pupil's knowledge of falsehood, and an extremely intelligent inspector visiting it asked the teacher whether his children did not know that people were not struck down now a days for telling falsehoods. The teacher replied that he could quote a case in point as an answer to the question. He had detected a boy in a falsehood and publicly punished him, and the next morning a schoolmate said to the teacher, "I have been thinking. You once told us that God was the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. If that is true, why did not God kill that boy for lying as well as Ananias and Sapphira." The teacher said, "I could not answer him." This simple tale directs us to the right method of moral teaching. It should be done by drawing out the conscience of the children. It often seems to me that when men say that without the authority of the Bible there is no morality, they are simply destroying the foundations of morality itself. It is not the subject which is taught, but the spirit with which it is taught, that determines its religious character. Any subject will make a religious subject. From the outward universe, the nature of man, the history of nations, the biographies of great men, works of human genius, the life of Christ, incidents, laws, experiments may be taken through which the teacher may reach young hearts. Our responsibilities are vast. Who is there, as the years pass over him, that does not feel more and more deeply the majesty and glory of childhood? It is no insignificant matter of instinct that grandfather and grandmother are the dearest friends of the young child. Children will pass over us middle aged men and scarcely notice us, but will run to old men and rest in peace upon their knees. As age comes youth shines with more glorious beauty and child hood-has a more unfathomable charm. President Garfield is reported to have said, "I feel a profounder reverence for a boy than for a man. I never meet a boy in the streets without feeling that I owed him a salute, for I know not what possibilities may be buttoned up within his shabby coat." How strange a thing it is that we enter this world so helpless, so dependent upon our surroundings. The other day I saw a small child hardly able to speak in the midst of a busy street surrounded by a crowd. The poor little thing could not tell where it lived, or how it could get back to its home. What responsibility rests upon a Christian church that children should be guided in their helplessness; children entering life appeal to us as that poor lost child to learn their way home! Take two children. Take a child out of the worst part of Manchester; change it with one in the best. Put one in the close and crowded den-the other in the comfortable home with every appliance. You will doubtless find that inherited tempers will appear, but equally doubtless outward circumstances will be more or less redemption. On the moral and religious life of our people our civilization depends. We are too boastful. We have ten thousand new sources of material comfort, and the stress we place upon them is far too great. Telegraphs may flash messages which are not to our credit; the imperial power may be exerted with moral culpability; we may travel quickly on wicked errands. There is nothing in the telegraph or the railway, or the steamship, or in our imperial power that can assure our future. We are apt to be too blind to the greatness there has been on this earth, and the grandeur of the old civilisation. As for material wealth, Palmyra in the desert and a thousand other cities amassed the luxuries of existence. The philosophy of Greece is still a light to our schools, and has made its immortal mark upon the history of the human intellect. In art we vainly strive to equal the creations of ancient days. In empire Rome, held north, south, east, and west, with a firm and civilising hand. In Athens and Rome men and women lived highly cultured, graceful, and genuine lives. But all is past, and if we trust to our commerce or inventions, our empire, and in our pride neglect the reverence for that which is above us, in some of the isles of the Pacific, or in same ot the regions of Mid Africa, will be the greater civilisation of the future. Unless we cherish and sustain reverence for the highest and the noblest within the hearts of our people, there is a reserve of barbarism in the heart of civilisation which will conquer us. The Roman Empire was attacked from without. Our danger is from within. I plead for this larger character for religious instruction because I believe that in Christian reverence, in bowing down the heart before that which is supreme in righteousness, the seed of civilisation is sown for the world, and the redemption from sin is won for every living soul. ON Sunday last, Mr. Justice Day, one of Her Majesty's Judges of Assize, attended solemn High Mass at St. Chad's Roman Catholic Church, Cheetham Hill Road. The church was crowded, and the sermon was preached by the Very Rev. Canon Sheehan, Vicar-General, on the Gospel of the day. The choir, under the direction of Mr. J. J. Heyes, sang Gounod's "Messe Solennelle" for the first time. THE NATIONAL UNION FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF INTEMPERANCE.