The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-26 00:00:00

145 seats in Parliament whose members always voted agaist
MB. MACGREGOR, lif..P., IN GLASGOW. , liament excnpt Hyam Ferrars. He therefore disfranchised
the interests of tho people and in favour of every corrupt
measure brought forward by a Tory Minister, whilst at the
same time he rescued Scotland, being a great rotten bo-
rough, to be so independent, that I will tell you the result
of what Scotland did at the late change of Ministry. It is
this—ln fact, were it not for Scotland, you'would have had
and
crd
ihiDs Derby oweanguesirnspzuserd.
a(aCmheuerusw.)
uoWmihnegnvLer7ord Johnrohn
to
the present times—within a few months) her Majesty was
advised, I think very wisely, to see what they could do, to
send for Lord Derby. Lord Derby went to Buckingham
Palace, and he was empowered by her Majesty to form an
Administration. Lord Derby having received this com-
mission, went from Buckingham Palace to a house in Park
lane, where resided a gentleman distinguished by the bril-
liancy, the fluency, and the acrimony of his eloquence. I
do not believe that he is of the Jewish persuasion himself;
but this I do know that, paternally and maternally, he
belongs to the Israelitish nation. lam not at all illiberal
with respect to that ; I have voted and will vote for re-
lieving the Jews from their disabilities ; I merely
state the fact, that to this eloquent member of
Parliament was intrusted that great essential maxim
of our liberties and taxation—to him was intrusted
the carrying out of that principle, that no subject
of her Majesty should be taxed without his own con-
sent through his representatives in Parliament. The Derby
Administration was formed. Mr. Disraeli was entrusted
with the most important responsibility in the country; as
Chancellor of the Exchequer he had the whole responsi-
bility of the immense taxation, the revenue and the ex-
penditure of the United Kingdom, everything from the
salary of the Prime Minister down to the mere wages of
the letter-carrier. With regard to the ,personnel of the
toerity Adininisfintion; there we're several very eicelleht
men in it. I must do that Administration the justice to
say, that with regard to their legal appointments, never
were there more able or better men, probably, with one or
two exceptions. Their Lord Chancellor was the greatest
Equity lawyer that this country ever had at the head of
the Court of Chancery. He had long determined that he
would do away with the delays and iniquities of that op-
pressive, vexatious, and interminable Court. Their At-
torney-General for England, and their Attorney and Soli-
citor-General for Ireland, were all eminent, and I believe
as honest, lawyers as ever lived. (Cheers.) With regard
to the Home Department, I must pay a just tribute to
Mr. Walpole ; and a fair tribute also to the Colonial-office.
With regard to our foreign relations, however, I do not
think the Earl of Malmesbury was to be trusted ; his lean-
ings being altogether towards absoutism, as allihis negotia-
tions prove. I will say nothing about the minor appoint-
ments further than this—that some of them were exceed-
ingly discreditable—men who were appointed to do the
dirty work of a Protectionist Government. Very well,
they entered on power. They met the Parliament which
then existed. It was necessary for the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to bring forward a budget. Lord Derby, in
the House of Peers, still declared himself a Protectionist
—predicted ruin to the country if we persisted in
the Free-trade system ; Mr. Disraeli was rather
more cautious in the - House of Commons ,• but his
colleagues, when they went to be re-elected, still de-
clared themselves Protectionists. We found we could not
put our trust in them. However, it was necessary, as I '
have stated, to bring forward a budget, and Mr. Disraeli did
produce a financial scheme, which he brought forward with
very great ability—extraordinary ability. He was cheered
by the House of Commons—he was eulogised by the press,
and generally praised out of doors. Out of regard to the
peculiar circumstances of the Government, we passed all
the estimates without a division. As Chancellor of the
Excheque, Mr. Disraeli got gloriously through the budget
and the estimates for the remaining part of the session.
