objection to the extension of the Household suffrage. I ask you who it was that conceded the principle of Household suffrage? The only answer that can be returned to that, I am proud to say it, is, that it was the Conservative party. (Conservative Cheers and Oh!) Now Sir, the nondescript gentlemen who occupy the indefinable position on the cross-benches (laughter)-may disagree with the statement, but I repeat it, that the principle of Household suffrage was conceded by the Conservatives. (Renewed Conservative Cheers) Having once conceded that principle, it is too late for the member for Carlisle to talk of any other franchise short of Household suffrage. Now, Sir, the resolution that the Premier brings before us simply means that the Government are in favour of a principle which we Conservatives have been in favour of for a long time. I was glad to hear that the leader of the Opposition has already given notice Mr. ASHWORTH (Carlisle) rose to explain that he was not the leader of the Opposition. Mr. WHITCOMBE:--If the hon. member for Carlisle would only be a little patient he would see that he was not at all alluding to his remarkable speech (laughter)—I would give notice of an amendment, that it is the plain and obvious duty of the Prime Minister not to throw upon this House a resolution offering no latitude for discussion, but that he should have dealt with the whole question, both of extension and redistribution. Now, Sir, one of the remarks which fell from the Prime Minister was that the opposition to redistribution would te mainly manifested from this side of the House. I throw back any such statement to him and his colleagues, and I say that obviously the reason why they have not dealt with the question is that they know it is the rock which will split into fragments the solid phalanx of his supporters behind him, and split up the Great United Liberal Party. We on this side are in favour of redistribution. (Conservative Cheers.) Sir, the resolution which the Premier has proposed speaks volumes for his discretion, but one would very naturally have expected, seeing the multitude of followers he has at his back, he would have given some expression in his motion as to the principle on which redistribution should proceed. The Government would have shewn a greater consideration for the dignity of this House, if, instead of bringing in a paltry resolution of this kind, they had set themselves the task of bringing in a bill dealing with both the question of redistribution and extension. When they do that they will find that we, on this side of the House have some principles of unity upon which we can act, and that discord and complete want of union will be found upon that. (Loud Conservative Cheers.) Mr. CONOLLY (Downpatrick) agreed with the hon. member for Carlisle in commending the Prime Minister's Speech, but did not agree with that gentleman's views as to an educational qualification. If education was to be any test at all, a man could not be considered to have passed a test in political knowledge simply because he could read and write his own name. (Hear, hear.) He had met with many a hard-headed man, full of practical good sense, capable of forming his own opinions on any subject upon which he might be called to form an opinion, who could not read or write his own name. He (the hon. member) submitted that it would be a bad thing to deprive a man of his citizenship because in the days of his youth the State neglected him. The State was not now neglecting the young, and some fifteen or twenty years from now, it would be a disgrace for a man not to be able to read and write-(hear, hear from Mr. Ashworth) but, while we should not punish him for that,— Mr. ASHWORTH explained that he had not intended to express that illiterate electors of the present day should be disqualified. through, a number of interesting debates will take place, and the members will thus have an opportunity of enjoying the benefits of a first-class Debating Society. At the same time they will acquire a knowledge of procedure of the House of Commons, a knowledge which is absolutely essential to every intelligent reading of the newspapers of the present day. The Society is to be congratulated on possessing in Mr. TALBOT and Mr. S. NORBURY WILLIAMS two Speakers who are thoroughly acquainted with their duties, and who possess in a singular degree that watchfulness and firmness, united with tact, which is essential for the proper working of a Society of this kind. Amongst the subjects to be dealt with, both by members of the Government, and private members, during the Session, are the following:-Procedure, The House of Lords, North Channel Railway Tunnel, Religious Tests, Eastern Question, Manchester Ship Canal, A Motion to grant Irish electors the same municipal and local advantages as are possessed by English electors, The Law relating to Breach of Promise of Marriage, and the Bankruptcy Laws. At the close of the sitting, Mr. Norbury Williams appealed to the members to do what they could to extend the membership of the Society, an appeal which we would do all