The Sun. — London, England, 1845-01-16 00:00:00

Gill AT MEETING OF THE ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE COVENT.GARDEN THEATRE. The first great metropolitan meeting of the League fir the year 1845 took place last evening inCovent garAlcn Theabre, George Wilson, Esq., Chairman of the League, in the chair. The proceedings commenced at seven o'clock, but long before that time, in fact within a few minutes after the doors were opened, the theatre was crammed to suffocation in every part. There was not, we believe, a private box unoccupied. Several ladies were present. At seven o'clock precisely Mr. Wilson, accompa nied by Mr. Cobden, M.P. ; Mr. Milner Gibson, M.P. ; Mr. Christie, M.P.; Colonel Thompson ; J. Fox, Esq., and several other staunch free traders, entered the theatre. As they severally appeared on the stage, they were greeted with loud and long-con tinued cheering. Among those present we observed George Wilson, Esq., Chairman, Hon. Charles Pelham Villiers, M.P., Richard Cobden, Esq., M.P., W. D. Christie, Esq., M.P., Thomas Milner Gibson, Esq., M.P., W. J. Fox, Esq , Major-General Briggs, Col. T. P. Thompson, Messrs. William Leaf, Dr. William Cook Taylor, Captain Cogan, Colonel Henderson, William Wiles, P. A. Taylor, jun., George Ridout, Joseph Ivimy, James Beattie, J. Cumming, R. Scholefield (Roch dale), J. Gerstonbery, Parker, Pugh, W. A. Wilkinson, George Thompson, L. and J: Travers, R. Palmer, R. Fowler, Gosnell, Daniel Cooper, S. Smith, Edmund Garrett, Charles Wordsworth, Summers Harford, Abraham Baner, N. Overbury (Westbury), Robert Overbury, William Biggs (ex- Mayor of Leicester), F. Alexander, J. Hunt, J. L. Ward, John Bedford, Rev. Henry Bedford, Thomas Ruston, Samuel Maunder (Exeter), W. J. Bower, Win. Cooke, Henry Jones (Liverpool), Thos. Owen, Thomas Wilkinson, J. S. Stock, G. Hoffman, A. K. Watson, J. N. Senior, Professor Granger, A. Har rison, C. Lloyd, T. B. Barton, Wm. Geesion, John Burd (Manchester). The SECRETARY read the minutes of the last meeting. Colonel THOMPSON then came forward and moved that the minutes be confirmed. The Gallant Colonel was gris , ded with a cordial shout of welcome on his making his appearance. The motion was seconded by Mr. CHRISTIE, MX., and carried. The CHAIRMAN then came forward and spoke as follows ;—Ladies and Gentlemen,—Since we last met here we have entered on the seventh year of this agi tation. Fresh arrangements have been made, and fresh bonds have been ratified, by thousands 'in the north, to stand together with unswerving resolution be continue this agitation—(Loud cheers)—and, if it be possible, to work with increased energies—to seek for the labourer of this country the permis sion to purchase his food in the world's market instead of being confined to the corn-stores of his Grace the Duke of Buckingham.—(Loud cheers.) The space of six years is not much in the history of a country, but yet within these six years many changes have taken place which are not undeserving of no tice. For instance, at the commencement of these itix years the term " free trade," had a very different signification from that which is now at tached to it—then it meant anything, or everything— every one who stated it as his opinion that only the slightest possible modification should be made in our import duties, was considered a free trader ; in the same manner as any person who proposed any, even the very slightest change in the corn-laws, passed for a corn-law repealer. That delusion has passed away, and now it is impossible to confound together the free trader and the monopolist ; the division between them is perfect and complete.—(Cheers). During these six years we have seen an Administration attempt an approximation to free trade. We have seen it intro. duce measures which were an approximation to free trade. Those measures and that Administration failed. We have seen another Administration introduce measures which were an approximation to free trade, and which measures were carried. We have seen an Administration, which came into office for the avowed purpose of upholding rawt nopoly, confessing the principles of free trade.—(Lou cheers.) We have a new corn-law, a tariff, and Canadian Corn Bill introduced and carried; and yet no shift, no expedient, has detached from us one single individual, but we are still as firm as ever to our principles—(Cheers)—as . determined to go on; and as confident that the doctrines of free trade will at length be estabashed as the law of our land.---'• (Loud cheers.) Six years have disposed, too, of a numerous host of fallacies. For instance, we hear no more of the old cry, " Don't depend upon foreigners for the supply of your food ;" we hear no more of the cry, "That cheap food will bring down the rate of wages." Thjse fallacies, like a host of others, are .now exploded. In Parliament they are scarcely heard of, and we certainly possess this great advantage, that in Parliament no question is mcre ably supported than this *question of the repeal of the corn4aws.—(ltrimense cheering.) The monopolist newspakia stated some time ago that the League was dead.—(A laugh.) The meetings in Covent garden were Stispended; there were no other meetings held in the country; and, as they saw nothing, these gentlemen took 'it for granted that nothing was done.—(X laugh,) • This' delusion did not last long.—(Renewed laughter.) In a few days after there were leaders in these same papers saying that the League was not dead, but that it was just as un constitutional as aver.—(A laugh.) There was the old cry raised of " Bring out the Attorney-General. -(Renewed laughter.) Where are the law officers of the Crown !---(Continued laughter.) If our ad vice had been taken, you w.,uld long since have heard nothing of the League."—(Continued laughter.) The idea which some people seem to have of the consti tution Is this—that if ever a grievance is discussed it is the duty of the constitution to suppress the dis cussion directly.--(Cheers.) And nothing wit! content these gentlemen until some fine morning the} see our friends, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Villiers, and others, standing hefore " tWelve good men and true," to answer an indictment as bulky as that which gave rise to the monster trials in Ireland.—(ltnmensa cheering.) Their last attack has been upon our efforts in the registration courts. But I think that the plan which our friend Mr. Cobden proposed ten weeks since, cannot have a better certificate of recommendation than the outcry which has been raised against it by the monopolists. Since that plan was first broached, we have held fbrty meetings— forty business meetings in Lancashire and York shire—to induce our friends to qualify. These meetings were purely business meetings. I have had some experience in public meetings, and I never saw any merely busrneas meetings so largely attended as these meetings have been.—(Cheers.) We want our friends in Yorkshire, in Lancashire, and in Mid dlesex, to come forward; not in a spirit of jealousy, but of conitnendable• rivalry, to see who shall qualify the most voters for the net election.—(Cheers.) These were counties in whiCh any man may be proud of Ite#irec,' a freeholden , , They were not made by the aristo crac - . . 7 They were not raised to their present position.. by the — aristocr ac y. Th e y owe no thi ng t o the protection or to the care of the aristocracy. But they are indebted for the position which they occupy solely to. the skill,' the industry, the muscle, the sinew, the toil, and capital of the operative, the mechanic, - and the nierchant:- , -(Cheers)—and they ought not longer to he held * 'in' thialdoin to an aris tocracy which is in . oli,43ition' to th e principles on wfounded.—(Loull cheers ) hich their prosperity You w ill be addressed this evening by Mr. Milner Gibson—(Cheers)—the Member fir Manchester ; our friend Mr. Cobden--(Loud cheers)—as i d Fox.-4 Cheers.) lr have great pleasure in calling on Mr. Gilson. Mr. isflnavaa GIBSON, M.P., then came forward, and was receiied with loud'cheers. When the cheer ing had subsided; the Hon.' Gentleman commenced his address as 'folk:lNya : . --Ladies and Gentlemen,—lt must be deeraed a great privilege to be permitted to address so imposing an assembly as that which is gathered together within these walls. But I must confess that, great as that privilege is, I feel some little difficulty in attempting to throw fresh light on a subject which has been so ably and so freq uen tly explained by abler persons than myself, and which, I doubt not, is thoroughly understood by the great bulk of such an intelligent audience as I bee gathered to gether before me._ I have heard of an actor who, having forgotten his part on the 140th repetition of the piece, pleaded, as an excuse, that it could not be expected that his memory could last for ever.—(A. laugh.) I can plead no such excuse here. In the first place, we are not assembled here for the purpoie of dealing with me:•ely imaginary things, but for the purpose of dealing with stern re alities—of dealing with facts which are po tent to all—of dealing with the great subjects of justice, of humanity, of the spread of civilisation, and of procuring for our fellow-countrymen the full reward of their industry, which can only he accom plished by commercial freedom.