The Welshman

THE DISSENTERS AND THE IRISH CHURCH. I TO THE EDITOR OF THE WELSHMAN." Siit,-The tone of Mr Prydderch's letter seems to me to indicate that he has quite despaired of proving his groundless, and I am sorry to add, malicious charge. Like a skilful but foiled tactician, he endeavours to shift his ground and attacks my arguments in defence of the Irish Church Establishment. He is at liberty to do so, if he wishes, only let him remember that this mode of going on has nothing to do with proving the charge. The charge was this that the Petition was said to be against Popery," while in reality it was for the maintenance of the Irish Church. The arguments with which I supported the Irish Church may be or may not be fallacious, but the fallaciousness or the truth thereof neither proves or disproves the charge. And if the History of the Irish Church has anything to do with the controversy, I should like Mr Prydderch to point to any page of it which can throw light upon the subject. Now, for Mr rrydderch's questions, and very formid- able they are Question 1.—" How was the case stated to Mr E. J. Evans, Llanina Arms, when he was asked to sign the Petition. Against what the Petition was said to be ? Answer.—The question was stated to Mr E. J. Evans by reading the Petition to him. The Petition was said to be against Mr Gladstone's resolutions and for the maintenance of the Irish Church Q. 2. — Did any of the Dissenters sign it ? A —Yes. Their names are Mr Griffith Davies, Rose- hill Arms Mr David Rees, watchmaker—Dissenters to the back bone. Q. 3.—"Did they sign it from a mere wish to pro- vent the Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Irish Church ?" A.-As far as it is possible for me to judge of their wishes and motives, they did. I take their actions as an index to their wishes. If they did not. why should they sign the Petition at all? And if they did not sign it from such a wish, they were dishonest. But whv should I be responsible for their dishonesty ? Q. 4.- Was it not signed to prevent the rapid I spread of Popery? A. —No, it was not. Nor no one said it was against Popery, and therefore no one could sign it on that ground. Every signature to our Petition was the signature of persons of mature age, and not of young children of 10 year of age and below. Now that Mr Prydderch has given me a clue of the source of his information I am not surprised that he scatters his egregious falsehoods broadcast. I believe that he extorts false information from those who are under his care. I will not, however, be quite so un- charitable as to charge him with this but I have not the slightest doubt that he is behind the curtain and pulls the strings to move the puppets at his own will. But in these days of electioneering agitation, I suppose Dissenting Preachers have received a dispensation which allows them to say whatever they like with im- punity. I am glad to find that Mr P. has profitted by my hints. His style is improving, but it is far from what it should be. I am really sorry for him that he could not find a more honourable cause to flesh his maiden lance. Yours sincerely, Nov 23, 1858. D. LEWIS LLOYD,

THE ALLEGED INCREASE OF INSANITY. There is a very common notion that insanity has of late years much increased in this country. The idea is, we believe, chiefly traceable to the official publication, from time to time, of the number of insane persons supported out of the poor rates. Pauper insanity forms so large a portion of the whole amount of English insanity that any serious change in the parish lists of lunatics and idiots will materialy affect the total result. The Poor Law Office has published for a series of years, rather fitfully, as the annexed table will show, in the earlier time, but subsequently with greater frequency, the statistics which must be our guide in this inquiry — Number of Insane Paupers officially recorded other than those chargeable to Counties or Boroughs, on the 1st day of January, in the years named. Population Recorded Years. of England and Number of Insane Wales. Paupers. 1836* 14,928,000 18,667 1842* 16,130,000 15,914 1843* 16,332,000 16,764 1844* 16,535,000 17,355 1857 19,251,000 27,693 1859 19,687,000 30,318 1860 19,903,000 31,543 1861 20,119,000 32,920 1862 20,336,000 34,271 1863 20,554,000 36,158 1864 20,772,000 37,576 1865 20,991,000 38,487 1866 21,210,000 39,827 1867 21,430,000 41,276 1868 21,649,000 43,158 In 1836 the return was made in respect of a given day of July; 1842-44 for a day in August. Comparing the last return with the first in the table, we find that in the interval of thirty-two years, 1836-1868, the recorded number of pauper lunatics and idiots has increased upwards of 210 per cent.—an increase which, of course, is out of all proportion to the growth of the population in the time. Barley two-thirds of the kingdom had been formed into unions in 1836, and several years subsequently we find the Commissioners in Lunacy complaining of the omission of numbers from the parochial officers' returns. However, the figures for 1836, whatever be their defects, show the proportion of the known insane poor to every 10,000 of the population to have been 9.2. In 1843—that is to say eight years afterwards-the ratio had risen to 10.5. Speaking of private as well as pauper patients, the Commissioners observed in their report for 1847 There are in England and Wales alone, according even to the returns, more than 23,000 persons of un- sound mind. These returns, however, are notoriously imperfect, falling far short of the actual amount, and they do, not, moreover, embrace the whole of a numerous class, who are termed imbecile persons, having been so from birth or become so from senility "—persons [the Commissioners state] who are incapable of manag- ing their own affairs efficiently, being on the verge of idiotcy. They placed the numbers of pauper patients in the same year at 18,000, and the patients of the higher and middle classes at 5,000. The visiting Commissioners estimated the insane in workhouses to have been at least one-third over the number returned by the parish officers." Individuals whom the Com- missioners said were on the verge of idiotcy" must, we imagine, be of those who, or whose maladies, were described in a subsequent return by such loose and unscientific terms as feeble," fits," idiotic fits," "mental weakness," semi-idiot," 11 silly," "simple," weak," &c. The Poor Law authorities seem to have printed no return between 1844 and 1857. At the last date the numbers had risen to 27,693 or 14.4 per 10,000 of popu- lation. But in 1852 the Commissoners in Lunacy are again found explaining the apparent increase