The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-12 00:00:00

THE SITN.

the Church then bid claim to them, and wished to ,
hold them exclusively for those who professed them-
selves her members, and in order to further their
object they made it incumbent upon all to subscribe
to articles to which no conscientious Dissenter could
consent, and therefore an insuperable barrier was
raised against his admission to participate in the ad-
vantages of these national institutions. I have in
every possible way, by my voice and my vote, en-
deavoured to remove these obstacles ; and I opposed
on one occasion any further grant of public money to
pay the professors of Oxford and Cambridge until
the grievances complained of by the Dissenters of
their exclusion from those Universities were redressed.
--(Hear, hear.) I have opposed every vote of public
money to the Church. which, in the aggregate,
amounts to a considerable sum, and bears all sorts of
names, in order that their true purpose may not be
easily discovered. I have opposed those grants from
year to year, and have always divided the House
whenever I could get any one to second my motions.
Sometimes I could not get a seconder, and at no time
did I ever get more than thirty to divide with me,
and I;have:done those things as a conscientious Church-
man. I believe that the great principle on which the
doctrines of that Church are founded is to "Do unto
others as you would be done by," and hence consider
that its interests would be in a higher degree promoted
by keeping her fingers out of other people's pockets.—
(Loud laughter.) I certainly think that her
present position is very much: endangered by
the course she is pursuing.% Now, gentlemen, the last
vote I gave upon this subject was against a grant of
public money to maintain and pay a body, called the
Ecclesiastical Commission, whose functions are en-
tirely connected with the Church. They had to deal
with large sums of money belonging to the Church,
and I say that out of those ample means these Com-
missioners ought to be paid.—(llear, hear.) I there-
fore objected to that vote, as I have done to scores of
others. We have recently been enabled to draw out
some of the proceedings and accounts of the body,
and from them we have found that they are as
complete jobbers as are to be found in any other
public department. They have taken out of these
funds (which I say should he devoted to the
purposes for which church-rates are levied,
and the people relieved from such an exac-
tion), 143,0001. in the course of the last few
years for the erection of seven bishops' palaces—(Cries
of " Shame")-143,0001. fur erecting and beautifying
seven bishops' palaces ! I think one has been already
finished, at a cost of 54,000/. ; and whilst they are
carrying on this reckless expenditure, there are a
large number of clergymen—members of the Church
—educated men—performing duties day by day, and
week by week, many of whom receive a miserable
stipend of 35., and some as little as is. ld. a day.—
(Cries of " Shame.") That is a fact; I don't mention
on hearsay, 1 have obtained the fact from their own
published accounts. Well, then, I think I have given
my friends the Dissenters, for whom I have great
respect, cause to he grateful to me.—(Hear, hear.)
At the last election, many of them having recon-
sidered the course they had just taken before the
election came forward to support me; but they came
too late—unhappily the poison had been disseminated,
and those who came with their antidote on the; last
(Jay were too late to be of aviil. I think on an occa-
sien of this sort it is always better for a person
0-sliding in the situation I do at the present moment
to state openly mil that he has got upon his mind. I
have done so, end I know that three very gentlemen
who were so instrumental in causing me to be de-
feated are at this moment, Jeri-Jere as
..ardent and

. ,
sincere friends of mine as I can irAist of anywhere,
and I am proud of their frienlship and goodwill.
There is another body of oil friends of mine of whom

I see many here----f mean the freemen. You all
know that some hundreds who Lave always supported
me on former cecasions went against me at the
last election, and nice out of ten of them
were freemen.—(Cries of " Shame upon them.")
Under these circumstances, I think I have a right to
remind the freemen of what I have done for then, ;
and, having done so, I will leave it to their reflection
to consider whether they have acted rightly in the
course they have taken against me. During my first
session in Parliament a very important Bill was in-
troduced—namely, the Municipal Corporation Re-
form Act, which abolished your old corrupt corpora-
tions as well as the corporations of all cities of a
similar stamp.—(hear, hear.) That was a great
good, and we all thought so, and supported it ; but
there was a clause in that Bill which proposed to
abolish for ever the taking up of a freedom by any
person in this realm.—(Cries of " That is true.")
Freemen were to be entirely swept away from the
date of the passing of the Bill. I remember the late
Sir William Follett the most distinguished
lawyer of his day—stating in the House of Commons,
on the faith of his character as a lawyer, that that
clause would completely disfranchise the existing
freemen,•and he proposed that nothing contained in
the Act should, in any way, interfere with any right
or privilege possessed by the existing freemen. The
matter came to a division ; I supported him to my
utmost, but it was lost by a majority of 43. The
next clause took away all your property; it proposed
to take away your much cherished Lammas lands ;
and I was the very first man in the House of Com-
mons to move that both these obnoxious clauses should
be expunged from the Bill. Numerous discussions
took place on the question, and I was never
absent. On every one of these occasions I was
present, and supported tile abrogation of the clauses
both with my voice and my vote.— (Hear, hear.)
I recollect on one occasion that the freemen were
denounced from every part of the House, every
epithet which the English language could convey
was hurled against them ; they were described as
perpetrators of corruption and infamy of every_ kind ;
and the Attorney •General of the day stated, in his
place, that he considered the existence of freemen a
curse to the country. I made one or two unsuccess-
ful attempts to address the House, but I did not