—(Loud cheers.) The present moment is remarkable for the progressive advance which the principles of free trade are making in public opinion ; the progress of those principles is sure without being slow.—(Cheers.) .If we look at our adversaries, we shall find that they are moving in a retrograde direction. Who can doubt that such is the fact, when we hear the confused nature of their demands—when we see the different opinions that prevail amongst the protectionists ? The monopolists at the present moment constitute anything but a happy family.—(Cheers and laughter.) Sugar frowns upon corn, and corn frowns upon sugar. Sir Robert Peel has no confidence in the monopolists, and they are equally suspicious of Sir Robert Peel. — (Cheers and laughter.) Some demand the repeal of the malt-tax—others demand the repeal of the Cana dian Corn Bill. In one direction we hear that the currency ought to be depreciated, and in another that the present corn-law is not a sufficient protection to the agricultural interest, and that the farmers are losing their money. In whatever direction we cast our eyes, we see no signs of harmony in the mono polist ranks. There is universal disunion—universal discontent. If we look at our own ranks of the free traders, we see this great combination of the Anti- Corn-law League.—(Cheers.) Here there is no dif ference of opinion.—(Cheers.) Our demands are simple and straightforward. Our course is uniform ; we neither swerve to the right nor to the left ; we do not ask less to-day than we asked yesterday; but we confine ourselves to the plain unvarnished claims which is the same now as it was at the com mencement of this agitation. We demand now, as we ever have demanded, the total and unconditional repeal of the corn-laws, and of all other monopolies.— (Loud cheers.) This time last year there were Anti- League meetings assembled in various parts of the kingdom. At those meetings there took place such a display of brutality and ignorance, as to leave a stain on those assemblies which will not be readily wiped out.—(Cheers). It is very different now. There are none of those meetings held in the country now. The Central Protection Society in London dares not allow the smaller societies in the country to hold their meet ings, for fear that the public should be made aware of the discontent which prevails in the camp of the protectionists.—(Cheers.) We , bold our meet ings openly. We have no desire to prevent our friends from assembling boldly in any part of the country and expressing their opinions on the subject of free trade.—(Cheers.) . This is one great proof that the cause whieh we advocate is based in truth. Any cause which is not based in truth has no principle of cohesion in it, and any combination to support such a cause becomes split up into fragments, and is scattered to the winds. There is no bond of union to hold men together for any length of time in sup port of any great cause, but truth; and when we see a great society like this holding together year after year, and assembling together constantly, as we are now assembled, it is a convincing proof that the cause which we advocate is the cause of truth and of justioe, if the experience of past times is to be trusted on the subject.—(Cheers.) It is said we are opposed to the established institutions of Church and State, and that under the guise of corn-law repeal we have revolutionary views, and wish to interfere with the existing arrangements of society—that we are jealous of distinctions, and speak evil of dignities; that under the plea of making known the princi ples of political economy, we are in reality endea vouring to excite class against class, and to spread through the land feelings somewhat resembling those which prevailed in France previous to the Revolution. There is nothing more untrue.—(Cheers.) There are amongst us men of all political opinions and of all religious persuasions. —(Cheers.) We have men amongst us who hold liberal opinions as to the extent of representation and forms of Go vernment; we have also in this great Association men of Conservative opinions, who think the present form of Government best adapted to the happ►ness of the country (Hear, hear.) We have never made pro fessions on other subjects a condition- of being a member of this Association.—(Hear, hear.) It unites all men—the only common ground upon which we stand is that of free trade, the striking off the fetters of commerce, and freeing mankind from those selfish combinations against the community for the benefit of a few known under the name of monopolies.— ' (Cheers.) We are what we profess to be. We are nothing less and nothing more ; and I am quite sure I speak the sentiments of the distinguished leaders of this Association, when I say there is no man, let his general opinions on any other subjects, political or religious, be what they may, who will not find a welcome here,' if he only supports the great prin ciple of commercial freedom.—(Cheers.) It is said we are enemies of agriculture—of the art of tilling the land. We enemies to the extension of art! We opposed to the progress of science in any form , or shape, adverse to any description of knowledge ! We are not opposed to agriculture. On the contrary, amongst the:mettibers of this Association will he found some of the best supporters of science at present existing in the United Kingdom.—(Hear.) There will be found in the Anti Corn-law League all the principal improvers of agricultural science; there will be found in it men who have enlightened"the agriculturists upon husbandry, and upon the different modes by which the produce of the earth may be increased.— (Hear.) I will venture to say, not in any part of the kingdom is any individual to be found more anxious to improve the agriculture of the kingdom, more anxious to see two blades of Kress where one was now produced, than our excellent leader, my friend Mr. Cohden.—(Hear.) His speeches are replete with sound advice to the agriculturists—his speechef, have led, I believe, practically to improvements in agricul ture ; his speeches in different parts of the kingdom have turned the attention of the agriculturist to the improvement of his art rather than that fatal reliance of what Parliament could do, which has hitherto :)een the bane of the farming body.—(Hear, hear.) We are no enemies to agriculture. It has been said chat we are enemies to the British farmer. When Anti-League meetings have been associated together they have told us the British lion—that is, the British tarrner—(Laughter)—was shaking his mane at us. He is beginning to think, in that part of the country where I reside, in Suffolk, that the League will turn out, after all, to be his real friend. We are no enemies of the British farmer. We desire to. see him prosperous. We know there can be no stability in the pursuits of the farmer till every vestige of monopoly is swept away.—(Hear, hear.) We-know that he is now building on an unsound basis—that he is raising his edifice on sand, and that it will not stand the shock with which it will have to ,:ontend.—(llear, hear.) Experience proves that there ;s no portion of the kingdom suffers more severely from the operation of the corn-laws than the British farmers. Then, it is said, we are opposed to the land owners. We are not opposed to men because they are landowners. We are opposed to the principle which is laid down by the landowners of the country, at least, many of them, that the possession of land en titles him to go to the Legislature and ask the Legisla ture to prevent persons from buying food from any one but him.--(Cheers.) If a shoemaker made a de mand that this metropolis should buy all its shoes of him, and we objected to such a monopoly—that any single person should have the shoeing of the inhabi tants of this metropolis, would it be said that we were opposed to shoe-making ?—(Hear.) We are opposed to the . unjust demands of the landlords; we are opposed to the principles laid down by them that trade is to be a secondary consideration in the country—that the merchant and the manufacturer, and all other classes, are not to be deemed equal in the eyes of the Legisla ture.—(Hear, hear.) We hold that all are equally worthy in the eye of the Legislature. The landowners have legislated for England in the spirit that they constituted the country, and the rest of the commu nity were but to enjoy just so much comfort, so much trade, so much of the conveniences of life, as may sill , their peculiar interests.— (Hear, hear.) That has been the principle of the landed legislators. You cannot look into the statute-book without discovering it in every page. I need not give a stronger instance of their favouritism than appeared in the Thnes news paper the other day—l mean the legacy duty.. That will give one smull instance of the way in which the landed proprietors have used their power in the Legis lature, for when personal property passes after death to another, it ha s t o pay a d u ty t o th e G overn ment while land e d property is exempted.