of insanity. The newly prescribed quarterly visits of the union medical officers to the insane poor cannot fail, the Commissioners thought, to bring to light numerous cases of lunacy and idiotcy to be found among paupers who are living at large with relatives or friends," was given as one reason for a fuller record. Then people who themselves had never had parish relief have been permitted to place lunatic relatives in the county asylum under an arrangement with the guardians for afterwards reimburising to the parish the whole or part of their charge for their maintenance,' and thus appear to have entered on the guardians' lists. Another cause of increas was found in the practice of transferring lunatics from the priviate patient to the pauper class. Indeed, it may be said with truth that except what are termed the opulent classes, any protracted attack of insanity, from the heavy expense which its treatment entails, and the fatal interruption which it causes to everything like aciive industry, seldom fails to reduce its immediate victims, and generally also their families, to poverty, and ultimately to pauperism." The Commissioners further notice as a significant fact that the increase in the number of private patients was at a much less rapid rate than the number of lunatic paupers." Coming to 1861 the insane paupers had reached 32,920, or 16.4 per 10,000 of population. In the report for the same year the Commissioners again notice the agencies at work to swell, apparently, the ranks of the mentally afflicted: these are:—1. The large number of cases previously unreported, and only recently brought under observation. 2. The increased number of those sent to asylums. 3. The prolongation of their life when brought under care. It is also shown in this report that in about thirty large parishes and unions only 408 insane paupers were stated to have been residing with their friends in 1852 but that in 1860, under the paid quarterly visits of the local medical officers, 235 paupers were entered. Some places which returned none of this class in 1862 recorded a large number in 1860; like Liverpool, whose return was nil for 1852, but included fifty-five persons for 1860. It was frequently the practice of the parish officers to keep their lunatic or idiot poor at home, not sending them to the workhouse, for fear of the patients attract- ing the notice of the visiting Commissioners, who might order their removal to an asylum, and thus put the parish to a far heavier outlay. To remedy this abuse the Irremovable Poor Act of 1861 empowered the guar- dians to charge the maintenance of asylum paupers on the union common fund, instead of the parish in which they were settled. The provision was immediately effective. When last the parishes supported their asylum paupers, that is, in 1861, the number of patients thus housed was 18,262; but at the end of the six years 1862-67 the number amounted to 24,379. The annual expense for 1861 was £ 443,892; for 1867 it was X607, 292, or nearly 50 per cent more. From 1862 to 1868 the general pauper insanity augmented at the rate of 1,500 yearly on the average, the whole number returned at the commencement of the present year being 43,158, or 19'9 per 10,000. But in addition to the insane relieved at the expense of the poor rates, there were on the 1st of January last 1,766 chargeable to the counties and boroughs of England and Wales, thus carrying the total of the rate-supported up to 44,924, or 20.8 per 10,000 of population, or say 9-10 per cent. After a careful consideration of the official reports and returns, it appears to us that there is no evidence of an increase of pauper lunacy, but abundant proof of a much fuller and more careful record of the afflicted poor in this country.

MR. GLADSTONE'S AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Mr Gladstone has done many characteristic things in the course of his life, but we doubt whether he has ever done anything more characteristic than the publication of a "chapter of autobiography" in the very beat of a contested election, and by way of a contribution to its literature. Though characteristically lengthy, not to say long-winded, the substance of the pamphlet is short enough and is this: It is desirable that public men should be as consistent as possible. It is, however, impossible that any man in these days should retain precisely the same opinions at every stage of his life but bis changes ought to be honest and wise. In 1838 I wrote a book about Church and State, which maintained emphatically that the Irish Church ought to be kept up, and as I now propose that the Irish Church Establishment should be pulled down, I wish to explain the extent and character of the change which has come over my views. I thought in 1838 that it was the duty of the State, which in my opinion bad a conscience, to propagate religious truth. I also thought that the creed of the Irish Church was religious truth, for which reason it ought to be upheld by the nation at large for the benefit of the Irish people. As time went I on I perceived that public men did not share and would not act on my views as to the duty of the State to pro- pagate religious truth. On the contrary, they endowed Maynooth in 1845. This step was indefensible if my theory was right, and though I was beginning to think that my theory was wrong and my party right, yet I gave up office rather than make a change in my own favour. I acted like a woman who, because the man to whom she is engaged is unfortunate, refuses to break off an engagement of which she repents apart from his mis- fortunes. I became convinced by the course of events, and especially by the Maynooth grant, that my theory had been wrong, and I felt that the abolition of the Irish Church was a question of time. However, I did not feel called upon to make an attack upon it. I thought it might as well have a chance, or a day of grace but I was so much impressed with my new views, that when I contested Oxford in 1847, I would not pledge myself to stand by the Church. Moreover, in 1851, in the debates on the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, I used language which showed that I had in my mind the principles which have now led to my disestablish- ment resolution. In 1865 I made a speech which was regarded by Mr Whiteside as intended to be fatal to the Church when the opportunity should arise, but my views upon the subject were not then matured. I thought the Irish Bishops would have to be kept in the House of Lords, and I also thought that the question might not arise in my time, as it seemed a long way off. I now think that the time has come for dealing with