The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, APRIL 16, 1860.

.REPRESENTATION OF AR IVICII.

FAREWELL ADDRESS OF THE HON. W.

F. CAMPBELL.
A meeting was held on Saturday night in the
Assembly-room of the Three Cups, Harwich, to
enable the Hon. W. F. Campbell, M.P., previous to
his elevation to the Upper House, to take leave of
the electors. 1)r. Burt took the chair, and in the
name of the meeting read a complimentary address
to the hon. gentleman.
Mr. CAMPBELL, after acknowledging with grati-
tude the address which Dr. Burt had read, said he
had deferred as long as possible the painful task of
taking leave of the electors; but as Parliament
would meet again at the beginning of next week,
and he should then cease to be a member of the
House of Commons, he had deemed this the proper
moment for coming down to make a respectful
farewell to the constituency. There were so many
topics upon which he felt anxious to address them
that he resolved to confine himself to one, since,
while it embraced the destiny of the empire itself,
it vitally affected the rights and the existence of
their borough. (Hear, hear.) They had heard a
great deal lately about Savoy and Switzerland.
Whether Savoy belonged to France or to Sardinia,
whether Switzerland maintained or lost her inde-
pendence, were no doubt important questions ; but
they sank into insignificance when placed side by
side with the much larger and much more anxious
question of how the representative assembly of
Great Britain should be called into existence, The
arch of European freedom had the British House of
Commons for its key-stone, and if the key-stone was
impaired and undermined, the arch would crumble
into ruin. (Hear, hear.) On the Ist of March last,
Lord John Russell introduced a measure of reform,
to affect the mode in which the House of Commons
was elected. It had met with no encourage-
ment in Parliament or out of it. The great organs
of the Press, the chairman of committees, and the
leader of the Opposition had united in attacking it.
Scarcely any member of the Government had ven-
tured to deferid it. By a practice wholly unprece-
dented in the annals of the House of Commons, the
debate after beginning had been adjourned from
week to week to make way for less important busi-
ness. One night the house was counted out when
the debate was to be resumed. Another night
the house was all but counted out in the very midst
of the discussion. By the series of delays he (Mr.
Campbell) had adverted to, the Government ap-
peared to shrink from the hostility and criticism
which the scheme excited. He believed an ex-
planation could be given of what at first sight ap-
peared both new and paradoxical. The language
which Lord Palmerston had held in 1857 was evi-
dence before the world that this scheme did not
represent the wisdom of the Premier. The measure
which Lord J. Russell had propounded in 1852,
when uncontrolled and independent in the Cabinet,
was evidence before the world that this bill did not
represent the judgment and the mind of Lord John
Russell. The measure which the Earl of Aberdeen
proposed in 1854 was evidence before the world that
this bill did not represent the convictions of the
Peclite party, of whom the Earl of Aberdeen was
the exponent, and who now formed a brilliant sec-
tion in the Cabinet. As Mr. Milner Gibson and
Mr. Charles Villiers were known supporters of the
ballot, which this bill was framed to damp the
hope of ever gaining, the world clearly saw that it
did not represent the views of mon so long distin-
guished by their friendship to the people.
(Hear, hear.) If, therefore, this bill did not
coincide with the recorded judgment of any sec-
tion in the Government, was there any cruse for
wonder when the Government betrayed towards it
a feeling of distrast and of antipathy ? And if the
whole country saw that the bill had not engaged
the approbation of its ostensible promoters, was
there any cause for wonder when the public de-
clined to endorse or approve it ? He had now
pointed fairly to the situation which existed, and
had shown from what causes that situation had
arisen. The real question was what ought to be
done at such a moment. What course would best
become the dignity and prudence of the country,
left as it was to adopt a line of action for itself, by
the dilemma of a Government propounding a scheme
which they were known to cUsapprove, and for
which they had net thought it proper to conceal
their legitimate and natural aversion. If, on the
second reading, the bill was thrown out, a party
crisis would be hazarded. Such a party crisis
would lead to many inconveniences, and ought to
be if possible avoided. But it had now been too
repeatedly established that Cabinets were not qua-
lified to prepare a change in the Reform Act. If
Cabinets were qualified to do so, neither the bill
of 1852, or that of 1854, or that of 1859, or that of
1860 would have ever been presented. It remained
for the strength of Parliament to make up for the
failures and defects of the Executive. (Hear, hear.)
The House of Commons was too numerous to frame
a legislative project in itself, but by the means of a
select committee, uniting all the soundest minds
which it contained, it would not be found unequal
to the labour. (Hear.) Had he still been their
representative, after the bill was read a second
,ime, on the motion that the Speaker do leave
he chair, he should have moved an amendment
n the sense he had described. As it was, he had
:ransferred the arguments which struck him as con-

