The Brecon Reporter and South Wales General Advertiser

IlfSllAL PARLIAMENT. 'Il In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Mr. Clay having moved the second reading of the Elective Franchise Bill, The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was his disagree- able duty to oppose'the bill; but he did so on conviction. He should not, however, adopt the course of taking,isolated parts of the measure and criticising them in a hostile sense, a eourse which he thought would be offensive and in- vidious to its promoters; but he should oppose it as a whole. There was no presumptive ground whatever for such a bill, which was totally foreign to the nature of our electoral system, which was founded on an educa- tional test. A practical objection to the bill was, that whereas it did not apply to those who possessed the £10 franchise, but to those who were below it—the labouring class, it would be the young men just issued from the schools in which they had acquired reading, writing, and aritmaetic. who could obtain the franchise, instead of the eady and mature fathers of families in that class. Again, the bill required greater educational proficiency for the fran- chise than the Civil Service Commissioners demanded as qualification for a class of officers in the public service, who obtained a maintenance in prmmiti and a pension iu futuro. Nay, the arithmetical test would be too much tor nearly every member of that House. The right hon. gentleman then pu6t a sum in money division which M,saldscarcly any member could solve, upon which Lord B. Montagu said that no divi- sion smn could be worked out-by those figures. Amid much laughter the right hon. gentleman asserted that it could, and then proceeded to say that he need not press that argument further, as it had been practically established. Then there was the ordeal which aspirants had to go through besides e,xaminations, the machinerY,(If'getting(,ei-tificates andobto in- ing registration; the operation taking two years to perform. Then a price was to be paid for the franchise, and this by the poorer el-ass, under £1!J, while the rich above it paid nothing, a series of fees being exacted at every stage of the prooess of getting on the registry. In fact and practically such a fine was imposed on the qualification that the mea- sure must prove a nullity. In his opinion no method had yet been invented for practically carrying out it-a educational test for the franchise, and on these grounds and the unwork- able character of the bill he moved its rejection. iord R. Montagu viewed the bill as complement to the reform measure, and he hoped that, if it passed the second reading, a motion would be made to amalgamate it with the other reform bills. The only right to the franchise was intelligence, which quaJi&ed a man to exercise it for the benefit of the country; and as the present bill reoognised that principle, he supported it. Sir. dive, whose name was on the back of the bill, said thttt though he had -always thought well of it, he never thought so well of it as since he heard the speech of Mr. Gladstone, many of whose objections were inapplicable to; the measure. Mr. Ewart, being of opinion that the measure was a tri- bute to the growing intelligence of the working classes" would give it his support. Sir J. Eakington was unable to concur in the sweeping ceasare which Mr. Gladstone had passed on this bill. He Jbelieved that the bill, hi principle, would give a strong Stimulus to education, affording as it would a new te,t of fitness for the exercise of the franchise. In voting for the second reading of the bill he only acceded to the principle, for he was not prepared to agree to many of its details. Mr. Goschen opposed the bill, observing that it was strange that gentlemen opposite should adopt a bill which was to extend the franchise, and this wit bout statistics, and unaccompanied by redistributior of seats, and sY, ould accept it as a settlement of the question. The bill was in principle One for universal suffrage, while it would in practice admit few persons to the franchise, thus being an instance of the maximum of profession and the minimum of performance and it seemed that gentlemen opposite supported all im- practicable measure coming from bis side of the House in order to conciliate gentlemen who might thus be induced to assist in obstructing the practical measures of the Go- vernment. After SQmeobservatins from Mr, R Hope, Mr. Desman, and Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Bright said that after much and long consideration of t pTinciple of this bill, he had been unable to see the righteousness of its principle or the hope of its practical Working. He was, if justice was done to him, the most fe<shservative of politicians, for he was never willing to de- t from the ancient constitution of this country, except Ulsuchcases where departure would be undoubtedly for the blicgood. The franchise now proposed was as new in ttlfoas in every other country; and he required to be shown tt the ancient practice of the constitution was not sufli- to secure an adequate extension of the franchise before ^accepted aproposition so fanciful as that before the House, ^ue educational best laid down was puerile in the extreme, ?id as to this test being in existence in the rcmversities, h the Government, of this country bad bem coiulncfceacm those mstitu- tecms was carried on, the result could only have anarchy of the direst kind. He argued that what was called education was not indispensable to the understanding of paBtios, sta they were understood by the exercise of the franchise. There was no neeJ, at least it had not been Shown to him, to depart further than now from the ancient that household occupation should constitute the franchise, in order to extend the suffrage. In departing from that principle, a test had been fixed which consisted of capability of paying a certain rent, -and this was taken as an jnoicatioti of fixity of habit and stability of character; and this he contended was the best test of the education and bhecivilisation of the persons who occupied the hoases "which constituted the suffrage. He was not afraid of aai- Tirsal suffrage, but he had