ceedings, the vicar found the opposition too strong for him, and church-rates in Rochdale were abandoned.

Mr. Bright for some time employed his pen, as well as his voice, in advocating such reforms as he deemed desirable. The Rev. Dr. Molesworth having launched a periodical under the title of Common Sense, or Everybody's Magazine,' an opposition serial was commenced, with the covertly sarcastic title of 'The Vicar's Lantern.' The most frequent contributors to the latter magazine were Mr. Bright and Mr. Oliver Ormerod. Mr. Ormerod, who was one of Mr. Bright's earliest friends, was the author of a very racy book on visit to the Great Exhibition of 1851, written in the Rochdale dialect. It is referred to now as one of the best specimens of Lancashire humour. In 'The Vicar's Lantern,' Mr. Bright severely handled the articles which appeared in the vicar's magazine. "The general question of the Corn Law is not to be interfered with,' he wrote on one occasion. 'Of course not. To withhold a few pence of an illegal church-rate is an offence which cries to heaven and demands a pamphlet, but to withhold bread from millions of honest men and their families is a general question of no immediate importance.' Again, 'An Act of Uniformity, made by weak and erring mortals to bind the human mind for ever, is a monstrous thing. Are mankind to stand still? Are all things to change and to advance, and man alone to rest content with ignorance and superstition and imperfection? Is a parchment church, whilst it drains the purse, to perpetuate error, and to shun as a pestilence the discovery of truth? Is custom to be venerated because it is old, or ought we not rather to affirm with Cyprian that custom without truth is but agedness of error? Now the Bishops come under his lash. When the aristocracy of Britain were draining the country which has so long been afflicted by the pressure of their iron heel, for the purpose of exterminating the germs of liberty in continental Europe, the whole bench of Bishops, with one honourable exception, were their firm allies, and their votes were ever ready in behalf of the war which was desolating the fairest portions of the civilized world.' 'When the question of the abolition of that infamous and accursed traffic in human flesh, the African slave trade, was proposed, it met with great opposition from the bench of Bishops. Their conduct on one occasion drew from Lord Eldon the cutting sarcasm that "the slave trade could not be opposed to Christianity and the precepts of the Gospel, seeing that it was uniformly supported by the right reverend prelates.' The writer further observed that he was

not surprised the clergy should hate the Anti-Corn Law League, for the League is the foe of aristocratic injustice, and the State Church is the creature and tool of the aristocracy.' The following passage must have been particularly distressing to Dr. Molesworth: 'We doubt not that the munificent contribution made in this town to the Great League Fund has had an effect the reverse of soothing upon the nerves of the bread-taxing Vicar of Rochdale. When men refuse at all hazards to pay church-rates, and yet cheerfully contribute upwards of £2,000 to an Anti-Corn Law League, it indicates a degree of alienation from the "Political Church" which must shock the feelings of every well-paid and comfortable_dignitary who nestles within its ample folds. And so it is in Rochdale.'

Whether it was that the Vicar of Rochdale relished the written comments of Mr. Bright upon public and local questions as little as he did his eloquent verbal comments, does not appear, but at any rate 'Common Sense '-the magazine we mean, we are not now discussing the quality-disappeared. The opposition journal followed suit in a few months, the editor in its epitaph remarking, 'We rejoice that amidst the dangers and difficulties that have beset our path we are at length enabled in peaceful triumph to place the extinguisher with our own hand upon the "Vicar's Lantern." This grappling with local questions had not been without its uses-leading to quickness of intellectual fence, but still sterner work than crushing local opponents was soon to demand Mr. Bright's attention.

Towards the close of 1839 Mr. Bright was married to Miss Elizabeth Priestman, daughter of Mr. Jonathan Priestman, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. By this lady he had one daughter, Helen, who married Mr. W. S. Clarke, of Street, in Somersetshire. Mrs. Bright died in the year 1841, and was buried in the graveyard belonging to the Friends at Rochdale. While sorrowing under this heavy bereavement he again saw Mr. Cobden, and their meeting has thus been described, with simple pathos, by Mr. Bright: At that time I was at Leamington, and on the day when Mr. Cobden called on me-for he happened to be there at the same time on a visit to some relations -I was in the depth of grief, I might almost say of despair, for the light and sunshine of my house had been extinguished. All that was left on earth of my young wife, except the memory of a sainted life and of a too brief happiness, was lying still and cold in the chamber above us. Mr. Cobden called on me as my friend, and addressed me as you might suppose with words of condolence. After a time, he looked up and said, "There are

thousands of homes in England at this moment where wives, mothers, and children are dying of hunger. Now when the first paroxysm of your grief is past I would advise you to come with me, and we will never rest until the Corn Law is repealed." The untiring and devoted manner in which this appeal was responded to we shall hereafter see.

