The Sun.
London, England, 1864-01-21 00:00:00

THURSDAY EVENING, JANUARY 21, 1864,

two great sentiments—freedat of labour on the one side,
and slavery on the other—cam; into collision on the scale in
which they exist in America, what are the certain conse-

quences ? Why, we did not Ind it so easy to emancipate
our own slaves ; we had some tzouble. We paid £20,00,000,

and we had a long, eager agtation, in which there was
much embittered feeling; and my firm belief is, that if the
slave party in England had borne the same proportion to
the rest of thecommunity who, emancipation was demanded
in this country which they bo.e in the United States at the

commencement of the civil war, it is very probable you
would not have been able to pt through your emancipation
in this country without a resort to arms, or perhaps to the

secession of your slave counties to some other slave coun-
try where there would have been a greater affinity to them-

selves. Now, it is remarkable what is going on at the pre-

sent momeut in the North, notwithstandiag this tremen-
dous pressure upon their resources, which no doubt will
raise a very large debt, but which debt I believe that coun-
try will, with its growing population and its vast means, be
enabled to bear. I have got in my hand a report of the

Commissioner of Agriculture in the United States for the

last year, and I find that in 1862 there was grown in that
country 169,993,500 bushels of wheat. I find in 1863 that
that quantity has increased to 191,068,239 bushels. I find
that nearly all articles of agricultural produce have increased
considerably even during this war, and notwithstanding the
fact that no less than a million of men employed in the

army and navy have been withdrawn chiefly from the
agricultural producing class. Notwithstanding we see this
remarkable statement,perhaps emigration may in some mea-
sure account for it, I find that large numbers of adven-
turers from every part of Europe are still crowding the

shores of the United States. I find that the commissioners

say thac " While some as adventurers seek the western
world for military fame, stimulated, by our large bounties

and chances of promotion, on to fighting sincerely the battles
of freedom and equality, the greater part come to labour, to

enjoy independence and quiet, and to make happy the humble
homes for themselves and theirchildren. According to there-
posts of the New York Commissioners of Emigration tho

number of immigrants arriving at that port was 146,519
against 67,307 during 1862. This increase holds good in re-
spect to other great ports of our country, and independent
of the large number of persons from Canada for other por-
tions of America." I will read only one small passage more

of the commissioners' report, because if I were to go on al

any length I should read some opinions which would be held
to be unpalatable in certain quarters. (Laughter.) I shall
confine myself to one passage, in which he wishes to indicate
some of the causes which have led to this great immigration
0.4 .I,z„ r—ticular tiwo in `L"." 17ultet States. Ho say' "t"
an i..t.,aligetit mind, and especially to every American, the
causes of this influx of foreign population, even during a
period of war, are very evident and gratifying." I shall
simply indicate some of them without discussing them at
length. In the first place, the present rebellion is being
understood abroad in its true light, as a revolt against de-

mocracy, the rights of labour and human nature, and that

the triumph of the Government guarantees to immigration
its great reward of peace, prosperity, and freedom. (Cheers.)
I hope I may be forgiven for speaking out so much on this
question, but I could not disguise my feelings, and I think
the contest has arrived at a stage when we i,hould frankly
express our views and interchange our ideas. (Hear, hear.)
I will next touch briefly on some questions of domestic re•
form. No doubt I ought to do so, I ought to say a great
deal on reform. (Hear, hear.) I shall be asked what has
become of the Reform Bill—is it put in the pigeonhole
never to be taken down again till covered inches deep with
dust? (Laughter and loud applause.) I would say the
Reform Bill when brought forward was a question which
had neither friends nor foes. (Applause.) It was smothered
with kindness—everybody was a reformer. Lord Derby
proposed a considerable reduction of the county franchise,
and said, "Go to £lO in the counties." Mr. Disraeli
thought the borough franchise ought also to be extended,
and if so effectually ; and that the promise should be
kept in the spirit as well as in the letter. The Go-
vernment brought in a Reform Bill proposing a
£lO franchise in counties and Di in boroughs. But

that bill was completely talked out of existence. What
was the cause I I think it would not have been in the
power of any Government to withdraw a bill of such itnpor -
tance after it had been laid on the table of the house, unless

