Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
17 articles on this Page
WEDNESDAY.
WEDNESDAY. The debate upon the second reading of Sir Wilfrid Lawson's Permissive Prohibitory Bill in the House of Commons ran for some time almost entirely in the old grooves, and few, if any, new arguments were ad- vanced, either on one side or on the other; but after a while the discussion,became more practical, and in the end it had the effect of throwing considerable light upon the intentions of the Government with reference to the licensing system. The hon. baronet the member for Car- lisle laid, naturally, a great deal of stress upon the extent to which drunkenness prevails among certain classes in the country, and the evils which it produces; and after alluding to the repressive legislation which has been adopted in many of the States of the American Confedera- tion, and dealing with the arguments by which his pro- posal would probably be met, warmly urged the House to give its assent to a measure which he declared was supported, and indeed demanded, by the aristocracy of the working classes. Mr Bazley, in seconding the motion for the second reading, relied mainly upon the patent evils of intoxication—which he asserted to be the cause of two- thirds of the crime of the country-and asserted that the only remedy for those evils was to be found in this Bill. Colonel Jervis founded his appeal to the House to reject the measure upon its interference with individual liberty, or rather with the liberty of large classes of people who might happen to he in a minority in their respective dis- tricts. He did not deny the prevalence of habits of intoxication among the working classes but he asserted that drunkenness, "instead of increasing, was diminishing, and warned the House that such a measure would pro- bably create greater evils than those which it would remove. Referring to the fact that the petitions in favour of the Bill were signed by young persons only sixteen years of age, he inquired, rather indignantly, Are grown-up men to be'legislated for by a parcel of children?" —Mr Osborne Morgan said that after careful consideration he felt it his duty to support the Bill. They were all agreed that drunkenness was the bane and curse of the poorer classes in this country, and the fruitful parent of crime and misery. He believed they could only meet that evil by some special enactment, and he could not help thinking that for much of it their present legislation, or he ought perhaps rather to say their want of legislation, was directly responsible. He by no means contended that the Bill before the House was a perfect measure but until hon. members could point out to him a more effectual mode of curing the evil which it sought to deal with he should support that Bill. He quite admitted that the remedy contained in the Bill was a most stringent one, but it was to be remembered that stubborn diseases required strong remedies, and the disease of drunkenness was one requiring the utmost boldness to cure. It was contended that if Parliament passed this measure it would be abro- gating its functions as an imperial court of legislation, and would be delegating its powers to local bodies. That, however, was nothing new, for even under the existing state of the law the right of the local bodies to tax them- selves was admitted and recognised. This Bill was pre- eminer.tly a ratepayers' question, and they alone should ql be left to deal with it; because as surely as pauperism begot increased rates, so eurely did drunkenness beget in- creased pauperism. His own opinion was that it was a very sound and- sensible idea to remit the principle embodied in the Bill to the discretion and decision of local tribunals. Indeed, he would 'like to see the power of these local bodies increased in this respect. He should like if the ratepayers had the power of abolishing public houses altogether in cases where they saw fit, to limit their numbers, and exercise the strictest supervision over them in those districts where it ,was thought beneficial to allow them. The ratepayers were clearly the best judges of the necessities of their own particular localities, the conditions upon which publicjhouses should be allowed, and the restrictions which it would be judicious to impose upon them. One of the stock objections urged against the Bill was that it would place in the hands of the majority of a parish the means of coercing the minority. That argument was all very well as far as it went, but the fact ,of the matter was, that it was refuted 'by everyday expe- xience. Our whole system of legislation was in a measure based upon the principle that the majority should decide controverted questions; and in that house there were innumerable examples of the minority having to submit to the wishes of the majority. Perhaps the strongest argu- ment against the Bill was that by adopting it you would be punishing the innocent for the guilty. Those who urged this objection contended that it was very hard that a man who used drink should be prohibited its use because a good many abused it. He felt that there was some force in (this argument, although it could not be supported upon strictly teetotal grounds. He admitted that there was much-truth in the objection, but he could not adopt it, because tiere was a most flagrant evil requiring to be dealt with, and as it was a greater evil than the .evil of leaving things as they were, he felt bound to support the Bill. No doift>t the remedy which this measure proposed was somewhat clumsy, and unscientific, but as there was none better at "hand he thought it would be wise to adopt it. Another favourite argument of the opponents of the Bill was that, by accepting it, they would be making one law for the rich and another for the poor. That, however, was not really the case. Those who contended that clubs should be closed 'because public-houses should be closed really begged the question. Drunkenness, it was to be remembered, was the evil that they were striving to deal with. Now, it was essential to be borne in mind that, as a rule, men got drunk in public houses, but did not get drunk in clubs; so that there was really no analogy be- tween the two cases, Moreover, it should further be con- sidered that a very large proportion of the working and poorer classes themselves were in favour of some such Bill as that under discussion. No less than 2,300 petitions had been presented from all parts of the country, generally from the poorest sections of the community, in favour of the Bill, which showed that these poor people wished really, by means of legislation, to be protected against themselves. Capital was sought to be made by the ob- jectors to the measure out of the fact of the Bill being supported by the United Kingdom Alliance, on the grouud that it was unfair to allow an organised association like that to gain the advantage which its strength and wealth were likely to afford. That argument, however, cut both ways. If the United Kingdom Alliance were ranged on the one side, there were the licensed victuallers ranged upon the other, and these latter were very far from being uninfluential in Parliament, The last ob- jection which he should notice was a very simple one. It was said that large numbers of persons had been induced to invest their capital in public-houses on the security of the present law, and that if they were to be deprived of the liberty of carrying on their business they were entitled to compensation. He denied, however, that any such claim could justly be set up. This was not a private Bill in connection with which the rights of individuals might very fairly be taken into consideration. On the contrary, the Bill was one which sought to deal with one of the greatest and most important problems that ever engaged the attention of the legislature, and private interest had no claim to be taken into account. The Bill was not the best remedy that could be provided, but until a better was brought forward he should support it. (Hear, hear.) Mr C. E. Cawley could not assent to the second reading of the measure, because it would be impossible to prohibit the sale of beer or spirits throughout the whole country, [ and he did not think it right to commit to a section of the inhabitants of any district a power which could not and ought not to be exercised all over the kingdom.—Mr W. E. Forster fully recognised the demand which exists, especially amongst the elite of the working classes, for legislation of this description but he could not consent to give the majority of the inhabitants of any district power to prevent the minority from doing something which was perfectly innocent. At the same time he thought that, although the ratepayers could not be allowed to exercise prohibitory power, some authority might be permitted to them in the way of restricting the number of public- houses. At the close of his speech he appealed to the Home Secretary, not as a colleague, but as a member of the House, to take this subject into his serious considera- tion, and at as early an opportunity as possible to propose legislation upon the whole subject. This view comrc ended itself to Lord Sandon, Mr Leatham, Mr Scourfield, and Mr Walter, all of whom questioned the justice of the charge of general drunkenness which had been made against the working classes, but concurred in urging the necessity that the Government should take some measures to remove the admitted evils of the present system of licensing. -Differing entirely from these views, Mr Jacob Bright expressed his preference for a much more revolutionary measure than the one before the House, and only gave his support to that Bill because he did not see his way to inducing Parliament to adopt more stringent legislation.—Mr Bruce, in expressing the views of the Government, fairly grappled with the principle of Sir W. Lawson's Bill; and, affirming that public-houses supplied means of innocent enjoyment and comfort to very large classes of persons who could not obtain them elsewhere, maintained that what was really needed was not prohibition but regulation. Partially raising the veil which has hitherto concealed the intentions of the Government upon this subject, he informed the House that there has for some time been in the pigeon-holes of the Home-office a measure for the improvement of the licensing system, and the regulation of public-houses, the introduction of which has only been prevented by the consciousness of successive Home Secretaries that they were powerless to press it through the House. Their inability to perform this task he attributed, in part at least, to the influence which in past times licensed victuallers were able to exercise over Members of Parliament; and anticipating that this influence had been diminished by the recent extension of the suffrage, he announced that the Government intended next session to deal, and to deal efficaciously, with this subject. As to the details of the proposed measure, of course, he was silent; but he indicated generally that its provisions would be directed to improving the character of public-houses, restricting the hours during which they should be open, and conferring upon some persons, or body of persons, a power to limit their number. Under no cir- cumstances could he assent to the Bill before the House, and, in order to facilitate the measure which the Govern- ment proposed to adopt next year, he asked the House to reject it. This speech substantially closed the debate. Sir W. Lawson resisting an appeal hinted by Mr Graves, and pressed by Sir G. Grey, determined "to take the sense of the House," and, upon a division, the motion for the second reading of the Bill was rejected by a majority of 106--193 to 87. A short time was occupied in an un- finished discussion of Mr Norwood's County Courts Bill; and, after disposing of some other business, the House ad- journed.
