The Sun.
London, England, 1863-01-14 00:00:00

eag

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1863,

_
On Tuesday, at Halifax, Sir CHARLES WOOD and
Mr. STANSFELD addressed their constituents. Sir
CHARLES commenced by congratulating himself
upon the long period during which he had sat for
Halifax. He said that thirty years was longer
than most members sat for any particular borough,
" and certainly longer than any Minister had re-
presented one particular constituency." He stated
that last June he had fully explained his views in
respect to the Government of India. He complained
of the blame that had been imputed to him in re-
gard to his conduct of affairs, but he maintained
that it was unjust and without foundation. It must
*be confessed that the subsequent passages in his
speech did not tend to confirm this assertion. No-
thing could be more unsatisfactory than the tone
which he adopted on the subject of Indian cotton.
It has been a subject of regret to many that Lord
STANLEY was so soon removed from the direction of

Indian affairs, ani certainly after this oration at
Halifax the regret will be increased tenfold. Sir

CHARLES WOOD seems totally to ignore the prin
ciples of political economy, when he dis
conrages the extension of Indian commerce.
The following sentence comes strangely from
member of a Government who pride them-
selves so greatly on the French Treaty and
the extension of free trade. "It had been sug-
gested to the Government to place a premium on
the excortation of cotton from India on the ground
of policy, and it was justified, because, as he had
said, every pound of cotton that it was possible to
send had been bent from India." It may be asked
if this is the case where would be the benefit of the
premium. This is certainly a new method of in-
ducing manufacturers to purchase, but it is not
likely to prove a very succeseful one. When Sir
CHARLES mentions it as an insuperable difficulty
that the 4, ryots" would cultivate the plant if re-
munerative, he forgets that it is the fault of his own
Government that left the monopoly of so important
a branch of commerce in the hands of the natives.
English capital
some years ago, onawti
and enterprise, if allowed free scope
effected very different
results at this important juncture, but all such
efforts were discouraged. Also he seems to overlook
the fact that the expense of transit will be very
much diminished when the roads are completed.
This is the mere strange because he mentions
himself how fast they are progressing with public
works in India, and states that " by the time the
next year's crop of cotton is ready there would be
at least two main roads completed and available for
its transport." Neither can we coincide with Sir
CHARLES WOOD'S notions when he states that it is
not his duty to consider the welfare of the people
of Lancashire, but to confine himself to the good of
toe natives of India. Are they not fellow subjects
under one Crown, and should they not work in con-
cert? Besides commerce is a connecting link between
divers nations and separate states, a better
exponent of the doctrines of fraternity
fierce denunciation of revelutionists. The
than the
mission
of commerce has been
truly,
bringing to the frozennorthof
the productions of
the burning tropics, and making the whole world
contribute to the daily happiness of every home."
Should the ministers reach the end of the session
so soon to commence in the enjoyment of the pri-
vileges of office, they certainly will not %lag puns
of praise to the Indian Minister as the pilot who
has weathered the storm that now hands over them,
if the views enunciated at Halifax are to be the
future policy for India. Mr. STANSFELD followed
Sir CHARLES WOOD, and gave some of his opinions
to his constituents. He dilated on the question of
Reform; he said that he had been returned their
member at an election which he believed had been
entered upon for the purpose of settling that ques-
tion, but he feared be could not say that they had
fulfilled their mission' Tile hon. member spoke
strongly, and in some respects correctly, on this
point. He
said that the " Government had not ful-
filled its
pledges, and the Liberal party in the
House had not held it to those pledges, So far Mr.
STANSFELD is right enough, and it does him great
honour to see that he has
the courage to say 50 in
the presence of a Cabinet Minister. When he went
on to throw the chief blame on the Conservative
party, however, he does not exhibit the same
straightforwardness. No censure can be too great