But i t is painful
this
o subject.revert to certain
eltDalisranCeilliellhlllad con-
nectedpreviously
sious with
stated that Sir Robert Peel's administration had surprised
the Whigs when they were bathing, had stolen their
clothes, and came into office wearing their garments. Un-
fortunately the budget which Mr. Disraeli brought forward
was not his own. It had been previously prepared. The
Army Estimates were prepared by Mr. Fox Maule, now :
Lord Panmure ; Mr. Disraeli found them at the Horse
Guards. The Navy Estimates were prepared by Sir Fran- :
cis Baring : Mr. Disraeli found them at the Admiralty. :
The Ordnance Estimates were prepared by General Anson: I
Mr. Disraeli found them in Pall Mall. The Colonial Esti- 1
mates had been prepared by Lord Grey : Mr. Disraeli 4
found them in the cul de sac at the bottom of Downing 4
Street. The Estimates for the Miscellaneous and Contin- '
gent Expenditure were prepared by Sir Charles Wood and. 4
the Lords of the Treasury; Mr. Disraeli found them corn- 1
fortably folded up within red tape in his uew residence at 1
the Exchequer ;so that he at all events had discovered the I
old clothes of others that had been there before him. Lord 1
Derby, in the House of Peers, declared himself still for 1
Protection—he said the country had thriven under Pro- 1
tection : that the prosperity we had enjoyed for some ]
years past was purely accidental, in consequence of our
having had good harvests and other circumstances which •
he stated. Mr. Disraeli stated the same in the House of i
Commons—still adhering to Protection. They then said we
will dissolve Parliament; we will go to the country: we will 1
abide by its verdict, in full confidence that we shall have 1
a majority to' enable us to govern the country upon Pro-
tectionist
principles. They did dissolve Parliament ; and i
they went to the elections. Never was there so mnch in- (
trigne, never was there so much immorality practised as 4
at those elections ; yet notwithstanding all that, when :
Parliament met afterwards, such was the good sense of the
people—so great the benefits they had derived under free I
trade, full employment, from the great prosperity of
manufactures and commerce, with all the advantages of
being fed, better clothed, and better sheltered than they
had been before—they sent a large and decided majority
to the House of Commons in favour of free trade. (Cheers.)
On the 4th of Nov., 1852, Parliament met. In the mean-
time, the Duke of Wellington having departed this life at
Walmer, on the 12th of that month, Mr. Disraeli, in the
House of Commons communicated a message from her
Majesty, intimating that it was her Majesty's gracious
wish that the Duke of Wellington should have a public
funeral at the expense of the country. On that occasion.
the Chancellor of the Exchequer delivered a brilliant ora-
tion worthy of Fenelon or Massilon, to the memory of the
illustrious departed hero. But if the shade of the Duke
of Wellington had been present it must have shuddered to
have heard laisfuneral oration was not that of an Englishman
but of a Frenchman. It was an oration delivered over a
French General who was buried some years before at Pere
la Chaise, every word of all its immortelles, and all by that
witty, sparkling French statesman, known as the author
of several romances which he calls histories. It was an
oration by M. Theirs—(a laugh)—at the grave of General
St. Cyr. These were stolen goods at all events.
(Loud cheers.) A few days afterwards, the Free-traders
and others in the House of Commons were determined
to bring the Derby-Disraeli Government at once to declare
stvhailtlioefrsfrweeastreandtrue asnteddLwiibteh-
-1 arwarhleepsotrihleunrctiitpohnieisstro
;
paonllcty is wasquite and
Mr.
this effect, that "free trade is just, wise,
and beneficial " I
true that the Derby Govern-
ment obstructed us, but they themselves were compelled
to declare, both in the House of Peers and in the House of
.
Commons, that a return to Protection was an impossibility ;
and we carried Mr. Villiers' resolution that " free trade is
just, wise, and beneficial," all the members of the Derby
Government, and even Sir Robert Inglis, going out into
lcbto ear bei s
the lobby with us. We therefore settled the question of
free trade for ever. Then came the question of the politi-
cal integrity and morality of the Derby Government. Mr.
