IF anything could strengthen our demand, made on the eve of Sir CHARLES WARREN'S resignation, that he and Mr. MATTHEWS should go together, it would be the debate on the Police Vote read in connection with the fresh outrage on the rights of free speech at Clerkenwell. It is quite clear that we can on no occasion trust Mr. MATTHEWS. He last night renewed his oft-spoken and oft-broken pledge as to guaranteeing the rights of public meeting. In the same breath he condoned a flagrant and avowed breach of that right. We say "avowed," and we call Mr. MATTHEWS'S attention to the proof of that fact. Mr. LUSHINGTON, the Clerkenwell magistrate, declared that the mounted men were doing no more than it was their duty to do - viz., "breaking the crowd into small knots." What is this but breaking up a meeting? It was precisely the thing which was done in Trafalgar-square. The mounted men rode among the crowd, "breaking it up into small knots," and breaking the heads of the men who resisted, just as their comrades broke other resisting heads at Clerkenwell. The one was a miniature of the other; and no more flagrant proof can be given of the fact that Sir CHARLES WARREN, though dead, yet speaketh at Scotland-yard. It will be no use changing one man while a worse remains, and while the system which both have created remains as well. Things have begun on Clerkenwell-green as they began in the Square, and a further diminution of popular rights is to be apprehended so long as the police are governed either by a Chief Commissioner or a Home Secretary. There is only one solution of this business, and we are sorry Liberal members did not adopt our advice and Professor STUART'S example, and make this the pivot of the discussion on the Police Vote. The day of Chief Commissioners is over; and so is that of Home Secretaries who do not control, but only aggravate, the indecencies, the perils, the wrongs which have grown out of one shameful and intolerable exercise of executive power as against popular right.

Mr. MATTHEWS then must go, and if he has any care for his soul he will quit the Home Office before he imperils it with fresh equivocations. But the danger is that the Government, having rid themselves of the brothers JONAH, will speedily undo all our work, shut us out of the Square, appoint a man who will combine the vices of Sir CHARLES WARREN and Mr. MATTHEWS without their follies and caprices, and embitter the quarrel between the people and the police. How is this to be avoided? By courage on our part, and also by prudence, and by not mixing up in the controversy elements which do not concern it. We publish in another column a temperate letter from Mr. WALTER CRANE, called forth by our remarks on the London commemorations of the Chicago affair. What we complain of in those demonstrations is that Chicago and Trafalgar-square have no more to do with each other than, say, the Norman Conquest with the Spanish Armada. There was, thank God, no bomb-throwing in Trafalgar-square; there was a cruel and vindictive attack on harmless citizens who might have been followers of GEORGE FOX for all they thought of resistance. As for the leaders of Chicago anarchism, we know little of them. We are certainly opposed to their execution as we are opposed to capital punishment all the world over; and we imagine that a large number of them are entitled to the respect due to honest, though mistaken, opinion. But as to the principles of anarchy, we are under no misapprehension. They aim, says Mr. CRANE, at the freedom of the individual "or of the social group." How the freedom of the social group is to be attained by the unrestricted freedom of the individual, which is to be the fruit of the abolition of all law, we do not pretend to understand, any more than we see how the brightening of the homes of the poor is to be attained by the dissemination of dynamite and the slaughter of Irish policemen. We are all for moral dynamite. We are all for Parliamentary pressure. We are all for making the object of politics the improvement of the social condition of the people. But the question of method is vital; and while we think the principles of anarchy are curiously at variance with the most promising developments of Socialism, we say that their practice as illustrated by dynamite is altogether detestable. At its best, Anarchism is but a hopeless gospel, sinking as it does into the gentle pessimistic Quietism of a Tolstoi. At its worst, it is a movement which provokes such retaliations as that of Chicago. We have better hopes for popular progress, a firmer faith in the possibilities of the constructive development of social forces on rational lines, than to preach anarchy to London working-men. Mankind cannot be reformed by a kind of spasm, and least of all will it be bettered by a rather childish parody of the old selfish doctrine - the doctrine of the "classes" all the world over - that every man is to do what is right in his own eyes, and that you can only perfect society by destroying it.

MR. WILLIAM MORRIS, by the way, asks us what we mean by talking of the lesson of Birmingham and the lesson of Trafalgar-square as opposed to the lesson of Chicago. Surely, it is obvious what we mean - viz., that the people have obtained considerable results by Parliamentary means - at Birmingham, the adoption of a social programme, capable of expansion, in Trafalgar-square the supersession of Sir Charles Warren - and that at Chicago, where violent means were employed, they gained nothing.

