The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-11 00:00:00

S
,tz,4 JANUAR

Mndlle. Lind, to learn that the result of this benevolent
effilrt has been the realisation of a sum amounting. to
nearly 1,4001. tor the enlargeinent of the hospital. Con-
tributions were sept to the treasurer by sornezentlemen
who' were unable to attend. Amongst these were the
Bishop of Chester, Alexander Henry, E2q„ M.P. for
South Lancashire, and Mr. H. Banner.

FINANCIAL REFORM

GREAT MEETING IN
MANCHESTER

MANCHESTER, WEDNESDAY MIDNIGHT.—This even-
ing a meeting of Liberal electors and others was held in
theiFree-Trade Hall. The hour advertised for the cool-
mencement of the proceedings was hall-past seven.
Admiss'wn was by ticket only, but such was the pressure
and eagerness to be present, that shortly after six o'clock
the doors were besieged, and before half-past that hour
the vast area and galleries of the spacious building were
crowded to excess. It was calculated that from 10,000
to 12,000 persons were present.

Mr. Cobden, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr. Bright, and the
other members of the committee, were most enthusiasti-
cally received.
Mr. GEORGE WILSON, Chairman of the Anti-Corn
Law League, presided. He commenced by saying that
he had seen that hall filled on previous occasions so as
he never expected to see it filled again, but he confessed,
looking to that vast assemblage, it appeared to him to
contain more than the usual numbers, and whatever
apathy might exist elsewhere, whatever changes had
taken place abroad, however old institutions had crum-
bled to pieces, and new ones had arisen on their ruins,
there was no change, or re-action, or revolution among
the liberal electors of Manchester. He bespoke their
suffrages in favour of no ill-digested scheme or immature
project, of nothing which should involve violent changes
or changes to be brought about by violent means. 'Their
aim was to collect into one focus the mass of floating
opinion in the district, to give it force and direction, and
concentrate it, for a time at least, upon the practical
objects of economical and financial reform.—(Loud
cheers.) It had been asked, why stir at all at present;
why,' in the unsettled state of Europe, do anything
which might in the slightest possibility interefere w ith
the arrangements of the Government? In the United
Kingdom there was no class of men more in favour of
the test institutions of the country, none more in-
terested in supporting order at home and peace
abroad, than the industrious and mercantile com-
munity of that district, but they reserved to them-
selves the right of expressing their opinions freely on all
the great sue jects affecting the public interest, and 7,000
or 8,000 people could not be collected together unless
the subjects were of great national interest. It was for
such a meeting to stand by Mr. Cobden in promoting
financial reform.—(Cheers.) Ten millions was no slight
amount in this money-loving country, and that amount
he proposed to make flow back into the pockets of the
people, instead of passing through the fingers of the tax-
gatherers.—(Cheers.) He called on them to adopt the
resolutions which would be proposed to accomplish with
the slightest waste of power, and in the least delay, that
most desirable end.
Recteenn COBDEN, Esq., came forward amidst great
cheering-, which was prolonged for several minutes, and
then the meeting became as quiet in their attention as
they had been noisy in the expression of their gladness
to meet the Hon. Gentleman. He said—Mr. Chairman,
ladies, and gentlemen, I must bespeak your kindness in
keeping silence and order, for I am afraid lam so
much out of practice, I shall hardly make myself beard
by this vast meeting. I have to move the first resolution,
and will read it to you. It is—
That this meeting resolves to co-operate with the
Liverpool Financial Reform Association and other
bodies, in their efforts to reduce the public expenditure
to at least the standard of 1835, and to secure a more
equitable and economical system of taxation."
Now, gentlemen, we have often met in this hall to
advocate the cause which has brought upon us the
charge of being the farmers' enemies ; and now we
come forward in another character. We appear here
as the farmers' friends.—(Cheers and laughter.) We
have, by our agitation, subjected the agriculturists of
this country to a competition with the foreigner, and
I they have complained to us that they are more heavily
I taxed than the foreign farmers. Now, gentlemen, we
come forward to offer them the right hand of fellowship
and union to effect a reduction of ten millions in the cost
of our Government.--(Loud cheers.) I have proved,
and in your name I hope it will go forth to the country,
that we co-operate with the Financial Reformers of
Liverpool in their agitation for financial reform, on the
condition that we advocate the return to the expendi-
ture of 1835.—(Cheers.) In 1835 the affairs of tho Go-
vernment were carried on at a cost of ten millions less
of money than they are, this year, and I bare ventured
to propose, in a letter which may have probably met the
eyes of some of those present, that we should go back to
that expenditure; and I have waited for three weeks
Mere I had an opportunity of saying a word in public
in defence of that letter, to see what would be said against
that recommendation—and I must confess they have not
given me much to answer.—(Hear.) I have heard it said,