—(Cheers.) But if I were to go over the numerous instances in which the landed interest have favoured themselves in tilt distribution of the burdens of the country, I should detain you much longer than I should desire, and your time unwarranta bl y. B ut t h t tre landed trespass s on proprietors and when I say landed proprietors, perhaps I am wrong in using the tern; too generally, because we have as members of this Association men of vast landed possessions, men who hold large quantities both of arable and pasture land. who are anxious to give up this odious monopoly, and who believe that it is, after all, a vain effort to benefit themselves at the expense of the community—vain because its recoil would fall on themselves, and pre vent them from having that full prosperity which would ensue if ccaninercial freedom were established. The landed proprietors say to the Anti-Corn-law League, "You, gentlemen, are very fond of talking about the corn-law monopoly, but you never say anything about other monopolies ; you always attack us ; why not ask other people to give up their mono polies? We do ask other people to give up their mono polies, but unfortunately the landed proprietors them selves are the Legislature of the country.—(Hear, hear.) It is they, and they only, that can give up the monopolies of other parties, and many of the monopolies they maintain are inoperative to the ad vantage of those parties, car are only maintained as excuses for the great corn monopoly.—(Cheers.) Besides, there is a great difference between other monopolies and the corn monopoly. If we look to any manufacturing monopoly, fresh capital can go into it, fresh mills can be built, and persons who have a monopoly granted to them will not long enjoy it, because the profits of capital will soon be brought down by competition to the profits of all other capital. You can build fresh mills, you can open fresh shops in particular districts, and give what monopolies you please to different branches of indus try, the competition of capital will bring down the profits in them to the ordinary profits of other capital. Those monopolies will not be less injurious to the community; but what I contend is, that the monopo lists, under the appearance of an advantage, will, in a short time, have no advantage at all, for the profits will soon be brought down by competition. But that is not so in the case of land. You may build more mills, but you cannot add more acres to England.— (Cheers.) The landed proprietors hold the monopoly of the land —thet you cannot increase in size ; and though the farmers who hold this land under them will never receive more than the ordinary profits of capita', give them what protection you may, there will be a surplus, in the shape of rent, for the landlords, which they keep a steady eye on, and which makes them unwilling to relinquish their monopoly, even if we abolished all other monopolies.—(Hear, hear.) And what a monstrous thing it is that there should be in these times any question of the propriety of repealing the corn-laws, when you look to the limited extent of this island, and the growth ofits population. There are 230,000 fresh human beings added to the population of England, exclusive of Ireland, each year. But there is not one additional acre added to your soil. There is no increase of acres; on the contrary, there is a diminution of them. Mr. Chadwick, the Secre tary to the Poor-law Commissioners, tells us that, as there are 230,000 fresh persons added to the popula tion every year, there must be an addition to the number of houses in which this population is to reside. He calculates that 59,000 new tenements are built in England every year. Manchester has only 30,000 houses, and Birmingham 27,000 houses; so that if your population is not to die in ditches, there must be built in England every year a number of houses which would occupy a space equal in extent to the two towns of Manchester and Birmingham. Thus, every year, the territory of the land is smaller for the purposes of agriculture and for the growth of wheat. Your available surface is becoming less and less, and to think that you should hear men in the House of Commons wisely telling the Legislature, or with a wise look (for their wisdom is in the au thority of their acres)—(Laughter)—and I suppose it is from that the term " wiseacre" is derived—(Great laughter)—gravely telling the assembled Commons that it is for the Advantage of this increasing popu lation, upon this limited soil, that every possible difficulty should be thrown in the way of the im portation of food from foreign countries.—(Cheers.) Mr. Chadwick, in the same volume, on the sanatory condition of the people of this country, tells us, what I am sure you have often heard repeated within this theatre, that in order to give sufficient food for this increasing population, there must be added to Eng land every year a county, equal in size to Surrey, unless you can devise some means ofgrowing more on the present extent. Now I fear, unless we repeal the corn-laws, we shall not make the present extent grow more. I believe we would get a benefit from their abolition in two ways —by increasing the supply from abroad, and from those at home too. They talk of guano island. I have no faith in guano without free trade.—(Cheers.) I have_no faith in the agriculture of the country put ting forth all their energies. I have no faith in lec-tures on under-draining, and the application of che mistry to agriculture, till we remove every vestige of protection from them, and prevent them from pro ceeding on an unsound and deceitful basis.—(Cheers.) There is another charge brought against the Anti- Corn-Law League, that we are opposed to the Church. —(Cheers). Why, we have in this society some very distinguished clergymen, and one of the brightest writers on political economy is the Archbishop of Dublin.—(Cheers). But still they say we are ene mies of the Church, because, if we were not, we would say, when we demand a repeal of the corn-laws, we will indemnify the clergy for any loss that may arise to them in reference to tithes and corn rents.—(Hear, hear, and laughter). Now, I admit that tithes and corn rents are entirely dependent on price, so that they cannot look upon any improvement in agriculture with comfort. They cannot look upon any improve ment which would lower the price of corn with a fa vourable eye. The clergy derives no consolation from guano.—(Laughter). The clergy were, therefore, the determined opponents of the Anti-Corn-law League, because their tithes and rent-charges de pended entirely on price. We may console the land lord by telling him to drain the land, and to expend more capital ; the farmer, by telling him that if prices fell rents would fall ; and the labourer, by telling him that if wages fell he could buy more with them ; but if the corn-laws were repealed the price would fall, and the clergy knew'that with the fall of price their. tithes and rent-charges would be also reduced; and to that they would not willingly agree. Mr. Cobden has most ingeniously, but with great truth, met the case with regard to the farmer—in some measure with regard to the landlord—and entirely with regard to the labourer ; but we have got to deal with the clergy. How are we to indemnify them ?—(Loud cheers.) A gentleman, for whom I have a very high respect, said to me, "If you can only convince toe that the abolition of the corn-laws will not produce a lessening in the price of corn, why, I wouldnot mind much to support the Anti-Corn-law League." That reminded me of what is said in one of Sheridan's plays by some one to his black servant—" Can you be honest, Mungo ?" " What you give me, massy ?" (Laughter.) That is the question which the clergy man has to consider. Is the corn-law a just law ? If it be unjust, abol;sh it, and take the consequences.— (Cheers.) That is the course which the clergy ought to pursue.—(Cheers.) The course which a clergyman should pursue between his income and his duty ought to, be this—if the repeal of the corn-laws makes the Church poor let it be poor, better be poor than unjust.—(Loud cheers.) I would give the sane answer which Dr. Charming gave to the slaveowner who complained that the abolition of slavery would make him poor. He said, "Be poor, then, and thank God for your honest poverty."—(Loud cheers.) I think I have completed, so far as I am individually concerned, the denial that there is that hostility to the labourer, the farmer, the landowner, or even the clergy, which was imputed to the Anti-Corn-law League. There is no hostility in the Anti-Corn law League to any individual whatever.