the subject for reasons often assigned in public. This is the gist of the pamphlet down to the top of page 46. We have no doubt that is is all true enough, though the story is one which those who are capable of understanding Mr Gladstone hardly want to hear told, especially at such astonishing length, whilst it is, on the other hand, quite certain that it will not convince political opponents who are determined beforehand not to be convinced. It is much more like the sort of matter which one would expect to find in one of Miss Yonge's novels put into the mouth of an invalid relat- ing the history of his inner life than the utterances of an English statesman about to take the leading part in a great political struggle. In a word, it is soft stuff. The other eighteen pages are more interesting. They contain Mr Gladstone's view of the general march of affairs" upon these matters since 1838. You may think, says Mr Gladstone, that my notion that the business of the State was to propagate religious truth was a gross error, but look back to the state of things in 1838. Jews were excluded from Parliament. Roman Catholics and Dissenters had to take oaths and declara- tions which marked their past inferiority. The Church all but monopolized the direction of what little aid the State gave to public education, and then the Church of England itself was in such an interesting situation. It was in a gush of convalescence and revival. The deep religious lethargy of the eighteenth century was breaking up. The Church had been roused by the re- peal of the Test Act, Catholic Emancipation, the Re- form Bill, and the Church Temporalities Act. It was moreover being internally reformed. Worship was being made more splendid, the clergy were becom- ing enthusiastic and devoted. Dr Pusey, Dr Newman, and Mr Keble were in the height of their influence at Oxford. Much beyond one-half of the very flower of its youth chose the profession of holy orders, while an impression hardly less deep seemed to be stamped upon a large portion of its lay members." Purity, unity, and energy seemed as three fair sisters, hand in hand to advance together. Such a state of things were eminently suited to act on impressible and sanguine minds. I, for one, formed a completely false estimate of what was going to happen, and believed that the Church of England" was going to convert the nation. How, asks Mr Gladstone, could he be expected to see that Dr Newman and others would become Roman Catholics, and that a not less covulsive rationalistic movement" would arise in the opposite direction 1 Besides being mistaken in his enthusiastic estimate of the High Church movement, he underrated the energy of the Dissenters. In short, the entire miscalculation which I have now endeovoured to de- scribe of the religious state and prospects of the country was combined with a view of the relative position of governors and governed since greatly modified, and the two lay at the root of my error." This, certainly, is an abundant explanation of the fact that Mr Gladstone has had to change his views. When a man tells you that he set out in life with fun- damental errors upon the most important parts of the subject to which his life was to be devoted, you certain- ly want no other explanation of a good deal of vacilla- tion in his subsequent career. The pamphlet concludes with several pages about Mr Gladstone's present views upon Church Establishments. They appear to come to little more than this, that under circumstances they are good things, and under others bad things, and that it is impossible to lay down any general principle from which you may ascertain de- ductively how States and Churches ought to be related to each other. Lord Macaulay's theory, that govern- ment is police, is not, Mr Gladstone thinks, any truer than other theories, and as a matter of historical fact the connection between religion and politics has been very useful in many ways. This is the substance, as it seems to us, of six or seven rather puffy pages, which contain a good many fine words about the State and Christianity. The pamphlet, on the whole, appears to us a melan- choly exhibition of intellectual weakness and rashness, and an injudicious proceeding in a political point of view What is the short result of it ? You may ask how I ever came to write such a silly book as my Church and State" ? The answer is, I was impressible and san- guine and was carried away by Puseyism, and I have been finding out ever since that it was all a mistake. This is perfectly true, no doubt but then need a man who is just going to become Prime Minister of England say so ? No one doubts Mr Gladstone's almost unboun- ded ability on some points. Give him figures to steady himself by, and he will make financial statements to admiration; bnt upon moral and religious subjects he got his head filled with nonsense of various kinds early in life, and he has never fairly got it out of his consti- tution and never will. It is impossible to read his pre- sent pamphlet without feeling that he has found out only a very small part of the errors into which be was led by his enthusiastic friends and associates at Oxford. If any one will read his speculations about Ecce Homo" he will see what we mean. When a very young man, he rashly presumed to write a book about Church and State, which was founded upon what he now sees was the false assumption that it is the duty of the State to propagate religious truth. He has not even yet learned how false was the second assumption involved, that the creed of the Church of England is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth upon the subject of religion. He despises and insults the eighteenth century and its religious condition. It had its faults no doubt, but it had also its merits, and it would be highly inter- esting to learn upon what grounds, moral and intellectual, Mr. Gladstone went when in 1838 he so decisively rejected the theories of the most eminent writers of that century, and so eagerly embraced the teaching of the religious guides who, as he now sees, misled him so grievously upon points of such vital importance. If Dr. Pusey and Mr. Keble and Dr. Newman were alto- gether wrong in the application of their theory to the facts of life, was the theory itself a sound one ? A good many people have said and still say the opposite in very emphatic language, and if Mr. Gladstone lives long enough he may very likely find himself obliged to consider more or less from their point of view questions still more fundamental than those on which in his early youth he pronounced such a strong and such an utterly false opinion.-Pall ivall Gazette.