THE latest idea of the autocrat of the workhouse is to cut the hair off little children who happen to fall into his or her clutches and sell it to wax doll makers. So at any rate we have it on oath in certain proceedings before Mr. Slade yesterday. The apology of the workhouse authorities for this barbarous outrage is highly characteristic. The matron does not know anything about it, the master defends the matron because she is "dependent on the wards-woman." The wards-woman stoutly denies that she cut the child's hair off, although it is certain that while the child was in her charge the hair - "splendid golden hair," is the description of it - was cut off and sold. Considering that in addition to this the little girl, with another temporarily entrusted to Mr. Bumble at the same time pending proceedings at the police-court, had been discharged in a "shocking" and "filthy" state, it is highly desirable that the management of St. George's Workhouse should be overhauled without loss of time. Let the Local Government Board see to it.

There is not the slightest chance of Lord Charles Beresford accepting the Chief Commissionership of Police, even if it were offered him. He was actually offered the post by Mr. Childers in 1885, before Sir Charles Warren accepted it, and he would, as he said, have accepted it for a year or so, if he could have done it without interfering with his naval career. Now, however, he would not dream of taking the post. The offer was made to him because of his success in dealing with the outrages and incendiary fires in Alexandria in 1882.

Mr. Ismay, the chairman of the White Star Line, has just returned from India. Mr. Ismay is one of the most successful of the merchant princes of Liverpool. He began life as a poor man, but by shrewdness and industry has succeeded in building up a colossal fortune. He has a great talent for administration. When he first took the White Star Line in hand its finances were by no means in a flourishing condition, but it is now one of the most popular of the Atlantic Steam Companies. It is said that he won the custom of the Americans by the ingenious idea of supplying ice water gratis at table.

Mr. Ismay has not long completed a magnificent house in Wales, which is filled with pictures of the best artists, among which his own portrait by Sir John Millais figures. Mr. Ismay celebrated his jubilee on the same day as the Queen, but in a different manner. Instead of receiving presents, he contented himself with giving £22,000 to the poor of Liverpool.

Miss Ellen Terry is quietly waiting at Bournemouth for the "Macbeth" rehearsals to begin.

Mr. John S. Kennedy, the well-known New York banker and financier, has paid nearly £400,000 for the historic Murthly Castle and estates.

In the division on Mr. Bradlaugh's motion in favor of a reduction of the Police Vote by the sum of £1,500, the salary of the Chief Commissioner, he was supported by 91 Radicals and Nationalists, and opposed by 207 Tories and Unionists. The following London Liberal members voted for it: Mr. Sydney Buxton, Mr. R. J. Causton, Mr. G. Howell, Mr. O. V. Morgan, Mr. E. H. Pickersgill, and Mr. J. Rowlands. The other London Liberal members, we believe, paired in favor of the motion. The reduction of the salary of the Chief Commissioner was opposed by the following :-

UNIONISTS (25)
Anstruther, H. T.                             Hobhouse, H.
Barclay, J. W.                                            Lea, T.
Bolitho, T. B.                           Mackintosh, C. F.
Caldwell, J.                                  Maclean, F. W.
Chamberlain, R.                                  More, R. J.
Crossley, Sir S. B.                           Morrison, W.
Crossman, Gen. S. W.                   Richardson, T.
Ebrington, Viscount                       Russell, T. W.
Elliot, Hon. A. R. D.                     Sinclair, W. P.
Finlay, R.                                              Taylor, F.
Fitzwilliam, Hon. W. H. W.         Thornburn, W.
Goldsmid, Sir J.                   Williams, J. Powell- 
Haverlock-Allan, Sir H. M.    And the following
LONDON TORIES (34).
Aird, J.                                              Hoare, E. B.
Baring, T. C.                                       Howard, J.
Bartley, G. C. T.                         Hughes, Col. E.
Beresford, Lord C. W. de la poer       Hunt, F. S.
Bigwood, J.                                   Hunter, Sir G.
Brothwick, Sir A.                            Isaacs, L. H.
Carmarthen, Marquess of           Isaacson, F. W.
Cochrane-Baillie, Hon. C.                 Kimber, H.
Cooke, C. W. R.                                 Lafone, A.
Darling, C. J.                                    Lambert, C.
Fisher, W. H.                                   Maple, J. B.
Fowler, Sir R. N.                             Norris, E. S.
Gent-Davis, R.                Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. T.
Gilliat, J. S.                                Rollit, Sir A. K.
Goldsworthy, Major-Gen. 	Smith, Rt. Hon. W. H.
Hamilton, Col. Charles E.          Webster, R. G.
			         Whitmore, C. A.

