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

THE S(JN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, JULY 4 1844. woul.l not do much good, for it was very possible, nay, very pro b able, that they would sink together._ (Cheers.) N ow, w h at was t h e state of the case? Publi c 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 hostility to the sliding scale. The commercial classes generally were not very united, but they were united in their hosti lity to th e s lidi ng scale. The Liberal party in Par liament, were not united on ninny points, but even I4' , )rd John Russell himself, who was not a friend to the League, and who the other night hail been cross with the m b ecause, 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 on l y exeusable, but it was commendable.— (Loud ch eers. ) There was not a single man who wtsl;kely to be a member of the next Government, Rho ' ss in favour of a sliding-scale.—(Cheers.) Now the present Government was not so strong as it had b , e een•—(Ch eer the If th e y as k e d any man th e y me t i n strest what he thoueht of it, he would tell them he thought it was enin g —(Cheers.) Every one thought that it was tottering, and that it was very shak"Y—(A. laugh) —that it could not go on for any bong 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 be en g i ven to t h e public opinion of the e e° , uu trY• Publi c op i n i on would not any longer tole ;ae monopoly It insist e d upon its abolition. The of publi c Opinion had set in against monopoly. The present Alinistry were aware of this, and while oti the one hand they - dreaded to outrage public opi hy openly supporting monopoly, on the other hand they feared 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 rreisnikaionfe,iirriintating their friends ; and as long as they rence of thos: l '"•a ra c rn e ii th would be a constant recur ejr•ers which had so nearly upset them the other day. Y If '. they inquired of the ngricul 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, an 1 the present prices being obtained. Th e agricul turists said th ey never were in a worse p os iti on ; th e y p u r r pr e f er anyt hi ng to it ; they would rather have total repeal, - free trade—anything, rather than things should be left in their resent unsettled state. They Were perfectly convinced that while the law remained than in i ts unsettl e d s t ate, they were more injured benefited by it. If th e y read the debates on this sat tiect, in th e Lords and the Commons, and what that Was l as said by th e i r organs i n t h e press, they would find when th ose part i es sa i d t h ey considered the que bon as settled, there had not been any question w i sich W as mor e unsettle d . T h i s was a great encouragement to th em to proceed, and afforded them good ground fur h uidng that they sh ou ld succee d if th ey perse vered. The agriculturists saw no thi ng b u t th e prospect of change before them. Either the Government would be turned out, or their friends Nvmdd turn round. Why th e G overnmen t m i g h t b e and turned o u t every day ; and if they continued in office, turned round by a judicious distribution of stars and places, they might at any time alienate the friends of the agriculturists from the came. They were only eager t o se i ze an opportunity of being re rin to Sir R o b ert P eel. The recent discussi ons ' ll the to of Parliament had shown their weakness and impotence. As compared with the free-traders, they "ere weak indeed. They had no spokesman a mong them, who could come Ibrward and give rea sons which would bear discussion, for supporting this l a ► w; They trusted entirely in Sir Robert Peel, and er , e Wad to do whatever he told them. Now this fix e d upon Sir Robert Peel the responsibility of main tea,ining this law.—(Cheers.) They had been blamed Sur ativocating what were called violent measures, ch as total and immediate repeal.—(Hear hear.) let them look at the history of this Wa and see what encouragement there l i, t oseeer t t i thhe'ing forward moderate propositions. year 1827 that Mr. Canning first pro ther w e ; those/lb: sw•ltta.er-scale. At that time, as at present, parties in the House of Commons, the import of in favou r of an entire prohibition of sliding scale, rein , d :,`“o`e who were in favour of a am-- `"°,-; wh o were against all mono- P,? I .Y. In 1827, when Mr. Canning first proposed the a gentleman representing the district which he (Alr. Villiers) had now the honour to re- P r esent, Mr. IVoolr ehe Whitmore, was opposed to the sliding, scale, and rose to express his doubts as to the advantages accruing which its proposer expected deriv e from it. Now, how had that gentleman been i r lo (Teived at the time ? He turned to "Hansard, , i , found it there stated, that the Honourable Member was proceeding to state his objections, ti hen he was interrupted by loud and general eeu ghing he waited for some time until the " no se had somewhat subsided when he said that if he lad proposed counter-resolutions there might have been some reasons for refusing to hear him—(Re newel coughing) —but he merely wished to state opinion that the evils of the present system would not he alleviated by the sliding scale.—(Coughing.) Xow that was the way in which a gentleman was t reated w h o ventured to express a doubt as to the Nerits of the sliding scale. Mr. Whitmore had been followed by a gentleman with whose name they were ne d ou b t all familiar, he meant Sir Edward Knatch bull•—(A laugh.) Ile had no doubt but that Sir E. linatclibull had not suppressed his cough, if he hap pened to he suffering from one during the speech of the former speaker. Sir E. Knatchbull had stated that h e 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 forduty; his part, he thought the importation of corn ought to be entirely prohted. He stated that he had h eard - - with horror the declaration of Mr. Canning, that this measure was an approximation towards free tr ade, and he trusted that the House would never accede to such doctrines. That Bill had passed the Meuse of Commons but it had been thrown out of the nuke of Lords b ' y the prohibition party, with the 'e of Wellington at their head, and the party had sota ttacked Canning, that they had worried him to eath—the session had hardly closed before he had ekpired. Re had been succeeded in office by his °l)Ponents, and in the year following they also had proposed a sliding-scale, whi c h th e year b e f ore th e y Hir t \\T exposed. This w as i n 1828, and on that occasion no riche Whitmore had opposed the Ministe- Vo al Slidin g scal e , and h a d proposed another in opposi in to it as an amendment. Now what was the scale which Mr. Whitmore had then proposed ? Why the veerscale which Sir Rohert Peel had proposed the day. Now Mr.Whitinore had been attacked in the most violent manner for this proposition—he had been stigmatised as the enemy of the agri cu l tural interest had been told that the ;t-t!io of the interest must be the consequence hadthe adoption of his motion, and on a division 381 voted a ga i nst it, and only 50 for it. Now that .; h.Tan fir: a , encouragement to mo d erat i on, and it con- Ted him in his deter m i nat i on to ask for noth i ng e e than total an d i mmediate repeal. In 1833 and 1c..."4 motion s on the subject of an alteration in the tiirn,-,l,aws hail been treated in the same sort of way. Scal e , to a change had been proposed from a sliding ' ,, to a fixed duty —that motion had been rejected, aed the h t. occasion the majority had been greater Whe le minority less than it had been the next year, (Ci v il he had proposed total and immediate repeal.