THE CHESHIRE MEETING.—The meeting of Chester county was called on

two requisitions, one signed by 45, the other by 247 freeholders. It took place on Tuesday, at Northwich; the Under Sheriff, Philip Hum- berston, Esq. in the chair. The meeting was addressed by Sir John Stanley, Mr. E. V. Townsend, Mr. Stanley, son to Sir John, and several other gentlemen. Mr. E. D. Davenport moved an address, calling on the House of Commons, in the event of the House of Lords again rejecting the Bill, to refuse the supplies ; but as this did not meet the general ap- probation of the meetiug (which seems to have thought a second rejection of the Bill extremely unlikely), he did not -press it. The address to the King passed by acclamation, and was directed to be transmitted to the Marquis of Westminster for presentation. Earl Grosvenor (Lord Bel- grave) and Mr. Wibraham, members of the county, were present on the occasion.

Seaeeonnsante.—The meeting held on Tuesday in an open space at the back of the County Gaol, was one of the most numerous and re- spectable that ever was held in the county. The High Sheriff was in

the chair ; supported by the Earl of Shrewsbury, the Earl of. Lichfield, Sir John Wrottesley, Mr. Littleton, Sir Oswald Moseley, the Earl of

Uxbridge, Mr. Rolfe of Wolverhampton, George Keen, the Under-She- riff, and a vast number of persons of eminence and distinction connected with the county. The reTtisition for the meeting was signed by up- wards of three thousand freeholders ; the number of freeholders present at the meeting was calculated at ten thousand.

The Earl of Lichfield, in moving the first resolution, described the motives that actuated the worthy One Hundred and Ninety-nine," He would tell the meeting the motives that induced, or rather the reasons that induced, the Peers to reject the Bill. The reason was, that the very persons who were so instrumental in rejecting the Bill, bitterly re- gretted that they themselves, when in office, had not been the originators of Reform ; they bitterly regretted that they had been induced by the statement of the Prime Minister to resist the wishes of the People. They found that it was no longer to be resisted, and when they left office de- termined to vote against the Bill. •rhat did they then do ? "Why, they put forth that a reaction had taken place in the minds of the People

with respect to this important subject. It was impossible that a reaction could have taken place in the minds of the People, on a question for which they had been struggling for the last thirty years. The late Ministers willingly listened to this, because they thought when they were able to throw out this Bill, they would throw out his Majesty's present Ministers, get into power themselves, and then bring in a bill founded on the same principles. That he (Lord Lichfield) had no doubt was their intention. His firm belief was, that the Anti-Reformers who had thrown out the Bill more bitterly regretted that it had not gone into Committee, than he did who advocated the success of it. The very few who did not admit the necessity of Reform—who spoke in favour of Re- form, but who voted against the second reading of the Bill—knew that the same power which would reject the Bill could in every clause have so mutilated it as to have altered its complete character. But that step they thought would not have the effect they wished—namely, that of overturning the Government ; nay, it was likely to have a contrary effect, as it might give greater facilities to the Biil being carried through both Houses of Parliament in a more efficient state than it even then was."

Mr. R. G. Heathcote put the necessity of a creation of Peers on its proper basis. " When the meeting reviewed the late proceedings in the House of Lords, he thought that there were but few of them that would not come to the conclusion that the House of Lords stood as much in need of Reform as the House of Commons. Many questions of scarcely less interest than that which engaged the attention of the meeting, earnestly demanded the consideration of a Reformed Parliament. He would not take up the time of the meeting by stating what those ques- tions were. Many of them would be sufficiently obvious, and could no more be delayed with safety to the country than the great question of

Reform itself. He was quite sure that no minister, even with a Re- formed House of Commons, could hope to bring those questions even to a satisfactory result, while a majority of the Ifouse of Peers remained as it at present did, so little on a level with the national feelings, and so determined to oppose itself to the general voice of the country.

The meeting was also addressed by the Earl of Shrewsbury, and by Mr. Littleton, and several other gentlemen. Mr. Littleton said he had

no doubt that the measure to be brought forward by Government would not only be as efficient a measure, but even snore extensive than the last ; he at least would vote for no measure that was not equally efficient.