in our power to endorse. o'clock. Mr. JAMES HOUSTON C (Chief Secretary for Ireland) movedThat inasmuch as the State is bound to secure all property to its owners, and as the emoluments of the established Church are strictly and legally her property, having been voluntarily given to her, and are therefore her absolute rroperty, any measures having for their object the disendowment of the English Church, as by law established, are, in the opinion of this House, robbery and sacrilege. He said the only occasion when State aid was required was when private property was in danger. Church property was composed of lands, tithes, glebe-lands, houses, &c., which were given to her by private members of the Church, and the State only enforced payment of the tithes and dues by law, as private property. Who would compensate the Church for the loss of her property? Was the purchase-money, which would be about £80,000,000, or 20 years' purchase of the Church's income, to come out of the pocket of the laymen? The Church had practically educated the country as it was to-day, and out of her funds had established schools and missions all over the country. Mr. BELLAMY C (Premier) formally seconded the resolution. Mr. SYKES L (Ipswich) said he should support the resolution, as he held that private Church property, as well as any other private property, should be protected by the State. Mr. FIELDING C (Foreign Secretary) said that when you interfered with private property by law, you introduced a principle which would lead to ruin. Church property was entitled to protection, and when any property was to be taken away from its owners by force, it was robbery, but if it was Church property, it was not only robbery, but sacrilege. Who was to counteract the evil influence such an act of spoliation would have on the morals of the rising generation. The debate having been adjourned, on the motion of Mr. WEBBON L (Brighton), the House adjourned until next Tuesday. TE LONGSIGHT. HE ordinary weekly meeting of this Society was held on Monday evening, in the large hall of the Mechanics' Institute, Longsight, Mr. W. E. JONES, Speaker, presiding. There was only a very small attendance of members and strangers present. Mr. CONOLLY, continuing, said-That when the principle of Household Suffrage was conceded in 1866, though it was carried by the Conservatives, it was not their bill. It was, in no shape or form, the same bill that it had entered the House. The changes made in it, were not the changes made by the party with whom the Hon. member for North Devon sat. He (Mr. Conolly) was very much pleased with the way in which the resolution had been introduced by the Right Hon. gentleman. The debate was continued by Mr. BARBER (Nottingham), Mr. J. W. | felony, as well as to abolish the oath prior to members taking their seats. RITCHIE (West Aberdeenshire), and Mr. BRODERICK (Richmond). The House adjourned at half-past nine. The debate will be continued at the next meeting of the Society, when Mr. N. C. Schou will move an amendment. The proceedings were followed with great interest throughout, and there can be no doubt that now the preliminary business has been got Mr W. GAHAN (Inniskillen) asked the First Lord of the Treasury (Mr. Lawson) whether it was his intention to legalize the admission into the House of Commons of those who had been convicted of treason and Mr. LAWSON (First Lord of the Treasury) said he would do his best to answer the hon. member's question, but he was not quite clear if his object was to inquire whether the present Government were willing to introduce a law which does not at present exist, to the effect that all persons convicted of treason or felony should be permitted to sit in the House. In that case he did not know how the law stood, but he believed that there was no such law on the statute book; but, if he were rightly informed as regards that, the present Government would be no party to make a law to that effect, and if such a law existed it would be their intention to abrogate it and sweep it off the statute book. (Applause.) Mr. GAHAN (Inniskillen) did not know whether there was such a law or not, but in "May's Constitutional History" there was a law disqualifying persons who had been convicted either of treason or felony. Mr. WOOD (South Devon)-It is stated on the ministerial programme that the oaths' disability would be dealt with. In reply to the above question, the FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY said he believed that there was such a law in the "Constitutional History," but the present Government would abrogate such law. With regard to the second question, he may state for the information of the Home Secretary that any member is quite competent to introduce a measure, and it is not always necessary for the Government to do so. They had not yet had time to go through their programme, but they would introduce a bill on the subject when time and opportunity presented themselves. Whatever was stated on their programme would receive their serious consideration. Mr. W. GAHAN-I give notice of the following motion :-That facilities should be made for admitting such as have been convicted of treason and felony, as well as those who are not competent with regard to the oath. (Laughter.) Mr. WOOD (South Devon)-I give notice that I shall oppose the same. (Laughter.) Proceeding, he said he gave notice the previous Monday to the Irish Secretary of the following question, to which he would expect a reply, on behalf of the member for Londonderry, next Monday: Whether and by what authority, and at whose advice, court valuers were appointed by the Irish Land Commission? Mr. MOUNTCASTLE (South-west Lancashire)-I give notice that I shall next week ask the Foreign Secretary whether a convention was made with Egypt for the payment of the British troops in occupation in Egypt ? Mr. DEACON (Eye)-I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is correct that Sir Garnet Wolseley and Sir B. Seymour are to receive £25,000 as a gift for their services, and in addition to this a pension of £2,000 a year? The FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY-In answer to the question of the hon. member, the Government have to say that nothing has been settled. Mr. HORSLEY (Mid Cheshire) wished to ask whether the Government intended to make any pecuniary rewards to the families of those who had been killed during the war? pursued by the Conservatives was that of the Radicals twenty years ago, and he would say that they (the Conservatives) were twenty years behind time. (Laughter, and "Oh, oh!") He contended that it was the men of the present day who had the most experience, and not those who lived eight hundred years ago, as the world was now more enlightened than it was then. People could not do what they liked with their own, and it was only necessary for him to give one instance. We have a certain great duke, who evicted his tenants in order that he might get the large territory of thirty miles of land enclosed for shooting purposes; and another, the Duke of Newcastle, who attempted to coerce some of his tenants because they would not vote as he wished. In conclusion, he said the sole object of the Government was to make the land more productive, and not to reduce the political power of the landlord. Mr. JACKSON (North-east Lancashire) spoke on Lord Cairns' bill, which, he said, met every difficulty raised by the Government; and it was a bill that no Radical could ever have drafted. The member for East Cumberland having spoken in favour of the Government proposal, Mr. DEACON (Eye) said that to sweep away the law of primogeniture was absurd on the face of it. Mr. NASMITH (Foreign Secretary) next addressed the assembly, and the House shortly afterwards adjourned. A GORTON. THIRD SESSION.-TENTH ASSEMBLY OF THE HOUSE. FTER some preliminary business of a routine character had been gone through, the Prime Minister (Mr. F. W. DEACON, C.) rose to move the following resolution : Consequent upon the war in Egypt, and recent events attending the policy of the Gladstone administration in that country (which this House condemns as unnecessary, unjustifiable, and impolitie), it has now become requisite that certain measures be at once introduced, in order alike to regain the confidence of the Egyptian people and for the safety of our own interests. Be it therefore enacted, from this date, that a British Protectorato be established in the towns of Port Said, Ismailia, and Suez, which shall be duly garrisoned in future by English troops, and that the Island of Socatia, together with the said towns, be strongly fortified. It having likewise been amply demonstrated that the joint control between France and England has for the last three years been grossly abused, it is further decreed, that henceforth independent action be taken by this country regarding our monetary interests, and the said control abolished, thus leaving the Egyptian people to form their own constitution, and to carry out the interna! government of their country in any way that may appear best to them, under the sovereignty of the Sublime Porte. With a view to effect such policy aforesaid, a supplementary grant of £1,500,000 is The FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY-I may repeat my answer, and say hereby apportioned towards such objects. that nothing has been officially passed. After a speech of considerable length and vigour from the Prime Minister in support of the resolution, the member for Wenlock spoke strongly against it, in favour of the policy of the Imperial Government After the member for Lincoln had moved the adjournment of the debate, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. W. G. JONES gave notice that at the next meeting he would move an amendment as follows: That this House has no confidence in the policy of the Government as enunciated in TH HARPURHEY. The debate on the Land Bill, the preamble of which reads as follows"That, in view of the present condition of the agricultural interests in England, it is expedient that the laws relating to the disposal, holding, and taking of land should be amended "--was opened by Mr. WooD (South Devon), who