The Sun.
London, England, 1859-10-20 00:00:00

SIR E. T. COLEBBOOKE AT LANAI?.K.

Sir E. T. Colebrooke, M.P. for Lanarkshire, met
his constituents in Lanark on Tuesday, in the Meal
Market-hall, which was pretty well filled.
Mr. HOPE VERE, of Blackwood, having been
called to the chair, expressed his satisfaction at be-
ing-present at this meeting, and called upon Sir E.
Colebrooke to make a statement.
Sir E. T. COLEBROOKE then stepped forward and
spoke as follows :—Gentlernen, I have asked your
attendance this day, in compliance with a request
from some of my friends, who thought it would be
a proper mark of respect to this constituency if I
took, during the course of this autumn, some op-
portunities of publicly addressing them with regard
to some of the important topics of the day, and giv-
ing them an opportunity of asking for explanations
of any part of my public conduct which they might
think it right to call for. And I have cheerfully
obeyed that request, because it gives me an oppor-
tunity of tendering my thanks publicly to this great
constituency for the honour they did me in elect-
ing me as their member at a time when I was not
able personally to attend. On occasions like pub-
lic elections electors have advantages and privi-
legcs, in calling upon their candidate on the public
hustings, and asking him for any explanations as
to his past or as to his future conduct which they
might desire ; and, as you were deprived on that
occasion of this privilege which belongs to you, I
wish to put you in the same position of advantage
that you might have otherwise enjoyed by giving
you this opportunity on the present occasion of ask-
in.. for any explanation with regard to my public
conduct. (Applause.) Before doing so, I think I
should be complying with the expectations of those
of my frietvls whom I see around me, and who have
so kindly attended on this occasion, if I made some
few remarks on one or two of the public questions
of the day which have lately engaged the attention
of that short session of Parliament to which you did
me the honour of calling me. The first act of that
Parliament was to decide a point to which their at-
tention was necessarily called by the dissolution.
My vote was given in favour of a change of Govern-
ment. Ido not think I stand in need of defence or
, apology for the course I took, for the result of that
division was the formation of a Ministry so strong
in its administrative ability, and in the union of
eminent men, that I think it commands now more
of the public confidence than the Administration
that was displaced; but, as my position was different
from many of those who joined in the vote of no
confidence, inasmuch as I voted for the second read-
ing of that bill which gave rise to the dissolution, I
wish to say a few words as to the grounds on which
I acted. (Applause.) I consider that the great body
of the Liberal party acted unwisely in unanimously
rejecting that bill, instead of endeavouring to modify
its objectionable features in a Parliument in which
they commanded so large a majority. But our posi-
tion was materially changed when the result of the
appeal to the country was to add to their strength
and numbers, by an accession of Irish Conservatives,
and, to a certain degree, English. The appeal to
the country was avowedly a party move. There was
no measure or principle involved in it, except the
simple one whether that particular set of men were
to be entrusted with a continuance of the nation's
confidence. I considered that I should have put the
Reform principles in danger if my first act had been
to invite them, so strengthened, to deal with that
important question, -which must engage the atten-
tion of the new Parliament. I readily admit that
this Conservative Administration had, in the last
Parliament, made some important approaches to
Liberal principles. They could not have ex-
isted for a month had they not done so. But this
pliancy was avowedly under compulsion, and I
should have been very simple if I had relied on
their continuing that course if the first act of the
Parliament had been to place such confidence in
men, all whose sympathies are averse to the princi-
ples of the Reform Bill. A Government which has
the initiative in such a question has a great advan-
tage ; it has a peculiar one in Scotland, and, above
all, in this neighbourhood. I could have no ques-
tion as to my sympathies, as to whom I would
trust in the matter ; and I do not think this con-
stituency will complain of my giving effect to them.
