The Sun. — London, England, 1844-07-04 00:00:00

- 4 ' Gh,IND WEEKLY ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE MEETING AT COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE The usual weekly meeting of the Anti-Corn-law League was held yesterday evening at Covent-garden Theatre. The meeting was very numerous, and the greatest order seemed to prevail. Amongst those present we noticed the following : George Wilson, Esq., in the Chair ; Hon. Charles Pelham Villiers, Esq., M.P., Richard Cobden, 75q. M.P., John Bright, Esq., M.P., Benjamin smith, Esq., M.P., Major-General Robertson, Pro t ssor Key, Colonel Tucker, Dr. Tucker, Messrs.W. Power, J. W. Griffin (Paisley), J. Howorth (Roch dale), J. Angae, Jacob Angas, Summers Harfori, Stainforth (Hull), B. Metcalf (Liverpool), Thos. Lattimore (Wheathampstead), Robert Hobbs, Chas. Mackay, Joseph Limey, W. Geesin, Edwards, 11. Moore, Crawford Burkitt, Benjamin Thorne, S. Lucas, W. A. Wilkinson, P. A. Taylor, J. Gadsby, 0 . . P. Burnard, Francis Stokes, Jarvis, Thomas Clark, jun. (Birmingham), Press Granger, W. J Blow, Samuel Grafftey, A. Baner (Man chester), Richard Ware Cole, S. A. Smith, • Crabbie (Leith), George Blanshard, H. L. Keeling, J. T. Campart, G. F. Minton, -- Wilson, J. Chal rier3, Charles W. Cobby, Patrick M‘Gregor, George 33eacon, J. Ridge. George Wilson, Esq., took the chair at half-past seven o'clock. The minutes of the last meeting having been con tlrmed, The CHAIRMAN came forward and was received gteith loud cheers. He said he apprehended there evere few there who were not aware that the mono dists in the House oT Commons, true to themselves aed their own interests, had again succeeded in es tAelisbing their peculiar claims to the gratitude and admiration of their fellow-countrymen.--(Hear, hear, tnd laughter.) On Wednesday last they had, by a majority of 202, decided upon the maintenance and continuance of the corn-laws. He knew not whether .any one present had expected a different result, but he confessed, looking to the party who composed a majority of the House, and knowing that they were the men who a few years ago sat by whilst mono poly' Was doing its work, he had no expectation that _they would he found now giving their support to those just principles which they sought to see estab lished. However, he rejoiced to see that they were not en strong as they formerly were, and that there was a strong tide setting in in another direction.—(Hear, heir.) Last year the monopolists voted 381, this ear they voted 330, having lost 51.--(Hear, hear.) but it might be asked " Where is the proof of your rogress in the House—this year you voted 126 and hat year you voted the same number ?" Here was the proof it. In 1842, when Mr. Villiers put the total and unconditional repeal prin ciples in issue in the House of Commons, but 92 voted with him on that occasion, and 395 voted against him, the majority forming considerably more than one-half the whole House. On the present occasion, his minority was increased 34, and the Illajority against him was reduced 65, leaving them shorn of the majority they had in 1842 by 100.— (Near, hear.) But, though the Members who voted with Mr. Villiers on this occasion were the same in amount with the number who voted with him last year, they had -28 new votes in favour of the motion. —(Hear, hear.) Besides 32 of those who supported him in 1842 were absent, but their opinions were still the same they were at that time.—(Hear.) Thus the titrength of his party was near 170.—(Hear, hear.) And it ought to be understood that this was the same House of Comte - tons which was elected especially and epecifically to maintain the corn-laws.--(Hear, hear.) There was no general electiOn, and they had no :neaps of operating on the House except by reason and argument, yet within two years they found those who supported the motion had increased considerably, and the majority of their opponents had been reduced upwards of sixty-five.—(Hear, hear.) He would ask any one to point out another question which had made such progress, which was not a party question, sand not supported by the great leaders in the House. —(Hear, hear.) Whatever the Ilouse of Commons might have been in 1841, every one knew it was now considerably behind public opinion.—(llear, hear.) how did he prove that? Why, by asking ;here to turn their eyes to their own city. One of the Mem teen for the City of London voted for the motion, two voted against it, and the fourth ran away.— (Cheers and hisses.) Yet, was there any one there hold enough to affirm that any of those, except Mr. Pettison, had conveyed the opinion of the City of London ?—(Hear, hear, and vehement cheers.) But more than this, a majority of the constituencies of eleven Members who voted au '' ainAt the motion re quested their representatives to support it.—(Hear, hear.) Adding those e'even to the 170 who supported him it would be found that his friends had more than doulde l in the House of Commons.—(Hear, hear.) '111 , 4r majority was, however, still strong, but it was a diminishing one.—(Hear, heat.) An littendan,e of twelve months at the registry would he sufficient to strip it away—(Hear, hear)—and there was enlugh of energy and spirit on the part of the people of this country to secure a victory when another elec ti,.in occurred. —(Cheers ) Mr. VILLIERS th , n came forward, and was re , eiv , d with loud cheers. He said that the Chairman had in. f:rrned them of what, no doubt, they were aware of before, that since the last meeting which took place in that house for the purpose of considering the corn laws, he had been at that house where those laws were made, for the purpose of making his an nual inquiry from its authors upon what grounds either of justice, wisdom, or humanity they c:euld defend the existence of them, and to ask them whether they had any fresh expe rience, circumstances, or reason of any kind which they could allege as a set-off against the mass of misery, and mischief which annually sprang from those laws.—(Hear, hear) He came before them at the reqUest of the Chairman, and, notwithstand ing the - contemptuous reference which had been made to those meetings by Sir R. Peel—(Groans) — out of respect to those who assembled there, to show their sympathy with the sufferings of the people, in order to convey to them his impression of the result of the recent discussion and division on the question of the corn-laws—(Loud cheers) — and he would say at once that he never had less reason to be discouraged on the subject in his lire at that result--(Hear, hear)—for it had exceeded his numt sanguine expectations. The motion was brought forward under very adverse circumstances, and he was not prepared for that impression being made on - the constituencies, and thereby on the members, which had pi-educed so large a minority in behalf of the mo tion he proposed. But it might be collected from the organs of the monopolists in Parliament and in the preSs a that they considered the result of thatdiscussion as most satisfactory to them and disastrous to the League. But about that, he had something to say. Those who represented the friends of scarcity in the House 0: Commons--(Cheers)—expressed their satisfaction at the speech of the President of the Board of Trade. They hailed that speech with joy and surprise, and the peculiar value of it, was as they expressed it, in its honeety.—(Latighter.) That seemed to have taken them by surprise; but the honesty of it, as far as they could collect was, that as far as he had power, and as long as he lived, he would stick by the sliding scale. Now, it was curious to find that any of the party should have faith i n any o f th e present - Ministry ; because, when Sir Robert Peel solemnly promises that he will not abandon them, some sarcastic friend gets up and says that he had another corn-law in his pocket.—(Laughter.) And on what grounds they had more faith in the young statesman Mr. Gladstone, he was at a loss to know, for as far as he (Mr. Villiers) knew he was not of that stuff of which martyrs were made.—(Laughter.) Great consolation was derived from the division, and the organ of the monopolists in the House of Peers, in the person of his Grace of Richmond, told his friends the tenants at will that they might now renew their engagements, and expect the Act of Parliament price, because the majority had greatly increased against the repeal of the corn-laws, and probably some . persons would be found foolish enough to follow his advice. What was the fact ? Why, twenty-eight men, who never before voted for the total repeal had voted for it on this occasion f— (Hker.) Then they had the organs of those luminaries in the press so satisfied with the result, that they did not occupy themselves with the question whether this debate had been a failure or not, but they entered into a rather curious inquiry ; and the Morning Ir s . ridd—(A laugh) —engaged itself to the extent of two columns as to what had killed the League, and why it was-that the people loved protection.—(Laughter.) He was not able to understand exactly how they ar rived at the conclusion they had come to, but they came to the conclusion that it was owing to Sir R. Peel's measures, which were of so comprehensive a character that they settled every questioa. —(Laughter.) They say that the agriculturists might now be at rest, as the question was now settled. Now, that seemed to him, if he might venture to differ from so venerable a personage, to be somewhat doubtfetl.