never advocated it desiring to Stand on the principle laid down by our forefathers, and which was inconsistent with those fancy franchises" which he had always opposed. Visoowat Cranborne spoke in favour of the bill, and said ileaoted the spirit of Conservatism whiah had suddenly come over the two greatest Radicals in the House, Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Bright. The Attorney-General followed in a speech of much ani- mation and paying high conapijmenj; t0 Bright, endorsed ail the opinions that gentleman had expressed, adding an opinion of Ms own that to houaeVi old suffrage we must come &1" long. r. Adderley advocated the principle of the measure, urging t&t no argument had been adduced against it &Jtoept on points of detail. Sir. Locke and Mr. Acland opposed, 8.1.d Sir S. Northcote 3rted the bill. Mr. M. Chambers was speaking against the bill when he "u interrupted at a quarter to six. The debate then stood adjourned. The other business was gone through, ana yj,e gjouse adjo«raed. shortly before six o'clock, In tiie House of Lords, on Thursday, the Capital Ptbqsh- Bill was taken in committee. grl Grey moved the rejection on the 4th clause, whicQ. j",ew a distinction between murder ia the first and second degree. The question was discussed, and on a division the numbers for retaining and expunging the clause were equal-Raniely, ?-3-andby the practice of the House the non-contents had lt, and the clause was rejected. The Lord Chancellor said that the definition of murder and manslaughter was most important, and after the deci- sion which had been come to he should move the adjourn- ment of the committee. This was agreed to. and the House resumed. The Ecclesiastical Leb,ses (Isle of Man) Blll and the Hop Trade Bill passed through committee. The Companies Act (lS61) Amendment Bill was read a Second time. The House then adjourned at a quarter past six o'clock. In the House of Commons,the adjourned debate on the orm Bills was resumed by Mr. Goldsmid, who ar^edth,t population ought not to the guiding ^jtribution of seats. Look- ing at the Qisfraach.sing^art of ttQ Redistribution Bill, so Jar as it went, he thought that it de.;lt fairly with both sifies the House. „ Mr. Goschen said £ J?aa suggested that the disfranchisement should be a(. 1Q ingtead 3,000 population, and that the membL,s go taken from boroughs should be given to the grouped boroughs; but it w&s impossible to do otherwise than to nx au arbitrary jjne any line fixed must produce anomalies J-L.arcis7iips' The objections to the Government measure oatae wi^)j arJ id grace from members whose boroughs had grouped they had been leniently treated in not bein^ <jj8frall' °bised altogether. He urged that now that the Hous,e Obtained its wish in having the whole scheme of r6form ->efore it, the Liberal party ought not to assist in defV. ^e principle ov the measures on merely local and pers0llaj grounds. Sir J. Pakington desired to hear some independent Ullofll- siai member say that, now that the House hid the who e scheme of the Government before it, he considered it worthy of acceptance as an improvement of the reprer,en- io of the people. But no speech had been made by any sUch member in favour of those measures. Turning to a general consideration of the subject of reform be rgnedgeneralJy against tie Governme t proposi-- £ ions fljS novel and dangerous. He urged that £ ae House should not submit to be dictated to tb ./Government in regard to sitting till October in order pass these bills. He was of opinion that the whole ques- tion of Parliamentary reform might be advantageously con- sidered by royal commission, with a view to enable the Go- vernment of the day to found a measure on the result of its laquiry. He thought it premature and useless to send these bills to committee. The debate was continued by Me. S. Mill, Mr. Scourfield, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Mowbray, Lord F. Cavendish, Mr. Ducme, and Mr. Cancllish. Mr. Lowe said that the House was asked to go into com- mittee on a bill which had been read a second time only in parts, and it was, therefore, open to him to question its principle. He bad to complain again that the Government was always bringing iDIueasures subversive of the consti- tution without ever stating the principle on which they acted. The principle of the first Reform Bill was dis- franchisement but the principle of all others which hie been introduced had been that of enfranchisement, ■tie proceeded to argua that the House as now constituted did represent the general opinion of the country; though there was, perhaps, a tendency to a monotony of opinion feii™^Ht-'ST01ild*ve a great pectin a redistribu- Hon bill to give Vd«efy to the representation, and this could only be done by new 'ifranehiseoa^nts, one the effects of which would be todimiir^htha of elections. The cost of si »,e of.i5, ? expenses ranging from £ 5,000 to The right hon. gentleman creu.^ expenses, teeing extents from Lord by. '•^rk on the consti-. "S tutioa (published last autixmnj, which contained curious comments on the electoral position of several members, and some of his own colleagues, in illustration of an argu- mentagainst any large disfranchisement of small boroughs; assuming that there was reason for disfranchising small boroughs, what cause was there for re-enfranchising them ? By grouping several boroughs, and giving them one member in the, gross, expenses would be increased, for each con- stituency would expect from the one general member as much as each of them had received from its individual member. It was like asking a man to marry several wives; nay, worse, it was asking him to marry several widows. The right hon. gentleman then argued elaborately against the proposed Franchise BilL The Attorney-General said that after the admiration which the speeches of Mr. Lowe must always excite sub- sided, iJhequestion always arose what it was he wanted to have done; what was his practical object. His argument resolved itself into this, that we should stand onthins as they axe, because they are, and without showing any rea- son why they are. The hon. and learned gentleman, setting aside details, proceeded to argue in favour of