Abe Vrobinces.

A " monster meeting" was held in the Free-trade Hall at Manchester on Wednesday evening, to initiate a general agitation on the subject of finan- cial reform. The moving parties are the prominent leaders of the late Anti-Corn-law League: Mr. George Wilson was chairman; Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, and Mr. Milner Gibson, were the chief speakers. The pre- liminary trumpetings in the local papers promised an assemblage of twelve thousand persons, asserting that the hall will contain as many; but Mr. George Wilson seemed to assume that the actual audience (admitted by ticket) was somewhat fewer—he said " the industrious community of that district reserved to themselves the right of expressing their opinions freely on all the great subjects affecting the public interest, and seven or eight thousand people could not be collected together unless the subjects were of great national interest."

Mr. Cobden was the first speaker after the chairman, and the lion of the night. He begged for a silent audience, for he was so much out of prac- tice that he feared he should not be audible to so vast a meeting. Pro- ceeding to business, he read the following resolution- " That this meeting resolves to cooperate with the Liverpool Financial Reform Association and other bodies in their efforts to reduce the public expenditure to at least the standard of 1835, and to secure a more equitable and economical sys- tem of taxation."

" We now appear," said Mr. Cobden, " as the farmer's friends. (Cheers and laughter.) We have, by our agitation, subjected the agriculturists of this country to a competition with the foreigner, and they have complained to us that they are more heavily taxed than the foreign farmers. Now, gentlemen, we come for- ward to offer them the right hand of fellowship and union to effect a reduction of ten millions in the cost of our government." He had waited three weeks before saying anything in public defence of his letter to the Financial Reformers of Li- verpool; and he confessed that he had not at last got much to answer. It was said, and it was probably the most solid argument urged, that population has increased since 1835. It has: our numbers are 12} per cent more than they were then. He admitted therefore that an increased sum must be allowed for civil government; and in his plan he did allow 40 per cent more than was al- lowed in 1835. But he denied that thirteen years of peace was an argument for increasing our military expenditure. Sir Robert Inglis had advanced this ex- traordinary doctrine—extraordinary anywhere but at Oxford—that the longer you remain at peace the greater the probability you will go to war. His idea seemed to be that men only fattened in peace for speedy slaughter in war. Lord Palmerston replied, he "thought, on the contrary, that the long duration of peace rendered its continuance more likely." To return. In 1835 we spent 11,600,0001. or Army, Navy, and Ordnance: Mr. Cobden proposed that we should now ex- pend only 10,000,000/. on those services, and the 1,600,0001. that he took from them he would add to the civil expenditure. " In 1848, we spent for all purposes of civil government 4,300,0001. I allow," said he, " 5,900,0001 for the civil ex- penditure of government ; and, taking into account the saving in the collection of savenue, I take the contemplated management of Crown lands, estimated by a financial reformer at one and a half millions. Taking this into account, I allow more for the civil government than they are actually expending." Thus he got altogether rid of the argument for increase of expenditure on the ground of the increased population.