said he quite agreed with the preamble; but as regards the first clause, he did not think that the laws of primogeniture and entail should be repealed. The law of primogeniture and entail their proposals for the settlement of the Egyptian question. simply gave the privilege to a man to do what he liked with his own. With reference to the second clause, which ran: "That power should be given to all present holders of land to deal with it; all existing interests to be respected," he contended that it was an impossibility to respect all "existing interests." With reference to the third clause, he thought it should not be so "absolute," and that it should be left optional and not compulsory "for all owners of land to register their titles to such land," &c., &c. They must remember that when they were legislating for the agricultural interests they must not try to overthrow the power of the landlord, as he verily believed was the intention of the mover of the bill (Mr. Nasmith, Carlisle), who stated that the political power of the landlords should be reduced. It appeared to him (the speaker) that the bill, was drafted in order to militate against the rights and privileges of the landlord. (Hear, hear.) There was no doubt if that clause was made optional it would receive the support of the members on that side of the House, and the bill would be productive of a great deal of good. But he contended that if the bill were to pass in its present state, it would tend to raise up a plutocracy which would be very much worse than an aristocracy. (Applause.) HE weekly meeting took place on Wednesday night, at the Conservative Hall, Harpurhey. The chair was occupied by Mr. W. JACKSON (Chairman of Committees.) Mr. H. PLUMMER (Gloucester), in defending the bill, criticised at some length the remarks of the previous speaker, and said that the policy The Foreign Secretary (Mr. WHITCOMBE) pointed out that Mr. Glass (Birmingham) had given notice of two questions, which were against the done so inadvertently, allowed one to be struck out. rules of the House, and the Hon. member having stated that he had Mr. CHAMPION (Scarborough) gave notice that he would ask the Postmaster-General when the New Post Office in Brown Street would be ready for business. Mr. TATTERSALL (Burnley) gave notice to ask the Home Secretary to explain the long delay in the re-building of Christ Church Steeple at Harpurhey. The Foreign Secretary, on behalf of the Premier, in answer to the member for Burnley, stated that there could be no objection to a member of the Government being interested in a Government contract, especially when it is a case such as the one referred to, and when the member fulusually appertaining to such a high position. The Chancellor of the filled the onerous duties of his office without asking for the emoluments Exchequer said that if the miserable lot of fronting which was described as a Contract, stood in his way of being a member of the Government, he would rather give up the "Contract" and retain his position. The member for Lincoln (Mr. WooD) resumed the debate on the Limitation of Distress Bill, and moved an amendment to the first clause to give no man any priority of claim for any species of debt. The Government desired to continue a system which was antiquated and unjust, and they might as well ask the House to reinstitute hanging for sheep-stealing, as to do such a thing a perpetuate the present system. (Cheers) Mr. NESBITT (Irish Secretary) urged that the previous speaker had not brought forward a single argument in support of his amendment, and that therefore he left nothing to answer. At the last meeting the member for Birmingham made much of the power of the landlord to distrain upon agricultural implements for which a tenant might owe an amount of money equal to the rent owing. But the Hon. gentleman forgot that such things were tools, and as such, were exempt from distress, providing there was sufficient otherwise to meet the claim for rent. During the delivery of the speech of the Irish Secretary, the leader of the Opposition (Mr. J. RAMSBOTTOM) who had been absent for several weeks through family affliction, entered the room, and was greeted with cordial cheers from both sides. At the same time the Speaker (Rev. N. GLASS) entered the House and took the Chair. Mr. GLASS (Birmingham) pointed out on behalf of his side of the House that he was perfectly right in saying that at one time tenants had the right to rescue their goods on the way to the pound, and Hon. gentlemen might find this out for them selves if they chose to refer to Blackstone. He was surprised at the extraordinary speech of the member for Ashton, and he was surprised at the extraordinary nature of the bill. Here the Government had said in the very preamble of the bill that they proposed to limit the right of distraint. He wondered if gentlemen on the Government Benches ever consulted the dictionary. If they did they would find, and surely be aghast at the fact, that they as Conservatives were actually proposing to limit a thing which was right. Mr. WHITCOMBE (Foreign