The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-16 00:00:00

~~

~ -__,.,

/~"~

MR. WARD, M.P., AT SHEFFIELD.
SHEFFIELD THURSDAY.—Mr. Ward, M.P., the Secretary
to the Admiralty, made his annual address to his constitu-
ents yesterday, at the Cutlers' Hall, on which occasion the
chair was occupied by Alderman Dunn. The acceptance of
office by the Hon. Member under the present Goverment
gave to his present address a more than ordinary interest, and
thei spacious hall was crowded to excess. The Hon. Gen-
tleman was accompanied by several of the leading gentlemen
of the town, amongst whom were Mr. H. Wilkinson, the
Mayor; Mr. S. Butcher, the late Mayor; Mr. T. B. Turton,
the Master Cutler, and others.
Mr. WARD, on Tieing, was received with loud and reiterated
cheers. On their subsiding, he spoke to the following effect :
Mr:Alderman Dunn and Gentlemen, time has familiarised us
with these annual meetings, which have implied a recogni-
tion of proper principles on both sides—a proper responsibi-
lity on my jpart, and political power on yours. The elective
franchise, which had been allowed to this constituency, and
which the men of Sheffield enjoyed, had been exercised in a
proper manner, and had done credit to the town. Without
a recognition of these principles, these meetings would be
a mere farce, though not where the constituencies
choose their member on account of his own opinions,
and not from the length of his purse. It also gives
them an opportunity of knowing that he does not prove
false to those pledges which have justified their choice. I
feel this strongly, and that is the reason that I am here to-
day. But my position is now materially changed. When I
was here on the last occasion, I stood before you an inde-
pendent man. I then tried to give every man a plain
answer to a plain question upon every point that has pre-
sented itself to your fertile imaginations. What I had then
done I was prepared to defend; and upon what I meant to
do it was better that I should see you face to face in the
Town Hall. On these occasions we have often discussed the
affairs of the future, and quarrelled a little upon those that
were past. I could then speak out with great satisfaction,
and if we have ever disagreed, I must say that I have feel-
ings of gratitude for the kind and liberal spirit in which I
have been met. But nothing which ever then occurred has
prevented us from parting friends. My position, however,
is now changed, and more than half my usual topics are cut
off. I cannot dwell upon matters that will occur for the
future, and I do hope that gentlemen will not press me with
questions to which I cannot give a satisfactorf reply. I have
now joined a party, and the policy which they will think
proper to pursue will very soon show itself through
the proper quarters. I have told you I have taken
office. 1 make no apology for that ; and Ido not disguise
that office is the natural reward of political men. I could
not wish to take office with a greater number of men of
liberal political principles than now. I have taken office
with men like Mr. Strutt, Mr. Charles Wood, and Lord
Morpeth. Mr. Cobden was orthodox, and Mr. Villiers was
prevented by personal reasons from accepting office. I
could not, therefore, have hoped to take office with a greater
combination of 'liberal men than now, nor with a Minister
whose character for integrity stood so high, nor one who, in
the opinion of the country, was more likely to strike out a
line of policy in which all liberal men would concur. It is
not mere place that I was seeking; but the offer was so large
and liberal a one, that I accepted it in the same spirit in
which it was offered, and I hope, therefore, it will not meet
with your disapprobation, but merit your support. I have
sacrificed no principle, nor do I mean to sacrifice any ; but,
as I have told you before, of the po'icy of the Government
I am not authorised to speak. A man like myself, in a
subordinate office, knows very little, and if I did know it, I
could not tell you. The session begins on Tuesday next,
and in the course of the year it is quite clear there must be
a dissolution of Parliament.' If I have acted inconsistently,