I would only add that I would not, in the existing
state of politics, have taken that part to displace
that Government, were there not assurances that
the Liberal chiefs were likely to act in an accord
which had not existed for the previous two years
—this accord was the result of the dissolution,
and it is one good effect of that act; and se-
condly, that for this step I think I ought to have
the thanks of the Conservatives themselves in
having relieved their friends from a false posi-
tion—bad for the country, for the interests
of popular government, and even for the cause of
Conservatism.. A Ministry that attempts to govern
by a minority cannot act with that high-minded
devotion to principle that we expect in an English
Minister. We do not expect our Ministers to be stiff
and unbending. In Cabinets, in popular assemblies,
there must be some compromise, or Government
would be at an end ; but a Ministry which is forced
to bend to the opinions of a majority from which
they differ is but carrying on the Government by
shifts and expedients that lower the character of
popular government ; and I think I rendered a pub
lie service, and a service to that Government, in put-
ting an end to that state of things. The emsenuence
was the adjournment of the question of Reform, and
the adjournment of all important business except that
which did not admit of delay. I will now only say
that you have been called upon to contribute more
largely for the military and naval forces this year
than ever before, except during war, or in the immi-
nence of war. I cheerfully accord to the late Govern-
ment the credit due to them for their exertions in
putting our navy on an efficient footing. (Cheers.) I
have formerly given votes bearing more to the re-
duction of our forces than I court do now. I have
come slowly into the conviction that for many years
to come you must ba prepared for heavy estimates,
and I wish to take this opportunity of statidg the
ground of that belief. I need not remind you, in
the first place, that the great change in the art of
war changes the position of this country altogether
with regard to foreign Powers. The application
of steam to naval warfare, and the improvement of
gunnery and all the machinery of war, as well as
the great progress of railways, enable great States
that have large armies to concentrate and employ
those armies with a rapidity never before known.
We made use of it first in the Crimea and in India,
and we have seen it employed with terrible effect
on the plains of Italy. Now, any Power that, in
addition to great military resources and wealth and
the appliance of railway communication, has, in
addition, the means of directing it beyond its shores
by the means of a powerful steam navy must be
dangerous to its neighbours, and, if its affairs arc
not directed by principles of justice and fair deal.
ing, must be a nuisance to the world. (Hear, hear.)
We know that France has fOr years pat bent the
whole of her energies and spent enormous sums to
render her navy as powerful as her army. Her
fleet is as large as our own—her dockyards in-
creased, and in full activity; and this was done by
a sovereign who has found the art of drawing large
sums from the people in the most convenient, but
most reckless way, by throwing the whole burden
on posterity. Now, I will not attempt to fathom
the designs of that ruler. He is said to wish to
maintain with us a cordial alliance. He did, indeed,
try at one important point in his career to show that
he considered his mission was to avenge Waterloo;
but he has professed to work out a friendly part,
and he has acted with cordiality on important occa-
sions. But what is his position ? His throne rests for
support on the least instructed classes. His system
of government is one of despotic repression, and he I
has a vast army to employ. He is not a free agent.
Again, what is the disposition of the people ? Do
not deal with conjecture when we can appeal to fact.
There have been occasions when relations were dis•
turbed, and when it *required all the courage of
Luis Philippe Phii to resist the war foyer when it raged.
Would the present sovereign do so ? I believe it
would be a mere question of convenience, and it
would turn on
points whether we were weak and
he was strong ; .
and,
lastly,whether we should have the sup-
port of allieswhether he could feed
the vanity of the renclr employ his troops in
a successfal coup dc ntaitz.anilf is our danger,
let us be forearmed, and let us nots rest till we have
placed ourselves secure against' such danger. We
have with us the feeling of the country and
Par-
liament. With some, however, there is an oplthat we may rely en volunteers to a considerable
extent. So strong yis this felt that a spontaneous
movement has arisen throughout the country to
strengthen the defences by the enrolment of volun-
teers.
I do not wish to speak slightingly of an
army which may be made most powerful as an
auxiliary, and which would start up in myriads
were any real danger to threaten our shores. But
I see it said that volunteer troops may play a great
part in war, and the improvemenrof gunnery gives
new advantages to this army. I must here state
my opinion that these improvements will give us
great improvement in the art of war. Battles may
become more short and decisive, the victory may be
gained at greater distance; but there is a crisis in
all engagements where armies are approaching,
when men begin to fall fast, when the victory be-
longs to the steadiest, and that steadiness can only
be attained -when men are knit together by the bond
of discipline and training. Do not let us indulge
the hope that we can, by reliance on volunteers, or
even on militia, safely lower the amount of that
farce on which our safety depends. There are diffi-
culties in keeping; up that force by enlistment, and
I have regretted co observe that it has been expe-
rienced in our own. militia, and sonic say•we must
look to the ballot.. Now, before we resort to these

expedients of despotic governments, there is a very
obvious one that I hope will be tried. Wages are
rising, emigration is increasing the difficulty of
providing labour for our ordinary industry.
