The Sun. — London, England, 1846-01-15 00:00:00

was the county representation—or, rather, such was ' the system of tyranny and oppression, miscalled representation, under the landlord system. But that system had been attacked by the League, and, as far as they had gone, with great success; and though they were threatened with being met in the most formisesble manner, he had no doubt but that the issue would be most triumphant for the advocates of free trade.—(Loud cheers.) On this question the first Minister of the Crown had been charged with cowardice and treachery to the cause that had brought him into power. He (Mr. Villiers) did not believe this was a true representation. He exonerated him from the charge of cowardice, and could not see any treachery in doing that which, to him, appeared best calculated to serve the interests of the country. —(Hear, hear.) It had been said at certain protec tion meetings on a former occasion, where the policy of the Premier had been reviewed, that they (the monopolists) had made him, and could unmake him when they pleased ; for they had given him his place, paid him his wages, and intended him to at tend to their wishes, and do nothing that was con trary to their interests.—(Hear, hear.) When a Member of the House brought this matter under the consideration of the Minister at the time it was de clared, and asked if such was a proper representation of his position, he did, he (Mr. Villiers) was bound to say, repel it with a proper spirit.—(Hear, hear.) His words, on that occasion, were as follows : It is my intention to act upon a sense of public duty, and to propose those measures which my own conviction of what is requisite for the public interests shall make me think it desirable to propose. It is right that there should be a distinct understanding as to the terms on which a public man holds office. The power of circumstances and a sense of public duty have compelled me to take upon myself the harassing and laborious office in which I am placed. What can be my inducement to take office, and to make the sacrifice the acceptance of it requires ? What can be my inducement but the hope of rendering service to my country, and of acquiring honourable fame ? Is it likely I would go through the labour which is daily imposed upon me, if I could not claim for myself the liberty of proposing to Parliament those mea sures which I believe to be conducive to the public weal ? I will claim that liberty, I will propose those measure; and I do assure this House that no considerations of mere political support should induce me to hold such an office as that which I fill by a servile tenure which would compel me to be the instrument of carrying other men's .opinions into effect. Ido not estimate lightly the distinction which office gives. It is not valuable on account of the patronage which it enables its pos sessor to dispense nor from the personal distinction it confers upon him; it is only valuable to any man fit to hold it for an hour, on account of the opportunity it gives him of serving his country ; and the moment I shall be convinced that the power of doing that, according to my conscientious sense of public duty, is denied me, then I tell every man in the country that he has conferred no personal obliga tion on me, by having placed mein this office ; but, free as the wind, I reserve to myself the power of retiring from the discharge of onerous and harrassing duties, which, under such circumstance, could no longer be discharged with satisfaction to myself, or advantage o my country." A voice—" Three cheers tsr Sir Robert Peel." Another voice—" No, not now; at our next meet ing."—(A laugh.) Mr. Vieereas, in continuation, said, that he thought the course proposed a very proper one.—(Hear, hear.) He would revert to the statement made by Sir Ro bert Peel, in order to show that party had no claims upon him, but that he was only bound to do his duty to the nation at large. Sir Robert Peel showed his disposition to perform his duty, and he (Mr. Villiers) had no doubt that he would perform it.—(Cries of " Hear hear.") He might say, in justification of Sir Robert's consistency, that from the time he made the statement he had been consistent. Was it not seers that he had assailed the system of protection, and, not only that, but he had assailed it in every instance his office allowed him, and with it the parties who thought to claim him for their humble servant. They had had enough of public men not to have any faith in them ; but when the party acting had his duties and his interests combined, he would not shrink from what his interest prompted him to do. The gentlemen who wished Sir Robert Peel to be a servant to them had, during the last four or five years, been making a noise in the country, and had been ready to support their Minister in spite of his pur suing a course contrary to their inclinations—they 1141 acted as his supporters and friends, and they had shared in the favours the Government had been able to bestow on the Premier, but they had now become very loud in their opposition to his measures. They had, at one time, been opposed to a protective interest, andprotectiou had been altogether withdrawn bythem freen a great many, and the weakest had been treated with the least scruple. They had been told that their own turn must come next, and that their own system would assail themselves; and they had answered that they were prepared for it. They had on every occasion, in Parliament, adopted opposite principles from what they now adopted. Persons had gone before them, and had said what the protectionists are now saying. Men had had their produce destroyed by competition, and they had claimed from Parlia ment what the protectionists are now claiming ; but those men had always been disregarded, and Parlia ment had looked upon their sufferings with philoso phy. Thousands had been thrown out of employ ment by the introduction of machinery, and they had gone to Parliament to ask for some pro tection, but they were told that individual interest must yield to the general good.—(Hear.) They were the hereditary lords of a guod deal of pro perty, and they had been allowed to enjoy it freely, but were they now to maintain that exclusive in terest to the annoyance of the community? Were they able to point out any good result of their system in the condition of their own people, and the general condition of the country? One of the members of that meeting had made an allusion to a meeting in Ile county of Wilts; and would the protectionists refer to the condition of the people who composed that meeting as they appeared in the moon light? What had been said at Goatacre was no novelty, for the protection system had existed for a long time, and the condition of the people had been the same for the last 23 years. In 1824 an in quiry was made by the House of Commons as to the state of wages and labour, and by referring to the report made they would find that the state of the peasantry was such that it could not be worse, and that any change must be for the better; and the wit nesses examined had given it as their belief that it was the wretched condition of the people that had tempted them to crime. It was quite conformable to those inquiries that these people should be almost the last in the scale of society. Some years ago some commissioners were appointed by Government to form a scale of society, and the agricultural labourer was literally at the bottom of the scale—below the felon in gaol. It was 12 years ago that a gentleman, the Member for Bedford, and a Conservative, made a personal inquiry into the cause of the condition of all labourers who were confined in gaol in many of the agricultural counties for causing riots and incen diarism—(Hear, hear)—and, although a Conservative i n po licy, declared that the condition of these unfor tunates arose from the low state of their wages leading them into the commission of . their employer s —( crimes against Hear, hear.) How could they prove anything in favour of their system, by saying that when the price of provision was high that wages increased in proportion, and that if foreign competition were introduced into the mar ket the land would go uncultivated? Why, the poor men at that meeting in Wiltshire had declared that during forty years, whenever the price of provisions had increased, the wages had not been increased in proportion, mid that if the food or the means of getting it were secured to them, they would take care that the land_ would not go to waste.—(Loud cheering.) _ they could not point to these people as a specimen of the benefit of the system of protection, how could they " How have even answer the question of you supplied them with food ?"—(Loud (411) e ru g.) Had these men been supplied with food — (No, no.) g a d • rz y t , the last four or five years shown them the•fttu estsibed that the country of their system ? They had of itself produced enough to support the whole of hear.)people, but let them prove it if they could.