In the same year as his first marriage, Mr. Bright built his residence of One Ash, Rochdale. The reason for this curious designation is very simply explained. Near the house is a single tree, an ash, and the name was adopted in remembrance of his ancestor, John Gratton, of Monyash, in Derbyshire. At this place, and amidst congenial pursuits, he has, at the close of each session, sought recreation and the renewal of that physical health which of recent years has been seriously encroached upon by the pressure of his public duties.

CHAPTER III.

ELECTED FOR DURHAM.

Mr. Bright's first Election Contest.-Cause of his non-success.-His Opponent, Lord Dungannon. Mr. Bright the Popular Candidate.-Lord Dungannon unseated. -Second Election in July, 1843.—A singular Conservative Candidate.-Mr. Bright's Election Addresses. Scene at the Hustings.-Election Pleasantries.-Return of Mr. Bright.-A Free-Trade Triumph.-Rejoicings. Great Meeting in London.

THE able and vigorous part which Mr. Bright took in the AntiCorn Law agitation naturally led to the conclusion amongst his friends that he must have a seat in Parliament. By the year 1842 it began to be apparent that he would be a power in public life. He is earnest, argumentative, eloquent,' said one who spoke with prophetic instinct, 'clear in statement, apt in illustration, fluent in words, abundant in resources. Mr. John Bright is in talent a second Peel; he was born in the same atmosphere. Let his career be observed-he has entered upon it.' Men should generally distrust prophecies, but there was plenty of ground for this one. Mr. Bright had already impressed both his friends and his foes with a sense of his power. If Mr. Cobden might be described as the Paul, Mr. Bright was certainly the Apollos, of the League.

The opportunity of contesting a seat in the Legislature came sooner than was anticipated. In March, 1843, Captain Fitzroy, member for the city of Durham, resigned his seat in consequence of having accepted the appointment of Governor of New Zealand. An address from Lord Dungannon, in the Protectionist and Conservative interest, immediately appeared. It seemed as though his lordship would enjoy a walk-over, but only on the very day of the nomination an address to the electors from Mr. Bright was published. It was written in plain and forcible language, pointing out the special reasons why the representation of the city should be contested. The paragraph which attracted most attention in this first election address of the future statesman was the following: 'I need not allude to the attempt which is making to degrade you into the convenient tool of an aristocratic family-to employ your suffrages to place a man in Parliament as a stepping-stone to

the governorship of a colony, and then to hand you over, as it were by "private contract," to another, who in his address considers your sentiments and your judgment of so little importance that he does not even condescend to explain the principles by which his political course will be guided! It is for you to determine whether you will become an instrument for the exaltation of those who have no interests or sympathies in common with your own; or whether you will assert your right to be a free and independent constituency, using your electoral power to maintain the liberties and protect the interests of yourselves and of your country.'

Lord Dungannon had been canvassing for a week, whereas Mr. Bright's canvass barely extended over the space of two hours and a half, before he met his friends to depart for the hustings. The nomination took place on April 3, when a crowd of four thousand persons assembled in front of the hustings, the Liberal candidate being accompanied by troops of friends. After the nominations had been completed, Lord Dungannon, who was a nominee of the Marquis of Londonderry, first addressed the electors, the burden of his speech being that they knew his principles, and that he had no new pledges to offer. Mr. Bright then stepped forward, and being manifestly the popular candidate, he was received with great cheering. I come before you,' he said, after one or two preliminary remarks, 'more particularly as an opponent of every description of monopoly, but still more particularly of that most infamous of all monopolies which obstructs the supply of food to the people of this country, for the sole purpose of aggrandizing a class. I believe that that class is mistaken, and that the time will come when they will see that injustice to other classes of their countrymen will not, in the long run, benefit their own. But this law is calculated, I am persuaded, to inflict the most appalling suffering upon the great body of the working classes.' He demanded their support for any man who came forward to break down this monopoly, and expressed his great surprise that Lord Dungannon had not uttered one word upon the great question that was already exciting more interest than any other among the intelligent portion of the population. He then proceeded to show the evils of the protective system, which the noble lord supported. 'At this moment there are thirteen hundred thousand paupers in England and Wales. The mover of the noble lord (Prebendary Townsend) spoke of this country as being a great and a free and a prosperous and a wealthy nation. Another gentleman, who is also of the profession of the hon. mover, told us not