-Mr. Herbert Birch writes from The Vicarage, Blackburn, that "some years ago the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, aud the Bishop of Chester withdrew from this association, and since then (in 1881) the Charity Organization Society advertised it in The Times. Within the last few days the Duke of Westminster, the Lord Bishop of Liverpool, and the Right Rev. Bishop Vaughan (of Salford) have publicly withdrawn from this National Union.' I ask you to give these facts a place in The Times, in the hope that those whose names appear as patrons and supporters of this association may make careful inquiry into its character, either from the Charity Organization Society or from those capable of judging its worth. In the district where it is best known, it has not the support of a single temperance leader."-The Times. SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGY.-The thirteenth session of the Society of Biblical Archæology was opened on Tuesday evening, at 9, Conduit Street, Regent Street. The president, Dr. Birch, keeper of the Oriental Antiquities in the British Museum, was in the chair, and amongst those present were Professor Oppert, member of the French Institute, and M. E. Revillout, of the Egyptian Museum at the Louvre. The first paper laid before the meeting was by the latter gentleman. It gave an account of a demotic papyrus, seemingly of the second century, and containing the malediction of an Egyptian mother on her son for embracing Christianity. A paper was also read by Mr. Theophilus G. Pinches, on "Some recent discoveries bearing on the Ancient History and Chronology of Babylonia." HE poor always ye have with you." The truth of Half a century ago drunkenness was prevalent nigh and low, amongst the educated and uneducated. To be a three-bottle-man was some mark of social distinction. To sit at table till you slipped under it was no disgrace to a gentleman. The next thirty years will produce a change in this respect quite as marked among the lower class, as has already taken place amongst the upper and middle classes. "This saying of the Great Teacher could not have the school alone can, and we believe, will accomplish it. "THE Pulpit, platform, and press may aid the good work, but been more apparent eighteen centuries ago in Palestine, than it is this day in England. Look at our streets. Day and night they are crowded with wretched children; their shoeless feet are freezing in the mud; their rag-covered bodies shivering in the piercing wind; their pinched and wizened faces void of all childhood. How vast is the misery, which, in spite of our boasted wealth, exists in our midst, must be evident even to the casual observer. All these form but a small part of that vast multitude of men and women who pass their lives in poverty and wretchedness, too often the miserable parents of more miserable children, and whose only provision against sickness and old age is the workhouse. The causes, or rather cause, of this misery so widespread, is as apparent as the misery itself, it may be summed up in one word-intemperance. The evil then being known, how shall we combat it? What hopes have we of finally overcoming it? Fifty years ago Richard Turner told his hearers at Preston, "that nothing but te-te-total would do it." Since then from pulpit and platform the same doctrine has been preached, teetotal and temperance societies have been formed in every part of the country, yet drunkenness does not decrease. And the reason for this is not far to seek. However large the army of teetotalism may be, few, we think, very few drunkards swell its ranks. Its recruits are drawn from church and chapel, but the class amongst which drunkenness is most rife has little to do with church or chapel. A thousand take "the pledge," a hundred keep it, but ninety-nine out of the hundred belong to that class, the least likely to offend against sobriety. The disease is known, an unfailing remedy offered, but the sick man will not take it, neither precept nor example will induce him. Is his case then hopeless? Labour combined against capital has secured for itself one great boon-shortened hours of toil. But how do house. The blessing is thus turned into a curse. Are there so many spend the time thus gained? In the public not mechanics' institutes, free libraries, evening classes? Yes, thanks to Lord Brougham and the enlightened men who followed in his footsteps, we have all these, but nine out of every ten of the men and women belonging to the class we refer to, are incapable