Disraeli had declared—l believe, as a disappointed man—
that. the Government of Sir Robert Peel was " an organ-
ised hypocrisy." The country, fortunately, thought other-
wise. They considered the measures he brought forward
wore practical, were consistent with the circumstances and
necessities of the times, that his free trade measures espe-
cially were permanent realities. We then began to think
that Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli and their colleagues,
having for ten previous years resisted every thing like the
appearance of free trade and Liberal sentiments—having
declared, on coming into power, that their policy should
be to arrest the dangerous progress of democracy,
which was undermining the institutions of the country,
and admit of no system of education, except that which
should be strictly and indissolubly connected with the
Established Church of England, we began to think that
the proper designation of the Derby-Disraeli Govern-
ment was a great political immorality. (Cheers.) We,
the Liberal members of the House of Commons—and I
am glad to say there were none more Liberal than certain
members of the Peel Government, both as regards civil and
political liberty, as well as that connected with our com-
mercial and industrial operations—we, the liberal members,
were determined to bring them to the test. We knew very
well that Mr. Disraeli must now, at length, bring forward
a budget of his own. He had to fulfil some pledges of his ,
colleagues. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster,
for instance, addressing the electors of North Lincolnshire,
said that he was still a Protectionist—that Lord Derby was
a Protectionist—that Mr. Disraeli was the great leader of
the Protectionists—and then there was their veracious Soli-
tor-General, in addressing the electors of East Suffolk, said
" we are going back to Protection as before—give us power
and we will do it." The country, ho said, had been de-
ceived by Sir R. Peel—the country was still Conservative.
Mr. Forbes Mackenzie said the same thing. There were
rather blacker things done at Derby and other elections.
Well, Mr. Disraeli did bring in his budget. It did con-
tain some good things P • and he certainly put the best things
in the front. I admit at once that his proposals with re-
spect to merchant shipping, by taking off the various re-
strictions as to the manning of our ships, and other parts
of that measure, were quite equal to that passed by the
present Government. But in admitting that, I am obliged
to stop. The rest of the budget, if it were his own d-
get, which I can hardly conceive—from his really well-
known abilities, I should say it was forced on him—for it
exhibited so great a want of financial sagacity, with such an
utter ignorance of the sentiments and interests of the coun-
try, that I can only regard it as the last expiring effort of a
desperate party. He proposed, in order to relieve the agri-
cultural interest, to take off half the malt tax, sacrificing
two millions and a half of revenue. Now, if the duty
could have been altogether abolished, it might have been
very well ; but taking away one half of it would, practi-
cally: speaking, have given no relief to the agricultural in-
terest. terest. There would still have been the presence of the
would have
exciseman, and the great malsters and brewers
h have got his
have derived no advantage, for he could not a
And then there was to
beer not one halfpenny cheaper. _
tended area given
be an increase in the amount, and an ex
hied at 10/. and
to the house tax by including the houses va .
got the whole benefit, from which the consumer would
upwards, and doubling _ .
making up a remission of
201. All this for the purpose of _
Zr. Disraeli brought
taxation in behalf of the landlords.a n _
ski ;
11 and. I admit
this forward with great ingenuity d
and others had proposed
that, if he had agreed to what
whole soap duty—if he
—if he had agreed to abolish the
tea from 2s 2d to is at
had agreed to reduce the duty on
the tax above the previous limit of
d to abolish the
and various othere things, pointed
duty on advertisements,
we might have agreed in prin-
cipleout by myself and others,
of the area, and doubling the rate of
to the increase .
