House. I myself will not go into the late Mr. Shiel, in a brilliant and pointed question to which I think we are sentence, describe my right hon. Friendinvited-how far any portion of that I speak from memory-but Mr. Shiel Resolution, by speaking of the satisfac- described him as possessing faculties which tion with which we view the financial peculiarly qualified him to be the exponent management of the Government, and the of dissatisfaction and the faithful mirror confidence with which we look to the of discontent. I think that was spoken in future, may be consistent with the opi- 1849, and I can vouch for it that my right nions which we have often heard ex- hon. Friend has preserved that charactet pressed in this House. I would rather to the present day. ["No, no!"] There not on this occasion go into any review is an expression of dissent. Possibly the of the financial policy of the last few statement might be qualified. I will not years; but I can only say that upon an say the right hon. Gentleman is always occasion like this, when a challenge has the exponent of dissatisfaction and the been given to the Government by the mirror of discontent; for he has this other hon. Member for Halifax to justify their remarkable quality, that he sometimes naval and military expenditure, I think does express himself satisfied and conit is not the right way to meet that chal- tented, but it is with a state of things lenge by entirely evading it, and making with which all the rest of the world has it an occasion for a certain show of tactics become dissatisfied and discontented. Now, and dexterity, by which the economists I think if there is any one assertion that one part of the House will accept I could make with little fear of being cona Resolution which does not affirm a tradicted, it is that all rational men who reduction of expenditure in the sense they examine facts before they give an opinion understand it, but which does affirm an approval of the present military expenditure; while Gentlemen on the other side of the House also accept that Resolution which confirms the armaments which are now kept up, but which, with regard to the general financial condition of the country, every one must admit is extremely vague and unsatisfactory. I must confess that for myself I would rather the issue that has been raised by the hon. Member for Halifax had been more directly met. I think it would have been more satisfactory to the country and the House, and more in keeping with the recent policy which we have pursued and the great interests connected with the question which we now know to be one of the most interesting of the day.

on

MR. COBDEN: Sir, it was my intention to have moved the adjournment of this debate. I came down to the House expecting that there would have been a lengthened discussion on the question of our finances, to which the House generally I would have listened. I am not able to speak at length on the general question that has been discussed to-night; but as I think from the turn the debate has taken that the House will not be disposed to adjourn the discussion, I am induced to offer one or two remarks simply in consequence of the very friendly and affectionate appeal made to me by my right hon. Friend, who has just sat down (Mr. Horsman). I remember once hearing the

who reason instead of declaiming-who talk sense instead of rhapsody-I say all men who answer to that description have, I think, now arrived at the conclusion that we ought to be engaged in something else besides declamatory exultation upon the amount of money we can spend. Is there anybody in this House except the right hon. Gentleman who thinks that if we spend £30,000,000 multiplied-he does not say whether by itself or by how much-that if we spend £30,000,000 or £100,000,000 sterling, we shall have it back again to the markets for our manufacture and industry? Is there anybody but the right hon. Gentleman who at the present moment thinks that the state of our finances and the prospects of our country are such that they should be dealt with in the rhapsodical fashion by which we have just been entertained? I remember hearing the right hon. Gentleman speak in this House-it was the last time but one that I had an opportunity of speaking here, though now three years ago-I remember hearing him deliver a speech in 1859 in favour of fortifications. He spoke for an hour, with remarkable eloquence; but there was not one statement of fact in all his speech, with this exception-he stated that France had a number of iron-clad vessels, and had possession of the Channel. That was in June, 1859. Well, I visited Toulon six months afterwards, and the only ironcased ship France was building was then

but half finished and was not launched till House, responding to the feeling of the the August following--more than twelve country, is, or should be, engaged in the months after the right hon. Gentleman same occupations. It is this that has had told us that France had iron-cased given an interest to this discussion. Does vessels in the Channel. On that occasion anybody suppose, that in the present state the right hon. Gentleman was threatening of the country the existing expenditure us with invasion. He was not talking of the Government can be maintained? about Savoy or about French treaties, but Nobody expects it, for this reason-revean invasion. The right hon. Gentleman nue will not be forthcoming, and reduction now goes back and sketches all the events will therefore be inevitable. Would it that have taken place since that time; but not be more rational and more becoming, he does not say a word in explanation of that, as a great and intelligent nation, we the failure of his predictions about this should make a reduction of expenditure pretended invasion. Now, I regret that as a part of our policy, and in consequence the right hon. Gentleman, who I am of a well-defined and understood plan, happy to be permitted to call my Friend, than that we should be forced into reafter thirty years in this House, and with trenchment merely by the exigencies of undoubted ability-that he, while engag- our finance? Now, the right hon. Gening our attention for an hour with great tleman has talked a great deal about the power, gives us not one fact or argument. power which England exercises in conseHis speeches are pleasant episodes. As quence of her being always fully armed. parentheses in our debates they are perfect But I have ever understood that money -but the question before the House is a was the sinew of war, and that to be well very simple one-it is one of expenditure, armed was to be well fortified in your and the possible reduction of it. We finances. I do not think the strength of have certainly not heard much upon that a nation depends upon armaments so much subject from the right hon. Gentleman. as upon its resources. I deny the doctrine But does anyone suppose that the interest of the right hon. Gentleman that it is taken in this House-the interest that necessary, in order to impress your policy is taken in that lobby with respect or impress your counsel upon the rest of to this subject-arises from any care the world, that you should always present about the state of parties in this House? yourselves in the attitude of armed men. The interest that is taken in this Look what is now going on beyond the question of economy now arises from Atlantic. Everybody has complained that nothing in the world but the impending America was very overbearing in her state of difficulty and trial that is coming foreign policy. Very well; but bear in upon the country. I have no hesitation, mind America was never armed. after twenty-one years' experience in this had but 14,000 or 15,000 soldiers; she House, in saying that if we had continued never would have a fleet; she has not had as prosperous now as we were two years a line-of-battle ship in commission for the ago, we should have had no difficulty last ten years-certainly not more than about fortifications and armaments; we one. If, then, America played the bully should have gone on, and perhaps our ex- without arms, what was it that impressed penditure might have risen to £75,000,000. her will upon the rest of the world? UnBut now every one feels that there is a doubtedly, it was that you gave her credit great calamity pending over our prospects. for having vast resources behind her, which It has been hanging over us for some time, were not unnecessarily displayed in a state and we have hardly dared to face it. We of armed defiance. Well, what has been cannot even now face the whole amount the result of the present deplorable war and magnitude of the difficulty that may in America? You have seen that country be impending over us, except something manifesting a power such as I have no averts it-though no one I have met knows hesitation in saying no nation of the same how that is to be accomplished. There is a population ever manifested in the same great gulf yawning which none of us has time. No country in Europe, possessing the courage to look into or fathom. That 20,000,000 of people, could put forth the being the case, and seeing that every man might, could show the resources in men, in the country engaged in active pursuits money, and equipments, that the Federal is obliged to begin to put his house in States of America have done during the order and review his expenditure, and to last twelve months. Taking the whole make fresh calculations for the future, this country together, about 30,000,000 of