of deriving any advantage from these institutions, which have been created for their special benefit. Taken from school before education could have made any permanent impression on their minds. How many of these have forgotten, through the long years of toil, even the little reading and writing they had once acquired. Now the children, even of the poorest, receive in our national schools, an education more liberal than that in the reach of the middle class thirty years ago. Education does not necessarily make a people virtuous, but will certainly free it from a vicc, the evil consequences of which are so certain and evident, as those which follow in the train of intemperance. THE report of the Wesleyan Methodist Sunday School Union shows that the schools of the denomination throughout the country are in a flourishing condition. The numerical returns of the year with reference to church membership in Great Britain have also been remarkably large. Of the new Sunday School Hymn-Book, it is stated that no fewer than 800,000 copies have been disposed of. The number of Sunday Schools in Great Britain is 6,489, being an increase on the year of 63. The total number of officers and teachers is 122,999, an increase on the year of 1,506. The Daily News says it is informed that there is not the slightest foundation for the rumour circulated last week to the effect that it is the intention of the Archbishop of Canterbury to resign the Primacy. His Continent, in the hope that the journey will off ect a complete restoration Grace is making satisfactory progress, and intends shortly to visit the to health. A patent has just been taken out in Paris by a M. Petit, for a substance called dynamogene, intended to replace dynamite. Its manufacture and management are stated to involve no danger, and the cost to be 40 per cent. less than gunpowder. PARLIAMENTARY ORATORS. I.-HENRY ST. JOHN, VISCOUNT BOLINGBROKE. OLINGBROKE is regarded as the first really great Able speakers there were undoubtedly before his time. Such men as Bacon (of whom it was said that the fear of every man who heard him was lest he should make an end), and the famous leaders of the Long Parliament-Sir Edward Coke, John Elliot, Pym, Selden, Hampden and Wentworth-were men of unquestionable vigour of speech, but what we regard as oratory did not become a power in Parliament until after their time. The men of the Long Parliament had not time to make long speeches. It was not until the wild passions and tumultuous excitements of that period had calmed down, that it became possible to indulge in rhetorical displays in the Legislative assembly. St. John, or Bolingbroke, as he is now always called, was born in 1678 at Battersea, where his father had an estate. He was educated, like many of the great statesmen of England, at Eton. His future rival, Sir Robert Walpole, was one of his contemporaries at the school, and there is a tradition that the implacable enmity which afterwards existed between the two was begun there. From Eton he went to Christ Church, Oxford, where he stayed some years. He then removed to London, and plunged into the most reckless dissipation, though in the midst of his licentiousness he pursued his studies, and showed that fondness for letters which distinguished him all his life. A visit which he made to Paris about this time enabled him to acquire a mastery of the French language, and also caused him to become imbued with the scepticism which was rife there. livelihood by writing abusive and slanderous lampoons and pamphlets upon men in office. The young Secretary made short work of these gentry. On the 17th October, 1711, he wrote to the Queen-" I have discovered the author of another scandalous libel, who will be in custody this afternoon; he will make the thirteenth I have seized, and the fifteenth I have found out." In 1712 Bolingbroke was created a viscount, and in the same year he went to France to negociate personally terms of peace between the two countries. This period marks the culmination of his power and success. Thenceforward his star began to fade, and he soon fell into disgrace. The story of his remaining life is a melancholy one, comprising as it does his impeachment in 1714 for having assisted in obtaining a clandestine peace with France, his flight to the latter country, and alliance with the Pretender, his dismissal from the post of Secretary to that personage, his return to England in 1723, and renewed exile to France shortly after on account of fresh intrigues in which he had engaged. On the death of his father in 1742 he returned to England once more, and at his country seat at Battersea lived in retirement until his death in 1751, dividing his time between study and the pursuits of a country gentleman. All the accounts we have of Bolingbroke's oratory declare it to have been superb, and it is a remarkable thing that not a fragment