The Sun.
London, England, 1853-10-15 00:00:00

858,

endeavour to increase his number of acres; and his
neighbours will think him more profitably engaged
with his large number of acres, insufficiently tilled
though they be. But that opinion is not sound and philo-
sophicid, and does not work to the advantage of indi-
viduals. And the same principle applies to states. But
in the next place, I don't take the encroachments of Rus-
sia upon Turkey as a sign, still less as a proof, that Russia
wants to encroach upon us. Russia, it is true, is evidently
encroaching upon her neighbours in the East because her
neighbours are a decaying, disorderly, and anarchical
people. Nations don't perish from without : they always
perish by suicide from within. Wherever you find a nation
eclipsed from the map of the world you will find that has
been caused, and invariably caused, by a long period of
misgovernment, amounting sometimes to centuries, which
leads you to wonder as you read, not that that country was
extinguished when it was, but that it was allowed to re-
main so long before it became annexed to another more
prosperous and orderly state. I say, the case of Turkey
is precisely that case. You have Russia, a less barbarous
country, better organised, and with all its faults, more
progressive and industrious than Turkey ; and you find
Russia encroaching upon Turkey. Well, I therefore deny
that you have proof that the encroachments of Russia are
necessarily to lead to this vast increase of power that is to
overshadow the world. I say, that taking the course that
Russia has pursued for the last 30 years, and comparing
that with the progress of the United States, you will find
that where Russia has advanced three, the United States of
America have advanced at least to thirty. That is, at the
least, the comparative progress of the two countries. Mea-
suring the power England has gained during the last 30
years against Russia, we have increased four or five times
more in real power and wealth than the Russian empire.
Now, I don't say this as an argument that we should en-
courage Russia to attack Turkey. But when you say I
should go to war to prevent danger to this country, I want
strong proof of danger before I go to war to avert what is,
after all, but a calamity in imagination. But lam told
that we must go to war with Russia, because Russia is an
anti-commercial country, and Turkey favours commerce.
lam not disposed to admit the premises. I deny that
Russia has ever been an anti-commercial country. No
Government in the world has shown more carelessness to
extend commerce and manufactures, wherever they have
extended their empire, than the Russians. That is our
complaint against them, that when they took her territory
they shut us out with their tariffs. But shutting out by
tariffs does not make people an anti-commercial people.
We formerly put on a restrictive tariff, but that protec-
tion, as it was called, did not make us an anti-commercial
people, but was intended to benefit this country by mak-
ing this country's commerce more profitable. Russia has
become a restrictive country, but there is no restriction im-
posed by her half so indefensible as that which we put upon
her corn up to within the last ten years. And I would
here point to this fact, that all the commerce you have,
and the world has, with the Black Sea, has been made by
the Russian encroachments on the borders of the sea ; for
until the Russian Government erected Odessa, there was
no communication by the Black Sea. Where do you get
your corn from now ? Odessa ; yet Odessa was the results
of the encroachments of Russia. They tell me that you
are going to lose the trade with Wallachia and Moldavia,
because the Russians are going to make further encroach.
ments upon that country. lam told by the best authori-
ties connected with that trade that all the commerce grow-
ing up in these countries is owing to the more settled go-
vernment consequent upon the encroachments of Russia.
Don't take my opinion. Turn to M'Culloch's Dictionary,
to the head of Odessa, and read his description of those
Russians about which we are now discussing, M'Culloch,
writing in a commercial spirit, says that whatever objec-
tions there may be in a political sense to the encroacments
of Russia upon the Black Sea, by giving greater order to
its government and greater security to its industry, it has
undoubtedly tended to improve the commercial relaaons of
these regions. In the face of these facts, am Itogo to war
to prevent the possibility of our losing some of our trade to
Constantinople ? (Cheers.) Don't assume that I want to
argue that we should encourage Russia in her aggressions.