—(Reart!le m T e. They brought scien tifie men to their protection meetings, who told the farmers what they " could , w o uld, might, and should measures do," if they adopted the recommended to them, and that a public improvement would be the r es ult of those measures. What they all said very was true, but they should let the land under cir cumstances that would enable them to go to the trouble and ex panse of making these improvements. Lord Stanley .once said in the House that the agriculture of this country required a great improvement, b ut no man could be expected to improve laud unless a secu rity was given for the duration of his interest on that land by means of a long lease, as the extent of their improvements would depend very much on the time they would have to occupy the land.—(Hear, hear.) He would ask if they had any prospect at present of leases being more generally Piven? At th e meeting of the Agricultural rotection Society, last Monda they had said that" it was necessary for them to in c rease their influe nce .. in the counties; but mild they do so by giving leases to the farmers?—(No, no, and loud cheers.) The fact was, that the farw ould never be allowed leases. A committee o f inquiry uirbeen asked for in the House of Commons foritvehneje.as. had tthree years by Mr. g Cobden, but one was never alth ough ugh he had asked over and over again, and they woul w a e n re ot grant one at all if more active measures Well, the fermers, too, had had their meetings upon this question of free trade as well as others. The farmers felt thiat they had their grievances to complain - THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING. JANUARY 15 1846 of in common with other classes in society t./lat were' and affected by the operation of the corn-laws; at the meetings they had attended they declaa that the establishment of a free trade system ' would not have the effect of doing them the I least possibly injury.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Villiers) had had recently a great deal of communi cation frequently of late with men of the highest respectability, who stood in the position of represen tatives of extensive landed proprietors ; in fact, they were the agents of some of the Peers of the realm, who were amongst the largest landowners in this country. To one of these gentlemen, in particu lar, he had addressed himself, and he asked him, if he concurred in the opinion that the repeal of the corn-laws would be injurious to the tenant farmer; and his answer was that there was no gen tleman in the country more surprised than he was at the strong feelings he had heard expressed amongst the tenant-farmers in favour of the repeal of the corn-laws.—(Hear.) That gentleman said to him (Mr. Villiers) that he had repeatedly heard the farmers say that they would not have the least fear as to the result of a repeal of the corn laws, for they could not conceive how such a measure could injure them.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Villiers) then asked the same gentleman what were the bene fits which he conceived would be likely to follow the measure, or what the results expected to flow from it; in fact, he asked him, if the corn-laws were repealed, what was his estimate of the loss which the farmer would be supposed to sustain ? The answer of the gentleman was to this effect—That he had asked the same questions of the farmers ; that he asked them, on behalf of the nobleman whom he re presented (as kind and generous a landlord as ever lived), whether they would wish, in the event of the corn-laws being repealed, to have clauses inserted in their leases enabling them to cancel those leases six months after the corn-laws should be repealed ? The farmers said they would take time to consider. They did consider the matter maturely, and the result was, that they all declared that they did not wish to have the clause inserted.—(Loud cheers.). Well, the advocates of protection said that such a measure would be the ruin of the farmer—the total, utter ruin of the farmer; but, in reply to that assertion, he (Mr. Villiers) had the assurance to the contrary of this gentleman of whom t he had been speaking— (Cheers) —a gentleman of the highest respect ability, honour, integrity, and one who, if he were to be summoned before a Com mittee of the House of Commons to give evidence upon the subject, every word he uttered would carry with it weight and importance, by reason of the position which he held.—(Hear.) He (Mr. Villiers) would now read to the meeting an extract from the speech of an agricultural gentlemen,delivered at a recent meeting in the country of more than 20,000 persons, in order to show what the sentiments of that gentleman were upon this question. The Hon. Member then read the extract, which was to the effect that he declared himself a country 'squire and extensive farmer, residing in the neighbourhood of a manu facturing district ; but from that fact, he did not think it would be fair to make the state of the agri cultural labourers in that district a criterion by which to judge of their general position, and, therefore he had taken care to acquire information in counties that were strictly agricultural ; and after having made himself acquainted with the state of the agricultural labourers' condition in Dorsetshire, Gloucestershire, the Isle of Wight, and several other agricultural counties, he had no hesitation in saying that their condition was so bad, that it would have been necessary for him to have sought in the work houses for many skilful labourers."—(Loud cheering.) Now, he (Mr. Villiers) did think it was a very im portant fact that the farmers of this country, who really understood their interest, had so powerful an ad vocate in their favour as the gentleman from whose speech he had been reading that extract.—(Cheers.) Such speeches were the more calculated to give con fidence to those who opposed the corn-laws, from the fact that those who were opposed to free trade were far from unanimous.—(Cheers.) They did not agree amongst themselves even in their own speeches.— (Hear.) He recollected that Lord Salisbury made a speech at one of those protection meetings, in which the Noble Lord declared that so far from protection being excessive, his Lordship did not think they had half enough of it.—(Laughter.) But Lord Essex happened to be present at the same meeting, and yet, strange to say, he did not utter a word upon the subject.—(Laughter.) His Lordship certainly did say, that with regard to the inferior descriptions of grain, he was of opinion that the duty upon those ought to be removed, and that they should be admitted duty free.—(Laughter.) But it_was rather strange, that while his Lordship was quite willing to admit, duty free, all descriptions of agricultural produce, that could be required for the feeding of cattle, he had not said one word about that which was required for feeding the people.—(Cheers and laughter.) Now, with respect to the advocates for the continuance of the burdens upon land, he (Mr. Villiers) would defy any man who read their speeches to say that any two of them agreed.—(Hear, hear.) Why did they not, if they felt that they were right, bring in their Bill, which they had so often been solicited to do ? (Hear, hear.) Because they well knew that if they did so, it would apply to the exemptions as well as to the burdens ; and they also well knew that the exemptions would be found to preponderate.— (Loud cheers.) Men of even moderate politics were in the habit of speaking of the proba ble effects of a Divine calamity or a scarcity ; but now their argument was, that at the present moment the country was never in a more prosperous state, and that therefore no change was necessary. Some men were advocates for changes in everything but the one most required; but the moment it was proposed to in terfere with the corn-laws, then they insisted that people should let well alone.—(Laughter.) Now he could not disguise from them who now heard him, the fact that those were the class of men who, the more universally advantageous any measure was likely to be, which should be introduced into the Legislature, the more strenuously would they oppose it, and therefore the advocates of free trade should leave nothing undone to defeat such opposition, be cause it was the opposition of the most interested and unpatriotic party that ever arrayed itself against the people. (The Hon. Member concluded amidst the loudest acclamations.) _ Mr. HOUGHTON next came forward. He com menced by saying that he never once stood up to ad dress a public meeting under circumstances so pecu liarly embarrassing as those attending his appearance on the present occasion. His embarrassment was increased by the fact of the importance of the present crisis, by the eloquence of those patriotic gentletnen who had preceded him, and by the fact of his having abandoned the opinions he had formerly entertained upon this question.—(Loud cheering.) He would have no hesitation in saying to the meeting that, if he did not conceive he had had sufficient reasons for changing his mind upon this subject, he would deserve to be denounced in language as strong as that which cha racterised the speech of a reverend gentleman recently in Staffordshire, who had denounced Sir Robert Peel as a traitor to his country and his religious principles. (Laughter.) Now, he (Mr. Houghton) was cer tainly a traitor to his country in that sense, because, for twenty-five years, he had been expending his money and his time upon his estate, and had also been ad vising those around him to do the same in the way most approved by protectionists.