—(Loud cheers.) All I contend for is, that it will be for the advantage of all those individuals, and not the least, of the clergy, that this law should be abolished ; for, if there be a loss in income, will not these be a gain in reputation and a relief from odium, the settling of discord, and the harmony of all classes in society, and the increase of social happiness? And if there he those gains, how can we set off against them, those paltry additions which it is said are made to some particular classes by a great infringement o" the first law of nature, of the first principles of civi liberty, that man bas a right to the full enjoymeni of his industry, and alone entitled to the rewards o his own labour, whether of head or hand Now it is said, " if you reduce the price of corn you will reduce the wages of the labourer." It is said that this Anti-Corn-law League are totally indifferent to the welfare of the labourer; that this question is a mere question between the manufacturers on the one hand; and the landowner on the other; and that the interest of the labourer is completely lost sight of. It is contended that the interest of the labourer would be even injured by reducing the price of corn and making food more abundant. Nim I should not have much difficulty. in convicting our opponents, by their own assertions, of uttering what they da not believe. What do I read in the papers ? Why, within the last two or three days I have seen, in the Morning Post and in otherj ournals, a statement that certain philanthropic gentlemen are about to establish a society for the purpose of grinding and baking for the poor.—(Laughter.) They propose to raise a large sum of money, and to erect mills, offices, and bakehouses, in order to un dersell the present millers and bakers, who, they tell us, are extracting too high a price for their bread from the pockets of the poor. But how does this tally with the notion that if you reduce the price of bread to the poor, you will reduce their wages? Why, what is it to me who raises the price of bread, whether it be raised by the miller, or the landowner, or the baker ? If the rating of the price be a benefit to me, I say, "Don't lower it."—(Hear, hear.) Tllc. labourer does not buy his bread in Mark-lane; we do not buy our corn, and our food, by the averilges which are published in the Gazette. No, we bu) our bread from the baker. They tell us , that if we make bread cheaper in price, we shall reduce wages. " Well, then," we reply, " if you make it cheaper by baking more chetiply,or grinding more cheaply, you wil make wages lower than !hey are at present." So that (hese philanthropic gentlemen are convicted by their own course of not entertaining the belief that the wages of_ the labourer will be reduced by reducing THE SUN, LONDON, THITRSDAy EVENING, JANUARY 16 1845. the price of bread.—(Cheers.) They seem deter mined that nobody shall 'rob the poor except the land lord.—(Great laughter.) Oh, it is a shocking thing for millers and bakers to be getting this large profit out of the hard earnings of the poor man, and it is a shocking thing for the people to make such advan tage of the labourer; but my Lord Duke is entitled to increase the ;Tice of flour by an Act of the Legis lature, and he has a right to call all men fools who do not believe with him, that to raise the price of flour in that way is a benefit, though in all other ways he admits that it is a curse.—(Hear, hear.) However, the day is not far distant when this great delusion will be thoroughly exposed and understood. I am convinced that we are approaching the time when the corn-law question, and the question of free trade, must have a practical issue. —(Hear, hear.) The Morning Post is an honest paper after all. What did the Morning Post tell the agriculturists but the other day ? It says that the only difference be tween the policy which even Sir Robert Peel is pre pared to pursue and the policy of the League, is this, that of Sir Robert's is a slow decay of gradual po verty, saddened by disappointed hopts ; while the other, the policy, namely, of the League, is prompt as the guillotine ; but he says they are both forms of extinction—both are going in the same direction to a certain extent. I believe this is true. I believe from all that I have heard Sir Robert Peel say in Parliament, that he is, .in his own mind, firmly convinced of the truth of the principle of free trade, but that he is prevented from doing all he would do by the power of the aristocracy of this country, which rules not only Sir Robert Peel, but the Queen upon her throne.—(Cheers.) The strongest Ministers that England has ever seen, have succumbed at last under the weight of this powerful landed aristocracy.— (Hear, hear.) Pitt succumbed under that weight when he yielded his point with regard to the legacy duties on landed and personal property. It was his intention to have placed the same duty on landed and personal property. It was his design that the lands of the great man should pay the same duty on passing to his heir, as the mo ne y or the furniture of the poor man pays in passing to his heir. Such, I s',y, was his intention, but he was overborne by the great landed aristocracy of the country. Ministers have always quailed before that tyranny ; and the only power in this country which can overcome the landed aristocracy, is the power which exists in such meetings as these.—(Loud cheers). It is the firm and indignant voice of the intelligent classes of this community, cons.ioas of their rights, and determined to vindicate them, which will make that landed aristocracy succumb.—(Cheers). The corn- law is the last—l will not say the last— but it is one of the badges of feudal barbarism.— (Cheers). It is a remain of the Norman Conquest, and it is for the Saxon population of this country to rise up and throw off this yoke.—(Hear, hear.) They, and they only, can do it. No Ministers that ever will be born can make them a present of commercial free dom. It will never be a free gift at the hands of the great. It will be wrested from the great by the exertions of the people themselves.—(lmmense cheer ing.) I know we are told that majorities are large, that landed gentlemen return numbers of Members to Parliament, and that the towns can never com pete with them. I would not despair, even if there were no plan so good as that which has been struck out by Mr. Cobden for the registration and formation of 40s. freeholders. No, I should not even then despair. I have faith in the ultimate conquest of truth over error—of reason over prejudice—of freedom over oppression.— (Cheers.) The experience of mankind tells me that those triumphs have always been accomplished. The mind of this country has but to be awakened, and I am persuaded that the hearts of all good men will be united in the cause of commercial freedom.—(Cheers.) It is emphatically the cause of justice—it is the cause of truth—it is the cause of civilisation—it is the cause of social happiness—and I cannot entertain the small est shadow of a doubt of its ultimate and enduring triumph.—(The Hon. Gentleman concluded his ad dress amidst loud and prolonged applause.) Mr. COBDEN, M.P., then came forward, and was received with customary enthusiasm. When the cheering had subsided, the Hon. Gentleman said— Ladies and Gentlemen,—Even I, who have almost lived in public meetings for the last three years, feel somewhat daunted at this magnificent spectacle. Why, is there here any friend or acquaintance of the Duke of Richmond ?—(Cheers and laughter.) If there be, I hope he will describe the scene of to night. Ido not know how he may be impressed, but I am quite sure that if the Duke of Richmond could assemble such a meeting as this in behalf of the monopolists, I should abandon in despair all hope o f repealing the corn-law. But this is only one meeting. When we look back at the numerous gatherings which we have had of a similar kind, and when we remember that not one discordant opinion, not a single violation of order, or even a breach of etiquette has occurred at any of our meetings, we cannot but feel that there is an amount of moral force gathered together around these great assemblies which it is impossible for any unjust law long to re sist. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I come before you to-night as a kind of connecting link, and a very short one, between twogentlemen who have not so recently presented themselves before you. I come between our most able and efficient fellow-labourer in the House of Commons, whose speech you have heard to night, and one of the most distinguished and accom plished orators of the age, who will follow me— (Cheers) —and I promise you that on this occasion I shall, in deference to your feelings, and in justice to myself; be very brief in my remarks.—(No, No.) Indeed, I scarcely know that I should have any pre tence for appearing before you at all, if it were not that we are preparing for our Parliamentary cam paign—that it will probably he some time before I have a similar opportunity. As we are preparing for that campaign, it may be as well, if we can possibly dive into futurity, to try and speculate at least upon what the course of proceeding may be in connexion with our question. Now I think I may venture, without anv great risk of failure to tell you what course the Prime Minister will pursue. He will at tempt his old arts of mystification.