— i t w e rs) In 1838 he had proposed as a measure of 1. Ice the total and immediate repeal of the corn -4".---"leer".) There was a majority of 300 t • ,a motion although he had so framed it as to °liabl e every p er s ' ouvhodisapproved of the existing syst e i 1:e • to vote in its favour ; for although , had argued in favour of total repeal, 18 , had only mov e d f or a Committee. In 18-10 1 ,, J he had roposed th e same mo ti on , 1 the inajority p had b een diminished to 147 ; in , he had proposed th e same motion; and the ma jority had dimi n i s h ed to 123, but at that time the 4nti•Corn law League was in active operation, and their energy in diffusing information on the subject hea tended much to reduce the majority on the question. The majority, which, in 1838, nail been 300, had been, in 1840, reduced to 123. At that time the Ministry became convinced that the sufferings of the people were to ba attributed to the emitinuance of the system of monopoly, and they pro la,sed measures for putting an end to it. On those vic e sue they 'were defeated, and the present Go ,4....iiimetit came forward as the supporters of monopoly. forget° Could the calumnies, the misrepresenta lseliels, which were had recourse to at the isst election to make the people believe that monopoly Wa s for their benefit ? It was impossible, without being ,s,litstd, to consider the system which was then pur tn? induce the people to believe that monopoly was felt h,.ir advantage, and that the free traders were their inies. Now what happened in the session of 1842? Sir R . p eel was fain to yield to public opinion, and erP,r?Posed tie tariff, and th e new corn-law. Every lhelPle that the free traders had con t en d e d f or was that admi tted by th e monop o li st Mi nistry. They admitted the doctrines of free trade were true—they admitted that persons Ought to buy in the C . he apest and sell in the dearest market—(hear)-- that admitted that abstractedly monopoly was `r ng, and free trade was right.—(Cheers.) Now ~tli)t princ i ple havi ng b een acknowledged, he brought principle hs motion for the repeal of this most mur tel`,rms law. This law had produced all the evils of W hich the country complained. He had moved in 0 42 for the total repeal of the corn-law, and his ittia:stliote had been rejected by a majority of 300. In 1843 rt - s t ad r(Teated. the motion, and the majority against had been reduced from 300 to 256; and on the last. uceasion, the majority was reduced 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 b 3 abolished.—(Loud cheers.) He found that, on the last division, there was no Liber.sl 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 hi: resolutions for repealing the corn law, without stating in those resolutions his reasons for making such a proposition. He had therefore proposed a seriesof 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 f00d,.. They 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 bsdly 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 pres s so muc h on th e 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 Ireland 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 those 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 the interest 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. Peel's mouth, before Mr. Sharman Crawford, the son and the nephew of Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Sheil, voted for the repeal of the corn-laws.—(Hear, hear.) Yet, this was all he had to say by way of reason or argu ment. There was another thing, he said, but that was a personality which had been often used against himself lay 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 munity, who bad advocated the total repeal of the corn-laws. (Hear.) Why, that was the old state bit of abuse which had been used by everybody 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 Hon. 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 the 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 came 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 corn-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 some 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 be 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. N') as it not monstrous, then, to postpone this great question, in order to avoid discussing the monstrous conse quences of the corn-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.) Ile 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 institstions.—(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 Ino reason to despair. They must not mind the cowardice, the baseness, or the meanness, of other persons, but do their own duty. He had refei:ed the other night to what had been done by the I.:': ; :slatits . e with respect to the slave trade. He hi. , 1 z; ace lea rnt that, within forty years, Mr. Pitt lee' 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 then?—(llear, hear.) They had abundant proof that the ern-la-law was an abundant source of mi:;ery, and they were bound, therefore, to do all in their power tc, procure its abolition as a nuisance and calamity, by which the country was grievously tifllicted.—(Ch , eers.) Mr. COBDEN said that, after the narrative which their friend had given them of the past pro• ceedings of himself and others in the House of Commons, in connexion with this great question, ha was sure it would be as acceptable to this mee+.lng as it would he 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-Corn-law League was six months ago, and when he considered the progress which that move ment had made in this country since that time, he could not help thinking that it afforded every encou ragement to them to proceed.—(Cheers.) Six years ago all the members of the Anti-Corn-law League 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 they found them selves landed in the midst of this mighty metropolis; 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 advance 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 jealous of any 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, " To keep his courage up." Whence the necessity for these asset Lions ? Why had the landlords found out, on a sudden, that the far mers were with them ? It must have arisen, he sup posed, from some doubts pervading their minds as to whether the farmers were really hoodwinked and blinded by their professions.