THURSDAY.
THURSDAY. The House of Lords did not adjourn for the Whitsun recess without another debate upon the condition of Ireland, and another attempt to extract from the Government an exposition of their policy with reference to the land question. In this instance the assault came from the Ministerial side of the House, and it was Earl Russell who at some length inquired what the Govern- ment intended to do to stop the increase of crime and out- rage in Ireland, and what were to be the leading features of the measure for improving the tenure of land, which they had promised to introduce. The noble lord availed himself of this opportunity to condemn the project of which Mr Bright is the author, and which has more than once be- fore been referred to in both Houses of Parliament, and to express his opinion that the reticence of the Govern- ment upon this subject was calculated to excite in the minds of the Irish people expectations which could never be realised. Lord Granville's reply to his noble friend was almost identical with that which he has repeatedly given to similar appeals from other noble lords. He as- sured the House that the Government were using the most strenuous exertions for the suppression of crime and the protection of life in Ireland, and altogether refused to make any premature disclosure of the method in which they proposed to deal with the land question. Of course this answer was unsatisfactory to Lord Derby, and that noble earl—encouraged no doubt by the example of Lord Russell—vigorously attacked the Government for their whole Irish policy. The present excitement in Ire- land, and even the seditious expressions used by the Mayor of Cork, he held to be entirely attributable to the language which had been employed by some of the principal members of the Government, and especially by Mr Bright; and he peremptorily demanded that noble lords who represented the Government should disavow that right hon. gentleman's scheme for the dis- memberment of estates.—Such a disavowal Was distinctly refused by Lord Kimberley, who characterised the attack of Lord Derby as unfounded and unfair, and justified the language which had been used both by Mr Bright and other members of the Government with reference to Ire- land.—The Duke of Abercorn modestly remarked that the state of Ireland at the present moment afforded a lament- able contrast to its condition last year, when it was under his own government; and after two or three other peers had favoured the House with their opinions the subject was allowed to drop. The clause of the Government of India Act Amendment Bill which introduced the elective principle into the formation of the Council of India was rejected by 89 to 53; and, after advancing some; other measures a stage, their lordships adjourned to Monday, May 31st. In the House of Commons, Mr Otway stated that the Spanish Government had declined to accede to the request to have the case of the Tornado reheard before a special tribunal Mr Cardwell replied t. a question by stating that it was not the intention of the Government to coun- termand the instructions for reducing the troops in Canada, which instructions were now being carried out. The Marquis of Hartington informed Mr Hambrathat experiments were being made in suitable districts as to the use of velocipedes in. carrying letters. Mr Bagwell elicited from tie Chief Secretary for Ireland that thirty- five extra police constables had been sent to Tipperary. Upon the report of the committee on the Irish Church Bill being submitted a number of amendments were pro- posed, but only those accepted by the Government were agreed to, and none of those adopted materially modified the BilL The House then adjourned to the 27th.
INTIMIDATION IN WALES.
INTIMIDATION IN WALES. At the meeting of the election committee, Mr Gee, a solicitor at Hay, in Breconshire, stated that at the general election of 1868 the Dissenting ministers in Breconshire w,ere very active as politicians, and many of them were paid Agents. Their places of worship were fre- quently used for political meetings, and in the borough of Brecon he knew of one case in which, on one chapel being refused, another was proffered, and a political meeting was held in it. On such occasions the ministers were present, and addressed the meetings. Had heard of cases in which political sermons were preached. In Carmarthenshire the Dissenting ministers took an active part in canvassing, organising, and bringing the Liberal voters to the poll. With regard to political preaching he had heard that in one instance a minister went so far as to say -that those who supported the Conservatives would be in danger of the pains of hell. Believed that similar language was used during the election of 1866, and had heard of one case in which an old man who had promised to vote for the Con- servative candidate was attended by his minister, and told that he would endanger his salvation if he so voted. Had heard of other cases in which members of a Dissenting body had been threatened with being posted on the wall" if they voted in a particular way. Witness believed that this meant exclusion from the body to which they belonged, or, at any rate, that disgrace would follow. Witness was not aware of any cases in which intimidation was resorted to by the landlords, and had never heard of an instance in which a tenant had suffered for his vote. With regard to the ballot, he did not think it was desired by the tenant farmers. The voters were for the most part very inde- pendent, were proud of wearing their party colours, and he did not think would be inclined to keep the way in which they voted secret. Believed that as a rule a candi- date could tell pretty well after his canvass was over how the votes would be given. The Wesleyan body were very free from this kind of improper influence to which witness had referred. There was an inquiry into the 1868 election for Brecon. The seat was voided for bribery. Witness believed that there was an influence exercised by the land- lord in this way-that the tenants generally desired to vote aa the landlord did. There was no doubt that the tenants were under the idea that it was the better policy to please the landlord. The petitions presented from Wales were very few. Witness believed that there were not more than two petitions consequent upon the last election, and for the previous twenty years there had hardly been a single petition. The influence used by the Church clergy was not of the same character as that resorted to by Dissenting minis- ters. The clergy of the English Church simply used the legitimate influence they possessed as private gentlemen. Witness believed that if the ballot were adopted there would be no more threats among Dissenting bodies of posting persons on the wall. The issue raised at the last election was considered in Wales to be a religious issue. Witness doubted whether any good would result from the ballot, but at the same time he did not think it would work any injury either to the Conservative party or to the country generally. Mr Williams stated that he was a magistrate in the county of Pembroke, and a barrister practising on the South Wales circuit. He had had considerable experience in Welsh elections since 1861. Had heard the evidence of the last witness, and considered that that portion of it which had reference to the conduct of Dissenting ministers and the influence they exercised over their congregations was incorrect. Did not believe that the influence of the Dis- senting ministers had been exercised in the manner de- scribed. Dissenting ministers necessarily had from their position and character considerable influence among the people by whom they were surrounded. His experience was that they appealed to the people on the ground of principle, with a view of showing that as consistent Dis- senters they ought to take a certain line of action but as to their having threats of what would happen hereafter held out to them, or their being told they would be posted on the walls, or expelled from the bodies they were con- nected with if they voted for a certain party, he had never heard of a single authenticated instance in which this had been done, although his experience in Wales