—(Laughter.) What reason was there for supposing that the great agricultural question was settled, or that the Government had done anything or intended to do anything to settle it ? Those who sup ported the Government, said the question was settled, because the Minister had said that he would stick to the eliding scale, and that the principle of protec tion should b e a dh ere d to. N ow , h e maintained that was not enough for the Minister to declare. There was another condition neoessary to give assurance to the effrieulturista, and that was, that the public would stick to itink,gf ear , h e ar, and cheers.) Unless they did soitie itiokin to the sliding ecele ' would not do much good, for it was very possible, nay, very probable, that they would sink together.— (Cheers.) Now, what was the state of the case ? Public parties were not now much united upon any mat ter, but if there was any one thing in which they were more united than another, it was in hostil' y to the sliding scale. The commercial classes generally were not very united, but they were united in their hosti lity to the sliding scale. The Liberal party in Par liament were not united on many points, but even Lord John Russell himself, who was not a friend to the League, and who the other night had been cross with them because, a few nights before they had crossed him on the question of the sugar duties ; even Lord John Russell said, that as long as the sliding scale existed, agitation was not only excusable, but it was commendable.— (Loud cheers.) There was not a single man who was likely to be a member of the next Government, who was in favour of a sliding-scale.—(Cheers.) Now the present Government was not so strong as it had been.—(Cheers.) If they asked any man they met in the street what he thought of it, be would tell them he thought it was going.—(Cheers.) Every one thought that it was tottering, and that it was very shakey—(A laugh)—that it could not go on for any long time. Now why was this so ? It was impossi ble to deny that such was the fact; and it was very much to he attributed to those meetings, by which expression had been given to the public opinion of the country. Public opinion would not any longer tole rate monopoly. It insisted upon its abolition. The tide of public opinion had set in against monopoly. The present Ministry were aware of this, and while on the one hand they dreaded to outrage public opi nion by openly supporting monopoly, on the other hand they feared to offend their friends by attacking it. They feared to run counter to public opinion, and when they acted in accordance with it they ran the risk of irritating their friends ; and as long as they remained in office there would be a constant recur rence of those family jars which had so nearly upset them the other day. If they inquired of the agricul turists, they would inform them that the farmers had never before been left in such an unsettled state. Such was the complaint of every man connected with agriculture, and the man was a fool who, upon the faith of the continuance of the present law, would invest any money in improvements, or would lay out capital upon the faith of the present law continuing, and the present prices being obtained. The agricul turists said they never were in a worse position ; they would prefer anything to it; they would rather have total repeal, free trade—anything, rather than things should be left in their present unsettled state. They were perfectly convinced that while the law remained in its unsettled state, they were more injured than benefited by it. If they read the debates on this subject, in the Lords and the Commons, and what was said by their organs in the press, they would find that when those parties said they considered the ques tion as settled, there had not been any question which was more unsettled. This was a great encouragement to them to proceed, and afforded them good ground for hoping that they should succeed if they perse vered. The agriculturists saw nothing but the prospect of change before them. Either the Government would be turned out, or their friends would turn found. Why the Government might be turned out every day; and if they continued in office, and turned round by a judicious distribution of stars and places, they might at any time alienate the friends of the agriculturists from the cause. They were only eager to seize an opportunity of being re conciled to Sir Robert Peel. The recent discussions in the Houses of Parliament had shown their weakness and impotence. As compared with the free-traders, they were weak indeed. They had no spokesman among them, who could come forward and give rea sons which would bear discussion, for supporting this law. They trusted entirely in Sir Robert Peel, and were glad to do whatever he told them. Now this fixed upon Sir Robert Peel the responsibility of main taining this law.—(Cheers.) They had been blamed for advocating what were called violent measures, such as total and immediate repeal.—(Hear hear.) Now let them look at the history of this corn-law, and see what encouragement there was to bring forward moderate propositions. It was in the year 1827 that Mr. Canning first pro posed the sliding-scale. At that time, as at present, there were three parties in the House of Commons, those who were in favour of an entire prohibition of the import of corn, those who were in favour of a sliding scale, and those who were against all mono poly. In 1827, when Mr. Canning first proposed the sliding scale, a gentleman representing the district which he (Mr. Villiers) hed now the honour to re present, Mr. Woolryche Whitmore, was opposed to the sliding scale, and rose to express his doubts as to the advantages accruing which its proposer expected to derive from it. Now, how had that gentleman been received at the time ? He turned to "Hansard," and he found it there state'', that the Honourable Member was proceeding to state hi= objections, when ho was interrupted by loud and general coughing —he waited for some time until the noise had somewhat subsided when he said that if he had proposed counter-resolutions there might have been some reasons for refusing to hear him—(Re newed coughing)—but he merely wished to state hs opinion that the evils of the present system would not be alleviated by the sliding seale.—(Coughing.) Now that was the way in which a gentleman was treated who ventured to express a doubt as to the merit: of the sliding scale. Mr. Whitmore had been followed by a gentleman with whose name the , y were no doubt all familiar, he meant Sir Edward knetch hull.—(A laugh.) He had no doubt but that Sir E. Knatchbull had not suppressed his cough, if he hap pened to be suffering from one during the speech of the former speaker. Sir E. Knatchbull had stated that he was of a different opinion from the Honourable Gentleman, that the question before the House was a most important question, it was whether the importa tion of food should be entirely prohibited, or whether it should be permitted on paim - ent of a certain duty : for his part, he thought the importation of corn ough to be entirely prohibited. He stated that he had heard with horror the declaration of Mr. Canning, that this measure was an approximation towards free trade, and he trusted that the House would never accede to such doctrines. That Bill had passed the House of Commons, but it had been thrown out of the [louse of Lords by the prohibition party, with the Duke of Wellington at their head, and the party had so attacked Canning, that they had worried him to death—the session had hardly closed before he had expired. He had been succeeded in office by his opponents, and in the year following they also had proposed a sliding-scale, which the year before they had exposed. This was in 1828, and on that occasion Mr. Woolriche 'Whitmore had opposed the :Ministe rial sliding scale, and had proposed another in opposi tion to it as an amendment. Now what was the scale which Mr. Whitmore had then proposed ? Why the very scale which Sir Rohert Peel had proposed the other day. Now Mr.Whitmore had been attacked in the most violent manner for this proposition—he had been stigmatised as the enemy of the agricultural interest had been told that the ruin of the interest must be the consequence of the adoption of his motion, and on a division 383 had voted against it, and only 50 for it. Now that was an encouragement to moderation, and it con firmed him in his determination to ask for nothing less than total and immediate repeal. In 1833 and 1834 motions on the subject of an alteration in the corn-laws had been treated in the same sort of way. In 1837 a change had been proposed from a sliding scale to a fixed duty—that motion had been rejected, and on that occasion the majority had been greatcr and the minority less than it had been to next year, when he had proposed total and immediate repeal.— (Cheers.) In 1838 he had proposed as a measure of justice the total and immediate repeal of the corn- laws.—(Cheers.) There was a majority of 300 against that motion, although he had so framed it as to enable every person who disapproved of the existing system to vote in its favour; for although he had argued in favour of total repeal, he had only moved for a Committee. In 1839 he had proposed the same motion, and the majority had been diminished to 147 ;in 1840, he had proposed the same motion, and the ma jority had diminished to 123, but at that time the Anti-Corn -law League was in active operation, and their energy in diffusing information on the subject had tended much to reduce the majority on the question. The majority, which, in 1838, had been 300, had been, in 1840, reduced to 123. At that time the Ministry became convinced that the sufferings of the people were to be attributed to the continuance of the system of monopoly, and they pro posed measures for putting an end to it. On those measures they were defeated, and the present Go vernment came forward as the supporters of monopoly. Who could forget the calumnies, the misrepresenta tions, the falsehoods, which were had recourse to at the last election to make the people believe that monopoly was for their benefit ? It was impossible, without being disgusted, to consider the system which was then pur sued to induce the people to believe that monopoly was for their advantage, and that the free traders were their enemies. Now what happened in the session of 1842 ? Sib R. Peel was fain to yield to public opinion, and he proposed the tariff, and the new corn-law. Every principle that the free traders had contended for was admitted by the monopolist Ministry. They admitted that • the doctrines of free trade were true—they admitted that persons ought to buy In the cheapest and sell in the dearest market—(Hear) — they admitted that abstractedly monopoly was wrong,. and free trade was right.