The Sun.
London, England, 1858-12-22 00:00:00

MR. BRIGHT IX GLASGOW.

GLASGOW, TUESDAY EVENING.

This evening Mr. Bright addressed the citizens
of Glasgow in the City-hall, which was densely
crowded, the rate of admissisn being respective/Y.
is. and 6d. The meeting consisted principally of
members of the middle classes, and was evidently
drawn together from motives of curiosity. Mr. W.
Buchanan, M.P., filled the chair, the Lord Provost
of the city having declined to occupy this post.
Mr. BRIGHT was received with great applause.
After some remarks he said they were there to
discuss a great constitutional question, and to con-
sider how far they might with security extend the
liberty they had received from their fathers. They
might have liberty with monarchy, as they had in
this country, and they might have a monarchy
without liberty, as there was in many nations of
the continent. He alluded to the definition of free-
dom by William Penn, and said that nobody now
attempted from the multiplication table to prove
that the House of Commons represented the people
of England. He had been told that he used the
same facts and figures in his addresses, but what if
he had used other facts and figures when the case
was the same ? lie then alluded to the number of
full-grown men who were unrepresented, being
5,000,000 out of 6,000,000. Suppose he were to
assemble all the men in this country upon a Scottish
heath, which he would hardly do even in imagina-
tion, for fear of disturbing those sacred animals the
grouse, the Constitution would say to 5,000,000 of
these men "We don't want you, you may return to
your homes, and the million which remains will do
your business for you." He alluded to the large
number of members returned by small boroughs,
and said it was impossible to devise a system more
cumbrous and untrustworthy than that which now
existed. As to the representation of property, he
found that in Edinburgh and Glasgow there was tax-
able property to the amount of £7,800,000, and now'
there were 101 boroughs in Great Britain and Ire-
land whose taxable property was £7,434,000 ;
and while Edinburgh and Glasgow returned
only four members, these small borougts returned
126 members to the House of Commons. Whether
they took numbers, wealth, or industry, all came to
the same result,—that the people were most inade-
quately represented under the present system. He
had addressed a meeting at Birmingham—did they
recollect the howl of astonishment that was raised
on account of it ? He did not wonder at the expres-
sions of Tory papers calling themselves Liberal.
These journals seemed to have been manacled by
the triumph of 1832, for they were not now so far
advanced as at the time of the Reform Bill. He
had been told that the sentiments he had uttered
at Manchester were more moderate than those
uttered at Birmingham, and that those uttered at
Edinburgh were still more moderate than those at
Manchester ; but it was impossible to compare the
speeches at Birmingham with the two or three that
followed, and to discover the slightest abandon-
ment of any statement he had uttered on the first
occasion. Did these men suppose that he would
have the effrontery to stand before thousands of his
countrymen, and that he came there to speak
merely the temporary sentiments and the passions
of the hour? Nearly the same sentiments were
uttered long ago by the Earl of Durham. He then
explained, as before, his system of household
suffrage. If they were not permitted to do this
great act of justice to the operative classes, better
let them remain as they were. He was willing
to enfranchise that class of persons called lodgers/
who were already, to a small extent, voters in
Scotland, and they might be admitted by re-
ducing the rent in accordance with the principle
upon which these persons had paid and were en-
franchised. He was ready to extend the 40s. fray.'
chise to Scotland. He had not spoken of the ballot
at Edinburgh, and it had been insinuated that he
had charged his mind. He considered the ballot
absolutely indispensable in an extension of the suf"
frage. He presumed that any Reform Bill would
draw a line and disfranchise the burghs under it.
Were they content that Edinburgh and Glasgow,
with their immense population, should be repre-
sented by only four members, while there was a
population not greater which returned 50, 80, or
100 members ? He was not bound to state the limit
that ought to be taken, but he was afraid that the
limit which should be taken would not be taken.
It was possible that Government might attempt o
measure, which, while seeming to reform, might
leave the question as unsatisfactory as ever. But
he maintained there could be no real reform except
upon something like the basis he had laid down.
The numbers under his rating franchise had been
much exaggerated. In Edinburgh it had been de-
clared by competent authority that the constituency
would be increased from 8,000 to 17,000. He was
satisfied that if they now changed the representa-
tion, although it might not be done without the
destruction of a Ministry or two, and possibly a
couple of elections—he was satisfied that, should
they treat the great body of the people with gene'
rosity, before 20 years passed the course of generosity
in 1859 would be found to be the path of absolute
wisdom. He then spoke of the law of entail. The
land in Scotland did not belong to the people. Let
no man say he was going to assail any body Of
landed proprietors in Scotland ; he spoke only of
the system, which arose from legislation diametri-
cally opposed to all those principles of political
economy which they struggled for many years to
place on the statute-book, in the shape of legislation
for matters of trade. Was there any reason why
land should not be as free as machinery, ships'
household furniture, or the goods and manufactures
in their warehouses ? He had travelled from the
rising to the setting of the sun upon the lands Of
one man, and found there few tenants and little
agriculture. There was little social freedom, little
industrial freedom, and less political freedom 14
districts such as these. He did not wish to enforce
the division of land, but he said the laws of primo-
geniture and entail, which were intended to keel)
vast estates in one hand through generations, and
prevent the dispersion of land, which had been found
so beneficial in other kinds of property, were most
pernicious, not only to agriculture, but to all other
classes of the country. He then spoke at some length
upon the extravagant expenditure of the Govern-
ment, and upon the selfish and unpatriotic manner
in which foreign affairs were conducted. The people
of this country knew as little of foreign affairs as
did the people of Russia, Austria, and France. ge
also spoke briefly of the horrors of war. A Scotch
Duke, rather a sprightly peer, had taken him to
task for what he had said in a speech. He (My'
Bright) questioned the enterprises abroad while
the people of Ireland could only earn a shilling a
day, arid a great many people in the Highlands had
only a meal of oatmeal. What was the answer ?
It was that oatmeal was b. wholesome diet. If he
had said that the Duke's dogs were fed on oatmeal
at Inverary Castle, the answer would have We
perfectly satisfactory. He denied that the Lords
were against war. If they had sorrowed Or
war they never told their grief. He compared
Great Britain to Egypt, and the Foreign.offiee
to an Egyptian temple in which there were
serpents and creeping things, in defence o',
which the British fleets were traversing the
world, and their children's blood was she',
like water. Reform in Parliament wool('
change all this. Notwithstanding there was much
in the country to be proud of. He then spoke et
considerable length on the extravagance of Of
Government. Freedom in land, he said, would
produce as much benefit to the country as the ab°'
lition of the corn laws.
Mr. Bright sat down after speaking an hour and
50 minutes.

Resolutions were passed in favour of his seller°o
of Reform.

REPRESENTATION OF BRECON.—The Hl
lr
Sheriff has received the writ for the election of ametnber'-d
this county in the room of the late Sir Joseph Baileyql
has fixed this day week for the election. The only cancliul
in the field is Mr. Godfrey Charles Morgan, son of
Charles Morgan of Tredegar, who in his address to the con.
stituency avows himself favourable to "timely, progresov,el
yet well-considered, measures of financial and
improvement." On the subject of church-rates he sa3tl,
"he hopes to see such a measure shortly introduced ill,
Parliament as will secure the maintenance and repair of tilo
'
fabrics of the established church, and finally allaY allt
irritated feeling which now unhappily prevails." No 4'„6
SitiOn is threatened,