was very great. The Dissenting ministers in Wales were very active in the discharge of their duties, and they were con- stantly consulted by members of their congregations and asked for advice. With regard to their chapels, the Welsh Dissenting ministers had not the same feeling with reference to the sanctity of their religious edifices which was entertaine1 by clergymen of tkii English Church, and they continually lent their chapels for secular purposes. With reference to the Church clergy, they were generally re- garded in the parishes with which he was acquainted as the great Conservative power of the place Was of opin- ion that landlords in Wales did exercise an undue influ- ence in elections. This was done to some extent by intimidation. There were many large estates in Wales on which no leases were granted, and the tenants only held from year to year. In these cases there was a feeling on the part of the tenant that if he did not go with the land- lord on the occasion of an election he would be turned out of his holding. In certain districts of Wales the first question "a tenant asked was which way his master went. There was no doubt that in the great majority of cases the tenant had no desire to vote against the landlord's wishes, and this was especially the case in the rural districts, where there was very little ndtion of political independence among the tenants. Witness had often heard tenants say they must go with their master. Believed that landlord influence in Wales was used by the Whig houses quite as much as by the Conservative houses. Witness had not known of this influence being used directly by particular landlords, but he had known cases in which strong letters had been written by the agents of the landlords. Wit- ness had never known of any actual instance of eviction on account of a vote, although he had known the strongest pressure put upon a tenant. Mr Ward Hunt: Do I understand you to say that such language as has been described by the last witness as having been used by Dissentiug ministers has never been used ? Witness Yes, I do say w. I have heard of such things being rumoured about, and I know that they have got into the newspapers, but I have challenged different persons to produce a single instance, and they have failed to do so.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER…
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER AND THE BUDGET. SIR,-The first budget of Mr Lowe created universal astonishment throughout the country, seeing that a known deficit of four or five millions could be converted into a surplus of more than three millions. There are carping critics, we know, who obstinately refuse to believe that any good thing can come out of Nazareth, and who persist in asserting that the budget proposals are dangerous and unstatesmanlike. We do not deny that in order to reap the benefit of the proposed remission, we must suffer some amount of inconvenience. Seeing that the first moiety of the assessed taxes for 1869 will be collected in October next, and in January the excise licences will come into operation, a twelve-months' having to be paid in advance; and in April again the last moiety of the taxes will have to be collected, so that within the space of six months three calls will be made upon the purses of the tax-payers. The collection of the dog tax has been the pioneer of this reform, there is no doubt. The vigilance of the excise officials secured the payment of duty on 600,000 more dogs last year than had been taxed under the old system. The sum thus added to the revenue is worth notice, and the acknowledgment by ministers past and present of the value of the services thus rendered shows that there is some appreciative sentiment in high quarters. The late Chancellor, Mr Ward Hunt, claimed, with a pride that was justifiable, to be in some degree the parent of the new plan, inasmuch as the dog experiment was tried during his tenure of office. But though the experi- ment was so limited in its operation, it proved beyond all manner of doubt the immense superiority of the official over the local or amateur collectors. Thus it is seen how greatly it is to the advantage of the revenue to place the sole charge in the hands of those whose business it is to look after it, and who have been trained exclusively for the purpose. It is with unmixed pleasure we state that the excise officials have not exaggerated their ability to collect the revenue. Every right-thinking man must be convinced that Mr Lowe's scheme will be fraught with vast benefit to the country, and we believe the great suc- cess which attended the excise collection of the dog-tax to be only indicative of what will assuredly occur on a far greater scale when the plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer shall have been adopted.—Yours, &c., May 6th, 1869. REFORM.
- THE LITTLE AFFRAY AT ABERDOVEY.
THE LITTLE AFFRAY AT ABERDOVEY. SIR,—I notice letters in your impression of the 1st and 8th inst., referring to a row which took place in this town a short time ago, the writers of which seem to attach blame to the police constable's not being present at the time to quell the disturbance. I have always found P. S. Roberts at his post. He has been stationed here for nearly ten years, and has been considered a most intelligent and efficient officer. Upon enquiries of his whereabouts on the night in question, I find that he was ill at home, which is about half a mile from the scene of the melee. Had some one informed him of the so-called murderous assault" no doubt he would have endeavoured to crawl down and quell what, after all, turned out to be only a few words and blows. If persons have anything against a public officer why not report him to -the chief constable, and not rush hastily into print with such a paltry affair as the one re- ferred to. With respect to the innkeepers in our town, I can safely say there are not more respectable parties anywhere, and none more strict in adhering to the rules laid down respecting the keeping of their houses open after prohibited hours.-I am, sir, yours, &c., A LOVER OF FAIRPLAY. Aberdovey, 11th May, 1869.
EMIGRATION CLUBS.
EMIGRATION CLUBS. SFR,-In Clerkenwell and elsewhere, such Institutions are carried on with marked success. Each member is required to subscribe weekly, with the Understanding that should he wish to withdraw, he can' only forfeiting the entrance fee, which goes for expenses. At each meeting the president reads or speaks on emigration in general, or of some particular colony.— Discussion then follows. Each member, duly authenticated by the president, secretary, or treasurer, has a book to gather subscriptions for the society; but on the distinct understanding that such sums be placed to his individual credit for passage, &c. A circular with good substantial names for the Com- mittee should be freely circulated in the neighbourhood. Help will come. in; for the English love to "help them who help themselves Excellent and reliable books on each of the colonies (price 4d. to 7d.) are published by Messrs Algar, 11, Clements-larife, Lombard-street, and for 10s. a serviceable colonial library supplied. Good smppingagents are also obtainable. Emigration Clubs might easily be formed in most towns and villages, with great present and future benefits to the working classes. Let religion, and temperance hold a prominent place at these meetings. The whoie subject, is intensely interesting, and will amply repay the philanthropist, be he cleric or layman. One cannot but sincerely hope, that the whole question of pauper and assisted emigration, will, during the present session, be taken up by Government. Public lecturers might also be appointed. We should also like to hear the old popular song of Clieer boys Cheer!- no more of idle sorrow," again sung throughout old England to cheer up many a drooping heart. I have in Clerkenwell an Emigration Club of upwards of 300 members, and everything bids fair to be a complete success. I want funds to send off some families to Canada, and shall be very thankful to receive any subscriptions. I remain, sir, your obedient servant, A. STYLEMAN HERRING, Incumbent of St. Paul's Clerkenwell. 45, Colebrooke Row, London, Feb. 13th.
ABERYSTWYTH.