—(Cheers.) Now that principle having been acknowledged, he brought forward his motion for the repeal of this most mur derous law. This law had produced all the evils of which the country complained. He had moved in 1842 for the total repeal of the corn-law, and his motion had been rejected by a majority of 304. In 1843 he had repeated the motion, and the majority against it had been reduced from 300 to 256; and on the last OCClid01 1 ) tite rujolity Tras reduted from 256 to 204. —(Cheers.) Now that certainly proved that the question had made progress, and he trusted the time was not far distant when this atrocious law would be abolished.—(Loud cheers.) He found that, on the last division, there was no Liberal Member who had been returned for a city or borough, with the exception of the Member for Carlisle, who had voted against the motion. With reference to the arguments which had been used on that occasion, he would observe that he had not been content to propose his resolutions for repealing the corn law, without stating in those resolutions his reasons for making such a proposition. He had therefore proposed a series of resolutions, stating the present dis tressed and destitute condition of the popula tion of this country—the fact that such population was increasing, without any in creased means of subsistence, and stating also that their present destitute cond;tion was to be attri buted to the want of food, and that, therefore, the laws which prohibited the importation of that food of which they stood in need ought to be repealed. That it was unwise and unjust to prohibit by law the importation of the subsistence of the people. Now, how had these propositions been met ? Their oppo nents had not denied any one of his proposi tions. They had not denied that the peo ple were distressed.—(Hear.) They had not denied that distress increased as the numbers in creased. They had not denied that that distress was attributable to the want of a sufficiency of food. Thay had not denied that the corn-law prevented a free importation of food. He had shown this, and had challenged them to prove the contrary—that when the price of corn was dear, the labourer was badly off; and that when it was cheap, the lahourer was well off; and that when the la bourer was well off, the farmer prospered.—(Cheers.) The opponents of the question had not attempted to answer these propositions ; but instead they had spun a long yarn about the delinquencies of the Anti-Corn-law League. They did not deny that the people were suffering—they did not deny that the cause of the suffering was scarcity of food—they did not deny that the corn-law was intended to produce that scarcity. At length Sir Robert Peel rose to put things together, and to defend the present sys tem. He did not attempt to defend the law upon any principle of abstract right or justice, he did not deny the assertion of Lord Howick that the corn-law was a robbery, but he said that the corn-law was a part of the protective system, which, in fact, amounted to this, that because A, B, and C, robbed the public they should be permitted to rob it likewise. Now, Sir Robert said the corn =law ought to be maintained because of the peculiar burdens on the-land ; and what did they think was the burden, more particularly mentioned by the Premier? Why, the poor-rates. The fund which was raised for the purpose of relieving the po verty created by these very corn-laws was given as a reason for the continuance of those laws.—(Cheers.) Now, with regard to these rates, he had heard a landowner say in private, and their discourses in pri vate were very different from their discourses in public; a landowner had said to him, in private, that the poor laws did not press so much on the landowner as on other people, after all ; for, said he, we deal in food, and the poor-rates are levied from the tradespeople and the inhabitants of towns to purchase food for the, paupers.—(Cheers.) And then, said Sir Robert Peel, only think of poor Ireland. Only think of Sir R. Peel thinking of Ireland !—(Laughter.) One conse quence of the shutting up Mr. O'Connell was that Sir R. Peel could allude to Irelan.l on such an occasion. If Mr. O'Connell had been in the House, he, who had always consistently advocated the cause of the repeal of the corn-laws, would have told him that tho,e laws were not upheld for the benefit of Ireland. —(Cheers.) Why Mr. O'Connell had said on one occasion, in a county in Ireland, the landlords had attempted to get up a meeting to support the corn laws, and the farmers and peasantry had attended at it, and out-voted them.—(Cheers.) There was not a man who loved that county—not a man who under stood that country—not a man who had theinterest of that country at heart—who was not eager and anxious to repeal the corn-laws.---(Loud cheers.) The words were hardly out of Sir R. Peers mouth, before Mr. Sharman Crawford, the son and the n-phew of Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Sheil, voted for the repeal of the corn-laws.—([fear, hear.) Yet, this was all he had to say by way of reason or argu ment. There was another thing, lie said, hut that was a personality which had been often used against himself by his friends. He said, he really did not believe that the same men could be found, either in the commercial class or in any other class of the com mun:ty, who had advocated the total repeal of the corn-laws.—(Hear.) Why, that was the old state bit of abuse which had been used by everyb'dy against anybody, who did not agree with him. Why, he himself had been called mad for bringing forward certain measures over and over again. In the case of the Currency Bill, for instance, madness had been attributed to him by many persons. He wanted to know what right he had to call persons mad because they felt it to be their duty to advocate the repeal of the corn-laws. He ventured to say that the Right lion. Baronet knew no more of agriculture than the man in the moon.—(Laughter.) What right had he, then, to tell Lord Ducie, who took the chair be other night, that he was a madman ?—(Hear, hear.) The man ought to know something of agri• culture who made such a declaration. Lord Ducie was acknowledged on all hands to be the best and the most scientific practical farmer in the country; and yet, being a landlord himself, he declared that the total repeal of the corn-laws was essential to the best interests of the landlords, as well as those of the rest of the community. Then, as to the safety of such a measure, what reason had he to tell them that such men as Mr. Jones Loyd and the Marquis of Westminster had not sufficient stake in the country to be able to judge of the importance of this measure ?—(Hear, hear.) They were men with a little property, those two. —(Laughter.) They had come to years of dis cretion, and he thought they might be trusted in this matter. These two men had come forward in the most prominent manner, and declared that the repeal of the corn-laws was not only a just measure but a wise one, for they had given that proof of sincerity which men usually did when they felt interested in a cause, they had contributed largely to the funds. Why, then, should they be told that all who recom mended or voted for the total repeal of the cora-laws were insane?—(Hear, hear.) Why, it was the strong part of their case, that there never was a measure b ought before the public which was fortified by so much authority as the repeal of the corn-laws. They had same of the most reflecting, some of the most wealthy, some of the most influential persons in the country on their side ; and let not Sir Robert Peel imagine that a flippant reference to the sanity or insanity of those who advocated their cause would prevent them from continuing such advocacy.— (Cheers.) It had been stated over and over again by their opponents that the bringing forward of this question in the House was a waste of the public time. Now, he would ask them to turn over in their minds the measures which occupied the public time in the House of Commons. Why even those which had some interest attached to them were branches of this great question ; they were in reality attempts to botch up some of the evils which flowed from the corn-law. What was the Factory Bill ? The Factory Bill had occupied a considerable portion of time. That Bill was a mode of preventing persons who were en gaged in factories from working so long as they were led to do by the hard necessities of their condition. Why, would it not he better to repeal that law which brought about such a state of things ?—(Cheers.) What, again, was the Poor-law Bill ?