanding was
come to that an outrage should be perpetrated, the mea-
sures for carrying it out were left to the officers, and the
funds of the society were available for the purpose. The
largest sum which the examiners found had been paid was
£2O, and the share which generally fell to the lot of each
man engaged in the transaction was £l, though the
amount varied, and was often more. As already stated,
many books belonging to the unions were destroyed, but in
others the money paid for outrages was frequently
entered as "certain expenses," and in others a
sum total was put down without any expla-
nation whatever. These modes of making up the
accounts seemed to be so well understood that the auditors
never objected to them. The books were always open to
the inspection of members of the union, and the examiners
have no doubt that the expenditure of the money and its
object were well known. They considered that the out-
rages had been perpetrated and the union money spent in
the promotion of a system which they sanctioned and
upheld.