ABERYSTWYTH. THE PROPOSED UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF WALES. An important meeting of the committee connected with this national undertaking, was held on Friday last (too late for insertion in the Times), on the College premises. The following gentlemen were present:—Messrs Thomas Jones (in the chair), Richard Roberts, Morris Jones, M.D., Jonathan Pell, John Matthews, Thomas Davies, C. Rice Williams, M.D., John Williams (43, Terrace), John Wil- liams (Bridge-street), Richard Jones, Benjamin Hughes, Richard Morris, Rev. David Charles, B.A., secretary, Rev. E. Richards, Rev. D. Thomas. Mr Geo. Jones, architect, was likewise in attendance. The CHAIRMAN, after an encouraging and appropriate address, called upon the secretary kindly to explain the primary questions for consideration by the committee. The Rev. DAVID CHARLES, B.A., said it afforded him unspeakable pleasure to meet so many of the members of the local committee, after a considerable absence and much up-hill work in the prosecution of his arduous yet honourable mission. He very much appreciated the kind expressions from the chair, and the hearty and unanimous response with which they were received by all present. This enabled him to go on his way with increased cheer- fulness and renewed courage, and he hoped with the gener- ous co-operation of the committee and other friends in various directions sooner or later to carry this momentous enterprise to a successful issue. Interviews with sub- scribers, and personal experience every day increased in his opinion the desirability of practical steps being taken towards the completion of this spacious and magnificent building. This he thought was particularly the case in respect to local subscribers. Several indeed whom he could name had already expressed their readiness to pay up their promised subscriptions whenever the money was required to be expended on really permanent work in the progress of the building, and he had no doubt this feeling was pretty general among their friends in Aberystwyth and its vicinity; and moreover during the approaching summer a considerable number of visitors would come to this fashionable watering place, and seeing the work being actually done, would be favourably and practically af- fected. Under this impression he had laid the matter be- fore the Executive Committee in London. He was also indebted to Mr Pell and Dr Rice Wiliams for letters they had kindly written corroborative of his own opinions on this subject. The result of this was, that he had been authorized to take steps in the matter. He had con- sequently given instructions to the architect to prepare plans and specifications of the required work. He would therefore call upon Mr George Jones to explain the plans and read the specifications, which the committee would kindly deliberate upon and freely express their opinions. The ARCHITECT then submitted his plans, specifications, &c.. After having explained the whole to the general satisfaction of the committee, he was asked to be good enough to read the specification in respect to the contem- plated portion of the building now to be completed, the roofing, &c. They suggested sundry questions for con- sideration, which having been taken up in order and fully discussed, The CHAIRMAN said the whole was so satisfactory that nothing better could be done than to adopt it, which having been proposed and seconded, and put to the meet- ing, was unanimously passed. This portion of the work is intended to be commenced in June and finished in three months. It was next agreed that an advertisement for tenders should appear for two successive weeks in the following papers, namely :-Aberystwj?th Times, Aberystwyth Ob- server, The Builder, Oswestry Advertiser, Baner, Cambria Daily Leader (Saturday edition), Carnarvon Herald, Dydd, Herald Cymreig, Hereford Times, South Wales Press, and the Shrewsbury Chronicle.
BUILDING COMMITTEE.
BUILDING COMMITTEE. For increased convenience and dispatch of business, the following gentlemen were nominated to act in this capa- city :—Messrs John Matthews (Mayor), Thomas Jones, Jonathan Pell, Richard Roberts, and Dr C. Rice Williams.
LOCAL PROMISES AND PAYMENTS.
LOCAL PROMISES AND PAYMENTS. Mr RICHARD ROBERTS enquired how things now stood with regard to the amount promised and paid at Aber- ystwyth. The SECRETARY stated it was his impression that at an early period in the history of this project the inhabitants of this place were represented as likely to subscribe about £2,500, being one-fourth the purchase price of these re- markable premises. This was an admirable beginning, and he had no doubt after a little while it would be happily realised, and, so far as Aberystwyth was concerned, it would doubtless be money well spent. The present amount of actual promises in this place wastl,363 Ils. 6d. or thereabouts, and actual payments, E667 6s. Gd. or thereabouts. He had no doubt that immediately it was seen that they were in earnest, and the work was proceed- ing, old promises would be executed and a considerable number of new subscribers would be discovered.
THE INDEPENDENT ORDER OF ODDFELLOWS.
THE INDEPENDENT ORDER OF ODDFELLOWS. The first instalments from the Rheidol and St. David's Lodges in the town were to hand, and it was confidently expected the members of the Temple of Love and others in the district would shortly carry out their generous inten- tions in this patriotic movement. The second instalment is intended to be paid in August, and the final one at Christmas. It was also reported that the children's collections had realized £13.
VISITORS.
VISITORS. On excursion days an immense number of persons ob- tain admission to the college, and it becomes very difficult to restrain their wanderings, more particularly along the unfinished parts of the building; hence the necessity of some arrangement being made to protect the premises from injury, while at the same time the public are allowed to enjoy the pleasure of an inspection. It was therefore proposed and carried that henceforth, on excursion days, admission be by ticket, 6d. each.
OPENING OF TENDERS.