—(Hear, hear.) But when they told him that the farmers—that the tenant-farmers, rose spontaneously to form the Anti- League Associations, he told them there, in the most public place in the world, that what they said was not true, and that they knew it was not true.—(Cheers.) He (lid not wish to be offensive, and, therefore, he would only say it was not true in a logical sense. He said it was not true, and he would prove it by reference to facts. He would take the meeting at which his Grace the Duke of Richmond attended at Steyning, in Sussex. He knew something of Sussex, and he fearlessly asserted that the meeting was got up by the aristocracy and squirearchy of Sussex.—(Hear.) If they themselves did not go round and canvass their tenants, their agents and land-surveyors did, and the tenants were canvassed and pressed to come to that meeting in just the same manner as they were canvassed at a general election; nay, more, the carriages, the horses, the vehicles, down even to the deer-cart, were put at the disposal of the farmers, to carry them up to Steyning.—(Cheers.) What he said of tie meeting at Steyning he asserted of almost every other meeting, purporting to be spon taneous, which had been held in opposition to the League. The tenant-farmers were moved by the landlords. They were canvassed by the agents and the surveyors of the landlords in every part of the country.— (Cheers.) In many cases the farmers did nit even know what was the object of the meeting. What he told them was patent to the whole com munity. There was not an individual there from the counties where those meetings were got up who would not testify that the tenant was at the bidding of the . landlord, either in his own person, or second hand. And who were the men who had taken the lead at these meetings ? Could they mention one bona fide, intelligent, substantial farmer, like his friend Mr. Lattimore, whom he saw sitting on the platform ?—(Cheers)—or like Mr. Josiah Hunt, who had addressed them there ? or like thoz., two worthy men who had come out of Somersetshire to deliver their sentiments ?—(Cheers.) But while there were no farmers of that stamp, the persons who took a prominent part in the meetings would nearly always be found to be either an agent, an auctioneer, or a land steward. Why, who was Mr. Baker, of Writtle, in Essex ? This was the man who was put forward as their great leader, and who made speeches and pamphlets in support of the cause. He saw his name advertised in one column of a paper as the author of a pamphlet or a letter addressed to the Protection Society ; while, in another column, he saw Mr. Baker, of Writtle, appearing as an auctioneer, who was going to sell up an unfortunate farmer who had beef ruined by the corn-laws.—(Cheers.) . Did his Grace of Richmond, or the squirearchy in the House of Commons, believe that after the en lightenment and education which their great peripatetic political university, the League, had diffused through the country, the people would be gulled by their assertions that the tenant-farmers had risen spontaneously to join the Protection Asso ciations ?—(Hear, hear.) They appeared to him to be about as cunning as the ostrich which had its head in the sand and thought that nobody could see its unfortunate body because it could not see that body itself.—(Great laughter.) He watt jealous of their taking the name of the tenant farmers in vain. They told them that they had been abusing the farmers, and that it was for this reason that they had turned against them. Why he (Mr. Cobden) had always been the champion of their rights.—(Hear, hear.) He was bred in a farm-house, and, up to the time of his going to school, he saw none but farmers and farm labourers. He should be a traitor to his forefathers if he entered into a crusade against one of the most deserving, industrious, and pains-taking elssses in the community.—(Cheers.) He had said scores of times, in all parts of the country, that he believed the tenant-farmers had been more deeply injured by the corn-laws than any other class of society. If they could but have the history of the tenant-farmers who had been ruined during the last thirty years by the blessed protection of the corn laws, it would form a dark calendar of woe and suf fering, not to be equalled by the history of any other class of men. An enemy to farmers ! If he were so, at all events he had not thrust himself among them. —(Hear, hear.) He had challenged the monopolists to meet him in any county in England, and take the sense of the meeting on the question of the corn laws. They would not accept the challenge, because tkey knew that, if they did, they would be outvoted. —(Cheers.) The corn-laws protect farmers! Why, the farmers paid their rents according to the price of produce.—(Hear, hear.) If the corn-laws kept up the price of produce, they kept up rents, and the question was, in fact, a rent question. He had commenced his career in the House of Commons by telling the landlords that they were no more agriculturists, because they were land lords, than shipowners were sailors, because they owned ships; and when the Duke of Richmond got up and said the Anti-Corn- law League, by its abuse of the agriculturists, had set the farmers against them, why, he told him that he did not know the English language, for, that the term agriculturist meant a cultivator of the land, and, therefore, could not pos sibly be applied to any one except the tenant-farmer. It was not only in this way that they had heard it pointed out that the corn-laws injured the farmers— the corn-laws did not merely tempt the farmers to make bad bargains, by expecting Act of Parliament high prices, but by distracting their attention from other grievances that lay nearer home and were really of importance—keeping their attention fixed upon an ignis fatuus, which always evaded their pur suit, and which would not benefit them even if they could grasp it.—(Hear, hear.) The farmer wanted a cheap tenure for his land—he wanted a lease, he wanted to plant good hedge rows, and to rid the ground of noxious weeds, which were devouring the produce of industry and of capi tal.—(Hear.) The farmers wanted improvements in their homesteads—they wanted draining—they wanted, in short, a variety of concessions from their landlords, and how were they met ? Why, the far mer could not approach the land agent or steward to ask for assistance or redress, without them telling him—" Oh, that is not the matter which concerns you; go and oppose the Anti-Corn-law League."— (Laughter, and cries of " Hear, hear.") Name any other class treated in that way but farmers. Did it happen with any other portion of the commu nity that they could not seek any arrangement of a business nature without having an Act of Parliament constantly thrown in their teeth? He had often illustrated this to the farmers in the agri cultural districts, and as he found that they compre hended and approved of the illustration, he would now repeat it. He had often said to the farmers, " Your dealings with your landlords are very diffe rent from mine with the lineadrapers, my cus tomers. I will tell you how the linendraper and I manage our business. My goods are dis posed of to the draper at certain prices. My traveller, at the end of six months, goes round to these customers, and demands pay went, but the linen draper says, oh, your cotton was of a 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 be the land lord, why he would in that case say, oh, it may be perfectly true that you have lost, and that you have had a bad bargain, but petition the House of Com mons to appoint a Committee to inquire 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 themselvesin the hands of the auctioneer ?