elusive to a member of the House of Commons who

had at once authority and eloquence to urge them,
and who, unless the Government had the sense
and prudence to anticipate him, would most pro-
bably unite all sections of the house in favour of a
course so full of moderation and of justice. (Hear,
hear.) It was not possible to give here the whole
range of grounds on which this course could be de-
fended as the right course ; but there was one which
he would mention, because he hoped it would equally
come home to the mind of the people and of Parlia-
ment. During the existence of the East India Com-
pany, at intervals of 20 years the Government of
India was exposed to revision and renewal. Ac-
cording to invariable practice, the renewal was pre-
ceded by select committees in both Houses of Par-
liament. Evidence was taken, arguments were
weighed, grievances were canvassed, problems were
disposed of, before any measure was propounded. It
was not contended for a moment that such grave and
periodical revisions should be entrusted merely to
the wisdom of a Cabinet ; and, if the wisdom of a
Cabinet was avowedly unequal to the task, on re-
newing, from time to time, the Government of In-
dia, could it be equal to the task of renewing the
Government of the British Empire, as a whole,
without such aid as Parliament might furnish ? If
select committees in the houses were essential to
renew the East India Charter, they were far more
essential to remodel the Reform Act. In approach-
ing the Government of India, Cabinets at least might
act according to the lights which they possessed, and
the convictions which occurred to them. If they
propounded a bad scheme it could only be from want
of genius and sagacity. It was not so with the Re-
form Act. No Minister could alter the Reform Act
without selfish passions in his way, and selfish inte-
rests to bias him. No Minister could alter the Reform
Act without an eye to his Government, his friends,
his party, his majority. (Hear.) In dealing with
this question Cabinets were morally as well as men-
tally inadequate. The time had now come when an
agency should be resorted to more powerful upon
the one hand, and more disinterested on the other.
If he was asked where he should look for the sup-
port and sympathy which such a proposition needed,
he should answer in all the long array of persons
and of interests whom this bill aggrieved, but who
are yet too prudent to desire a change of Govern-
ment at present. At the head of the array was
the Prime Minister, who in 1857 declared, know-
ing that his words would reach the utmost corners
of the habitable globe, that the Reform Act of 1832
ought to be amended on a prilaciple the very oppo-
site to 014 'which thin unhpppy bill embodied.

Next to the Prime Minister was Mr. Cobden, who
only last August endorsed the maxim of the Pre.
mier, and persuaded a vast assemblage of electors
and non-electors to accede to it. After these would
come the whole body of the freeholders in counties
whom the bill proposed to rob of the ascendancy
they had so long and so proudly held, and to turn
into the humble victims of an occupying clause
which Lord Chandos himself would not have had
the forehead to propose. After the freeholders you
fairly might rely upon the body of electors in
towns and counties indiscriminately, who all saw
that if a settlement (and this bill was vaunted as a
settlement) could be achieved to the exclusion of
the ballot, they would struggle many years in vain
for the protection which Lord Macaulay, with his
noble eloquence, had taught them to aspire to.
Beyond this you would have the sympathy of the
House of Commons, which is placed by the bill in
a position at once deplorable and ludicrous—which
is called on, a few months after the electors had
returned it, in a single session to make fundamental
laws for England, Ireland, and Scotland, to re-con-
struct the general taxation of the country, to sanc-
tion a commercial treaty with a Power they are told
no longer to confide in, and at the same moment to
prepare for the general election they are asked to
hurry on. Beyond this you might rely on the
concurrence of the public, who now fully under-
stand that the bill threatens to extend the most sig-
nal faults of the Reform Act. And last of all, the
man who urged the proposition he referred to might
count on the support and sympathy of Europe, since
all Europe is aggrieved when the Foreign Secre-
tary of Great Britain is associated with a project
which renders him an object of distrust, of censure,
and of ridicule. (Cheers.) In conclusion, he advised
them to petition against the further progress of the
bill until, in both Houses of Parliament, select com-
mittees have inquired into the subject. By such a
mode of acting they would do something to uphold
the name of this country among the Powers of the
world, and to raise that of Harwich among the
boroughs of the kingdom. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. CAMPBELL then read the draft of a petition,
and suggested that the leading members of the
party should revise it, if the meeting resolved on
such a course as he had mentioned.
A motion to this effect was put by the CIIAIRMAN,
and adopted .without a dissentient voice.