you will then have the remedy in your own hands. I will
not quit this subject without saving that von must not expect
too much from the present Ministry. Lord John Russell's
Government exists at present upon sufferance, and with a
minority in the House of Commons, where the same political
party exists that drove them from office in 1841, It is now,
therefore, at the option of the majority to place them in any
point they please. It is for the country to strengthen the
hands of the Liberal Ministry, and to impart those opinions
in which the public are expected to concur. I told you in
the short address that I issued on accepting office, that I was
sorry I could not vacate my seat, for I could not do it with
a sort of Quixotism that would have been unbecoming.
What I did was done voluntarily, and, as Parliament will
not last long, I have had no scruples in taking office. Some
men might think that I could be more useful as an indepen-
dent man ; but, if the Liberal men are to be always in oppo-
sition, you must content yourselves by forcing forward your
own opinions. It has been said that the waste of private
and public character which has taken place would hardly
compensate for the good which has been effected by the
change The last session was a very triumphant one in one
sense, though a very -A.
lost by the public character that was sacrificed, and it con-
stituted, through a long struggle, the great impediment and
difficulty of Sir Robert Peel, who had lent himself too largely
and inconsiderately to the illusions by which he has now
been destroyed. I have no doubt that what he did was
the fruit of sincere conviction, brought about in his own
mind. He stood in advance of his own party; and after he
had arrived at his own conclusions, he was one of the best
and ablest advocates, although not able to convince theparty
he had left, for their minds were incapable of conviction, and
they considered themselves insulted and betrayed. I have
told you of Sir Robert Peel's character year after year, and
have shown you how inevitably his convictions led him fur-
ther, and how on the question of the Tariff and the Corn-
laws the Government plan was a great and comprehensive
one; it should, therefore, have my most cordial support, and
although it would be carried in the House. of Commons, it
would be rejected in the House of Lords. It was a slow and
painful process to witness, and there were just grounds for
just complaint, for the vessel should not have been carried
into port by those who had gained their opinions only last
year. These were no new principles, Sir, for they had been
announced by Adam Smith, Mr. Huskisson, and others; and
to justify the change which had been forced upon him when
lie took the responsibility of making it, he ought to have ar-
rived at those opinions ten years before. I have told you that
the struggle in the House of Commons was a very curious one.
There were incessant changes, and they would all remember
that Mr. Denison, one of the Members for the West Riding,
seconded the Address. But that gentleman had also been
subject to changes, and was the first to cross the Rubicon ;
and when he had crossed it, he walked back again.—(Loud
laughter.) Ido not know what change had come over his
mind, but he showed a mast marvellous agility, and became
the stoutest opponent of those opinions that he had just as
strongly advocated. The Protectionists, as a body, made the
stoutest resistance. They had great oratorical powers, and
complained of great injustice from the Minister who had so
deceived them, because their own hands were clean. In fact,
there were not ten men who had not agreed in the changes
which Sir Robert Peel had opposed in 1842. They were
willing to give up a great monopoly to save a small one, and
when the change came over them, were willing to do it on a
large scale. They then found out that every trade and rami-
fication of British industry should have been protected. Nor
was this an inconsistent plea for men trying to protect their
own monopoly ; and when they had tried to protect the mo-
nopoly of everybody else, not ten times the talent which Sir
Robert Peel possessed could get them to stigmatise the prin-
ciples which they had advocated. They had said, in effect,