—(Hear, hear.) He should never despair of the bona 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 hocus poems of Acts of Perim 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 unemployed there, and standi n g a t c orners of roads 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 laws, not only the farmers should be considered, but those mechanics and artisans who lived in towns and who were dependent upon the farmers for bread, should be considered likewise. There was one other argument which he did not expect to hear even from a Duke.—(Laughter.) A Noble Duke told them that the Anti-Corn-law League wanted to reduce the price of corn in order to reduce the price of wages; and that when the price of corn was high, wages were high ; and when corn was low in price wages were likewise low. Well, he (Mr. Cob:len) must say, that he did not expect to hear this statement thrown out and falsified as it had been, even in the House of Lords. But that truly noble and patriotic peer Lord Radnor had shivered these idle arguments to atoms.—(Lord cheers.) It did require considerable moral courage in such an atmosphere as the House of Lords, to meet those misstatements; but Lord Radnor, in the most clever and concise manner, put the extinguisher upon the Noble Duke.—(Loud cheers.) He told the Duke what was an axiom, and what should be always borne in mind—that, if labour sunk so low that man could not subsist, or less than the price of that labour, the price of labour could have nothing to do with the price of corn, for if the latter sunk lower still in price, the labourer would infallibly be starved. When labour reached the minimum of, value, the labourer was treated as a horse—a fixed quantity of bread was apportioned for his use—if it were dear, as in scarce years, the complement would be still the same—just the same sum of money to be expended in oats whe ther the horses would live or die. Why labourers were kept in a worse condition than the slaves of Cuba or Brazil, who dined on a stinted meal of rice and red herring.—(llear, hear.) Was the price of wages regulated by the price of food ? (A voice, " Yes. ") Somebody said " Yes,' Nell, then, let them examine the state of the metro polis. In 1839 and 1840 the price of corn was double what it was in 1835 and 1836, but did the price of labour increase with the price of corn ? No, the reverse was the case.—(Cheers.) The wages of labour were greater in the cheap than in the dear years. All trades in the dear years felt the oppression—the citizen, of whatever description, received but the same money in 1841 and 1842 ; even the poor boatman, who rowed them from Westminster to Black friars-bridge, did not demand 2d. more because the quartern loaf was nearly twice ' dearer. What had been stated by Mr. Robert Gardiner, a Conservative, and a man of wealth, who was treasurer of the Church-building Fund in Manchester, and which had already erected ten churches there? This gentleman subscribed 1,0001. himself towards this fund, but yet he was an advocate of free-trade prin ciples, and had nominated Mr. Brown as a candidate at the South Lancashire election.—(Cheers.) Well, what did Mr. Gardiner say—one of the oldest and most extensive manufacturers in Lancashire ? After an experience of thirty years ? Mr. Gardiner gave it as his opinion that wages always declined with the increasing price of corn, and always im proved with its declension of price. He said that, when coin was dear, labour was cheap, and labourers in superfluity ; but when corn was cheap, labourers were fully employed, and labour was dear. Mr. Gardiner's observati ons h a d no t b ee n co n tradicted, or even questio ne d, a l t h oug h he had ut tered them in a place where most of his hearers ss ere conversant with them, and where many of them would have been happy to confute them if they could. Therefore when men said that the object of the Anti-Corn -law League in lowering the price of food was to lower the price of wages, and so ad vantage themselves, they stated a fact contrary to all experience. He was happy to say that the League was not confined to manufacturers—they were in a large minority, but if there were any of this minority who were so blind and be sotted as to believe that they were further ing their own exclusive and selfish interests by seeking a repeal of the corn-laws, they would be most sadly disappointed, and were hoping against ex perience, and against reason.—(Hear, hear.) The League had, indeed, made wonderful progress. Did they remember when, in 1839, they came from the manufacturing districts to London and went to Brown's hotel, in Palace-yard, what a cold reception they met with. If the people of London felt then as they feel now, a repeal of the corn-laws would have been obtained in 1841 or 1842. What did the manu facturers come to London for then—were they in wa nt of labour?—no, the price of corn was high, and labourers were idle in thousands in the districts from whence they came. Did they want to cheapen labour ? Why labour was to be had for less than they re quired it there----half the concerns in Stockport were at that tim e shut up, and as a last remedy they sought for a free-trade in corn. The condition of the agricultural labourers at that period was likewise distressing in the extreme. In fact, the condition of the labouring classes was a state of degradation below that which should exist in any Christian 'country. (Hear, hear.) What did Adam Smith say ? He said that " the wages of labour do not, in Great Britain, fluctuate with the price of provisions; wages vary everywhere from year to year, frequently from month to month. But in many places the money price of labour re mains uniformly the same, some for half a century together. If in these places, therefore, the labouring poor can maintain their families in dear years, they must be at their ease in times of moderate plenty, and in affluence in those of extraordinary cheapness." The Duke of Cleveland hail lately quoted the pam phlet of Mr. Caylon, one in which Lord Kinnaird, at a meeting of this body clearly showed that Adam Smith's " Wealth of Nations" had been most sadly mutilated —something , in fact, in the same way in which the atheist had quoted Scripture to show that there was no God. He quoted from the passage in the Psalms, " The fool says in his heart, there is no and upon this garbled quotation based his argu ment.Go d ;" but he But thquoted w o a n s l y " There is no God," no need whatever for quoting any authority. Experience, the surest guide, clearly demonstrated