an i it is probably the most valid argument urged, that
population has increased since 1835. Well, gentlemen,
it has. Our numbers are 12i per cent. more than iu
1835, and our opponents say that you must allow a larger
sum for the government of the greater number, and I
admit the argument, as faras civil government goes; and,
in my plan, I allow 40 per cent. more for the civil
government now than was allowed in 1835. But I deny
that 13 years of additional peace is an additional argu-
ment that we shonlel have an increase of forces.—
(Loud cheers.) And here I am very glad to call
to my aid the opinion of a statesmen who will
probably be allowed by , our opponents to be a
good authority. Towards the close of the last
session of Parliament, Sir Robert Inglis, Member
for the University of Oxford, uttered this extra-
ordinary doctrine very extraordinary anywhere
but at Oxford—that the longer you remain at peace, the
greater probability that you will go to war.—(Great
laughter.) His idea seemed to be that men in time of
peace were only fattening for a speedy slaughter.—
(Laughter.) Hear what Lord Palmerston said in reply
to it:—" But I look, gentlemen, to the tendencies of
men's minds towards peace, and I differ from the Hon.
Member for the University of Oxford, who thinks that
the long duration of peace renders war more probable.
I think, on the contrary, that the duration of peace
renders its continuance more likely."—(Cheers.) Well,
now gentlemen, in 1835 we spent 11,600,000/. for the
army, navy, and ordnance. I propose we now should
not expend more than 10,000,0001., and the 1,600,0001.
that I take from the expenditure for warlike purposes—
all that I add to the civil expenditure. In 1848 we
spent for all purposes of civil government 4,300,0001.
I allow. 5,900,000/. for the civil expenditure of Govern-
ment; and taking into account the saving in the col-
lection of revenue, I take the contemplated manage-
ment of Crown lands, estimated by a financial re-
former at one and a half millions. Taking this into
account, I allow more for the civil Government
than they are actually expending. And therefore I
get rid altogether of the argument for increase of ex-
penditure in governing the people.—(Hear, hear.) Then
there has been one argument used, and it is this:—
During the last year and the year before there was a de-
ficiency of revenue. We spent more than we received,
and borrowed money; and they say if Mr. Cobden's plan
should be carried out still, he will not have his ten mil-
lions to dispose of in the taxes. My answer—and these
cunning financiers might be aware of that argument—
that it it has fallen off during the last year, it is because
the balance-sheet of every manufacturer likewise, and
the ledger of every merchant in the country presents a
deficit; because the profits of every man in the country
have fallen off too.—(Hear, hear.) But now you have
trade reviving, fed on free-trade principles, and instantly
you see the revenue increase—(Cheers)—and this yeur
or.the next year you will certainly see you have a sur-
plus revenue, as certainly as you had a deficit last year.
—(Cheers.) But I say, gentlemen, I want to keep
financial reformers to that point, for we must have a
simple point of faith, or we _cannot march together.
Give me.back the expenditure of the year 1835, and I
will guarantee the remission of the ten millions.—
(Cheers.) If you want—if the country wants—to reduce
the duty on tea to one-half, and abolish altogether the
tax upon timber, upon butter, upon cheese apd soap,
upon paper, upon malt and hops, upon house win,dows—
(Loud cheers)—if you want to put an end to the system
that curtails these necessary comforts, then raise your
voices throughout the country simultaneously for the
expenditure of 1835,—(Cheers.) Where is the difficulty?
Where is the difficulty of returning to the expenditure
of 1835 ? If the whole question lies in the amount of
your warlike armaments, the whole question is will the
Government be content to waste ten millions of money
in unproductive services like your fighting establishments
—for maintaining your fighting establishments in a time
of peace ?—(Hear, hear.) Will they be content with
ten millions—and if not, why not?—(Cheers.) I want
the arguments why not. I was asked the other day by
a Member of Parliament " When are you going into the
details of how you are going to carry on the Government
on your plan ?" My answer was this: I should be a
very bad tactician, a very bad logician, when I made the
proposition that Government should carry on its warlike
establishments with ten millions if I did not call upon
them to give me an answer why they cannot carry them
on with ten millions.—(Loud cheers.) I put them on
the defensive ; I ask them whether they
_makeWh the
the money they have got ?—(Cheers.) Ye Why
how do you think they dispose of tltesmo
retired
admi-
rals.—(Laughter.) have got 150 admirals, besidesdo
you think you
employ ? During
record--when you had
tiihrh,eigmhatnYof the great French
war—the greatest war on_
nearly a thous And at
you never employed
and pendants flying,
you can find active
more than 36 admirals a one time:
this time you have but 14 admirals
service for. With all the ingenuity to put admirals to
work where they are not wanted, you can only find
room for
14.--(Laughter and cheers.) What do I
find
in your army—why you have a colonel for every regi•
/mint who does the Work, another colonel who plays the