of his great passages has come down to us. The absence of reporting in his time is mostly responsible for this, yet it is rather strange that nothing has been preserved. All we know about his speeches is from the descriptions of those who heard him speak, and these all ascribe to him the character of a most gifted orator. The absolute want of any record of what he said has been much deplored by students of political oratory, and the younger Pitt is said to have once remarked "that if he had the choice he would prefer one of Bolingbroke's lost orations to one of Livy's lost books." If we may judge of his oratory by his writings, it must be In the year 1700, the fifth of William's reign, Bolingbroke confessed that the loss of his speeches has not lessened his was returned to Parliament for the borough of Wootton reputation. If the examples of his written eloquence had Basset in Wiltshire, which for many years had been repre- been destroyed as those of his oratorical efforts have been, sented by some member of the St. John family. He attached his renown as a writer would be greater than it is. In a himself to Harley, who was at that time both Speaker of the letter to Sir William Windham he has given his estimation House of Commons and leader of the Ministry. From the of the kind of speaking which was most calculated to please first he was a Tory of the Tories, and continued so. He at the House of Commons. "You know the nature of that once made his way in the House of Commons. Everything assembly," he wrote; "they grow like hounds, fond of the was in his favour. He was a member of a patrician family, man who shows them game." His writings are considered had a tall, graceful figure, handsome features, a piercing eye, to be good examples of his style of speaking, being cast in an a winning smile, and a clear harmonious voice. In those oratorical mould, which is explainable from the fact that they days a young man endowed with these advantages was sure were generally written from his dictation, and were therefore of a hearing when he rose to speak in the House, and when, really spoken addresses. But though these have been, and having addressed an audience thus prepossessed in his favour, are still admired, so much so as to have drawn from Earl he displayed eloquence marked by fluency of utterance and Stanhope, in his history of Queen Anne, the extravagant eulogy charm of diction, and abounding in picturesque and forcible" that Bolingbroke's style in them was perhaps the very illustrations, his success was complete. So it was with Bolingbroke. He obtained an early ascendancy over the House, and quickly became one of its leading characters. In 1704 he was made Secretary of War, and in 1710, Secretary of State. Swift wrote of him at that time that he was "the greatest young man he ever knew, and that he turned the whole Parliament, who could do nothing without him." His success did not prevent him from being constantly assailed by the swarm of scribblers who in that age gained a highest perfection of English prose," the curious reader finds nothing particularly striking in them. There is nothing like the soul-stirring eloquence which is to be found in the orations of Pitt or Fox, nor is there the splendour of diction, the originality of thought, or the beauty of illustration which characterise both the writings and the speeches of Burke. But in wit he excelled them all. The remark he made with regard to the parsimony of the Duke of Marlborough is inimitable. It was in a letter to a friend at the Hague when he was Secretary of State. "I am sorry," he wrote, "that my Lord Marlborough gives you so much trouble; it is the only thing he will ever give you." By his political contemporaries Bolingbroke was detested. In concluding a speech in the House in reference to him, Sir Robert Walpole exclaimed, "May his attainder never be reversed, and may his crimes never be forgotten." But in compensation he was the object of the enthusiastic admiration of the men of letters of his time. While in France he was visited by Voltaire, and the talented young Frenchman wrote "that he had found in this illustrious Englishman all the learning of England and all the politeness of France." Pope extolled his marvellous memory, Swift spoke admiringly of his judgment, his vast range of wit and fancy, his thorough comprehension and his invincible eloquence, and Lord Chesterfield was never tired of writing panegyrics upon him. His fluent pen was unable to express all his admiration for the great writer and orator. After many eulogistic descriptions of him, he at last exclaims: "What a man! what extensive knowledge! what a memory! what eloquence!" MORAL INFLUENCES OF JOHN RUSKIN'S WRITINGS HIS paper is not devoted to criticism, but reminiscence. It seeks to recall and recount some of those mental and emotional phenomena experienced during a somewhat