—(Laughter.) He has acquired, somehow, a great character as a finan cier—that is a character which amongst men of busi ness does not always place a man in the very highest grade of respectability. A clever financier ! He has nut the finances of the country in a satisfactory state. Yes, he has done so ; and how ? Why, I hope to your satisfaction, through the income-tax.—(Laugh ter.)—Now we have nothing to do with fiscal regu lations here. As free traders we have nothing to do with systems of taxation for revenue; but perceiving that it will be the policy of the Government, and of the Prime Minister in particular, to raise a dust, to shuffle the cards, and to mix up revenue taxation and free trade all together, I think we cannot do better, at the beginning of the year 1845, than by letting the' country know, even at the risk of repetition, what we, as free traders, really want—that we are not to be made supporters of this or that system of taxation, inasmuch as we want nothing which involves an increase of taxation of any kind. I have said again and again—and I now repeat—that free trade means the removal of all protective duties, and that protective duties are monopoly taxes paid to individuals and not to the Government.—(Cheers.) In order to carry out our principle of free trade— in order to realise what the League wants—what which, if granted, would dissolve it to-morrow—it is not necessary that one shilling of' taxation which goes to the Queen's Exchequer should be removed. You will increase the Queen's revenue in proportion as you take away those taxes which are now paid to particular classes and to individuals. We are told that there is a surplus revenue, and there is a great boast on this account. The income-tax has been productive. Those men with sharp noses and ink bottles at their buttons, who go about prying at the back doors of houses t o ascertain how many dinners you give in the ear, and who examine and cross-examine cooks and footbovs to find out what style of living vou adopt—(Daughter)—these men have managed to secure a very reasonable surplus revenue. Th ere i s now a very great contest among different parties as to what taxes are to he removed in consequence of this surplus. The parties dealing in cotton claim a re duction in the duty on that article; those who deal in malt claim a reduction of the duty on malt; and a third class step in and say, " Let us have half the duty taken off tea." Now, what I want to have clearly understood is this, that although there are many par ties claiming a specific reduction, you do not fi n d any one class organising themselves in opposition to the taking off of any tax paid to the Exchequer. Flow is it that we, who want to take o ff the tax on bread, meet with such a mighty opposition ? Why, it is because the tax which we pay on bread goes to the titheowner and the land owner, and not to Queen Victoria.—(Hear, hear.) Now, do you think it will do us any more harm to take off a tax which is paid to the squires, than one which is paid to the Queen's Exchequer , ?—(flear, hsar.) It seems to be universally admitted, that to reduce a tax paid to the Queen is a benefit to His, community at large; the only question is, who shall get the most. But when you come to reduce th e .1 lay on breada thous and dangers and difficulties arise. Talk to a man about the bread-tax, and he says, " It's a wry complicated question."—(Loud laughter.) Talk about that other ingr e di en t o f I the tea-table, tea. an I there is scarcely a gentle- I man or a gentlewoman t , , - ; ha found who will not hpo tnediately say, " I think it would be a very good thing to reduce the fluty." It you speak of takin g off the t a x on br ea d, people say, " Why, you want t o lower the wages of the working man, and to make us dependent on foreigners." Take the case of sugar. As free traders, we d 6 not want to reduce the g ileen i, tax on sugar; we simply want to bring the foreign tax down to :a level with the colonial tax on sugar, so that the whole tax paid shall go to the Queen's gxcheguer and not to the owners of estates in the Wrest Indies. Now nobody opposes the reduc tion of the duty on sugar so far as the Queen gets it ; but if we propose to tike away the tax which is paid to what is called the colonial interest, we have a powerful body arrayed against us, and all the same dangers are alleged es in the case of bread Now, this will serve to illustrate our position to those who are not in the habit of reasoning closely on this subject. I put it to any one, can it be less in jurious to a country to pay taxes to individuals who make no return, in the shape of services to the State, than it is to pay taxes which go into the Exchequer? Now, what we wish to guard ourselves againstis this, the mixing up by Sir R. Peel of our question of free trade with his dexterity in finance. If he likes to shuffle the cards, or, in other words, to make an interchange between tea, and cotton, and tobacco, and malt, and the income-tax, and to set up one interest against the other, it may suit him very well as an effort in the jugglery of statesmanship—(Laughter)—but let it be understood that we have nothing to do with that mystification and shuffling. Ours is a very simple and plain proposition. We say, "Abolish those mo nopolies which go to enrich the majority in Parlia ment, and which placed and keeps it in power." I confess I am more afraid of our friends being taken in by plausibilities and mystifications than anything else. I wish we had the Duke of Richmond, or his Grace of Buckingham, in power for a twelve month.—(Laughter.) Let them only avow what it is they really want, and it would not be long before we should have achieved the object of our organisation.—(Cheers.) Now Sir Robert Peel will meet Parliament under circumstances which may per haps call for congratulations in the Queen's speech. Manufactures and commerce are thriving, and the revenue is flourishing. Now, was that ever known when corn was at an immoderately high price ? (Hear, hear.) Why, the present state of our finances and manufactures afford an illustration of the truth of our doctrines. I have been, as the Chairman has told you, during the last two months paying a visit to nearly all the principal towns in Lancashire and Yorkshire. I have seen the great prosperity prevail ing there, where four years ago the people were plunged in the greatest distress, and I am glad to tell you that I have everywhere witnessed larger and more enthusiastic meetings than were held in the time of the great crisis of distress. We have arrived at that time which I thought would be most difficult to test this agita tion. I mean the time at which the manufacturers of this country have returned to a temporary pros perity. We are proof against that trial. We have had larger, and more enthusiastic, and more influential meetings than we have ever had before—(Cheers.) I am happy to tell you, that as far as the north of England goes, the present state of prosperity in busi ness is merely recruiting the funds of the Anti-Corn law League.—(Cheers.) There is not a working man in the manufacturing districts who has not had his eyes opened to the enormous falsehoods which have been uttered by the monopolists during the last five years. These men do not deal largely in books ; they are not very great theorists or philo sophers, but they have a lively faith in what passes under their own noses.—(Laughter.) They have seen the prices of provisions high, and have at the same time seen pauperism and starvation in their streets • they have seen prices low, and the demand for labour rising, and wages increasing in every part of Lancashire and Yorkshire—the very oppo site fact from that which we are told exists. In fact, some working men have their employers so completely at their mercy, that they can dictate their own terms to their own employers. I have heard one gentleman in the north say, that if the corn-laws were repealed he should not be able to manage them at all. I was at Oldham the other day, and during our proceedings at a public meeting held at the Town-hall, a working-man got up in the body of the hall and begged to say a few words as to the effect of high and low prices on the wages of the opera tive. I have here a verbatim report of his words. Joseph Shaw, the working man to whom I allude, said : "Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I rise for the purpose of making a few remarks on the subject of the corn-laws. I have but once before spoken before a member of Par liament, viz., Mr. Hindley,: at a public meeting at Lees. I have spoken once at Ashton and Saddleworth, but never before in Oldham. I have thought on the subject of the corn-laws for the last twenty years and more, and I have ever seen great reason to con demn them. As'there is no probability that I shall ever see Sir Robert Peel, as he never comes down into this neighbourhood, and I being not able to bear the ex. pence of going to London, I wish you (addressing Mr. Cobden) to be so kind as to tell him what you have heard a working man say on the subject of the corn-laws in a large and respectable public meeting in the