t tax ; but he did not, and we
the house tax, as a direct
him. After a very skilful speech, he was
had to meet
'n one of the most powerful
answered by Mr. Gladstone i
of c
the end of three years—if he had agreed
Iconclusive ever pronounced
upon a
the most powerful an(
',ll estiou What was the consequence ? We di-
vided,fmanci• qu •
speeches ever heard in the House Commons—l believe
members, they had 286 votes, ' •
a house of 591 _ including all
and we left the Derby Government ma minority. In
those who had since been unseated for bribery and corrup-
tion. We had on the Liberal side 305 votes—the whole number
inthe house voting being greater than in any other division
since the passing of the Reform Bill. 0
• bay n dha d stilladding
a majorityur majority was
therefore nineteen against the absolute Tory Government
of Lord Derby. (Cheers.) But I have to remark that in
consequence of the bribery and corruption which prevailed,
Lord Derby had a majority
of 15 English members ; taking
the eh to
ofth4e in Eng-
lish
thealso into consideration the bribery that was practised to a
Baja ; but when we come to include members who voted
from Scotland, and this is a most glorious fact, that in the
first place no Scotch member has been unseated for cor-
ruption; and when we came to decide upon the great prin-
ciples of civil, religious, and commercial freedom, the
g rea t
members, extent in
Lord Ireland,p e
Scotch members gave a majority of the whole against Lord
Derby of 19. (Cheers.) Let not Scotland forget that we

(From the Glasgow Constitutional of August 24. )
On Monday evening, Mr. John Macgregor, 11l P., one of
the representatives of the city of Glasgow, met his consti-
tuents in the City Hall, for the purpose of giving an ac-
count of his stewardship, in fulfilment of a promise to that
effect, given by the honourable gentleman at the late elec-
tion. On the platform we observed, amongst other gentle-
men,e J. Smith,
Bailies Gilmour, and J. W. Macgregor; Councillors
11l Moir, Couper, and 'Adam ; Messrs. Peter Mackintosh,
Paton, G. Ross J. W./Warn, J.
Clark, Wm. Ross,iJ. Murchi
M`Gregor M'lntosh, Rowland Hill.
The galleries were well filled, and there was a large atten-
dance in the body of the hall.
On the motion of Councillor MADAM, Bailie J. W.
Macgregor was unanimously called to the chair.
Bailie MACGREGOR, on being called to the chair, said—
Fellow-citizens, it is with pleasure I respond to your de-
sire that I should take the chair on this occasion. I could
have wished it had fallen into abler hands ; but on account
of my immediate connection with Mr. Macgregor, as chair-
man of his committee at the late election, it behoves me to
rnn
defer at once to your wishes, trusting to your indulgence
terminationt o
e in
honourable bg theto
ourselves
and
of this
agreeable meetingto to
ou a
r
representative. It is unnecessary for me to detain the
meeting by any statement as to its object. You are all
aware of this from the public notice given in the papers.
I will only state, to prevent misconception, that Mr. Mac-
gregor, while on his canvass and at public meetings during
the late election, stated, that if returned again for Glas-
gow, he would consider it his duty to appear amongst
you annually, and at his earliest convenience, after
the close of. ,the seasipn„ to render an account, of his
stewardship. Mr. MacgregOr appears before yip.
night for that purpose ; and it must be gratifying to ts
all that be is enabled to mingle thus early amongst us, in
perfect health, after such an arduous and important session,
to inform uswhat has been done, and what maybe expected,
and what should be done. I know you will give Mr. Mac-
gregor an attentive and a patient hearing. The details
connected with finance, law, and commerce, may be dry to
some, but the subject is an important one for the welfare
of the people ; and when you hear of this from the mouth
of one of your representatives, it will give you more inte-
rest, so that if your assistance is required you will aid your
representatives in bringing matters of importance before
the State, for if both the representative and the repre-
sented go firmly united to have their grievances redressed,
it will require a perverse government indeed to withstand
them. (Cheers.) I have further to congratulate you in
having a representative that honourably and respectfully
thus comes before you, the. your intercourse may be
strengthened. I trust this gocki example of confidence may
have its effect upon other members and other constituencies,
but remember many eyes are upon you, and I do hope and
trust that the business of this meeting may so terminate
that Mr. Macgregor may have pleasure in renewing his
pledge, and that the great cause of social progress—of civil
and religious liberty—may be advanced at such meetings
as the present, conducted in a spirit of mutual forbearance.
Allow me, then, without further remark, to introduce to
you Mr. Macgregor, for whom I crave a kind and an atten-
tive hearing. (Cheers.)