OPENING OF TENDERS. It having been decided that these are to be delivered not later than the 31st inst., it was agreed that the next meeting of the General Committee take place on the after- noon or evening of Tuesday, the 1st of June. At this stage of the meeting several of the friends present favourably and freely expressed their sentiments with regard to the progress and improving prospects of this important project. In conclusion the Rev. D. CHARLES, M.A., the per- severing secretary, gave a brief but interesting outline of his visit to London, Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol, Shrewsbury, Festiniog, &c. In each of these places he had obtained subscriptions, and laid the foundation for a future more extensive canvass. With regard to London, he had found during his late visit that there were a much larger number of comfortably circumstanced Welshmen there than he had ever imagined, and to do anything like justice to the work he would require to spend some two months at least in the metropolis. As they were all aware a most enthusiastic meeting had been held in Lon- don some time ago. He had no doubt the words spoken on that occasion, reports of which were given in a great number of papers, and circulated through the length and breadth of the country, had already exerted a beneficial influence upon the friends of Wales. He had had an interview with a goodly number of the members of Par- liament for the Principality, and several of them had expressed their warm sympathy with the movement, and he had no doubt that by and by they would honourably figure in the subscription list. He had recently received a cheque from Sir Francis Crossley, Bart., for 2100, accompanied with most kind observations as to the early realization of their highest wishes. He had likewise met and enjoyed a very pleasant chat with Mr Hugh Jones, merchant, of London, who had already, as they knew, given 2100, and in proof of his increasing practical sym- pathy with this question, had kindly proposed the fol- lowing intention, which, by the by, would not be a bad challenge either to those who had already subscribed like himself, or to others who had hitherto remained undecided in the matter viz., that he would give again one hundred guineas to the funds of the proposed Uni- versity College of Wales, on condidition nine more in sympathy with the better education of the sons of Walia were found prepared to do the same. He (Mr Charles) trusted this generous challenge would be productive of much fruit at an early date, and who could tell but that Mr Hugh Jones, or some other gentlemen of like spirit, might, by the success of this, be induced to repeat such expressions of munificence. Young men in mercantile establishments had also evinced their readiness to do all in their power to further the object of this truly national and non-sectarian scheme. He had almost forgotten to say, what he should have been very sorry to have for- gotten, that the ladies had been of very considerable service in assisting him in the production of favourable impressions upon gentlemen who in many cases had been more than a match for him. A vote of thanks to the chairman, &c., closed the meeting. COUNTY COURT, FRIDAY, May 7th.—Before A. J. Johnes, Esq., Judge. JURY CASE.—RICHARD DAVIES V. EDWARD RICHARDS. The plaintiff, who is a farmer living at Troedrhiew, sued the defendant for k7 8s., alleged to be due for sheep sold to defendant. Defendant pleaded P.8 5s. 6d. as a set-off, 25 188. of which was stated to be due for wheat in the straw, which was purchased by plaintiff for a man named Evan Davies, at defendant's sale in October, 1866; and J22 7s. 6eL for one half share of £4 15s., being the costs of an action brought by defendant in the Aber- ystwyth County Court at defendant's suit, but at the request of the plaintiff, against David James, milkman. Mr Crealock for plaintiff, and Mr Atwood for defend- ant. The following gentlemen were sworn on the jury:— Messrs J Jones, Commerce House, grocer, E. Ellis Princess-street, grocer, Lewis Jones, Compton House, grocer, Thomas Howells, Bridge-street, grocer, and Thos. Samuel, Bridge-street, currier. Mr Crealock, in opening the case for the plaintiff, said he should deny the set-off. His Honour—Are any of the prices disputed. Mr Atwood—No, your Honour. If I shall cross-ex- amine the plaintiff it will shorten the case considerably. Plaintiff was then put in the box and in cross-examina- tion said that 23 was paid by defendant on account of an original claim amounting to about 210. The 23 was paid to plaintiff on the street in Aberystwyth. In 1866 plaintiff had a bill of sale against defendant. Plaintiff remem- bered defendant coming to him previous to the sale and telling him that Evan Davies intended buying some grain at the sale; defendant told plaintiff he would not be re- sponsible for what Evan Davies bought. Evan Davies wanted witness to go bail, but he refused. Evan Davies bought four mows of grain in the straw, but witness did not authorize Davies to buy them. Witness denied that he promised to pay half of the costs in a suit against David James, milkman. Mr Crealock contended that the statute of frauds ap- plied in this case; he could also prove that the goods sold at defendant's sale at Cwmheilog in 1866 were debited to Evan Davies, and not to the plaintiff. Mr John Evans, auctioneer, was called and stated that he sold a quantity of grain in October, 1866, at defendant's sale; his son made the entries in the book. William Evans was called and stated that he made the entries in the sale book produced at Cwmheilog sale in October, 1866. There were no goods debited to the plain- tiff. Some mows of grain were debited to Evan Davies. Mr Atwood addressed the jury for the defendant, and called Edward Richards, the defendant, who stated that he had a sale at Cwmheilog in October, 1866. Saw Evan Davies before the auction; he talked about going to the auction; witness said he did not want any of his (Evan Davies's) sort at the auction unless he had good bail. Witness heard some mows knocked down at his sale to Evan Davies. Witness went immediately to Evan, and said to him, I thought I told you not to come here." They had sharp words and Richard Davies, the plaintiff, said he would go bail for Evan Davies, stating that he (Evan Davies) must not "clem." The next day there was a sale of horses at witness's farm, and Evan Davies was again there. Plain- tiff asked witness to take two of the mows back as Evan Davies only wanted four. Witness heard plaintiff tell Evan Davies to take the mows home. Plaintiff advised witness to put David James in the court and said he would pay half the costs. Cross examined-I never sent in a bill to plaintiff for these mows. I have bought sheep off him, and an account has been carried on between us. There were no bills sent to any of the purchasers. I did tell plaintiff that he must pay for the mows this was about six months after the auction. That was the only time I mentioned it to him. The whole of the four mows were knocked down to Evan Davies the first day of the sale. Evan Davies should not have had them if Richard Davies had not promised to go bail. I have had some conversation with Evan Davies respecting this action. I told him he must come and tell the truth. Did not promise him as good a team of horses as any in Cardiganshire if he would come down to give evidence against Richard Davies. When the £ 3 was paid on the street plaintiff did not ask me when I was going to pay the balance. Plaintiff was referee in an arbitration case between me and another farmer, and he did me a very great injustice. The claim for the mows has been put in since the award. I never sent in a bill until this action was brought. John Morgan said he lived at Pencarnau. Was traveling with Evan Davies. Mr Atwood—Conversation between Evan Davies and anyone else, without my client being present, is not evidence. One of the jury asked why Evan Davies was not brought forward. Mr Crealock, in answer, said Evan Davies was not at all connected with the plaintiff's case, but the set-off was supported by a statement between Evan Davies and the defendant. He, Mr Crealock, thought Evan Davies would have been subpoenaed here for the defendant. If he (Mr Crealock) had received the slightest intimation that the defendant was not going to bring Evan Davies here to-day, he (Mr Crealock) should most undoubtedly have subpoenaed him. His Honour, in summing up, said he agreed with Mr ¡ Crealock that it was not part of the plaintiff's case to bring Evan Davies forward, and it was very strange he was not brought here. They would have to decide whether the j plaintiff had become bail for Evan Davies or not. The real point for the jury to decide was, which of the parties J they believed—the plaintiff or defendant. The jury retired for a short time, and on their return gave a verdict for defendant with respect to the sale of the mows the real result being a verdict of ki 10.3. for plain- tiff, with costs, as Mr Atwood could not prove that the plaintiff made himself liable for half of the costs in the action with David James.
ABERDOVEY.
