The Sun.
London, England, 1867-11-15 00:00:00

TIIL•' MEMBERS FOR FINSBURY.

On Wednesday:Mr. iil'eulloch TorrensTand Mr.
Alderman Lusk, the members for the borough of
Finsbury, addressed a crowded meeting of their
constituents at the Myddleton-hall, Islington, Mr.
Henry Spicer in the chair. The chairman having
opened the meeting, Mr. TonnENs rose amid loud
cheers. The lion. member said since they were last
assembled in that hall great changes had been
wrought in the Constitution, and in those changes
himself and his colleague had taken a part. Ile
was there to give an account of his stewardship in
the past, and to speak of the future. He had supported
the Reform Bill of Mr. Gladstone not because he
thought it was a satisfactory measure, but because it
was an instalment of Reform. That bill was de-
feated, they all knew by what means, and the Tories
came into office promising to deal with the Reform
question. Ile was one of those prepared to give them
a fair trial, and to consider any measure of Reform
they might offer, with the view of improving it as
much as possible. Lord Derby had said the passing
of the bill was taking a leap in the dark, but what-
ever it might be considered by the Tories, he thought
it had brought to light upwards of 600,000 men
who had hitherto been denied the franchise. He
had always stood upon the principle of household
suffrage, but he felt as regarded London the bill
would have been a mockery without a lodger fran-
chise being embodied, and he had therefore felt it
his duty to propose a clause conferring the suffrage
on all lodgers paying £lO rent per annum, and he
was happy to say, after a hard fight, that clause now
formed part of the bill. Thecommittee of the Work-
ing Men's Association had sent him a letter ask-
ing him for his interpretation of that clause as it now
stood, with the words " clear annual value" inserted
in it. They were under the impression that the mere
payment of £lO each annually would not entitle a
lodger to be placed on the register. He replied that
he believed that every lodger paying £lO rent per
annum would be placed on the register if he made
his claim in accordance with the act. Parliament
was to meet next week to hearfrom the Government
a statement as to the Abyssinian expedition, and
would be called upon to vote a sum of about
£5,000,000 for the purpose of carrying on the war
in that country. He thought this large sum might
be much better spent at home. Before a shilling
of that money was voted to the Government a
pledge must be exacted from them that it was to be
used solely for the release of the captives now iu
the hands of the barbarian King, and that they had
no intention of permanently occupying a country
about which they literally knew nothing. Mr. Al.
denim Lusk, on rising, was very warmly received.
He said his hon. colleague had ,exhausted Reform,
and he would direct his remarks to other matters.
Since he had been their member he had devoted a
considerable portion of his attention in the House
in endeavours to reduce the extravagant expenditure
of the Government, and had incurred much obloquy
thereby in some quarters. He had not been very
successful in those endeavours, but in his failure he
had but shared the fate of more able men who had
preceded him. Ile, however, should still persevere.
If members were to be found fault with for criticis-
ing the items of expenditure, why were those items
brought before Parliament for its consideration ?
He had taken an active part in all commercial
matters brought under the consideration of Parlia-
ment. He had assisted in the passing of the Mer-
cantile Marine Bill, and had left his mark on many
other bills relating to commercial interests. He had
assisted the passing of the Metropolis Regulation
Bill, and though he admitted there were some clauses
in that bill which, if strictly enforced, would be op-
pressive, still, on the whole, he thought it a good
and necessary bill. As regarded the street hawkers,
their removal was only contemplated from the lead-
ing and overcrowded thoroughfares. lie was op-
posed to church rates and in favour of law reform.
He was one of those who had every reliance upon
the intelligence, loyaly, and good faith of the work-
ing classes. So long as the electors of Finsbury had
confidence in him, so long was he willing to serve
them to the best of his ability. Several questions
were then put to the hon. in .tilbers on a variety of
subjects, all of which appeared to be answered to
the satisfaction of the great majority of the meeting.
Mr. Willans then moved, awl Mr. Surr seconded, a
vote of confidence in the lion. members, and thank-
ing them for their past services. The resolution was
carried, and a vote of thanks to the chairman con-
cluded the proceedings.

THE REPRESENTATION OF MAN-
CHESTER.