that the corn-laws were injurious to trade, to commerce, to the labourer, to and, in fact, to all but tell them that the weekly meetings of this body were the drawing an but they had th e sa ti s f ac ti on o f knowing that they t r e l shopkeeper,vih d i o t r o d. a — e ( o t s e ; the a r , farmer, hear.) The Chairman would had made th e i r cause p o p u l ar , i and in had Englandexcited andinsympathy for th e i r exert i ons, not on l y Europe, lfrlbut in America, and every quarter of the world. e le e Y trade in this prime wanted free trade in corn, and theysought necessary of life, not onl y for its own sake, but be cause it would lead to t h e abolition of all monopolies. They wanted to bring cor n down to its natural price —to that price which nature, and nature's God, in tended it should be, a nd t hen they would be satisfied. They did not believe tha t a free trade in corn could injure the farmer; be be lieved it would benefit the tenant-farmer as much a s it would any trader or ma nufacturer in the cou n try. They believed it would benefit the agricultural labourer, by enlarging the market for his e mployment, not only from the im provements which the agriculturist would have to adopt, but also from the general rise in the prosperity of the neighbouring towns, which would give to the young peasant a chance of choosing between labour in the fields and labour in the towns. They believed it would not injure the landowners, d s pirspaherowsoal shattered ralti might the it } I nons i e i n i no 3 ont ' a eunit l ogeo t o rl e hfv o f r tee l : orp e iecdo d l:nvitt merely appealingsecte th b sa r i believed th , eo,oei evt! power peidslmorte t ael h ebiidtay e nr: roetpa though elphhi that e dohgel c eurae u osg: mlpf n hco i eteu a tha i r tno:o j ein if i tool i tnt.o n hi habr t b:ani e :ndy! thew'h which honest m an fellow-country men, 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 legesthy wouldtohfetlha e m c i, hase, as that of " vert and venison ;" if chooseand g between v e e teon destroy keepingthetenants tenants'to culti vateorop 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 ready tools for hoodwinking the farmers, he did not believe that a free trade in corn would necessarily injure 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 500/. 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 10s. 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 lab Our of operatives, but of every class—of clerks, of the youths 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 faith ; 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 period in their history, in which there was an attempt to carry on an opposition with so intangible a line of demar 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 the 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 gave 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 par moment twt the ould rightcompromisearm of every u theirrpritnrcie friend principles, m that 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 fur 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, they had ground for b believinc , 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 ware 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 endangered ; 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 be followed by disasters at least as great a; those from which they had but just escaped. And the future was before them, warning then that if they did not take a lesson from the part it had in store for them— 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 0113 found that their potato-grounds were not worth cultivating. The importation of tea, of coffee, of cocoa, of sugar, increased the consumption of these va rious beverages ; and those who drank them would have I 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 imported annually; and he had seen in a scrap book, a petition from the hens of England, published at the time the importation was first allowed, complaining of the hardship and injustice of allowing it —using arguments against it as reasonable as those of the Duke of Richmond in the House of Lords. In July 1842, the importation of live cattle was permitted at a moderate fixed duty. He wished them to know the number of cattle that had been imported since that time, up to January 1843, there Iliad been imported 1,114 oxen, 368 cows, 40 calves, 210 sheep, 7 lambs, swine 361, sucking pigs 87. The Dukes of Richmond and Cleveland said before this law was passed, that cattle were actually standing on the shores of foreign countries in the utmost agony of expectation that they would come over to this country to feed the people here. In consequence of this repre sentation the farmers of the country were panic struck, and this, added to the poverty of their customers, caused cattle to fall in value twenty per cent. He recollected reading in history that 250 years ago, or rather more, the Spaniards equipped a numerous fleet for the purpose of invading this country. He believed that there was not half so much fear at the idea of the Spanish fleet invading this country, as the landowners got up amongst the tenantry about a lot of poor unfortunate half-starved oxen and cows coming over here.—(Cheers and laughter,) But there were other articles than those which he had mentioned. There was the article of hides. In the year 1843 there were intro duced into this country hides to the amount of 535,000 cwt. Of hides leather was made, and of leather, boots and shoes, and carria g e h arness , an d a var i ety o f other articles. In this country they had a large quan tity of hides that came from cattle slaughtered here. Nobody ever found, that because 535,000 cwt. of hides were imported from foreign countries, that hides the produce of this country could not be sold. Let them take the article of tallow. There were imported into this country last year 1,778,000 cwt. of foreign tallow. The Dukes of Cleveland and Richmond, no doubt, burnt a portion of that tallow. Tallow was produced in this country, yet this tallow was not diminished in con sumption. Take the article of silk. From the year 1820 to 1827 the average annnal consumption of silk in this country was about 3,000,000 lbs. In 1843 the importation was 5,743,000, very nearly double the amount imported between 1820 and 1827. There were 96,000 pieces of silk handkerchiefs which came from our possessions in the East. Did any one say that the manu facturers of silk of this country had been injured in consequence of this ? Take again the article of flax, from which linen was made. In 1835, the importation was 740,000 cwt. ; in 1843, it was 1,438,000 cwt., or nearly double what it was in 1835. The case of wool was the same. The importation in this article had doubled in ten years, and yet in spite of that the price of wool grown in this country had increased from 10d. to ls. 6d. per pound. Cotton, too, had increased from 1810 from 90 millions of pounds to 585 millions, yet this had not affected the agricultural produce of the country. He was prepared to argue that ao harm had come to this country or to the population in any shape from thus in creasing importation in these most useful articles. Let them turn for a moment to the protected trade. What had the West Indies been doing lately ? He had heard persons in the House of Commons get up and say that they were producing sugar at a cost of 61d. per lb., for which they could only get 6d. per lb. Why, suppose the manufacturers of this country were to do this, and call for a tax to be placed on the people in order to enable them to carry on their trade to a profit, would they not be classed as fools or something worse? If the West India people could not carry on their trade, why let drop.