town of Old ham. lam now, and have been long of opinion, that the corn-laws are very injurious to the working classes, and I will tell you how I prove it. I have been in the habit of observing that, when the prices of food have been high, wages have been low, which sufficiently accounts for the dreadful state of Stockport and the other manu facturing towns and districts two or three years since. At that time, when wheat was .up to about 70s. a quarter, the working man would have 255. per quarter to pay for it more than now when it is down to 455., and consequently would have 255. less to lay out for clothing and other necessaries for his comfort during the time he was consuming a quarter of wheat. I have further to state, that, since the prices of eatables have come down, I have seen a deal more new fustian jackets in our village of Lees than I have seen for four or five years during the time of high prices ; and I will also tell you how I ac count for that. When provisions are high, the people have so much to pay for them that they have little or nothing left to buy clothes. with; and when they have little to buy clothes with, there are few clothes sold; and when there are few clothes sold, there are too many to sell; and when there are too many to sell, they are very cheap; and when they are very cheap, there cannot be much paid for making them; and that, consequently, the manufacturing working man's wages are reduced, the mills are shut up, business is ruined, and general distress is spread through the country. But when, as now, the working man has the said 255. left in his pocket, he buys more clothing with it (aye, and other articles of comfort too), and that increases the demand for them, and the greater the demand, yOu know, makes them rise in price, and the rising in price enables the working man to get higher wages and the masters better profits. This, therefore, is the way I prove that high provisions make lower wages, and cheap provisions make higher wages." Now, is it not impossible, that when there can be found one intelligent man like this, to rise at a public meeting and give so clear and satisfactory a view of the working of the system, that other equally intelligent men, his fellow-workmen, should net also be equal') able to do so? Well, gentlemen, one by one these fallacies of our opponents have been, by a continued and successful course of exposure, cut from under the feet of the monopolists.—(Cheers). Now, I do not know that the objects of the Association can be better advanced than by reiterating what is our mode of attack, what the grounds of our principles, what the provision for the fight.—(Loud cheering). In allud ing to these, I may tell the gentlemen with the pens in their hands that they may lay them down, for I repeated the same things a hundred time before, but seeing some persons present who seem strangers to our objects, I will again this evening refer briefly to them. We do not want a free trade in corn for the purpose of reducing the wages of the working man. If we did so, we should keep up the corn-laws, because experience has proved that wages have ever been lowest when corn was at the highest price.—(Cheers.) We do not want to be de pendent upon foreigners for our supplies of food, or to give a higher price to one country at the expense of another, merely because they took our manufactures. Supposing one of our manu facturers who voted for the corn-laws sending goods to China, and supposing that he said to the people of that country, " Give us a higher price than you give to the French or Germans, for we have a corn-law in Eng land imposing a tax u r n the articles imported, and I always vote fur it.' 'Why, what would the men with the pigtails say ? They would naturally enough say this, " If you are such blockheads in England as to submit to a high bread-tax, we are not such fools as to give you a hi . her price than we give to the Germ ins." You compete with foreigners now, but you would be better able to compete with them if you could get bread at the same price that they do.(Continued cheering.) Well, then, gentlemen, the object of' free trade in corn is this—to have inure trade ; and the Old - ham operative shows how more trade would raise the workman's wages. We want trade, and more par ticularly free trade in that article that so materially ministers to the comforts of the working man. Now, in that case, every cargo of corn that comes into the country—every quarter of corn will serve the working classes in two ways. In the first place, when corn is cut at all, it must be paid for, and there fore it is that I say . every quarter of corn that enters our ports :serves him in two ways. It can only be paid for by a demand for his labour, and an increased demand for his labour will increase his wages, whilst it lowers the price of corn. This w ill also benefit other classes, but only through the working classes— that is, through the classes that now unfortunately do not get enough to eat. But then the farmer objects if you bring in foreign corn, because for every quarter you so bring in there is just so much the less a mar ket for the home farmer. It is but just and reason able that the people in this country should be suffi ciently fed. The class that I belong to—the middle olass—is sufficiently fed; the upper classes get more than what is sufficient—more than, in fact, is good for them—(Laughter and cheers)—but the work ing classes—and in this I include the Irish, the Welsh, the labouring s—l say are not—t o o ur shame be it said—are not half fed.—(Cheers.) You have all heard the anecdote of the Irishman in Ken tucky, who could not write, and who, wishing to send a letter to his friends in Ireland, got his master to write it for him :—" Dear Murphy, I am here in America, happy and comfortable, and get -neat once a day." His master said, "Get meat once a day ! what do you mean ? You can get meat three times a day if you wish it."—" Ah, sure yer anner, but thim at home wouldn't.. behave, id if I tould thim."— (Cheers and laughter.) Weil l now, why should not the working men of this country be allowed to have as much meat if they can get it as the labourer of America? It is a hard penalty to be obliged to send three thousand miles to be fed, but this peneitt of nature, which the allwise Creator of the world im poses upon us, is greatly increased when certain per sons, the owners of land here, step in an .1 throw obstacles in the way, and prevent the men of this country being fed by their fellow-creatures three thousand miles off. All persons being sufficiently fed, it follows that the introduction of better prices will not hurt the farmer, and those who are now sufficiently fed will still con tinue to be his customers. All we say is, that those who now do not get enough, have an undoubted right to get bread for the produce of their labour, be it of the head or of the hands.—(Cheers ) Now the case of wool will well illustrate the truth of what I say. During the last year, not less than 2,000,000 of pounds have been introduced more than in any previous year. And why ? The Id. duty had been taken off, and this vast influx of wool was but the natural consequence ; yet farmers in this country still got from twenty to thirty per cent. more for their wool than before. How is this ? Simply because the extension and prosperity of the manufacture increa , e3 in a greater ratio than the increase in the importation of the wool. And so if you give freedom to commerce, the ability to con ume food will be proportionably increased.— (Cheers.) I feel shame to reiterate these truisms to you, but I feel that they are necessary in the present position of the question. My own firm conviction, gentlemen, is, that this question cannot be carried in doors, in the House of Commons, in the next session, although in its progress in that House the supporters of free trade should express with a fertility of argument the justice and expediency of their demands—although they should cover their opponents with disgrace in debate—although these op ponents should talk such stuff that the veriest child would be ashamed of it out of the House, yet these opponents will still vote for the corn-laws. It would be just as easy to draw a kid out of the maw of the wolf, as to get them to vote on our side in this national question.—(Cheers). I remember, that at the beginning of our labours in London, a certain Noble Earl called upon us at Brown's Hotel. We met him at a private interview, and he asked what we intended to petition for? We answered, the total re peal of the corn-laws.—(Loud and long-continued cheering). The Noble Earl then said, "My belief is, that the present Parliament would not pass a 12s. fixed duty certainly not a 10s. ; but, for a total repeal of the corn-laws, oh, you may as well try to overturn the monarchy." Now, I do not think that they will think the con summation so remote now, and, if you go to Tattersall's, my Lord George may not b e i n clin e d to lay long odds that this law will last much longer.— (Laughter and great.cheering.) We are doing all we can to shake the old edifice, but it wants a good deal of battering yet to bring it down.