But another objection was, that " during the last year and the year before there was a deficiency of revenue, and if his plan should be carried out he would have no ten millions to dispose of in the taxes." Such cunning financiers might have been aware of his reply—" that if the revenue has fallen off during the last year, it is because the balance-sheet of every manufacturer likewise, and the ledger of every merchant in the country, presents a deficit; because the profits of every man in the country have fallen off too. But now you have trade reviving, fed on Free-trade principles, and instantly you see the revenue increase; and this year or the next year, you will certainly see you have a surplus revenue as certainly as you had a deficit last year." (Cheers,) He wished to keep financial re- formers to the point of 1835. "We must have a simple point of faith, or we cannot march together. Give me back the expenditure of the year 1835, and I will guarantee the remission of the ten millions. If you want—if the country wants—to reduce the duty on tea to one-half, and abolish altogether the tax upon timber, upon butter, upon cheese and soap, upon paper, upon malt and hops, upon house-windows—if you want to put an end to the system that curtails these necessary comforts, then raise your voices throughout the country simultaneously for the expenditure of 1835." (Great cheering.) But where was the difficulty of returning to the expenditure of 1835. Were the Government content with ten millions? if not, why not? He wanted the arguments why not. He was asked the other day, by a Member of Parliament, When are you going into the details of how you are to carry on the government on your plan?" But he replied, that he would be a very bad logician and worse tactician, if he did not call on Government for the first answer, when they asked him to vote the war establishments. (Loud cheers.) He would put them on the de- fensive, and ask whether they had made the most of the money they have got. Why had they got 150 Admirals, besides 50 retired Admirals ? During the height of the great French war—the greatest war on record—when nearly a thousand pennants were flying, there were never more than 36 Admirals employed at one time; and at this time, with all the ingenuity that is used, only work for 14 can anyhow be found. Then in the Army: there is for every regiment one Colonel who does the work, and another who only pays the tailor, and never goes near the work or the regiment—if he went, the men would not obey him: he supplies the clothes, pays the tailor, pockets the profits, and does that alone. But be would not join to swell a cry raised only against the abuses of waste. He would not lend himself to the delusion which was practised by some who were professing to move with financial reformers but were only trailing a herring across their path—as they did once before on the Free-trade question: he would lend himself to no notion that a saving may be made by economy and better manage- ment in the dockyards, &c., but that you can have no saving by a reduction of the forces. " I tell you at the outset, that in order to effect such a reduction of our armament for the relief of the country—a material relief, that will be felt in the homes and firesides of the country—you must reduce the number of men, and be contented with a smaller manifestation of brute force in the eye of the world (Great cheering.) You must trust something to Providence, something to your own just intentions—to your good conduct towards other nations; and not put faith in costly forms or manifestations of brute force, as you now do." (Cheers.)

The present system had its origin, not in waste, or in increases of Admirals and Colonels, but the whole policy pursued since the war. That policy was no new thing since 1835, but was in force then as much as now. The cause of increased expense has lain in the enormous increase of men. In 1835, the men were 135,743 ; in 1848,196,063—an increase of 60,320 men. In 1835, the expense of all these services was 11,605,0001.; in 1848, it was 18,000,0001.; an increase of men and of expenses by about 50 per cent each. Therefore—though admitting there was monstrous waste and mismanagement—he declared that " if you want a material reduction in your armament, you must at once boldly press this plan of reducing the number of men engaged." Has anybody ever asked why this increase has taken place? No one. Aug- mentations have been made on particular excuses, which no one has questioned; but when the occasion passed away, we never heard of any diminution. In 1835, the lowest point, there was a cry about Russia—(it was opposition to that cry which first turned Mr. Cobden pamphleteer)—and that was made an excuse for an increase; then, in 1839, the unfortunate scenes at Monmouth—the rebellion, he supposed he must call it—were made a pretext by Lord John Russell for an extra naval armament of 5,000 men. But when the Russians never came, and when the Chartists were tranquil, no word was heard about reduction. So, step by step, it continued; and ready excuses never failed. One time Syrian squabbles, with which we had as mach to do as with the affairs of the moon—another time Oregon disputes, and the balderdash of President Polk—then disputes about Ta- hiti—then further quarrellings in America about the Maine boundary: but though all these disputes were settled, and the Chartists were well employed and com- fortable, the evolutions of the fleet still continued, and the great armaments were still maintained. And the last excuse he should not quickly forgive, or at all events forget—the wicked attempt to impose upon us under pretence of protection against invasion from France. However, the up-hill battle had been so fought daring twelve months that the proposals of retrenchment are more in favour with the public now than the ori- ginal resistance was when it was raised. Why is this? Because, in spite of all attempts to mystify the public mind, the events of the Continent have proclaimed that the accusations of a thirst for war were slanderously and unjustly uttered