The following is the outline of the petition :
" PETITION.

" Sheweth,
" That, as the measure of Reform before your
honourable house affects the interests of Harwich,
your petitioners have felt bound to devote a calm
consideration to it.

" That, acceding to the language in favour of
occasional and separate Reform held by the Prime
Minister in 1857, your petitioners regret that the
true policy as regards change in tho act of 1832 has
been overiooked and sacrificed in the aforesaid bill.

"That, to attempt a general amendment of the
system with a view to rest and perpetuity, and at
the same time to deny vote by ballot in elections
either wholly or partly, absolutely or conditionally,
seems to be a course more adapted to excite popular
resentment than to assuage uneasiness existing in
the body of the people.
" That the aforesaid bill, without reason or neces-
sity, proposes to place freeholders in a minority of
the electors in the counties.
"That while the aforesaid bill is not adapted to
any popular demand, so neither does it profess to
meet any of those particularslefects which the ex-
perience of more than 25 years has shown in. the

itcform Act.
" That, so far from affording guarantees for sub-
s.equent stability, the limited support it has received
has been coupled with avowed intentions to disturb
and encroach upon it.
" That, by moving 25 seats, all of which arc open
to ability and merit, and replacing the greaterpart
of them by seats wholly inaccessible to the mass of
public men, the aforesaid bill is likely to extend
the inability of general elections to return to Par-
liament all the men who ought to be there ;
whereas that inability, instead of being extended,
ought, in any change of the Reform Act, to be re-
medied.
" That the aforesaid bill tends to precipitate a
general election, when the public interest forbids
such an event, inasmuch as the near approach of a
general election is inconsistent with the public in-
terest at a moment when our foreign and financial
affairs require more than usual energy and calm-
ness in the Legislature.
" That as the known events of the last 10 years
leave no reason to suppose that the aforesaid bill
expresses the opinion of the Government from
which it ostensibly proceeds, or any section of that
Government, and as the same events have shorn
that governments are not qualified successfully to
alter the Reform Act, your petitioners submit to
your honourable house the wisdom of forbearance
to proceed with it until select committees have in-
quired into the subject."

MR. BEM AL OSBORNE, M.P., ON

PUBLIC AFFAIRS.