ABERDOVEY. PETTY SESSIONS, FRIDAY, May 6th-Before W. W. E. Wynne, Esq., John Pughe, Esq., and C. A. Thruston, Esq. Common Assault.-Thomas Jones was charged by Sil- vanus Jones with assaulting him on the 25th of April.— Silvanus J ones said I am the complainant and brother to defendant. I live at Abergroes, and my brother at Braichycaeau farm. On the 25th of April I had been up to see the sheep, and was coming down through a field I have when I saw a lot of my brother's sheep on my part of the mountain. It was about midday. I went to the mountain to send them home. When 'I sent the dog after them, my brother prevented my dog from fol- j lowing the sheep and turned him back. I afterwards sent my dog after them, when my brother came after me. I ran towards David Rees's pass, and when in the act of running from him I received a kick from my brother. I had not done anything to him but sent his sheep home. I received a second kick until I fell on my face. David Rees, Bwlch, and Davies, Dyffryn-gwyn, were within sight, and I called them to witness. I received a third kick from my brother when I was on the ground. He then left, when I called to the witnesses. I had not struck nor touched him before getting the kicks, nor said anything to him. I have been obliged to appear before the magistrates twice before to complain of my brother. —Cross-examined I did not strike nor touch my brother, nor had we a word together before he kicked. My brother was not sending my sheep back. The first time I saw him was when he was sending my dog back. —Re- examined It is a fact that I and my brother are not on speaking terms. I have not spoken to him for many months. -The Bench decided to hear the other case, which was a cross-summons by Thomas Jones v. Silvanus Jones. —Thomas Jones said I remember the 25th of April last. I was in the house until a quarter to twelve o'clock, and my wife went to the door, and told me that five sheep were coming down, belonging to my brother. I went out and followed the sheep very fast. I was from fifteen to twenty yards behind them. My brother then came in view he was behind me. He began to run after me and sent his dog after my sheep. I am afraid of his dog, as he has killed sheep belonging to me. I was then on my brother's land. I turned the dog back. My brother said, Why do you turn my dog back have I no right to send him after sheep on my own land ?" He said he was not afraid of me and struck me. He turned and fell over a clump of heath. I gave him a light kick, and another as soon as I could after. I did not kick him on the ground, nor did I strike him at alL I did not see David Rees at the time. He could not have seen me. We were on the other side of a mound, and could not be seen.—Cross- examined I was served with a summons by my brother on the 1st of May. After I got it I went to Aberystwyth to consult an attorney, and afterwards I got out a sum- mons against my brother. The reason why I did not take out a summons against him before was because he was my brother. If he had not been I would have summoned him before, as I suffer a great deal from him.-David Rees said: On the 25th of April last the first thing I heard was a noise. I then saw Silvanus Jones first and Thomas Jones following him within a short distance. Silvanus Jones appeared as if he were rising from the ground, and Thos. Jones following his brother. Silvanus Jones called to me, and Mr Davies, my neighbour, as wit- nesses. It was Silvanus Jones who called. They then separated. I did not see Thomas Jones kicking Silvanus, I only saw the latter in the act of rising, and being followed by Thomas. The Bench decided that being brothers, the only way they would deal with them was in binding each over in the sum of £10, with a satisfactory bail for 910, to keep the peace towards each other for twelve months. Breach of the Turnpike Act.—John Lewis, of Aberdovey, was charged by William Ellis, surveyor, with allowing his donkey to stray on the turnpike road.—Wm. Ellis said On the 29th of April last I saw John Lewis's donkey on the highway near the town. I have warned him several times. This is the first time he has been sum- moned.—Fined 6d., and 8s. costs, or in default seven days' imprisonment. The fine was paid. Common Assault, and Breach of Master and Workman Act. -Richard Hughes charged his master with assaulting him, and David Rees charged Richard Hughes with de- serting his service.—Richard Hughes said-On the 14th of April last, I was leaving my place. I offered to accom- pany Mr Rees that morning to go to Sergeant Roberts to give myself up for deserting my service. He came down to take a summons against me, but he refused to let me accompany him. I was at Dyffryn-gwyn speaking with the servant, when my master said, "Will you come ?" that was to Aberdovey to Roberts. When we went a short distance, he turned round, and told me to go to my work. I refused, when we had some words, and he struck me on my head with his stick until I was stunned. He after- wards beat me very severely, hit me on my arm, and the marks are still on my coat. He jumped on me, and kept me down for a long time. When the people came there to separate us, he had his elbow on my mouth, and was very near choking me. We were separated by them, a-Twj we left each other.—Cross-examined: I did not challenge you on that morning to fight.—David Davies said I re- collect a fight between D. Rees and R. Hughes. I was at a stable and R. Hughes came there and said he was going to Aberdovey to the police officer. He said he had been to Maesgwerngoch. Mr Rees came by and called out, "Will you come?" They went together, David Rees first, R. Hughes following. In about three-quarters of an hour later a girl came down and called out that there was a man up there nearly being killed. I went up to them along the road; my brother-in-law went before me. I got Mr Re es up. It was rather dark* and I did not know un- til then that R. Hughes was under Mm. Rees asked if I had not heard that a man was nearly killing him. I said not, but that a girl had told me some one was being nearly killed. I took hold of Rees and got him away. Richard Hughes was bleeding on the head.—Cross-ex- c amined: R. Hughes told me what. his errand at Maes- gwerngoch was, that he had lent the son some money, and had gone for the amount. I did not hear the girl say that it was the Bryndinas man who was near being killed, but I was afterwards told that she had said so. -The cross- summons was then heard.—Thomas Williams said I am the son of Maesgwerngoch. Hughes came to our house and said he had left his place; that there had been a little quarrel. He said, I did not get my tea yesterday-I don't know why but I did not get it. Master was in a rage that I was going to leave then."—Defendant entered into a long statement to vindicate himself, when the Bench advised each party to pay his own costs, and settle the matter amicably. Both parties agreed, and both summonses were dismissed. Neglect of Family. Henry Smith, labourer, was charged by Mr Edward Bell, relieving officer, for leaving his wife and children chargeable to the parish.—Mr Ed- ward Bell said defendant left his family in September last year, and his family became chargeable in November last. They had received in relief since that time, S3 16s. 6d. Defendant said that he went away in search of work and had sent money home while he was in work until Novem- ber. He had been out of work until three weeks ago he was now at work under Mr Scott, the drainage contractor. The case was adjourned until the next petty sessions, in order to enable defendant to come to terms with the parish authorities. Breach of Highway Act.-Lewis Lewis, of Yynsmaen- gwyn Mill, was charged with allowing his pigs to trespass on the highway near Bryncrug. -Sergeant Roberts said On the 12th of last month I was at Bryncrug. I saw four pigs belonging to defendant on the road. The gate of the field was open. I drove them home and it appeared the gate was not in a fit state to keep the pigs in. —Fined 6d., and 8s., costs. Breach of Turnpike Act.-William James, of Dyffryn, was charged with allowing his cattle to trespass on the turnpike road, near Caethle. William Ellis, surveyor said On the 25th of April I saw cows and a bull belong! ing to defendant m the road near Caethle. The bull was a savage one. I have cautioned defendant several times Fined Is., and 8s. costs.—ElHs Jones the Gasworks, was charged with allowing his donkey to stray on the turnpike road, at Aberdovey. William Ellis said: I found defendant's donkey in the road on the 27th of April last. Defendant said that his donkey was a very young one, about eight months old, and jumped over the fence to other donkeys. There were two other donkeys in the road at the same time as his, and the owners of those had not been summoned. The Surveyor said that he did not summon those parties, as it was the first time he had seen their donkeys. The Bench thought the surveyor ought not to show favour to anyone, and dismissed the case with a caution. -Thomas Andrews was charged with riding without reins on a cart belonging to his master, John Davies. P.C. Cadwaladr Jones said: On the even- ing of the 21st of April I met Thomas Andrews riding in a cart without reins. He refused to give me his name. He is a servant with John Davies, a carrier at Machyn- lleth. Defendant did not appear. Fined 6d., and 11s. 6d. costs, or seven days' imprisonment.—John Davies, a carrier from Machynlleth, was charged with having a cart in his possession, and used without his name being upon it. P.C. Cadwaladr Jones said On the 22nd of April I met Thomas Andrews, the defendant in the last case, driving a cart belonging to his master, John Davies, without a name being on the same. Fined 6d., ana lis. 6d. costs, or seven days' imprisonment.—Rachael Hughes and Daniel Hughes, of Pensarn, near Towyn, were charged with allowing their cattle to stray on the turnpike road, near Pontdysyny. P.C. Metcalfe said: On the 30th March I found a young cow and calf on the turnpike road, near Dysyny Bridge. Fined Is., and 8s. Obstructing a Footpath.—Mr Richard Griffith, of Bryn- cwy, was charged with ploughing a public footpath through one of his fields. —Mr Thomas Edwards, clerk of the Towyn Local Board of Health, appeared to prosecute. —P'C. Metcalf On or about the 26th of February or the beginning of March last a public footpath going through a field waB ploughed up, close to the ditch. I dont know whether it was ploughed the same as by the last tenant last year.—Defendant said I did not plough any part of the field but what had been ploughed by my predecessors. I ploughed the furrows back in order to widen the path. It is now in a much better condition than it has been for years. Instead of doing any damage. I have, by plough- ing it up this year and hardening it, greatly improved it.— Mr Edwards thought that all the damage was done by his predecessors, and not by him.—The Bench considered it their duty to inflict a fine, in order to show that it was illegal to plough up any public paths, and to award nomi- nal damages. The fine would be 5s.; damage, Is.; and 7s. 6d. costs.-Paid.