PROMOTION BY ANTICIPATION.—Colonel the Hon. F. A. Thesigar, of the 96th Regiment, late Deputy-Ad- jutant-General of the Abyssinian Expedition, is said to have been appointed Adjutant-General of the Indian Army, in place of Colonel H. E. Longden, C.B., who from failing health resigns that post from March next. The cultivation of rice in certain districts of Piedmont has recently been extended owing to an improved water supply, but the effect upon the public health is found to be very injurious, intermittent fever having prevailed in several villages throughout the autumn. King Victor Emmanuel has in consequence given orders that on his vast private estates no more rice shall be grown. When the Crown Princess of Prussia, passing through Paris a few weeks since, called at St Cloud, the semi- official journals of the Empire interpreted it as a pro- clamation of eternal friendship between France and Prussia. We hope these same journalists may not see the announcement that the Princess is now on a visit to the Due d'Aumale in Warwickshire, and has not hesitated to appear in public at Stratford-on-Avon with the Duchesse. If the civilities in Paris meant peace this must surely mean war, perhaps even a dynastic conspiracy. Of course every sensible person knows that the movements of the Crown Princess are utterly devoid of political significance. The idea of great national questions in these days being settled by princesscs in a little chat at a morning call is too absurd even, one would think, for French official writers to entertain it seriously. EXTRACT OF MEAT.—So much having been written about cheap food for the people, it is scarcely necessary to draw attention to the invaluable extract of meat by Liebig's proccss, which, first introduced as a medicinal agent, is now so extensively used in the kitchen. We cannot imagine housekeepers making soup or beef-tea by the old, tedious, and expensive method, while with this extract they can prepare soup equally nice and far more digestible in a moment. The genuine extract is manufactured in enormous quantities from cattle of English breed, on the establishments of R. Tooth, Esq, of Sydney, Australia, and is now sold at a reasonable price in jars with very convenient stoppers. The scien. tific men speak highly of Tooth's extract. Dr. Richter, of Dresden, a man of no mean attainments, describes it as exquisite at the same time, it is all approved by Dr. W. A. Miller, of King's College, before being issued for sale. We should recommend a trial of it. Messrs. Coleman and Co., of St. Mary-al-Ilill, are the con- signees, but it is sold in nearly every grocer's and che- mist's shop in town and country.-The Standard, Sep- tember 2nd. N 26

NOMINATIONS FOR THE COUNTY OF I CARMARTHEN. The nominations of members for the county of Carmarthen took place at Llandilo, on Saturday last. A drizzling rain fell nearly all the morning, but I being market day, a great many people were in town. Mr. Pugh arrived very early. The horses were taken from the carriage at the entrance to the town, and with about 20 mounted horsemen in front, and the same number behind, aud surrounded by an enthusiastic crowd, he was dragged by a score of willing arms up the steep hill into the town, and straight to the Town Hall, the inhabitants along the route turning out to contribute to the hearty welcome accorded him. Mr. Pugh was, doubtless, the popular man there, and had Llandilo been the county of Carmarthen, Mr. Pugh would have had no fears for his seat. As the town filled, the people who walked the streets became very excitable, and on the other candidates arriving, a general rush was made to the Town Hall, which was soon filled. Here we must allude to the kindness of Mr. Super- intendent Philipps, in reserving a seat for reporters, and admitting them to it early, instead of compelling them to secure it by dint of mere physical strength, as is too often the case at these times. The proceed- ings, at first, were very orderly, the candidates being cheered on their appearance; but later, the audience became very turbulent and uproarious. We thought, after the disgraceful proceedings at Carmarthen nomination, that the boroughs carried off the palm for ruffianism, but since our experience at Llandilo, that opinion is somewhat shaken. Whoever the lambs belonged to, or where they came from, is of little consequence they did no credit to their party. Only Mr. Sartoris and Mr. Pugh and their friends could get a hearing; all the others were denied freedom of speech. Had the speeches been inflam- matory or abusive this could have been understood, but they were not. However, our readers can gather their own impressions of the meeting from the following report:— Mr. C. W. Nevill, who discharged his duties with thorough impartiality, and did his best to get every speaker a fair hearing, opened the proceedings by the usual preliminaries. He then called on the electors to nominate members to serve them in Parliament. Mr W. R. H. Powell, Maesgwynne, said Mr High Sheriff, and Electors of the County of Carmarthen- It is a matter of regret to me that the peace and tran- quility, which so long have prevailed in the politics of this county, are at length disturbed (cheers.) No one appreciates more highly than I do the privilege of the franchise, still I look upon contested elections as great though necessary evils. Jealousies are engendered, friendships are severed, men take lines of thought and action, which at other times they would deem mean and degrading; in a word, a contested election brings all that is bad and base to the surface. It now appears that a contest we must have, and I hope and trust when it is over, it will leave no trace of acrimony or bitter- ness behind (applause.) Gentlemen, we are about to exercise the franchise under entirely new circumstances. Last session, Parliament passed a measure which has largely increased the number of electors in the United Kingdom, and the coming session will show what effect that measure is likely to exercise on our existing insti- tutions. I sincerely trust that the new law will have fair play—(hear, hear,)—and that the Members re- turned to the new Parliament will be elected by the electors, (loud cheering) for the Reform Bill was not passed to place the representation in the hands of a few, whether employers of labour, or owners of land, but in the hands of the people (cheers); and I must express a sincere hope that, at all events, in the county of Carmarthen, freedom of election will be allowed its full sway, (cheers), and every man permitted to vote as his conscience and inclinations dictate (applause.) I have no intention, on the present occasion, of dwelling at any length upon the various political topics of the day, as they have been so thoroughly discussed for the last few months, by the speeches of the various candi- dates, and the leading statesmen of the day. But I will say a few upon the questions which Mr Pugh has alluded to in his address. First, then, as to the Irish Church question. Great fault has been found with Mr Pugh for not being explicit; for not, in fact, pledging himself to follow a leader, more