Only one Gladstonian voted with the Conservatives, namely, Mr. S. Whitbread. The front Opposition bench, with the exception of Mr. Osborne Morgan, abstained from voting; but Sir William Harcourt made a speech on the whole supporting Mr. Bradlaugh.

SIR, - Is your paragraph against Anarchism yesterday quite worthy of The Star, and that tolerance and fair representation of all sorts and conditions of opinion we have a right to look for, except in journals devoted exclusively to further the interests of class or party politics?

What you say of Anarchism is very much what was said of Socialism a while ago. Socialism having become fashionable, Anarchism comes in for the abuse now - at least, of all respectable politicians - and large and enthusiastic meetings, which, had they been connected with either the ins or the outs of our party politics, would have been made much of, are entirely ignored by the reporters.

No politically unpopular names ought to prevent one from enquiring into the truth of new movements.

Anarchism at present, so far as I understand it, is an ideal. It aims at the absolute freedom of the individual, or of the social group. I suppose The Star aims at least in this direction, though by purely parliamentary means. Anyway, we ought to go to the chief exponents of a cause for a true account of it, and yours certainly does not square with what the leaders of Anarchism - men like Peter Kropotkin for example - tell us about it.

But surely The Star does not defend, even on political grounds, the judicial murder of the brave men of Chicago, whose lives were sacrificed - as anyone who had looked into the history of the trial must feel - not because of the bomb, with which they were not proved to have anything to do, but because they championed the cause of labor. Just as the upholders of the right of free speech and public meeting in Trafalgar-square were attacked and imprisoned, or even killed, by the tools of the classes, in the name of law and order in London.

However, their idol has fallen, and we democrats of all shades may well triumph on the anniversary of 13 Nov., and need not ask which section had the greatest share in contending for the people's rights, if those rights are now to be fairly conceded. - Yours, &c.,

Beaumont Lodge, Shepherd's-bush, 14 Nov.

SIR, - A short paragraph in your issue of yesterday (13th) deprecating "a small section of the London democrats mixing themselves up with the cause of Anarchism," seems to me rash, not to say unfair. I have nothing to do with defending Anarchist principles, but it does not become a democratic newspaper to meet those principles with a mere shriek of horror and a hiding of the eyes instead of meeting them with sober argument. Further, those democrats and Social Democrats and other non-Anarchists who attended the meetings recently held in commemoration of the Chicago tragedy did not go there to express their agreement with Anarchism, but to record their abhorrence of the legal murder of citizens charged with no crime for which there was a particle of evidence except being present at a meeting at which a bomb was thrown by some unknown person at the moment when the police were advancing with loaded rifles to the attack of the said meeting, which had been quite peaceable up to that time, and was on the very point of dispersing quietly. I must add that this meeting was called to protest against the slaughter of six unarmed citizens (workmen on strike) the day previously, and that the whole agitation into which Parsons and the others had thrown themselves was one to bring about an eight hours' labor day in America. Surely, sir, this is an event which every democrat when he knows the circumstances is bound to record his feelings upon and protest against an act of tyranny all the viler because it has happened under a so-called popular republic.

You ask us to look to the lesson of Birmingham and of Trafalgar-square, and to compare them with the lesson of Chicago. As I am not good at guessing conundrums, perhaps you will tell me what this means. The lesson I read from Birmingham is not to hand your political conscience over to a caucus and a conventional "statesman." The lesson I read from Trafalgar-square is to distrust Mr. Gladstone and the other "statesmen" who have most flagrantly betrayed the people, and the further lesson that we are kept out of Trafalgar-square by brute force, and are likely to be this long while in spite of your crowing over the quarrel between Matthews and Warren and the heaving over of Jonah.

Sir, it is a game unworthy of a democrat to hold up a name as a bogey wherewith to frighten people and prevent them from looking at facts. If Radicals are to be forbidden to protest against acts of injustice and cruelty, for fear they should compromise themselves, the party bonds will grow unendurable to honest and thoughtful men; they will break them, and your careful party organisation will have nothing left to organise but tricksters and fools. - Yours, &c.,

Helmscott House, Upper Mall, Hammersmith. 14 Nov.