Secretary) replied on behalf of the Government, and urged that it was not for the Government to answer the question why the landlord should have no priority of claim. It had no relation to the whole bill, but belonged exclusively to the amendment which had been moved, and it was for the movers of the amendment to prove their position. The Right Hon. gentleman went on to argue that the right of distress made it possible for agriculture to be carried on by people with small capita', and finished by urging that the circumstances of the case wou'l be met, not by the abolition of the law of distress, but by its limitation. (Cheers.) This concluded the arguments, and the Foreign Secretary, having stated on behalf of the Government, that they staked their existence o the bill as a whole, the amendment was put and carried. Thereupon the Government resigned, and Mr. JOSEPH RAMSBOTTOM, as leader of the Liberal party, was called upon to form a Cabinet. The House then adjourned. After some preliminary business the hon. member for North Durham moved the following resolution That this honourable House strongly protests against, and views with deep distrust, the vacillating and cowardly policy of the present Government, in reference to the Anglo-Egyptian difficulty, and further believes that the late war has not only been unnecessarily forced upon this country by the Government, to the detriment of its highest and best interests, but, owing to its utter incapacity, has caused a useless destruction of life and property, and that a crime of blood guiltiness has been committed, therefore forfeiting the confidence and respect of the nation. In moving the resolution he said they had often been told by Liberal speakers, that, to a very large extent, the past and present situation in Egypt had been entirely due to the Conservative policy, but he maintained that those speakers were either ignorant of facts, or if they were cognizant of them, gave a mis-statement of them. (Hear, hear.) He contended that if the Liberal Government had followed the policy pointed out by Lord Salisbury, the state of affairs in Egypt would have been different--("no, no ")--and as the Liberal members of the House would give credit to Mr. Gladstone for his intentions with regard to Egypt, then he would ask them to accord the same attention to what had been said by Lord Salisbury. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member then entered into a strong declamation of the policy pursued by the Government in Egypt, arguing that if the policy of the Conservative Government was to be subservient to that of the Liberal Government, he failed to see why the members on the other side of the House should attempt to fasten the great share of the blame of the present situation in Egypt. ("No, no.") He charged the Government with dishonesty, unmanliness, and blood guiltiness, upon the assumption that the Egyptian war could have been averted by common foresight and sagacity. The Egyptian war had been caused, not for a love of peace, but through the insatiable anxiety and greed of the Government to achieve a popularity, which was acquired by trampling down the rights and liberties of their fellow men. (Cries of "nonsense," dissent, and cheers.) Mr. ALLEN (Merthyr Tydvil) thought that in his attack on the Government, the preceding speaker had displayed an amount of audacity as uncalled for, as it was unexpected. He believed that the war in Egypt was brought about by the joint control, but they must remember that the treaty which affected it, was brought about by the late Government. ("No, no.") The hon. member for North Durham had stated that France had backed out of her alliance with them, with regard to Egypt. He denied this, for there was no doubt that the French were cognizant of our intentions, and had it not been for other difficulties which they had to contend, they would have joined with them in subjugating the rebellion in Egypt. He thought that if the blood guiltiness of the late Government was weighted with that of the present one, there would be a preponderance on the Tory side of the scale. (Laughter and “ no, no.") Mr. R. M. RICHARDSON (Oxford University) read some copious newspaper cuttings, of statements made in the Imperial House, by Liberal members who were averse to the Egyptian war, stating, as his reason, that they would be accepted with less prejudice than if they were uttered by Conservative speakers. He contended that had the Conservatives been in power, the Egyptian war wou'd have been avoided--(“ no, no ")—and they had always shewn that they were better able to rule than the Liberal Government. (Loud laughter and ironical cheers.) The Rev. S. HARTLEY (Premier) said he was reminded that evening by the member for North Durham about the quotation of someone entering where angels feared to tread. In a measure this was exemplified that evening, for here they had Mr. Marsden moving a condemnation of the policy of the Government, which even the great Tory leaders had not yet even thought of. It seemed to him that all along the opening speech of the motion, the mover had been vainly fighting for arguments -(cheers)-and he could not understand the consistency of the quotations which had been made by the opposition, and they knew perfectly well that the men who uttered them were of the peace-at-any-price policy. (Applause). After pointing out the inconsistencies of the opposition speeches, and defending the policy of the Government in Egypt, the hon. member resumed his seat, and the motion, being put to the House, was lost by a large majority. MUTUAL IMPROVEMENT SOCIETIES. 