----l FRIDAY.
l FRIDAY. In the House of Lords, Earl Granville, replying t« a 8119gestion by the Earl of Ellenborough, stated that it might be necessary to postpone the Whitsuntide holidays in order to deal with the Bill to disqualify the Mayor of pork. The Marquis Townshend withdrew the Bills he had introduced to amend the Reformatory Schools Act the Industrial Schools Act. Several Bills having been, advanced a stage, the Marquis of Salisbury, m ac- ^^dance with the notice he had given, called attention, to the views expressed by Mr Bright, in a recent speech in the House of Commons, with respect to Irish policy, and Sisked how far they were to be accepted as the views of the Government. He complained that the Prime Minister, instead Of checking the "rash and hasty language of his collea-nje himself indulged in such language as would lead to the°knpression that the Government was prepared to yield lto pressure. Earl Granville fainted out that Mr bright, as the Marquis of Salisbury could but be aware, tad referred to a land scheme \Vhich he had propounded 80ra4e years ago, and which did not at all affect the rights property, as did a plan which the Irish Secretary of the ^te Ministry had proposed. With respect to the plan ,i11ch the Government was maturing on the subject, and Much it was intended to introduce to Parliament next Session, he thought the House should at present be con- tent with the Ministerial assurance that nothing would be 4°ne which would subvert the rights of property. The of Carnarvon, Lord Cairns, the Marquis of Clanri- carde,and Earl Grey all complained of the Government ot at once explaining its views upon the Irish land ques- tion, as the language -of Mr Bright upon the subject, ^less disclaimed by -kis colleagues, was likely to be pro- active of tnuoh mischief. The Earl of Kimberley and the Lord Chancellor defended the Government with Aspect to its reticence, and accused the Opposition of 3ggrava-ting the evils they professed a wish to allay, by attributing dark and mysterious designs to the Govern- ment. The subject then dropped. The House of Commons, during the afternoon sitting, Passed the Irish Church Bill through committee amid loud cheers from the Ministerial benches. They commenced "rith the consideration of the 58th clause, which relates to enactments Tespecting vacancies in any see, benefice, or ^thedra! preferment before January 1st, 1871. A proviso \V added 'to the clause, upon the motion of Mr Gladstone, |° the effect that if the holder of any archbishopric, bishopric, benefice, &c., should be appointed to fill a Vacancy in any other benefice, he should still retain the life estate and interests, and all the rights and privileges to which he would have been entitled if he had not ac- J^pted^he appointment. Several amendments to succeed- 1llg clauses were moved by members of the Opposition, but Were not pressed to a division. In clause 3, which had been reserved, it was agreed, on the motion of Mr Glad- Stone, to insert as the names of the commissioners Viscount itonck, the Right Hon. J. C. Lawson (one of the justices the Court of Common Pleas in Ireland), and Mr G. A. Hamilton. So soon as the Bill had passed through com- mittee, shortly before seven o'clock, the sitting was ^journed, and when the House resumed at nine there ^as a count-out.
MONDAY.
MONDAY. The House of Lords went into committee upon the •Parochial Schools (Scotland) Bill. Whilst clause 19, re- lating to the character -of the instruction to be given, was Under consideration, the Duke of Argyll, who has charge of the Bill, stated that it was desirable that denomina- tional schools in Scotland should be put an end to, because they neither covered the whole field of education, nor were they necessary to secure religious teaching. The Bill Passed through committee, with some modification of the clauses. In the House of Commons Mr Maguire gave notice that on the following day <he should move for the withdrawal the Mayor of Cork's Disability Bill. In reply to Lord '"ohn Manners, Air *G. Fortescue stated that the Govern- ment was using every exertion to discover the. perpetrators of the recent agrarian outrages in Ireland, and was not Without hope of a successful result. The Government had ftlso under consideration the question how to render the Powers of the Lord-Lieutenant more speedy and effectual. A motion of Mr Corrance for a select committee with Aspect to the operation of the poor laws led to some dis- cussion. Mr Corrance thought some modification was 1'equisite, especially with regard to the education of Pauper children, and for improvement in this re- ject he suggested the establishment of district schools. He further suggested that assistance should be given -from the -rates to benevolent societies and sick clubs. Mr A. Pell thought this would be a very objec- tionable mode (jf subsidising such societies. He expressed opinion ■that tJhe increase of pauperism was merely temporary, and'pointed out that even with this increase the oost of the present system was £ 2,000,000 less than Wilder the old-plan. Mr Floyer urged the desirableness of ^tending 'the out-door .relief system. M«r Denison con- tended that the chief defects in the present system were the weakness-ef the central board and the lodging of the Sick and infirm in the same building as the able-bodied. Mr W. 1JiI. Smith'contended that, however beneficially it might work in other parts of the kingdom, the result of the operation of the poor-law in the metropolis showed t need for its revision in the interests of the ratepayers. Mr Samuda also urged that as far as concerned the east •of London'the poor law system was a'failure, tending *? encourageratherthan to diminish pauperism. The Pre- sident of the Poor 4jaw Board was glad to find from the totte of the debasfceethatthe fact was beginning to be re- Cognised that in the management of workhouses they were Erring on the side /expenditure. At the close of the dis- cussion Mr Corrance withdrew his motion. Mr Layard Saovedtfor leave'to repeal certain portions of the Act 28 ftnd 29 Vict., cap. 49, with respect to the erection. of the Uew law courts • on ."the Carey-street site, and to enable the Compiissioners ef Works to acquire a new site for the concentration and erection of the Courts of Justice. lie explained that the object of the Bill was to carry Out the propoog .,of.the Chancellor of the Exchequer, ^hieh was fully -reported at the time, between Howard- gtreet, Strand, and -the..Thames Embankment. After IJoltle discussion, leave was given, and the Bill read a first time. The House.adjoumed at 2.7 a.m.
TUESDAY.