—(Cheers.) Down, however, it must go, if we enlarge the consti tuency.—(Continued cheering) I have done some thing in aid of this object since last I saw you.— (Tremendous cheers.) I have done something to wards bringing some four or five thousand voters, good men and true, upon the electoral list—(En thusiastic cheering)—four or five thousand votes that will very greatly influence the counties of Lanca shire, Yorkshire, and Cheshire.—(Cheers.) But a good many more in the country could be equally well organised. Some people had said, and many say, "It is dangerous and unconstitutional thus to invite persons to take up their freedom by buying 40s. qualifications." I say, without being in any way revolutionary or de mocratic, that the sooner the power is transferred from a landed oligarchy, and placed absolutely in the hands of the industrious—the middle and working classes, the sooner it will work well for the com munity.—(Cheers.) I hope that every man who has it in his power to purchase himself a franchise for a county will regard it as a sacred and solemn duty to do so before the 31st of January. I ask you to take into your own hands the power of doing justice to the twenty-seven millions of people in these islands. You remember what the immortal Watt said, when presented before his Maajesty George the Third The Monarch asked him what he had made, and the great inventor of the steam-engine replied, " I have made that which kings are fond of— power I"—(Great cheering.) Now, we seek to create a moral power, by inducing those favourable to the abolition of the corn-laws to place themselves on the electoral lists of the country. We wish not merely to have the boroughs, but in carrying the war into the country of the squires, we wish to give the counties to the towns, instead of, as formerly, the towns to the counties.--(Great cheering.) There should be no father now but ought to purchase a county qualification for his son, and—there are ladies here—though it is a strange anomaly that ladies cannot vote themselves, yet they can confer votes on other persons—l wish they could vote. for they would make a better use of it than their husbands and brothers do.—(lmmense cheering.) When in Manchester yesterday--for now the power of steam brings that town within an eight hours' journey, a lady presented herself to make inqu ries how she might confer a freehold qualification on her son before the 31st of January. She received every instruction how to do so. Now, the ladies who feel strongly on this question cannot do better than make an addition to the county votes, by conferring suel• where they can bestow that privilege. The time is short, and we have much to do. Let us qualify for Lancashire, the West Riding of Yorkshire, and Middlesex. I will guarantee Lanca s hire an d th e West Riding if you will assure the county of Middlesex. This is a labour in which all may engage. It re quires no ostentatious exertion—no gaudy oratory.— (Cheers.) Let all follow up the movement—let all do their best to further this object.—(Cheers.) We are not without consolation in the meantime ; for when I think of this odious and oppressive system— when I see the people of this country tamely submit ting to this odious tax, deprived of the first necessary of life—l blush that my countrymen should submit to it ; but I console myself that I did my best to put an end to it.—(lmmense cheering ) The Rev..W. J. Fox then came forward to address the meeting, and was received with the most en thusiastic cheering. The Rev. Gentleman several times attempted to address the meeting, but such was the rapturous reception given, that for some minutes he could not obtain a hearing. Silence having been somewhat restored, he proceeded as follows :—The practical measure by which the Anti•Corn-Lan League is characterised this present year, is that to which Mr. Cobden has just adverted—the correction of the registration of counties, and the enlarging o: the county constituency, by inducing the wealthy free traders of towns to employ part of their surplus money for such a purpose, and the industrious classes of the same towns to invest their savings in purchasing forty-shilling freeholds, in the contemplation, at no distant time, of meeting the lords of the soil on their own ground, and, as we confidently believe, fight, aye, and drive them from their own strong-holds.— (Cheers.) This policy has excited a remarkable degree of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. The displeasure at it has been expressed by the use of the Word uncon stitutional, which, for the purpose of political dis grace, is analogous to the word respectable as a moral characteristic. The late William Hazlitt says that one never calls a man respectable if there can be any other defined quality by which he can be designated. If a man uses ardent and ima ginative language—if he makes good verses you call him a poet; if a person is learned in profound problems, if versed in diagrams, you call him a ma thematician or philosopher, till, having run the round ef the qualities by which men may be honourably distinguished, and having failed in discovering any one of them, you conclude by saying he is certainly a respectable man. And so in politics, if a person acts not illegally when he violates no engage ment of the laws of the land—if he cannot be charged with acting immorally because he com mits no breach of the commandments, if you cannot account his conduct dishonourable when it is perfectly consistent with all conventional forms, von can fail back on the word which has been inferred, and say, at any rate, " It is very unconstitutional."--(Laughter and cheers.) Although it is with singular impropriety that such dispraise is applied to a policy that tends to give life to the constitution—to make it more than a dead letter, and to enlarge the number of those who possess its prvileges, and through that extension to multiply its blessings to the community—(Cheers)— we displease our enemies, but we gratify our friends. With the Central Society for the Protection of Agriculture the case is reversed, and whatever is the effect of these proceedings on their s opponents, certainly during the last year they have excited the strongest dissatisfaction and reproof from their friends.-- (Cheers.) Never was protection, if it can be so called, so thinly represented. They stated that they were the friends of the labourer and of the farmer, but thi - oughout these classes there was hut one feeling of disappointment and uneasiness. At a meeting they held the other day —not a meeting like that of the League, unless every Noble Duke counted for a thousand, and every Member of Par liament for two hundred—at a general meeting of the Great Central Society—(Laughter)—in the first floor in Boni-street, numbering about forty, even the members of the Committee found fault with their own report, and baeliod their own dissatisfaction by saying that :t was generally thought throughout the country that the agriculturists had carried out nothing—had done nothing—attempted nothing—had not suggested or originated any proceeding—had not gone to Man chester, and had not held a great discussion there. I wish they had done so. • They thought the farmers were going to ruin, for the prices which were to have been secured at 565. by Sir Robert Peel's Bill, were found not to have averaged five-and-forty shillings And there war?, truth and reason in this disatisfaetion. The League had risen during the last twelve months in the-opinion of every well-thinking man, and the monopolists had by its exertions been led to mortifica.J ------- ------ ] tion, defeat, and disgrace.—(Cheers.) The, ILA taught the monopolists tnis lesson, that ttl_ej not attempt to carry out their principles by 5 . means. Wheat and corn was grown by the taw' ..t,. and so were surf lives and gowns.—(Chee rs. t_ but after ail this, was it not better to ha ve a 11' than no bread?—(Cheer i.) law League had used all means in their pO lB-1. ., accomplishment of the great object they hat! '__`' and they had succeeded in a most ernaw, hustings. Their great efforts now must be hustings. That was the principal focus to Nvh,l c , The leaders of the l strength was to be applied. Now, how does tr i : Corn-law League act, notwithstanding all L ts been said against it ? Did it follow the I.°° the Duke of Buckingham ?—(Cheers.) D id it ~. dirty tricks and unworthy proceeding to pi p ' ends ?—(Cheers.) The mandate of the Log' gone forth that the people shall have che,llsll and that mandate will be carried out , not means of trickery on the part of the Leagolelli the means of the people themselves. He sl,e, e to see her Majesty—God bless her—(t' u f conic to their free trade bazaar next May ;of did not expect her to take a stall there---t:e - ter)—but he was sure that none would I v. , with a more hearty welcome.—(Cheers.) 