succeed in catching the Speaker's eye for some time.
Many spoke on that occasion, and the lion. Member
who spoke before me, stated that unless the freemen
were abolished the great principle intended to be
carried out by the Reform Bill could not be ac-
complished.—(Hear, hear.) By-and-bye, when I
had an opportunity of addressing the House,
I replied to the charges so generally levelled against
the freemen. I said, " I believed I represented the
largest constituency of freemen, compared with the
population and freemen of other towns, in England,
and that I had been returned by them to that
House without a man asking or receiving from me, in
any way, a 3 much as +he value of sixpence, in the
shape of bribe or drink, or, in fact, in any shape what-
ever."--(Loud cheers.) I said, looking round me,
" I call upon the columuiators of the freemen—l call
upon any one to say that he has been returned with
equal purity." Not one replied to my challenge.
But on the next occasion the Bill came before the
House the Attorney-Gsneral, who had said that free-
men were a mile, and must be destroyed,
got up and said that the freemen of such
a city as Coventry were an exception to the
general censure, as the Member who represented the
city had borne his testimony to their integrity, and
added that the conduct of the freemen of Coventry
was not sufficient to continue the freedom to those
towns not one of whose Members had stood up to
defend them.—(Cheers.) Well, the control of your
property
Wi's to be entirely taken away from you. We
fought for
the expulsion of that clause for a long
time, and the
Government of the day said, " Well, as
the previous clause
(no freeen e destroys freemen root and branch,"
that existed W
were
to be subsequently created, and those
to: be deprived of all the rights they ,
enjoyed) we
do leaving
n tmind, under those circum-
stances,.
Sir 'Wm. Follett told me l'
the
freemen their property."
ivatel that if the clause
were passed even as eeato
disfod ,
y
that in isopinion all t
old freemen would be rrichised,h and i
~ I know,he
"
he said, " well enough (au
have told you. that he
was Baba est lawyer of his day)for liat the judges will
decide gnst tlieir voting Members of Parlia-
ment or for exercising any otherimportantocd functions."
The Bill went up to the House of
inut;fwbith the first
clause annihilating the coming freemenosi.
never-
theless, by the combined exertions
respect exto-
tiff
respect
and
others, this outrageous principle of the
punged.—(Hear, hear.) Then with
the stamp duty of 1/. upon young men taking ‘1
their freedom. I saw honest young men who had
served their masters faithfully for seven years, and
who, perhaps, had no means of accumulating a little
fund to provide implements necessary for the trades,
in order to start as independent tradesmen, subject
to a tax of 1/. before they could become freemen.
I brought in a Bill to abolish that stamp duty ;
I was opposed by the present Prim, Minister, and
he defeated me twice, and then I told her Majesty's
Government that so long as I had a 1 seat in that
H eels
e I should, F I were allowe(;, to the last day
of my existence, never cease to bring in H. einalr
Bill on every ~,
opportunity that presented itseit.
Acting upon this
ininciple after My secend defeat, I
brought • lt -
1" again at the close of the same session,
making a little difference in is torm. Lord John
Russell then said, in avoeryolite manner, as he does
everything, " The Hn Member for Coventry has
really stuck to this measure so well that, I think, we
h
must now let him have
way."—( Loud
cheers.) Of course, I. thanked h(iew,l,,nrdship, and we
carried the Bill. And chat wasohth e condition of
the freemen at that time ' Too
know; and I think every yowl.. man many
of you
know that their freedom was taken out to
eoultiti4
many instances at the expense of one of the political
parties in the city, on condition that they should give
their votes to that party as a consideration for the
purchase money ; i.e., they were forced to vote against
their convictions—not from their own feelings, but
they were forced to do so trans the position in which
they stood, and perhaps it was no degranation, be-
cause it was done by all who had procured their votes
by such means. Seeing their deplorable condition, I
I stool by them and emancipated them.—(Great