the principle on which the measures were founded, which he contended was the same as that on which the existing franchise was established. The debate was then adjourned to next day. The Customs and Inland Bevenue Bill was read a third timea-nd passed. After some further business, the House adjourned at 15 minutes past two o'clock. In the House of Lords, on Friday, Lord Dunsany called attention to the case of a man named Bryan, convicted at the Sligo Petty Sessions, and urged that Fenian agents were allowed to tamper with the soldiers of the army with im- punity, when such light sentences as two months' imprison- ment were passed for the offence. Lord Dufferin admitted that the offence deserved severer punishment, but the Irish Government was not responsible for the summary proceedings of magistrates. The debate on the Selling and Hawking Goods on Sundays Bill was resumed, and after some discussion, on the ques- tion that the bill do pass, it was negatived by 69 to 39. The House adjourned at half-past seveu o'clock. In the House of Commons, on the motion for going into committee of supply, Sir G. Grey appealed to gentlemen who had motions on the paper to postpone them in wder to allow the adjourned debate on the Reform Bills to be resumed, but Mr. Whalley, who 3 toed third on the list, proceeded to move for a select committee to inquire and report as to the origin, object, and extent of the Fenian conspiracy now or lately existing in Ireland, and especially whether it is in any and what degree connected with any form of religious belief. After the hon. gentleman had proceeded for an hour, amidst continued interruption, Sir R. Burrell moved that the House (which was quite 'full) be counted. Upon this more than two-thirds of the members left, The, Speaker appealed to the hon. member, untder the pe- culiar circumstances of that evening, to have some con- sideration for the House. The motion was then withdrawn. The adjourned debate on the Reform Bill was resumed by Sir H. Cairns, who said that he, like Mr. Lowe, liad -en- deavoured to discover the principle of the Bill for the lie- distribution of Seats, and though be had hoped to have bad that difficulty solved by the Attorney-General, he had been disappointed, for all he bad stated was that the bill adhered to the old maris and practices of the constitution. What ancient practice of the constitution consisted of grouping boroughs ? The grouped boroughs of Scotland were brought into the Imperial Parliament with the union, and had been grouped 150 years before. The boroughs in Wales were grouped 300 years back, and this was done with the view of obtaining borough representation. The only cases of grouping in England were two, Penryn and Falmouth, and Sandwich, and they were grouped for the same reason. He objected and arg-ued against the giving of three members to large constituencies: and to the apportioning of seven English members to Scotland, urging that no reason had been shown for depriving England of any of her members. He also urged that the subject of boundaries should be dealt with in any plan of reform, and contended generally that these measures would unsettle much and settle nothing. The debate was earned on by Mr. Acland, with an earnest defence of the Government measures; Mr. B. Cochrane, who took the opposite views Mr. C. Wykeham Martin, supportisg the bills; Mr. Kennard, the colleague of Mr. Martin at Newport, dissenting from his opinions; Xx Leatham, arguing against the amendment in discussion, Colonei C. Jjiadaay, who probested on behalf of Abingdon. Mr. A. Feel was etf opinion that as population increased it was necessary to enlarge constituencies; and unless it was proposed to add to the number of members of that House, it was necessary to have recourse to grouping: and he also supported the plan of the Government for a P, franchise, although he was prepared to go lower. Sir E. Lechmere remarked on the anomalies which were palpable in the plan of grouping in the Redistribution Bill, especially dwelling on the incongruity of the group to which his own borough of Tewkesbury was subjected. Mr. Holden, although a member for one of the condemned boroughs (Knaresborough), was prepared to support the Government measures on the ground of the public good. Major Jervis was surprised at last to see members behind the Government rising to support their measures; but he was not surprised at hearing each of them practically con- demn them. Although a member for a small borough, he did not desire to speak on the subject of small boroughs, but on the ministerial measures generally, and he declared his disbelief in the honesty and good intentions of that bill; and he should oppose them, though always ready to support a good measure for the extension of the franchise. The Lord Advocate put it that long as had been the time during which the House had been discussing the question of reform, it would not be easy for the country to come to a conclusion as to what their opinions really were on that subject. In the present debate there had been no con- sideration of principles, but details, which ought to have been dealt with in committee, had been minutely discussed. The question of the grouping of boroughs did not in- volve any vital principle, but was, in fact, a matter of detail. The right hon. gentleman proceeded to reply to some of the arguments of Sir H. Cairns, and especially showed that Scotch boroughs were not grouped for the purpose of extending, fent for diminishing representation, and the same principle was sought to be applied to small English boroughs which were now over-represented. He argued in favour of an extended franchise; saying, in re- ference to the objection'that it would lead to democracy or government by numbers, that the House of Commons was the embodiment of democracy and government by numbers. Lord Elcho asked, if the amendment now before the House was rejected, it was the intention of the Government to press on the Redistribution Bill this session. He asked this on behalf of many gentlemen who were constrained to vote against the Government on the measure: and if it was the intention not to pass the bill it ought to be announced at once. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the proper t"' Ike for declaring his intention in regard to the amendment wou^ be when he came to address the House in the debate, Th*116 wou^ state the decision of the Government, fne was then adjourned. 1ae other business was disposed of, and the House adjourned at twenty minutes past twelve o'clock. In the House of Lords, on Monday, Lord Bedesiale moved that the stanamg orders on private bills be considered, with a view to their oerng amended. He proposed that in future a subscription contract should be entered into by 20 sub. scribers, for at least two-thirds of the share capital, that it should contaan a rail description of the subscribers, the amount and number ot shares, and the total amount paid up; that a deposit ot one-eighth of the subscribed capital should be paid into the 90urt of Chancery: that no transfer of a share should be valid unless at the time of the transfer three-fifths at least of the aino-ant of that share has been paid up in answer to calls. The Marquis of Clanricarde moved as an amendment, that a select committee be appointed, to consider how far it is expedient to amend the standing- orders relating to railways." After discussion, Lord Bedesdale agreed to the appointment of a select committee to inquire if any alterations were necessary in the standing orders, which was agreed to. The Commons' reasons for disagreeing to the Lords' amendments to the Poor Persons' Burial (Ireland) Bill were considered and agreed to. The House adjourned at ten minutes to eight o'clock. In the House of Commons, after some preliminary ques- tions as to the course the Government intended to pursue with regard to the redistribution of seats, the adjourned debate on the Reform Bill was resumed by Lord J. Manners, who criticised the details of the mea- thles» au(:i opposed especially all the provisions of that for j, Redistribution of seats. vote il rose to explain why he should give his ment J!/?',vour of the Government, instead of to the amend- hnri-J 6 inember far Wells. Referring to the resolution iiioh he°K-^ on Franchise Bill, he said that the object ^apt-ofoth* fckea in view, whatever miy have been the ° 'V -3Af]jsfr?Ka'was attained by the fusion of the Franchise aB' Bills; aTld the Government was no«v ),;«« Bill future conduct. He did not think the Franchisei h t poasMe bill> whUe fehe Eedlstri. bufcionB underw?6' und]Sfasted, and anomalous; and he did n why the Government had not followed the of the bills of 1859 and I860 m regard to of seats. Still he felt bound, if the amei'imentofGaptain Hayter was pregsed fcQ division, to amL,1hou°l1 he thouS'ht that it would be advisable that th^amendmeBt s]lould not be preSsed. If he voted ^r the amen,he might contribute to the defeat of the Government, agam^ wj,ich no hostility but in whose policy hconfidence, and Of a bill which he should feel at liberty to attempt to amend in com- mittee. Hewas of <^0«ldmg these measures might, perhaps, be shaped into a settlement of the ques- tion of reform; but as he also believed that the opinion of the country concurred with his own, that it was impos- sible that these bills could pass this session, he appealed to the Government to postpone their further consideration till next year. Mr. Osborne congratulated Lord Grosvenor on his return to the ranks of the party of which he was an ornament, though he could not but observe the adroitness of the noble lord in looking one way and rowing another. He saw that the present Reform Bill would be treated by this House as previous measures had been treated by previous Parlia- l meats, No one ventured to say thai: ih«r<2 -was so necessity for reform, but every one endeavoured to destroy and neutralise any measure that was brought forward. He be- lieved that the error had been that the Government had not felt the pulse of the House for this session on the subject of reform. It was, however, their own familiar friend (Mr. Bouverie) who had forced on the Government a whole, com- prehensive, incomprehensible Reform Bill, the end of which proceeding would be that the Franchise Bill would melt away in the hot weather, while the only redistribution of seats would be a new grouping on the Treasury bench. He earnestly urged, however, that there should be no unneces- sary delay in dealing with the (question of the lowering of the franchise. The debate was continued by Mir. Adderley, Mr. Grenfell, Lord R. Montagu, Ms. Pim (who returned to the support of the Government), Sir. xiroad, Mr, Wyld, and several other her-. members; after which The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reference to the real intentions of the Government in regard to reform, which had been questioned, traced the-history of these measures since the introduction of the Franchise Bill in March last, contending that its iatroaucbion then was sufficiently early. Then, as to the consultation by the Government of political supporters, in one sense that was impracticable, but they had, by the moderate demands of the Franchise Bill, endeavoured to anticipate the objections to a still lower franchise than that proposed entertained by some of their friends. As some suspicion had been hinted with regard to the distribution of seats, the Govern- ment felt it necessary to lay this measure before the House. Then came the Semand for the amalgamation of the bills, and agfiin this was conceded; and thus, as in all the other steps taken, the Government desired to ,coneiiiate the House. It was a discouraging circumstance that a majority of the House engrafted on the measures the subject of corrupt practices, contrary to all precedent, and in opposition to the distinctly expressed opinion of Lord Derby. Ifesfc, the Government had to meet the amendment of the member fur Wells, which bore about it the marks of concert with the Opposition and if, as had been said, there was a want of reality in the debate, it was not: tb.e fault ef the Govesinnemt, but arose out of the break- down of certain oonrbinaitioMs. The principle of grouping was adopted in no spirit of hostility to small boroughs; but it might often operate to prevent total disfran- chisement. As to the charge of precipitancy in tho preparation of the ^Reform. Bill, it was deliberately prepared by experienced constructors of such bills in a period of forty-five dayg. Aa regarded anomaliiH, the measure mitigated anomalies, just as the first Reform Bill did, but it did not create any. Referring to Mr. Lowe's speech, he hinted that that gentleman was one of those who, if the honour of the Government was implicated, shared in the responsibility. The sight hon. gentleman proceeded to vindieate the Bill against the objections, which had been taken to it. The principle of the bill was one which the Government asked the House to consider in committee, and not to accede to an amendment which was intended to prevent its reaching- that stage. MT. Disraeli stated that the Opposition had Mailed a pledge given by Lord Detfby, th;tt the Reform measures cf the Government WAfau],Ci. have :fMr "pl&y ■ although it was true that they had voted for the motion of Lord Grosvenor, which bad been adopted by the Government itself. The House had acted towards the Government with a tem- perance and sagacity whieh might well have been imitated by monsters. The right hon. gentleman then set about to argue the subject of the representation of the people from his poiiat of view, to show that the proposed bill acted in the direction of disfranchisement. As to the amendment, it appeared to him that Mr. Gladstone had. ceded its principle, for he had said that the details of his bill were open to objection and reconstruction. He attributed the failure of the mea- sures of the Government so their immature character, and urged that the House should endeavour to induce ministers to pause, and to cotae forward at a future time with mea- sures which would give greater satisfaction to the people of this country. Captain Hayter then withdraw his amendment. The Liberal side having refused to allow the amendment to be withdrawn, the question was being put, when nearly the whole of the Opposition withdrew, amidst tremendous cheering from the Ministerialists. The amendment was then negatived without a division, and the House went into committee, the cheering on the Liberal side bgiag agiiin renewed with great vigour. The preamble was postpaid, when a motion to report progress was opposed by the .Liberals, who cried out to go on." A division wats called,, when, sihe■greater part of the Opposition returned. On the division, tae ii*o'u~>on to report progress was carried by 40S to 2 The otber was disposed of. and the House ad. journed at hftlf-oast two o'oioek. In the House of uords, on Tuesday, on going into com- mittee OIl the Public Schools Bill, Lord Houghton urged the advisability of adding representatives of art and science to the special commission. In Committee on the bill, the Earl of Ellenborough ob- jected to the nomination to icholarsliips being thrown open to competition, and moved an amendment against that pro- vision, which was rejected by 58 to S3. A proposal of Lord. to add Lord Wrottesley to Id sp3oial commtesioaf was, on a division, lost by 44 The bill passed through committee with some verbal amendments. The Lord Chancellor brought up a message from the crown, intimating the marriage of the Princess Mary of Cambridge with Prince Teck, and requesting the aid of the House in making provision for her Royal Highness. The Pensions Bill passed through committee. The Burials in Burghs (Seotiaaci) Bill was read a second time, and the House adjoui-ned. In the House of Commons, Mr. Layard, in answer to Mr. D. Griixith, saiid that there Was resison to believe that the author of two recent forgeries e>f official letters from the Foreign-ollice to the newspapers was the same person, and mquirtes were going on upon the subject. Mr. T. G. Baring, in answer to Mr. Laird, said that her Majesty's Government were a.wa.re that there were several iron-clad vessels of other nations in the Pacific, carrying the heaviest guns. He declined to state what the move- ments of her Majesty 's ships were to be; but he might say that an iron-clad ship had been sent on an experimental cruise to the North American station. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to General Peel, said the proposed Congress had been given up, Austria having intimated that if; should be agreed beforehand to ex- clude from the deliberations of the conference all questions of territorial augmentation, or increase of power, on the part of any State. The Governments of France and England were coincident in opinion that, u!,der such circumstances, any hope of proceeding usefully with the conference was at au end. Mr. M'Evoy moved that the recommendations of the select committee of 1858 and 1865, that the Government should take into consideration the claims of Ireland to a grant of the half cost of medical officers and schoolmasters and schoolmistresses of unions, with a view of providing for the same in future, as is now the practice in England and Scotli n i, should be acoeded to. Mr. Daw son seconded the mot-ion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said that he was pre- pared practically to accede to the motion, and to make pro- vision for it in next year's estimates. After some conversation the motion was withdrawn. Mr. B. Cochrane moved for a Royal Commission to inquire into the constitution of the Metropolitan Board of Works, the Office of Publis Works, and the Office of Woods and Forests, with the view of ascertaining whether some means may not be devised by which the improvements of the metropolis may be carried out in a more comprehensive and economical manner, and with greater unity of purpose. Mr. Ayrfcon spoke in opposition to the motion. Mr. Cowper thought that the motion was inopportune, and the suggestions made by the mover impracticable. A discussion which followed was concluded by the with- drawal of the motion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer brought up a message from the crown, stating that a marriage had been agreed on between the Princess Mary of Cambridge and Prince Teck, and asked the aid of the House towards making a pro vision tor her Royal Highness, The message was ordered to be taken into consideration on Thursday. The House was shortly after counted out, at 20 minutes to eight o'clock.