I want merely to show that the arguments with which they
want to urge us on to war are such as the people of this
country in their own interest ought not to accept. lam
told the tariff of Turkey is very favourable. It is quite
true that the Turks have so far despised foreign commerce
and had so little faith in their power of collectingduties at
the outports, that they have never attempted to collect
duties upon the exports from foreign countries. But to
say that Turkey has done this in the interest of commerce,
because they wish to encourage trade in exports and im-
ports, is to misunderstand the character of that country.
Go into the interior of the Turkish Empire, and inquire
what security there is for the cultivator of that country ?
Wherever a Pasha may levy his exactions, the rudest mode
of plundering the peasant is resorted to—that of handing
in the produce as he grows it. Let me see what security
there is for the internal communications of the country.
Ask how a camel load comes from-the interior to Smyrna,
and see what security there is. Why, that magnificent
country, that contained in ancient times nearly the civili-
sation of the world, is given up to such a state of brigand-
age that even the merchants of Smyrna dare not go seven
miles from Smyrna to their country-houses, for they would
be carried off by bands of brigands for the sake of obtain-
ing a large ransom for their recovery. It is absurd to talk
of such a country as that being favourable to commerce.
When' hearof returns being made to the Heuse of Commons
of the comparison of our exports to Turkey and Russia,l say
give us the imports as well as the exports. As a tree-trader,
I value imports as well as exports. Let us see the amount
of the tallow, the hemp, and the corn we get from that coun-
try, and how we pay for it. It is true Russia, copying our
example, puts on high duties upon our manufactures, but
we take raw cotton to Petersburgh, and exchange it
for tallow, hemp, and corn, which is a profitable trade.
You have a larger proportion of tonnage carrying on trade
with Russia than with any other country. But when
people talk about the trade with Turkey, I beg to remind
them of one fact, that they are arguing in our favour ; be-
cause the trade is carried on, not by the Turks, but by
Christians. Whoever heard of a Turkish vessel coming
from Turkey, manned with Turks, bringing over freight
here for the purposes of commerce ? You have sixty
Greek merchants in Manchester who carry on all the trade
with Constantinople in British manufactured goods. It is
the Greeks and Christians, who have the wealth and en-
terprise of that country, that I wish to be considered in
this controversy. (Hear.) The very fact that commerce
is in the hands of the Christians, is a proof that you can-
not long secure that supremacy of Turks over Christians
which it the object of our diplomatists to accomplish,
but which they never will affect. Now, my gallant
neighbour here, I see, used a rather peculiar phrase that
fell from me some years ago at a meeting, with regard to
" crumpling up the Russian Empire." Now the phrase I
used was at a meeting on the subject of the Hungarian
invasion in 1849. I attended a meeting in the City of
London Tavern, to protest against the invasion of Hun-
gary by Russia. Russia was allowed then to march her
armies across Wallachia and Moldavia to strike a death-
blow against Hungary, and no protest was raised against
this by our Government. (Hear.) And it is my deli-
berate conviction, from a patient study of our blue books,
and it is the conviction of those illustrious men engaged
in that Hungarian struggle, that if Lord Palmerston had
made a simple verbal protest in energetic terms, then
Russia would never have invaded Hungary by passing
through Wallachia and Moldavia, It was well known
that the ministers of the Czar of Russia almost went down
upon their knees to entreat him not to embark in that
struggle between Austria and Hungary. Our protest
would have been backed by the ministers of the Czar, if I
had been made, and I believe would have prevented that
most atrocious outrage upon the rights and liberties of a
constitutional country. I said, on that occasion, when
I attended a public meeting in the City of London Tavern,
in the midst of all that exciterTeanatr I would resist any
attempt to send any d phrenzy in favour
of Hungarian nationality, id
_ force to fight the battles of Hun-
gary on the banks
b.ofnt y
athne Danube. I did not disguise
more tha I do now.