long, though often interrupted study of John Ruskin's works. In making this attempt I labour under the disadvantage of one of Apostolic times, who after a glimpse into the third heaven found it impossible to translate into words the impressions there received. Our highest sensations are ever incommunicable; the best part of our lives is never put into words. Therefore it will be impossible for me to be faithful to the title of my paper, inasmuch as it is impossible for me to speak the unspeakable. Then, say you, why choose such a subject for discourse? Partly to recall as far as possible, experiences that live like a dream in my mind; and, partly in hope, that by so doing I shall lead others to the enjoyment of the same experiences. The spirit of curiosity first led me to a study of John Ruskin's works. I heard them spoken of by men, choice in their selection of authors, and known for their attainments and culture. I found the mention of his name called up the soul into their face, and rung out from their lips, what seemed to me, words of wildly exaggerated praise. I determined to procure the works of this wonderful writer-a determination easier formed than fulfilled. At last-for I lived in an out-of-the-way place, I secured a little volume of his lectures entitled "The Political Economy of Art." That is about eleven years ago. I was but a lad, and no doubt my experiences were "laddish." But to be faithful to the title of the paper I must try and recount them. I was entranced by the style more than the subject matter. "Alice in Wonderland" was never more surprised nor captivated. I read on, page after page, like the Ethiopian, not knowing what I read. But I fared worse than he, for no Philip came to ask "Understandest thou what thou readest." I was carried along with the sweep of the sentences, and anon, tossed high and dry, by some revolutionary idea that gave greater force to the style, I grew wild with the whirl of words, I was fascinated with the faultlessness of the imagery, I had never before met with scriptural language so splendidly woven into English literature. From the perusal of this book the charm and power of the English Bible dawned upon me. I had heard many sermons, and read not a little Theology, but it was the writing of John Ruskin as seen in this little volume of lectures on "Art," that first opened out to me the hidden treasures in the Word of God. Thus, the curiosity that led me to his works soon lost itself in an admiration for his style; this admiration spurring me on to further and more thorough studies. Such was my earliest experience of the influence of John Ruskin's writings. Soon after this I was fortunate enough to receive, on loan, a small copy of " The Crown of Wild Olive," which I read with avidity, and copied complete in manuscript. It is needless to say that further study fed my already enkindled admiration. And as I now, in cold blood, seek to analyse the secret of his power as a writer, over my youthful mind, I am constrained to trace it to the clear, straightforward, attractive, and convincing way in which he put his positions and drew his conclusions; and of which no book is a finer example than the one now under consideration. The following extracts will illustrate what I mean :— Take clearness. What can surpass this as a statement as to what is implied by play and work? "Now, roughly, not with vain subtlety or disposition, but for plain use of words, play is an exertion of the body or mind, made to please ourselves, and with no determined end; and work is a thing done, because it ought to be done, and with a determined end. You play, as you call it, at cricket, that is as hard work as anything else; but it amuses you, and has no other result but the amusement. If it were done as an ordered form of exercise, for health's sake, it would become work directly. So in like manner, whatever we do to please ourselves, and only for the sake of the pleasure, not for an ultimate object, is play, the pleasing thing, not the useful thing." What could be more clear than that; hitherto I had imagined that vagueness was the sign of profundity, but I began to discover that the greatest teachers put their greatest truths in simplest form. Or take an example of straightforwardness-clean, hard-hitting, linked together with that poetical method of presentation which, while it lessens the ruggedness, sharpens the edge of the weapon used. Speaking in the same lecture of the English games, horse-racing, and sportsmanship, he says:-"Through horse-racing you get every form of what the higher classes call play; that is gambling: and through gamepreserving, you get also some curious laying out of ground; that beautiful arrangement of dwelling house for man and beast, by which we have grouse and black cock, so many brace to the acre, and men and women so many brace to the garret." That I call straightforwardness