Hemesmee.—An important meeting of this county took place at Win- chester on Wednesday. Among the persons of wealth and respectability present were tine county members, Sir James Macdonald and Mr. Shaw Lefevre; Sir F. Baring, Mr. Francis Baring, Mr. John B. Carter, M.P. for Portsmouth, G. P. Jervoise, late M.P. for the county, Sir R. Simeon, a Reform candidate for the Isle of Wight, Mr. I'. St. John 31ildmay, M.P. for Winchester, Mr. Henry Marsh, of Reading, and LILO V others. The meeting had been called on the requisition of 500 freeholders : it was held at the Castle : the number assembled, in the room and outside, was not less than 5,000.

A greater degree of interest had been attached to this meeting than many others, from its being known that it was the intention of Cobbett, who is a freeholder of the county, to bring l■wward an opposition address. The address was moved by Mr. Budd, Town-clerk of Newbury; and the gist of it was, to pray his Majesty would dissolve the present Parlia- ment, and, in calling another, exercise his constitutional prerogative by omitting to send writs to the disfranchised boroughs and by sending writs to the enfranchised boroughs, agreeably to the tenor of the rejected Bill.

In seconding the address moved by Mr. Budd, Mr. Cobbett spoke strongly against the Bishops ; a theme on which he was heard with much pleasure by all present. He said—" In many counties in which he had been, he found a very great delicacy prevailing in speaking of the conduct of the Bishops. Now the people must recollect that the cup of bliss had been dashed from their lips by those Bishops—by those men who had fattened and been made rich by the labour of the poor. Only two Bishops voted for the Bill, twenty-one voted against it, and all the rest were absent : lie felt, however, gratified to notice those two who voted for the Bill, and they were the venerable Bishop Bathurst of Norwich, and Dr. Maltby, Bishop of Chichester. Then there was the Irish Church, cons sting of eighteen Bishops ; and they must surely have a great deal to do, for they had only sixteen resident clergymen belonging to each bishopric in the whole country. Of these eighteen, four of them sat in Parliament as what were called Representative Bishops. These men were all pampered in luxury, revelling in palaces, rolling in wealth, and able to leave behind them 200,000/. or 300,0004 when they died, although they were not worth a halfpenny when they were appointed. All those Bishops, but two, voted against restoring to the people any portion of the liberties that belonged to them. There was one Bishop who had a palace at Farnham, and one at Chelsea ; that at Chelsea was sold by an Act of Parliament, and the money put into the Funds, but the Bishop received the interest of it. If he could do with one palace less by the authority of an Act of Parliament, could he not do with another less, and then why should not the money be placed in the Treasury ? If one palace could be taken by law, what was there to prevent a second being taken in like manner? The Bishop would that be reduced to something liko-

an apostolical life, and be obliged to work, like St. Paul and Timothy, with his own hands, the thing that was goad, and that he might give

to those who needed it.' Of all the counties in England, the people of

Hampshire would be base to be silent on the conduct of the Bishops. They had not only a Bishop, but two sorts of half Bishops, for Bishops were in the habit of breeding in Hampshire. That county had not only one, but three Bishops. There was the Earl of Guildford, who had a Prebendal stall in Winchester, and several livings : did the People think that his Lordship would vote for the Reform Bill, which would take from him all his livings but one at least ? Then there was the present Lord Walsingham ; he was Chancellor of the diocess of Surry, Prebend of Winchester, and had the livings of four parishes in Hampshire.

Would he, did they think, vote for the Reform Bill ? He had good rea- sons for not voting for it. They were, however, good reasons for the

People to tell the King that they had no hope hi the Lords, and to re- quest his Majesty to exercise his undoubted right of canine- on all the towns to send members to Parliament without the permission of the House of Lords."

31r. Cobbett went on to complain of the taxes—of the malt-tax, the hop-tax, and all time taxes. lie s: rd he had a short plan for them—" he would not pay the parsun—he m.a.,.1 pay nobody."

Jervoise moved the address, originally intended to be submitted to time meeting, by way of amendment on Mr. Budd's address. It was seconded by 3Ir. 11. Mersh ; who remarked on Cobbett's boast that he was an old Reformer, that " he was an older man, but not so old a Re- former as Mr. Marsh was. He was a Reformer when it was not only not the fashion to be one, but when time Refinmers were compared with Fal- staff's ragged regiment, which had only two shirts and a half amongst them, and those they were accused of having stolen. He was a Reformer when old George Rose said the country gentlemen must give up a portion of their property to save the other, and old Rose made pretty good pick- ings out of it. At ti at time, when Mr. Marsh was a Reformer, Mr. Cobbett

was an Anti-Reformer. (Cries ttf No ! ') He would say, yes. Often

did Mr. Cobbett shoot his porcupine quills, making them reach from America to England ; and be it remembered that all his quills, whether goose or porcupine, told, and left a visible wound for years afterwards." Mr. Marsh strongly argued the claim of the Ministry to the confidence of the country, on the ground of the consistency of Earl Grey's politi- cal character, not less than the nature of the Reform measure which he had introduced to Parliament.

