The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-19 00:00:00

lieve in what the truth of history attcstel, and that
nations would continue to be agitated by the pressure
which gave rise to war. But it was said that new
tendencies had been introduced by the new system of
commercial policy. The only tendency which
he recognised in the new principle was the increase
of their taxes.—(fiear, hear.) The Gentlemen who
represented the Manchester school were not content
with relieving themselves, but they must inflict taxes
upon their opponents.—(Year, hear.) This new prin-
ciple was, it seemed, an omnipotent deity, under whose
wheels every institution was to fall.—(llear, hear.) Ho,
however, was not prepared to believe that the commer-
cial tendency was stronger than the religious tendency,
and as the people of Europe professing, the same creed
centuries, worshipping the same God and the same
Saviour, were not prevented from having recourse to
national defences, he did not think that the commercial
principle which was only in its swaddling clothes, would
produce results so marvellous. The Ron. Gentleman
at the meeting in Manchester, where he promulgated his
formal revelation, quoted a flowery speech made at
Rouen by M. Cremieux—a speech quite worthy of the
purple rhetoric of the Anti-Coro-law League in its palmiest
days—as his vindication to the people of England.
That gentleman also anticipated the millennium, and
terminated his speech with the words " liberty, equality,
fraternity.•' Why that was the Jacobin banner un-
furled !—(Cheers.) What did those words terminate in
before ? Not in perpetual peace.—(Hear, hear.) Some
men were for liberty, many men were for equality, but
as for fraternity, the only objection he had against it
was this, that he always found that every party and
nation who wished to get, or who preached fraternity,
were always prepared to perform the part of elder
brothers.—(Much laughter and cheering.) That was a
rather alarming communication, but it was not all, for
when the sun went down _

" The moon takes up the wondrous tale;"
and the Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Man-
chester (Mr. Gibson), inspired by " liberty," by
" equality," and of course inspired by fraternity—
(Laughter)—came forward and told them that was not
enough, that the great movement was not to preserve
perpetual peace alone, that it must do more—that it
must touch the law of land inheritance—remove the
anomalies of primogeniture—(Cheers)—and certainly if
you inflict a 5 per cent. income-tax this would be the
result. Reverting, however, to the subject of debate, be
(Mr. Disraeli) reverenced the rude simplicity of the
Government.—(lronical cheers.) He only wished their
supporters had kept their principles for Covent-garden.
—(ltenewed cheers.) But what was it the Government
asked them to do? The object of their policy
was to give the franchise to one class, who
throw the burden of taxation upon another.
(Ilear, hear.) In an age of monopoly let
them take care that there was not a monopoly
of taxation.—(Renewed cheers.) The Ministry were
acting up to the spirit of a class whose principles were, in
his opinion, opposed to the permanence of our prosperity.
He wished the sources of that prosperity to continue,
but lie felt that it was impossible to secure the wealth of
nations without securing their power. If the principles
referred to succeeded even for a moment, still they were
principles opposed to the independence of the country.
They might even be opposed to the defence of the
country ; for on the principle that they thought nothing
of a colony, Members opposite might reconcile them-
selves even to consider England a province of France.—
(Loud cheers.) But though they on that side of the
House were, as they were celled, " a broken and dis-
tracted party," he hoped there was spirit enough left to
deal with these principles in a firm and manly mode.—
(Loud opposition cheers.) Weak or strong, they must
be prepared to inquire e hat were the principles of the
system they were invited to adopt, and be prepared to
support at all hazards the ancient and the venerated in-
stitutions of our realm.--(Great cheering.)
Mr. COBDEN then rose and said—l shall be obliged
to descend from those regions of imagination into which
the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire has soared; and
although he has apparently paid use the high compli-
ment of following me with some attention from France
to England, from Manchester to Covent-garden, and
thence over the Continent, yet, whilst we are in a Com-
mittee of Supply, and while the budget is before us, the
Hon. Gentleman must pardon me when I say that I have
not found in his speech much that I think it necessary
to refer to on this occasion.—(Hear, hear.) I must
confess that I did not hear with surprise the disastrous
report which has been made to us by the Noble Premier
with reference to the state of our finances. His budget
has been but a counterpart of the balance sheet of all
the industrial interests of the country; but what has
surprised me very much has been to find that, unlike
individuals who unfortunately have a balance on the
wrong side of the account, the Government, instead of
making some effort to diminish the expenditure so as to
render it equal to the receipts, seems apparently to have
only ono thought—that of raising the receipts to equal
the expenditure.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now,
this is precisely the opposite policy to that which
is pursued by individual concerns throughout the
country. I venture to say that at this moment in every
manufacturing and mercantile concern in the kingdom,
the greatest pains are taken, and the utmost care and
anxiety are devoted to the task of making the two ends
meet in the balance sheet; and if they can contrive to
keep themselves from a loss in striking the balance i
believe they are very well satisfied. lam not only exceed-
ingly pained at the defalcations of our revenue, but I
am, if possible, more pained at the tone in which the
Noble Premier has alluded to the necessity of an in-
crease in our expenditure with reference to the army.