AN OLD WOMAN OF SIXTY SENT TO PENAL SER VITUDE. Caroline Hushes plea.dad glil by, at the Middlesex Sessions, on Wednesday, before Mr. Bodkin, the assistant-Judge, to stealing six yards of flannel, value 7s,, the property of William Finney. The facts of this case were unimportant. The Assistant-Judge asked if anything was known of the prisoner. Mrs. Howe, of the House.of Correction, proved the following convictions against, hsr:—Two months, 18th August, 1856; 21 days, 18fch April, 1857; one tnontfa, n^r, 1857; two months, 11th September, 1857; three months, 18th November, 1859 tkree months, 15th July, 1861; three months, 15th April, 18o2; 18 months, 26th Aug us b, 1862; six months, 2ud October, 1865. She taid there was another official present to say something about her. The Assistant-Judge: I don't want to know any- thing more.about her. Ia is a very painful thing to pass a sentence of penal servitude upon a woman of her advanced years, bat she is a confirmed thief, and the court is compelled to do it. The sentence of the court upon the prisoner is that she be kept in penal servitude for seven years. 4

Serious disorders have just broken oat at Marienburg, in Prussia, The men of the reserve burst into private houses, and demanded with menaces, money, provisions, and clothes. Shops were plundered, and threats 0f a general pillage openly made. The officers were present at those scenes of brigandage without beingablo to control the men, and troops had to be sent for from Dantzic aad Elberg. Never," says the B~wiigsbevg Gazette, which gives the above •details, "wønld have been believed thai suoh a seene; i, aw&ld aems'in day i- a oivilised tswu/5

WEAVERS AND TBEIB WORK, In the London Sheriffs' Court the case of Wiltshire v. Foot was brought before the judge on Saturday. This was an action to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff, who is a weaver, of 11, Old Bethnal-green-road, in consequence of the defendant, a silk manufacturer, of 14, Gresham-street, not having provided plaintiff with work. The action was quite a new one, and the wording on the summosaa was Compensation for lose of time ia attending upon you (defendant) at your request, on your promise to supply plaintiff with work." His Honour (Mr. Commissioner Kerr) asked plaintiff how he made out his case. Plaintiff said that he had worked for defendant as a weaver, and upon one occasion recently he took in his "harness," i.e., his roller and other matters pertaining to a weaver's employment. Defendant detained the harness," and kept plaintiff waiting for other work. Plaintiff waited for a few days, and then demanded work, but could get none. Mr. Beard, on the part of defendant, contended that there was no liability, and that a master was not liable to a servant in a case of this kind. There was no specific contract between the parties, and defendant was not bound to provide plaintiff with work. His Honour was clearly of opinion that plaintiff was ill-advised in bringing the present action. He knew of no law which obliged a master to provide his servant with work, and he would illustrate plaintiff's position as follows :-Suppose a person agreed to take a oertam j supply of bread from a baker, would it be urged that upon his refusal to accept the baker could sue for damages ? It certainly could not. In this case the defendant was not bound to provide work, and plaintiff would be nonsuited. Defendant was not called upon to give his version of the affair.

SUICIDE OF A DOMESTIC SERVANT. On Tuesday morning Mr. John Humphreys, coroner, held an inquiry at the Sir George Osborae'a Head Tavern, Prinae-street, Spitalfields, relative to the suicide of Ann Williams, aged 17 years. Mrs. Jane Bird, wife of the landlord of the Sir II George Osborne's Head, said that deceased was her servant, and on Friday evening last witness discovered that she had been in the habit of baying cheap milk at 3d. a quart, instead of the best at 4d. a quart, and I keeping the difference in price. She had been specially told to get the best, as it was wanted for Mr. Bird, who was ill. When the milk-girl told the fact I deceased shook her head at her, but she did not deay it, and upon witness saying that she was surprised at her doing such a thing for a penny, which she oould f have got for the asking, she turned away very sulky. Witness being very partial to her did not discharge her or say anything more. Mr. John Bird said that on the evening in question, between nine and ten o'clock, he beard the water running over from the butts in the yard. He went out and found the deceased head downwards in the larger water butt. He called some persons out of the parlour, who extricated the bedy, but life was quite extinct. She must have climbed on the lower batt, and by standing on it reached the larger one. Mr. A. M. Champneys, M.R.C.S., said that he was called in, and every effort was made to resuscitate the deceased, but without avail. She had fallen upon a spike of wood plugging a hole in the bottom of the water butt. Ellen Stubbings, a married sister of the deceased, said that she never made any complaints of her place, but al way gave her mistress a good character. The Coroner said that it was quite in accordance with modern practice for the servant to give her mistress a character it would be satisfactory to Mrs. Bird to know that the character she got was a good one. No doubt, the shame of being detected in a petty theft had acted upon deceased's mind, and caused her to destroy her life. The jury returned a verdict of Suicide while in a state of unsound mind."