—(Hear, hear.) However, he had since changed his mind, and he had no hesitation in saying that protection was the parent of idleness.—(Cheers.) Let him ask when it had ever been known to prosper. Look at it with respect to the silk trade. When protection was about to be removed from that article it was said that the re sult would be the ruin of that trade ; yet, strange to say, that so prosperous had been that trade ever since, that now the silk trade of England had hoisted the flag of triumph even in India.—(Cheers.) The same observations applied to the wool-growers. He was an extensive wool-grower, and upon that point he had expressed his opinion to that great and good nobleman, now no more—he meant Earl Spencer— (Cheers) —to the effect that the wool trade would be ruined by the removal of the protection duty ;_ but that nobleman assured him that that trade in Eng land would be better than it ever had been, and the result proved that his Lordship was right.—(Cheers.) Well, let him now turn to another article, that of pigs. Why, they wanted all the fat pigs they could get, and if the Americans sent more of them, they in Eng land would be glad to receive them.—(Laughter.) Then with regard to beef. What was the case there? They, it seemed, had in the same country beef always fat—oxen ready for the knife. But what was the real fact ? Was bacon cheaper ? No; it was as dear as ever. So was beef; and therefore he contended, that all this fear was perfectly ground less.—(Hear, hear.) Then, again, wool was nol cheaper now that they had free trade in this article. lie would maintain this, that if protection, as was stated was good, they had since the days of Ifuskisson been going backward, and every movement, as certainly as day followed night, had been a step nearer to free trade. Why, the very hat that he wore was a French hat ; and had not the hatter in this country an equal right to come forward and claim for protection. But did he do so ?—(Cheers.) His own opinion was this, and he would beg their patience one moment while ha stated it. They had now had the corn-laws for thirty years. It was therefore no new acquaintance. lle had himself had occasion to give evidence before a Committee of the House of Com mons; he had also attended meetings when digress had been the cause o f their assembling ; andp now for some facts illustrative of the working o forn the rotective when 4 system. In 1822, aPr was most stringent, he would read them one line of what took place at a meeting held in the county of Kent, in consequence of unusual distress, and they prayed for a change in th 3 law. — (Hear, hear.) And yet this waa in the very height of pro- tection. They were then under the law of 1815— yes, in the very year when the corn protection was at the highest. Again, in 1829 and 1830, when corn produced the highest prices, they had in fact no corn lav tit all, for prices rose so that the duty was com pletely. t thrust aside. Then, with respect to 1836 and 1837, the price of corn was only 355. and 365. per quarter. Why ? Not because of the corn-laws, for they gave a protective duty of 38s. a quarter on wheat.—(Hear, hear.) Then, how was it in 1840 and 1841 ? Why, then again they had no corn laws at all, and there was the utmost distress in the country, and they were glad to get corn from any part of the world.—(Hear, hear.) When corn was at the highest price known in this kingdom—when the corn-laws were the most stringent, then the greatest misery, distress, and destitution prevailed among the farmers. In 1835-6, a , Committee of the House of Commons sat on this subject, and after a great deal of deliberation the result was, that they gave no report at all, but said that the distress arose from over-production—it could not be because of the importation of corn from abroad.—(Cheers.) This satisfied him that corn-laws had not effected what they were intended to do; because it was not to make corn dear or cheap that these laws were passed, but to ensure some certainty in its prices. Had they answered that end In 1835, the price of wheat was 365., in 1841-2, the price of wheat was 74s.—(Hear, hear.) The conclusion they must come to was, that when they had a beneficent season corn was cheap, because abundant ; and when they ex perienced an unfavourable season, they were compelled to get it from other countries. Now, he would in quire how the corn-laws had acted upon the interests of the classes they were originally intended to bene fit? For instance, with respect to himself, he had heard many say, that the repeal of' them—what ? they said that the repeal of them would ruin the Church.—(Cheers, and bursts of derisive laughter.) From that opinion he (Mr. Houghton) differed en tirely, and he differed for this reason—he loved the Church ; and he would tell them another reason also. He thought that the repeal of those laws would be the first means of making all parties hold out the right hand of fellowship to each other—(Hear)—for in the eyes of all right thinking Churchmen starvation in any degree could not by any possibility be good for the country at large. At present large masses met. About what ? About these measures, and they were the one opposed to the other ; therefore, he said that the repeal of these laws would unite them in the bonds of peace, and be productive of good to all parties.---(Cheers.) Then, again, it was said that this measure would ruin the aristocracy.— ' (Hear.) He had a great veneration for that body, but he did think that the alterations of this law would do more to raise that body in the opinion, the good sense, and the good-will of the people, than any other possible measure.—(Cheers.) Now he, for one, could not stand—what ? Why, to hear that they, the farmers, were a privileged class. He did not wish to belong to a privileged class, and he would throw down the gauntlet and cultivate land on free trade principles against any man.—(lmmense cheering.) Let them but have free trade—(Con tinued cheering)—and fair play, and what Mr. Villiers said that night, he (Mr. Houghton) would repeat, that the burdens on the land might be heavy, but let them see " the Bill;" and then they would be able to settle the precise amount of them. And now he would make one or two remarks with respect to leases. He himself held a great quantity of land, perhaps as much as ony one man in England—(Hear, hear)-- and he held it all by leases—(Cheers)—and he would indeed be a traitor if he were not prepared to come forward. For what ?—To take leases for as many years as the landlord would give him—(Great cheer ing)—aye, and at the same rents as he now paid for them.—(Continued cheering.) Now he must be ex cused for offering a few more suggestions.—(Cries of "Go on.") Then, in the first place, he maintained that the fears now expressed by the landlords were groundless ; but there was another question that he would just refer to. .It was said that land would go out of cultivation. He once recollected the lamented nobleman of whom he had already spoken, saying to him, when the repeal of the corn-laws was mentioned as a thing probable, " Let other countries send over their wheat. We shall be as glad to furnish a market for them as for ourselves. We shall, in fact, be then one large family." Now, with respect to the land going out of cultivation, he (Mr. Houghton) did not believe anything of the kind. On the con trary, he believed that it would be the means of in creasing cultivation. He would now say a few words with respect to leases ; and looking back to the last thirty years, and judging by experience, whether the state of the landed interest had improved or retrograded, he should say that the great and many changes in landed property augured very ill for the prosperity of landlords and tenant. farmers. These changes, especially to the lattter class, looked any thing but profitable. And now he would look to the condition of the labourer.—(Hear, hear.) He did not think that the last thirty years had been beneficial to them.—(Hear, hear.) He was sure that a great change on the whole system as re garded them was wanted, and if the meeting would allow him to say one word, he would tell them what he thought ought to be done to bring about a better state of things. And first, he would say that every labourer ought to have a little land.—(Great cheer ing.) He considered also that great attention ought to be paid to their dwellings, and he thought that every man should be educated. He believed also that it would be greatly for their interests to let them have a lease, for then they would take care that the land would not go out of cultivation. They would be thrown upon their own resources, and in those sea sons when the labour was greater than the demand, they would have something to fall back upon.—(Cheers.) He thought that the land should be let exactly at the same price to them, that it was in the same parish, and the nearer they were to a town the better.—(Hear, hear.) That would really be the means of benefiting the labourer. Now with respect to tenures, he thought that tenure should be granted as a security to the tenant. He saidse 'urity to the tenant because, although he (Mr. Houghton) had the very best land lords in the world, he would ask them for this security of tenure—and why ? Simply because of the uncer tainty of life.