we do not like any monopoly but that which touches our-
selves. Their deserting the man whose talent had shed such a
lustre on the party to which he belonged, was a climax of
injustice and one to which this country ought not to be
brought. I felt that there was really one of those great
questions at issue which should not be degraded to a inert
question of personal altercation fir support. There was not
a man of the free-trade party who did not give him his most
cordial support for the same reason which Mr. Cobden did,
namely, that it was an instalment paid down of 17s. 6d, ii
the pound, with security for the remainder in 1849.
If it had lasted till now, I should have given to Si,
Robert Peel my most cordial support. I voted with Mr
Villiers for the abolition of the 4s. duty, because I thought
it was an injustice to the land and to agriculture itself. 1
would not have done this to endanger the Government Bill,
but I did it to affirm a principle. I will not weary you by
going through the whole details of that session of Parlia-
ment; but it was a great triumph to principle and common
sense. Some of the best speeches which had been made were
delivered by men who, up to the last six months, had been
the most inveterate opponents to free trade—from Mr. Goul-
, burn and Sir George Clerk, who had been opponents during
the whole of their public life. The measure was carried in
the House of Commons by a majority of 87. and by the
same House which, by a majority of 91, had rejected the
'hig proposition six years before. In truth, it was a very
marvellous change. I find, too, that I have the sympathy of
a very _high Tory authority namely, the Standard,
which at that time seemed to take its stand upon principle.
It said, that as to the Government proposing changes in
matters which the Conservative party had supported for
thirty years before, it showed an obtuseness and per-
verseness beyond any other mortals—it showed that they
were very blind in. political affairs. Now, for once in a
way, what the Standard says is true, and I agree with
every word of it. ,Con,ervatism is not to be revived without
corn, and I am afraid now that these country gentlemen
will go on too fast for us. I am very curious to see what
proposition they will bring forward during the next session,
and what measures Lord George Bentinck and Mr. Disraeli
te
in a .
w r
will bring forward into the field. The Corn Bill anannnunt_
Tariff were, in my opinion, mixed up _
able to me with the Irish Coercion
Bifi tchoaetrßc
on
from first to last, I opposed. I once sup
rilitical life; but
Zlowu a
Bill, and this was the great si
since then I have repented,. andn of my
ra
done osomething both by
speech and vote to diminish its prospects of success, in con-
nexion with that measure, and those which Sir Robert Peel
wished to carry through the House; and the Liberal Mem.
hers were all of opinion that they should not risk the Go-
vernment
measure by opposing a Bill of which they all ap-
proved. It admitted that all disorders and excesses arose
from disorganization, and it contained all the stale portion
of coercion which had been handed down from Lord Castle-
reagh and Lord Clare. The Bill was, therefore, dropped,
-
and it gave the Government an opportunity of being beaten,
for there was No other question upon which they could have
been beaten than that. When the Corn Bill and Tariff were
passed, there were no other questions, except the Irish B
ll
upon which the Government would not have been agreed.,
The reduction of the sugar duties was Lord John Russell's
allotted work. It was not possible for a Government which
had come into power upon Lord Sandon's motion to remain
in power after undoing that resolution upon which they got
into power. It was natural that, with all these difficulties
attending him, there should be
part of Sir Robert Peel no very ardent desire on the
to return to place, and he could not
have died a nobler political death than he did die. lie had
conferred great benefits upon the country, and made. amends
for great mistakes. Do not think that he fell a sacrifice to
political intrigue. There is one thing I may tell you here,
namely, the only real danger to which the Corn Bill was