they found, on the part of the country and the House of
Commans, indifferent and lukewarm support. (Hear.) My
opinion remains unchanged. I think it is a mistake to
postpone the question of Reform. I believe that England's
happiness and prosperity have rested upon the fact that our
reforms have been progressive and gradual, not effected by
sudden and extensive leaps. If the Reform Bill was put off
till an indefinite period, a Reform may then be asked and
have to be granted, which will not then receive the sanction
of parties that would not support a useful measure of Re-
form, it would be useful for a Government, if backed by the
country, to bring forward a measure of Reform which would
extend the franchise to a larger number of the working
classes, and thus place the institutions of the country on a
broader and surer foundation. (Applause.) These are no
new opinions, thay have been expressed by the leaders of
both parties in the House of Commons. All parties are
committed to Reform, and some wish it to be understo)d
that they have abandoned those opinions upon which the
present Government was brought into power, and the pre-
sent Parliament elected. All say "Bring on Reform at a
convenient season." However, who is to say when it is
convenient ? I say that the constituencies—the country—
must answer the question. Reform, political reform, was

never made a freo gift to any people, and yet was never

granted by any governing body or Parliament except at the
demand of the country and in accordance with public
opinion. The laws of England hsve never anticipated
public opinion, and I hope will never do so. A Reform
must be such as public feeling can support and co-operate
with. And, being so, nothing would have a greater ten-
dency to sweeten the political atmosphere and to increase
the general confidence of all classes throughout the coun-
try. (Applause.) I am precisely where I was. I have
already expressed my views on the question of vote by
ballot, upon which lam also where I was. I believe you
cannot have a genuine vote from a constituent body, what-
ever that constituent body may be, if you impose as a
restriction on the voter that his vote shall be published.
Unless you give the voter the power to vote by ballot, if he
sees fit, you cannot secure that the electoral body will give
expression to its pule and genuine opinion. There mu be
countries in which the classes are so equal in the social
position—there may be circumstances in which the ballot is
rendered a question of no moment ; but I believe there was
never a country of our social feelings, our sense of caste,
our aristocratic predilections, our gradations of wealth and
poverty—there never was a country in the world which
requires for the eliciting of the genuine vote of a constituent
body the power of secret votieg, so much as England.
(Cheers.)
A VOlCE.—Denmark. (Laughter and cheers.)
ANOTIIEEVOICE. —Aye, that's it.
Mr. GIBSON.—WeII, I am asked to say a word about Don-
mark. One of our eminent statesmen on the Conservative
side sail that the Danish question, or rather the Sthleswig-
Holstein question, was one which few had studied, and which
none understood. (Laughter.) I confess my studies have not
been very diligent in regard to the Schleswig-Holstein ques-
tion; but I do not kaow that anybody who is not a German
professor is expected to be able to explain all the refinements
of German law, and all the difficulties which surround the
question of succession to the two Duchies of Schleswig and
Holstein. But it appears to we that this is a question
which ought to be settled without fighting- (Cheers.) I
remember that when the Congress of Paris met, after the
Russian war, which Congress was attended by delegates
from all the chief Powers of Europe, I think ray Lord
Clarendon, very much to his honour, moved a resolution,
which was supported cordially by the French representa-
tive, to the effect that for the future it was very much to be
desired that when questions arose between the different
countries in Europe—questions of dispute—that before
having recourse to arms the office of some friendly Power
by way of a mediator should be invited, I happen
not to have the resolution ,before me, but it came to
this, " Try if you cannot settle the difficulties in
future in Europe which may arise, and which are
sate to acme, by Luau:nee to some third party, before
you resort to arms." Well, I think that was a very
sensible resolution, and I wish they could see their way to
act upon theta in this Danish Schleswig—Holstein question.
(Cheers.) All I know as regards the policy of this Govern-
ment is, that the object they have in view ;n any advice
that they may have given, or any moral influence that they
may have attempted to exercise, their object has been to pro-
mote faith to engagements, whether on one side or the
other, to promote justice, and also to secure peace. (Great
cheering.) But beyond telling you that the question is ono
which I hope may not give rife to war between any Powers
of Europe—beyond telling yeti that it is impossible for me
to form any opinion as to whtt may be the ultimate views
of Prussia, or Austria, or Denmark in this matter-1 know
not the grounds upon which they are prepared to settle the
question. Our obligation is a /ery limited one in the matter,
and merely relates to the suce;seion. (Hoar, hear,) We no
doubt are parties to the treaty of 1852, which attempted to
settle the question of succession of Holstein and Schleswig
to the crown of Denmark—beyond that I should rather
avoid saying anything for fete I should mislead. (A laugh.)
I fear that at the present mouent the question is in a very
peculiar position, all hoping fir peace everywhere in respect
to it, still it looks dark and tlreatening, and if we express
any confident opinion perhaps we should be only misleading
—(hear)—but my earnest dare is, that it may be settled by
some kind of conference or arbitration, rather than having
recourse to arms, which onlr settles who is the strongest,
and very often leaves unsetad who is in the right, and who
has justice on their side. (Cleers.) I thank you once more
for your kindness. You hoe heard me with great indul-
gence. I have told yea thatney opinions upon reform are
where they were. I know tlat official men are supposed to
part with their first loves ant form new connections. I have
not done that yet—(cheers)—and I mean upon every occa-
sion when it is in my powe• to do so, to promote those
views which gained me favor in the first instance with this
constituency—reform, religion; equality, extension of edu-
cation, freedom of vote—l naan vote by ballot—extension of
the franchise—•(A Voice—" Itetrenchment"— (Laughter.)
My hon friend says retrenchment, so say I. (Cheers.) lam
for retrenchment. lam sony to say I do not think the
House of Commons is for retenchment. It is very popular
is a large expenditure, and visy difficult for a Government
to reduce expenditure. If tht income shows there is more