—a Bill which was thought to be of so much importance, that it would probably occupy the attention of the House of Commons for the remainder of the month ? Why, it was actually a measure to mitigate some of the evils of the existing law, because such an unexpected amount of distress existed, that some mitigation of it was absolutely unavoidable. —(Hear, hear.) But now, what was the great question which they were anxious to press upon the attention of the Legislature ? Why, it was the question of the condition of the people of England—of the best means of alleviating it. Was it not monstrous, then, to postpone this great question, in order to avoid discussing the monstrous conse quences of the eorn-law ? The Currency Bill was another important measure ; and, by the bye, that measure was recommended to Sir Robert Peel by this very man, whom he therefore considered insane. —(Hear, hear.) That measure was recommended by Mr. Jones Loyd, whom he considered stark staring mad, for advocating the repeal of the corn laws. Everybody said that the Currency Bill was his measure. The great recommendation of the measure, as propounded by Sir Robert Peel, was that it would prevent those great revulsions in commerce which had before occurred. He believed that it was utterly impossible to prevent such revulsions.—(Hear, hear.) The gold would go out just as much under the Bank Charter Bill as it had done before, and the same results would follow.—(Hear hear.) He only mentioned these Bills to show that they were not wasting the public time by directing the attention of the House of Commons to the great question of this country, the question of the corn-laws. The great point to be considered was, how to improve the condition of the means of the people. the country generally was in a healthy state, but whilst the mass of the people were increas ing in numbers and intelligence, they were suffering the greatest distress, and this state of things was not consistent, he maintained, with the continued security of their institutions.—(Hear, hear.) There was no reason to despair of the progress of their cause. They had contributed much by assembling there to form and influence public opinion ; and as long as public opinion was allowed to be expressed freely in this country, it was impossible that it should not have great influence.—(Cheers.) He repeated they had no reason to despair. They must not mind the cowardice, the baseness, or the meanness, of other persons, but do their own duty. had referred the other night to what had been done by the Legislature with respect to the slave trade. H e had since learnt that, within forty years, Mr. Pitt had been beaten by a majority of 80 on that ques tion, on the ground that the change ought to be moderate and gradual. How would the House of Commons act if that question were now brought before them ?.---(Hear, bear.) They had abundant proof that the corn-law was an abundant source of misery, and th-y were bound, therefore, to d o a ll i n their power to procure its abolition as a nuisance and calamity, by which the country was grievously afflicted.—(Cheers.) round to these custsmers, and demands payment, but the linen draper says, oh, your cotton v'as f.' t ' tk frailer texture than was agreed for—the colours have turned out fugitive. I expected to get such prices, and have not realised them—l have lost by the transaction." Suppose the traveller to h e the-land lord, why he would in that case say, oh, it may he perfectly true that you have lost, and that you have had a had bargain, but petition the House of Com mons to appoint a Committee to 1 nquire into this subject.—(Great laughter.) .And, following up the simile, if the former demurred the traveller (or agent) would tell the linen draper, in case he persisted in refusal " You must pay Cobden every farthing, for there is an Act of Parliament which em powers us to levy a distress upon your goods, and until the last shilling be paid no other creditor can be satisfied.—(hear, hear.) Did they think linen drapers would thrive upon such treatment as that ? Would they not find themselves where farmers had frequently found themselves—in the hands of the auctioneer ?—(Hear, hear.) He should never despair of the Lola fide tenant-farmers; they would find out at last how they had been bamboozled, and how they had been diverted by their landlords from the real grievances which affected them, and confused with a hocua pocus of Acts of Parini meat.--(Hear, hear.) But what did the landlord now ask the tenant to do? Was it to petition Parlia ment to reform or redress existing evils—to consider their condition with the view of bettering it ? No such thing, but to keep things exactly where they were. It was acknowledged on all hands that great distress at present existed in the agricultural districts, that there were large numbers of able-bodied men ueemploved there, and standin g a t corners o f roa d s looking for work , or filling gaols or union work houses—the farmers oppressed beyond endurance by the weight of the taxes and the poor-rates ; and yet in this state of things the landlord had the auda city to ask the farmer and the farm labourer to peti tion Parliament to keep things, as they were.—(Hear, hear.) Was it not a shameful imposture to tell farmers that they should persevere in a course that would in fallibly lead to their own downfal?—(Renewed cries of " Hear, hear.") It was said that he (Mr. Cob ben) had not the voice of the farmers. Well, all he could say was, that in Dorsetshire and in other places where he attended meetings, large numbers of the farmers were present, and great numbers of the mechanics resident in country towns. Many of the farmers held up their hands in favour of tree trade opinions. All the mechanics did. The landlords, in a recent discussion, would not admit that the opinion of the artisans should be taken as any indication of those of the farmers, yet in the same breath they stated that in considering the question of the corn "To keep his courage up." laws, not only th e f armers s h ou l d he considered, but those mechanics and artisans who lived in towns should be considered likewise. There was one ot lv , r Whence the necessity for these assertions ? Why had and who were dependent upon the farmers for bread, argument which he did not expect to hear even from the landlords found out, on a sudden, that the far- should Duke.—(Laughter.) A Noble Duke told them mers were with them ? It must have arisen, he sup that the Anti-Corn-law League wanted to reduce the price of corn in order to reduce the price of wr'::' , ; posed, from some doubts pervading their minds as to whether the farmers were really hoodwinked and and that when the price of corn was high. wages blinded by their professions.—(Hear, hear.) But when they told him that the farmers—that the tenant-farmers, rose spontaneously to form the Anti- were high ; and when corn was low io Tiricp usage were likewise low. Well, he (Mr. Cotelen) mint League Associations, he told them there, in the most public place in the world, that what they said was not say, that he did not expect to hear this statement thrown out and falsified as it true, and that they knew it was not true.—(Cheers.) He did not wish to be offensive, and, therefore, he had been, even in the House of Lords. But that truly no bl e an d patr i ot i c peer L or d R a d nor would only say it was not true in a logical sense. He said it was not true, and he would prove it by reference had shivered these idle arguments to atoms.—(Lord to facts. He would take the meeting at which his cheers.) It did require considerable moral courage Grace the Duke of Rich mon d attended at Steynin g, in such a n a t mosp h ere as the House of Lords, to in Sussex. He knew something of Sussex, and ha meet those misst a t emen t s ; but Lord Radnor, in the fearlessly asserted that the meeting was got up by most clever and concise manner, put the extinguisher the aristocracy and squirearchy of Sussex. — (Hear.) upon the Noble Duke.—(Loud cheers.) He told If they themselves did not go round and canvass the Duke what was an axiom, and what should their tenants, their agents and land-surveyors did, be always borne in mind—that, if labour sunk and the tenants wore canvassed and pressed to come so low that • man could not subsist, or less to that meeting in just the same manner as than the price of that labour, the price of they were canvassed at a general election; nay, labour could have nothing to do with the more, the carriages, the horses, the vehicles, down price of corn, for if the latter sunk lower still in even to the deer-cart, were put at the disposal of the price, the labourer would infallibly be starved. When farmers, to carry them up to Steyning. — (Cheers.) labour reached the minimum of value, the labourer What he said of the meeting at Steyning he asserted of was treated as a horse—a fixed quantity of bread was almost every other meeting, purporting to be spon- apportioned for his use—if it were dear, as in scarce taneous, which had been held in opposition to the years, the complement would be still the same—just League. The tenant-f armers were moved by th e the same sum of money to be e x p en d e d i n oa t s whe landlords. They were canvasse d by the agents and the ther the horses would live or di e . Wh y l a b ourers surveyors of the landlords in every part of the were kept in a worse condition than the slaves of country.—(Cheers.) In many cases the farmers did Cuba or Brazil, who dined on a stinted meal of rice not even know what was the object of the meeting- and red herring.—(Hear, hear.) Was the price What he told them was pa t en t t o the whole com- o f wages regu l a t e d b y t h e pr i ce of food ? munity. There was not an individual there from (A voice, " Yes. ") Somebody said " Yes,' the counties where th o s e me etings were got up W e ll , t h en, l et them exam i ne the state of the metro who would not testily that the tenant was polis. In 1839 and 1840 the price of corn was double at the bidding of the landlord, either in his own .that it was in 1835 and 1836, but did the prig of person, or second hand. And who were the men labour increase with the price of corn ? No, th e who had taken the lead at these meetings ? Could reverse was the case.