against a great people. " They were told at this time last year, Why, it's true the French are quiet now, because of Louis Philippe, the Napoleon of Peace; but let him die, and you will see how that French people, now kept in by this wise monarch, will break loose.' Well, Louis Philippe is politically dead ; the French people were thrown entirely upon their own resources. The bridle on their neck, and the bit in their mouth, the people were all-powerful to do whatever they willed, and the government, down on their knees, ready to follow the people to the ut- most bent of their passions. Has there been amidst that thirty-five millions of people, your next neighbours, anything to support this slanderous imputation alleged last year by these wicked alarmists—these most wicked panic-mongers? (Cheers.) Has there been an act to warrant the belief that they wished to attack you ? " (" No, no! ") Indeed, not coming so near home, had the French made the least manifestation of seizing the Rhine? Had they assailed Holland, or invaded Italy ? On the contrary, what were the words by which the man whom they have chosen as their President appealed to them for their votes?—' With war,' said Louis Napoleon, there can be no mitigation of your sufferings ; peace shall therefore be the most cherished object of my desires.'" Mr. Cobden therefore re-

peated his last year's argument, after the experience of that year's events—" The people of France, being nearly all proprietors, and having themselves to pay for any war carried on, will not vote for war to increase taxation." " I believe that Louis Napoleon, and Cavaignac, and Goizot, whose book was published only yes- terday, and M. Thiers, and every public man in France, will agree with me, that if there is one passion more predominant with the French people than another, it is the desire for peace."

And so throughout Germany and in Italy; for it was a trick of confusion to say that war is now prevalent in those countries. The same civil struggles are waged there, to obtain the same objects, that were waged in this country for ten years when the aim was to overturn the prerogative of our First Charles. It is only, indeed, by the most studied misrepresentation of what is going on upon the Continent, that immense standing armies are maintained and defended in this country. No government would possess the least guarantee for its own strength, which should now venture to throw France upon Germany in a war of conquest. The predominant passion of Germany now is nationality, and the Teutonic race would unite and rise as one man to repel the French. So in Italy: Austria may maintain herself there by her Radetzky and his hundred thousand men, but the Latin race will not be governed peaceably by the Teutonic race; and Lombardy will prove, like every conquest or partition of the last century, a source of weak- - nese rather than strength.

The times are no longer times when the people count for nothing and the princes for all, and when it is necessary to negotiate and to war against the union of lands and slave populations under the crowns of dangerous families and princes. The great demarcations of race are known, and their influence must be counted; empires have their natural limits, which it is weakness to transgress.

But there is not a petty squabble in any corner of Europe but we must have ready a fleet of line-of-battle ships, and interfere. In the kingdom of Naples, and the rest of Italy, throughout Spain, in Portugal, and in Greece—alike in all, we are hated for our interference. Let this cease. Let us keep aloof. Let us put our own house in order—pat our own mud cabins of Ireland in order, and not interfere where we can get no credit for the good, and are not respon- sible for the evil that we may do. This was the coarse recommended with regard to free trade: if foreign countries are unwilling to accept it, that is their affair. It was said to him, in the last stage of the League agitation, " Oh I free trade is a very good thing, but we can't have it till other

countries begin it too." His answer was, " If it was a good thing for us, let us adopt it, and leave them to adopt it if they find it is a good thing for them.

So now, interference with the affairs of the Continent is a costly, and useless, and pernicious plan; and if foreign interference is bad for ns, and the French and Austrians choose to pursue that plan, leave them to do it; but don't ruin your- self? (Cheers.)

But there was another argument—" We must maintain our Colonies." He ' considered that swords and ships of war were not a permanent bond for that maintenance. He would hold the Colonies by affection and not by force. But

the Colonies are well able to pay for their own police; they have few of the taxes which bother us so; most of the people in them have a vast deal more of the comforts of life ; and they are the very people to protect themselves, from their independent life and general skill in the use of arms. We don't want

Ships to protect their traffic; that traffic should be regarded as a sort of a coast- ing trade: our ships should be at home when they get to the Colonies. And -surely we don't want ships to protect our trade with the United States. Sir William Molesworth, in his admirable speech on the Colonies, showed that by wholly withdrawing our armies from the Colonies we should save 2,000,0001. a year.

