The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-30 00:00:00

them indulging themselves? Did not the House think
that if there be such characters, that they would take
1 the wiser course of coming over individually and dis-
persing themselves through the country, when they would
be able to do ten times more mischief than if they attacked
us in a body ? He did not believe that anybody in this
country seriously entertained the slightest apprehension of
danger front France. Was there not evidence that the
French Government contemplated anything but an attack
upon us? Did they think that that Government would have
converted their Five per Cents. into Four-and-a-Half per
Cents. if they contemplated any such thing? He saw
around him capitalists who were engaged in snaking rail-
ways through France. Was there ever such an amount of
capital going there as at the present moment? Well, then,
he asked them whether they thought that they would send
money into a country which was inhabited by armed bandits?
Why, the Government must ask them to get rid of their
reason and common sense before they could be induced to
assent to this measure. Why, they were legislating against
France is if she were in the position of ancient Scandinavia,
who, without the slightest cause or pretext, was determined
to make war upon us for the mere hope of plunder, feeling
that they had nothing upon which we could retal'ate. Had
they not rich cities in France? Had they not more silver
than we had in this country? Was there not inure bullion
in the Bank of Paris than in that of London ? (Hear,
hear.) Why, they appeared to think that the French
people were wholly bereft of common sense, and did not look
two inches beyond their nose. But what was really the fact?
Why they were second only to ourselves as a manufacturing
country. With the exception of England, no country depended
so largely on raw materials from abroad to carry on their ma.
nufactures as France did. Paris herself manufactured more
for exportation than any three capitals in Europe. All the
chances were against this apprehended attack being made
upon us. He saw his Right Hon. Friend near him who was
endeavouring to persuade the House to abolish a tax that
pressed severely upon the people in the way of preventing
the spread of knowledge and education amongst them ; yet
the Right honourable Gentleman opposite made a motion
that night that would absorb the whole of the money that
was produced by this impost. Another Honourable Gentle-
man was seeking for the abolition of the duty upon hops;
but here was a proposition which would involve precisely
the expenditure of that amount. If they could play at sol-
diers without making the people pay for their amusement
he would not of course complain; but, when they asked
him to consent to a measure which would press severely
upon the industry of the people, then he had a right to de-
mand their reasons for this expenditure. The Noble Lord
the Member for London, in reply, said, that because they
happened to be enjoying the blessings of peace, they should
take measures to prepare for war. Now, was that a good
reason for such a Bill as this? He was, on the contrary, of
opinion that every year they passed in this condition of peace
the better grounds had they for expecting a continuance of
peace. Would the Noble Lord tell him when this was to
end? :He recollected that the Noble Lord, in his speech upon
TIM in complained of the boroughmongers
so long resisting the reductions Or ta.. eeers. The Noble
Lord and his party, however, had aided in grauuumiy ;-
creasing that army since, by adding to the supplanientary
forces. They had their dockyard battalions, amounting to
10,000 men. They had also their veteran battalions, amount-
ing to 15,000 men, as good soldiers as any in England.
They had, however, now nearly doubled the uniform that
was supplied for their army since 1822. He recollected at
the end o f the year of 1830 there was as much unform
provided for their armed men as they had in France. Was
that necessarily or properly the fruit of peace? He
thought that we should naturally enjoy the ad-
vantage of peace in a time of peace. The Government
were not acting in the way to promote good feeling between
this country and France. Nothing had been done in France;
not one overt act had been committed by the French Go-
vernment during the last four years to warrant this outcry.
On the contrary, there was every reason to suppose it was
the wish of France to remain at peace with us. W hat was
said in 1848, when the revolution broke out? He (Mr.
Cobden) was taunted at that time with permitting himself
to be deceived; for the French people, it was then said, were
preparing to make an onslaught upon us. Well, what took
place? Every one now sees that the last four years have de-
monstrated that the French people were pacifically disposed.