—(Hear, hear.) And he would ask this also because he had a large farm under lease, and a large sum invested in it ; and if he had not this security of tenure, what could he claim as security ?—(Hear, hear.) When another man com menced trade, if he had not the money, he perhaps found a friend to assist him; but if a man commenced farmer, and required a large sum to begin with, the friend to whom he would apply would look rather hard in his face—and why ? Because he had not the security of tenure. Let them look to Scotland, where the security of tenure had existed for years, and let them observe the palmy state of agricultural pros perity there. Let them introduce it into Eng land, and the same results would follow. That was his opinion with respect to tenure. There was one other thing he would shortly state to them—he referred to the exclusive burdens on land. He agreed with Mr. Villiers that the landlords should, however, bring in "the Bill." He argued that they had some burdens which pressed rather heavily on the land, but if they hail a clear stage and no favour, they would ask for no further protection.—(Cheers.) But admitting that they had heavy rates, let them see how the proceeds were expended; and he would first take the county rates, and he would say of this rate that no money could possibly be expended in a more wasteful and extravagant manner. The county with which he was himself connected—he meant Berkshire—and there he would instance a point. The meeting might have heard of the gaol of Reading, where every description of architecture of the most expensive character war exhibited. Why was this ? Because the gentlemen of Berkshire thought it would look well from the railway. If they had their ex clusive burdens, they were doubly mischievous from the manner in which the funds arising from those burdens were managed. There was another part of this story which he would like to bring before them, and that was with respect to Ireland. These laws were made for that country, and he might state to them that he was himself connected with that coun try. Now, after thirty years' experience. they had it from the petition presented the other day to the Queen, that the country was in a worse state than it had ever been—that, in fact, its population was starving.— (Hear, hear.) He did not think that these laws could be deemed beneficial to the country ; but he did think that bad legislation had something to do with it, and that many of the mise ries of that country might be ascribed to this. lie asked for them what he would ask for himself, and that was, that some alteration should take place in the present system of the corn-laws. And he would ask the gentlemen who were present at that meeting to lose no time, to leave no stone unturned, until they had given some relief to that unfortunate country. — (Cheers.) He could tell them that by their united exertions they would soon carry the repeal of this measure. And now he would tell them of a fact that occurred within his own knowledge in that country. If true, he would call on her Majesty's Legislature to remove the gentleman he would refer to from the commission of the peace, and if false, then let them take him to the Old Bailey—(Cheers and laughter)— and there let him hang by the neck until he was dead. He said, and he repeated, that persons in Ireland were not fairly dealt with. They had county rates there as well as in England, and they had treble the amount of assessment. When a presentment was brought forward by a gentleman for his own use and benefit, it was tried by the judges, and it was thrown out and can celled. It was then taken before another judge, who quashed it. What was the answer of that gentle man when remonstrated with on the subject ? The petition against the presentment, he might observe, was signed by the most respectable of the cess payers. What was his answer ? He said, "He would take ca re th at t h ese d ev il s h a d no t ano th er p oun d of limestone."— (Indignant cries of " Name, nom") That was the fact, and he could give the name if they required it. The Irish farmer did not care for the corn-laws. All he asked for was fair play. The Irish did not think so much of the corn-laws as the want of good roads, and in this respect he wanted an alteration for them as well as for himself. If what he had stated was not true, let the Government send over to Ireland and inspect the roads, and see the state they were in at this moment. The Irish farmers, in fact, had no roads at all, and they were often compelled to carry limestone on their backs to burn upon the land.—(Cries of "Shame, shame.") Now that was the state of Ireland, and he for one said, and he hoped the meet:ng would join with him in declaring, that the time had arrived when they ought to be improved. He was sorry for having detained them so long, but when he knew what he did know, he could not help speaking out. Things required to he alleviated as well in Ireland as in this country, and he would tell them what he thought would effect that object, Land wanted improve ment, and he asked Government to bring in a Bill to sanction the raising of money upon entailed estates for their improvement, at about 4 per cent.—(Hear, hear.) There was another step they ought to adopt. When an English merchant sent out a vessel to Ame rica, he was compelled by law to provide proper ac commodation for emigrants, if he carried any ; and why should not the landlords of Ireland be compelled to provide suitable accommodation for their depend ants ? For his part, he would have first, second, third, and even fourth-rate dwellings for the Irish tenantry ; and this plan could easily be carried out, if Government would only adopt the plan he had just suggested. And what would be the consequence ? Why, it would give satisfaction to everybody, and the tenant would live in a decent dwelling-house instead of a filthy hovel. It would be the means of conferring great benefit upon trade in that country, and would inter fere with no interest whatever. There was a ques tion in Ireland, too, as well as in this country, respecting the Church. He once wanted to bring to the notice of Sir Robert Peel a Bill that would have enabled parties to rent land, which was Church property, upon a fair and equitable tenure. Some of the county Members approved of this plan, but de clined to support it, because they said it would have the effect of interfering with the Church establish ment. What nonsense it was for men to talk in that way. It would improve instead of injuring the Church ; and if his plan were adopted they might de fend upon it they would have in Ireland less of agi tation and more of cultivation—less of agitation and more of education.—(Cheers.) Mr. T. M. GIBsoN, M.P., then came forward, and was received with great applause. When silence was restored, he said—Mr. Chairman, Ladies, and Gentle men, after the excellent speech of Mr. Villiers, and the very practicable and useful address of our friend Mr. Houghton, an extensive agriculturist, it would perhaps ill become me to trespass long upon your time, but this I will remark, that it seems you have not thought, from the vast assemblage collected in this house this evening, that it is wise at pre sent to consider the measure of the repeal of the corn-laws entirely carried. It has occurred, I dare say to many, and it has been remarked by some in my hearing, that it is hardly worth while to attend a meeting on the corn-laws now that the leaders of the two parties, Sir Robert Peel and Lord John Rus sell, have taken the question into their care ; but let me beg of you to remember that the question is still in your hands.—(Hear. hear.) From this fatal mis take of considering questions not finally carried as not being in the hands of the people, have there been many disappointments to the cause of liberty. The liberties of a nation were never given—never yielded by rulers to the people ; they have been always rung from rulers by the steady, the persevering, and the unshaken ex ertions of the people themselves.— (Cheers.) Whp knows that Sir Robert has yet decided what questioh he shall submit to the Legislature, and who knows but that this very assemblage here this evening may give him power to dictate better terms to the Cabinet Council ? Who knows that this assemblage may not have great weight in inspiring Ministers with the courage to propose, and the ability to carry, a good measure ?—(Cheers.) We are in the position of a person standing by the bed-side of some worthy matron. We do not know whether it is to be a boy or a girle—(Cheers and laughter.) We do not know yet what is to be had, therefore I say it becomes us not to desert our duty, but to watch and be satisfied with nothing but a per fectly healthy child.—(Cheers and laughter.) Our worthy Chairman named that child, and it is the total, the immediate, and the unconditional repeal of the corn-laws.—(Cheers.) This assemblage l what a contrast is it with those poor and pitiable meetings of our opponents. Why, your Chairman has maintained that at some protection meeting, that a cat might be discovered if she went amongst the listeners ; but here I will venture to assert, that if the whole of the Central Society for the Protection of British Agriculture, that assembles in the front par lour of No. 17, Old Bond-street, were put into this theatre, you would not know they were here at all.