ultra notions concerning the landowners'monopoly. At the close of the poll, on the 30th of January, the numbers stood:-
| For Mr. Gladstone, | 363 |
| For Mr. Smith, | 336 |
Mr. Smith polled twenty more votes than had carried Mr. Finch at the previous election. At the previous registration, the tories had put seventy additional voters on the list, by paying their rates for them. The majority, however, had not been gained after Mr. Smith came into the field, but from the pledges obtained by Mr. Gladstone when he had no better opponent than a young cornet of the guards, who was totally unable to give expression even to the opinions which his friends advised him to state. It was Mr. Lyttelton who gave the triumph to Mr. Gladstone. When he retired he had received only 162 pledges, while his opponent had received 250. At seven in the evening of the election day, Mr. Smith addressed an immense assemblage, not with the despondency of a rejected candidate, but with the triumphant tones of one who felt that he had contended for a great principle, which was certain, ultimately, to prevail. His speech produced a powerful sensation, and when he took leave of his auditory, a great portion of them were in tears.
Ministers might have taken a useful lesson from Walsall. They might have told their supporters that they could no longer rely on whig aristocratic influence, but must give to the electors, in addition, some principle to contend for.They might have said, "Send us a supporter, by all means, but find one who will carry the electors with him. These anti-corn-law men are everywhere, and should not be put at defiance." But they chose to sit "between two stools;" they roused the fiercest opposition by their proposed modification of the Corn Laws, without gaining any confidence or support from the free traders. They enraged their foes, and did not conciliate those who were disposed to be their