/ ~
a

/it i
.<4lx
exposed, and from which it was not consiaire&safejlitOn
amendment of a five-shilling fixed duty it ivititarthe'
was threatened in the House of Lords. ix:lloo4rd t
would have given great satisfaction to thew 1.2m04r- -
the House of Lords, and who would a, v.
Lord John Russell would have been do,*
acclamation if he had consented to 0ke;(914
principle. He had declared, in his lettt S
tt •
that the time for a five-shilling duty was pas , &Vat.
period had arrived for a total repeal of the co - .
( Rear, hear.) At a subsequent meeting at Lansdowne
House, and which decided the fate of that Bill, Lord John
Russell had persuaded his friends to concur in his views;
and the policy was there decided which the Liberal party
in future intended to pursue. It was a singular casualty
that the repeal of the corn-laws should have been moved
by the Earl of Ripon, who proposed the corn-laws of
1810. It was carried, and the Tariff was carried; and on
the day after the royal assent had been given to the Bills
the Government was given up by a majority of 76, and
by the same Parliament that placed the Government in power
by a majority of 91. At that time there was a great sym-
pathy for Sir Robert Peel, for he had made great sacrifices
to repair great errors. I want no greater proof of it than
the great calamity now sweeping over Ireland, and which no
sacrifices on our part can avert. Ask yourselves this simple
question, are not these the very principles upon which we
acted six years ago, and upon which our whole commercial
policy is henceforward to rest? Had this principle been
adopted in 1841, should we not, under the Bs. duty, which
was scouted and laughed at, had a greater amount of corn
brought into the English market from Germany and Russia;
and would it not have doubled and even quadrupled the
supplies which we now hope to receive? You will say that
we have got a better settlement of the question now. In
February, 1849, the last vestige of the corn-law protection
will be destroyed. Had it been so before, the famine in
Ireland might have been much mitigated, although it was
not possible to calculate to what extent. Now this should
be a warning to all political men, and it showed the advan-
tage of having men in power who were ready to act on their
own principles. It was no excuse to say that Sir Robert
Peel was kept back by his party. He should not have
encouraged the delusions of that party, but should have
given the support to Lord John Russell which Lord John
Russell gave to him. The interests of his country would
have been promoted by the change, and if the late Ministry
have fallen, it is not to be regretted. I have alluded to two
transactions of great importance; there is now one other
subject, on which I have already given some political offence.
I allude to the discussions on the Factory Bill. I have
strong feelings on this subject, and by differing with some
friends on it I place myself in opposition to the Ministry
and to a part of the constituency to whom I am bound by
gratitude and respect. I think that the principle of a Ten
Hours' Bill is dangerous to the best interests of the working
man. I was the first to allude in the House of Commons to
what had been done in Sheffield. It was forced upon me,
and I could not speak of it there in a way different from what
I spoke of it before you. But I have been led into error with
respect to the operation of this Bill upon some of your trade
regulations. I stated that there were limitations as to the
sons of men connected with the trade, and which regulations
I am happy to find do not exist. At a meeting held yesterday,
with the trades' delegates, I was completely satisfied that I
was wrong. lam also of opinion that an error made in the
House of Commons should be repaired in the House of
Commons, and I told the gentlemen whom I met yesterday,
that if they would submit to me a written statement of what
was told me yesterday, I should have the greatest pleasure
in acknowledging the mistake which I had unconsciously
made. Upon all other points of this question I retain the
same opinions which I always did. With the mass of intel-
lect and energy which are to be found among the working
classes, I think they are doing themselves the greatest in-
jury by restricting the hours of labour, and building for
themselves prisons which they might be brought into. By
a free interchange of commodities higher wages and more
permanent employment might be obtained than by making
factious complaints. I tell you fairly I shall go to the House
of Commons this year to see the Ten Hours' Bill carried. I
say this on a higher authority than my own, and believe
that Lord John Russell will give some modification of a
Ten Hours' Bill his support. I believe the Bill is founded on
principles utterly destructive of the right that there should
be a minimum of labour and a maximum of wages. It can-
not be done, for there is no permanent profit and demand;
and adhering to these principles, I do believe most fairly
that I consult your interest by taking the course I intend to
take. I believe I have now gone into everything. I have
told you what we agree upon and what we disagree upon.
You have inferred that I was the instrument of a party de-
sirous of putting down trades' union and re-establishing com-
bination laws. But to put down open associations lead to
secret associations, and I would not inflict such an injustice
upon the country. The combination law was useless while
it existed, for masters had a ri4lit to combine on one side and
men on the other, and I do not wish to prevent them if their
combinations are kept within proper limits. When you fix
a price independent of demand, you may obtain a temporary
gain, but you will not obtain permanent employment, nor
is there so much certainty of extending the foreign trade. I
hope you are satisfied with the frankness of the statements
which I have made, although Sou may not agree with them;
and if I have done anything wrong, I am perfectly willing
and perfectly desirous to make you amends. The Hon.
Member sat down loudly cheered.

FAMINE in IREL 4ND & SCOTLAND.
MEASURES OF RELIEF.
In showing the Exertions made by the Government
for this object, we subjoin a complete list of the steam
and sailing vessels, with their tonnage,_ horse-power,
complements, present station, and to what places they
are ordered to proceed from the depots. A large pro-
portion of the list, it will be noticed, are steam vessels,
they being preferred, as most useful in securing timely
relief, where immediate assistance is imperatively de-
manded, to rescue the distressed population from abso-
lute starvation:—