my views on the su
the condo
ct of Russian towards Turkey,While
condemning
will not sanction the sending of any soldiers to fight in
favour of Turkey. I have never sanctioned intervention
by force of arms in foreign disputes, and when I send
any men to fight my battles, I will take part in them my-
self. (A laugh.) I said also that if Russia did attack us,
such were the enormous resources of this country—its
resources of wealth and scientific application—that we
could crumple up her empire by blockading her ports and
sealing them hermetically, so that she could have no com-
munication whatever with the civilised world. That is a
truth, and may be accomplished. But I say again that Russia
does not mean to come to attack us, and it will be time
enough to talk of going to war with Russia, when Russia in-
timates one design inimical to our interests. Mr. Cobden
next alluded to the reason why he rated at so low a value
thelpower of the Russian empire beyond her own dominions,
which was her want of wealth. He recapitulated the occa-
sions on which Russia had to contract foreign loans with
Amsterdam and London, and affirmed his conviction that
whatever was the issue of this dispute Russia could not go
on without another loan. Ho knew no cause for going to
war, but if it was thought necessary to interfere, he sug-
gested that instead of resorting to physical force, they
should first try the effect of a system of outlawry, such as
making it penal to contract for a Russian loan, prohibit-
ing the sale of Russian stock, which he considered would
strike as severe a blow at the power, ambition, and preten- i
sions of that country, as if they sent a fleet to Besika Bay.
As an illustration of the absurdity of keeping up military
and naval armaments to convince other nations of our
ability to resist attacks, Mr. Cobden directed attention to
the United States, where they had only ono line-of-battle
ship in commission, and whose army consisted of only
10,000 or 12,000 men, yet their enterprise, industry, im-
mense resources, and lightness of taxation, rendered them
in the eyes of other nations a power which they would be-
ware of coming into collision with. He ridiculed the con-
duct of the boy-emperor of Austria in engaging his troops
in so many fields of mimic battle, remarking if that plain
man in black clothes in a room in Washington were to send
a frigate to Trieste with a hostile message, that boy-
emperor's heart would at once be in his jack-boots at the
very thought. He concluded a long and eloquent address
by commending the claims of the peace party on the sup-
port of the country.
The LORD PROVOST here intimated that it was origi-
nallye arranged that Mr. Bright should now address the
meeting, but he had given way to Sir Charles &
gallant admiral, it was understood, was notNtopmw
the meeting
amendment, and he (the Lord Provost) hoped (Hear.)
move an
would give him a patient and deferential hearing
4 -Awith loud and
Sir CHARLES NAPIER, who was received
extraordinary
repeated cheers, said, it may perhaps appear
rd
that th
very that a naval officer or admiral should comefoarnwda
ad-
dress this meeting. It is generally supposed,
improperly, that naval and military men are always for
war and for large establishments, and that they have no
idea beyond bloodshed. (Cheers.) But I beg to tell you
that this is a most erroneous notion. (Cheers.) Lord Nelsonßenewed cheers.) And
was not fond of bloodshed or war.
if you read Lord Nelson's private letters you will find that
he was always wishing for peace. The Duke of Wellington
was always a peace man after the war was over. (Laughter
and applause.)
He was always for peace ; and he succeed-
ed in preserving peace. And I can assure the citizens of
Edinburgh—and lam proud of being a citizen of your
city—(chners)—that I am just as anxious for peace as my
hon. friend who sits at my right hand (Mr. Cobden) or any
gentleman in the assembly. But we may differ as to the
means of obtaining peace,
and we may still more differ as
to the means of preserving peace. (Hear, hear.) And I
must say that I do not think that the plan propounded by
my hon. friend Mr. Cobden is exactly the way to preserve
the peace of this country. (Cheers.) That hon. gentle-
man has said very fairly and very properly, and it has a
very excellent appearance, coming as it does with all that
beauty of language which he is capable of using, that if
France agreed to reduce her force to ten sail of the line,
and if we agreed to reduce our force to ten sail of the line
also, they would both be placed on equal terms : granted.
And he said farther, that if we reduce our force to five sail
of the line, and the Ereuch did the name, we would be ex-