The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-17 00:00:00

LORD J. RUSSELL IN GLASGOW.
On Monday last the freedom of the city of Glasgow
was conferred Upon Lord John Russell by the Town
Council in the City Hall, in the presence of upwards of
3,000 individuals.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in acknowledging the compli-
ment paid to him by the Town Council of Glasgow,
said, after a few introductory remarks, ho would not
deny that, although he thought it his duty in public life
to pursue that course, which, in his conscience, he
deemed best fitted for the public welfare; yet he did
feel depressed when the approbation of his fellow-
countrymen did not follow that conduct; and he felt
proportionably proud and gratified when he received the
marks of that approbation. His Lordship then referred
to the Test and Corporation Acts, and several other im-
portant measures, after which he proceeded as follows:—
"I will not detain you by touching on these measures;
but I must refer to two questions in which I have taken
a great interest, and upon which. I have met with great
opposition, but with respect to which I expect, as with
regard to others, to see public opinion firmly and de-
cidedly pronounced in their favour. The one was, that
as Scotsmen ought to have the privileges of English-
men, so Irishmen ought to have the privileges of Eng-
lishmen and Scotsmen. I consider that the union was
but a parchment, an unsubstantial union, not to be
trusted to in the hour of difficulty and distress, unless
you showed Irishmen that you were prepared to allow
them to participate in all our rights and privileges, and
to treat them exactly as if they were the inhabitants of
the same island.—(Cheers.) I therefore could never
listen to the assertion that they were to be considered as
aliens'—(cheers)—nor could I consent to any laws
which were fotliaded on that unjust presumption; and
yet the end4v6fir to obtain these privileges, with re-
spect to corporations for instance, the simple power of
Irishmen being allowed to govern their own municipal
matters, to regulate their own local affairs, even that
privilege cost us session after session of endeavour to
enforce. lam happy to say that at this time of day the
principle appears to be generally allowed, and the ques-
tion in dispute is only hew it is to be carried into effect.
For my own part, I must say that I thought I could do
me greater benefit to the country than to endeavour to
cement Ireland to Great Britain in affection, both in
peace and war. Far, however, from having obtained
any strength from this effort, it has been a source of re-
peated calumnies—calumnies which you all have heard,
which at the time I despised, but which were felt mate-
rially to impede the public usefulness which might have
been in other circumstances. I proceed now to the
other question to which I have referred, namely cora-
mercial freedom.—(Flear, hear.) It is not the place to
argue whether the general principles which Adam
Smith has laid down on this suhject arc the true prin-
ciples. I believe men who belong, whether to the pre-
sent Cabinet, or whether to the late Cabinet, or who
have been thought worthy, from their eminence in either
House of Parliament, of attempting to rule this country,
are generally agreed on this subject—that legislation
cannot do so well as the free intelligence, the free skill,
the free industry of the inhabitants of this United King-
dom. But Mr. Adam Smith, Mr. Ricardo, and others
who have written on this subject, have all said that if a
vicious•system of monopoly or proteetion has been long
embedded in the. legielation of a country, that it re-
quirLd caution; that it required deliberation, to consi-
der in what manner such restrictions could be removed.
Upon such principles, and upon such advice, was founded
the general outline of the measures which were pro-
posed by the Ministry which lost office in consequence of
this proposition in 1841. You all know that part of this
proposition was, that there sheuld be an admission of
foreign sugar with a differential duty of les. It was an-
other part that the differential duty on colonial tim-
ber should be dimjniehed ; it was another part
of the scheme that the.' duties on corn; instead
of proceeding on what is called the sliding . scale,
a houel be regulated according to a uniform fixed
duty of Bs., subject only to suspension by an Order in
Council in case of necessity, of which her Majesty's ad-
visers were to be the jiidges. Now, gentlemen, in con-
secptence of that proposition, the Government of that day
were assailed as being the most violent enemies of the
landed and agriculture! interest. I was held up myself
to all the .fareaere as an enemy of the agriculturists of
the finite:l Kingdom. They rejected my proposition,
and it was prevented from linsig carried in Parliament.
-The friends of protection—the friends of monopoly, as I
may call thein—thought they had obtained a gretr
triumph in defeating that (Je.ernment, and returning
Another more favourable to their views. Do they now
rejoice that the Si. duty was rejected ?—(Cheers.) Are
they now prepared to say that the es. duty, which would
have prevented much of the misery, and mitigated many
of the evils of oar mantifecth inn towns in the y !are
1841, 1842, and 184 e, would not have heen a to npromise
most favourable t' those who were calling for protection?
I was represeeted as an enemy to the landed interest,
and to the fernier. Upon my word, upon reflecting on
my conduct, the only doubt I have is, whether that duty
having been rejected, peremptorily rejected,. with every
mark of indignation and contumely, I ought not to have
at once said that I would make no further proposition
of the kind. But I proceeded ; I still said that I thought
it would be wise on their part to seek for a fixed duty.