0% MOSS SIDE (BAPTIST) YOUNG MEN'S SOCIETY. N Monday evening last, at the usual weekly meeting, a debate took place on the Sunday opening of Picture Galleries, Museums, &e. The Rev. JOSEPH TURNER occupied the chair. Mr. PRIOR moved the following resolution : That, in the opinion of this meeting, it is desirable to give greater facilities for recreation of a moral and intellectual character, and for the instruction of the people, by hours on Sundays, due regard being had for its preservation as a day of rest and cessation permitting the opening of museums, art galleries, and similar institutions, for some from ordinary work. He said-Men of learning and of high standing in the Christian Church, the Christian Fathers, the great reformers, Luther, Calvin, and Knox, all told them that the Jewish Sabbath had been abrogated, and that no sanctity was to be attached to the day we call Sunday, or the Lord's Day. They told us that in attaching sanctity to Sunday we tried to transform a Jewish law into a Christian superstition, and that there did not exist a single passage of Scripture which transferred the obligations of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. The injunction to the Jews was to observe the seventh day of the week-the Christian Sunday is the first day of the week. There was no authority for the change, and if the Mosaic Law was to be observed, we must observe it on the Saturday, like the Jews, and the whole of the Mosaic Law would be binding, and we should have an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. A sect called the Seventh-day Baptists now observed Saturday as the Day of Rest. The connection between the Mosaic Law of the Sabbath and the Christian Sunday was entirely unknown until the sixteenth century. We may thank the Puritans for the rigid Sunday we now enjoy; so rigid was it made that to laugh on that day was a sin. The speaker then made some very lengthy allusions to the Scriptures. There were many people who would not attend a place of worship, but would go to on art gallery or museum. Those institutions were national property, and the people had a right to visit them on Sundays, if they wished. In Manchester alone we permitted over two thousand public and beer-houses to open on Sundays, and sell drink on the premises, nd yet would not allow an antidote to what was admittedly one of the great curses of this country. Mr. PASCOE seconded the resolution. Mr. WITPEN moved the amendment, and the original idea of Christianity had been perverted from the spiritual to the temporal. That the figuratively warlike language of the Apostles, had been construed and taken up literally. He quoted the opinion of Voltaire, who could not reconcile (sceptic though he was) crusading, with theoretical and early Christianity. Mr. Elson then described, in some detail, the first crusade,-Peter the Hermit and his undisciplined rabble, Godfrey de Bouillon and his magnificent army of knights. He pictured Godfrey's early success, his installation as Duke of Palestine, his defeat at Ascalon, his final fall, and with him that of Christian domination in Syria and Palestine. Mr. Elson concluded by pointing out the principal motives of the Crusaders, and the effects of these wars of the Cross. In the debate which followed, most of the members expressed sympathy with Mr. Elson's opinions, but there were one or two dissentient voices. 7-30. Union Chapel, Oxford Road, M.I.S. Parliamentary Debate on "Woman November 28th.-Chorlton Road Association. "Our Mineral Zion Chapel M.I.S. "The Gift of the Gab," by the Rev. J. A. Macfayden, St. Margaret's M.I.S. "Commercial Morality," by Mr. B. Marchantor. Meeting." 7-30. Stretford P.D.S. At the Stretford Town Hall. Mr. ADAMS, in heartily seconding it, said that it was a question of Wednesday, November 29th.-New Jerusalem Church. great importance, considering the immense strides infidelity was making in this country, end he begged them not to allow any encroachment on the Day of Rest, nor permit God to be robbed of even a part of that day of worship. He asked did men who went to picture galleries on Sundays Thursday, November 30th.