The Sun.
London, England, 1860-10-19 00:00:00

411 R, I►IILNES, .61X., ON 1103 TE AND FOREIGN
POLITICS'.

Mr. It. M. addressed his constituents, in

the Sessions House, at Pontefract, on Wednesday evening.
Mr. Milnes, on rising, proceeded to observe that the ses-
sion of Parliament which had just passed had not been a
very lively ono, but he was not going to abuse the session.
A great part of the session had been occupied by the at-
tempt to pass a Reform Bill. For that calumniated mea-

sure he wasbound to say he had considerable affection. -It was

certainly not of a very showy character, nor was there any-
thing very original or striking about it, but at the same time
there was a good deal of English sense and moderation in its
composition, and, for his part, he was very sorry it had gone
to the dogs. Ile gave it all the support in his power, because
it rested on two principles of both of which he cor-
dially approved—viz., the gradual extension of the fran-
chise amongst the poople, and the present distribution of
Parliamentary seats. As to the first, ho did not believo
there was any man, whether calling himself Conservative,
Tory, or Whig, who would not recognise the justice and
the policy of from time to time extending the breadth o
the constituency of the country, and of introducing more

and more of the population into the active duties of citizen-
ship. Let them apply the principle to the constitution.
That constitution was not a charter beginning with a decla-
ration of the rights of the people, and ending with a system