" But, gentlemen, this matter is not one of choice with you: you cannot afford to go on as you have gone on. I tell you,you are spending too much money

as a nation. It is not merely your general taxation, but it is your local taxation

as well. And, mark me, the more you waste upon armaments in general taxa- tion, the more you will have to spend in poor-rates and other local taxation. The more you waste of the capital of this country, the more people will be wanting employment: and when they want employment, it is the law in this country that the poorest are the first to begin to starve under the process of national decay or national extravagance; that they should have the right to come to the immedi- ately-above-them-people to share the means of subsistence, by means of a poor] rate: and as you find your extravagancies of government increase, you will find your local taxes, for poor-rates and pauper support, increase also; and there- fore, I say, you must husband your national resources, or you will be lighting the candle at both ends, and you will have it soon burnt oat." There was a thing which he must notice. He besought them not to take such undue notions of their importance as a nation, and such undue and unfavourable views of foreign countries. "It is through your pride that cunning people man- age to extract taxes from you. They persuade you that you are so superior to all other countries, that your neighbours—France for instance—will always be ready, like brigands, to carry off your property. Until you as a nation can give credit to other countries for having intelligence to work out their own liberties and their own institutions, with time such as we took to work out our own—un- less you can believe that there is something of honesty and honour in other coun- tries that will protect you from any unjust aggression on their part—you will always be armed to the teeth, either to interfere with their affairs, or to protect yourselves from imaginary attacks from your neighbours." Mr. dobden enforced these views by reference to the conduct of America in late disputes with ourselves and with France. When France refused to pay a debt which she owed to Ame- rica, General Jackson proclaimed that if payment were not made he would seize French 'ships and pay himself. At that very moment, Admiral Makau was in the Gulf of Florida with a fleet and force large enough to have ravaged the whole American coast, and taken every town and port on it by siege or storm. France paid the money, and did not rush into war; for she knew that though she would gain immense advantages at first, the ships that were lying afloat, and the men-of-war that were ready, were nothing compared to what would swarm out from the harbours and ports of America if they were brought into a collision with another country from an unjust attack upon their rights. In the case of the Oregon dispute, we increased our ships and men; but America made no increase; and this although our Navy expenditure was then between seven and eight millions and hers was only between one and two millions. Yet rumour does say that America made a good bargain in that settle; went. " Of this I am sure," said Mr. Cobden, "that the English Government never measured the strength of America by the number of ships she had afloat. No; it was the spirit of the people, the prosperity of the people, the growing strength of the people, the union of the people, the determination of the people— it was that which commanded respect, and not going always with sword in hand." He desired that we should take the same view of other countries that we take of America, and he was persuaded that they would not attack us because we reduced our armaments to ten millions. Nay, unless we hasten, France will set us the example; for General Cavaignac and all the best men are urging a large reduction of the French armament.

He asked them, in parenthesis, whether the Government should not listen to the proposition made by Christians and reasonable men—a proposition which he should submit to the House of Commons next session—that a clause should be inserted in foreign treaties binding them to submit quarrels to arbitration; so that, instead of the point of honour being to fight, it should be to abide honour- ably and faithfully by the decision.

In conclusion, he told the meeting that nothing could be done in the House of Commons but by raising a voice outside of it which they could not avoid hearing. " There never was a time when independent men in the House of Commons—I mean the very few men who are independent, both by circumstances and by feel ing, of both of the two great parties who have hitherto divided the sway in this country; there never was a time when these independent men were so weak as they are at this moment. And I will tell you why. It is because the party in power is nominally the same as ours; it is because their followers mingle more or less with ourselves; and we are neutralized at every tarn, or, at all events, we find a wet blanket thrown upon our shoulders, whenever we go into the House of Commons. Now, if you want to carry financial reform, you must carry it in pre- cisely the same way as free trade was carried." (Great cheering.) He paid hearty compliments to Mr. Joseph Hume; " whom I venerate," said he, for his constancy, his determined courage, his pluck—the granite-like steadfastness and unflinching hardihood of the man who through good repute and bad repute has for thirty-seven years been advocating the public interests in the most ma- terial and useful reforms, and under many disadvantages, slights, and mortifica- tions." But Mr. Hume's hands should be strengthened, and he should be ena- bled to do in future what he could not do in times past. Mr. Cobden held out the hand of peace and cooperation to the landed interest; with whom his hearers should now sympathize in their efforts against the Malt-tax. " We owe them something, and we will repay them in kind." " There is a habit in this country of doing one thing at a time. I have that weakness; I can only do one thing at a-time ; and, with your help, I will go to work to do this one thing. (Loud cheers.) I promise one thing to you, and to my friends everywhere, that I will never cease the advocacy of this question until I see the cost of our armaments reduced to ten millions—until I see the ex- penditure of this country reduced to what it was in 1835, at least. I do not say I will stop there. (Great cheering.) But let us understand each other. The least that we intend to do, let us all understand, is something worth doing in the mean time. But I say that we will not stop there. I sincerely believe that, with your assistance, and with the growing tendency towards peace throughout the world, we shall not rest satisfied with that horrid waste of ten millions a year upon a fighting establishment in a time of peace. I believe we shall live to see it less than one half of that sum; and with your assistance, and the aid of such meetings as this, I do not think that it will be a very long time before we see it." (Pro- longed and enthusiastic cheering.)