—(Loud cheers.) The men who, of all others, deserved the least sym pathy, were the proprietors in the West India colonies. —(Renewed cheers.) There was another protected in terest, and that was the shipping interest. The com plaint of the shipping interest was one continued howl. They were continually calling on the Legislature for relief—they had been protected into their present wretched condition.—(Hear,) There was a Committee now sitting on the subject—the same sort of Committee that used to sit to inquire why the farmers were badly off. They had examined a large shipowner in London, who, at the last election, if he voted at all, voted in favour of monopoly. He told the Committee that ships could be built cheaper in the colonies than they could in this country, and it was therefore, he said, necessary that a tax should be imposed on all ships built in the colonies. Now what could be more absurd than that ? Was it not disgraceful that the shipping interest of this country, which was the mistress of the seas, should come to the House of Commons and ask for assistance in the difficulties in which they were placed? This had been the effect of the agricultural protection in this country. His business was entirely one on which Par liament had never laid its deadening fingers, in the shape of an Act of Parliament to pro tect it. Let them look to the cotton trade of Lancashire. Sixty years ago cotton was scarcely known there. It was said that the man was still alive who hauled the first bale of cotton into Liverpool that came from America. He had no doubt, too, that the man who erected the first steam-engine in Lancashire for the pur pose of weaving cotton was still living. He would read to them a statement of the value of property in land and buildings in Lancashire. The valuation of the county-rate including, altogether, stock in shops, furniture in houses, and including the enormous value of machinery em ployed in that county. The annual rateable value was 6,192.0671. How many counties (lid they suppose, in England and Wales, it would take to make up this ? Huntingdonshire, 272,570/. ; Westmoreland, 256,3031 ; Rutland and Anglesea, 15,7001.; Brecon, 171,132/. ; Cardigan, 180,151/. ; Carnarvon, 204,298/. ; Denbigh 232,7031 ; Flint, 207,456/. ; Merioneth, 25,506/. ; Mont gomery, 273,9641. ; Pembroke, 217,2221. ; Radnor and Berkshire, 652,9161. ; Buckingham, 636,027/. ; Hereford, 627,137/.; Hertford, 724,6871.; Monmouth, 453,7501.; and Oxfordshire, being a total of 5,860,4821. The whole of Wales was rated at 2,443,510/., and all England at 48,169,588/. Thus was Lancashire two and-a-half times the amount of all Wales, and more than one-eighth of all England. This, however, was an unimportant fact, if they spoke of it to the squires. They certainly had passed through Lancashire, when on their way to Scot land for the purpose of grouse-shooting. They saw there a great many chimneys, and a great deal of smoke, and a great many working men, who did not touch their hats to them.—(Great cheering.) That was a very disagreeable feature. But it would be well if these men would reflect that there was such a county.—(Hear hear.) The majority of the corn and flour produced in Lincolnshire went to Lancashire. The landlord class would not lose by the abolition of the corn-laws—they might lose in political power, but not in a pecuniary point of view. But they should recollect that political power might be bought too dearly. Wh o were th ose who kept up this system of monopoly? Sir Robert Peel's father made his fortune by honest trade—Mr. Gladstone's father made his fortune by the extent of his operations in foreign commerce. They had nothing .o boast of with respect to ancestry. They could not say " Their blood Had flowed through scoundrels since the flood;" and yet it was these men whom the aristocracy boasted of—men of whom it might be said that it was doubtful whether they had any grandfathers or not. He knew not which were the most contemptible or disgraceful, the aristocracy who became the dupes of these men, or the men themselves. The Standard, in a late article, bad contended that the labourers in Lancashire ought to share the profits of their employers ; and the Herald the other day alleged that wages had fallen ten per cent. since 1842. This was a most infamous assertion. He had no personal acquaintance with the editor of the Standard, but he un derstood that he was a native of Ireland. If so, then he was a living contradiction to the assertion that Ireland produced nothing of the reptile species. That paper, the Standard, a short time ago, consigned, with out the slightest remorse, all the manufacturing cities and towns of this country to utter ruin and destruction. He understood that this publication was now in the pay of the Government. In the years 1816 and 1817 a spy system was established in this country under Lord Sidmouth and Co. In the year 1820 two de serving, but erring men, paid the penalty of their lives on the scaffold at Stirling, on account of their having been engaged in some seditious movement. Those men were brought to that untimely end through the instrumentality of a spy. The Standard, a few days ago, said they were particularly acquainted with the subject of the manufactures of Lancashire. One of the spies in Scotland, in 1820, was a cotton weaver. It might be that that very man wrote this article in the Standard. He (Mr. Bright) did not say that it was ; but he had heard that this individual had been engaged to supply the columns of those gemini of the press, the herald and Standard, with matter. Oh, this was a filthy trade.—(Cheers.) Nothing could be more glorious to his (Mr. Bright's) mind, than an organ of the press like the daily press of this country, if it were managed with honour and integrity. He did not think that any man, however great his ambition might be, could wish for a higher honour than to put forth, every morning his sentiments to ten or twenty thousand reflecting, intelligent minds. He was thereby insinuating his own soul into the souls of thousands of his fellow-countrymen. But when a man perverted this power he became a demon. He (Mr. Bright) called upon that meeting, and upon the inhabitants of that metropolis, not to slacken in their efforts—not for one moment to let go their resolution, until the corn-law—that impious —that blasphemous law, had been abolished for ever.