cheering.) You have also referred to my conduct
with respect to railways which affected the city.
Many here present will bear testimony that I was
ever ready to get you clauses inserted in Bills as
they passed through Committee, in order to protect
those revenues which were devoted to the superannua-
tion fund. And then with respect to the Lammas
lands, I considered that an arrangement which could
be come to between the landowners and the freemen, '
if based on equitable principles, would be of great
benefit to both.—(Hear, and cheers.) A. Bill was
brought in called the General Inclosure Bill, and in
that power was proposed to be taken, that an applica-
tion, signed by two-thirds of the landowners, should
entitle the Commissioners appointed under that Bill
to enclose common lands. This would have applied
to Lammas as well as to every other description of
land belonging to freemen or to burgesses. I intro-
duced a clause in that Bill, making it imperative that
the sanction of two-thirds of the freemen should
also be required before any proceedings could be
taken to enclose lands belonging to them.—(Cheers.)
Now I ask those freemen who turned against me at
the last election—it is right I should state that a
great many, I dare say 400 or 500, never came for-
ward—l ask those who turned against me if they
have not deserted a friend?—(Cheers)—and those
4 who voted against me, as well as those who did not
come to the poll, if they have not neglected
their duty ?—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers.)
Nay, I will go further, and ask them if they have
not neglected to exercise that proudest of all rights
to which any Englishman lays claim—namely, having
a voice in the making of those laws which dispose of
his life, his property, his labour, and everything that
is dear to him. Now, my friends, there is only one
other subject connected with the late election on
which I shall address you. Some of the publicans
who voted for me on the former, voted for my
Tory opponent on the last occasion, because they
allowed themselves to be corrupted by receiving
money from the party which arrayed themselves
against me. They received money for the purpose of
supplying intoxicating drink to some of the corrupt
voters, and thereby influencing them to vote for my oppo-
nent. Yet a great number of the publicans did their duty
nobly, and many refused to be bought. Esau was
hungry, and he sold his birthright for food, but the
parties to whom I refer were not in that state which
made the possession of drink an important object to
them. I ask, therefore, if there can be anything
more degrading than the selling of his birthright by
an Englishman—selling, for a miserable considera-
tion, that elective franchise which he was bound to
exercise for the good of his country ?—(Hear, hear.)
Gentlemen, I have,now told you everything upon my
mind with respect to the proceedings of the last elec-
tion. Now, lam told that if I had spent but 2001.
that I need have had no fear of losing my election. To
those who addressed me thus I replied, ' If spending
twopence in drink would obtain me a seat for Coventry,
or anywhere else—if twopence spent in corrupting the
electors would obtain ine the proudest seat in Eng-
land, I would not take it."—(Hear.) It had been
said with truth, " You have been sticking long to
the people, and they are never grateful—(Hear)—
if you had gone en smoothly with the Liberal party,
you would have retained your seat." I said, " I
came in for Coventry for the purpose, as far as my
very humble abilities would allow me, of raising the
condition, the character, and position of the poorer
classes of my fellow-countrymen.—(Hear.) I owe
everything to their skill and industry, and I should
not have been in this position if it had not been for
the produce of that skill and industry. I have, there-
fore, gratitude in my heart for them, and I
never will desert them." Look at the late
Parliament, and see how many friends of the dis-
tressed millions are to be found in that House. It

