The Press.
London, England, 1855-01-20 00:00:00

MR. COBDEN AT LEEDS,

Ox Wednesday the member for the West Riding
appeared by appointment before a public meeting at
Leeds, in order to give an account of his opinions in
reference to the war. It was known that a vast ma-
jority of the electors differed altogether from the
hon. member on that point, and viewed with much
disapprobation the course he had adopted in Parlia-
ment respecting it.. Many other hon. representatives
and influential gentlemen connected with the West
Riding were also expected to attend the gathering ;
and it was anticipated that, atter Mr. Cobden had
spoken, addresses would be delivered, and resolu-
tions proposed, expressing the popular enthusiasm
for the prosecution of the war. An immense assem-
blage was accordingly attracted to the Leeds Music-
hall, which had been appointed as the place of
meeting, insomuch that a concourse tilled the place
to overflowing long before the hour fixed for com-
mencing proceedings. An adjournment was therefore
made to the Cloth-hall-yard, where, in the open air,
and in spite of repeated showers of snow, a crowd
estimated at between five and six thousand persons
patiently listened to the successive speeches during a
period of four hours and a half.
Mr. COBDEN opened the proceeding with an ad-
dress which lasted an hour and a half. He began
by defining the responsibilities under which he him.
self stood with regard to the war, which be held up
also to his hearers as the source of immense and
indefinite. expenditure
have, as a member of the House of Commons, to pro-
vide for you the sinews of war. I cannot avoid voting the
money necessary to carry on the war, if it is to be carried
on. The most important question in the nett session is,
how and in what manlier are we to carry on the war? And
I agree that if England is to have a war, you cannot have a
little war; but you must carry it on with that vigour and
energy which becomes such a nation as this. But to do
this will require money, mid not a farthing will come
except by a vote of the House of Commons. I think your
Government, and even Mr. Gladstone, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, much as I respect his character, have rather
lent themselves to the delusion that they could indulge the
people of this country in a cheap war. Mr. Gladstone told
the House of Commons that he wanted but ten millions.
We voted him ten millions. You have had an opportunity
of judging how that money has been spent; and you can
judge now, if we are to carry on the war, what that money
will do, and how long that money will last. Why, gentle-
men, it is gone already. What, then, are we to do for the
future? It is a provision of Providence itself that there
should be difficulty surrounding a war—that hardships,
and dangers, and sacrifices, are necessary to and inse-
parable from war—so that every country may feel it to be
beneficial to avoid these difficulties. You must, however,
raise the money to carry on the war. If yon come to the
question of direct taxation, I have no hesitation in saying
tost in theory I would have this money raised by direct
taxation, bemuse that money is raised at the least possible
expense in collecting. It does, I believe, the least injury
to trade and commerce. But we all know that on the
present scale of the income tax you cannot raise sufficient
to carry on the war; but you must lower the range of the
tax ; you must tax lower incomes, and you must divide it
b tween direct and indirect taxation. But I should be
very sorry to see taxes laid on those commodities which
are required in the production of manufactures, or neces•
sary for the commerce of this country. I should be very
sorry to see that ; and I tell you frankly that I shall, in
every case where possible, vote for direct taxation instead
of indirect taxation.

Mr. Cobden passed on to another branch of the
subject, and carried the sympathies of the audience
with him while severely criticising the military pro-
ceedings and management of the war :
I think with all parties here there will be no difference
of opinion about this—that all will agree that a more
wretched expose of our system of administration in mili-
tary affairs, a more clear illustration of the total break-
down of the aristocratic system of routine when brought
to any strain or stress, could not have been illustrated.
(" Hear, hear," and cheers.) We have the admission o;'
the represent. tive of Government in the House of Com-
mons that a great mistake had been made in sending an
army to the Crimea to take Sebastopol; and I heard a
Minister of the Crown say that all parties were mistaken—
the generals were mistaken, the Government was mistaken,
in estimating the strength of Sebastopol. I heard it
treated with as much nonchalance as though the specula-
tion of hazard involved only a couple of shillings in the
result. A " mistake " involving the homicide of thousands
and tens of thousands of men 1 Why was there such a
" mistake," which was in every way so deplorable? Why
was not all the information obtained with respect to the
actual condition and strength of Sebastopol? I will un-
dertake to say that a shrewd Leeds man, intrusted with
10,0001. and sent to Constantinople, would find the means
of getting information of every kind—information of
every gun, of every man—they might obtain even the
muster-roll and drawings of the whole place, if the proper
pr 'cautions were taken to get at them. The idea of send-
in; such an army was a leap in the dark, and throughout
" a mistake." Now, 1 am of opinion that the mistake
was not merely in estimating the strength of Sebastopol;
it was a inisudce to go to Sebastopol at all, under any cir-
cumstances. (Hear, hear.) We have gone three thousand
miles to attack an empire containing 60,000,000 of people,
and with an army of 000,000 or 700,000 men, and send
2'1.000 or 50.000 men. I must think—and I believe you
will all think, with a fulsome self-gratification—as that
with which some organs of the press talked abont annihi-
lating that umpire—as frivolous and childish. t Cheers.)