All endeavors to elucidate the circumstances of the death of the poor girl Florence Hancock only draws the folds of mystery more closely around it. It was on Friday last, it will be remembered, that a waterman found a body floating in the river of Shadwell. It was brought ashore and laid in the Wapping Mortuary unidentified. On Monday an inquest was held, and a girl named Maud Jennings came forward in consequence of having seen a description of the body in the newspapers and identified it as that of her friend Florrie Hancock, with whom she lived at 13, Pulross-road, Brixton, and who had been missing since 22 Oct. A Star reporter, in order, if possible, to ascertain something likely to throw light on Hancock's death, has found out all about her. Her mother keeps a lodging-house at Claud-road, Peckham, and she says that her daughter was about 28 years of age, and was the wife of a 'bus conductor named George Hancock, who left her with two children several years ago, and whom his wife supposed to be dead. At all events she seems to have been living a life of "pleasure" for a good many years. For some time she was the mistress of a gentleman named Nash, who was a man of means, but who died some time ago. After that she seems to have descended for a time to promiscuity, and she then made the acquaintance of a man named Frank Pain, a salesman, who set her up in a dairy at Hackney. She still went by

The dairy apparently did not answer, and she removed to a private house, changing about from quarter to quarter as such girls generally do. About a year ago she took the house at 13, Pulross-road, Brixton, furnishing it on the hire system. Here the girl Jennings came to live with her. She and Jennings had been friends for many years. Pain still made her a weekly allowance, which she boasted of as being £5 a week, but there is reason to believe it was not nearly so large. Now we come to the 22nd . On the night before that day she and her servant-girl sat up to a very late hour finishing a new costume, and her mother understood that she expected Pain was going to take her out of town for a holiday. At all events, about four o'clock in the afternoon she left home dressed in brand new clothes from head to foot. She had to meet her friend soon after five o'clock at Liverpool-street Station. She was never seen alive again at her

home. For a day or two not much notice was taken of her absence, as it was thought she had gone to Brighton or elsewhere with her friend, but soon the girl Jennings

and made inquiries. She found that Florrie had been seen on the same night that she left home, once in Jones's public-house in Ludgate-hill, where at about eight o'clock she was drinking with another woman, and afterwards at the Northumberland in the Strand. At twelve o'clock she went with a girl who is known as Beatrice, and belongs to the Charing-cross division, to have a drink. Beatrice does not think that at that time she had more than a little money - any more, in fact, than the sixpence with which she paid for the drink they had together. But in the Northumberland she met with a man. He was tall and fair, with a heavy moustache, and after talking to him for a minute or two she went away, telling Beatrice that she would see her again. There was nothing in her manner at that time to give the impression that she was in trouble. She was, as far as has yet been ascertained, never seen alive again. In the course of his investigation, The Star man found that shortly before this date she and Mr. Pain had had a tiff. "He had found her out," the girls who knew her say. He discovered her with another man in the King Lud public-house, and they had a quarrel. It was made up, but there seemed a probability that something of a similar nature had happened again, and that Mr. Pain, having broken off the connection, she had in a fit of passion thrown herself into the water. So last night

and had a conversation with him. He knew then for the first time that the girl was dead, and seemed terribly distressed at the news. They parted good friends, he said. She met him on the 22nd at Liverpool-street and saw him off at once by train. They arranged to meet again on the following Wednesday. She did not come, and after that he went out of town for a time. When he returned he called on Monday last at Pulross-road to inquire for her, and then found that she was missing. Neither Pain nor any other of her friends is able to suggest any motive for suicide. Now it was nearly three weeks between her disappearance and the discovery of her body in the Thames. The doctor stated at the inquest that the body had been in the water about a week. If this is to be relied upon there is nearly a fortnight to account for. The portrait we give herewith may enable someone who saw her in the interval to recognise her and throw some light upon her movements. It was at first thought that robbery might have prompted somebody to throw her into the water, since the gold necklace which she was said to be wearing had disappeared when she was found. But the necklace, it now transpires, has been found at her house. Her death is a complete mystery. Maud Jennings, her fiend, refuses to believe she committed suicide.

she maintains, and night and day she is devoting herself to the endeavor to find out how her friend died. Apparently she only has any interest in the matter, for the police have been doing so little that it was not until last night they took the trouble to see Mr. Pain. However, Detective David Francis, of Wapping, now that the authorities perceive there may be something serious in the case, has been entrusted with the investigation, and we shall wait with expectation to see what light he is able to throw on the subject at the adjourned inquest.