remarkable for his audacity and adroitness, than his honesty and earnest- ness (laughter, and hisses.) Let us for a moment examine Mr Pugh's views. They amount to this,—that he certainly will not join a vote of want of confidence in the ministry at the outset of the session, but will con- sider their's, as well as Mr Gladstone's proposals, but that if by the vote of the House of Commons the people of England ratify the vote of the late Parlia- ment, then, as the appeal to the country has been ex- pressly made in order to obtain its opinion on this very point, he would be no party to embarrassing a new government, but would do all in his power to assist in settling a question which, if left undecided, would create much irritation, and possibly endanger the stability of other institutions, in the maintenance of which he is so deeply interested (cheers.) Mr Pugh fully appreciates the gravity of the question, and his sole object is to support the best measure,—one which will give peace to Ireland-and at the same time have a due regard for the principles of the British Constitu- tion (cheers.) I will now briefly refer to his vote against Church Rates, which has caused some of his old adherents to desert him, to desert, too, without a cause in my opinion—(loud cheers)-for ov that vexed question his views were identical with those of many eminent dignitaries of the church, who thought that when the question became one of a majority of votes, it was better for the church that the compulsory levying of them should be abolished, as it only tended to pro- mote ill-feeling between Christian brethren, without assisting the institution they were intended to uphold (cheers.) I could name more than one parish in our county where the Nonconformists have freely and voluntarily contributed to the restoration or rebuilding of the parish church- (cheers) -and I think Mr Pugh may well follow the example of Lord Stanley, who now congratulates his constituents on having got rid of Church Rates, and says, I think now, as I always did, that it alienated more friends from the Establishment than the money involved was worth." As to education, Mr Pugh's views are wide and comprehen- sive (cheers.) The present system of national educa- tion is inefficient, and although I am far from advoca- ting a purely secular education still I cannot but think that a child may be taught truthfulness, honesty, and charity, the fear of God, and duty to his neighbour, by the Bible alone—(cheers)—without any works of dogmatic theology (applause.) With regard to the contest, it is not my wish to say one word disparaging against either of the candidates- (cheers, and laughter) —beyond this, that the coalition against Mr Pugh reflects, in my opinion, no credit on its promoters (laughter, and cheers), that Mr Pugh has been badly used, is the opinion of better men than myself. Mr Pugh has been too honest to pledge himself, and has prized the honour of his constituency too highly to submit to dictation from a part of it only. He has represented us for upwards of 11 years, and those who are arrayed against him cannot but say (" I will give him a vote") that he has acted with rectitude of in- tention, and a will to labour for the public good (cheers.) Judge him by his constant attendance to his Parliamentary duties, his votes, his liberal support of everything connected with the county as an Indepen- dent Member he has claimed to represent the will and the wishes of his countrymen, as superior in his sense of duty to any tie of party (" Three times three for Mr Pugh.") For his past services and attention to our interests, we owe him a debt of gratitude. Old friends should not desert him, and did full freedom of election exist, I hesitate not to say, that his grateful countrymen would repay him by placing him at the head of the poll (applause.) To the poll he is pledged to go, and I trust you will, on Tuesday next, record your votes for your countryman, and faithful servant, David Pugh—(cheers)—whom I beg to propose as a fit and proper person to represent us (cheers) in the new Parliament (applause.) Major Lewis, Clynfiew; Mr High Sheriff, Ladies, and Gentlemen, and Fellow Electors,—In rising to second the nomination of Mr Pugh as a candidate for the representation of this county, I shall not trespass long upon your time, for I feel that Mr Pugh requires no introduction to you—(cheers)—that he is not a new man amongst you (cheers). He has, for many years held a prominent position in this county as Chairman of your Quarter Sessions (cheers), and after that, as one of the representatives of the county. If you will only look at his votes in Parliament, I am sure you will allow that he has given them in a most conscientious manner (cheers). Gentlemen, he now places himself before you for re-election, and it is for you, the electors of this county to say whether lie shall retain the posi- tion which he has heretofore held for many years (cheers). I think it behoves us in the present critical state of affiairs, to take care whom we return to Parlia- ment. We ought to return men of sound and discrimi- nating judgment (hear, hear) y/ho could form proper opinions upon the various questions that are likely to be brought forward in the next Parliament (" Shut up and laughter cries of Order.)" The one great ques- tion which agitate the minds of men in the present day is, of course, that of the Irish Church. Now, I do not mean to say that the Irish Church is without blot or blemish, but I do state that the Irish Church is the right arm of the United Church of Great Britain and Ireland (laughter). That church, it is proposed by cer- tain parties to sweep away (cheers; A Voice The sooner the better;" laughter). It is said that the destruction of this church is for the purpose of streng- thening the Church of England now it is the first time I have ever heard of cutting off a. right arm in order to confer greater strength, (Mr Pughe, schoolmaster It's a putrid one;" laughter), provided that right arm is sound, (" It is'nt;" laughter and cheers). Some say it is not, some to the contrary; there are differences of opinions on that point. I believe it is a sound church I believe that church possesses a body of Clergy who are hardworking, examplary, and self-denying (hear, hear), and we have the testimony of Mr Gladstone to that effect, therefore, I think that church ought not to be swept away. There might be measures passed which would place her on a better foundation, but that she should be swept away requires some consideration. There has been a great cry of Justice to Ireland but is there nothing to be said, is there to be no justice, no plea, offered for our 700,000 Protestant brethren who live in Ireland ? Are they not to have the means of worshiping their God P are those means which they possess to be taken away ? (" Hisses, and Sit down"). I will not say more upon this subject, but I do trust and hope that after the excitement of these elections is gone by, and when we have sent our men to Parliament, the question of the Irish Church will be calmly and quietly considered, so that we shall be able, by making certain