Mr. Milner Gibson spoke at great length in amplification of Mr. Cob- den's arguments, and in refutation of opponent fallacies. He quoted the sentiments expressed by Sir Robert Peel in Parliament in 1841, before he was in office, and urged the application of them now- " If each nation were to commune with itself," said Sir Robert, "and ask what is at present the danger of foreign invasion, compared to the danger of producing dissatisfaction and discontent, and curtailing the comforts of the people by undue taxation, the answer must be this, that the danger of aggression mast be infinitely less than the danger of those sufferings to which the present exorbitant expendi- ture must give rise." (Much cheering.) Mr. Gibson declared himself for pulling down the Protestant Church in Ireland, and applying the funds towards the general civil government of the country. The other speakers were Mr. John Bright, in his usual style of Demo- cratic belligerency, Mr. Henry, M.P., Mr. W. Rawson, and Mr. Alderman Kay. The following resolutions, in addition to that moved by Mr. Cobden, were passed amid strong demonstrations of assent-

" That although a combined effort throughout the country may and will MC— need in effecting a large reduction in theimblic burdens, yet experience has shown that economy will not become the rule of government, nor the necessity for con- tinued agitation be done away with, until the tax-payers obtain a more direct and complete control over the House of Commons by the amendment of our system of representation." " That, whether with a view to the speedy, success of the efforts nowmaking to reduce taxation, or to secure, by means of a real representation, a guarantee

against future attempts of Government to return to the present extravagant ex- penditure, the most effectual mode of proceeding is that adopted by the late Anti- Corn-law League, viz. the extension of the franchise by the forty-shilling freehold qualification, and a careful attention to the registration in boroughs and counties; and the Chairman of this meeting is requested to take the necessary steps for the formation of an association to carry out this object, in conjunction with such con- stituencies as may be willing to unite with it."

In consequence of the late decisions of the Lancashire Magistrates, es- tablishing the legality of relays of hands in factories, a meeting of factory delegates was held at the Woodman's Hut, Manchester, on Saturday night, for the purpose of taking measures to preserve inviolate the Ten- hours Act. About seventy delegates from the various mills were present; Mr. Charles Hindley, M.P., attended, by invitation, and took the lead. Mr. Daly, an operative, presided. Mr. Hindley was anxious to direct their attention to the peculiar posture of affairs in reference to the Factory Act. They did not disguise from themselves that they had a strong conviction that the passing of the Ten-hours Act would have the effect of preventing the unwilling toil of a great many adult males. What bad been the result? They had a great many adult males employed fourteen and even fifteen hours a day. For this there was no protection by act of Parliament; and he candidly told them, that if they went to Parliament to ask it to protect adult males, they would be laughed at. They would be told that it was an inva- sion of all the rights of an Englishman to prevent him working as long as he pleased. Mr. Hindley was afraid, so far as some masters were concerned, that if the factory hands did not take steps for their own protection, the Factory Act, in- stead of being an advantage, would entail more labour upon them than ever. It could not be supposed that it was the intention of the masters to employ relays of adult males. This was not at all necessary for their purposes; but what they did intend was to get the adult males to work the whole of the time, and to make that labour effective and cheap by joining it to the relay system. He felt that the great majority of the masters, though they might be anxious to make the most of their capital, were not unwilling to work ten hours per day, provided their competitors in business were compelled to do the same. He wanted support for those masters, and that whatever was done for one should be done for all. ("Hear, hear!") If Mr. Clarke was to work fifteen hours, then every other master in Man- chester should work fifteen hours also.