—(Cheers.) The wages of labour they mention one bowl file, interugeet, sub tantial were greater in the cheap than in the dear years. All he saw farmer, like his friend Mr. Lattimore, trades in the dear years f e lt th e o pp ress i on —th e re, w horn sitting on the platform ?—(Cheers)—or like Mr. citizen, of whatever description, rece i ve d b u t th e same Josiah Hunt, who had addressed them there ? money in 1841 and 1842 ; even th e p oor b oa t man , or like those two worthy men who had come out of who rowed them from Westminster to Black. Somersetshire to deliver their se n ti men t s ?—(Cheers.) friars-bridge, did not demand 2d. more because But while there were no farmers of that stamp, the the quartern loaf was nearly twice dearer. gs What had been stated by Mr. Robert Gardiner, a persons who took a prominent p a rt in the meetings , Conserv a tiv e , en d a man o f wealth, who was treasurer would nearly always be found to he either an age n t an auctioneer, or a land steward. Why, who was of the Church-building Furd in Manchester, and w Mr. Baker, of Writtle, in Essex ? This was the man which had already er ec t e d t en c h urc h es t h ere ? Thi s who was put forward as their great leader, and who gentleman subscribed 1,0001. himself towards this fund, but yet h e was an a d voca t e o f f ree - tra d e prin saw his na me a d ver ti se d tmheade cause. speches ue and pamphlets in support of a paper as the author ciples, and had nominated M r . B rown as a can did a t e in one column of at the South Lan cas hi re e l ec ti on . —(Ch eers .) W e ll, of a pamphlet or a letter addressed to the Protection what did Mr. G ar di ner say — one o f th e Old es t an d Society ; while, in another column, he most extensive manufacturers in Lancashire ? After saw Mr. Baker, of ‘Vrittle, appearing as an auctioneer, an experience o f thi r ty y ea r s ? M r . Gardi ner who was going to sell up an unfortunate farmer who gave i t as h i s op i nion that wages always decl i ned had been ruined by the corn - laws.—(Cheers.) Did with the increasing price of corn, and always im his Grace of Richmond, or the squirearchy in the prove d w i t h i ts d ec l ens i on o f pr i ce. H e sa id t h at, House of Commons, believe that after the en lightenment and education which their great when corn was dear, labour was cheap, and laboure rs in superfluity ; but when corn was cheap, labourers peripatetic political university, the League, had were fully employed, and labour was dear. Mr. diffused through the country, the people would Gardiner's observations had not been contradicted, be gulled by their a ssertions that the tenant-farmers or even questioned, although he had ties had risen spontaneously to join th e P rotect i on A sso - tered them i n a place where most of his ciations ?—(Hear, hear.) They appeared to him to hearers were conversant, Ns ith then, and where be about as cunning as the ostrich which manyof them would nave beee happy to confute them it had its head in the sand and thought they could. Therefore when inen said that the obj-et that nobody cou ld see its unfortunate body because of the Anti-Corn-law Leiigue in lowering th e p r i ce it could no t see th a t body itself —(Great laughter.) of food was to lower the price of wages, and so ad- He was jealous o f their taking the name of the tenant- vantage themselves, they stated a fact contrary to all farmers in vain.. They told them that they had been e xperience. lie was heppy to say that the League abusing the f a rmers, and that it was for this reason was not confined to manufacturers—they were in a he (Mr. large minority, b u t if t h ere were any o f had always been the champion of their this minority wh o were so b lind and be rights.— t c h o a h t rie they n had turned against them. Why (p ear , h e ar.) He was br e d i n a f arm -h ouse , sotte d as to b e li eve that they were further and, up to the time of his going to school, he saw none log their own exclusive and selfish interests by but farmers a nd farm labourers. He should be a seeking a repeal of the corn-laws, they would be traitor to his forefathers if he entered into a crusade most sadly disappointed, and were hoping against ex against one of the most deserving, industrious, and perience, and against reason.—(Hear, hear.) The pains-taking classes in the community.—(Cheers.) League hal, indeed, snide wonderful progress. Did Ho had said sco res o f times, in all parts of the country, they remeinher when, in 1839, they came from the that he believed the tenant-farmers had been more manufacturing districts to London and went to deeply injured by the corn - laws than any other class of Brown's hotel, in Pal ace -y ar d, w h at a co ld recept i on society. If they could but have the history of the they met with. If the people of London felt then as tenant-farmers who had been ruined during the last they feel now,.a repeal of the corn-laws would have thirty years by the blessed protection of the corn- b ee n obtained in 1841 or 1842. What did the menu laws, it would form a dark calendar of woe and suf- lecturers come to London for then—were they in feriog, not to b e equ alled by the history of any other want of labour ?—no, the price of corn was high, and class of m en. A n enemy to farmers ! If he were so, labourers were idle in thousands in the districts from at all events he had not thrust himself among them. whence they came. Did they want to cheapen labour? —(Hear, h ear. ) H e had ch a ll enged the monopol i sts Why labour was to be had for less than they re to meet him in any county in England, and take the quired it there—half the concerns in Stockport question of the corn- were at that ti me shut up, and as a het not accept nnthe the chall e n g e, because remedy they soug h t f or a free-trade in corn. laws. sense ofT They y e w they knew that, if they did, they wou ld b e ou t vo t e d. Th e con diti on o f t h e agricultural labourers at —(Cheers.) The corn-laws pr o t ect farmers! Wh y , that per i od was likewise distressing in the extreme. the farmers paid their rent s accor di n g to I n f ac t, th e con di t i on of the labouring classes was the price of produce.—(Hear, hear.) If the a s t a t e o f degradation below that which should corn-laws kept up the price of produce, they exist in any Christian country. (Hear, hear.) kept up r e nts, an d th e question was, in fact, a rent What did Adam Smith say ? He said that " the question. He had commenced his career in the wages of labour do not, in Great Britain, fluctuate House of Commons by telling the landlords that they with the price of provisions; wages vary everywhere were no more agriculturists, because they were land- from year to year, . frequently from month to month. lords, than shipowners were sail ors , because they But i n man y pl aces th e money pr i ce of la b our re owned ships; and when the Duke of Richmond got mains uniformly the same, some for half a century up and said the Anti-Corn-law League, by its abuse together. If in these places, therefore, the labouring of the agriculturists, had set the farmers against poor can maintain their f a milie s in d ear y ears , th ey them, why, he told iim that he did not know the must be at their ease in times of moderate plenty, English language, for, that the term agriculturist meant and in affluence in those of extraordinary cheapness." a cultivator of the land, and, therefore, could not pos- The Duke of Cleveland had lately quoted the pam sibly be applied to any one except the tenant-farmer. phlet of Mr. Ceylon, one in which Lord Kinnaird, at It was not only in this w a y that they had heard it a meeting of this body clearly showed that Adam pointed out that the corn-laws injured the farmers— Smith's " Wealth of Nations" had been most sadly the corn-laws did not merely tempt the farmers to mutilated—something, in fact, in the same way in make bad bargains, by expecting Act of Parliament which the atheist had quoted Scripture to sh ow th a t high prices, but by distracting their attention from there was no. God. He quoted from the passage in other grievances that l ay nea rer , home - and were the Psalms, `,The fool says in his heart, there is no really of importance--keeping their a ttention fixed God ;" but he quoted only " There is no God," upon an ignis fatuus, which always evaded their pur- and upon this garbled quotation based his argu suit, and which would not benefit them even if they ment. But there was no need whatever could grasp it.—(hear, hear.) The farmer wanted for quoting any 'authority. Experience, the surest a cheap tenure for his land—he wanted a lease, he guide, clearly demonstrated that the corn-laws were wanted to plant good hedge rows, and to rid , injurious to trade, t o commerce , t o th e l a b ourer to the ground of no x i ous we eds, which were i the shopkeeper, to the farmer, and, in fact, to all ' but devouring the prod uce o f i n dustry . and of capi- 1 the landlord.(Hear, hear.) The Chairman would tal.—(Hear.) The farmers wanted improvements t e ll t h em t h at t h e wee k ly meet i ngs of this body were in their homesteads--they wanted draining—they drawing to a close; but they had the satisfaction of wanted, in short, a variety of concessions from their knowing that they had made their cause popular, landlords, and how were they met ? Why, the far- and had excited sympathy for their exertions, not only suer could not approach the land agent or steward to 1 in England and in Europe, but in Am e ri ca , an d every ask for assistance or red ress , without them telling quarter of the world. They wanted free trade in him—" Oh, that is not the matter which concerns corn, and they. sought free trade in this prime you; go and oppose th e A n ti-Corn -law League."