ALLEGED MISTAKEN IDENTITY. John Lewis Cotton, a very respectable-looking young man, who was described on the charge-sheet as a clerk, residing at 73, Cow Cross-street, was brought up at Guildhall before Sir James Dake, charged with steal- ing a watch from the prosecutor. Thomas Walsbury said he was an assistant to Mr. Keane, the sheriff's officer for Surrey. About half- past ten o'clock on the previous night he was in Little Bridge-street, Blackfriars, when the prisoner, who was in front of him, snatched his watch away, broke the chain, and made off with it. He was pursued and captured near the Old Bailey. He lost sight of him at the corner of New Bridge-street and Ludgate-MU. In answer to Mr. Beard, who appeared for the pri- soner, he said that two young men were running, and the other was to have been there to give evidence, but he had not come. He had never seen the prisoner be- fore, but he had no doubt he was the man who ran away with his watch. By Sir James Dake There was a light by which be could see the features of the accused perfectly weli, and it was a light night besides. The ether young man never lost sight of him. John Jones, 387, proved hearing the cry of "Stop thief and stopping the prisoner near the Old Bailey. When he took him he said, What have you got me for ? The prosecutor came up and said the prisoner had stolen his watoh. The prisoner said, I did not steal your watch. I was only running after the man who has gone down the Old Bailey." He did not see any man running in front of the prisoner. The wateh had not been found. Mr. John Edward Daffield said he was a carriage and harness maker, carrying on buainess at 168, Aldersgate-street, and he had known the prisoner from his infancy, and he had been his clerk for the last three years. His family was highly respectable, and his uncle was a magistrate for the county of Kent. There was no want of money to induce him to do such a thing, for he could at any time have had J210 from witness. Besides, his wife had aa income sufficient to support the whole family respectably. The prisoner's character had been blameless, aiid he (witness) had unbounded confidence in him. He believed him in- capable of committing such an act as that imputed to him. Sir James Dake thought there was some mistake, but remanded the case for the attendance of the other witness. Bail was taken.

TERRIBLE BOILER EXPLOSION AT LEICESTER. j On Thursday afternoon, about four o'clock, a boiler exploded in Leicester, resulting in the serious, possibly fatal, injury of two men; a boy also having sustained injuries of a less dangerous character. Within the last two months a person named Wol- stenholme, commenced business as an elastic-web weaver, and occupied a small factory, two stories high, belonging to Mr. J. P. Clarke, a cotton-spinner. This factory was sarrounded by buildings—in the front by hosiery warehouses, and on either side by a num- ber of small tenements, and a hosiery manufactory, which the explosion has damaged to a very great extent. Wolstenholme's factory is a complete wreck; the walls bounding the factory-yard are all blown down. Two out-houses in the adjoining yard have shared the same fate; and the windows and doors of the tenements adjacent have been shattered to atoms; Portions of the boiler, slates, bricks, and timbers of the building are strewn in every direction. A portion of the valve of the engine, weighing 121bs., was pro- jected with great violence over the high buildings of two streets, against the arch of a doorway on the Welford-road, a distance of 150 yards, smashing a piece off the arch and causing much consternation to the inmates, one of whom had just entered the house and narrowly escaped with life. Fortunately there were but three persons in the factory at the time of the ex- plosion-Mr. Wolstenholme, his father, and his child. The old man was blown into a dust-hole in an adjoining yard, his leg was broken, and he was otherwise seri- ously injured; the younger man was frightfully burat rig, and disfigured about the face as well as other parts of his body, and they were both taken to the Infirmary in a dying state. The child was badly out about the head, but was not dangerously hurt. The explosion seems to have been caused by neglect- ing to keep a proper supply of water in the boiler, as the gauge had evidently been red hot at the time of the catastrophe. The boiler appears to have been a very good one, and it is said would bear a pressure of 1001b, to the inch. The greatest excitement prevailed, and the street in fhe vicinity was crowded with people.