money able to be spent there are always excuses rising up
from one of the services or the other, and demands are made
for increased expenditure which it is exceedingly difficult for
the Chancellor of the Exchequer—than whom I assure you
there is no man more inclined for economy—to resist.
During the last few years there has been a considerable re-
duction of expenditure. My belief is that your expenditure
may be reduced below what it is at present without impair-
ing the value of your establishments—(cheers)—and I
think if her Majesty's present Government are permitted
much longer to carry on public affairs, in all probability
there will be reductions following that course of reduction
which has taken place during the last two years. And
now, gentlemen, if there are any questions which you may
wish to address to me, I shall bemost happy to answer them.
I perhaps could better discharge my duty to my constituents
by putting the matter before them in that light than, per-
haps, I could by commencing to dilate upon some subject in
which they cannot take a particular interest. (The right
hon. gentleman, after repeating the expression of his readi-
ness to answer any inquiries from his constituents, sat
down amidst hearty cheering.)

A hearty vote of thanks was given to Mr. Gibson, and a
similar compliment to the Mayor closed the proceedings.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS,

DAILY NEWS.—It is of importance at the present
moment that the real ground of the Ultimatum
which Prussia and Austria have just presented to
Denmark should be clearly understood. If the
peace of Europe must be broken, everyone inte-
rested in its preservation is naturally anxious to
know the precise causes, the definite wrongs and
grievances, which have rendered this extreme step
necessary. The only grievance alleged by the Gtr-
man Powers as the ground of their summary action
against Denmark is the common Constitution
adopted in November last, immediately after the
death of the late King. This constitution, while
carefully preserving the rights of the Provincial
Estates in Schleswig and Denmark Proper, created
a central organ or common assembly for legislation
in common affairs, in which both should be equally
represented. The German Powers assert that this
step is in direct violation of the engagement
solemnly contracted by Denmark in the diplomatic
correspondence which took place between them
twelve years ago. They maintain that in that
correspondence the King of Denmark pledged him-
self not to incorporate Schleswig with the kingdom
of Denmark Proper, or take any steps tending, to
produce this result, and to satisfy the Just claims of
the rival nationalities of Schleswig. The alleged
violation of the first of these engagements is the
ground of the German Ultimatum. Prussia and
Austria require the immediate withdrawal of the
November Constitution, on pain of armed interven-
tion i❑ Schleswig. The vital questions are, whe-
ther the engagements said to have been made by
Denmark have really been violated, and whether in
any case they were of a kind to justify hostile inter-
vention on the part of Germany. Taking the lest
point first, there can be doubt that before the final
pacification in Holstein and the withdrawal of
Federal execution in 1852, the King of Denmark
did engage that Schleswig should not be incorpo-
rated with the kingdom; but the very form of the
engagement would seem to determine its true
character as a voluntary and sovereign act, in
which none of the existing rights of the monarchy
were surrendered. They were made in the form of
a proclamation by the King to all his subjects,
specifying his intentions with regard to the future
government of the whole monarchy. This piocla-
mation was communicated to the German Powers
and the Diet, in so far as it related to the German
Duchies of Holstein and Lauenburg. These pro-
vinces being Federal territory, the Diet, having as-
sisted the King to restore order in them, was en-
titled by the provisions of Federal law to ask for
explanations in regard to their future Government.
But no such right existed with regard to Schleswig,
nor does it appear to have been once claimed
throughout the whole of the correspondence now
appealed to. It is true that the German Powers
pressed the Danish Government to declare its in-
tentions with regard to the future government of
Schleswig as well as of the German Duchies. But
the Danish Government, in meeting their request,
reserved at the outset the sovereign rights of the
King, formally denied the right of the Confedera-
tion to extend in any way its authority beyond the
limits of Federal territory, and declared that any
communications made with regard to the govern-
ment of Schleswig were of a strictly informal and
confidential kind. These reservations were accepted
by Prussia and Austria, and recognised in the for-
nall decree of the Diet which closed the correspon-
.

