The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1879-01-11 00:00:00

•MMIIMNION.I.I.II

MR. W. E. FORSTER AT BRADFORD

Mr. Forster, M.P., addressed a meeting of his con-
stituents in Bradford on Monday night. He explained
his reasons for declining to place his candidature for
the representation of the borough at the disposal of a
committee, and said he could never consent to be a
were delegate. Adverting to foreign affairs, he argued
that the G-overnmant had deceived their own friends,
had incurred the hatred of the Christian races in
Turkey, and had bolstered up the Turkish Pachas
without gaining their confidence. The Turks felt
that they had been misled, the Bulgarians that they
had been injured, and the Greeks that they had been
deceived. in point of fact. the policy of the Govern-
ment had been one of reckless defiance alternating
wit!: humiliating concessions. Mr. Forster said
And ro A, to come to Russia herself No one will deny the
unfriendly or rather angry relations not merely nor, indeed,
mainly between the Governments, but between the pcople
of England and Russia. What can be more danaerous be-
tween two great countries than rec'dess defiance, alta--
Dating with humiliatiegconceesion ? (Cheers) it must pro-
duce had blood between them, and that is a great danger.
I say dm ger advisedly; I believe England would win, but at
tremendous cost. (Hear, bear.) It would be a world-wide
war. (Hear. hear.) It would last at least for Lord Bea-
consfield's three campaigns. (Hear, hear.) There is a pre-
valent feeling that it would be a short war. I believe that
Ii a mistake; the difficulty of the two nations getting at
each other would prevent this. I hope men of business
will bear that in mind. In the excellent trade report
which the Bradford Observer gave on the last Saturday of
the year I find tnat the writer who described the prospects
of the iron trade says there is a feeling gaining ground similar
to that preceding the Franco-German war—that there will
be no confidence generally till England should have had it
out with Russia. It would probably be better for the world
and for our trade to get this war done with—l say, better to
get this notion of war done with. Why need we have a war
with Russia? lam not here to defend Russia. Much
may be truly said against her. Much has been said of her
ruler and her people and lately of her soldiers which I
believe to be untrue. But let these stories be true, what has
Russia done to us, or what can she do to us? Russia does
not threaten Egypt. Our Government derides the fear of
her invading India. True, she sent a mission to Cabal, and
Lord Beaconsfield has told us that, in the circum-
stances, she was justified in doing so. But lam told that
she threatens Constantinople; and this brings me to what
is perhaps the most dangerous result of the foreign policy
of the Government—the false position in which they have
placed England, not only in relation to Russia and Turkey,
but to Europe. It is not our special business to defend
Constantinople, even if it be in danger, which I doubt. Its
possession might make Russia a Mediterranean Power;
but France and fltaly are Mediterranean Powers with
long lines of Mediterranean coast. Austria, also, is a
Mediterranean Power; but Russia at Constantinople would
peril her existence. As to Germany, she cannot forget
that her greatest river is the Danuee, and that her greatest
future danger, is an alliance against her between France
and Russia, which danger would be increased by the aug-
mented power of Russia. It is true that the possession of
Constantinople by Russia would be dangerous to Europe.
But it is not our special business to defend Europe or do
the work of Europe. (Hear) The supporters of the Govern-
ment are never tired of quoting the approval of Continental
papere. No wonder Frane,e, Germany, and Austria wish that
England should do their work. But what right have our
Government to impose on the English people 'the duty of
other nations? (Cheers.) Why those enormous standing
armies in France and Austria and Germany and Italy? if
they cannot protect their nations against Russia, are we to
have a conscription in Eugland because we choose to assume
the designation of protector of Europe? Nor do I believe
that we could or should perform this duty. If there be
danger from Russia, it is in the apathy of Germany or France,
and this apathy is only made possible by false reliance upon
us. If this is what the "spirited policy" has done for us
abroad, what has it done for ns at home? I think you
will find out when Sir Stafford Northcote brings in his
Budget what it has done at home. (Hear, hear.) I think
we are suffering from it at home to some extent at present.
(Hear, bear) lam not going to say—l don't think it would
be true—l am not going to say that Lord Beaconsfield's
policy has caused the commercial depression. I thlnk ii
was an immense mistake for Sir Michael Hicks-Beach the
other day to say that he thought the distress had been ex-
aggerated for party purposes. The distress, it is too true,
is universal, it has not been exaggerated; and I should be
making a greater mistake than he made if I said it was
caused by the policy of the Government. But Ido think the
change from bad to good trade Is put off by the policy of
the Government. (Hear, hear.) I believe with Lord Derby
—(cheers)--that one of the greatest obstacles is a want of
confidence in our foreign relations, and how can we gain con-
fidence . •