---- necessary of life, 'not only for its own sake, but be (Laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear.") Name any i cause it would lead to the abolition of all monopolies. other class treated in that way but farmers. Did it i They wanted to bring corn down to its natural price happen with any other portion of the commu- ' ! —to that price which nature, and nature's God, in nity that they could not seek any , arrangement tended it should be, and then they would be satisfied. of a business nature without having an Act They did not believe that- a free trade in corn could of Parliament constantly thrown in their teeth? . He injure the farmer; he believed it would beeefit the had often illustrated this to the farmers in the agri- . tenant-farmer as much as it would any trader or ma cultural districts, and as he found that they compre- i nufacturer in the country. They believed it would hended and approved of th e illustration, he would ' benefit the agricultural labourer, by enlarging the I now repeat it. He had often said to the farmers, market for his employment, not only front • the ins- " Your dealings with your landlords are very diffe- provements which the agriculturist would have to rent from mine with the lineadrapers, my cos- ' adopt, but also from the general rise in the prosperity tomers. I will tell you how the linendraper and I of the neighbouring towns, which would give manage our business. Ares goods are di s- to the young peasant a chance of choosing posed of to the draper at certain prices. Imtweet, labour in the iLids and 14bour h, the towns.. My traveller, at the en d of six mouths, goes They believed it would not injure the landowners, Mr. COBDEN said that, after the narrative which their friend had given them of the past pro ceedings of himself and others in th e House of Commons, in connexion with thi s grea t question, he was sure it would be as acceptable to this meeting as it would be pleasant to his own feel ings, if he expressed their gratitude to him for the manful support which for the last six years, in spite of all sinister influences, he had given to the cause of the League.—(Cheers.) He had told them that the progress which he had made in the House had been measured by the progress of their agitation out of doors ; and really, when he remarked what the Anti-Ciarn-law League was six months ago, and when he considered the progress which that move ment had made in this country s i nce th at t i me, h e could not help thinking that it afforded evert encou ragement to them to proceed.—(Cheers.) Si x y ears ago . all the members of the Anti-C orn -l aw L eague might have been put into one of the stage-boxes.— (Hear, hear.) Year after year they had seen the progress of this movement, not merely in _Manchester, but in every provincial town, until th ey f oun d them selves landed in the midst of this mighty me t ropo li s , where they had been holding meetings for the last six months, almost weekly, in that vast theatre, which seemed still to excite unabated interest. If this were not a proof of the wivance of free-trade principles, he knew not where to go for one. Their friend Mr. Villiers had referred to the arguments used in the Houses of Parliament in opposition to their claims. Now, he was not so j ea l ous o f a ny as sertions made in Parliament as of one which had been made on the previous night by his Grace of Richmond. He was now continually repeating in the House of Lords that the tenantry of this country rose as one man to oppose the League. He had heard the same 'thing from the squires in the House of Commons so often that he confessed that, of itself, it would, if he had known nothing of the subject, have made him rather suspect the assertion. —(Laughter.) It very much reminded him of the schoolboy whistling on his way through the church yard, - provided they looked merely to their pecuniary inte rest in the matter. He believed a repeal of the corn laws might interfere with that political despotism and political union which still existed, though terribly shattered in the counties—he meant that union by which man sought political power by other means than the honest one of appealing to the intelligence of their fellow -countrymen, by means of that monopoly which oppressed the nation. If the landowners chose to undertake improvements, and would surrender their political power by granting long leases ; if they would be. content to eschew such old, feudal privi leges of the chase, as that of " vert and venison;" if they would choose between keeping tenants to culti vate the land, and game to destroy the tenants' crops, he believed the landowner would not be injured. They took their stand on the principles and evidence furnished by such men as Lord Spencer and Lord Ducie. They believed that if landowners would be come what they ought to be, useful, practical men ; if they would dispense with those agents and valuers who were now their rea dy tools for hoodwinking th e f armers , h e did not believe that a free trade in corn would necessarily injtire the landowners themselves.—(Hear, hear.) If any one class of men would be injured by the re peal of the corn-laws, it would be the clergymen of the Established Church. The Tithe Commutation Act fixed the income of the clergy at .a certain number of quarters of corn per annum. Suppose a clergy man's tithes were fixed at 200 quarters of corn per annum, at 40s. per quarter, that would be 4001. a•year. If corn was at 50s. a quarter it would amount to 5001. a-year. Now, if the result of the corn-law should be to cause a reduction of the price of corn in the amount of 103. a quarter, though he did not predict such a result, or take it as an argument, he admitted that this would cause an uncompensated loss to the tithe-owner; he did not spend enough of his income in bread to make the greater cheapness of it, a compensation. But he would ask, if this was a right position of the clergymen of this country to be placed in, that those who prayed for plenty should have an interest in dearth and scarcity?—(Cheers.) He would put it to the clergy themselves, whether it was in accordance with their character and respect ability, that they should be found going about to these meetings of the Anti-League Societies, for the purpose of upholding the corn-laws. Why, a clergyman would not be fit to sit on a jury to try these corn-laws; he might be challenged and excluded from the jury as an interested person ; in decency then he asked them to stand neuter on this question ; he asked no more. He believed that free trade would cause a rise in the money wages of the operative, and would give him provisions at the natural price, which natural price would probably be lower than they had ever hitherto been. He believed that it would cause an increase in the demand for labour of every kind, not merely in the labour of operatives, but of every class— o f c lerk s , of th e y ou th s they wished to set out in life, and about whom 'fathers and mothers felt so much difficulty ; they heard everywhere that trades were full, all the professions were overflowing, and they could get nothing from the Government, because it gave everything it had to give to the aristocracy.—(Cheers.) This was their filth ; these were their objects ; this was the ground on which they stood; they believed they were right, and their opponents acknowledged they were right. They acknowledged their principles to be true, and the League stood on the truth of those principles. Let them not be discouraged at the present difficul ties of their position ; he had never felt less discou raged than he did at the present moment. Their labours for the next few months might not be quite so noisy as they had been. Probably there had been a little too -much talking ; but they would be quite as efficient. The registration throughout the country would be well and systematically worked.—(Cheers.) And he would advise them in every locality, to press the im portance of this subject on their neighbours, to watch the registration, to put themselves on the list, and to endeavour to strike off those monopolists, who would not listen to truth and reason on this question. Let them have this registration, and another after it, and they should be able to make a very different account of things in the House of Commons than at present. One word more : let them keep the question in its true position. Let them not permit themselves to be used or abused by any existing political party. They had no objec tion to an alliance, offensive or defensive, with any party that would adopt their principles; but let them not be such blockheads as to go into partnership with any one ; with whom at the first step they should find themselves going quite in opposite directions. Political parties were breaking up in this country— all political parties • there never was a p er i o d i n th e i r history, in which there was an attempt to carry on an opposition with so intangible a line of demare cation as that at present existing between the Whigs and Tory party. From the time of Charles the First, when differences were so great, that men drew their broadswords, and decided the question in the field, down to the present hour, there never was a period at which an attempt was made to keep up an opposition, as against the party in power, with out any one great public question of the slightest interest out of doors to support that opposition. There were many other questions in which th e people took an interest besides free trade. But on no one question had the Opposition the support of the people out of doors ; and if they give up one iota of their principles, he knew the temper and character of those who nourished this agitation from the begin ning, and he was convinced that the moment there was the slightest evidence of a coalition with any party that would compromise their principles, from that moment the right arm of every true friend of the League would be paralyzed.