At the County Petty Sessions, at Salisbury, Charles Hayter, a gardener, was summoned for not causing his children to attend school regularly. Defendant pleaded that he only earned 10s. per week, and had to provide for 10 people. His children had no boots to go to school in. The case was dismissed.

A respectable young man named Collingwood H. Fenwick, was charged at Southwark to-day, with stabbing an unfortunate named Worsfold in the abdomen with a penknife, at her lodgings in Southwark-bridge-road on Wednesday night. - An inspector stated that when Fenwick was arrested he said: "I have made a great fool of myself." He gave a correct address, and was a man of independent means. At his lodgings they gave him a good character. He was remanded.

Frederick Marshall, the young man who murdered his sweetheart, Laura Wilson, a young girl living at Woolwich, and was sentenced to be detained at Broadmoor during the Queen's pleasure, escaped from that prison on Tuesday. He was recaptured yesterday.

The only new thing to report this morning in connection with the Miller's-court murder - except the arrest of more innocent men - is another story told by Matthew Packer, the man on whose statement with respect to the Berner-street crime, the discredited "grape story" was built up. Now he says that two men came to him the other day and asked him to describe the man who bought the grapes, and that after he had done so one of the strangers expressed the conviction that the murderer was his cousin, who had come from America, termed everybody "boss," and one day referring to some Whitechapel women said he meant to

as they had been accustomed to do "where he came from." The reporter to whom Packer made his statement sent off a copy of it to the Home Secretary, and also to the Chief Commissioner of the City Police. This morning it was officially stated that the information has not led to any result.

Another story now discredited is that of the man Hutchinson, who said that on Friday morning last he saw Kelly with a dark-complexioned, middle-aged, foreign-looking, bushy-eyebrowed gentleman, with the dark moustache turned up at the ends, who wore the soft felt hat, the long dark coat, trimmed with astrachan, the black necktie, with horseshoe pin, and the button boots, and displayed a massive gold watch-chain, with large seal and a red stone attached.

As we have already said, the only piece of information of any value which has yet transpired is the description given by the widow Cox of a man - short, stout, with a blotchy face and a carroty moustache - who at midnight on Thursday went with the murdered woman into her room.

Mr. A. Eubule-Evans writes to the Standard pointing out that a month ago, with only reason to guide him, he gave

of the man he supposed had committed the murders. He adds :- In this latest murder we have fresh data for calculating the personal equation of the assassin. Finding that it is no longer so easy as before to murder his victims in the open street, he does the deed of horror in a room; and these altered circumstances enable him to carry out to a fuller extent than before the work of butchery. Two things are clear from this - the man is not only cunning, he is original also. He has struck out a new line in crime, and he is capable of changing its method to meet specific exigencies as they arise. It is this originality of mind, far more than his cunning, which has rendered him such a baffling study to the detective police, who are very clever in working along traditional grooves, but are powerless before the unexpected. Another proof of the originality which mingles with this man's cunning is to be found in the curious limitation of the area within which he commits his crimes. In this way, he induced the police to believe that he must have his habitat in Whitechapel, and he succeeded in confining the search after him almost entirely to that district. Living, however, as he does, elsewhere,

to get out of this district, and practically to place himself beyond suspicion. Every man must act in accordance with the law of his specific nature, and the Whitechapel murderer, cunning though he be, is no exception to the rule. For instance, he betrayed himself, to some extent, by the periodicity which he suffered to mark his crimes. They were committed at certain definite times in the month. A detective of original character would have noticed this and have turned it to good account. He would have felt a moral certainty that between 7 and 10 Nov. another attempt at murder would be made, and he would have organised for those nights a special service of decoys. No doubt such a service has its dangers, but these dangers might be reduced to a minimum. In fact, the assassin is hardly dangerous except to the unsuspecting and unwary. His terrible procedure cannot be carried out against those on their guard. What is wanted is a man in authority possessing originality and imagination. Such a man would divine beforehand when the next attempt will be made - the cycle will be changed now - and he would devise a trap for the assassin.