I went on, an when there was a surplus in the revenue,
I said that it they could prove that there were taxes that
pressed ua th rit, then was the time to ask for an equality
of taxation, along with the abelitien of the corn-laws ;
but I was again treated with indignation, and as an enemy
to the lareLed interest. But let us consider what has been
the effect of the rejection of these terms. Is there any
man now, who as a Nleohi r of Parliament—as a Mi-
nister to his Sovereign, would propose terms equally
faveurable to these advocates of protection as thte.e
which I proposed in lett? I believe not—ellear, hear,
and loud cheers)—and for my part, when .1 saw this
obstinate and continued rejection, I reflected that that
confined proposition of mine, while it was not accepted
by the landed interest, was really an obstacle is the
way of those who asked for the complete freedom o!
trade on the subject of corn ; and rather than put that
cbetacle in the way, and believing that the present corn-
laws are, as I have stated, injurious to agriculture as
well as to commerce, I withdrew that propesition, and
declared my opinion in a letter to the electors of the city
of London, whom I have the honour of representing,
that these corn-laws ought to be totally repealed.—
(Cheers.) Gentlemen, it is not for me in this place to
refer to occurreneee of which you must all be aware, and
of which the day of explanation will arrive as soon as
Parliament meets ; but this I will say, that when that
day of explanation arrives, I .trust you will find that I
did not shrink from the assertion of the principles con-
tained he that letter to the electors of the cite, of Lon-
don.—(Loud cheers.) Gentlemen, the question of the
proposition with regard to the corn-laws is now in the
hands of Sir Robert Peel. I know no more than your-
selves what his proposition may be, or how he has
agreed with the remaining colleagues from whom he
had differed, and who have again consented to serve under
him ; but of this I am fully convineed, that if Sir Robert
Peel wishes his measure to be safe-Lsafe to propose and
safe to carry—it must be founded upon broad and extensive
principles.—(Cheers.) I am persuaded that, unless
it contain total repeal, the friends of monopoly and
protection will rejoice at the proposal of a measure
which will not satisfy the country, and that
they will take heart to defeat that which otherwise they
will not have the means of
,epposing—l say they will
not have the means of opposing.—(Hear, hear.) Not
that I do not believe but that they can make some
struggle if they choose on behalf of proteetion—not but
that I believe that if they stand on the ground of pro-
tection, and we stand on the ground of freedom, there
may not be a formidable opposition to the"measure, of
the Government in the House of Commons—not but
that it is within the range of possibility that there may
at first be a defeat of that measure; but if it is such -a
measure as I should wish it to be, I feel confident that
defeat will be a temporary and not a final one—(cheers)
—that that defeat will only be the commencement of a
struggle which I should indeed regret to see, but which
I should infinitely prefer to the carrying of a measure
which would not settle this question—(cheers)—which
would not at once, for ever and ever, settle the question,
and leave the people of this country that which they
ought to possess, the power and the privilege
to obtain their food as cheap and as good
as it is possible for them to obtain it.—(Cheers.)
I believe that now the people of this country, to whom
these questions were presented some time ago in a shape
difficult for them altogether to see the bearing of them
—I believe they now stand in such a shape that the peo-
ple of this country will give their support to no measure
which does not entirely rid them of the corn-laws.—
(Cheers.) Sometime ago, in the year 1841, it was said
by those who advocated protection, that the interests of
the labouring classes would be injured, that their wages
would be lowered, if the price of corn was dimiuished by
free importation. It,. was said.likewise that we should
be exposed to scarcity' from time to time were the restric-
tions removed from the importation of foreign corn.
This is another of those assertions which now obtain no
belief. Sir Robert Peel said in the House of Com-
mons that he did not give his assent to :the proposition
that the labouring classes would he injured by the
low price of, food ; and every intelligent man who can
thinkh on the subject, is now -of the same opinion.—
tit ear.) And with regard to the opinion of those
stah7eeetqhui
who maintain that we should be exposed to periods
of seareity by removing the restrictions on the importa-
tion of foreign corn, I think the principle is well stated
by Adam Sinith, that if the kingdoms of a continent
have free communication with each other with regard
to food, the prices will be more' equal in all of them
than if each kingdomTwheisre governed by separate laws
upon that subject,
priaciple, therefore, if appli-
cable to continental countries, is equally applicable to a
free communication with f terhoeershw' whole world. If we cannot
get a sufficient supply
o,tieism Dantzic or from Po,
land, we may obtain it from
or if not, we may obtain it froth
So diet the free
United States of
Atnerica.—(Cheers.)
.131 a
importationck Sea';
of
food is sure to lead to a more general
and a general provision of the people of this country, olF.Ptsicess'
a better mode tean any law can afford. say, that -11
law can afford; fur we have tried what some of the wisest
Supplied
rnen in this country have invented as artificial schemes
by which the country might be more equally
with food. We have tried the scheme of 1815, of which
Lord Moen. was the proposer. We have tried the
scheme of 1828, of which Lee] Liverpool and Mr. Huse
kirsoa were the original;,; and peihnotere ; and wee have
had the scheme of 1512, of which Sh. Robert. Peel was
the author, eter having gib' ;11 tine Winos; attention to
the
subject. We do not say that the propesers of these
schemes were unskilful or unitise is the invention of ar-
tificial schemes, but we do say that no artificial scheme
whatever will so supply the people of this country with
food, as leaving it tree and unfettered; to pursue its na-
tural course as
an
import
of the country
country,—({;re branch of tie commerce and
If I am right
TWIRL 'the( preeo"ptleaPPolfause this country, that
vivi this country, take this view of the e any Gee.
to tell me whether he
41tte the- public men of this country
that can resist
The people of
overnettei be formed
7 'thst: 46;1,4A:4, od sheering.)
•