is lamentable that there were so few; but it was
still more lamentable to see the hard-working man,
for a miserable quantity of intoxicating drink for a
day or two now and then, which cast him in the
lowest abyss of degradation, placing power in the
hands of those, who were his bitterest enemies.
Often when sickness overtakes them, they are com-
pelled to seek relief in the workhouse, whereas if
they had merely partaken of the just enjoyment to
be purchased by their earnings, they might place
themselves in a position to enjoy comforts, and to pro-
vide for accidents, sickness, and old age, without
seeking aid from any one. But, as I told you be-
fore, the hard-wrought, industrious artizans pay
all the taxes, with scarcely an exception—for they are
thrown upon all their necessaries of life, and they
cannot help themselves. I have done all in my
power, I have done all that man could do to remove
the taxes upon their bread and upon their meat—the
taxes on meat are abolished, and on the Ist of Feb.
the tax upon bread will expire. I also took an active
part in obtaining the reduction of the duty on sugar
from 01. to lid., so that now good brown sugar,
which formerly cost 6d. and Bd., can now be bought
for 3d. and 3iel., and before the stir made
about the repeal of the corn-laws I made a
tour of the continent of Europe—l visited
all the great manufacturing towns, and on my return
I told an influential member of the Government, and
I stated over and over again in the House, that unless
they placed the working men of this country, with
regard to the price of food, and unless they removed
the taxes from that food, such was the progress that
had been made by all the other nations, that in the
course of no distant time we should be placed in a
position of the utmost difficulty from our inability to
compete with them. These were the honest feelings
that guided Sir Robert Peel in taking the duty off
bread and meat. You have, no doubt, recently seen
much correspondence about the defences of the
country, and from the stir which has been created
you would almost imagine that the French were
about to invade the country, and walk in one day,
soon, and eat your dinners just as you were sitting
down to them. 450,000,0001. lave been taken from
your pockets to maintain the army and navy since
the peace. What, I ask, has become of all this money,
if we are now in a defenceless state ? My friends,
we are not defenceless—our strong arms will be found
a safe defence whenever we are called out. I say,
if
.we are defenceless, " Arm the people, let them
everywhere have arms in their hands like the people
of France." France, and other nations which are
termed despotic, keep up national guards. France
has a body of 800,000, and, if you are afraid
of invasion, constitute the people here a similar body,
and they will not only present an invulnerable force
against France, but against all the combined nations
of the earth, and laugh at them. A benevolent
nobleman, very much troubled with the gout, has
recently written a very long letter to the Times,
stating that the country is really in a very defence-
less state. Now, under the influence of the gout,
he might, perhaps, have fancied that his property,
which is reported worth 100,000/. a year, was in
danger. The Duke of Wellington has also written
a letter, and all sorts of opinions have been expressed.
The number of men voted for the army, the artillery,
cavalry, and infantry, from 1818 to 1840—embracing
a period of 21 years of peace—was annually about
115,000 men ; the difference between the highest
and lowest in any of these years was not more than
5,000. - The number voted last year, which I op-
posed as being totally unnecessary to the extent pro-
posed, including 10,000 able-bodied pensioners—and
we have the authority of Lord Hardinge that there
are not 10,000 better men in Europe—was 161,200
men, or 46,000 more for the regular army than
during these twenty-one years.—(Hear, hear.) Then
we have 6,500 marines on shore and 4,500 on board
of ship, constituting a most efficient body ; in fact,
there are none superior to them. We have 12,000
Irish police, and their commander, who had served
in the Peninsula, stated before a Parliamentary
Committee that he had seen what soldiers could do, and
that with his 12,000 men he would undertake to fight
any army of the same extent in Europe, and lick
them.— (Laughter.) These men are armed like
soldiers, and I remember once in Ireland passing a
man who was in the custody of three men wbo
carried guns and naked bayonets, and, thinking that
the man was a great criminal, I inquired the cause of
his arrest, when one of the policemen replied, " Why,
sir, he has been beating his wife."—(Laughter.) I
passed on, saying I hoped they would punish him
well. Then we have 14,000 yeomanry who may be
made good soldiers at any time, and the militia
staff is 1,300. That gives 195,000 men now
in service, and paid for by the people; for
the yeomanry cost a good deal, and the Irish
Police are now paid out of the taxes. The
average number of men included in the above
calculation, in India and the Colonies, during these 21
Years amounted to 60,000 on the average. I esti-
mate that there are 75,000 in service there at present,
but as we are
at peace with every Power, that
number, I think,
might be reduced with safety ; but
without them
an we
havean Ireland.aforce of 120,000ther
there, then,
eservice
in Great Brit
ground for fear from France Is
or from any other
cf:a efer ? There is not. That worths' and estimable
fe-.4deiearf, whose pci,,ition with parties I knew well,
wil')-e '''`'ti'S .re excited, is used as a pilot balloon to
ascertain public feeling on the neuter. Now mind what
I tell you—the income-tax expires in a few months
their finances are not equal to their expenditure ; they
e,l s i n screws t ab lfei,
e. ,0 r n
you ; and as they want
yatlndiink they will frighten
are spending more re
l
tai increase the ineonie- tax, they
you into osuiptiance by declaring that we are in a
defenceless state. The..r. calculations and statements
will go forth to the world, and I challenge any one
to dispute their accuracy : if any one dispute them.
I will meet him, and show that ley figures are correct.
When the income-tax was proposed in 18-12 by Sir
Robert Peel's Government, there was a deficiency in
the revenue. Sir Robert Peel said then with truth,
" We cannot
get more from our taxes ; we have
squeezed the .-_)rsinws dry ; if you increase the taxes
by one-fourth, by one-half, or if you double them, or
putuna
btlaex etso
articles,
upon,a
pay tTelmilfewthey the people will be
cannot pay them, and
,
therefore, as a natural consequence, less consumption • '