. . Let
us not hope to escape the necessity of cftering a
little more inducement to the soldier to enter
his profession. (Cheers.) Combined with this opinion,
that it is necessary to increase our defences, and
with a readiness to submit to sacrifices for the pur-
pose, there is another equally strong—that the ex-
penditure of the country could not have risen to its
present height without waste on the part of public
departments, or want of vigilance on the part of the
House of Commons. Now, then, that opinion has
engaged the attention of Parliament, and must un-
dergo strict inquiry. There is a document recently
published, which I have not yet seen, which gives
ground for belief that such improvement is required
in our dockyards. It could hardly have been other-
wise. Several of the last years have been years of
war—of lavish expenditure—during which great
power and trust must be given the executive, and
Parliament has not yet recovered its control. With
regard to this I will only ask you to place your
reafidenee in your reprasentatives. (Hear, hear.) I
believe that they are animated by the same feelings,
and if they fail it is rather from want of business
habits, from your chcosing bad men, or that there
are difficulties in the way of great reductions which
you must take into account. (Cheers.) It is said
by a prominent member of the Liberal party, Mr.
Bright, that the attempt to control military expen-
diture is a hopeless task in the present Parliament
—that the army and navy are in the hands of the
aristobracy, and a large body of the House of Com-
mons are bent on maintaining those abuses. My
answer shall be short. There was a man, named
Joseph Hume, who rose to distinction in an unre-
formed House of Commons, who devoted himself to
the task with an energy and success that have never
been surpassed. You will not have Joseph Humes
every day. The system of our Government trains up
men. They have the public eye on them—a public
press to support them—and I think the machinery
will be found equal to deal with abuses such as
these in the present Parliamentas it did 30 years ago.
(Applause.) There is another point in connexion
with this important subject to which I would briefly
refer. Many believe that great reduction was being
effected by the employment of private dockyards.
I do not. Vessels can be built cheaper by private
enterprise, but nothing can supersede the ne-
cessity of vigilance, on the part of the authorities.
There may be as great abuses in a system of pri-
vate contract as of public works, and it would be
less under the control of Parliament. Again, the
employment of private enterprise may answer for
a smaller class of vessels ; but the want of this for
first class ships would throw the work into few
hands, and the Government would be at the mercy
of contractors, and there would be great danger of
it becoming a monopoly. But there is another con-
sideration which is all powerful with me, and I
think decisive. If the work was carried on in every
private yard, and along our whole coast, what
would be our position in case of war ? Would not
such a state of things justify that which we are
now labouring to prevent, viz., filibustering enter-
prises against all our maritime towns ; and what
protection could. we have but hy engaging in a
system of public works along our whole sea-
board, which would be found more costly than
the present abuse ? Let me say a word now on
China. The public have been shocked by the tidings
of a disaster in that country, and the natural feel-
ing arises in the minds of the people how we could
take the most efficient means of re-asserting our
superiority, and protecting British interests in that
part of the world. This is a feeling with which I
cordially agree. Dangers may arise which r.quire
the presence of a large force. A Government so
inflated with their own importance may presume on
their success to undo every concession made for the
last 15 years. I enter into this feeling with certain
reservation. lam not so carried away by it as to
shut my eyes to the gravity of the crisis in our
affairs, and the danger to British interests (I put
aside questions of morality) if there be not a mild-
ness of temper—and I would add forbearance—in
those who have charge of our affairs, both here and
in China. Nothing is more easy than to throw up
our hats, decide on licking the Chinese, and vote
themoney forthe purpose. There are occasions when
there is as much danger in success as in defeat ; and
this is one of them. We are dealing with a Govern-
ment unwarlike ; and there is nothing in recent suc-
eess to alter our opinion. We are dealing with a Go-
vernment so prostrate and paralysed by internal
convulsions that it seems fast falling to pieces, and ap-
proachingthat state of things we found in India. Lord
Elgin describes their poverty, and he says he could
not for very shame press them for money to pay
the expenses of the war. It is in the power of the
European Powers to destroy it, but unless some
caution and forbearance are exercised by those
great Powers in their demands, we may be incur-
ring responsibilities by which not only 300,000,000
of Chinese will be affected, by also our own coun-
trymen engaged in trade in that part of the world,
which must be taken into account. There is a
strong danger of throwing that country into confu-
sion, and forcing upon ourselves responsibilities
such as we incurred in India, and which I desire to
see averted. We have enough on our hands with
regard to India without desiring any further em-
pire, and our policy in China ought not to be one
of aggrandisement. (Hear.) But if this is the state
of China, and I challenge discussion on this point,
what is the value of the policy to which we have
attached this ridiculous importance of having an
embassy at Pekin ? But there is another considera-
tion. Civilised governments derive advantages
from embassies, but the basis is good understand-
ing. But if we put ignominious conditions on a
semi-barbarous people, that they must accept an
envoy, the first consideration is that he must have
the support of a British force ; but what would be
the position of Mr. Bruce distant from the coast?