changes, to hand down unimpaired in her effi- ciency and security (cheers), that church which we have received as a rich legacy from our forefathers, and which we regard as the best inheritance we can bequeath to our posterity (hisses and cheers), Col. Stepney, M.P., who was loudly cheered, said—I beg leave to state that I have the honour to obey a request which makes me very happy, that is to propose a fitting member to serve you in Parliament (cheers). I shall not imitate the eloquence of my predecessor but proceed at once, and cut my few words as short as I can. I beg leave to state that the gentleman that I propose is Mr Edward John Sartoris (loud applause, succeeded by hisses; renewed cheering, and hisses intermingled general disorder, and cries of Sartoris for ever" which lasted for a long time). I think, gentlemen (hisses), I think, gentlemen, that under these circumstances I could not represent or present to you a better man, (applause), than Mr Sartoris (hisses). He has shown himself amongst you so often that I need say nothing in his praise, because he has so industriously disseminated his principles (hear, hear, from the Conservative leaders, and great laughter), which principles I most decidedly think are right (applause). I now have only to conclude by saying, that I trust the constituency of this county will follow the example, the independent, straight- forward example and want of fear (cheers) that the boroughs of this county have shown in my favour (applause). I now propose Edward John Sartoris, Esq., as a fit and proper person to be a member for this county (loud hurrahs followed the conclusion of the speech). Mr John Johnes, Dolaucothy Mr Sheriff, Brother Electors,—It has fallen upon me upon this occasion, to second the nomination of Mr Edward John (Mr Johnes could not remember the name of his candidate a man shouted out Sartoris," and much good humoured laughter followed) of the gentleman who has been pro- posed by the gallant Colonel. I can only wish that some person more efficient than myself (" No, no") had been selected to perform this pleasant task (" You are the right colour," laughter), for I assure you that although the materials are ample, although they are strong, yet, I fear that the workman who now has the honour of addressing you is not competent, or does not possess sufficient force or energy (" Oh oh"), nor yet, as I believe at all events, and I speak my own sentiments, (cheers), has sufficient skill for that relative connec- tion of the various materials that would sufficiently do justice to so great a cause as that we have now in hand. —I mean the great cause of the complete and proper representation of this nation (cheers). If the task were in other hands, no doubt, such a cause would have nerved them to great efforts, but, gentlemen, I have only to throw myself upon your forbearance and upon your indulgence in carrying out to the best of my ability the task which I have undertaken (cheers). Together with the gentleman who has so ably proposed my friend Mr Pugh, I have to say that it is not my wish, even if I could, but I cannot, to impugn the social character or dignity of any one of the candidates who have presented themselves before you to-day (cheers). And also I beg leave to re-echo another thing that he said, — that after this election and this contest is over we shall all shake hands (hear, hear from the Conservatives, and ap- plause). But although I have nothing to do with the social character of the candidates who have been pre- sented, or who are to be presented to you, I must tell you that I differ from them upon political grounds (cheers). I wholly differ from two of them who have yet to be proposed to you, and whose claims are before the county,—Mr Jones and Mr Puxley (hisses). I wholly differ from them in that confidence which they say they are determined to repose in Her Majesty's present Ministers (cheers); and I must, gentlemen upon this occasion, I am afraid, detain you for a short space of time, because it has been my wish, and it has been my principle generally, as far as I could do so, to base my conclusions upon facts (applause). I must take you back all far as 1866, for in that year, Lord Russel in the House of Lords, and Mr Gladstone in the House of Commons, were the leaders on the ministerial sides of both those Houses. In the House of Commons, Mr Gladstone, somewhere about the beginning of 1866, brought in a Bill, and laid it upon the table of the House of Commons, for the amendment of the Repre- sentation of the People in Parliament. That Bill was to this effect—that the franchise should bo extended to all persons in boroughs who were householders, and holders of tenements to the amount of JB7 clear annual value in counties those who were occupiers of land to the amount of JE14 clear annual value. There were other provisions in the boroughs there was a lodger suffrage for those who paid £10. That Bill was brought before the House, and the greatest opposition it received was from some who, upon that occasion, were deserters from the ministerial phlanax and Mr Gladstone, in my opinion very unadvisedly, staked the existence of the ministry upon the defeat or success of the amendment which was proposed. That amendment was nothing more than this-that for the words clear annual value" they should introduce the words rateable value." It was carried against the ministry, the ministry tended their resignation and it was accepted. Now, you will ask me why I should state this. I will tell you why—because I wish to inform you what was the opinion of Mr Disraeli upon the Bill (cheers). I have told you that it was a j67 clear annual value in boroughs, and that is quite sufficient for my purpose. Mr Disraeli, then, discountenanced that Bill as one which would Americanise the Institutions of our country, and, gentlemen, entrust to a numerical majority the interests of the nation: Such was his opinion on that Bill then, and I beg you, gentlemen, to bear it in mind (laughter) because upon that will depend in great measure the opinion you will form of Mr Disraeli, and whether you think he is one in whom this country should repose political confidence (" no, no"). After awhile, gentlemen, Lord Russel, and Mr Disraeli went out of office, and Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli became her Majesty's Ministers: after they had been in office somewhere about six or seven months, Mr Disraeli placed upon the table of the House of Com- mons certain resolutions, which were almost unintellig- ible-(laughter)-and at the latter end, I think at all events, of the month of February-I am not quite sure—he produced before the House a Bill, and by that Bill he proposed to extend the franchise to all persons who were householders in boroughs, of JE6 rateable value and in counties, to those who occupied land, of the value of £20. There were other provisions for giving votes to persons who had money in the savings bank, or in the funds. But when he had explained his measure, it became so distasteful, apparently, to the opposition, that he withdrew it. Now, gentlemen, let me ask you this simple