of style, a straightforwardness that must surely find a response in the heart of every Englishman. But note the poetical close of the paragraph :- "I often wonder what the angelic builders and surveyors-the angelic builders who build the many mansions up above them, and the angelic surveyors who measure that four-square city with their measuring reeds—I wonder what they think-or are supposed to think, of the laying out of grounds by this nation, which has set itself, as it seems, literally to accomplish word for word, or rather fact for word, in the person of these poor whom its Master left to represent Him, what that Master said of Himself-that foxes and birds had homes, but He none." And then, withal, there was the power of conviction- a something in what he said that carried proof upon its surface-a force appealing to the witness of truth in my own soul, and wringing forth, however reluctantly the response-" Verily it is so." As far as I can now judge, these were some of the features in his style that went to create within me the admiration of which I have spoken. Indeed, I was in danger of forgetting what the man said, in my admiration of the way he said it. But this book had other influences upon me. It was during its careful study that the mighty hand of the writer first kept and compelled me to own him as a master and guide. Hitherto I had been trained in the party school of politics, and taught to view religious questions wholly from a sectarian stand-point. I had grown up with an idea that my faith was the faith, and all other faiths false. I had been looking out upon the world from my own little port-hole, and deemed there was naught beyond its limits and range of view. I was facing life mainly in a spirit of indifference, determined not to trouble it much if it would but leave me alone. But as I read on from lecture to lecture--from "Work" to "Traffic," and from "Traffic" to "War," I was compelled to think about that over which I had only previously dreamed. I became uneasy. Ithought if this man is right I am woefully wrong. I felt that he was right; my conscience told me that he was right;-my experience-my eyes, when I opened them, and looked fearlessly forth, told me that he was right. Thus there was less of pleasure and more of uneasiness accompanying the study of his works. He told me things that vexed me, yet which I could not ignore, inasmuch as I knew they were true. It was a voice, coming to me of indolent nature, and selfish heart, saying-" Arise ye, and depart, for this is not your rest." But I must hastily draw these reminiscences to a close; they reveal but in part, a few of the influences the writings of John Ruskin have had upon my life. I know that his are but little known, and what is worse, misknown. But he is a wise man who goes to those books that ennoble him most; and sooner or later all thoughtful minds gravitate thitherwards. Many of my friends fail to understand my attachment to the man and his works; they fail to see in him what I see, or draw from him the inspiration I derive. Two gentlemen of my acquaintance were speaking one with another as to the claims of the late Frederick Dennison Maurice. "Why do you read him so closely," said the elder. The reply came in the form of another question-"Why do you wear those spectacles?" 'O!' said the elder, "because they enable me to see more clearly, and lengthen the range of my vision." "And," replied the younger, "that is the very reason why I read the works of Frederick Dennison Maurice." And when I am asked why I spend so much time in a study of John Ruskin's writings. In reply:-because he helps me to see more clearly and more accurately; he moves me to feel more tenderly and truly; he not only purges my vision, but warms my heart, and fits me for the claims of life; he makes me happy in my humble toil, and contented in my loneliness; he has strewn my past with profitable reminiscences which this paper has tried to recount, and pointing to a future, he says "Work on, for the prize is glorious, and the hope is great." Last week Mr. Anthony Trollope had an apoplectic seizure while dining at the house of his brother-in-law, Sir John Tilley. He is, however, in a fair way for recovery. A scheme is in progress to lay down a series of roadways from Liver pool to the centres of manufacturing industry in South Lancashire, and to carry along these roadways a double set of iron plates corresponding in breadth with the wheels of ordinary lurries or waggons, which will be drawn by steam traction engines. Dr. Tanner, the faster, lectured in Canada recently, and offered the brewers of London a test of the relative values of beer and water as nutriment by challenging them to place any six men against him to fast, they to be allowed nothing but beer, he nothing but water, and maintained that he would endure longer than the time of the others united. -Christian World. "General" Booth has written to the daily papers to contradict the statement of Canon Girdlestone, that his Sunday scholars had been presented with copies of the War Cry containing the words, "For He's a jolly good Saviour." Mr. Booth states that "no such line has ever been presented in the War Cry or any other publication of this movement." "E. H.," writing to the Standard, however declares that he heard the offensive chorus sung at a Salvation Army service at Woolwich on the 27th of August. Canon Girdlestone says he quoted the verse from memory. Other correspondents give specimens of irreverent adaptations, but the custom of the "Army" is notorious.