But within the last three months an individual had obtained
a supreme power there—this individual, no doubt, bore an
ominous name, which was calculated to renew old antago-
nisms and alarm here; and it is alleged that in consequence
of his having shown a disposition for war we were to arm
ourselves. But has his conduct been such as to warrant
such apprehensions? Has not the Noble Earl at the head of
the Government declared his belief in his pacific inten-
tions, and has not the Noble Lord the Member for London
said the same thing? This country was standing in an un.
worthy position. He thought it was both cowardly and im-
proper to take these unnecessary precautions against ima-
ginary dangers. He was speaking now in the name of a
large portion of the people of this country. The people
denounce this force, and declare they do not want it. Ex-
clusive of the 15,000 veteran pensioners, he would under-
take to point out 40,000 men who could be transported to
the coast of Sussex by railway, fresh and in good condition,
in one-tenth of the time it took when they were obliged to
march on a most irksome and fatiguing journey. But it
was invariably the rule in that House, on the Treasury
benches, to adopt the plea of destitution of the
forces when they were asking for an increase of
them. The Gallant Admiral who represented Gloucester,
when sitting on the Treasury bench, had stated that we had
not a ship of war fit to send to sea on an emergency; but
no sooner was he seated on the Opposition benches than he
made a speech to show that we were completely hoaxed in
regard to the navy ; for that we had steamers ready in the
Channel which could take up their position in such a way
as to be within hailing distance from the North Foreland
to the Channel Islands. Now, he (Mr. Cobden) should
like to have a Committee to inquire into the actual number
of armed men in the country. He thought it would be a
good addition to make to the army and navy estimates if
they had a statement of the exact disposition of these
troops. The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite shakes his head
at this, as if there was some mystery about it which we
should not tell the French. Now this was the old pedantic
excuse for withholding this information. The Noble Lord
the Member for Tiverton referred to our vast colonial em-
pire, which, he said, covered one-eighth of the surface of the
habitable globe, and that we were to send our army and
navy to defend this vast territory. But he (dir. Cobden)
would ask whether it had ever occurred to those who indulge
in such observations, that the taxation by which this large
force was maintained for this vast colonial empire was paid
by the little specks of islands called Great Britain and Ire-
land?—(Hear, hear.) Why should not Canada, for
instance, which contained 2,000,000 of inhabitant?, who
were infinitely superior to our people, and who paid no tax
into our Exchequer, pay for the support of the army which
she required for her protection? Canada did no such thing;
but she had actually put a prohibitive duty upon the pau-
pers from Ireland entering her borders. His Hon. Friend the
Member for Manchester as well as himself urged the bring-
ing home of their soldiers from the colonies, with a view of
disbanding them. The Right Hon. Gentleman the late First
Lord of the Admiralty said that if we brought our great line-
of-battle ships from the Mediterranean, and placed them in
the Channel, we would only induce the French to do the
same, in order that they might meet us in the Channel.
Why what did that mean but that we kept our fleet in
the Mediterranean because the French did the same? It
was suggested by Arthur Young, some eighty years since,
that if we could induce France to bring their ships along-
side ours in the Channel. and then burn them, it would
be good policy to do so. But then comes the argument,
that since the introduction of steam we were not as safe as
we were before. This steam, it was said, had bridged
the Channel; but the bridge was in our possession, and not
in that of the enemy. When it becomes a question of steam
we have an infinite advantage over the rest of Europe.
Why, the coals of England supply the French steamers in
Mediterranean ; and there was hardly a city in France that
was not lighted with British coal. As the Hon. Member for
Tyrone truly said the other night, for every steamer which
the French could fit out, England could fit out ten, and in
the course of two or three months an immense number of
our steamers could be converted into privateers, and our mer-
chant vessels might be diverted to warlike purposes of suffi-
cient power to command the ocean. Did they not think
that the French Government were perfectly well aware of
our immense force and our powers of destruction in the event
of war? Upon all these grounds he maintained that the
measure was wholly uncalled for—that the expense it in-
volved was most wanton, and, thinking so, he was deter-
mined to give to every stage of the Bill every opposition in
his power.—(Hear, hear.)