question. If, after eight months' consideration by an entire cabinet, they brought in that Bill, if they thought it was a Bill that would be bene- ficial to the country, why did they withdraw it P (cheers; Col. Stepney, M.P.: "They were turn. coats" much laughter). If, on the contrary, they thought that the Bill was ill-considered and unsuitable to the wants of the nation, it ought never to have been placed upon the House of Commons (cheers). I beg leave to tell you that they were either open to severe censure for wasting the public time, and the time of the House, through their carelessness or incompetency (cheers) or, on the other hand, I think it right to assume that the ministry on that occasion did place upon the table of the House of Commons a Bill which they did not consider for the benefit of the public and that bill they withdrew. Why, have I not a right to assume that they withdrew it because they feared de- feat and the loss of office (cheers) ? I care not which of the positions I have placed them in in each case they have placed themselves in such a position, by the withdrawal of that Bill, as to lessen, in a great measure, the little confidence which the country was inclined to repose in them (cheers and laughter). But, gentlemen, the Bill died in its infancy (much laughter), and then another Bill was placed upon the table by Mr Disraeli —in the month of March, 1867, I think. They had taken some time to mature that Bill—between the previons June and the month of March—and they did mature it, I can assure you (much laughter), because it was a very beautiful Bill when it was placed upon the table of the House of Commons, and it was a very dif- ferent Bill, indeed, when it left the House of Commons (much laughter and cheers). In that Bill Mr Disraeli proposed that in boroughs every person who was a householder should have a vote, provided he paid rates, and provided, gentlemen, that he had been a resident in that house for two years (laughter). They proposed that in counties, I think, all persons who were pos- sessed of tenements of the rateable value of £15-1 think it was, I am not quite sure, but if I am wrong, I hope I shall be corrected—should be entitled to the franchise. They also gave a vote to persons who had £20 in the savings bank, or £50 in the funds. They also proposed this, and I beg you to mark it, gentlemen,— as nice a little scheme as ever was propounded (laugh- ter). They proposed that those persons who were householders, and who possessed money in the funds, or in the saving's bank, to a certain amount, should have two votes (laughter). A nice little bit of a scheme that was (laughter). In addition to that, they also proposed a most Conservative measure—that you electors should vote by voting papers (laughter) and I am quite sure you all of you know, from this election, what would very likely have taken place, if that had been carried (laughter and hear, hear). Such, gentlemen, was the Bill that Mr Disraeli laid upon the table of the House of Commons and I stand here, and am perfectly ready to maintain that that Bill, in its integrity, was an un- fair attempt to delude the people of England and Wales (applause). Why, gentlemen, it had in it, and it was impregnated with such checks, or, as I may call them, counter poises as would have, to a very great measure, so clogged the extension of the suffrage which they proposed, as to render it almost nngatory. That is so far as relates to the extension, and even that small extension would have been materially deterior- ated by the exercise of that dual or double vote. There are scarcely any of you who are not aware that in our large manufacturing towns, it is not very often that the mechanic or workman remains in his lodging, or in his bouse, for a period of two years. You know perfectly well that in those large manufacturing districts they may very often leave their places for the purpose of obtaining employment elsewhere, or from some other causes. The result of that leaving their homes would have been that those men would have had no vote. Again, let me tell you this,—those men who were to have this Household Suffrage, or very near it, were bound, according to the Bill, to pay their own rates. Why, gentlemen, they could not pay their own rates. They had not the power to do so, by Act of Parliament, and Mr Disraeli knew it (cheers A voice How do you know that"). He ought to have known it, at all events (cheers). What, am I to be told here by any man that a ministor of the crown does not know an Act that is in general use in the country ? Why, surely, his ignorance of such an Act, which bore upon the subject on which he was preparing a Bill, is only another proof, at all events, that he does not deserve your confidence (laughter). But what would have been the result of that ? I tell you that the Act of Parlia- ment makes it incumbent upon the landowners to pay the rates of all occupiers up to j66 or £7 rateable value, which would be equal, very nearly, to a £8 or £9 actual or annual value. Thus, those who had the suffrago, not being able to pay the rates, because the landlords by law are bound to pay them, not one of them would have had a vote. Gentlemen, was not that a very nice little measure to bring in ? (laughter). And in addition to that, even if any of you had votes, the vote of the work- man and mechanic would have been all but neutralised by the double vote of men of wealth and property, and those who had money in the funds or the savings bank. This, then, was the Bill placed upon the table of the House of Commons, and I do not hesitate to tell you, and I think you will agree with me now I have detailed it to you, that it was one which was calculated to delude the people of England (cheers). Nay, more, it clearly manifested that at the time Mr Disraeli placed that Bill upon the table of the House of Commons he still was impressed with the feeling that a Bill introduced without those checks and counter- poises was one which would Americanise our institu- tions and would intrust the destinies of a great nation to a numerical majority and so he brought in that Bill, loaded with those checks and counterpoises in order to carry out his own views and principles in respect to that idea. Now, gentlemen, let us see how well he did carry out that principle; let us see how well he did it let us mark the progress of that bill through the House of Commons, and see whether he followed out that principle, or whether he yielded it at the bidding of Mr Gladstone and his supporters. We all know that the first thing he gave up, and was obliged to give up, was the two years' residence, which was reduced to one instead of two, and so much was done by the opposition for the householders in boroughs. Next he was obliged to submit to an amendment which was proposed, that the occupiers in boroughs, of all houses, should be rated. He assented to that, which was abandonment No 2 (laughter), and by that means the householders have this day got their votes. What next ? Why the admission to the suffrage, in counties, of leaseholders of 60 years at jE5 annual value, and copy holders also of £5 annual value—that