-The Guardian. Among the Hamilton MSS. just sold to the Prussians is one written in golden uncial letters on purple velvet, which dates from the seventh century. It is a copy of the Gospels in Latin, presented to Henry VIII. by Leo X., on the occasion of conferring on him the title of Defender of the Faith. It is said that the acquisition of these manuscripts by the Prussian Government is chiefly due to the exertions of the Crown Prince. The purchase will be paid for out of the fund placed at the disposal of the Emperor for expenditure by him at will, on the advice of a Minister of State. THE HE weekly meeting was held at the Liberal Club, Prestwich, on Monday night, Mr. Crossfield (Chairman of Committees) presiding. In answer to Mr. J. Ogden (Canterbury) the Irish Secretary (Mr. Jenkins) said it was not the intention of the Government to bring forward a measure for confiscating property of the Irish landlords, and he could not give the hon. gentleman any information respecting the Kilmainham Treaty, simply because there is no such Treaty in existence. In answer to a further inquiry he said there had been no letters on the subject, but if the hon. gentleman liked he could satisfy himself by searching the archives of the Irish Office (laughter). Mr. Ogden said if the House would permit him, he would read one of the letters (laughter.) Leave was withheld, and the subject dropped. Mr. RICHARDSON (Oxford University) resumed the debate on the Bill for the Abolition of the House of Lords, twitting the Irish Secretary on the want of knowledge of history, and quoting Lord Macauley as a greater authority than the Irish Secretary, and whose statement that the House of Lords had been of great good to the country, as more to be relied upon than that of the Irish Secretary, who maintained the opposite. Mr. CRAWSHAW (President of the Local Government Board) said that sufficient arguments had been used to justify the abolition of the House of Lords. Their acts of obstruction were not confined to one or two hear). Their veto power was too comprehensive, and ought to have a measures, but were directed against the whole policy of progress (hear, limit. It was his opinion that if a Representative Chamber passed a bill four times, no power in the Lords ought to be in a position to stultify their work (applause). He was surprised that the member for Leeds should support the House of Lords, seeing that at one time that assembly was strenuously opposing the repeal of the Corn Laws, when there were 21,000 inhabitants of Leeds starving (applause). Mr. MARSDEN (North Durham) said the bill, and the speeches made in its favour, were samples of the average ability of the Radical members. They were to remember that the restitution they were dealing with had existed nearly 800 years-(hear, hear)-and that for breadth of character and elasticity of freedom, its equal was not to be found in the world (cheers). They would do well to pause and ponder, before they rushed upon such a subject. Whilst they were considering the measures which had been rejected by the House of Lords, let them also bear in mind the work of this character accomplished by the House of Commons. If for this reason the House of Lords is to be abolished, then the inference is that the House of Commons should be done something with (cheers). Amongst the measures which had been passed by the House of Commons, but rejected by the Lords, was one of making church rates compulsory. ("When.") In 1647 (loud laughter). Mr. J. HOUGH (Banbury) urged the hereditary principle contended for by gentlemen on the Conservative side of the House was not natural, but artificial (cheers). It ought to be well-known that most measures which had tended to the good of the people of this country, had been initiated in the House of Commons and afterwards strenuously opposed by the Lords. The Radicals had no desire to crush the bishops, but merely wanted to place them in their right position. What right had they in the House of Lords? (applause). Could not Christianity take care of itself without having the bishops in the House of Lords? (applause). For 23 years the House of Lords prevented the passing of the Bill or the Abolition of Slavery. What |