Mr. TWyllatil spoke at considerable length, and amidst manifold inter- ruptions, against the charaioer and plans of the editor of the Register. He said time dislike of Cobbett to time Bin* was easily accounted for-

" Should the Bill be carried, the function of the demagogue Cobbett would be defunct ; the market for his political occupation would be taken away; the custom of the shop in Fleet Street, as to Registers' and political Trash,' would he lost, and the shop be kept open only for sell- ing Indian corn, vegetable marrow, or some other American quackery;

or that, perhaps, in opposition to Mr. Somebody Taylor, who was Mr. Somebody's chaplain, it would be opened as a Temple of Reason, where Cobbett would hold forth from Tom Paine's Age of Reason, or show Tom's bones brought from America, or some other person's said to be Tom's."

The mention of Tom's hones produced a shout of disapprobation as loud as the reappearance of the author of the Rights of Man could have

done. Mr. Twynam afterwards spoke of time danger of listening to such a man as Cohbett—" They all had something to lose : would they trust it upon time honesty or discretion of a political mountebank, who, like all other monntehanks, sent handbills about the country to get a gang to assist him in his deceptions and overawe them ?'"rhe noise at length drowned time voice of this abusive speaker, and he was compelled to withdraw.

Sir James Macdonald afterwards addressed the meeting-. On the sub- ject of the Bishops, Sir James said, "he participated in all the regret

and indignation respecting their conduct. He chil not stand there to justify them. Even the metropolitan Bishop had slid that their con- duct might be unwise. He said so likewise, and he said also that their conduct was marked by a great deal of unfairness towards the Govern-

ment, for never slid the Ministers expect to find arrayed against them so formidable a levy en masse of lawn sleeves. Time arrival of the Prus-

sians on the field of Waterloo could not be more inopportune or unhooked for by the enemy, than was that of the Bishops, when they thought fit to take the Government in the flank, to make them lose time day."

On the question of Cohbett's address, he put it to the common sense of the meeting if they believed " that all the world were so stupid or so blind, that only one man could light them to their Iiiierties ? (A cry of We won't be humbugged.') There were more ways than one of hum- bugging; and they should take care that whilst it was time desire of him

and others to put down one species of humbugging, there were others amongst them trying other ways. He put it to their good sense, if some of the bitterest of time People's enemies had been there to-day—what would that enemy have desired more than that Mr. Cobbett should start up in the middle of them, to distract and divide the people, and to lead them from their own interests ? He declared that those who stood by the recommendation of Mr. Cobbett to-day, were playing the game of the Anti-Reformers. He called on them to mark a specimen of that gentleman—an instance of his justice and his fairness to that man who was immortalizing himself bymaking a struggle for the people of his coun- try. Mr. Cobbett could net refrain from introducing the name of time Duke of Wellington, by stating that the Duke had the merit of break- ing the chains of religious bondage—those chains that bound their Catholic brethren. But he did not tell them that for thirty years Lord Grey had excluded himself from power because he could not hear to sanction those chains, and because his power was not strong enough to break them. Sir James wondered that Mr. Cobbett did not also tell them that the Duke of Wellington had trampled on the Test and Corporation Acts ; and he wondered that Mr. Cobbett had forgotten to state that the champion of the repeal of those acts was the man who bore the distinguished name of Lord John Russell. But that man had a purpose to serve—a humbugging purpose. If that was to be the measure of justice that public men were to expect from the People, * We must do Mr. Cobbett the justice to remark, that the Rill has not had a more able,. zealous, or judicious supporter than he, from the day in which it was first de- veloped by Lord John Russell to that of its rejection by the 1.19.

Lord have mercy upon them, fin• he did Inn know who would thirty his hands, by taking- their Weirs."