The following address of Mr. Jacob Bright has
been circulated by post to every elector in the con-
stituency : —" Gentlemen,—A melancholy event,
which I have learnt with deep regret, in common, I
am sure, with every man of every political party in
Manchester, has caused a vacancy in the representa-
tion of your city. At the request of the Liberal
party I offer myself as a candidate for the seat thus
rendered vacant. As I was before you at the last
election my opinions upon political questions are
known to the constituency. I rejoice that, owing
to the great exertions of the people, household suf-
frage in the boroughs of England is at length ob-
tained, but regret that this change is accompanied
by a vexatious interference with the ratepaying
system of the country, by which increased charges
will have to be borne by numbers of men in the
humbler ranks of life. The work of Reform is yet
only half established. We must have the ballot,
without which there can be neither freedom nor order
at our electiOns, and a thorough redistribution of
seats, so that national questions may be dealt with
in a national sense. The county franchise must be
reconsidered, for who can reconcile the wholesale
exclusion of the people in the counties with their
wholesale admission in the towns ? Manchester, in
common with a few other places, is, after this elec-
tion, to be made a victim of an intolerable arrange-
ment. We asked for and obtained an additional
member, but we are denied the power to vote for him.
I should not object to a division of the city, as is
proposed for Glasgow, so that in each division the
majority might return the members as heretofore.
I am in favour of a system of national education
to be supported by local rates, under local ad-
ministration ; and I would give a cordial support to
the bill introduced into Parliament last session by
the Right llon. A. Austin Bruce, as tending
in that direction. I would also free the great
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge from tests,
and restrictions, and make them, in the true sense
of the term, national institutions. The general sys-
tem of licensing must be brought under the consi-
deration of Parliament. In my opinion the public-
houses and the beerhouses should be subjected to
the same restrictions and have the same privileges;
and, in order to remove the dissatisfaction which is
felt at the present mode of granting licenses, I
wool I give a power of veto to the ratepayers. The
claim of the Trades' Unions for legal protection for
their funds ought to be granted. The Legislature
should remove at once, so far as it has the power,
the causes of disaffection in Ireland. It can deal
with the Church, it can modify her educational in-
fAitutions, and it can give to the cultivators of the
soil full security for the fruits of their industry,
without which prosperity is impossible. There
should be no delay in reforming the tepiesentation
of Ireland, for in no country that I am acquainted
\tail is rei,resentation so cimplete a mockery.
as I do, the conduct of the Tory party for
the last two years to be wholly indefensible, I yet
think that it is a good thing for the country that
the two great parties in the State have entered into
earnest competition to do the people's work. With
this marked change in the political arena, and with
Reformed Parliament, I am sanguine that many
important measures, which the best minds in the
community have long felt to be necessary, will now
be obtained. Were I sent to Parliament as your re-
presentative, I should give a conscientious support
to all such measures, in accordance with the
iews which I have often expressed among you.
Electors of Manchester !—lf It be, as I am assured,
at your desire that I enter upon a contest for the
representation of this great city, give me an earnest
and generous support. Let there be no uncertain
issue of the strue•gle. Genuine Liberal principles

ave had many a triumph here. It is in your power
o make them triumph now.—l am, gentlemen,
aithf ally yours, " JACOB BRIGHT."

Protection in the United States not a Party

Question.

-

Why does the Times persist in misrepresenting
Protection as it exists in the United States? A

subject of such universal interest, strongly affecting
Great Britain, very fitly finds a place in a cosmo-

politan journal like our great London contempo-
rary. Whatever may be the arguments used, Ame-
ricans will read and weigh them, but however tel-
lingly they may be put, however well the points may
be made, however truthfully and beautifully illus-
trated, everything advanced will be neutralised by

mis-statement of facts so notorious as almost to

appear wilful. 'The nines says, " Protection is
undermining the prosperity of the United States,

and the Republican party is not merely for Protec-
tion as it used to exist iu England, but for excessive

ariff bills and prohibitory duties such as no nation

has ever attempted to live under." " The Republi-

cans have built their party upon the fallacy of Pro-
tection, and, as a compensation for the injury sus-
tained by the country, they offer it the boon of

negro suffrage." Again, " Radicalism is Protection,
and the West is vitally injured by Protection."
Now the truth is the question is not associated

exclusively with any political party. The Eng-
lish, in considering Protection in America, must

reverse their own experience of Protection i❑ Great
Britain. The American manufacturers are opposed

to the agriculturists, it is true ; but exactly in the
opposite way to the sides these respective interests
took in England. Here it was the land owners who
espoused the cause, and it was the manufacturers

who carried, in spite of their opposition, Free
Trade. There it is the manufacturers who demand
Protection, and have raised almost to prohibi-
tion the duties levied on the products of foreign
countries. It was the Liberal party in England who
carried Free Trade, and it was the Conservative
party who so vehemently opposed it. According to

the Times, it is the Radicals of America on whom
the English Tory mantle has fallen, and the Con-

servatives who advocate the removal of restrictions
on commerce. The Britisher associates Free Trade
with Liberalism, and finds it difficult to understand
Radicals in the guise of rabid monopolists, and Con-
servatives the champions of an open and fair
field for all. He concludes that m tnufactures
aro somehow connected with Chartists, Red R -