Mr. MACGREGOR, M.P., who was loudly cheered, said—
Mr. Chairman and fellow-citizens. I now appear before
you in fulfilment of a promise which I considered it a duty
to make when you did me the honour of returning me a
second time to represent you in the Parliament of the
United Kingdom. (Cheers.) I consider it a debt of gra-
titude upon my part to come before you immediately after
the close of a mast important session, to give you not only
an account of my own stewardship, but also to make some
statements, which I trust may be instructive, with regard
to past administrations, and with regard to the present
Government of this mighty empire. I perfectly agree with
what has been stated by your excellent chairman, that a re-
presentative ought to come in communication with his con-
stituents; that he would be unworthy of your kindness
and the trust devolved upon him if he had not the
resolution, the honesty, andt he candour to come and meet
you at the end of each session of Parliament, to submit to
you what he has done as your representative and subject
himself to your inquiries and your questeionings. (Cheers.)
The most solemn trust which Legislate privileged to enjoy
is that of sending to the great re of this country
men in whom you have confidence—men, who, you believe
will do that justice which your interests demand, which is
required by the general welfare—entrusted, as they are,
with the making of laws that will not only
your posterity from generation to generation. (Cheers.)
Depend upon it that the right of electing a representative
is not only a moral but a religious obligation, which you
ought to discharge honestly, freely, fully, dispassionately ;
beyond almost any other obligation, it involves every one
of your civil, political, and religious rights. Therefore, as
I have already said, in gratitude and in justice bound, I
have come before you to endeavour to give an account of
my stewardship, and to make some cursory statements
with regard to the administration of the different Govern-
ments of this country for the last few years ; and with re-
gard to the legislation of the past session ; a legislation
which has been of the greatest, the utmost importance,
and the results of which I do say, fearlessly and hopefully,
will be of the utmost advantage to the progress of civil and
religious liberty within these realms.
(.Cheers.) As I will
have several statements to make, as I trust these state-
ments, which are all based upon truth and experience, may
be of some little use to my constituents, and being ad-
dressed to a constituency of so much importance as that of
the city of Glasgow, I hope you will bear with me, and ex-
tend to me a little of your gracious patience. Before pro-
ceeding further, I wish to make one premise, and it is a
maxim of vital importance in everything connected with
our free constitution—a maxim without which no govern-
ment can exist—a maxim without the due observance
of which no public, no civil, no political, no religions
liberty can endure. It is a principle that was first
secured to the people of England by the great
contract of liberty that the barons and freemen of Eng-
land exerted from a tyrant—that was afterwards con-
firmed by the two most remarkable statutes frequently
quoted by one of the present Ministers of the Crown, I
mean Lord John Russell - that was confirmed by the sta-
tutes of 25th and 34th of Edward 1., that no freeman, no
fiber homo, should be taxed. without his free consent,
through his representative in Parliament. (Cheers.)
Now, that great maxim of our constitution appears ex-
ceedingly simple ; but I could prove to you that without
that maxim you would enjoy no liberty whatever within
this realm—the principle that no man should be taxed
except with his own consent, through his representative
in Parliament. The violation of that great and sacred
maxim by Charles I. led him into these fatal errors which
cost him his life. Forty-eight years afterwards, when the
people invited William of Orange to England, before they
would consent, as they foolishly did with Charles 11., to
his ascending the throne of these realms, the Convention
Parliament of Lords and Commons insisted on his agree-
ing: and signing and swearing to that solemn deed and
covenant called the Bill of Right, in which were embodied
the Magna Charta, the acts of Edward 1., that celebrated
bill that was passed by the Long parliament, the Petition
of Right, in which all the great bulwarks of British
liberty were embodied—embodying also one of the most
sacred laws that ever existed in any country in the world,
and which only- exists where the English language is
known—viz., in England and America—I mean the
Habeas Corpus Act, by which no man can be deprived of
his liberty unless just cause be shown for his incarcera-
tion. I trust you will not consider me tedious in making
these few preliminary observations. Upon this rests
everything that we enjoy—on this depends the liberty of
the Press, our civil, religious, and all other liberties ; for
if we were to give up to the:prown or to the House of
Peers the power of taxation, the power of illegal im-
prisonment, the deprivation of liberty which exists
in other countries, you would be slaves to the Crown
and to hereditary jurisdiction. (Cheers.) Having
made these preliminary observations— having made
them advisedly, and I wish them to be undestood well by
the country—for we do not always speak out as we ought
to do in Glasgow—l do and
, many of my friends do but
with a population so great, so wealthy, so enterprising,
and so intelligent, I say, not only in this but in all other
respects, the voice of Glasgow, as a great component por-
tion of the empire, ought to be heard. (Cheers.) I now
Come to the more modern and matter-of-fact portion of the
statements I have to make to you.. And I must go back
to the time when you first did me the honour of electing
me one of the representatives of this great city. The
party then in power, the Whig party, were considered ex-
tremely strong in consequence of their great family al-
liances—the relationships subsisting among those who held
power at that period., Far be it from me to say or do
anything against any individual members of the Govern-
ment of 1847 ; but still I am compelled to speak the truth
obligations in a moral and
political sense, not only to you, but, as every public man
does, to the country. For some time past, but eeciall
in 1851, that Government began to grow weak before the
country. The House of Commons, and, I 'believe, the
public generally, became weary of the Whig Government.