—(The Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loud cheers.) The CHAIRMAN then said that he had the painful duty to perform of announcing to them that the next would be their last meeting during the present season. Their next meeting would be held on that day month, in Covent-garden Theatre. He thought they ought not to separate on this occasion without giving three cheers for Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Lord Howick, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Ward, and the other Members who supported Mr. Villiers in his late motion in the House of Commons for a repeal of the corn-laws. g Th ree cheers were then given, and th e mee ti ng separated. FRAUDS ON NEWSPAPER PROPRIETARY AND AGENTS.—A man named Francis Osborne, alias Henry Hors field, is in custody at Brighton, charged with having ob tained from various newspaper offices and from newspaper agents, papers under false pretences. It is supposed that his operationq in this way have been extensive. The copies ob tained he was in the habit of selling as waste paper. ACCIDENT BY THE LIGHTNING.—On Monday even ing, during the storm, the lightning struck the clock of St. Clement's Church, in the Strand, and sent the minute hand, which was at ten minutes past six o'clock, back five minutes, when it stopped ; the flash pasSed down the steeple, and crossed the street, where Mr. Cadman, the umbrella manu facturer, who was standing at his door, received a severe , shock on the legs, which nearly felled him to the ground. THE NAPOLEON MUSEUM. Miny inter--sting additions have recently been made to the extraordirary and costly colection of curiosities, works of art, and autographs, wVeli constitute the exhi bition at the Egyptian Hall, in Piccadilly, which is called, per excellence, the " Napoleon Museum." Mr. Sains bury, the collector of these rare and interesting objects aQ, we understand, originally prompted to search for and purchase all that could illustrate the life and times of Napoleon, from an ardent admiration of the soldier Emperor, without any notion of exhibiting them beyond the sphere of his private friends. The colloctiort, how ever, became sa large and complete, that he was induced to open it to the public, and the objects, as now arranged at the Egyptian Hall, form, as the catalogue affirms, a perfect " illustrated history of Europe, from the time of Louis XIV. to the death of the Emperor Napoleon." The admirers of autographs may revel for days among the vast stores which are here deposited. They occupy twenty thick folio volumes, which are illustrated by two thousand portraits and crests of ttre writers. To give some idea of the treasures contained within these " pon derous tomes," we may intimate among the letters are those of Louis XIV., Marie Antoinette, Mirabcau, Ro bespierre, Joseph Bonaparte when King of Spain, up wards of five hundred by Napoleon, and upwards of two thousand by his principal generals. Neither are the au tographs of distinguished Englishmen less remarkable. There are letters front Charles I. and his Queen, from Oliver Cromwell, Alton. llandel, Pore, Pitt, Fox, Nel son, the Duke of Wellington, &c. These autographs are not merely signatures, but many of them are letters relating to matters of political interest, or referring to marked incidents in the lives of the distinguished writers. The medallions and enamels of Napoleon at different periods of his life, are numerous, and there are .many paintings of battles, by David and other distinguished Frengartists. Among the curious documen's preserved in this collection, are two letters written by Napoleon on the same day (March 1, 1796), in one of which Bona parte is spelt with a u (Buonaparte) and in the other without ; and as no signature with the uof a later pe riod is known, these two letters are stipposed to be the last in which he wrote his name Buonaparte, and the first in which he adopted the more French orthography. The cordon of the Legion of Honour worn by Napoleon, and sent by him to his son, is among the varied articles that belonged to the Emperor. Perhaps the two most interesting relics are the notes made by Napoleon when attending lectures on mineralogy, in 1793 ; and his first and last attempts to write English when at St. Helena. The treasures deposited in this museum, we understand, cost the collector 60,0001., and occupied years of re search ; it is indeed surprising that one individual could have ransacked all corners of France and England so successfully. Those who propose to visit the museum should go early, for their are materials enough to occupy a lorg day in their examination. EXPLOSION of a STEAM-BOILER. THREE LIVES LOST. BOLTON, JULY I.—A dreadful explosion occurred at the wooden mill of Alde:man Brooks, of Manchester, this morn ing, soon after eleven o'clock, when the steam boiler blew up with a report like a piece of artillery. The side of the mill, at :he end where the engine stood, was shattered to its base, the walls being rent and the windows completely de molished. Search was made among the ruins, and two bodes were found dreadfully mangled, and three or four - others were carried off, apparently in a dying state. The • two men who are killed, and another who is dangermsly in jured, worked in a drying-room over the engine-house, and must have been driven into the air with the building. The fireman who was attending the engine is also much hurt, but hopes are entertained of his recovery. A woman is also in a dangerous state, who is supposed to have been passing from the mill into the yard when the explosion took place. The cause of the accident cannot be ascertained. The boiler has only been in use about six months. • de , LATEST PARTICULARS. BOLTON-LE ',MOORS, JULY 2.—The extent of the injury, by the explosion of the steam-boiler at the linen-mill of Mr. John Brooks, is now ascertained. • Three persons have perished by the calamity. Bridget Hart, who was the first person discovered among the ruins, died at her house in Newport-street this morning, - leaving a husband and three children. She was returning from the yard to the mill, when the explosion took place, an 3 thus met her melancholy end. James Swift, an elderly man, was found dead. He has , left a wife and four children. He was employed in a drying- . room over the boiler-house, and must have been thrown into . the air with the materials of the building. James M'Donald, of Dale• street, was also employed in the drying-room, and met the same fate as his companion, Swift. ' " He was a young man, and has left a wife in a state of pregnancy. He had only gone to work at the mill that morning with his brother William, who was also much mu tilated, but is expected to recover. James Rigg, the mechanic ; George Brinscow, the fire man, and the others who were injured, are also considered out of danger. This morning workmen commenced taking down the chimney and the end of the mill over the engine-house. There were nearly 600 hands employed in the establishment, who are thus thrown out of employment, but we are happy to say that 300 or 400 of them are expected to be at work . again in about a fortnight, there being two other engines at the other end of the mill, which will keep a considerable por tion of the machinery going. An inquest will be held on the bodies of the deceased to morrow (Wednesday) afternoon at the Borough Court, when • some light will, most probably, be thrown upon the cause of this calamitous accident. LAMENTABLE IGNORAN CE.