The "scares" are getting almost laughable. Yesterday while a City constable was walking along the Commercial-road in mufti and a low broad brim hat of rather singular appearance, somebody called out that he was "Jack the Ripper." Hundreds of people surrounded him, and the results might have been serious had not some constables come up. The officer made known his identity to them, and was got away from the mob. Another arrest caused more than usual excitement. A man stared into the face of a woman in the Whitechapel-road, and she at once screamed out that he was "Jack the Ripper." The man was immediately surrounded by an excited and threatening crowd, from which he was rescued with some difficulty by the police. He was taken under a strong escort to the Commercial-street Police-station,

howling and screaming at him. He proved to be a German, and explained through an interpreter that he arrived in London from Germany on Tuesday, and was to leave for America to-day. Confirmation of this statement having been obtained, he was set at liberty.

An arrest was made in the Old Kent-road yesterday evening. A man left a shiny black bag at the Thomas a Becket public-house. The police were communicated with, and on the bag's being examined it was found to contain a very sharp dagger, a clasp knife, two pairs of very long and curious looking scissors, and two life preservers. The man was afterwards taken into custody.

About half-past one this morning, several young men watching some premises in Spital-square, noticed a man talking to a young woman, and overheard him ask her to accompany him. She consented. As they were walking away a constable stopped them and took the man to the Commercial-street Police-station. He refused to state where he was on Thursday night last or give any information whatever, and he was detained.

At a quarter past three a man was arrested in the Mile-end-road and taken to Leman-street Police-station.

An arrest has been made at Dover in connection with the Whitechapel murders. A suspicious-looking character was seen near the railway station, and as he answered the description given of the murderer he was taken into custody, but was afterwards released.

On the afternoon of Friday, 2 Nov., a retired fishmonger, named Nash, 67 years of age, left his home at 36, Portland-road, Notting-hill. Nothing was heard of him till the afternoon of Tuesday, 6 Nov. Then he was found sitting on the steps of the Duke of York's Column. He was wandering in his mind, and was taken to Wallace-yard Workhouse, Pimlico. The next evening he was removed to the infirmary. There Mr. Pollard, the assistant-surgeon, found him suffering from pneumonia, but there were no signs of any injury. The next day Mr. Pollard examined the man's head, and questioned him as to whether he had fallen at all. The man made sensible replies. The man died on Thursday. A post-mortem revealed the astonishing fact that the third, fourth, and fifth ribs on the right side were broken, the fourth, fifth, and sixth on the left were also smashed, and the breastbone was broken. At the inquest last night the doctor said the bones were extremely brittle, but the organs of the body were fairly healthy. The immediate cause of death was inflammation of the lungs, but it was intensified by the injuries received. The man must have been wandering for three days without food, as his married daughter said her father left home without money, as far as she knew. Under the direction of the Coroner, the jury returned an open verdict to the effect that deceased died from pneumonia, caused by severe injuries, but how deceased was injured there was no evidence to show.

A largely-attended public meeting, convened by the Political Council of the Mildmay Radical Club, was held in the large hall of the club, 36, Newington-green-road, N., on Tuesday night. Mr. Jesse Argyle, president of the club, occupied the chair, and stirring speeches were delivered by Mr. C. A. V. Conybeare, M.P., Mr. Thomas Lough, Liberal candidate for West Islington, Mr. Miskin, and others. Resolutions expressing satisfaction at the retirement of Sir Charles Warren, and a strong opinion that a military man should not again hold the office of Chief Commissioner; calling for the dismissal of incapable Mr. Matthews; and asking that the Metropolitan Police Force should be placed under the direct control of the new County Councils, were unanimously and enthusiastically agreed to.

SIR, - May I trouble you with a few words as to the conduct of the Home Secretary with regard to the East-end murders, speaking from a working-man's point of view? Could Mr. Matthews only hear what working-men generally think about his refusal to offer a reward, he would be able to form some idea of the injury he is doing his party, and which they will feel at the next election. The working class think, and rightly think, if a reward is offered and it does not lead to the conviction of the murderer no harm can have been done, and no money will have to be paid; on the other hand, it might lead to the man's conviction; and more, they argue that if the victim was some person of high standing in society a reward would have been offered long since. But life is life, and it is as much to the poor degraded victims of this fiend as it is to the highest in the land. A reward might bring forward evidence of the conduct of the murderer at his lodgings or in a hundred different ways.

With regard to the notice of pardon to anybody not the actual murderer, in the last case, it is childish. Degraded as the poor victim was, does Mr. Matthews think she would take a third person to witness her immorality? - Yours, &c.,

Canterbury-place, Lambeth, S.E., 12 Nov.