was given by Mr Disraeli to Mr Gladstone and his supporters, as an extension of the franchise (cheers) aye gentlemen, and more, he yielded, at the bidding of the opposition, that beautiful dual vote (much laughter). That is abandon- ment 3 or 4, or 5, I am sure I don't know which (laugh- ter), and lastly he abandoned those beautiful voting papers, which were to have been presented to you, and made use of in this county at this very election. So that, after the Bill had passed through the refining furnace of the House of Commons, it was so changed that Mr Disraeli could scarcely recognize his own bant- ling (laughter). At last the Bill became law, the law under which we at present are acting; but it became the law, and it conferred Household Suffrage simply, subject to the payment of rates, in boroughs; in the counties it was reduced, as I have told you before, from a£14 or £15 occupation to a £12 occupation, and as I have said before, to leaseholders and copy holders, and tenants under a lease of 60 years. The Bill remained in that simple state, denuded of all the checks and counterpoises which Mr Disraeli had put into it, in order to neutralise the franchise, and narrow it. Such was the state of the Bill when it left the House. Now, I have only to say this, that those Conservatives—as they call them,—checks and counterpoises having been abandoned by Mr Disraeli, I have no hesita- tion in saying that if he had one spark of the spirit of the statesmen of yore, rather than have submitted to the abandonment of his principles he would have resigned his office (cheers and "Oh.") I say again, he would have resigned his office, and left to other hands the work of Americanising the institutions of our country (loud shouts of applause), and of entrusting the best interests of the nation to a numerical majority (renewed applause.) But he was the man who did that, according to his opinion, but not according to mine. By the passage of that Bill in its present state through the House of Commons, judg- ing him by his own words, I say he has, according to his own opinion, Americanised the institutions of our country, and has entrusted the interests of this great nation to a numerical majority. Why, gentlemen, I do not believe that in the history of this country there is such an instance of the abdication of principle upon a great and important question existing (cheers.) I tell you, gentlemen, that history will, I feel perfectly satis- fied, present to future ages the session of 1867 as a pro- verb and as a bye-word for political demoralisation (loud cheers), for political inconsistency, and for the sacrifice of political principle upon the altar of political power and political patronage (loud and prolonged ap- plause.) A gentleman here suggests that I should have said they sacrificed their political principles for pelf (laughter.) Do you think, gentleman, that I am wrong, after what I have said to you, in differing from two of these who are candidates here this day, in the confidence which they say they are determined to place in Her Majesty's ministers, of whom Mr Disraeli is the chief? (Hisses and laughter). I say I am not, nor do I hesitate to say in this place (hear, hear,) that no thinking man can possibly come forward, place his hand on his heart, and say that Mr Disraeli deserves the confidence of the country (loud cheering; cries of Time from the left of the bench Go on" from the body of the hall, and renewed shouts of Time" and "Go on.") Give me breath at all events, gentle- men (laughter), I am an old man (cheers.) Such was the state of the Bill, as I told you before, on leaving the House of Commons, and if you think that, under the circumstances—and I am quite sure that you must think it—Mr Disraeli does'nt deserve the confidence of the country, I must entreat you, brother electors of the county of Carmarthen, to refuse your votes to all those candidates who are determined to place their con- fidence in him (loud cheers). And further, I have also to entreat you all to do a still better thing—to give your votes freely to Mr Sartoris (loud applause), who intends, at all events, to support the general policy of Mr Gladstone (hisses) in the House of Commons (applause). Gentle- men, I pray your indulgence. I have addressed you for some time, and I hope I shall have your forbear- ance while I say a few words more ("Gib on") upon the subject of the Irish Church (cheers.) I am sorry I do not agree altogether with that very excellent gentleman, for whom I have a very high esteem and regard, who seconded my friend Mr Pugh. The Irish Church it is proposed to disestablish, at all events, and partly to disendow. Now, I should tell you, in the first instance, before I go on, that I am not going to fatigue you in any way with numerical details save this, which is quite sufficient for me—that unless I mistake not there are in Ireland about eight Roman Catholics to every single member of the Established Church (hear, hear.) If I am wrong I am open to be contradicted, and I shall apologise, provided, as I have said, that I am incorrect. (" You are right.") Then, gentlemen, that church is established by law; it is based upon law, and upon the law made by the legis- lature. It is the church of a comparatively small minority, supported by law, against a large adverse majority. I conceive that I am not wrong, at all events, in saying that it is an anomaly. I had almost said it is not just according to the common principles of justice (applause.) But although it is so now, I beg leave to inform you that it was not intended to be, when it was established, the church of the minority, because it was intended that the established church should induce the Roman Catholic population to enter into its fold. I doubt whether it has ever done that, and I must say that if it has failed, it is not very bad justice to say that, as an establishment, it ought to be dis- established (cheers.) In addition to that, it is not good policy, in my opinion, to retain an institution when it has failed to perform the purpose for which it was originally intended (cheers.) It has been said by some- one, somewhere, I care not who, I care not where, that the civil power was not called in aid of the ecclesiastical power for the purpose of spreading the doctrine of the reformed religion. I have only to say this, that from the State papers, which are published, and which are tolerably good authority, the civil arm was exercised in tho days of Queen Elizabeth in a manner most tyrannical and most odious (cheers), for the purpose, not of inducing but of forcing Roman Catholics to be- come members of the established church (hear, hear.) Aye, I say odious and tyrannical, for it will scarcely be believed, in these days, that such a policy was made use of, and that men were executed. If anybody can deny it, I have the State papers to prove it at least, I have not the papers myself, but they will prove it. (A Voice: "John Bunyan?") No it is not, indeed, sir; I assure you it is not from John Bunyan (laughter.) This is the basis on which I make that statement. In the days of James I., fine and imprisonment were