publicans, and that class of sinners, while corn and
other productions from the soil are represented
by the Conservatism of a country, whether in the
New or the Old World, whether in an English
county or on an American prairie. The Times
fosters this ridiculously erroneous idea. It matters
nothing what the manufacture be, whether butter
or ploughs, flour or rails, cheese or knives, pork or
calico, all are governed by the same laws, produced
for the same reasons, and upheld when protected
by the same arguments. The Pennsylvanian iron-
master holds in America on Protection precisely the
same position the landed magnate once held in
England. The one might now take the speech then
made by the other, and with as few changes as a
parson introduces into his New-year's sermon,
spout it as becomingly as the clergyman the pulpit
oration, though some of the congregation might
have a dim idea they had heard it all before. The
Times got its text from an item of the 'Week, in
what it calls a Radical journal of acknowledged
power and respectability (the New York Nation),

in its issue of the 17th Oct)ber, and we cannot do
better than transfer it bodily to our columns, that
our readers who have read the article in the Times
can read it also, and judge whether this American
Radical newspaper (or one of its correspondents)
uses these words as the Times represents it :—" The
trade of the country is nearly at a standstill ; the
labourer is abroad in search of employment ; taxes
and the cost of living are enormously high ; the
profits of labour arc almost unprecedcntedly
Whatever may be the true state of the country, it
is pretty sure to be described as in a disastrous con•

dition, with a wide-spread irritation and discontent

by the opponents of the governing party. Suppos-
ing that condition to be truly stated, the causes are
certain to be ascribed to misgovernment and corrup-
tion. As the question is an economical one,thosefavour-
ing Free-trade would seize on the distress to point
the moral that such is ever the result of Protec-
tion delusions. Just as " Manhattan," in a letter
transferred to the Times, laid all the miseries and
starvation in England on Free Trade. We
know that America has gone through five years
of the most sanguinary and expensive war. We
know that failure has followed failure in the har-
vests both North and South. We know that the
deluge of paper money has demoralised commerce,
and unfixed prices, and in these facts we think we
can see sufficient cause for great distress, and some
reason for thankfulness that it is no worse. The
representative journal of England desires the
principles of Free Trade to be established in
America, for, whatever might be the gain to the
United States, there can be no question about the

profit to England on the abolition of excessive
import duties. It thinks the Republican party is
doomed, and that it would be a clear gain to asso-
ciate the cause of Protection with the losing party
tying the Protectionist millstone round the Repub-
lican neck, in the hope of dropping both into the
depths of the Atlantic. If the Democratic party
would openly adopt Free Trade, and the Republican
party Protection, the Times doubtless considers,
as it holds the latter doomed, that both together
could be killed and ammunition saved by mak-
ing them one target. The Republican party,
however, has no intention to be so saddled,
for no principles it advocates are to be found
in Protection. While in the ascendant Pro-
tectionists have fastened like barnacles on it,
to make it a tool for their own pet scheme,
just as Teetotallers did in the New England States
—as a religious section did in enforcing the ob-
servance of the Sabbath in New York ; as theLabour
Congress endeavoured to do ; •as the advocates of
woman suffrage—perhaps with better cause, or other
holders of hobbies. But these barnacles would as
surely fasten on the Democrats if they were
launched into the sea of power. Those who want
to increase the tariff must ally themselves with the
party who can carry the measure in Congress, as they
are not such idiots as to join a hopeless minority.
Thus it happens that Protection has adhered to
Republicanism, which is now made responsible
for its shortcomings. But to say that the
Republican party has been built on the fal-
lacy of Protection, or that Radicalism is Pro-
tection, is totally to misstate the case, and the very
journal from which the 7 imes derived the material
for this article was itself a strong instance that
Radicalism is not Protection, as that newspaper
happens to be a powerful advocate of Free Trade.
As we write we have before us the League, with its
motto—

'Free Trade: Th 3 International Common Law of the
Almighty." EICLIARD COBDEN.

What politics does this American organ of Free
Traders profess? for we see no sign. We know to
what party Mr. Cobden and every man who fol-
lowed him belonged, but it is no proof whatever
because a man holds Free-Trade principles that he is
a Democrat, or because he holds Protectionist prin-
cipLs that he is a Radical. Let Senator Grimes speak
for himself on this question. En his letter to the
Burlington Ilawkeye this Republican leader says :
" So far as I know, the Republican party has never
taken any position on the subject of a tariff, and
so far as I believe four-fifths of the members of that
party in this State arc in full accord with Mr.
Wilson, Mr. Allison, Mr. Kasson, Governor Kirk-
wood, and myself, and with a majority of the
members of Congress from the North-Western
States on the subject of an increase of the present
tariff." Commenting on this the New York Tribune,
itself so strong a Protectionist advocate that it may
have deceived foreigners regarding the identifica-
tion of the Republican party with Protection, says:
"And we will unite with him in maintaining the
right of every Republican to be a Protectionist or
Free-trader, as he shall see fit. No man is the less a
Republican for any opinion he may cherish on
questions of political economy." Again it states:—
" What is just, fair, and practicable in the premises