She

tleman, that on two occasions-once in 1859, and again last year he has been the first of right hon. Gentlemen sitting in the front rank to make the suggestion, that instead of keeping up this foolish rivalry with France, we should try to make some arrangement by which we can produce peace and quietness between the two countries on cheaper terms. It seems to me the present moment is peculiarly opportune for such an arrangement. You have got to the end of wooden-ship building; you have not yet got a navy of iron vessels. Let the two Governments who are so

people have kept nearly 1,000,000 of men in arms; and they have, upon the whole, been equipped and supplied as no other army ever was before. Why was that? Simply because the Americans had not exhausted themselves previously by high taxation. They were a prosperous people. Their wages and profits were high, because their taxation was low; and as they were earning twice as much as the people of Europe earned when the war broke out, they had only to restrict themselves to one-half of their usual enjoyments, and they found means of carrying on the war. That, I think, is a doc-friendly that they can enter into offensive trine that applies to us as well as to the and defensive wars, and who can make Americans, and I deny the doctrine of my treaties of commerce with each other, and right hon. Friend below me that a nation are therefore supposed to entertain feelings increases its power, and is better prepared of confidence towards each other-let them for carrying on war, because it always exercise their friendship in the most elemaintains a large war establishment in mentary way. Let them say, "Do not let us time of peace. I have frequently, in arm ourselves and exaggerate our mutual speaking on this subject, alluded to the forces in order that we may deceive our relations of this country with France. I people in respect of the heavy taxation imsay it is an anomaly, that whilst you have posed upon them." Does anybody suppose a Government professing to be par excel- there is anything impracticable in the lence the friend of France, we should be suggestion? It wants only will to act kept always in a state of alarm and appre- upon it. The noble Lord at the head of hension from the alleged hostile prepara- the Government brings here accounts tions of France. All the increase of our which come from Paris as to the state of armaments during the last ten years has the French preparations. I have no hesibeen made under the plea of protecting tation in saying that these accounts are ourselves against France. We have had calculated to give a most exaggerated imsince the Crimean war no occasion to arm pression of what is going on in France. ourselves against Russia, for the Russian The noble Lord, indeed, scarcely ever fleet in the Black Sea has been annihi- speaks but it is to produce some apprehenlated; and there has been no plea sion, some disquietude, with reference to for a fleet against America or any other the French preparations. For instance, country. Our increase of armaments has he tells us there are now thirty-six ironconstantly had reference to France. Well, cased ships-he always speaks of "ships" say it is hardly treating us with consis--built or building. Why, one half of them tency to tell us that a Government which came into power especially as the Friend of France is not able to keep on terms of amity with that country in any other way than by maintaining heavy armaments. I speak now of those in preparation for an attack from France. I have often saidand I repeat it here only for the purpose of making a suggestion better by far than to allow yourselves to appear to be forced to reduce your armaments by mere poverty, go to France and talk over the subject of these iron-cased vessels. ["Oh, oh!"] Some hon. Gentlemen in the back benches opposite cry "Oh!" but they forget that the same proposal was twice made by the right hon. Gentleman, their own leader. I think it is rather an enviable distinction of the right hon. Gen

I

are not ships. There are but sixteen ships sea-going vessels; twenty are iron-clad batteries, and of these five are actually lying in the warehouse at Toulon, having been built to be carried by railway to Lake Guarda to be used in the siege of Peschiera. The noble Lord lumps them altogether. and talks of thirty-six iron-cased vessels, Is not this a matter capable of being dealt with in a different way? I ask what is the use of our friendship? The right hon. gentleman, the leader of the Opposition, asked last year, "What is the use of your cordial alliance and your diplomacy—what is the use of your entente cordiale—if you cannot do such a thing as that?" I will not attribute motives; but it seems as if the object of the noble Lord was first to frighten people into the apprehension of