— (Cheers and laughter.) Perhaps some of them are here, and I wish they may be. They are going, it seems, to fight the League with its own weapons. They are going to try the registration courts ; they are going to try the manufacture of votes, as it is called. Thus, though they condemned such a course as highly immoral and unconstitutional, yet it seems, they are going to try it themselves. These are the persons, who, though favourable to unrelaxed protection, have no great objection to relax ing morals—(Hear, and laughter) --and so they are going to use our weapons. Well, then, perhaps we may live to see a rival house —not Drury-lane. Let me advise them not to be so aspiring as all that at first. They had better try a smaller house, and I will suggest to them the Strand.—(Hear, and laughter.) I am quite sure our excellent friend, the Chairman, if they are unwilling to try at first a theatre upon their own account, would let them some portion of these boxes to some of the principal members of the Central Society for the Protection of Agriculture, when they might attend and speak forthemselves. We would give them a patient hearing, and we would reply fairly and dispassionately to their arguments —(Hear)—and if we do not convince those of them who are capable of being convinced that our cause is one of justice, one of humanity, and one of right, then I can only say that 1 should despair of ever triumphing in the cause we are advocating.— (Cheers.) What an extraordinary thing it is that we should have this mighty opposition to the proposi tion we make. What is it we are proposing? Why, we are proposing to take off a tax. If we were as sembled in these great numbers for the imposition of a tax upon the people, then I could perfectly under stand that there might be meetings of those people who'would be unwilling to bear our burden. But our object is nothing of the kind. Our object is to re move a tax ; and what a strange notion—what a strange perversion of just political principles—is it that there can be such a tax existing, that, when you propose to remove it, you have great numbers of per eons coming forward, saying the tax is a benefit to us—it is a tax that is putting money into our pockets, and therefore we will not consent to relieve the na tion from the burden. Does it not strike every one that a tax ought to be a general burden, and ought to be levied for the general purposes of the State, and it is impossible that a rightful tax can be imposed for the benefit of any portion of the State's subjects? But this it at once a burden on the nation, and a benefit to a large portion of the nation, according to their own showing. Therefore I say their opposition to the removal of this tax is of itself proof that there must be something dishonest in its operation—there must be something at variance with the true principles of taxation when you have a tax that is a burden upon some and a benefit to others.—(Cheers.) We have never made this question a question of mere price ; on the contrary, we have treated the corn-laws as a question affecting the food of the people. The high ground we have taken is this—that we have a right to the freedom of exchange. We demand of the Legislature —the landed proprietors who have been, from time immemorial, the ruling party — to desist from obstructing the corn trade. We say the corn trade is a legitimate pursuit ; we say that Englishmen have a right to invest their capital in a foreign trade, and we say they have a right to bring corn into England to sell it at a profit, if it suitedtheir interest and convenience to do so. We say they ought not to be obstructed from doing so to suit the private or pecuniary interest of any class of their fellow-subjects. We do not put it upon the mere ground of price, but upon freedom of exchange, which was the most obvious right We say, if there is to be any article thrown in the way of foreign corn, the same burden ought to be placed on home-grown corn, and let the home corn grower bear his proportion to the tax. There would be justice between them; not that we say that corn is a fit subject of taxation—nothing of the kind. We think the food of the people ought more than anything to be exempted from taxes, but I am anxious to dwell upon this point, because so much has been said by • our opponents of certain alleged inconsistencies in the statements of free traders with reference to what would be the price of food after the repeal of the corn laws. I admit, as I have done before, that our demand rests not upon price, but still the price may be a matter fur our speculation.—(Hear.) Be the price what it may, we contend for commercial freedom in the corn trade. Speculation as to the price, when that freedom shall be obtained, would be a curious speculation, and an interesting speculation undoubtedly, if price be the primary ques tion ; but it does not form the basis upon which the just and righteous demand is made. Now, with re gard to price, our excellent friend, Mr. Houghton, does not anticipate a fall of price from a repeal of the corn-laws. True, there may be no fall of price , yet there may be a great increased consumption of food. Imported food may not be substituted for what is grown at home. It may be for additional consumption. Customers may be so increased as to require all the imported corn, without causing any diminution in the bale of corn grown at home. But the protection party seem to me to be trying all in their power to depreciate the value of their landed properties.—(Hear, hear.) It seems very singular for them to exert all their abilities in telling their tenants that when the corn-law is repealed their lands will not produce any rent. Will they not, when the' corn-law is repealed, coma forward and ask to have their farms for nothing ? Now, we free traders have never said so. What was the case with respect to estates ? Why, it was a fact that estates had been lately selling in the public market by auction, and had not these been purchased as mere investments ? I ask, if these lands have sold for one year's less pur chase than when the agitation against the corn-laws was not so rife as it is at the present moment ? Again, it is a fact that the farmers are selling their farms by auction at as high prices as ever they did. He was himself aware of a case in which two farms were sold at a higher price than they brought two years ago ; and this was at a time when the corn-laws was not as near being repealed as they now are.—(Hear, and cheers.) If there was an idea on the minds of the farmers that the repeal of this law would ruin land, put it in the same scale as everything saleable, would they not be induced to adhere to the same or a higher price in purchasing it ? —(Hear, hear.) If there were shares in a railroad to be disposed of, it would greatly diminish their value if there were any competing lines. And so it would be with land, if there were truth in the doc trines of those opposed to the free trade principles. With reference to what has been said by Mr. Hough ton respecting tenants, I will offer an observation. I myself am acquainted with four tenants in Suffolk, who at the time when the recent change had taken place in the Ministry, and the power was supposed to be placed in the hands of Lord John Russell, in nego - tiating leases with their landlords, did not one of them say a word respecting the corn-laws. Now it is riot our business, as advocates of free trade, to counsel persons whose property it is said is about to be injured. But I must say that it is strange that the landlords should be endeavouring to create a panic to depreciate their own property.—(Hear, hear.) I will recommend this view to Noble Marquises and Dukes, if they do not wish to make a sweeping measure.—(Cheers.) When speaking of Dukes, I mean those who have that propensity to deliver themselves of corn-law speeches, who, I must say, are not the most wise persons in the world.— (Hear, and laughter.) They appear to be persons of very homely wit, and it is difficult to single out one more foolish than another. It reminds me of a French Duke who applied at Court fora place for his friend, saying that he was deeply indebted to him ; and on being asked as to the nature of his obligations to him, replied that, but for him, he would be the ugliest man in France.—(A laugh.) Now, so it is with those noblemen ; for it would be difficult to single out one that has made a more foolish speech than another, for they have kept each other in countenance with their nonsense ; not however, that he despaired of making some of them disciples of the League. Even the Duke of Norfolk was not a hopeless case, and perhaps when that Noble Duke spoke of curry pow der he meant rice, for they were mixed together in India. Now, we have another Duke, who says that anti-corn-law meetings should be treated with the contempt they deserved.—(Name.) Ile was well known, for he was at one time engaged in a corre spondence with the chairman of the League.— (Name, name.) It was the Duke of Cleveland, whose speech was in this day's Times. He says that the country was convulsed from one end to the other by the agitation that was car ried on. And so it was, but it was with laughter at the nonsense uttered by Noble Dukes at protection meetings that it was convulsed.