I must say—and I say it with the greatest regret—that
I believe there has not been a speech made by a Prime
Minister in this House since the peace so calculated to
du mischief as the speech of the Noble Lord.—(Hear,
hear.) Why, Sir, if I, an irresponsible private iudi-
vidual, had alluded in such terms to France in the Free-
trade Hall in Manchester, it might have been passed
over; but when a Noble Lord, holding the position of
Prime Minister of this country, draws attention
to the state of France, and adduces the pre-
parations of that country for war as a motive for our
augmenting our armament, what is it but a menace?
(Cries of " No, no," and " Hear, hear")—an Act cal-
culated to irritate and exasperate?—(No, no, and
cheers.) lam anxious to give you, the representatives
of England, the opportunity of disclaiming any such
feeling in the remarks which have fallen from the Pre-
mier; but we know we have a sensitive nation to deal
with, and I think there could not possibly have been too
much reserve exercised by the Noble Lord in dealing
with a topic of this nature. Now, I ask myself, " What
is the occasion of all this? Why have we heard lately
of the necessity of an increase of our armaments? What
have been the indications of a warlike tendency towards
us from France or elsewhere?" We were told in the
Speech from the Throne, that her Majesty had the
assurance from all foreign States of sentiments
of amity. Now, I wish to ask this question—
for it is time that we should come to honest straight-
forward feeling and speaking—" Does the language
of the Sovereign speak the truth ?" If so, how can
this armament be necessary ? Are we justified in
arming in this country when we have declared,
through our Sovereign, that a feeling of perfect
confidence exists that peace will be maintained ?
Where them is our danger? Has France been arming
against us? There is no evidence of the kind. I know
there have been facts and figures brought forward to
show that France has been augmenting her navy. Yes,
and when this question comes substantively before the
House, as it will do—for if the Hon. Member for Mon-
trose (Mr. Hume) had not told me
s
dheisfecraerneceer,
thtahtittsuwbajsechtisl iwnoteunld-
ith all
w him
of economy—l will be prepared to show you from the
andht ia)‘i"e
stdohouptlirleobipteoshea
amyself,pp3s,paebtuuiatallmotion
Il
tbowim est
otolo:fmelllso.
speeches in the French papers that your augmentation of
your navy
• has been the standing plea and excuse fur the
increase of the French force .—(llear, hear.) The Noble
Lord has himself told us that our navy is as near as
possible double that of the French. Ought not that to
have satisfied us? Who's afraid?--(A laugh.) Yes,
who's afraid of being invaded ?—(Hear.) Where are
the people that have petitioned for your protection?
Why, I have the honour to represent the largest and
most important constituency of the empire; there is a
population probably of a million, and I believe there
is not one town in West Yorkshire in which there has
not been a public meeting to disclaim all desire of the
sort, to disclaim all fear, and to pray that you will not
augment your army. I represent 36,000 electors, and I
challenge any one to contradict me, when I say that the
vast majority of that important constituency is opposed
to this measure of the Government.—(Cheers.) I men-
tion this with the greater satisfaction, that it may go
forth, and go to France and to Europe, alongside of the
speech and the proposal that have come from the Prime
Minister.—(Bear, hear.) And at what time is this pro-
posal made?—(hear, hear.) I should have been sorry
at any time to see such a proposal; but at a time such as
the present ought there not to be the most cogent reasons
why you should put us to this expense?—(Hear.) And
what aro the reasons? I listened attentively, and I heard
not one fact alleged by the Noble Lord to call for these
armaments. He said that, in 1792, Mr. Pitt had great
confidence in peace, and he proposed, I believe, a partial
disarmament ; but there was war in 1793. It is true ;
but we were in different circumstances then in England,
as they were also in France. I believed that if Mr.
Pitt had had the power he would never have gone to
war to put down the French Revolution. I believe if
Mr. Pitt had had then what the Noble Lord has now—
an intelligent middle class in the kingdom, governing the
kingdom—and a more instructed working class averse to
war—lie nosier would have embarked in that war—
(Hear, hear)—but he was carried into it by the aristoc-
racy of this kingdom and the obstinacy of the monarch
wielding the power of the aristocracy for the purpose.
—(Hear, hear.) But we have the lesson of the war
which followed—we have the debt which followed asa
bond of peace. And ihow is it in. France ? What is
the motive now in France for going through such a re-
volution as in 1793 ? Why France has gone through
its social revolution—it has effected its social revolution,
and I know of no motive now why France should seek
such a revolution as that of 1793. They have no pri-
vileged order ; theyikbave no established church—
(lronical cheers from the Opposition)—they have no
great inequalities of condition ; there is a very-
minute subdivision of property ; and I ask what
possible motive of the kind can there be in
France 7 (Hear, hear.) Then, I say, these facts
instead of being evidences that we should now arm, are
proofs that we are no longer in the tame, danger.—
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord has alluded to our
narrow escape in the affair of Mr. Pritchard. Why, I
take that as another proof that we are not going to war
for any such trifling things in these days.—(hear, hear.)
.
We are told of secret councils the Foreign-office
between our Minister end the Minister of France, and
of the great danger of war. Well, I venture to say, that
if those two gentlemen had ever come to that point of
obstinacy or of recklessness, that they had proposed to
involve 60,000 of men, their fellow subjects, in a bloody
war, the result would have been that they would both
hare been turned out of office,—(Hear.) that what does