of police, but it was the natural growth of the times
through which they had passed, extending its roots
wherever it could find the nutriment of intelligence,
and only limited in its expansion by the vigo-
rous sap of national activity and the will of God.
He approved, too, in the main, of the principle of retaining
the present representation. He thought that the smaller
boroughs were most useful in the representation of the
country. Believing that if the representation was confined
entirely to large towns and very extensive bodies of men,
that the effect would be to alienate from such representation
a large body of very useful and very intelligent members of
Parliament, he did not wish that what were ()ailed the aris-
tocracy—whether connected with land or with property_
should be separated from the daily processes of the constitu-
tion ; and he should also regret very much if men of calmer
thought and more retired habits were excluded from Parlia-
ment—he should very much regret to see England reduced
to such a state of things as that in which the aristocracy
should be like the Legitimists of France, or men of intelli-
gence and literature placed in the same position as that class
in America. Therefore he thought it advisable that there
should be means of representation for those classes who
wished to enter Parliament without the somewhat dema-
gogue life which was absolutely necessary in the represen-
tation of large constituencies. He said this because he had
observed that the representatives of large constituencies in
the House of Commons did not take that position there
which the representation of large bodies of men under other
circumstances would authorise them in taking ; they were
gentlemen of great intelligence and great experience, but
they had, nevertheless, not been accustomed to the practices
of popular assemblies—they came into the house in mature
life, and its habits and practices, as peculiar as those of n
public school, were not familiar to them, and, as the result,
these gentlemen seldom favoured them with the fruits of
that knowledge which they possessed. He wished, indeed,
that the manufacturing constituencies would send to Parlia-
ment some of their young men, who would learn the habits
and usages of Parliament, in the same way as the upper
classes connected with the land had done, and he was sure they
would find their account in the goodwill and favour with
which they would be received. But that Reform Bill failed,
and it was not difficult to see why it did. At the election
immediately preceding the meeting of Parliament one third
of the constituencies of the country never recorded their
votes at all, proving that amongst large masses of the people
there was no desire for the acquisition of political privileges
—a desire which ought to lie at the bottom of any measure
for their extension, for without it he did not think they would.
deservedly exercise the privilege when conferred. He regret-
ted this, because he did wish to see political activity. He wag
not afraid of political activity—he was rather afraid of politi-
cal apathy, and of the two evils he would rather incur the dan-
ger of the former than the absorption of political intelligence
in the latter. On these grounds he should, when the question
again came before him, act as he had hitherto done, retain-
ing his preference for the two principles to which he had
referred. Another considerable portion of the session was
taken up by the consideration of Mr. Gladstone's budget,
the effects of which they would all practically bear in the
shape of increased taxes. That measure was a work of great
talent and great audacity. At a time when the country was
not in such a position as to justify any extravagant expendi-
ture, Mr. Gladstone diminished the income at the same time
that he increased the outgoings. He did so no doubt in a
far •seeing spirit, but still they were called upon to make
great sacrifices, and the only way in which they
could reconcile themselves to these sacrifices was
by considering the advantages which the country
might derive in the future, and the great part of that
budget comprised in the commercial treaty with
France. Hitherto the commercial relations between France
and England had really been of a scandalous character.
U was a horrible thing to think that the two greatest and
most civilised countries of the world, separated only by
that little ditch of the Channel, should for commercial
purposes be as much parted as if they were at the ends of
the globe. There was, in fact, hardly more commercial
communication between France and England than there
was between two petty German States. Now that evil
had to a great degree been remedied. By the commercial
treaty with France they had broken down the system
of prohibition ; and although the duties now levied on
articles of English produce were in many cases very
heavy, and although they were taking French goods
entirely free, they must hope that before long the good
sense of the French people and the bad practices of the
smuggler would lead to the reduction of the French duties,
and bring them to something more like an equality. It was
a very great boon to have broken down that system of entire
prohibition. A step had been taken which no Government
in France could ever recall. The duties might be higher
or lower ; they might change according to the policy of
the Government or the caprices of the people, but the ad-
mission of English goods into France was now entirely
granted, and they must trust to time to bring the good
work to its fruition. So far he went heartily with Mr.
Gladstone in his proposition. The budget also repealed the
duty on many small articles, and had reduced the number
changeable in the customs to fifteen, thus approximating
almost to absolute free trade. Now, he could not conceal
from himself that a great deal of personal calamity must
ensue from the immediate admission of French goods,
especially those upon which women in this country were
employed. He was not, he was bound to say, a thorough
going freetrader in that sense, and he did wish that there
should be a little more consideration for the interests of the
producing classes of this country in matters of this kind.
He thought that immediate admission of these foreign goods
to the diminution, perhaps the extinction, of some of their
own trades, though perhaps right in principle, was, never-
theless, in its application, a hard measure, and one which
he should have been willing to see somewhat delayed and
modified. The third portion of Mr. Gladstone's budget
consisted in the proposed abolition of the paper duties.
He had as much dislike as anybody to excise, and be-
lieved that there was no mode of taxation more vexa-
tious to the producer, and ha should bo glad to see the
abolition of this duty upon any articles, providing
they did not sacrifice too large a portion of the revenue.
He was aware that the House of Commons had previously
decided that the paper duty was a bad one and ought to
be repealed, and he agreed. with that decision not only
because it was an excise duty, but also because it in some
degree check6d popular literature and damaged the e'neap
press ,
• but he did not think the revenue of the country was
in such a position that they could afford to make a sacrifice
on account of the French Treaty, and the reduction of the
customs' duties, and also repeal the duty on paper, and he
therefore voted against it. He was thus placed in a different
position to the majority of the Liberal members who voted
for it, in considering the question which arose upon the
rejection of the bill by the House of Lords. As far "as the
thing itself was concerned, ho could not regret that
decision, but he did regret that anything was done
which should give any appearance of collision between the
two Houses. The House of Lords had, no doubt, the letter
of the constitution in their favour, but he did not think they
had the spirit, for the rejection of the abolition of the tax
could scarcely be considered different in its effect from the
rejection of the tax itself. The House of Lords, however,
would never have done this if they had believed that the
abolition of the paper duty was unanimously or even much
desired by the voice of the people. Mr. Mihies proceeded to
allude to the Church-rate Bi", stating that he had never,
before the last session, supported a bill for the entire aboli-
tion of these rates. He had done so partly out of deference
to the wishes of his constituents, and also because he wished
to see the question settled. Mr. Mines went on to notice
some of the committees upon which he had served, and
concluded his speech by a reference to the cession of Savoy
and Nice, and the independence of Italy. As to the first
question, he know that if it had been diplomatically con-
sidered from the first, instead of being made the
object of violent and useless protestation in the House
Commons, Switzerland would have saved the provinces
omfdi ichhad been taken from her, and Nice, he believed,
would have remained as part of Italy. With regard to the
second question, they were every day reading about Gari-
baldi, that wonderful man and great rid honest wanior,
who went out, as it were, upon his own account, and world
end, by the blessing of God, in constituting a great king-
dom in Italy. He had had the pleasure of seeing and shak-
ing hands with Garibaldi, and a more simple and honest
sailor he had never seen. He had been raised up by Pro-
vidence for a great object, and he possessed that simplicity
of mind and honesty of purpose which could alone render
him Ivor thy of being the saviour of his col-1h y. Let them
do honour to him ; let them do honour to the Ring of Sar-
dinia, and especially to that great minister, whose wisdom,
he trusted, would be crowned with the fullest and most
complete success.
Mr. Childers, M.P., subsequently addressed the meeting
At the conclusion of the speeches of the hon. members, a
vote of thtlas to them was carried with acclamation,