—(Cheers.) Let poli ticians take up the principles of the League, or any other that they might think would gain them more popular support; but at present the Opposition had no sympathy out of doors ; and he asked them, whatever might be said of them in the party newspapers, whose pens were often guided by the intriguers of the political fac tions, he asked them as free traders to try them by one test—were they true to their principles ? What ever obstacles they might meet with, they might depend upon it, if they were true to their principles, their principles would be true to them—(Cheers)-- and lead them on to an ultimate and not very distant triumph.—(Great cheering.) Mr. BRIGHT, M.P., then came forward and "was received with several rounds of enthusiastic cheering. He said it was a matter of very pleasant reflection, that after having been consigned to utter oblivion on several occasions, after having been killed outright at least half-a-dozen times, to find that they could yet assemble together in such respectable numbers, and could feel themselves in such cheerful and good condition. It was satisfactory to feel that they were yet able to struggle for the great principles which had been the cause of their so often meeting in that theatre. Although in the course of this warfare they had met with storm and sun shine, and those vicissitudes which most men have met with in pursuance of a great object, th e y h a d ground for believing that the principles for which they strove, although they might be out •voted in both Houses of Parliament, were making sure and steady progress in the minds of the honest, the intelligent, and the re spectable portion of the people of this country. It was satisfactory to know that the opposition they had now met with, partook more of the character of a political than a commercial opposition. They were certain that the principle of free trade was so beautiful, so natural, so simple, that it must commend itself to the mind of every unprejudiced person. The infringement of that principle he was convinced was considered by a majority of the people of this country to be unsound and vicious. But now they had to contend with a political opposi tion ; it had assumed this character naturally, for the question about which they had been battling was one, round which political parties were turning. The men of the party now in power were afraid of it ; because their rents might be injured by it, and that the great party which they had been ten years in building up, might be shattered in pieces by a blow. And it was not only afraid of rent, everything else possessed by a great political party might be endana ' ered ; all the patronage of office, at home and abroad, the patronage of the army and navy, the vast amount of patronage in the church, in fact the feeding and fattening upon 50,000,0001. of revenue, besides much more in other departments, all this might be sacrificed, and they, themselves, might be thrown into the " cold shades of opposition." .'They were not daunted at the opposition having taken that character. They found that all the great writers who had touched upon this question had, almost without an exception, taken the same view of it as they had done. Great men, and great statesmen, for fifty years past, had held the same opinion ; they knew that their opponents practised the principles the League advocated in all their private affairs ; they held the prin ciples of free trade to be the principles of com mon sense, in their private business, though they did not apply it in the national affairs. All the past justified the course they were pursuing, whether they regarded free trade as conferring benefits upon all those who had applied it to commerce ; or whether they re garded it as beholding monopoly inflicting grievous and indescribable evils upon large portions of the population. The present exhorted them also on the working of this question, for though there was now a respite from the evils they had lately suffered, yet it was a respite only, which must he followed by disasters at least as great as those from which they had but just escaped. And the future was before them, warning them that if they did not take a lesson from the part it had in store for them-e a lesson not only teaching themselves the error they had committed, but making them a warning to nations in all future times, teaching them that there were dangers on which a nation might run, and make fearful shipwreck. Their honest opponents had honest fears, and, if he could bring those fears to a point, it would be this— that they suspect the introduction of foreign pro duce, especially of foreign grain, would supersede the consumption of their own corn, and cheapen it in the market, and throw the land out of cul• tivation, by making it Unprofitable to the occu pying tenantry of the country. They thought that if foreign wheat was eaten, the same quantity of English wheat would remain uneaten. The same might be said with respect to rice. The importation of rice was an addition to the food of the country, and of potatoes; yet no one found that their potato-grounds were not worth cultivating. The importation of tea, of coffee, of cocoa, of sugar, incr eased the coneumption of these VA' rious beverages ; and those who drank them would have consumed more beer, made from the malt of barley. Yet the barley growers did not find any difficulty in selling their produce. Again, there were no less than seventy millions of eggs impoi ted annually; and he had seen in a scrap book, a petit ion from the hens of England , published at the time tht 1 importation was first allowed, complaining of the bards hip and injustice of allowing it, —using argum en t s aga i ns t it as reasonable as those 01 the Duke of Richmond in t '6l , House of Lords. 'ln JOY 1842, the importation of li% Pe cattle was permitted - at a moderate fixed duty. He wi:shed them to know the number of cattle that ha. i be en imported since that time, up to January 184,3, there lad been imported 1,114 oxen, 36,3 co ws, 40 calves, 2 10 sheep, 7 lambs, swine 364, sucking pigs 8 7 ' The Dukes of Richmond and Cleveland said before this law was passed, that cattle were actually standing 011 the shores or foreign countrie• s i n t h e utmost agony o f expectation that they would c. ')me over to this country to feed the people here. In cc els equence of this repre sentation the farmers of dm co uwiry were panic struck , and this, added to the poverty of their customers; caused cattle to fall in value twenty par cent. He recollected reading in history that 250 yet irs ago, or rather more, the Spaniards equipped a numerous fleet for the purpose of invading this country. Ife „ believed that there wa s not half so much fear at the ie lea of the Spanish fleet invading this. country, as the land 'owners got up amongs c l the tenantry about a l o t o f poor t o "f ortunate half-starse., oxen and cows co m i ng over bere.—(Cheers slid laughter,) But there were other articles that' those which he had mentions A._ There was th e article of hides. In the year t, 843 there were intl.(); duced into this country hides to the amount 0 ' 535,000 cwt. Of hides leather was made, and of leather,, boots and shoes, a n d ' carr i age h art less, and a variety 01 other articles. In this country the y had a large quad" City of hides that came from cat - le slaughtered here' Nobody ever found, that because. 5 35,000 cwt. of Lidos were imported from foreign cou nudes, that hides th e produce of this country could not be sold. Let then' take the article of tallow. There ' - were imported' late this country last year 1,778,000 Cc vt. of foreign tallow' The Dukes of Cleveland and Richa sand, no doubt, burnt a portion of that tallow. Tallow w as produced in thi s country, yet this tallow was not diminished in COr sumption. Take the article of s ilk. From the ye 1820 to 1827 the average annnal cc 'sumption of silk te this country was about 3,000,00 0 lbs. In 1843 th e importation was 5,743,000, very ;nearly double the amount imported between 1820 and 1827. There wer e 96,000 pieces of silk handkerchiefs ed Lich came from ea' possessions in the East. Did any one t ay , that the menu" t facturers of silk of this countr4 , hAd been injured I n t consequence of this ? Take again Ihe article of flan from which linen was made. In 18'35 . the importation was 740,000 cwt. ; in 1843, it was :1,438,000 cwt., nearly double what it was i n 1835. The case of w' o ° was the same. Th e i mportat i on in this article ha d , . doubled in ten years, and yet in spite o f that the price et wool grown in this country had inert rat ied from tod. t ° Is. 6d. per pound. Cotton, too, had inc Teased from 181° from 90 millions of p oun d s to 585 millic ins, yet this had not affected the agricultural prodtece of the country He was prepared to argue that no harm had come to thi s country or to the population in any sh rt e from thus is; creasing importati on i n th ese most uso ful articles. Le them turn for a moment to t h e prote ct ed trade. Wha t had the West Indi es been doing lat e ly- 1? H e h a d h e ard persons in the House o f C ommons gel; up and say t hat they were prod uc i ng sugar at a cost o f 6 id. per lb., I°', which they could only get 6d. per 1i &. Why, suppos e the manufacturers of this country • were to do thi s ' , and call for a tax to be placed on the people i, ll order to e na bl e t h em to carry . an their trig ° to a profit, would th ey not b e classed as fools 0, ' i something worse? If t h e W est India people could 11°` 0 carry on their trade, why let drop. (Loud cheers.) The men who; of all others, deserved the least srfl ' ' pathy, were the prop r i e t or ei n t h e West India colony' --(Renewed cheers.) Th ere was anot : ear protected ity terest, and that was th e shipping ineare st. The conV plaint of the shippi ng i n t erest was one et mtinued howl' They were continu a lly ca lli ng on the Legislator! It. for relief—they h a d b een protected into the ir it: present wretched condition.