After some further observations, Mr. Forster adverted at
some leugth to our affairs in India, and said-
- -- -

Indian wars are becoming, in truth, English wars. Impress
these facts upon your mind in future. I believe we shall
have to do most of the fighting its India ourselves, and we
shall have to pay for the greater part of It; this Afghan
war and debate have made that clear. It will only be by
the greatest care that we can avoid this becoming a most
heavy drain upon British resources. There must be a risk,
and if the Government policy be pursued there will be a cer-
tainty of this drain. lam prepared to run the risk, but I
will oppose the policy which increases the danger and would
make it almost inevitable. ((Lear, hear.) I absolutely deny
the charge that I wish to give up India. (Cheers.) I am
determined to do my part to keep India for a far stronger
reason than that felt by those who vaunt "Imperialism" the
loudest. However England obtained her rule in India, I
think it is her duty to prererve it—(cheers)—and I believe if
this duty be not fulfilled, England will have the punishment
which rests upon the non-fulfilment of great national duties.
(Hear, hear.) . . •
In answer to a question as to the policy of Protection or
Free Erade, Mr. Forster said :
I am quite aware that there is very great interest felt in
this que,tion of Free Trade and Protect/nu, or what a Tory
peer called reciprocity, " Protection under a false front.
It would take me some time to go into the qusstion. In the
first pace, I believe reelproc ty, as it is cells d, won d not
hrlo our trade. (Cheers ) I am a Bradford trades-
man myself, and I do not object to state that I
sh-u'd b s very glad to have ley own trade helped.
Bat by adsly,ing reciprocity I do not think that we
should increase our customers either abroad or at home.
' And, afier all, it is our hosae customers we have to con-
sider. As regards foreign customers, adopting reciprocity
duties would not help us; I think it would enormously
encourage the enemies of free trade throughout Europe. I
think a war of tar.ffs or the fear of it would endanger "the
most favoured ilaVon clause." (Hear, hear.) But I have
another reason why I feel perfectly sure that it would not be
a gain. Now, I see a good deal of talk in Bradford and a
good many letters in newspapers of this district in favour of
reciprocity; but they all seem to go on this mistaken suppo-
Sition—that we could monopolize monopolies; that we
cou!d persuade the House of Csmmons merely to put duties
upon the goods that come here and compete with our
market. It there was any real notion of its being carried,
everybody would be crying out for reciprocity—that is, for
heavier duties; and, above all, producers of food would be
crying out. ((Lear, hear.) Well, the distress would be very
hard to bear, but how much harder would it be to bear if
bread was dear? (Cheers.) Just let me conclude by quoting
what one of the strongest Tories in the House of Commons
(Mr. Clare Sewell Reade) said the other day while canvass-
ing—and, by the by, I hope he wont succeed. (Laughter.)
The bon. gentlemati advised farmers "not to be pulled by
the cry which had been raised of recfprocity ; let them not
suppese that the people of this country would ever allow
their food to be taxed ; and, as this could not be allowed,
nei'lisr could mauufa•sturers expect to be protected."
(cheers.) New, there is the real answer to the whole
affair. You cannot get -it because farmers will not let
you have it, and if they did it %mill be at a tremendous
cost—by thdr getfing the protection of theiaproduce aud
raising the price of food. (Loud cheers)
•