The Sun.
London, England, 1868-12-10 00:00:00

BANQUET TO MR. BERNAL OSBORNE

On Tuesday night a banquet was given at Nottingham
to Mr. Bernal Osborne, who was defeated in contesting that
borough at the late election. Mr. Osborne made a long
speech, which occupies three columns in the Nottingham
Journal. The ex-member began by admitting that he was
not perfect, that he was not

"That perfect monster which the world ne'er saw."
He had some human feelings, and he could not but regret
his defeat in solitude, though he might smile at it on the
hustings. In the great political tournament which had
taken place during the last month, many more able and
stalwart champions than himself had been unhorsed and
laid low. But he claimed a pre-eminence in misfortune.
for he had not only been hurled to earth by his opponents
but he had been ridden over by his friends.
His experiences of the recent election were somewhat
painful. He thought that parliamentary government was
now for the first time upon its trial, and he felt certain
that if parliamentary government was to flourish and be
respected in this country, they must root out parliamentary
corruption. And in order to do that, they must firs
strike at municipal venality. It was of no use asking for
bribery bills ; it was of no use inveighing in good set
phrases against parliamentary corruption. So long as the
municipal franchise was bought and sold, so long
would members of Parliament corruptly gain seats ;
and so long would the " almighty dollar " be
the real sovereign of England. But the humble electors
were not alone to blame. He did not hesitate to say
that from the peer in Westminster to the town councillor
in a parochial ward, the expenditure of money or the
use of money's worth was the thing which made alike
peers and town councillors. There were men in the last
House so greedy of honours, with wives so anxious for dis-
tinction, that they would accept knighthood. There were
two instances which should be nameless. Men of great com-
mercial knowledge ; they became knights—made what for?
It was not for building churches, but for voting in the
House of Commons. Well, they were made knights,
and, like himself, they were now benighted, and were
out of Parliament. He did not wish to make
it a party attack ; both sides were equally bad.
But he would say that Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli had
carried their system to an extent to which it was never
carried before. They had been ruling this country for two
years and a half in a minority, and there ought to have
been a Suspensory Bill brought in to hinder them from
giving honours and titles, as well as to prevent them
making Irish bishops. They had made sixteen peers ; he
did not know how many baronets, and the two unfor-
tunate knights. That was the most unfortunate
stretch of power. Mr. Osborne then went- on
to speak of the reduced county franchise, and
asked what had been the result of the £l2 rental?
Look at Lancashire. As far as he could understand, Lan-
cashire had been carried by the exertions of two of the
most powerful elements of society in this country—the
pulpit and the petticoat. The pulpit had united with
the petticot to reuscitate the cry of " The Church in
danger." Not only that, but they had resuscitated the old
cry of "No Popery." But they had not been satis-
fied with that even. In addition to reviving the old
cry, they had actually resurrectionised a man
of 1678, and by the exertions of a second Titus Oates—
although not able to send innocent men to the scaffold—
as in 1678 ; still, by the preaching of another Titus
Oates, it had been possible to drive statesmen
from the House of Commons, and to ostracise them for a
time from the Parliament of their country. Such had
been some of the handiwork of Murphy, Derby, Disraeli,
and Co. He had often heard aspersions cast upon the
Irish people. But he would say, look at home.
See what their own clergy had been doing ; look at the
conduct of the Episcopal clergy in this country, and see
what part they had taken in the late election. They had
formed themselves into a great political trades
union, and there had been many cases in which
these gentlemen, not satisfied with advising, had rattened
their congregations in an electioneering sense. lie was
tired of hearing of the Church being in danger. Talk to him
of toleration 1 Why, Ireland had set them an example of
toleration. In England there were about two millions
of Roman Catholics, and for these two millions only one
member was returned Sir John Simeon. Now
in Ireland there were about four and a half
millions of Roman Catholics, and under 700,000
Protestants. And yet Ireland sent seventy-five
Protestants and but thirty-five members of the
Roman Catholic faith. What did Mr. Disraeli say
the other day in Bucks on the Irish question?
He ascribed the ills of Ireland—and it was very curious—
he ascribed them to the influence of race. The Irish
peasant, he said, lived in a damp climate, contiguous
to a melancholy ocean, and that he suffered from
a monotony of pursuits. He had the face to say
this to the Buckingham peasants, who live in an
equally damp climate, and with no more diversity of
occupation, though it was true the only melancholy ocean
they had was the reservoir of the Grand Junction water-
works. A new page had been opened in the history of
Ireland. He believed Mr. Gladstone's name to be a
guarantee to Ireland that her wrongs would not
only be considered, but her grievances redressed.
No doubt they had gone over the names of the new
Cabinet. With respect to the new Chancellor of the
Exchequer, he believed that Mr. Lowe was probably
the ablest man in the House of Commons. Mr,
Lowe was a giant among the pigmies, and he was glad
that Mr. Lowe was in the Cabinet. There was another
man that he rejoiced to see in the Cabinet—he meant
John Bright. Let them also do houour to another states-
man. He would say that Sir Roundell Palmer's conduct
in refusing the first prize in his possession, set him upon
a pinnacle, to which he himself would be the
first to look up and bow down to. While they
reared men of this description, England would never
want statesmen. But there was one other— a great and
illustrious name -- which he was sorry to see was
conspicuous by its absence from the new Cabinet.
In the absence of Lord Russell they missed the
first, the foremost, and the best man this coun-
try had ever seen lead the Liberal party—the first
man of the Whig aristocracy, and the first man
of the old Liberal party. Mr. Osborne concluded a long
and able apeech by regretting thathe had notbeen returned
for Nottingham at the last election. Whilst he had been
in the House he had been a volunteer, not a camp fol-
lower ; he had shared in the assault, but he never cared to
ask for a share in the spoil.

Notice has been given to the inhabitants of
St. Mary-le-Strand that, although their parish church had
been closed for months past in consequence of litigation
between the churchwardens and rector, arrangements had
been made for the reopening of the church for Divino ser-
TickS4 StUadaYaitt 049_414 iqt.