deuce. " The annex of the Prussian despatch of
comber 30,1851, declares the aff ars of the Duchy
of Schleswig, being those of a non-German country,
to he, as such, not subject to the investigation and
discussion of the Germanic Confederation." Austria
made the same acknowledgment, that communica-
tions with regard to Schleswig must be looked upon

as voluntary, and could not possess the che.racter o:
formal engagements. The King's proclamation was
communicated to the Diet under the express reser-
vation that this was done only in so far as related
to the Federal territoricg, and the Diet accepted
this communication as satisfactory in a decree
which Jumped up the official points of the previous
correspondence. In this final resolution, passed on
the 29th of July, 1852, no reference whatever is
made to the Duchy of Schleswig. Any statement
with regard to the government of Schleswig made
to the German Powers under these circum-
stances can hardly amount to an international
obligation, much less afford any justifiable
ground for hostile intervention. Still the pro-
mise not to incorporate Schleswig with the
kingdom was undoubtedly made, and the
Danish Government is honourably bound to fulfil
it so far as this may be possible. The question is
whether it has really been violated, and if so to
what extent. The D tnish Government declares that
it has done its utmost to carry out all the promises
contained in t he Royal proclamation of January 28,
1852, to which the German Powers now appeal as
a ground of action. In Schleswig it has not only
restored the Provincial Estates but enlarged their
prerogatives. This was the main point urged by
the German Powers in the correspondences of 1851
and 1852, and the facts of the case show that they
regarded the restoration and retention of the old
Provincial Assembly as affording a sufficient gua-
rantee against the dreaded incorporation. The very
proclamation that protected Schleswig frcm incor-
poration contained the promise of a common consti-
tution fir the whole monarchy, and this was ac-
cepted by Austria and Prussia as a perfectly legiti-
mate scheme, not conflicting in any way with the
promise now invoked. The Prussian despatch of
Dec. 30, 1851, contains the following decisive para-
graph :—" The German Powers acknowledge that,
as a consequence of the principle of the integrity of
the Danish united monarchy, a representation of all
portions of this monarchy in a distinct legislative
assembly for discussion and decisions is not incon-
sistent with the separate rights of the German
Duchies of Ho;stein and Lauenburg." It a common
constitution is not inconsistent with the separate
rights of the German Duchies, it surely cannot be
seriously maintained that it is inconsistent with the
separate rights of Danish Duchy of Sehles wig ; and
in the light of these facts the grievance complained
of can hardly be regarded in any other light than
that of a convenient pretext for carrying out a fore-
gone conclusion. The Gelman Powers have cer-
tainly no right to insist on the withdrawal of the
constitution, and it would seem from their own ad-
missions that there is no good reason for making
such a demand.
IiERALD.—The National Shakspere Committee
was divided against itself last week, and should have
fallen to the ground. It is now sub-divided against
itself, and its standing would be still more contrary
to proverbial precedent. The danger must
be imminent when the crew take to the
boats ; and Mr. Tom Taylor, Mr. Shirley Brooks,
Mr. Theodore Martin, and their friends; whose
letter appeared in our publication of yesterday,
are no unimportant secession, more especially as
they are evidently prepared to pull together towards
an intelligible shore. The fact is, that the ship in
which they sailed was rotten, and should not have
been trusted to the sea. There was ill fate against
it from the first. It must have sailed on a Friday.
There must have been a black cat on board. But
there is no occasion to seek for wonderful causes.
The failure may be accounted for in the most natural
manner. The ship was in wrong hands. Shakspere
at the prow was all very well, but Mr. Hepworth
Dixon at the helm was a different matter. No other
literary pilot could have greater experience of the
rocks in his way, and, like the Irish skipper, he
must have been well acquainted with the one upon
which he struck. But the strike was inevitable.
The vessel may hold together a little longer, but it
must go to pieces ; and to Mr. Dixon will doubtless
attach' the honour—belonging properly to the cap-
tain rather than to the pilot—of being the last man
to leave her. Indeed, we should not wonder if he
clung on to the wreck a little longer than was ne-
cessary for his personal dignity—the courage of the
hero being intensified by the constancy of the bar-
nacle. Wo confess we are glad to hear of the last
disaster to this unmanageable craft. Not from any
disrespect for the object in view, which, properly
carried out, would reflect honour on the country.
But for the carne reason that the gentleman liked
to hear a child cry—because he then knew it would
be taken out of the room. The National Shakspere
committee has from the first shown so many ele-
ments of discord as to be hopeless. Any further
crash is welcome, therefore, ss likely to clear it out
of the way. There scorned some chance of rational
proceeding when the report of the council was re-
jected, and a sub-committee appointed to prepare a
yew eue: But when the sub-committee were denied