. _ _

Mr. BERIiSFOR.D said the Hon Member for the West
Riding was only following hisvocation in abusing everybody
who wore a red coat.—(Oh, oh.) But the Hon. Gentleman
was not the best authority on these subjects. The lion.
Gentleman lately made a tour of peace and goodwill on the
continent, and on his return he prophesied a universal reign
of loving kindness and goodwill. But hardly had the Hon.
Gentleman made his prophecy when they heard from all sides
wars and rumours of wars—the citizens of every capital in
Europe cutting the throats of their neighbours, and civil war
raging all over the continent.—(Oh, oh, and cheers.) He
was therefore not disposed to place implicit confidence in the
opinions of the Hon. Member, because he had already been
tried and found decidedly wanting. The llon. Member said
that in 1802 the French prepared to invade this country,
and that many months were wasted in these preparations.
But the Hon. Member did not advert to what he stated
when he reckoned up the means of our defence—the faci-
lities which the railways now afforded for concentrating a
force on a given point. The Honourable Member ought, to
have remembered that railways did not exist only in Eng-
land, but that by means of them it was in the power
of France to concentrate a much larger force for attack than
we could do for defence. But the measure had never been
defended on this side of the House, merely because they
dreaded an attack from France. Their doctrine had always
been that a country rich and powerful like England ought to
have a sufficiont amount of force to preserve her, in case she
should be forced into war, in that amount of peace and se-
curity at home which she had always hitherto enjoyed. The
Hon. Member for Montrose and the Hon. Member for the
West Riding told them that all the danger was imaginary,
and that fear existed only in the minds of old women. Weil,
he was glad to see that the Hon. Member for Montrose
retained not only so much strength of body, but so
much vigour of mind as to show that he at least was
superior to all danger.—(Laughter.) But younger men, and
me who knew more about the matter, were not of his mind.
With excepthioen
donfnageferwwaGeennotltemimenagoinpaproys.ite,TehveerNyoohnlee
as wel as isßight h. Hon. Friend the Chan-
Member foir London the Noble Lord the Member
forgivettoll,
chequer, had all agreed that some such
this was n
re
masa as
d its preference for a generatel over a local
ecessary. Nay, e House had
in consequence of that decision of the
militia;Lord
and it was
admitted that that t
souant with their own convictions,
at the same time it was con
Bill. The real question was—Had the
cia lor leuoarsdeyotfndtaehtceltanree
present
I to being forward this
Government felt compelled, though
• burdensome and oppressive to the people?
which was
that they had. They bad brought in a measure
regard to the
free from the objections of the ballot. Now, with
measure;
Government brought in a Bill which wouildie beni maintained
etalienaesdt
• ballot, he was bound to say it was an obnoxious
though when called upon to fig ht for their hearths and homes
he felt sure no Englishman
would rfuse to serve.
The
and Gallant Member for Westminster thought there would
; be an objection on the part of the people to volunteer. The
Hon. and Gallant Gentleman ought to be the last person to
raise such an objection, for he had without much difficulty
raiseodid
a corps
England, of o t volunteers,for not
warfareon a
for th e purposeforeign
shore
o dr eel,f
andn° nd
lug
that too in the face of difficulties thrown in the way by
the laws of this country. He thought, therefore, it was
ungrately, to say the least of it, on the part of the
; lion, and Gallant Gentleman to raise this objection. Was
; English feeling dead? Were high-minded and noble senti-
. merits altogether extinct? Far be it from them to say so.
Then the Right Hon. Member for Manchester said that
this Bill ought to be thrown out because it did not include
. Ireland and Scotland, and he called upon the Noble Lord
the Member for Tiverton to defeat it on that ground. Now,
; he maintained that her Majesty's Government had acted en-
. tirely in accordance with precedent on this subject. The
L Militia Bills for England never were the same as the Mi-
litia Bills for the other two parts of the kingdom. There
; never had been a ballot in Ireland ; the militia there were
, always raised by beat of the drum; the plan had never failed
yet. What had been done in Ireland ? They had a remark-