TUESDAY. The House of Lords negatived without a division the second reading of the Marquis of Townshend's Bill to em- J)ow>er magistrates, in cases of aggravated assaults on Xnromen and children, to order corporal punishment, instead of the long terms of imprisonment authorized by the Aggravated Assaults Act. To prevent a similar fate oefalliag his Bill to protect the property of lodgers, the marquis withdrew that measure. The Sea Birds' Preser- vation Bill passed the House. Lord Kinnaird obtained an order for the legal authorities to make a report with refer- ence tcftbecase of MriLisle, who was killed on the North British Railway, the object of his lordship being to show that the law and practice-in Scotland with respect to eases of death iloyaccident j'andj violencel are of a very wnsatis- factory character. When the House of Commons met at noon, the crowded entranoe ii6ud full- home manifested the great interest felt in the fate -of thd.O'Suilivan"Disability Bill, to make pro- gress with which was the object of the afernoon sitting. But those who had collectedj-round the entrance and imthe lobby to see the Mayor of .Cork make his way to the .bar, as well as the distinguished "strangers" who occupied seats in the galleries with the-expectation of looking on an exciting scene and listening to an animated debate, were doomed to disappointment, the ugh to many probably the t disappointment was an agreeable one. Mr Maguire, in- stead of moving a direct negative to the Bill, as he had in- tended, stated that he had received a letter from the Mayor' of Cork intimating his intention of resigning but at the same time solemnly declaring that the seditious language attributed to him did not in any way express What he really meaat. Mr Maguire expressed a hope that e after this intimation from Mr O'Sullivan the Government Would not proceed with its Bill. The O'Donoghue also informed the house that he had been authorized by the Mayor of Cork to state that it was his iintention that even- ing to send in his resignation to the corporation of Cork. Mr Gladstone announced that as Mr O'Sullivan had really, though not formally, resigned, the Government would stay -all penal prosecutions against him, but would postpone for a month the withdrawal of the Bill as a precaution Against his; re-election. Mr Maguire assured the Govern- ment that Mr O'Sullivan had no intention of offering himself for re-election, neither had the corporation any intention of re-electing him; and Mr Downing, member for Cork coiinty, went so far as to state that Mr •O'Sullivan, after the course he had taken that day, would never again be chief magistrate of the city of Cork. y After some conversation the House resolved, on the motion of the Attorney-General for Ireland, to discharge the second reading and postpone the Bill for a month. •On the House resuming at nine o'clock, Mr Fowler moved resolution to commit the assembly to an expression of opinion that the law as to the duty on the succession to eal property and as to the exemption of certain kinds of Property from probate duty is iinjust and anomalous, and *efcs the immediate attention of the Government The Chancellor of the Exchequer having pointed out that the referred to was only part of a much larger one, involving the entire problem of the principles upon which Property was taxed, and stated that it was undesysble to unseit men's minds by a premature discussion which IVould lead to nothing, Mr Fowler withdrew his motion.
COUNNTY FINANCIAL BOARDS.!
COUNNTY FINANCIAL BOARDS. Mr K. Hugessen, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to establish county financial boards in accordance with the speech from .the Throne, observed that in doing so he had llo desire to impute mal-administration or want of efficiency to those who hitherto had the entire control of the county- rate expenditure. It was only fair, when the Government Were proposing to interfere with that which had hitherto been the monopoly of the county magistrates, that they F3hould express the value which they attached to the ser- vices county magistrates had hitherto gratuitously ren- dered. It was not to be supposed that the interests of the Ratepayers had been wilfully neglected under the present system Many persons who complained of county expend- iture were not aware how much of the expenditure was levied under special Acts of Parliament for which the Magistrates were not responsible. (Hear, hear.) He did !lot think that in this proposal anything ought to be introduced which would be unpopular with the class to Which he himself belonged—that of county magistrates and county gentlemen. (Hear, hear.) In framing the Present Bill the Government had avoided any lengthy legis- lation or cumbrous machinery, and whereas the Bills introduced by Mr Milner Gibson in 1850 and 1852 com- prised 120 or 130 clauses each, and last year's Bill reached 145 clauses, the Bill he had the honour to lay upon the table contained the moderate number of twenty clauses. (Hear, hear.) The Government had also avoided adopting the permissive principle, which had worked so much mis- chief with respect to highways. What the Bill practically roposed to do was to divide the business at present transacted by the courts of quarter sessions into judicial and administrative business. With regard to the former, H would be reserved entirely to the court of quarter ses- sions to trau^.ct that particular business; with regard to the fatter, it was proposed to en^rafi on the court of quarter sesdfons a body wliinb^ terms of equality with the members of it, VvittM K'ansact the administrative business of the court. f^Aancial Boards would be consti- tuted, and would resist of ex-officio and representative membèrs-th county magistrates being the former and the latter being elected in a way he would describe. To the magistrates in court of quarter sessions assembled would be reserved the trial of prisoners and the hearing of appeals, and the financial business of the court would be left to the financial boards. A power of appeal to the Home Secretary as to whether a question belonged tpthe court of quarter sessions or the financial board would be given. With respect to the gaols, the visiting magistrates would, as in boroughs, have the control of the gaols, and the financial boards would regulate their finance. I he general result of the Bill would be that the financial arrangements of the Board would be placed in the hands of the court's financial boards, while all the other official business of the court would be left m the hands of the magistrates, as at present. The Bill further enacted that the"accounts should be audited by a responsible person to be appointed by the Board. (Hear, hear.) Now, with be appointed by the Board. (Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to the representath e system, the Government had taken the Board of Guardians as their constituent body, and they proposed to regulate the number of represent- atives according to the gross estimate of the rental in the I respective unions. In counties of England, unions having a gross rental of less than £ 50,000 would elect one repre- sentative each; unions having a rental from £ 50,000 to £100,000, would elect two; from 2100,000 to £ 150,000, three; and above £ 150,000, four, the highest number of representatives that any one union could return. In Wales they took the figures P,25 000 instead of k-50,000, and so on in proportion, so as to arrive at the same result. Experience would show how this arrangement would act. They were dealing with a matter in which it was neces- sary to proceed cautiously, but they sought to improve and not to overturn the present system. (Hear, hear.) He did not think that much objection would be raised to the plan by magistrates who had given their attention to the subject. It might be said that the representative element was not strong enough, but that opinion was founded on the assumption that the persons sent as representatives to the boards would be opposed to the previously existing members. He had always thought that that was a most fallacious objection, as was proved at the last general election. At every division that took place at any financial 'board there would be ex-officio and representa- tive members on one side and the other, and if there should be a large number of the representative body in the same lobby, they would probably be in the majority, be- cause they would have a great number of the ex-officio members with them. Some persons might object to the appointment of another board to deal with the valuation of property, but it was a different thing to find out how taxation should be levied and to appoint a body to ad- minister that taxation. It would be found that the two plans might go forward at the same time without inter- fering with each other. An objection had been raised by gentlemen who desired to have a financial board composed entirely of elected representatives, but he doubted very much whether at that moment that was practicable. The passing of this Bill would not stand in the way of the adoption of any scheme that might hereafter be deemed advisable. If it did not succeed the ground would be open hereafter for future legislation. If they could add to the vitality of the governing body by the introduction of the representative element, they would have no difficulty hereafter in extending the principle. The result of every enquiry showed that they should strengthen the present system, and not subvert it. He would not say that they could effect any great reduction of expenditure by the adoption of this plan, but it would promote good feeling between the magistrates and ratepayers. The proposal was very favourably received on both sides of the House-only Mr Hunt apparently anticipating any difficulties in its way-and after a brief discussion leave was given to bring in a Bill to carry it into effect.