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 thee. City Hall, in the presence of upwards of
3,000 individurr is.
Lord Jon- ; Russzr.o., in acknowledging the compli-
ment paid t o him by the Town Council of Glasgow,
said, after a few introductory remarks, he would not
deny that, al though he thought it his duty in public life
to pursue ' ;hat course, which, in his conscience, he
deemed beat fitted for the public welfare; yet he did
feel depressed when the approbation of his fellow-
countryenen 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
vou showed Irishmen that you were prepared to allow
;hern to participate in all our rights and privileges, and
to treat them exactly as if they were the inhabitants of
,he same island.—(Cheers.) I therefore could never
Olsten to the assertion that they -were to be consieered as
' aliens'—(cheers)—nor could I consent to any laws
which were founded on that unjust presumption; and
yet the endeavour to obtain these privileges, with re-
spect to corporations for instance, the simple• power of
riehmen being allowed to govern their own municipal
~tatters, to regulate their own local affairs, even that
erivilege 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 allowel, and the ques-
-Iton in dispute ie only hew it is to be carried into effect.
For my owntpart, part, I must say that I thought I could du
no 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 com-
mercial freedome-(Hear, hear.) It is not the place to
argue whether the general principles which Adam
Smith has laid down on this subject are 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 legislation of a country, that it re-
quired 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 should be an admission of
foreign sugar with a differential duty of 12s. It was an-
other part that the differential duty on colonial, tim-
ber should be diminished ; it was another part
of the scheme that the duties on corn, instead
of proceeding on what is called the sliding scale,
shoukl 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 judges. Now, gentlemen, in con-
seqoence of that proposition, the Government of that day
were assailed as being the most violent enemies of the
landed and agricultural interest. I was held up myself
to all the farmers as an enemy of the agriculturists of
the United Kingdom. They rejected my proposition,
and it was prevented from being carried in Parliament.
The friends of protection—the friends of monopoly, as I
may call them—thought they had obtained a great
triumph. in defeating that Government, and returning
another more favourable to their views. Do they now
rejoice that the Bs. duty was rejected ?—(Cheers.) Are
they now prepared to sae, that the Bs. duty, which would
have prevented much of the misery, and mitigated many
of the evils of our manufaotu,ing towns in the pars
1841, 1842, and 1843, would not have been a compromise
most favourable to those who were calling for protection?
I was represented as an enemy to the landed interest,
Ind to the farmer. Upon my word, upon reflecting on
my conduct, the only doubt I have is, whether that duty
'aaving 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, and when there was a surplus in the revenue,
I said that if they could prove that there were taxes that
eressed on them, then was the time to ask for an equality
f taxation, alone.; with the abolition of the corn-laws ;
cut I was again treated with indignation, and as an enemy
to the landed interest. But let us consider what has been
the effect of the rejection of these terms. Is there any
man now, who as a Member of Parliament—as a Mi-
nister to his Sovereign, would propose terms equally
Savourahle to these advocates of protection as those
which I proposed in 1841? I believe not—;Hear, hear,
and loud cheers)—and for my part, when I 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 in the
.vay of those who asked for the complete freedom of
trade on the subject of corn ; and rather than put that
obstacle 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 proposition, and
declared ray 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 nut for me in this place to
refer to occurrences 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 in that letter to the electors of the city 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 convinced, that if Sir Robert
Peel wishes his measure to be safe—safe to propose and
safe to carry -e-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 opposing—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 protection—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 opposion 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
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 bo 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 leaves 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.—(ateers.)
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 diminished by
tree importation. It was said likewise that we should
ne 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
think on the subject, is now of the same opinion.—
(Hear.) And with regard to' the opinion of those
Who m tintain that we shonld he exposed to periods
rem. w;TIg the restrictions on the importa-
..4 ,rn. I :hn.k the principle is well stated
.1. r s kin . ,In•A of c ,ntinent
i. e nain ,vl,, I.: ~tb,,r. with vga,r,l
to toed; the.,prices 'will be more equal in all of -them
than if each kingdomiwih,is re governed by separate laws
upon that subject. principle, therefore, if appli-
cable to continental countries, is equally applicable to a
free communication withf er n from whole world. If we cannot
o
get a sufficient supplyDantzic or from Po •
/and, we may obtain it from Odessa or
or if not, we may obtain it from the heßlack lea ;
United States of
America.—((%heers.) So that the free importation of
food is sure to lead to a more general equality of prices,
and a general provision of the people of this country, • l
a better mode than any law can afford. I say, that any
law can afford; for we have tried what some of the wisest
men in this country have invented as artificial schemes
by which the country might be more equally supplied
with food. We have tried the scheme of 1815, of which
Lord Ripon was the proposer. We have tried the
scheme of 1828, of which Lord Liverpool and Mr. Has-
ki,son were the originators and promoters ; and we have
had the scheme of 1842, of which Sir Robert Peel was
the author, eter having given the utmost attention to
the subject. We do not say that the proposers of these
schemes were unskilful or unwise in the invention of ar-
tificial schemes, but we do say that no artificial scheme
whatever will so
itsuply the people of this country with
food, as leavingtree and unfettered, to pursue its na-
tural course as an importantG branch of the commerce and
'
trade of the country reat applause.) If lam right
in believing that the of this country, that
the working men of thispaletry, take this view of the
question, I should like any one to tell me whether he
thinGl7),vert
nmhat
enotu_t
cooufki_th.
h elpublic men of this country
a
bas formed-o that can resist
that wish ?--(Continued cheering.) The peoplo. of