—(Laughter.) As I have alluded to a correspondenee that has taken place, I will take the liberty of reading those letters, which are important documents, as showing that they were as anxious as those who were deficient in knowledge of this matter. The Duke of Cleveland delivered himself of a speech, at Baby Castle, which appeared in the Mark-lane Express, upholding the corn-laws. The Chairman of the League wrote to the Duke this letter : "My Lord Duke,—ln an account of a meeting of your Grace's tenants, you are reported, in the Mark- Lne Express, to have warned your tenants against the doctrines of the League, and that they (the tenants) could not compete with the foreign growers. As chair man of the League, I believe you have made these state ments in ignorance, and I forward you some tracts of the League that will give you information on the subject, which will show you that the land does not bear those burdens that you have asserted,. and that it is not so heavily taxed, and that income derived from land is a small compensation ; and I trust'that you will take the earliest opportunity of correcting your error. "I am, &c., GEORGE WILSON, " Chairman of the National Anti-Corn•law Le igue." To this letter the Duke returned the following answer : " Sir,--I have received a letter which has followed me to the Highlands of Scotland, and has filled me with astonishment. The writer signs himself Chairman of the League.' However despicable that faction has be come in the consideration of the country, I could not conceive that any one of its members should have the boldness to lecture me on what I have thought fit to say at a private party at which no member of the press was present. I know nothing about the Mark-lane Ex press, and treat your observations with the contempt they deserve." Now this was a very unhandsome reply to the letter that was framed in very courteous terms. He con tended that they had a right to investigate the opi nions of those who were hereditary legislators, and in whose hands the transactions of affairs affecting their interest was confided. Now, he would assert that it was false what had been stated about the land being more taxed. It had been shown by Mr. Hume in the House of Commons, that the taxes , pressing peculiarly upon agriculture amounted to something about 8,000,0001. a year; and they would have now yielded about 30,000,0001. to the revenue. When the deputation of the Central Committee waited on Sir R. Peel, they could not answer him when he asked them what were the peculiar burdens that pressed upon lands. Now he himself was counted with the landed interest, though to a small extent, and should feel very loth to have, as had been suggested this evening, a hill fur nished for the amounts received off the land. My Lord Beaumont had said that real property in England bore about 8,000,0001. taxes; and that he would set that 8,000,0001. in one scale and the corn -laws in the other, and they ought to be satisfied. But did not the Noble Lord know that houses, mining pro perty, and shares in companies, were as much real property as land ? So much for that portion of the subject. Then the argument that if corn from fo reign countries were to be admitted, it would have a very injurious tendency. Poland had been particu larly mentioned ; and they were very fond of declar ing, that if Polish bread were admitted, their labourers would become like Poles ; to use the expression of a venerable labourer in this cause, Col. Thompson, if they admitted this Polish corn they would begin to speak the Polish tongue.—(Laughter.) This arose from the different circumstances of the two countries, and what was applicable to Poland could not be ap plied consistently to Great Britain.. This great question now agitated is no pecuniary question. The landed proprietors are jealous of the advance of the mercantile community of this country; they do not like their heels trod upon by a class whom they have been taught from their cradle to look down upon. t They like to depress the mercantile community. Yet this cannot be from a pecuniary motive. From their love of power, their love of ascendancy, and their love of aristocratic privilege, they wish to keep down the middle classes of this country. Now, however, that this question and its merits are clearly developed in the sight of the country—now that free-trade is almost obtained, that it is so near their hands that they can reach its fruits—Englishmen ought to be branded as slaves if they do not throw off the yoke which a proud landed aristocracy have pressed upon their necks.— (Immense cheering.) When we consider the great ness and universality of the cause now advocated, it is evident that the mercantile communitycannot throw off the yoke without their act being felt throughout the whole world. It will be felt not in this nation only —it will be felt throu g h a ll th e c i v ili se d na ti ons o f t h e world. Ties which link them in mutual union and interests, which bind them together, will be drawn closer, and more beneficially interwoven — commercial freedom will be " peace on earth and good will to men."—(Cheers.) The first step to this is th e a b o liti on o f t h e B r iti s h corn -l aw s. It is not true what has been asserted by our oppo nents, that we seek protection for certain branches of ma nu f ac t ure, an d t h at we w ill no t g ive it to agri culture. I deny the truth of this. , I, who am a representative of Manchester—the men of Man chester—the men of the greatest manufacturing town in the kingdom, desire no such thing. The merchants in the Chamber of Commerce in Manchester, and the petitions, all of them that have issued out thence, have prayed for the total abolition of the corn-laws, and of all restrictions on free trade.—(Cheers.) There is a gentleman, a Mr. Stuart, about to become the repre sentative of the constituency of Newark, the represen tative of the Duke of Newcastle—(Laughter)---who has said so much, namely, that those who demand free trade are seeking protection for themselves. I must tell that gentleman that it is not to be tolerated, after we have asserted so often that we seek the abolition of the corn-laws, free trade, and no protection—it is not to be tolerated that he should w r it e l etters, and g i v e the authority of his name to such statements Ile is, I iftelieve, a Chancery barrister of some practice ; this,however, is rather sharp practi ce; an d hi s b rief has not contained proper instructions. —(Laughter.) Mr. Gladstone, too, is leaving Newark.—(Laughter.) Whither he is going I do not know ; but if Sir Robert Peel make such a change in his policy as is rumoured at present, the probability is that the League may have to find a seat for him.—(Laughter.) Mr. Gladstone, indeed, is the best man among them. As for Sir Robert Peel, he has been taught by a proper I preceptor—he has learned from experience ; in the Cabinet he is the best supporter of our cause. But, after all, it signifies little what Cabinet Councils may do, it is you, you only, with the aid of the people of this country, that must carry this question ; but you will not suc cee d if you s h ow t h e slightest flagging in your exertions to gain the point. If it were supposed that you had allowed yourselves to be lulled into a false security of success, the League would have for many years to continue in the struggle. But I know you must triumph— (Cheers)—l know the ' con test is between justice and oppression —between right and guilty privilege —and you must prevail. I. believe you will succeed in the present year else, and this hope I draw from the condition of the two parties. What is it ? On the side of the one party, on the side of protection, there is division ; on our side there is unity ; on our side there is confidence— on theirs, suspicion ; here, r e a son —th ere , pass i on ; here we have the use of experience and philosophy— there they are supported by none but those who have maintained feudal tyranny, and every abuse on the statute-book of the kingdom. Considering both parties in the contest, comparing their condition, there was everything to hope, and everything to stir energy and encourage perseverance till a triumph has been achieved.—The lion. Gentleman sai. down amid great and prolonged cheering. Mr. R. R. Moores then came forward, and said he would rather the chairman had allowed the meeting to break up after the closing of Mr. Gibson's address, for nothing more could be added to what had been said. If anything was necessary in addition, it was to urge them to continue their activity in increasing the number of free trade votes in Middlesex, ei:ast Surrey, and Hertfordshire. Middlesex was won-1,700 free trade votes had been gained in that county—but East Surrey and Hertford shire must be won. He recollected, in urging this upon them, that they had been charged by a Noble Duke with using unconstitutional means to gain their end. He had the best ground for denying that, and for retorting it upon the author and his party. The unconstitutional means which the nation had to com plain of, was the interference of the House of Peers with the representatives of the nation. It is not the League, but the other party that boasted of the power they had in returning a representative, and the num ber of farmers they could drive up to the poll.