1 1 useless to di,guise facts. The leadets of th e w had shown themselves to be men w ho w° 11 t , cease to persevere in obtaining the great ohje c lit ere long, they hoped to obtain. In the gr t e o in which they were engaged, they had n° 03 1 or more hearty friend than Colonel Theo (Cheers)—and he trusted that the time w t 'o c , distant when they would see him in the.„.lo, Commons fighting the battles of the .1-41,u; (Cheers.) What was the object of the s a l Why, to make bread cheap, to enable the to be well paid, and to ensure the peaP le ,_ 1 tuency which would send such Membersltube went as would look to their interests. l e d law League wished to make a couat e v reality and not a farce.—(Cheers.) ~,,'",., this the interference of strangers! 'Jut e absurd way of speaking of the Le a giT e gl stranger everywhere; I co ntend that the J-.4c_t now a stranger nowhere! We are domesti; London ; besides, the League is with evell,,, f sees clearly, and wh ose h ear t b ea ts strong cause of free trade.-7(Cheers.) We, lwri ‘ e;. 0 01 League in London ! an d, if you look 3 ' e: the towns and districts o f th e country, w he f rj, see the true interests o f the I.l _, 3tw i.inl feel the wrongs of th e p oor , and " t he against oppression, say this tax i upon _ „„ 0 of the indigent shall n o t continue--w e r i il League! The League are th e r e ! When j 7 re o or Lord Radnor rise i n th e i r pl a ce to 9 " iloti fellow Peers, then the League is in th e ho d Lords—(Cheers)—and w h en by an y chae ce ' t he remote, a courageous thought shall arise 'o. i i it of the Premier, and one h ones t determiaß t ,T a lilf matter should come from hi s mo uth on°6lo leagues, then the League w ill be in the ill( (Loud cheers.) Principles of this nature or e s , t air and water ; they h ave an e lements : a l e presence ; they are wherever there is 6 and warmth of feeling. B es id es , what representation representation ? Are no t t ow ns :-, 11l part and parcel of counties ? Are %j e l li ng countries ? Are they " aliens in blood , 0 0 and religion ?"—(Loud cheers.) Are ne t , l'i 90, ties made of th e to wns an d c iti es i n them , f oili not arise as the crown of the riches and ;,0° your prouder countie s ? A n d w h e re ther e - 100 fertility, but where natural treasures lie Oll surface, do we not find works and harbone coast ? Why, the towns and cities • :,,, 00 counties, by a work whi c h may s to compared to creation; they give ~,a: i' the numbers, wealth, gran d e ur, au fo% tance which nature seemed to have gi or overlooked.—(Cheers.) What w ould ' t o , be if you struck Lo n d on ou t o f i t ?—(C be fLo ° f what would your m o st r ura l coun ties be ' TOv from them the advantages of their towns ? de e richest•counties, those said t o b e th e most i n bul Of towns, what would th e y d o it y ou did 13: );10 wheat at their own monopolist price ? $; :il not often feed their poor who see, l ' do : eil l i ; here ? Do you not supply with emPk c 'r, B,'" refuse and surplus hands ? Do you not A e i l, P`', l to the victims who seek refuge here? : ). ;,...(v all this, do you not purchase their game; 01 0 , and laughter.) Cities are the hearts ei At; and are the last portion of them that el i t' av e left unrepresented. If it be said they . 0 :' no own separate representation, I say, i t , 4 0 0 at all. It is property that is re p r esentea A A authority of the law und e r w hi c h we liv e ', r,,,," ever has a freehold of forty s hilli n gs a Per the constitution supposes, and, b 3 supposi n g; and demands of us, if we are pa t r i o tic, a e„ r g iat, ing vote also. It i s no t your f or ty shi ll O A ; holder who i s re p resente d b y the C 1,114.0 Members • he has yet his claim "" 0 10,' and well is it when that claim ye, urged with such h a ppy resu lt s as `r i to attend it in the pr esen t instanne'ol,l ' this plan there is a moral good beY: t iool haps, that which in its original con ce r,ter thought of. It tends to act upon the char''' ti pl entire labouring population of the countrit t o,, working classes, and the more toilsome LPL,' s iPP i j middle class ; it holds out to them the ho p e or wise of an incitement of the most desirol;'• ,' I eating description. It says to them, '' /0 0 proprietor of a portion, however mat 0 ,01 4 0 England. Have a stak e i n th e on' a, 1 something here. It was thought A bf it i thing when, by the measure i n t ro duerrd late Mr. George Ros e , th e sav i ngs b a nks `,, - tito connected with th e p u bli c f un d s o f the c°' soll was thought a judicious link b which °wit' those who c ou ld amass on l y ver Y sma ll stim: vii se ; national ins,itutio ns an d interests. If it gt i rel'i good to end eavour t o ma k e a ll w h o co uld l''', 3 l; tance become fundholders, it must h e icli! as wise and good t o i n d uce th e m, a ccn the'' their proporti on or means , t o i n duce 00 0 become landholders also, joint shor t co l ol their lovely and b eau tif u l coun t r y—thee as much as it was that o f th e welg'" ee roj whose lands cover half a county- - ( v ":th r d iJ gives them a tangible bond o f conn exion o i 0 ra and a feeling of independ en t and bo ae o ecri they are put in possession of that which w n5 ,301i1 to citizenship in the republics of ancient oleo which was best adapted to cherish in th e f i l6 of consistency, propriety, and dignity °if an 'loll The poet Campbell describes the feelings ° vi heal ' when he wanders through a village • 110 h°. wistfully at a cottage with a little garde n ' „ill' hangs over the gate and says— old ' " Oh! that for me some home like this I t o, d , , Some hamlet's shed to yield my sicklY ' l , ° e - st‘ P. o Health in the breeze, and shelter from 'lie el And such, too, is the hope of those vvhn' e fi sta l 'lnc been spent in toilsome exertions and cl je fot e ii durance. Let theni take opportunity hY,. t ,seo 0, r , at least to such an extent as this; the 1 )- 05 e g g holds out such an incitement to mi l " oil fi re country ; may the spirit rise to spur thee i the i V seize, and, obtaining it, they may think of °f l i the high-road towards a better choie e tio a l: 1 0 lators, and a more complete identifie s in ter o ill interests of those who toil with the , h e cil'rci those who think, a better direction for ' t del!, IV classes extending throughout the dirferee 9 d9 S III tions of society. The House of Comae so d (1/ better show what it is to have a full, nals:cl' , representation of the Commons of ,ijise s 1 (Loud cheers.) You have had well-u rto rn of 16 you this evening the constituent el e tb ia 0 I ) great financier. You have heard so°:; 1 • 0 0 t b ;/ 1 prosperity of the reve nue . I have a ll ° t ao° o i revenue is most prospe rous w hen mo re orb e , 1; mains in our own poc k e t s than _,,, te r.1 0 ,1 1 ' is taken ou t o f them.—(Cheers and lattro.otldll comparative prosp e rity, for it is only c° ll lo, s ole falsified ev,ry assertion of the in000Po; tb di tio lt i verified every prediction of the leader s °f o ig 106 —(Hear, hear.) We rejoice that the'. flit , 0 OP comparative prosperity ; but Yet, 11° , W r ies P ti do ill o gone towards the reduction of the t rtl e s i e o - doe t f o i t l 'i i a t ti bosoi (lured by a very large portion of rake up the daily newspapers, and J-, ioo "4,5 v,; look at them for many days in suceet:ordePioje; meeting again and again coroners' itigli es „,, a 17° „plf I / 0 1 destitution—some poor wretch perishes v ss or ,- 0 . 0 i straw, in them tier of a hovel, where he lig, .1 0 th 1 0. any nutriment for days and nights! 1% t il : to, e , is )! such scenes as this, it is not for our effor„,ooooie., is not for us to " bate one jot of heart 0 , 1 ' 0 " . doe!. great struggle, but still to " press rigil l ' n ° t of ne istl e _ o is another testimony to the fearful am ( ,' ll re nt syjt i er that yet remains untouched in the dir''' ti WA, continually forming ; societies such as );. 0 4) ,- thel i ti t ; of, for grinding aid baking the bread 0 5i1. ,6 societies for furnishing the poor with 136 . 0 wor, :o. ge ing- Louses—societies for setting them ' d oh', sieties for putting them into the I ) " ha ve' t iel societies for relieving the wants o f „, ae 0 . ,„ I women. And the leaders of the Leng e f e e these les b e tter , sor 0 V. blamed, because they looked coldly en,;freree care II and evinced a jealous, or, at least, an lo"' eat or ',I il l , towards then], as if they must be indiffere en ter e . e f, V' ' of the wants of the poor, unless they o f re tie le these specific modes, or attempted moti , e_ s or e l' Oil fact being that the leaders of the LeoVi:f th e '' fit s solicitous for the removal of the roi 6( ; he y 51 , 1 „ ° , 1 5, $ (1 who thus complained of them ; but ' re teos t i l l ° I, as measures of relief, these are mere P„ w or, to „ so miserably inefficient as to be s caree'i w inc° oo t " I thought, while the great battle still re_, the ! w ag fought about that which could alone rell,c r ",,. Iv_ 1 ,00 1 , the ( vil, and abolish it from the coup' fa the oers deep feeling, and not a want of fe r e t l i i r n ig g to ... t h h e n e s: . e ll it t th io a n t s o ; e i c n a l s t io a n i ( l • o d , his mode of adve that those ho , b 0 quick to detect what is i s : 3'r' re pres if on the part of free trader, Inigu" that tliof `'l