In fact, the House of Commons did not like to see ten or
twelve highly respectable noblemen and gentlemen, ruling
the whole country, inasmuch as with one or two exceptions
they all stood with respect to each other as brothers-in-law,
sons-in-law, uncles, nephews, cousins ; and, in fact, among
themselves, they were an exceedingly happy family.
(Cheers and laughter.) But the happy family unfortu-
nately did not enjoy the confidence of the House of Com-
mons nor the confidence of the country. The country
thought they liked their ease. The country thought that
men who would do more with regard to the progress of re-
form were necessary. It is quite true that in that Govern-
ment there was a statesman, a favourite of the House of
Commons. From his kindly nature, he was respected and
loved in his domestic relations and with those who en-
joyed his hospitality—he was a man loved, respected,
and. trusted by all. The Prime Minister of the day had
stated, "he is not the Minister of Russia —he is not
the Minister of Austria—he is not the Minister of France
—he is the Minister of England." (Cheers.) He had no
relations in the Cabinet—he had no brother-in-law, no
father-in-law, no uncle in the Cabinet—it was determined
to get rid of him, they dismissed him very unceremoniously
under the pretext of having had an indiscreet conversation
with the French Ambassador, Count Walewski. This
occurred on the 4th December, 1851, two days after what
was called the coup d'etat in Paris. On the 17th of the
same month he was dismissed without any notice what-
ever. That statesman was Lord Palmerston—(cheers)—in
whom the House of Commons had confidence—the man
who always held up his voice against the despotism of
continental Europe. The pretence was a conversation he
had held with the French Ambassador. I know what the
real cause was; but it would be indelicate f6r hie to un-
veil the secret—now he is in the Government it would be
useless. Very well, the House of Commons and the
country saw, from the moment the only popular element
in that Government was left out, that the downfall of the
Ministry was inevitable. Some time afterwards, the
Government entertaining very extraordinary apprehen-
sions of being attacked, invaded, and ruined by France,
brought forward various measures for the protection of the
country. I don't say they were not in some degree pru-
dent. A Militia Bill was brought forward. Lord Pal-
merston, who had been in the Wu before, and had
great experience, thought, because it was to be a Local
Militia Bill, such a force would be extremely pernicious
in every town with regard to morality, and he moved an
amendment and carried it. The Ministry were in a mi-
nority, on the following day they resigned, and the com-
pact Government was broken up for ever. (Cheers.)
In making these observations, as I have already stated,
far be it from me to make any invidious charge against
any member of that Government. However much I may
blame them, I cannot forget the service which Lord
John Russell rendered to the country. (Loud cheers.)
I cannot forget that it was: through his exertions that the
repeal of the Tests and Corporation Acts was carried 26
years ago. I cannot forget that ho was one of the principal
actors in ca rrying the Reform Bill—which I considered very
imperfect, yet a groat march in the progress of reform—l
mean the Reform Bill of 1832. (Hear.) He was certainly
the most active of those men who carried that bill—a bill
that disfranchised 58 boroughs in England, returning each
two members to Parliament, although their whole popula-
tion did not amount to that of the Barony parish. He also
reduced the number of members sent by. other 30 boroughs
from two to one—all of these sending two members to Par-