-Lever Street Essay and Debating Society. go there to worship God or to satisfy their own selfish pleasure. The mover of the resolution had said that the Mosaic Law was simply for the Jews, and not for the Gentiles. If that were so, we might as well ignore any of the other commandments, as avoid the fourth. He feared that Sunday opening would be introducing the "thin end of the wedge," and would, in time, lead to a wish for its extension to theatres and music-halls. Mr. P. ABROT, Mr. HALL, Mr. J. ABBOT and others, made some brief observations, and the chairman, having put the resolution, it was carried by a majority of one vote. ON ST. MARGARET'S. 66 N Tuesday last, a lecture upon Dreams, Somnambulism, and allied phenomena," was delivered before this Society, by Dr. Leech, of this City. The lecturer commenced by explaining (with a set of diagrams) the structure of the brain, and by tracing the action of the will from its origin in the higher centres, through the connecting tubes to the lower centres, and thence down the spinal column. It was further shown that the lower centres, although incapable of thought, were the origin of most nervous action, and had moreover the power of learning "by heart" the way to direct this action. This might be observed in mechanical exercises like walking. The lecturer proceeded to show that the brain of a dreamer is sleeping only in certain regions, and that in the case of a somnambulist the lower centres are awake and active, while the rest of the brain may be in a state of unconsciousness. Hence the sleepwalker will often deny that he has walked, and sometimes even that he has dreamed. Dr. Leech went on to say that no dream was ever original, but always was a recapitulation of past actions, all of which are indelibly recorded in the brain. Instances of abnormal power in certain portions of the mind were then given, and some curious tales were related of poems having been written, and works of art, and mathematical problems having been executed during sleep. Dreams of this sort worked with a definite object in view, but some night-visions, on the contrary, were subject to sudden changes of character, due to the awaking of new parts of the mental structure. Night-mare was the result of wakefulness in the higher centres of the brain only, so that when danger threatened, the unconscious condition of the lower centres rendered communication with the muscles impossible. Dr. Leech concluded by submitting theories with regard to Mr. Irving Bishop's performances. The proceedings concluded with a cordial vote of thanks to the lecturer, the audience dispersed at 9-45 p.m. The next meeting will take place on Tuesday next, at 8 p.m., in the School-roooms, Hulton Street, Moss Side. Friday, December 1st-Lower Mosley Street M.I.S. M. Pimley. "Charles Swain," by Mr. J. Astley Lane M.I.S. "Salvation Army," by Mr. McLaughlan. Eecles Baptist M.I.S. "Impromptu Speeches." Manchester P.D.S. NEW CROSS WARD SHORTHAND WRITERS' ASSOCIATION. A LECTURE, under the auspices of this Association, was delivered on Friday, 17th November, by Mr. J. A. Gibson. Subject: "Some doubts as to the Efficacy and Wisdom of Vaccination." There was a moderate attendance of the public. The Lecturer treated his subject in an able manner, and at the close, received a very cordial vote of thanks. The next public lecture will take place on December 8th. Subject: "How is the (Church) Parson paid?" by Mr. W. Carter. Chair to be taken at 7-30. Meetings will be held in future at the Coach and Horses Coffee Tavern, Oldham Street. Full particulars may be obtained from the Secretary, 75, Reather Street, Manchester. Obituary. Rev. MATTHEW BRAITHWAITE, Pastor of the New Church, Rev. THOMAS WHEELER, Rector of St. Stephen's, Salford. Misappropriation of Funds Collected for Religious To the Editor of the Pulpit Record, SIR,-With the case near Preston, mentioned under this heading in the Pulpit Record, I am well acquainted— in fact the Reverend gentleman was good enough to send me a circular, begging for money for his new Church. I enclose the curious document, it gives us a great deal of information, but he omits to state to what denomination he belongs, or professes to belong. Manchester, November 20. Yours obediently, H. REFORMATORY SHIP CORNWALL, An earnest APPEAL is made on behalf of the Funds of this Training Ship. Since its establishment in 1859, 1,759 Boys convicted of crime have been educated and trained for the Merchant service, on board the Cornwall, and of these more than 90 per cent. are now known to be earning an honest livelihood, many being in positions of great trust and respectability. Notwithstanding the most rigid economy consistent with the successful working of the Institution, various untoward events, impossible to have foreseen, have resulted in a debt exceeding £1000, which now presses heavily on the resources of the Cornwall, and even threatens its existence as a training ship. A kind friend of the Institution has generously offered £500 on condition that others will subscribe an equal amount. The public is earnestly invited to visit the Ship lying off Purfleet, which is open to inspection every week day except Saturday. CONTRIBUTIONS will be thankfully received by the Treasurer, JOHN S. GILLIAT, Esq., 4, Crosby-square, E.C.; CAPT. MORRELL, R.N., the Superintendent on board the Cornwall; or by the Secretary, Mr. WALTER MILLACHIP, 4, Mincing Lane, E.C. Printed and Published for the Proprietors by CAPLETON & Co., 23, Blackfriars, Manchester.-Saturday, November 25, 1882. |