MIRACULOUS ESCAPE, On Saturday morning, about noon, as Mr. Matt, of Issington-honse, was driving homewards in his dog- cart, accompanied by his son and daughter, and gently trotting dowa the hill from the Back's Horn Corner into Blacfcaest, he was startled to find a pair of horses coming full gallop aftc-i- him down the hill, with a plough at their heels. The horses had bolted from their work on some adjoining land and contrived to get into the high road. Covering the whole of the road in their headlong career, with the plough plunging aad jumping from side, to side, onwards towards Mr. Mott's vehicle they oame. Mr. Mott jumped out and forced his own horse and trap as closely into the hedge as possible in the hope of escape. Seizing his little girl, he endeavoured to force her into the hedge, bus she in terror clung to him, while the boy still sat in the caTt. Crash came the plough into the cart, dashing Mr. Mott and his child to the ground, and throwing the boy out into the ditch. Down went all three horses and plough and cart, and horses and harness were mixed up in inextricable confusion. Mr. Mott's horse rose and started off, clearing himself from the trap, which was utterly smashed. The plough horses followed, plough and all, leaving the trap in the road. One wheel of the cart went over Mr. Mott's back, but such was the force of the collision that it appears both cart and plough cleared Mr. Mott and his child, the cart-wheel oniy lightly grazing Mr. Mott's back. The boy escaped unhurt, Mr. Mott almost so, and the girl with but few bruises and scratches. The knees of Mr. Mott's horse were broken, but the plough horses escaped almost uninjured. It is stated one of the plough horses is a brute of the most intractable aai vicious disposition,—Griviidford Times.

THE LAW OF COUNTERFEIT COIN Rogers v. Isaacson. An action of considerable importance to tradesmen who place in their shops notices that they" Will not be answerable for any change after it is taken from the counter," was trie-4 in the London Sheriff's Court on Wednesday, in which the plaintiff sought to ze- cover 2s. for two counterfeit coins, which she alleged that she had received at the defendant's public-house Plaintiff said that upon a certain day she went into the defendant's tavern, and there changed a half- crown. She received two shillings-or, as she thought,, shillings—and put them in her pocket. Upon her going subsequently to purchase something at a grocer's shop it was discovered that both tke coins were counterfeit. His Honour: What do you say to this, M. Isaacson ? Defendant: I do not believe that I gave her the ooins. His Honour: She swears that you did. Defendant: If she had come to me with one bad shilling a few minutes after she had left my house, I should have given her a good coin, so that I might net have been bothered with the matter, but when she is absent a early two honrs and then briagg me two bad coius I think if I am to be held liable it is a hard cas? upon me. His Honour: You see that she swears she received the money from your house. Had you any other money, Mrs. Rogers? Plaintiff: None at all. Defendant: I have a notice up in my house that ao mistakes in change can be recognised after the money has been taken from the bar. Is not that binding oa the plaintiff ? His Honour: Not under the circumstances detailed. She swears that she received the ooins at your house. I may remark that there is a great deal of counterfeit coin about, and to show that there is nothing very singular about your getting two at one time, I will tell you that it is not very long ago that I obtained change for a sove- reign at a railway station, and with that change I re- ceived two bad half-crowns (laughter). I did not trouble myself about the matter, but put up with the loss. Defendant: Perhaps your Honour did not feel very satisfied as to the position of the law r His Honour Oh! yes, I did but I could not very well trouble myself about it. There can be no doubt about the law in this case, but if you could prove that a person trumped up a claim of this kind against vtn the case would be for another court, where the penalty enforced would necessarily be most severe. I must fifid for the plaintiff with costs. Verdict for the plaintiff.

A subscription has been set on foot for tiu Bufferera by the reoent conflagration near Exeter. Robbery of Wine by a Servant.-On Mon- day, at the Dawsbury Police-court, Sarah aawkheac, a servant, late in the employ of Mr. draper. Market-place, was charged with stealing 100 bottles cf wine, the property of her master. On Sunday week her master was entertaining company at his house, and on going to the wine closet found that no less than 100 bottles of the best vintages had been emptied and refilled with water- He challenged the prisoner, and she admitted having drank the wine and refilled the bottles. She was sent to prison for six months. A terrible explosion of what was supposed to be aifcro-glycerine occurred at Wells, Fargo, and Co. a building in San Francisco on the 16th April. The ex- plosion shook the earth like an earthquake for a circle of a quarter of a, mile. Samuel Knight, superintendent of Wells, Fargo, and Co.'s express, died in half-an- hour of injuries received. G. W. Bell, supervisor and assayer, was instantly killed. Mr. Wallub, Wells, Fargo, and Co.'s assayer, Joseph Elliott, John Gallagher, Frank Webster, and William Justin were instantly killed. Eight bodies were so mutilated that thev could not be identified. Louis M'Lane, Captain Eldrid^re, of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, and Judge Hoffman, were braised and out. Felix Lamax, D. Stacy, Jefferson Taylor, H. Blane, clothing dealer, Captain J. E. Ayres, Fred. Leiz, Frank Morris, and others were injured, but not fatally. Some can never be identified, as fragments of human flesh, bones, and brains were found nearly two blocks distant. Mont- gomery, Sacramento, and California streets were lined broken glass, scarcely a window for several hundred feet remaining whole. Wells, Fargo, and. Co.'s horses, and everything in the vicinity, animate or inanimate, were blown into fragments. The damage is estimated at least at 200,000 dollars. William Havens, a bookkeeper of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company, is ascertained to be among the killed. The cause of the explosion is a mystery.