—A singular circum stance, arising out of a man's ignorance of any difference be tween the Old and the New Testament occurred at a coro ner's inquest recently held by Mr. Higgs, where one of the jurors summoned was of the Hebrew persuasion. Jews are, of course, always sworn upon the Bible, and the coroner or dered a man to go for a copy of the Old Testament. After some delay the man returned, and it was stated, amid the laughter of the Court, that be had been looking for a literally old Testament, namely, a copy of the Scriptures, published some time ago ' and one which, from its ragged and worn ap pearancc, affin.ded proof that it was an old one. _ A circumstance, calculated to create a feeling of confidence in the safety of railway travelling, inasmuch as it prove,l the control the engine-drivers have over their fiery steeds, occurred on Saturday last. The after noon down train, which leaves London at three o'clock, soon after passing the Witham station, suddenly came to a stand-still ; the up train, which leaves Colchester at four, being also stationary at only a short distance. Tho alarm of the passengers was speedily allayed by the guards, who dismounted ; and from them it was learnt that two horses had strayed upon the line, and were ap proaching at a galloping pace, crossing and recrossing between the down and up trains. . The affrighted ani mals, after a few blasts from the whistle, made towards the Witham station, where they were driven off, and blth trains proceeded uninterruptedly on their journey. But for the judgment and caution exercised on the part of the engine -drivers, the poor animals must have been destroyed, and one of the trains would, probably, have been thrown off the line.—Essex Herald. THE Firms IN SUFFOLK.—In Bury gaol there are nine prisoners on charges of arson, and one for sending. threatening letters ; at Ipswich gaol ten for arson, and two for sending threatening letters ; at Beccles House of Correction, four prisoners for arson, and one for threatening to burn ; waiting for trial at the next assizes. The Felice Gazette contains a notice of the apprehen sion of a man named Abraham larren, on the 7th instant, by the Nottingham constabulary, on the charge of setting fire to a stack, belonging to Henry Beevor, Esq., of Barnley-moor, in the same county.. He is suspected of having committed similar offences elsewhere, and he states that he has travelled all over Essex and Suffolk, and that one of his companions was transported in Essex, for incendiarism. He says he is a woollen cloth weaver, and a native of Rodley, near Leeds. He is remanded for further examination.—On Saturday last, an old man named Francis Bye, was brought before the county Magistrates at the Shire-hall, Bury, and charged with hawking lucifer matches with out a license. He said he belonged to Cawston Wood row. The fact was clearly proved by one of the rural force, and the magistrates said they were determined to put down the' practice, so far at least as unlic‘. , .nsed hawkers were concerned, and would convict in every case that was brought before them, where the evidence was sufficient. Bye was sent to the Castle for one month's hard labour.—Essex Herald. LIVERPOOL DOCKS.—The annual return of Mr. Withers, the excellent treasurer to the Dock Committee, has just been published. The following is a compara tive statement of the rates and duties received in the years ending on the 24th June, 1843 and 1844 :—ln 1844, the duties on tonnage ware 99,044/. 13s. 7d., and the duties on goods 86,119/ Bs. 4d. In 1843, the uties on tonnage were 96,4451. I Is. 7d. and the duties on goods 91,840 E 10s. 6d. Increase of duties on tonnage 2,599/. 2s. Decrease of duties on goods 5,72 a. 2s. 2d. The light house duty this year produced 7,357/. 2s. Bd. ; floating light, 3,367/. 4s. 1 id. ; graving d0ck,9,4991. 10s. ; graving block, 1,671/. Is. ; extra dock rent, 2,132/. 6s. 7d. ; being rather less than last year, except as to light-house and floating-light duties, which produced a larger amount. The total income this year is 208,1911. 7s. Id., and last year 212,402/. 3s. 7(1. ; the decreas e on the wole being 4,210/. 16s. 6d. The following is a comparative state ment of the shipping, &c.:-1844, num b er o f vesse ls, 18,411 ; tonnage, 2,632,712. 1843, number of vessels. 16,606 ; tonnage, 2,445,278. Increased number of vessels, 1,805 ; tonnage, 187,434.—Liverpool Journal. EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE.—A circumstance the like of which has never been known within the memory of the oldest inhabitant of Beds, occurred in this county on the 20th instant. Mr. Jeffreys, a farmer, residing at Great Barford, whilst his neighbours were sowing barley, cut and carted a quantity of the same grain. The barley in question was the produce of a field that had been severely injured by the hail storm of the last year, and the occupier had had it ploughed up for the purpose of sowing it with wheat, but ob serving a good deal of the grain growing, he allowed it to stand, and the result has been that he has obtained an excel lent crop, a fine sample of which was exhibited in Bedford market on Saturday lase—Herts County Press. LORD MOUNTCASIIEL AND HIS NURSE.—Our readers will remember that, at a free-trade meeting in the Liverpool Amphitheatre some time ago, Mr. O'Connell thus apostrophised Lord Mountcashel, who had just been deli vered of seine monopolist absurdity : " But who on earth, besides his nurse, For Lord Mountcashel cares one curse?" • Well ; his Lordship has row actually married his nurse Having been dangerously ill and faithfully attended on hie sick bed by an Irish lass, he has since shown his gratitude by marrying the girl, who is now Countess of Mouuteashel.— Leeds Times. PRESERVED PISIL—Many of -the names of persons and places in the United States are very curious and not seldom absurd and ridiculous. It is the same in England. One of the principal merchants in the city of New York is a Mr. Preserved Fish. Although now the principal of an extensive mercantile house, he was formed) the humble owner and skipper of a small trading schooner, respecting which the following anec dote is told !—Mr. Preserved Fish was carrying a cargo of pickled fish to Baltimore, when ho was hailed by a large ship, and the following dialogue ensued :—" What ship ?" " The Preserved Fish."—" What captain ?" " Preserved Fish." — " What owner 2" " Pres.arved Fish."—" What cargo ?" " Preservel fish."—Aye, aye, I we know the cargo ; but what's your captain's name ?" .‘ preserved Fish, bound to 13a1timore, '—Mackeniee‘ Sketches. law len the icse on. len, min 'ro- Av. ch )rd, los- has. rd F, mas ,rge ?ast ved sere D.-- - )ted y 10 5 e n t I hi s illt -- i