11, 1849.

[Pitic.E SD.

-~ _~.: ~_

tailor to the regiment, never goes near the regiment—
never sees it—and if he went near the men would not
obey him—he has no more to do with it, but he supplif s
the clothes, and gets the profits of the tailor.—(Leugh-
ter.) Well new, gentlemen, these aro illustrations of
how the money is wasted that yon have paid for these
services. Mit I won't confine myself to the abuses and
waste that takes place ; I will not lend myself to the
delusion practised upon the country by those politicians
who profess to move with us, but who are only trailing
a red herring across our path. as they used to do upon
the free-trade question—(Laughter)—who tell us that
by economy in the dockyard, by better manage-
ment, they can make a saving, but that you can have no
saving by a reduction of your forces. I lend myself .to
no delusion like that. I tell you in the outset that
in order to effect such a reduction of our armament fur
the relief of the country—a material relief that will he
felt in the homes and firesides of the country—you must
reduce the number of men, and be contented with a
smaller manifestation of brute force in the eye of the
world.—(Great cheering.) You must trust something
to Providence, something to your own just intentions—
to your good conduct towards other nations, and not put
faith in costly forms or manifestations of brute force, as
you now do.—(Cheers.) Now, gentlemen, I bring this
matter home to my opponents with a few figures. How
is it we have had this great increase of our armaments?
Has it been by the increase of waste, the increase in the
numbers of admirals and colonels? No, the system has
existed ever since the war. It was no new thing, began
in 1835. It was in force then as much as now. But
what has been the cause of your increase of armaments?
You have increased enormously the number of your men.
In the statement made by Lord John Russell he gives
me the increase in the army and navy and ordnance
in 1835. In 1835 the number was 135,743; in 1848,
196,063. The increase since 1835 has been 60,320
What has been the increase in the expenditure?
In 1835 the expenditure of all these services was
11,605,000/. In the present year it was upwards of
18,000,0001.; an increase of men of 50 per cent., and an
increase in money of about 50 per cent. also.—(Hear.)
We, gentlemen, in the House of Commons, when a vote
is brought forward for our army, and navy, and ord-
nance.—when the Secretary at War, or the Secretary of
the Navy, or the Secretary of Ordnance brings forward
his budget, he says how many men he wants, and when
the number of men is voted all other expenses follow as
a matter of course. It is perfectly understood that when
you have voted the men you must vote corresponding
establishments in every direction; and therefore, while I
admit there is monstrous waste and mismanagement, I
say, if you want a material reduction in your armament,
you must at once boldly press this plan of reducing the
number of men engaged on those services. Why should
you not reduce them? Why have they been increased?
Has anybody ever asked himself why has all this increase
taken place? Whenever an augmentation has been pro-
posed, there has always been an excuse. But what I
complain of is this. After the occasion has passed away,
we never have a diminution.—(Hear, hear.) In 1835
I have told you the sum in 1835, it was the lowest point
—in 1836 there was a cry got up that we were going
to be invaded by the Russians (it was that made me
first turn pamphleteer, to write against this mania),
about the Russians landing on the coast of Norfolk some
foggy morning. That was made an, excuse for increase;
and our navy. I remember very well, in 1839, was in-
creased for those unfortunate scenes at Monmouth by
Frost, Williams, and Jones—the rebellion, I suppose I