will take place, and instead of an increase there
will be a greater deficiency in the revenue."
God knows the labouring man has little enough
money to purchase tea and sugar at their present
price, but it you double their present cost he must
content himself with one-half.—(Hear, hear.) I
said at that time that the income-tax upon trades and
professions was a grievance surrounded by every species
of oppression and injustice, and I proposed to raise more
than would meet the deficiency that might be created
without doing any injustice, like that inflicted by the
income-tax. I proposed that landed property and

every kind of ieaf property should pay the same
legacy and probate duty as all other kinds of pro-
perty. I will put a case. The Duke of Northum-
berland died a short time ago, leaving behinclThim,
some say, property of the annual value of 150,0001.,
on which he did not pay sixpence of duty ; but if a
poor, hard-working labouring man dies, and leaves
his house pretty comfortably furnished, they will
come and value every article, even the wearing ap-
parel he has left behind him ; and if all is worth
201., probate and legacy duty must be paid
upon it.--(Hear, hear.) I say, deal with
the Duke of Northumberland as you deal with the
hard-working man, for he can a thousand times better
afford it. I also suggested that all the salaries of
public officers, which were greatly increased during
the war, on account of the high price of provisions
and the depreciation of paper money, should be taxed
on a gradually increasingl scale from 1501., those re-
ceiving 1,5001. a year being taxed 201. per cent., for
now everything is reduced to something like one-half
of its cost during the war. If both these suggestions
had been carried out, 1,500,0001. more than would
cover the deficiency that existed at that time
would have been raised. My advice was un-
heeded. Peel said, " We will have an income-
tax ;" he raised 5,000,0001., and they immediately set
about creating 600 new places, which swallowed up
in salaries during the first three years 225,0001. Now
they are again in difficulties. I proposed also, in
1842, that trades and professions should only pay one-
half of the amount of real property—namely, 3Ncl. in
the pound instead of 7d. Well, we failed in that.
Then I proposed that the inquisitorial system adopted
with regard to ascertaining the profits of trade should
be placed on a different footing. I thought that the
tradesman, who was full of anxiety from year to
year, should not pay so much as the rich man, who
merely casts up his banker's book to see bow much
has been paid in by his agent, or who goes twice a
year to receive his dividends. In 1835 I supported a
proposition that trades and professions should be ex-
empt from the tax altogether; but we were not suc-
cessful in our endeavours. Well, you will see how
the gentleman who has supplanted me in the repre-
sentation will act ; and I hope he will publish his
votes as I have mine ; if not, I hope you will do so
for him, and that you will compare them with mine ;
and if you find that his acts and votes have tended
more to promote the public good than mine, I shall
be the very first to rejoice that the opportunity has
been afforded to him. But, gentlemen, I will only say,
in conclusion (the Hon. Gentleman's voice here failed
him repeatedly), how gratified I am to see so
many of my old friends again, and especially for this
mark of your esteem and friendship. Since my first
connexion with you, I) have never received anything
but the most kind and friendly feelings, and I can
assure you that I shall carry the recollection of thi
.lay with feelings of proud gratitude to the last hour
of my existence.--(The lion. Gentleman resumed his
eeat amidst loud cheers, and was greeted on taking
his seat by many of the assembly, and several females
who crowded round him, and shook him cordially by
the band.)
A vote of thanks having been voted to the Chair-
roan, the meeting separated ut half-past three o'clock.
In the evening Mr. Williams was entertained by
his supporters at the Castle. Mr. Clark occupied the
chair. About 140 sat down to dinner, and several
able and eloquent speeches were delivered by Mr.
Williams, Mr. 13ucknay, Mr. Browett, and others.
The speakers regretted that Coventry was now a
political nullity, and confidently looked forward to
the day when the disgrace the town had brought
upon itself, by the rejection of Mr. Williams, would
be removed by his re-election. One gentleman sug-
gested that they should not separate without esta-
blishing a Liberal Association to defend their in-
terests, and to fight the Liberal battle in the Regis-
tration Courts. The company did not separate until
a late hour.