The right lion. member for Liskeard met his con-
stituents on Friday night in the Temperance Hall
of that town. The attendance comprised the princi-
pal electors of the borough, of all shades of politics.
Mr. A. HINGSTON took the chair, and, after a few
remarks, introduced
Mr. OSBORNE, who was received with loud cheers.
Addressing the electors, non-electors, the electresses,
and non-electresses present, said he had taken the
opportunity during the Easter recess of paying them
a visit, and he did not think a member could spend
his Parliamentary vacation in a better way than
by visiting his constituents. (Hear.) He had very
great pleasure in meeting them. It had been re-
ported by some good-natured friends—and good-
natured friends had an epithet attached to them in
the comedy which he would not use on the present
occasion—that he was going to Birmingham, also
that he was about to go to Norwich, and it was
even reported that he was spoken of for Devonport ;
but, as they invited him to Liskeard in a very gra-
tifying manner, he was.determined that as long as
Liskeard stuck to him he should stick to Liskeard.
(Hear.) He thought it not a little complimentary
to be told that he had got the best seat in the House
of Commons, that he was a lucky fellow in repre-
senting the model borough in Cornwall—a county
which had not always enjoyed the highest repute
for moral boroughs. Proceeding to the discussion
of political questions, he said that since the session
commenced, on the 24th of January, he had never
had a harder ten weeks' work, and he had never
seen more important measures introduced into any
Parliament. (Hear.) Whether for good or evil,
never had there been such a succession of important
measures brought before the notice of any Parlia-
ment as had been introduced this session. The first
measure of which he took note was one of great
importance to the people of this country, and was
introduced by a man who, by his courtesy, calm-
ness, and thorough study of the subject, had ad-
vanced it to a position which it had never attained
before. He referred to the bill for the abolition
of church rates. His respected and dear friend,
Sir John Trelawny (cheers) introduced his
measure on the Bth of February, and he (Mr. Os-
borne) voted for the bill—(cheers)—not from any
hostility to the Church, for he was a Churchman,
and he knew that an Established Church was the
very best barrier they had against intolerance, and
against those unfortunate theological differences.
(Hear, hear.) The majority was 263 and the mino-
rity 234 ; the largest minority which had ever voted
that he had rather
amgaanityl sot
tbt he
re
mqtetems tbieorns, and
aSlisro,J. Trelawny
lost ground. But the reason of the falling off was
veryf
Lords evident.a
year in the
on
the House
commission ques-
tion of church-rates, and unfortunately some evi-
dence was given by highly respectably :conscien-
tioussatlastevidence men connected with the Church Liberation
Society. These gentlemen, instead of giving evi-
dence directly about church-rates, gave evidence to
show that their intentions went further than
the abolition of church-rates—that they wanted to
do away with tithes, and desired the separation of
Olga, and State, Thin alarmed many people: and