must call it. A proposal was made by Lord J. Russell
for an armament of 5,000 men to meet the case of these
Chartist trials ; but, when tranquillity returned, I never
heard a word about reducing them. If you follow, step
by step, gentlemen, the increase of armanents, there has
always been some special and ready excuse. At one
time we must needs go and settle affairs in Syria (we
have as much to do with the affairs of the moon); and
we must bombard Acre and fight Ibrahim Pecha or
some other Pacha. Well, then we had to go to Ota-
heite; then we had a dispute with America about the
main boundary; and then we had a squabble about the
Oregon territory, zed Mr. President Polk talked a great
deal of balderdash, and some of the United States
Members talked more nonsense than usual, when
our Government pressed another increase on us; and
this great squadron of evolutions still goes on with
its evolutions, perfectly understood at that time
as a demonstration against America, but the Oregon
question and the main boundary squabble; the Syrian
and the Otaheite squabbles aro settled, and tho Chartists
well employed and comfortable; and where is the use of
keeping up all these armaments?—(Cdeers.) But, gen •
tlenaen, I have not fergottt n the last excuse. You re-
member this time last year. As near as possible this
time last year I stood on this platform to raise my voice,
in conjunction with you, almost alone, against thst
wicked attempt to impose upon us by increasing our
national defences, to protect us against invasion from
France.—(Hear, hear.) Then, gentlemen, by way of
parenthesis, and for your encouragement, and for the en-
couragement of the country, let me just remind you of
the progress of opinion since then. We have had to
fight-against an increase of our armaments. And it was
an uphill battle, but we succeeded in raising proposals
before the country to reduce the cost of our armament
more than one half, and that proposal is received with
more favour during twelve months—(Cheers)—receives
mere favour with the public now than our resistance to
the increase six or twelve months ago. Why is it? Why
because, spite of all attempts to suistify the public mind
on these subjects, the events of the Continent have
trumpet-tongued declared that the attempt to slander
and malign the English and French nations at that time
was a most wicked injustice perpetrated on a, great
people. We were told this time last year, " Why, it's
true the French are quiet now, because of Louis
Philippe, the Napoleon of Peace; but let him die, and
you will see how that French people now kept in by this
wise monarch will break loose."—(A laugh.) Well,
Louis Philippe is politically dead; the French people
were thrown entirely upon their own resources. The
bridle on their neck, and the bit in their mouth, the
people were all-powerful to do whatever they willed, and
the Government, down on their knees, ready to follow
the people to the utmost bent of their passions.—(Cheers
and laughter.) Has there been amidst that thirty-five
millions of people, your next neighbours, anything to
support this slanderous imputation alleged last year by
these wicked alarmists—these most wicked panic-mon-
gers, that I will never forgive; or, if I do, I will never
forget to remind them of their wickedness—(Laughter)
—has there been au act of the French people, I say,
to warrant the imputation that they wished to come
and attack you?—(No, no.) I will not confine my-
self to that; there was something nearer home which
somebody assumed the French were much more
likely to attack than England. Has there been the
slightest manifestation on tae part of the French people
to make the Rhine the boundary of their empire, by at-
tacking Belgium? Have they assaulted Holland or in-
vaded Italy? Have they shown the slightest desire to