— (Hear, hear.) The Earl of Salisbury boasts his sway over Hertfordshire, the Duke of Richmond over Chichester and Sussex, Londonderry over Durham city and south Durham county. The Duke of Marl borough had had three representatives for Woodstock in two years, and two of them his own sons ; Newark was in the power of the Duke of Newcastle, where the majority of the voters are free traders ; the Duke of Buckingham for Buckingham, Winchester, and Aylesbury ; the Marquis of Exeter for Stamford ; Lord Sandwich for Huntingdon ; Lord Egretnont for Midhur3t ; the Earl of Bathurst for Cirencester, and various other names that may be found in The Sun of the sth January. It i 3 this kind of tampering with the election of the people's representatives that must be put a stop to. The Duke of Richmond said the other day that the gentlemen of the Anti-Corn-law League threatened, and were determined to carry the elections by means of fabricated votes, and by no other means. Mr. Moore believed it was the Corn-law League which proposed such a course for themselves—that league in which is the Duke of Norfolk, and the Duke of Buckingham—meeting at 17, New Bond-street. Their only hope was by means of fabricated votes. They made uncon stitutional use of the register of this country. The agents of the Anti-Corn-law League had gone and taken the register, and purged it of the fabricated votes put on it in favour of protection. One man in Highgate claimed a 405. freehold. Where was it ? In the churchyard.—(Laughter.) Who was the tenant there that paid rent ? He was struck off. Nor had they restricted their doings with the regis tration to this ; they Lad taken care to have many recorded of the right kind, and in the legal way, to all of which the other party had opportunity of objecting. Yet, though that party had a right to expenses had they been successful against them, from all those recorded in Middlesex they had got but 21. of expenses. He (Mr. Moore) hoped many would continue to apply at 67, Fleet. street, with a view to qualification as freehold voters. For 561. they could have a 405. freehold, and thereby re ceive four per cent. for their money, be sides the opportunity they had of benefiting the country. The League had not spent their 100,0001., and their 50,0001. of the year before, in giving free holds gratis—they had used that money in spreading abroad right information among the people on the great question occupying their atten tion, and on the means of qualification as voters. There was some talk of compensation with the other party. Compensation, continued the speaker, to those who, in spite of a petition signed by the citizens of London in one day to the amount of 44,000, enacted that law ! Compensation to the men who rode down the poor people assembled at Peterloo in 1819 to peti tion for the repeal of this law ! Compensation to those who have oppressed industry for thirty-one years ! Was there ever such an instance of audacity heard of before ? Do you imagine that any men will be found to stand up in the House of Commons and ask for compensation ? That there can be any serious idea of putting in such a claim ? Do they come forward and say, " You gave twenty millions to the slaveholders to take their grasp off their fel low-creatures, give us something to let their bread be free," we reply, do you want to stand in the same category with the slaveholder ? We have re viewed our verdict as to that grant. We say that that twenty millions should have been given to the slave.—(Loud cheers.) It should have been taken not from our purses to be given to the slaveholder, but from the pockets of the slaveholders to be given to the men whom they had wronged. These protec tionists talk of compensation ; we tell them to be content ; that we ask for nothing but forgetfulness of the past, and the total and immediate abolition of the law. If they speak of compensation, we will tell them to go over to our penal colonies, and see if they cannot find some men there whom poverty and hunger, the result of the scarcity of food made by those laws, tempted in the beginning to that criminal course which ended in their transportation to a penal colony. We ask if they can compensate them—if they can bring them home, and restore them to the situa tion they held, before want drove them into a course that ended so lamentably ? We will ask them to go and look at our Gazette for the last thirty years, since they enacted this law,and trace the history of those merchants, shopkeepers, manufacturers, and others whose names are inserted there, and find out which of them has been broken down struggling for independence, in spite of the most heroin endurance, perseverance, and industry, by the crippling of trade, the result of these laws. Who can compensate them? We will tell them to go into our orphan asy lums, and try if they cannot find some children there whose parents were worn out before their time by want, from endeavouring to work when they had not food enough to sustain them in their anxiety for the support of their families, and let them try if they can compensate those children for the loss of their parents. We will tell them to go into okir union workhouses, and endeavour to find old men and women there scarcely knowing whether they have a friend on earth left to protect them, left with out home in their old age, notwithstanding they had worked hard in their youth to earn an honest inde pendence, who had a right to expect it from their work in their old days. We ask them to look if there are no young persons in those workhouses brought down to that by the perpetually crushing effect of these corn-laws, and we will tell them to compensate them. When they have done all that, let them go out over the broad land into those counties where they keep their agents ever busy at work on the register; let them go oat into the neighbourhood of the boroughs which these Noble Lords influence — into the counties of Dorset, Devon, Norfolk, Suffolk, to Essex, Hants, and Wilts, and tell -us if there are not whole sets of farmers who have been swept off farm after farm, having agreed to give high rents, believing that the corn-law would enable them to realise such prices as would enable them to pay those rents by pressing the whole population down ; and let them tell us if these parties can be compensated ? Then let them take the climax of the whole—let them go out amongst their own agricultural labourers---" a bold peasantry, their country's pride"—the labourers whose health they drink—the labourers to whom they give prizes for rearing their families upon the least possible amount of provision —the labourers that they are for ever talking of as if they were their especial fa vourites—to go into their wretched hovels that do not keep the wind and rain out—and let them go amongst the 500 or 600 labourers amongst whom the beds were distributed, which were subscribed for by the free traders in Wiltshire, Dorsetshire,Hampshire, Oxford shire, and elsewhere—let them go into the cabins of their own peasantry and see how they live— let them recollect that much of the anxiety felt at the present moment is on account of the rot amongst the potato crop. It is proved that five I millions of agricultural labourers, four millions in Ireland, and one in this country, live upon potatoes, and are likely to starve in consequence of the failure of the crop. How do they propose to compensate these labourers ? Can they compensate men for years of unrequited toil ? Can they compensate men who have grown old before their time, working while it was daylight from year's end to year's end, and living, after all, on nothing better than pig's food— potatoes ?—(Cheers.) Can these protectionists com pensate these injured men ? Let them talk of com pensation ! There is a dark and heavy account of responsibility lying at the doors of those who maintain the corn-law. If they speak of compensation—if they retard the repeal by one day's debate for compensation, ------- of I tell you what m us t be done. The la bourers. Wiltshire must again meet at Goqtacr e aft e r day's work, and IRA only have their speeches repo7l, but choose delegates t o their class in oth er egrlG tural counties—the twelve or thirteen counti es t h e t h e which the Rev. Sid ne y Godolphin Osbo rne, Hanover Rooms, said they were in the sam e condlyt_, We must have delegates from the labourers in 'l; one of these countie s , marching up to London, etloro ing audience of Sir Robert Peel, and appearing 'lee, him to refute the assertion that the corn-law has. „of for their benefit. It is the first time a agricultural labourers in Downing-street must ke, 6 10 coming to ask their own, demanding from the Kr i ,a Minister that, living upon God's bountiful and ble ss ,. earth, they should have as much of its bountifal duction as their own strong arms, hard hands, r ep , willing minds could earn for them. I caution t 1 : 00. Protectionists, let them not talk about comPen s ; a t of WV, between the present time and the rnee tle 'th Parliament— between this and the end of this ta ° to —you have a great responsibility thrown on Y °ll o o protect the interests of these labourers. I t T r be with you to stand by them. The duty Sir depu tatio; 3o m thrown more closely on you. It may be 0 11- if Robert Peel canno t carry his measure, or thatlespa attempt ng re i some measu short of the wh ole ' Oil that he t h be defeated. I trust in that case tbsti.ich country is ready for the awful responsibility 700 will be cast upo n it.