Mr. Johnson read the following resolution, agreed to at a meeting of the dele- gates from the various factories in Manchester, as indicative of the universal feel- ing of the factory hands in favour of the Ten-hours system—" That we, the operative cotton-spinners of Manchester, Salford, and their vicinities, in general meeting assembled, do hereby declare our approval of the principles of the Ten- hours Act, and our unalterable determination never to remain satisfied until such be made effective by the Legislature."

Mr. Hindle), again rose, and deprecated the implied appeal to Parliament. This question, he said, should be taken up by the middle classes; for the law of settle- ment being now altered, they were forced to support those whom over-work had made unable to support themselves. At present he did not think it was desirable to petition Parliament to alter the act, for he had no doubt the decisions come to at Manchester and Ashton were erroneous.

The Secretary of the Short-time Committee suggested the formation of an As- sociation amongst themselves for the protection of the Ten-hours Act. He knew that they would be supported in this course by the able men who had assisted them in carrying that act. A resolution was proposed, and unanimously carried, which authorized " the Committee for the protection of the Ten-hours Act " " to call a pub- lic meeting of the factory hands of Manchester, Salford, and their vicinities, for the purpose of forming an association for the protection of the Ten- hours Act."

At the quarterly meeting of the iron-masters of the Midland districts, held at Birmingham on Thursday, the trade was reported to be improving. The make of " pigs " for the next two months was already purchased in advance. The demand was so brisk that the price of coals is " looking up- wards."

The two men charged with the robbery of the mail on the Great Western Railway were again examined, by the Exeter Magistrates, on Saturday. One of the prisoners still refused to give his name. Clerks in the General Post-office described the despatch of the Western mails on the 1st instant, and deposed to the fact that the registered letters which were stolen had been enclosed in the bags; these letters are enclosed in green covers, addressed to the postmasters, and put by themselves at the top of the bags. Barrett, the guard of the mail, de- scribed the discovery of the robbery. At Bridgewater, on unlocking the door of the Post-office tender, he found that the bags had been opened; they had been tied up again, but with string of a wrong s'ze, and they were not sealed. When the prisoners were addressed in the carriage, they behaved in a very suspicions manner—Poole pretended to be asleep. Poole had for- merly travelled with the mail-train on Sunday nights. The key used for the Post-office tender was of the same kind as that used for other vans. The lamps now used in the tender were different from what they were in Poole's time; then they could have been got at by a person in the tender, but now they cannot. [A candle and sealing-wax were found on the prisoners: it is surmised that they intended to light the candle by the lamp, and then seal the bags ; which might have prevented so early a discovery of the robbery.] The witness had tried an experiment: he had managed to get from a carriage to the Post-office tender, and had then succeeded in opening the window, and had thus entered the van. A

i wool-packer's hook was found in the first-class carriage: it would be of great ser- vice to any one climbing along a carriage. Poole and his companion pretended that they were unknown to each other. Many other suspicious circumstances were mentioned. The prisoners were remanded for a week.

At the Manchester Borough Sessions, last week, Mortimer, the clerk who was charged with embezzling the money of his employer, the proprietor of print-works at Pendleton, was brought to trial. Though the accounts were in confusion, it was not evident that Mortimer had omitted any entries with a felonious intent ; so be was at once acquitted.

Rush was reexamined by the Norwich Magistrates on Monday, in order that Miss Sandford might give her new criminatory evidence in his presence; it having been previously adduced only at the Coroner's inquest. No announcement had been made of the examination, and reporters were not present. It is mentioned, however, that the prisoner's demeanour was very different from what it had been on previous occasions: he refrained from abusing the Magistrates or Miss Sand- ord, and did not even cross-examine the woman.

The murderer's fire-arms have not yet been found, though the police have ex- pended nearly 1001. in employing labourers to search for them. Mrs. Jermy and the maid are going on favourably.

James Kelly, a young man who murdered his sweetheart at Stockport, was hanged at Kirkdale on Saturday. Daring the morning, he told the Governor o the gaol that his conscience was so tormented that he would not accept a reprieve if it were offered to him.