—(Hear,) There was e l• Committee no w s itti ng on t h e subject-411e same sort is i it Committee that used to sit to inquire wh y the farmer s k were badly off. They had exam i ne d a l as ge shipowne r in London, w h o , at the last election, if Ile voted at 8,1" voted in favo ur o f monopoly. He told ti sae Comtnittl-, t" that ships could be built cheaper in the colonies than they could in thi s country, and it was they efore, he se l .',l necessary that a ta x s h ou ld b e i mposed on ' all ships bie' in the colonies. N ow w h at could be aloe a absurd 60 1 ! . that ? Was it not disgraceful that the shit pping i n teres t ; of this country, whi c h wee t h e m i stress of tai to seas, shod come to the House of Commons and ask •for assists"e e d in the difficulti es i n w hi c h t h ey were plated? This h'. been the effect of the agricultural prote motion in 01 ' country. His business was entirely one -on which Fa i t liament had never laid its deadening• fingers, 1 , A the shape of an Act of Parliament to P r n 'i It ,9 t' tect it. Let them look te the col ton trade `,, It a it e c 4 l ffe-1 Lancashire. Sixty years ago cotton was s carcely kno w , 0 her e b y there. It was said that the man was. still alive w . „ / e !t . /sui t ., hauled the first bale of cotton into Liverpool that cs',, s ,'"eilles r from America. He had no doubt, too, tin it the inati''',:f • i c c iee" at erected the first steam-engine in Lancashire for the fll,-(1 killeirreelet' pose of weaving cotton was still living. He would r e - a Illall, e s IZ , to them a statement of the value of' property in land ° ' te ' : rn ing SU buildings in Lancashire. The valuation of the county rate a' including, altogether, stock in shops, furniture in hat: ,vvitnlB44, and including the enormous value of machinery eu"; ---- ---st ployed in that county. Tbe annual rateable value "I'o t o 6,192,067 L H ow man y count i es . did they suppose,, 1? re- "to a England and Wales, it wou ld take to make up this, f i cut, an Huntingdonshir e , 272,5 70 1 . ; Westmore land, 256,3031, ; o gle sale Rutland and Anglesea, 15,7001.; Brecon, 171,13 21 5 : Ts7l,- ) i s ' Cardigan, 180,151/. ; Carnarvon, 204,2984 ; Dettldr tune, trees] 232,7031 ; Flint, 207,456/. ; Merioneth., 25,506/. ; 31 0111 ,i k i t: trees] goutery, 273,9641 • Pembroke, 217,2.?...2L ; Radnor affil lider41:11( n Berkshire, 652,91 a ;Buckingham, 636,027/ ; Herefer' 627,1371.; Hertford, 724,6871.; Monmouth, 453,7501; end f Oxfordshire, b e i ng a total of 5,860,482/. The whole ‘' t -Ed I i tE, E , o N , Wales was rated at 2,443,5101., an d a ll England'". e 48,169,5881. Thus was Lancashire two and-a-half tin ie ,,f l t PaYina rk a e l t ' the amount of all Wales, and more than one-righth " t„ elt, as is all Englan 1. This, however, was an unimportant fe e d e ssay r i li ix if they spoke of it to the squires.. They certainly hst.. settentlst'r, passed through Lancashire, when on their way to 6 0° n ecess a r y Vi Th • Y. land for the purpose of grouse-shooting. They s s „ Ivi re :ir T there a great many chimneys, and a great deal of sten; . salletig an ' and a great many working men, who did not Wo e , t.,et ts e : l i their hats to them.—(Great cheering.) That was a ve r, ,, firitest ei; disagreeable feature. But it would be well if tiles' .....__ At4re a at p a t -----__ men would reflect t h a t th ere was such a coun ty.—(esLise hear.) The ma j or i ty o f the corn and flour produced I n A. Lincolnshire went to Lancashir e . Th e l an dl or d 00 1 B 7 tr-d" would not lose by the abolition of the corn-lays—they . ,, t ~ td vat might lose in political power, but not in a pecuni at i i j Natt k r e point of view. But they should recollect that politic Th lewort power might be bought too dearly. Who were ti) (ls l . ° ,t'r'amp who kept up this system of monopoly? Sir Rol! e rr. t ISt grits Peel's father made his fortune by honest trade —e 3 ' f j p---a-z AT I Gladstone's father made his fortune by the extent. 0 , , his operations in foreign commerce. They had nothinio - to boast of with respect to ancestry. They could not S 0 " Their blood Had flowed through scoundrels since the flood;" and yet it was these men whom the aristocracy bossts ol of—men of whom it might be said that it was doub y , whether they had a n y gran df at h ers or not. He 10e.i, not which were the mos t contempt ibl e or di sgr ace ,, u or the aristocracy who became the dupes of these melt , „ 4 1 the men themsel ves . Th e S tan d ar d , i n a l ate article, "'""to contended that the labourer s in L ancas hi re oug ht share the pr o fits o f th e i r emp l oyers ; and ,t, , _'A. Herald the other day a ll ege d that wages PP;el fallen ten per cent, since 1842. This was. most infamous assertion. He had no pe rson i acquaintance with the e di tor o f the Standard, but he lie. ni derstood that he was a native of Ireland. If so, th e o gt he was a living contradiction to the assertion ,„t,'' is Ireland produced nothing of the reptile species. 1 _4.. paper, the Standard, a short time ago, consigned, 'lrti. out the slightest remorse, all the manufacturing c lll O , and towns of this country to utter ruin and destructi°,o He understood that this publication was now in the PT Q f the Go vernment. In the years 1816 and 1817 r" system w as esta bli s h ed i n this country un cle , l - Lord Sid mout h and Co. In the year 1820 two air serving, but err i ng men, paid the penalty of t,1:;1. lives on the sca ff o ld at S t i rl i ng, on account of t"`i, having been engaged in some seditious movenle n bi Those men were brought to that untimely end througo, the instrumentality of a spy. The Standard, a f fh days ago, said th e y w ere part i cu l arly acquainted w i t ,f the subject of the man u f ac t ures o f L ancas hi re. One 40 the spies in Scotland, in 1820, was a cotton weaver. that might be that that v er y man wrote th i s art i cle in to . 1 Standard. He (Mr. Bright) did not say t a l 4 1 it was ; but he had heard that this indiviu;s had been engaged to supply the columns of tV vvit ts t: gemini of th e p ress, t h e herald and Standard, ~d matter. Oh, thi s was a f i lthy trade.—(Cheers.) Nothlo could be mor e g l or i ous to his (Mr. Bright's) mind, Ih, , an organ of th e press like the daily press of this courl f d,' , if it w e r e managed with honour and integrity. He -no not think th at any man, however great his ambit s might be, could wish for a higher honour than to P er - 1 forth, every morning his sentiments to ten the twenty thousand reflecting, intelligent minds. t he . was thereby insinuating his own soul into /3 0 souls of tho usan d s of his fellow -countrymen. 0 when a man perverted this power he becaras. , demon. H e (M r. Bright) called upon that meeti ng and upon th e i n h a bi tants of that metropolis, 11°1 ts go slacken in their efforts —not for one moment to I ° l ,o their resol u ti on , until the corn-law—that impious--,,ito blasphemous la w , h a d b een abolished for even-et.' Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loud cheers.) „ee/ The CHAIRMAN th en said that he bad the PIP" 0 duty to perform of announcing to them that the n eo n , would be their last meeting during the present ses s t b, Their next meeting would be held on that day 11 1, t ot in Covent-garden Theatre. He thought they ought to separate on this occasion without giving three chi for Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Lord Howick, Mr. Gib s 'i: Mr. Ward, an the other Members who supported- 3 i or Villiers in his late motion in the House of Common a repeal of the corn-laws. Three cheers w ere then given, and the meeting separated. -e ~ a ve hhe h i . had h has Britt, their T' of iirotoi ZrDentel o r, anci 4 e t se isClos„, I st a nd , , hen th -Red , month 27th da; Wit ne , ,__ ,Thls „, M ere 'a n tent pant s , v ° ecc 3 8. ea Th a vr°Pet 8 „ t: and h. • no aaNe I d I ; " 1:1 L on ! o nd f or IvTER f „ ml Azo ß e, . rto E e;. c s t t tPeeinten" tuttutionc, te h e:', 4o the leher k e t th e h4thes 4 ' At • Ihet Ai Cae- SPE g r : T er 4 et l " th'xoi"" w'hFc th at t i l t ' . 4 d i rtY hal:. U . t irpete ll t i ttottim b h.w7 i pl e bi , ikyrti b i y d ! opirati on ; , 111 . !ed h u ,7 - 1 11 11 e e re , bet: o ' ,„ ha d ri QU l tieAUit Vith „..11tk tQ klll7l Whi fort: n :Utler kr test ee; Eda itr e : Ili rr e il t ; Pe I naba 4h, "l4 toOrs n . ..„Pi . r tof qier,c. to tatio,;:aikto 0 Thi f tcp , '' tty, re f s., -- A the 117 a_ Iln e. cool 1 7 , 120r ea rectt e e. st r eek ti l t: e na nd , the It i i ttrral In e llds de r r 3 ,!; 4 l: - -moio of t CAu Nt I utt erlY " ruin the ti 4 ,•nitcr ng ‘4 4tthe 111;), STX POUNDS of TEA, and upwards, sent, carriage free, - to • l• part of the Kingdom, at the Wholesale Price, on receipt of a tance, or Post-office order. Black, 2s. Bd., 35., 3s. 41, 3s. Bd., 45., 4s. 4d., 43.8 d., SL Green, 36. 4d., 3s. Bd., 45., 4s. 4d., bs., ss. 4d. 65., 76. G. Coffee, ANSELL 9d„ Is. Is. and 2dC0.., Is. 4d., Is., 6d., le. Is. 10d ., Z0: T. M Wholesale ea Dealers, 9, LF , RSBLTIty, CHEAPSIDE. C AB ncies will be given to resP°ctBl)l . parties !4,9ttle. t Ask rreits t! 1.4 E tro n 40,4 w.ithoi a l t ,l": i s e to k n , 4 1 lir"v,43, rhea o to trnit t a,„l:llkPrec ibYthokT Ask f _. 14...04,1"4". • DIED. On . 0 0 thP. 19th ult., a Rochester Frances, wife of v." , Curry W. Hillier, It:. 'N L - ;;;( - 1 7 o17: by MURD - 0 YO.'11 ()51 No. 112, Strand, P r i nter, at The Sus Oftioe t ,_ . ..M* ll 0 Strand , in the Precinct o f th e S avoy , i n t h e Thuralay, July 4, 1644. Ev COil .A. si z i oft, Ad( a ,,u 1 104 orni again! late 0 bOeto alread c. Gooi tts eox il aate] han, a Utly......_____ Witne l