The address and amendment were ism! great confusion ; and it was doubtful which could be said to lie cersial. A pall was suggested as necessary for the decision ; but time Sheriff appealing to Mr. Cobbett, he candidly allowed that there was a small majority in favour of the amend- ment ; it was declared to be carried accordingly.

Comuswara..—A numerous meeting- of the county of Cornwall was also held on Wednesday, at which nearly all the gentlemen of conse- quence in the county were present. The following; names are given by the reporter—Sir Charles Lemon, Sir John. Colman Rashleigh, Sir Wil- liam Pratt Cafes, Sir William Molesworth, Messrs. E. W. W. Pen- darves, William Peter, J. B. Trevauion, R. Bennet, Rev. Robert Walker, Rev. William Hecker, Robert Rolls Peter, Salisbury Tre- lawny, George Call, P. L. Owatkin, William leiker, James Bull, Charles Buller, C. Harvey, J. P. Mager, J. Taylor, M. Anstis, Edward Goode, F. C. Paymiter, Thomas Cootie, John Thomas Phillips, David Howell, and Frammeis Pinder. Lords Valletort and Eliot were also pre- sent, the solitary representatives of the Anti Reformers of the borough- monger county. The address WIIS maiiv;:d liy Mr. Peter, and seconded by Sir Colman Rasideiele Lord Valletort afterwards addressed the meeting.; and in the course of his address, made a incest insuccessi d attempt to show, that had the Bishops and the Boriiiiglt proprietors been excluded from time majority, still the Bid nmst have been lost. lie excused his breaking down in his statements, by having left his notes behind him. The address was carried, with the exception of four hands held up against it,—namely, these of Lords Valletort and Eliot, and a couple of Captains named Heat and Borlase. Thanks were then voted to Dr. Bathurst and Dr. Maltby ; and the meeting, which is described as time largest and most respectable that has assembled in the memory of the oldest freeholders, peacefully separated.

%%TILT SU RE.—The Wilts county meeting, held yesterday at Devizes, was by far the most respectable and most numerous ever convened within the county : it is computed that front ten to twelve thousand per- sons were present. It would he beyond our limits to attempt to convey an idea of the numerous processions from the several towns in the county, with their bands and banners. The meeting was addressed by the Earl of Suffolk, Lord Radnor, the members for the county (Mr. P,enett and Sir J. 1). Astley), Sir Alexander Mahlett, Captain Bouverie, Colonel Napier, Mr. Joy, Mr. Paulett Scrope, Mr. J. Awdy, Mr. 31on- tagne Gore, Dr. Brabant, and many other influential gentlemen of Wiltshire. The greatest decorum and order prevailed throughout the meeting ; and within half an lour :titer it had liven dissolved, by a muse excellent speech from the High Sheriff; time town was zts tranquil as mem any ordinary occasion.

YORKSHIRE.—The meeting held at Richmond, Yorkshire, on Wed- nesday the 19th, adopted an address which may be taken as a me-'el fin-

similar documents. It will be seen from the following extra. _ goes straight to the point. " By the conduct of the Upper P

Par- liament, time reasonable expectations of your petitioners ]nay.

onsly disappointed ; but they most earnestly entreat your sionourable House to resume the consideration of the question with as little delay as possible. They beseech your Honourable House steadily to adhere to the Bill which was submitted to your Honourable House by his Majesty's Ministers. They feel it their bounden duty, as you would satisfy the just claims and ardent expectations of all classes of the people, to press upon your Honourable House the necessity of not abstracting any thing from its efficiency. Your petitioners feel that it is the undoubted right of time Commons of this ancient realm to be fully and fairly represented in the Commons House of Parliament. They therefore beg leave to assure your Honourable House, that, in their opinion, no modification in the extent of time measure will meet time necessity of the case, or secure to them and their posterity that free government to which, by time prin- ciples of time CemisTiettion, they are justly entitled." There is no mis- take, there can be no mistake, here.

DUBLIN TRADES UsroN.--A nemerons meeting of this body took place on Tuesday; when Mr. O'Connell addressed them in his broadest and best style. His argument, that a bad Government is more oppressive to the poor than the rich, is ingenious. Time rich, he said, could afford to be taxed—it was but an abandonment of their superfluities, and the tyranny of the taxmaster they could set off by tyrannizing in their turn over those below them ; but the poor, in order to satisfy the cravings of Government, were compelled to give up their necessaries, and they must suffer the tyranny of all above them without revenge or redress.