—(H ear .) I b e li e ve that L anue two. ready to return f our f ree t ra d ers , an d Middlesex tb, I cannot but believe that by the 31st of J enag ob registers of East S urre y an d Hertford will be ia the o a position as that those two places betvvel A ; br will be ready to ret urn fi ve f ree traders. " - old lieve that this new year will be the brighte st le happiest that England has h a d for a long t i de' Thirty-one years ago there was joy in EurnPar s , bo• one potentate was overthrown. There was A J„ ° e stell , cause he who was opposed to England w 53 rda and because there had been more men 1)0 0 side of their opponents than had been kiael f tl iol their own side. Now there was better cause iv o yiloo approaching. There was a m o r e important noolil at issue. It was whether thi s great country cease to he nursed and spoon-fed by M r- 01 10 c biiter omi e n s o t ris They could not watch with too A i to the coming eve n t s . Th ey looked f °rW t* e the time when they s h ou ld get free trade as t " he' from which every man s h ou ld b e a bl e t o fia l i re n e rieor t • live. They looked for war d t o t h e to t a l and ~;00 LP ditional repeal of the corn-l aws . N o less - would be sufficient.—(Loud cheers.) t . ; „ g , tia! Mr. WlLsobt then announced to the mee ago.; the meetings of the League would be more tr, than they had been hitherto, and that the next likely be held on that night fortnight. THE TWO FORTY-FIVO' A DRAMATIS SCENE. (From the Punch of this day.) DRAMATIS PERSON/E. d€0 10 ; 0 1 SEVENTEEN FORTY-FIVE. A rebellious old gen.- .9 EIGHTEEN FORTY-FIVE. A modern gentleman , h is son. SCENE.— The Past. 1 10i Enter 1845. (Years walking about. ).1:„) Seventeen Forty-Five. Welcome among 00: 4 , me to introduce you to a few of the famili( o l B , r Remarkable years, very.-1776, let me introo0.0011; —(Sotto voce) Year of the declaration of Mn er' Oa dependence—a headstrong rogue, not quite 00 se 1789, though, yonder ;—the year with the red „ ) 60; head, and that copy of " the Rights o f Man hies', out of his pocket. Don't allud e t o F ranc e before dead cut between him and 1830, that long-half Selo with " Glorious Three Days" on hi s h a t, and ja Bill" in large letters on the placard he carrie s hand. Eighteen Forty-Five. A very odd-looking e s t 141 feet Guys in the matter of dress ! of Seventeen Forty-Five. Revolutionary, mos t t he l $6 1 : in their notions. I prefer civil war myself. 1 : 13 : I li s j of the " Legitimists." The only one of the : ) ", 5 Iv x much to say to is 1815— o ld " H o l y Alliauce, t he fr him—though even ha has rather low notions o f rogttive. Great changes up above, eh ? Eighteen Forty-Five. Yes; I think things bat e for the better since your time, old gentleman. Oe 0 " . Seventeen Forty. Five. So every year has told I . walked out of the Present. How's Legitimal Eighteen Forty Five. At a discount, I fa lie i . DUKE OF BORDEAU X — , r Seventeen Forty-Five. H ENRY THE FIFT H' bop , please— -OPr Eighteen Forty-Five. Is th e p eg t o h an g ape lo on ; nothing more. for Seventeen Forty-Five. What ! none to figh t ises al Eighteen Forty-Five. Bless your stupid old Seventeen Forty-Five. Dear, dear—to th il3 s te h r things change ! Lord, I remember what 0 tint{ made for poor CHARLES EDW ARD ! How w e ibeC tined the Hanoverians ! 250,000/. wa s 50bt r ielei GARRAWAY'S for raising a regi m ent for the °` the City ! .40 9 11!) Eighteen Forty-Five. Ah I I b e gan to 250,0001. for a more peaceful revolution. I do Young '46 will have the cre dit o f th a t , t h e rasca l eir r a s Seventeen Forty-Five. I rememb er , as if 1 /$ 5l day, the 27th of Nov e mb er , w h en th e Cl ans brok e ° pi t ; the bridges over the Mers e y, an d marc hed if t o es ll chdster. How the poor w e a v i ng rogues packet' looms when the blue bonnets marched in. 0 0 ; Eighteen Forty-Five. The " weaving rogues,' te eh'd call them, have increased the wealth of England t of" and it is to them I owe the first instakeen 250,000/. 1 , Os Seventeen Forty-Five. Lord, Lord I To 1 11 they ran—with th e i r we b s on t h e i r b ac k s . h ip Eighteen Forty-Five. They would have Or° et fl carry off now, if another such visitation 5 13 ° 5 1 , 0, 4 '1 them. Square m il es o f mills—thousands riP.r°oll7 sands of tons of machinery—warehouses full°` t , 9g ° Seventeen Forty-Five. Only to think of than! What marching the Hi g hl an d ers h a d— suc h roa ° o ,, they did their twelve miles a day notwithstand ili ;ae i e Eighteen Forty-Five. Aid I'd h ave packed a ret i r , a railway train and w hi s k e d th em away at Siesta three hundred miles in the twelve hours. summed up all revolutions in itself. Seventeen Forty-Five. What's steam ? 13 1 !" Eighteen Forty-Five. Ther e ' s a question• tO explain that to y ou by- an d-b y . I mus t b e off - A N up my account. My b oo k s are p re tty well 01 00 1 11 0 though things look rather queer for the last me two. However, '46 may se ttl e a ll th a t, if he $ his business. Good morning, old gentleman. ,co [Exeunt iv" Ot EADVERTISEMENT.]—BAD LEGS AND •• n o f ALL KINDS SPEEDILY CURE D BY H oLLOWAY 's D og AND PILLs.—If these very valuable medicines be r bs tel 4 ther, according to th e di rec ti ons g i ven with them, oo,,ter case, however obstin a t e , b a d, or long-standing, bs;y0,"011 shortly cured by th e i r surpr i s i ng efficacy. Thealslords sons, who had been patients of large ho sp itals, 5 O" • in care of the greatest surgeons of the day, w ithout o `, least benefit, as a l as t resource use H olloway ' s 01 1 0 Pills, which always cure them, and frequently in s9 , 4 l o siir as a cut finge r wou ld requ i re w h en treate d i n t he to" e as Sold by all dru g gi s t s , an d a t P ro f essor H o ll o waY's went, 244, Strand, London. o i‘e lio THE DUKES—We understand that the Bedford, and one or two other Dukes, are about „ her Majesty for leave to lay aside their title for take a plain Mr., the Duke of Norfolk and O r ' o rtl Dukes having brought the nominal dignity into e ra bad odour. The Duke of Bedford has already ord er c h. . 0 0 card-plate, simply inscribed----" Mr. Russell."--P u , n i ro DEPOSIT.—A sum of money which one r„, et)! into the hands of another ; a piece of simelie" 13 , during the railway mania, became very general.o Roman law, the refusal to return a deposit Wa s ,g4 or with infamia, or infamy ; and in the present day t he " good deal of infamous conduct with reference t° fr return of the deposits.—Puneh. Ag e, THE BIS HOPRIC OF J ERUS ALFIL—The e t • Gazette publi s h es i nte l l i gence from Berlin, to the e . c ilsirpso the Prussian Government, which now has the P r i l asei , 00' appointing a P ro t estant bi s h op to t h e see o f Jer°; 3 oo o s 4 o ol made choice of M. Belson t o fill th a t pos t. g• toe.' ginally belonged to the Je w i s h p ersuas i on , but la braced Protestantism. clf BIRTHS. the o t.;h At Bellfielil, Cupar-Fife, on the 11th inst., U g h Lieut.-Col. Moncrieff, Scots Fusilier Guards, of fr WA' On the Ist inst., at Fl orence , i n T uscan y, to , le Campbell iicarlinsett, of a son. On the 13th t., at Duchess-street, Portland-r Slaughter, of a son. n ste d ' On the 13th in s t., a t H avers t oe k- p l ace , 1 - 11 111 Mrs. John M. Duffield, of a daughter. MARRIED Fr_ A • - • s iP y On the Ld ult., at Tyn e mo u th p ar i s h c hurch, self ft Jones, Esq., M.D., of Monk Seaton, near North,,eo Mary Ann, second daughter of William Davison, same place. b arle S On the 3d inst., at St. James's, Clerkenwell, C o f Woolley, of Pentonville, to Miss Eleanor Magro t O, 0' tl • ° street, Hackney. g lO On the 13th inst., at Paddington Church , Ch Colonel Vivian, lit Madras Fusiliers, to Emm a relict of the late Captain H. Gordon. John , On the 13th inst., at St. James's, Ratcl in, betii , Burnaby, Esq., of Asfordby, Leicester, to Ellg s daughter of the Rev. James Williams. DIED. On the Ist inst., in Liaden-street, Hamburgb' 0 5 widow of the late J. Strother, Esq. On the Bth inst., at East Grinstead, Sussex' otS'l Rogers, aired 70. r oe* 9 • On thelOth inst., M r . L ucas , so li c it or , o f PO. f 10 , On the 12th i ns t., Th omas , th e secon d son o Fisher, Blandford. Dorset. no io, On the 13th inst. at Camberwell, Alfred yrs son of Mr. H enr y Keene Smithers, jun. of surgeo n, On the 13th inst., M a tth ew Gi use ppi, o ee lb 13 ' street. rcIP On the 11th inst., at Sheffield, Charles son of C. Timm, Esq., M.D., of Bath. 1-4" -roscl, On the 12th inst., at Tredegar-square, At see 11 Jonas, Esq., aged 61. of G re On the 12th inst., Robert Stewart, Esq. , street. of2 4s O tr • On the 12th inst., Mr. Peter King Duncan:, a o fi lo" On the 12th inst., Mr. H. Bramley, l a te of (i_ vid On the 13th inst., in Wimpole-street, Dad sae, " Esq., M.D., F.A.S., aged 69. „. J° 05 On the 13th inst., :it Kingston-upon -I ' a o o o e Cate wife of Alexander G. Pmley, E On the 14th inst, at Sise- s la q. ne, Alice Mary' daughter of A. B. Braudram, Esq. ~~ *IOW , oI f London: Printed an d P u bli sh ed by M- - gica, of Ne. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun o to Co Strand, in the rveoinet of the Savoy, ,I tt Middlesex, Thar, lay, January Os 11/4v. ke gs De von The; 1 14; 11 tit*, ' 4 14 .'et