engage in warfare'? On the contrary, wherever a public
man has wiihed to conciliate the French people, has he
not addressed them in terms of place, and has he not
promised, above all things, to follow a pacific policy?
Their present President, a Napoleon Bonaparte—l say
nothing of his fitness to be a President, that is an
affair of the French people, not of ours— (Applause)—
but when this individual was canvassing the French
people for their suffrages, how did he accost them?
Why if our panic-mongers understood the French cha-
racter rightly, he must have promised them a war of ag-
gression upon England, or at least upon Belgium.
What did he say iu his address ? " With war there
can be no mitigation of your sufferings; peace
shall therefore be the most cherished object of
my desires. At the time of her first revolution
•France was warlike, because others compelled her
ley be so; she was attacked, and she rolled back
the tide of conquest on her invaders. But now that
nobody attacks her she can devote all her resources to
peaceful relations without abandoning a firm and
honourable policy." Now, gentlemen, does that look
as if you have been wisely spending your money in for-
tifying yourselves, and keeping up your enormous
standing armaments, because certain parties are inter-
ested
in clothing regiments; and admirals, with nothing
to do, tell you France is a hobgoblin who will come and
devour you some roorning.—(Loud applause.) But I
don't confine myself to France altogether, though I
have said more upon that, because I took upon myself,
,last year, standing in this place, to declare my opinion
regarding the tendency of the great mass of the French
people. I said in this place that in France property is
more divided than in any other country in the world ; I
said there are eight or ten millions of real property on
the soil of that vast empire (the richest on its surface
of any in Europe), the whole of that rich patrimony
is owned in fee simple by the persons who cultivate
it, more than any country in the world. And allot
me to say, . gentlemen, by way of parenthesis,ra
when I hear certain wise men who write in aristocratic
m
journals talking of the dangers to the country:tfeh dtlhs.e.
minute sub-division of its property,
feeeirvetbe lessons of
posed to whisper in their ears,
history have not taught us a differenttotwelhlyeeth_
and if they can point out an instartioc
rain,
e
gone through
the world `where a nation has come
soznething
the ehe imaut danger,o
ea ytko
that you
multitude of the people
cannot point to any
becausena onwwnigephearyteynhoats accumulated
eers)
sin not
few i al
br
ae
ny
do lsiti
hands—(sheers)—and
luxury and corruption—aodthienreth we a
fsewa
and
degra-
dation of - in .the many. But, gentlemen,
experience
lo f the e last year, that the
the
dation and miser,'
year, which repeat h
t used last'ere, con-
formablyargumenheee being y all proprietors, and h
to pay for any war carried on,
peoplen ot vote
m,-
lag themselves they will
and Guizot, whose
book y Cyltev yesterday, and and every public
that
wasp Lours
uirNautalbcpleits.lhe °oat M. Thiers will agreeme,
with, w ose
that if there is one passion more predominant with
rean
‘\pezplgoentahelanother, it is the desire
I take Germany, tft
0,11,
reFrrela'anreecene.
.0 h
andbut
Id
torteon't confineltaly. myselfnowhere, amidst the convulsions where monarchs have
atubed ideiastged, and
uia
eof ipaoe
qp
ue andsa, a
npdogteennt: potentateshave n r
iarwiacuyeiens
before the mob, I ask you where, in all Europe, there
has been amongst the people one sign or symptom of
aggressive war on their neighbours? Now, gentlemen,
beware of being mystified again. The enemy is again
at work, and one of their favourite devices is this:—
They raise a confusion in your minds by pointing to in-
ternal revolutions going on in other countries, and per-