Would he have weight with the Court? Would he
not be in a worse position than at Shanghai or Can-
ton ? Lord Elgin felt this, and proposed a modifica-
tion. It seemed like an attempt to back out of a
false position. Lord Elgin came home ; Mr. Bruce
went out, and a simple question was put, is this an
exceptional visit or not ? It will be said that such
conditions are out of place now we have committed
ourselves and the Chinese have treated us with
indignity, and we must fight our way through.
Now, on this point I claim for myself the- right of
suspending my opinion as to the hostile intention

and bad faith of the Chinese, because I observe that
Lord J. Russell states that Mr. Bruce was obliged to
act upon presumptive evidence, and " in_these cir-
cumstances," he says, "you had to weigh contingen-
eies on which no safe calculation could be made." In
this remark I cordially agree ; and, having ;read
the published papers connected with the embassy
to Pekin, I entertain the hope that the Chinese never
did wish to carry matters to an extremity, and that
if we act wills firmness,'and at the same time with
forbearance, we may carry our point better than
with a high hand. With regard to the immediate
cause of the rupture—that the Chinese had at-
tempted to re-open negotiations—l entertain the
opinion that the simple questions they put to Mr.
Bruce, when he arrived at Shanghai, were justified
from he imperfect state of things in which Lord
Elgin bad left them. With regard to the resistance
of an armed progress up the Peihn, I will quote
Lord Elgin's own words in his despatch written in
November of last year, from which you may form
your own conclusion how far we are entitled to as-
sume that this was an act of hostility on their part,
and how far the treaty could be understood as giv-
ing us a right to send vessels up the river when we
please :—(Lord Elgin to Lord Malmesbury, Nov.
5, 1858)—" We know, from the Pekin Gazette, that
the Emperor has issued orders for the construction
of the forts on the Peiho, and for the erection of
other works to protect Pekin. It would hardly, I
think, be reasonable on our part to require that the
Emperor of China should leave his capital unde-
fended for the express purpose of enabling us,
whenever we see fit to do so. to attack him there.
Nor do 1, on the other hand, think that any works
which he is likel.y to raise will prevent us from
reaching it if we resolve to go thither in pursuance
of a treaty right. At the same time it may be a
question whether it would be expedient to exercise
the option conferred on her Majesty by article 111
of the Treaty of Tien-tsin in such a manner as
would force the Emperor to choose between a des-
perate attempt at 'resistance and passive acquies-
cence in what he and his advisers believe to be the
greatest calamity that could befall the empire." I
do not think that any language could be employed
more prophetic of what really occurred. Here is
the Ambassador who negotiates the treaty warning
the Government that any attempt to use the right
1•of visit by an armed force mus lead to collision,
because it was one which no Government would sub-
mit to. I ant not careful in in who is to blan e
.Ir. Bruce acted under instructions that he
was
to go up the river in an armed vessel. lie may or
may not have construed these instructions too
strictly. I here claim for myself the right ofjudg,-
iug. I take this opportunity of warning my coun-
trymen of the dangers they run if this policy is pur-
suei. If you give such powers to your country-
men in distant parts, you will always require an
armed force—you will have to pay liberally in
money, and you will have the comfort of knowing
at last, as 3.-o-.1 will find out, that you are pursuing
a policy injurious to your own trade, and against
the best interests of your count: y. Looking to the
importance of that question, I have thought it right
to express myself thus freely with regard to it ; and
having already expressed my opinion as to the prin-
cipal events of the session, I will only say, in con-
clusion, that, as one of my objects in asking you to
attend was to give you an opportunity of asking
for explanations of any part of my public conduct