the result was that the majority for the measure
dwinlled down some 60 or 70. Sir J, Trelawny
had been rather ill used by his friends. If people
wanted to get anything, they should ask what was
moderate—(hear)—and when they desired to get
one thing they should not ask for another. No
doubt the most important matter of the session was
the production of Mr. Gladstone's budget; and, in
reference to Mr. Gladstone, he had shown himself
the foremost man of the present day. (Hear, hear.)
His acquaintance with Mr. Gladstone was only a
House of Commons acquaintance, which, as they
all knew, was not a very intimate one ; hut, speak-
ing as an independent member of Parliament,
he should say that he had never been more
struck with the thorough mastery of details,
the business way in which it was introduced, and
the great eloquence that fell from the lips of
that right honourable gentleman. The budget
was associated with the treaty with France. That
met with considerable opposition, for people
who had all their lives been proposing free trade
measures became suddenly afflicted with such a dis-
interested love for free trade that they opposed this
commercial treaty on free trade principles, although
it had been made, signed, and sealed, and now
might be considered delivered, by a man who was
as forward an apostle of free trade as Mr. Gladstone
was of finance—he referred to Richard Cobden.
(Cheers.) At this time of day it would be a work of
supererogation to go into any discussion about free
trade doctrines. They might be very shortly defined
to mean looking to the interest of the consumer.
Who was the consumer ? The public at large. That
was the right principle of free trade, and this com-
mercial treaty looked to the interest of the public at
large. (Hear, hear.) Nay, more ; the treaty was not
merely commercially good, but it was politically
good, because he looked upon it as a great thing to
be on good terms with their next-door neighbour.
They were taught to love their neighbours as them-
selves. Had they done so with France? All the pro-
hibitory restrictions on trade had proceeded from
that insane love of going to war with neighbours.
The French system previous to 1793 was not a pro-
hibitory system. In that year Great. Britain went to
war with France, and in 1796 it was ordained that
any Frenchman who wore an article of English
manufacture—oven though his wife may have given
it to him as a birthday present—if it could be proved
that he knew it to be of English manufacture, or
that his wife knew it to be so, should be liable to
penal servitude for 20 years. That law was after-
wards repealed, but until very lately the French
tariff had. been "grounded on a prohibitory basis.
What had they got in 1860 ? Through the exer-
tions of Mr. Cobden, and the gallantry of the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, they had obtained a great
reduction of the French duties. They were rather
high still, but he had no doubt they would be re-
duced, and that English manufactures would be
admitted into France at a lower rate than at present.
It was remarkable that although France was within
two hours' journey of England, our export trade
with that country was only seven millions annually,
while with America it was to the extent of 23
millions annually. He believed that the man who
brought about this treaty had conferred a great
benefit, not only on France and England, but on
the world. A great feature of the treaty was the
reduction of the wine duties. He believed the sub-
stitution of light Frbnch wines for the heady wines
now imported would tend to the increase of tempe-
ranee. It had been said that there was no necessity
for the remission of the duties on wine because wine
was a luxury, but it should be remembered that you
could make anything a luxury by excessive taxation.
It so happened that under the old system the duty
on the variety of wines drunk by what are called
the superior classes, not being an ad valorem duty,
was light, while the duty on the cheaper wines
which would go into consumption by the poorer
classes was about 200 per cent. (Hear.) Having
quoted some statistics from the letters of Mr. T. G.
Shaw, as published in the Times, the hon. member
proceeded to state that the consumpion of ardent
spirits had increased 48 per cent, in the last 50
years, and the consumption of wine decreased in the
same proportion ; that drunkenness was scarcely
known when wines were the ordinary drink of the
inhabitants ; and that there is no country in the
world where drunkennesis, and the crimes naturally
arising from it, prevail to any such extent as among
ourselves. He expressed himself in favour of giving
wine licenses to refreshment houses, and, while
warmly commending the efforts of the Temperance
Allance, he avowed himself opposed to their project
of introducing a Maine Liquor Law, for he would
not have an act of Parliament passed which might
become an engine of tyranny and oppression in the
country. (Hear.) Passing to a consideration of the
paper duty, he said he very much doubted whether
the proper time had arrived to take it off. The abo-
lition of the paper duty was the price the country
paid for having Mr. Milner Gibson in the Cabinet,
and the amount was about one million and a half.
Mr. Milner Gibson had advocated the abolition of
the paper duty when out of office, and most consist-
ently advocated the same thing since he entered
into office; but highly as he (Mr. Osborne) respected
Mr. Gibson, he objected to. the country paying
such a price for his services. (Hear.) It added
more than a penny per pound to the income tax.
(Hear, hear.).The income tax had risen from five-
pence to sevenpence, and was now tenpence in the
pound. The excuse for the increase was the in-
creased estimates for the army and navy, and these
estimates had become so enormous, that many
people were inclined to think if they could not have
an army and navy for less money, it would almost
be better for them not to exist. Since 1858 those
estimates had increased eight millions. There might
be certain excuses made for that, no doubt, one of
which was that they should keep pace with the
improvements of the time, and there were now
greater facilities than ever for removing the people
off the face of the earth with Armstrong guns and
Whitworth guns and screw vessels of war. But,
notwithstanding all that, he felt that the enormous
increase in those establishments was more than
ought to exist. (Cheers.) Ministers were con-
stantly complaining that it was not their wish to
add to the army and navy estimates ; but how had
the House of Commons dealt with the question'
Every advocate of retrenchment went to that Pool
of Bethesda, the Consolidated Fund—(laughter)—
with his crippled idea, forgetting that that fund
was the taxes of the country, and only desiring to
have a pull at the public purse. He came How to
the question of Reform. It was a peculiarly
awkward question. The rival politicians were
terrified at their own work, and
" Back recoiled, they knew not why,
Scared at sounds, themselves had made."

(Hear.) After one party had been pitted against
another, there was now a sort of lull, and they
wanted to get rid of the question, but they did not
well know how. Ho thought reasons could be
assigned for this. The question had been made
between the Whigs and the Conservatives a step-
ping stone to office, and the Conservatives having
come to the level of the Whigs, the Whigs were
obliged to be Whigs and something more. (Laugh-
ter.) The two parties differed about the pace,
but there was no difference on one thing_ each de-
sired to be the coachman to drive the State coach.
(Laughter.) Lord Derby, when in power, brings in
a measure extending the franchise to £lO in coun-
ties and £lO in boroughs. Lord John Russell must
outbid Lord Derby and therefore brings in his mea-
sure. Now, the advocates of Reform had placed
the question in a very false position. lie (Mr. Os-
borne) had a very high respect for Mr. Bright, who
had done a great deal of good, and would do more,
but he could not help thinking that he had in his
nature a little of the disposition of that celebrated
foreigner, the Benicia Boy— (great laughter)—and
was always for flooring somebody. He (Mr. Os-
borne) did not see the use of always denouncing the