The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-22 00:00:00

dissension and contested elections ; men of noble
minds know that they are the very workshops of
national liberty and national prosperity." (Ap-
plause.) Surely such an authority as that was an
answer to Mr. Leatham's fears. The third objec-
tion raised by Mr. Leatham was that he denied the
right of any Government " to lay an embargo upon
any great and valuable article of human food."
(Loud laughter.) What Mr. Leatham meant to
say, although he did not express it very clearly,
was that he denied the right of any Government to
lay an embargo upon what he considered to be a
great and valuable article. He (Mr. Lawson)
should not dispute that point, which did not affect
the argument in the least. All that he would say
was, that the accursed sale of this drink caused un-
numbered evils in this country, and that people
ought to be entitled to the power of suppressing it.
Then Mr. Leatham went on to say he was perfectly
satisfied with the state of the country. He was
delighted to see the effect of what he called "spon-
taneous and irrepressible development." (Laughter.)
He (Mr. Lawson) began to think over this, and
found it was not exactly " spontaneous." In 1863
there was upwards of a million of children attend-
ing the primary schools subsidised by Government.
Government had spent during the last six years up-
wards of seven and a half millions sterling upon
education. In 1851 there were two and a half mil-
lions of Sunday scholars ; there was an Established
Church with an income of five millions a year ; and
there were 22,000 clergymen all striving to make
people religious by Act of Parliament. (Cheers and
" Oh, oh.") He was not using this in an offensive
sense, but was merely quoting an expression from
the opponents of the Permissive Bill respecting
makingpeople sober by Act of Parliament. (Cheers.)
There were already 41,000 places of worship in this
country, and an immense number of police also.
These were all things which had been done to en-
courage this " spontaneous development." (Cheers
and laughter.) What were the results ? The total
commitments to prison in 1863 exceeded those of
1862 by 2,700, and there was an increase of 591 in
criminal offenders. The commitments for drunken-
ness in 1861 were 82,000, in 1862 they were 94,000
and in 1863 the same number within 150. In 1863
the verdicts of death through excessive drinking
were 53 per cent. over the year before. On the Ist
of January, 1864, there were 981,000 paupers in re-
ceipt of relief. This was what Mr.Leatham was satis-
fied with. The fact was they could not but come to
the conclusion that it was the power of the drink
traffic which neutralised all their good efforts, and the
course to be adopted was to return men to the House
of Commons who would give people the power to
suppress such a neutralising influence (Cheers.) They
(the Alliance) proposed to " fight it out on this line "
—(cheers)---and he hoped the result would be the
same as the result of that general (General Grant)
whose success was telegraphed to this country last
Saturday, the news of which sent an electric thrill
of gladness through the heart of every friend of free-
dom. (Great cheering.) He did not say that they
should make the Permissive Bill the cardinal point
in the political action, whatever might arise subse-
quently. He could conceive some question of
pressing interest of peace or war which would swal-
low up the Permissive Bill question for the moment,
but if the mere question was as to whether Lord
Palmerston or Lord Derby should go into office,, a
measure to prevent the drunkenness of the country
was of far more importance than the returning to
power of either of those estimable nobleman. (Loud
applause.) Why were they blamed for making the
Permissive Bill a political question ? Their oppo-
nents had taken the same course. Lately there had
sprung up an agitation for the repeal of the malt
tax, and they were told if beer could be got at a
halfpenny per quart cheaper incalculable benefit
would arise to the country : the farmer would be

richer, the poor would be happier, and the reign of
virtue and order would commence. (Loud laughter.)
The promoters of the Permissive Bill did not see
that. The people concerned in the anti-malt tax
movement made theirs a strong political question,
and the publicans did the same. He was addressing
the most influential gathering of the friends of the
Alliance which had, perhaps, ever been held, and
he would remind them that they stood very much
in the position in which the members of the Anti-
Corn-Law League stood 25 years ago. The friends
of the Alliance were despised by the great and
powerful, hated by those whose interests were as-

sailed, and the press covered them to a great exten

with ridicule and invective.

But the Anti-Corn

Law League triumphed. So would the Alliance
triumph. (Applause.) There were two courses open
before them. One was now, in this the eleventh year
of the agitation, to say it was too hard to go on,
and to decline to avail themselves of that political
power already in their possession, and which was
daily increasing. They might take this course and
write themselves down the greatest political impos-
tors of the day, and amply justify every term of
opprobrium and reproach used by their enemies ; or
they might adopt another course, and take deter-
mined political action upon the question, and then
ultimate success was certain. (Loud applause.)
The resolution was carried unanimously.
The second resolution—one of thanks to the
members of Parliament who had supported the In-
toxicating Liquors Bill--was moved by Sir R.
BRISCO, seconded by Mr. ISAACS, of Liskeard, and
passed.

Mr. S. POPE moved the third resolution:--
" That trade and commerce would be immeasurably de-
veloped by the removal of the principal cause of intemper-
ance, and the consequently increased sobriety, industry, and
economy of the producing classes, by whom upwards of
£50,000,000 are annually expended in strong drinks, and on
whom the chief burdens and evils of the liquor traffic fall."
_ _ _

He said the fact that so large a number of repre

sentative men from all parts of the country had been
gathered together to express their determination at
the next general election to make an impression on
the next House of Commons was a fact of enormous

political significance. This was not an ordinary
Manchester Free-trade Hall meeting, but it was a
representation of the working, middle, and higher
classes from all parts of the country. There were

present representatives of 100 different societies,
from 100 different Parliamentary boroughs, and
they were united with the common purpose to work
until they influenced their Parliamentary represen-
tatives. Their purpose was not discussion ; they
were satisfied with the Permissive Bill, and
they intended to make it a topic at the

next general election—(cheers)—not for mis-
chievous or party purposes, but because the inte-

rests sought to be affected by that measure were so
vast and important that the questionmust be settled
by political action, and could be settled in no other
way. It appeared from recent letters about Liver-

pool, the writer of which was present---(cheers)--
and had his sincere thanks, that it had been ascer-
tained that out of 770 men working in one esta-
blishment, 271 were sober and industrious, and 499
were more or less habitually intemperate. Suppose
the latter spent a third of their earnings in drink,
that would be £230 a week, or £12,000 a year—
almost enough to establish another concern. A tem-

perance society's committee in Manchester had
ascertained that the average of their former spend-
ings in drink had been Bs. a week, which repre-
sented £457.a year now flowing into the common
labour fund. An Irish magistrate present had in-
formed him of a district in Ireland, of 47i square
miles, containing a population of 9,500, including
Dungannon and two other towns, in which the land-
owners had passed a Perniissive Bill—there was no
crime—perhaps they would be told that was became

there was no police—(laughter and cheers)—and
the poor rate, which had been 16s. in the pound,
was Gd., while that of the surrounding district was
is. (Loud cheers.) Why should not the United
Kingdom be like this district ? With these facts

before them, men must be blind indeed who would

refuse attention to a suggestion which sought to
confer similar benefits upon their beloved land.
(Loud cheers.)
Mr. W. R. LEE, Mayor of Wakefield, seconded
the resolution, which was carried.
The Rev. Professor KIRK, of Edinburgh, moved
the fourth resolution :--
" That it is the duty of all social and moral reformers to
organise for the purpose of being efficiently represented by
candidates who win support a measure enabling the people
in each district, by the removal of places licensed for the
sale of intoxicating liquors, to protect themselves from a
grievous and intolerable nuisance."
Dr. F. R. LEES, who was much applauded .on