# History of the Anti-Corn Law League/Chapter5

CHAPTER V.
ORIGIN OF THE LEAGUE.
With the prospect of a wet autumn, and a deficient harvest, or wheat inferior in quality, requiring an admixture of foreign-grown, not admissable but at heavy duties, it seemed likely that a lecturer would find audiences. There was a certain Dr. Birnie, who, about the end of July, announced a lecture on the Corn Laws in the Bolton Theatre. There was a good attendance, and the lecturer was well received but he had provided himself with a great bundle of papers, and he could not readily find those to which he wished to refer. When he did find them he read them badly, his connecting observations were not understandable, and, the meeting expressing its impatience, he came to a complete stand still. In one of the boxes sat several gentlemen with Mr. Abraham Walter Paulton, Mr.a young medical student Thomas Thomasson said: "Do Paulton get on the stage and say something, and don't let such a meeting be lost." The young man rushed round to the stage, and asked the meeting to hear him for a few minutes. The people had come to hear, and they called "hear, hear," and "go on." He did go on for a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes, and created a wish that he should be heard more at length; and it was arranged that he should deliver a lecture there on Monday, August 6th. The theatre on that night was crowded, and the young lecturer not only showed that he had carefully ​studied the question, but that he had, in his earnestness and energy, and mastery of appropriate language, and combination of argument, with appeals to high moral principle, the power of deeply interesting an audience.
Dr. Bowring was to pass through Manchester, on the 10th September, on his way from Liverpool to Blackburn, where a public dinner was to be given in his honour. He had recently returned from a mission to promote more free commercial intercourse with some of the European powers, and with the Viceroy of Egypt; and I, thinking that the relation of his experience would be useful at a time when men began to talk one with another about the absurdity as well as the iniquity of the corn monopoly,sent out a hundred circulars, saying that some friends of free trade would meet him at the York Hotel on the evening of that day. About sixty responded to the very hasty invitation. I was called upon to take the chair, and Philip Thomson the vice-chair. Mr. Dr. Bowring being introduced to the meeting, was received with great enthusiasm. After alluding to the desolation he had witnessed, the result of the long war between Turkey and Egypt, and to the prospects that would be opened out by a more general recognition of the principles of peace, he said:—
After adverting to the improvement which would take place in countries desolated by war, were the principles of free trade recognised, Dr. Bowring exclaimed:"Why, England, if only she pleased, might become the universal benefactor! Ask the Duke of Wellington, and the other advocates of the Corn Laws, as to what would be the consequences of a war? Do you believe that war would be possible when we had universal trade? Who quarrels with his benefactor? Or if he quarrel, does he not ere long seek to heal the breach? Who would seek to quarrel with those who were perpetually communicating to them benefits and blessings? Gentlemen, I hope the time is coming when the warrior will not be looked to as the defender of England, but the peace maker. The happy state of things will come, in which we shall look on the victories of commerce, and the victories of peace, as far more glorious than any that have been gathered in fields where blood has been poured out like water."
Mr. George Hadfield said that although the Corn Law had been passed against the will of the people, most strongly manifested, it was extraordinary that from that time to the present there had not been one simultaneous popular effort made to overturn it. We seemed, therefore, to have degenerated, and with all our talk of the advance of political science, seemed to have been going down the hill instead of up it. Well might Lord Chandos say that the farmer was beginning to be at peace on this question. He was sorry to see men trying to set reformers at variance on other questions in order to keep them back from looking at this.The repeal of the Corn Laws would probably amount to six times the good that would attend the repeal of the new Poor Law. The profit to the country would probably be six times the amount paid to the poor ​altogether. The aristocracy had joined the outcry against the new Poor Law, and talked about the rights of the poor merely by way of throwing as they thought a tub to the whale, and drawing the attention of the people from looking at heavier grievances. And should this continue? Should not this great town exert its powers and say at once, "We will not have our trade shackled by your laws, made—not for the farmer as was pretended, not for the benefit of the country at large,—but exclusively to maintain high rents?" It was time to unite heart and hand on this question, and challenge the whole country to put their shoulder to the wheel, and get rid of a system alike offensive to the laws of God and man. This incitement to action was followed by loud cheering.
I then proposed the health of Colonel Thompson, whose writings in favour of reform had done much to procure an amendment of the representative system, and who, in addition to the instruction so well given in his Corn Law Catechism, "was then engaged in exposing every new landlord fallacy. The toast was received with loud applause. The next I gave was, "The health and happiness of the poor hand-loom weavers, who have set the example of petitioning for the repeal of the Corn Laws." I said, "I could not but regret that the merchants and manufacturers of Manchester should have been so long supine under a system which threatened to deprive us of a great portion of our commerce, and that their Chamber of Commerce had been so long inert under it. However, an example had been set them by the HAND-LOOM WEAVERS, during the late inquiry into their condition, when a number of them met, and came to the conclusion that whatever might be attempted for their relief (and amongst the systems proposed was the constitution of a board of masters and men to settle disputes about prices, as in France), no benefit could reach them without a repeal of the Corn Laws. These men, who were so reduced that they could not buy ​the paper for a petition without assistance, had sent up a petition for the repeal of the Corn Laws, bearing 22,000 signatures. I could not help thinking that it was degrading to the merchants, manufacturers, and tradesmen of a town like this, that the poor hand-loom weavers should have to set them this example."
Mr. James Howie, a man always prompt for action, said that what had just fallen from the chairman reminded him that we had here no Anti-Corn-Law Association. He believed that if the devil himself had contrived a system for the destruction of the human race, he could not have framed a code of laws more adapted for the purpose than the insolent aristocracy had done. He should propose that the present company at once form themselves into such an association, and though few in number, be the rolling stone that should gather strength in its progress. Mr. Howie's proposition was well received, and I requested all who were favourable to its object, to meet at the same place on the following Monday evening.
The health of Mr. Paulton was then given, with commendation of his lectures at Bolton of Mark Philip, M.P. for the borough; of Earl Fitzwilliam, as an opponent of the Corn Laws; and of Mr. Brotherton, M.P. for Salford, to which his brother-in-law, Mr. Wm. Harvey, responded.
M. Frederic Bastiat, in his "Cobden et la Ligue," published in 1845, says: "Seven men united themselves at Manchester, in the month of October, 1838; and with that manly determination which characterizes the Anglo-Saxon race, they resolved to overturn every monopoly by legal means, and accomplish without disturbance, without effusion of blood, with the power only of opinion, a revolution as profound, perhaps more profound, than that which our fathers worked to effect in 1789." There is no reason why the names of those seven men, possessing "cette virile determination qui characterise la race Anglo-Saxonne," should not be known. The first meeting to ​form the Association was held at the York Hotel, on Monday, September 24th, and was attended by the following persons: Edward Baxter, W. A. Cunningham, Andrew Dalziel, James Howie, James Leslie, Archibald Prentice, and Philip Thomson. At this meeting the failure of former associations was attributed to the want of a popular foundation, and it was resolved that the subscriptions should be only five shillings, in order that all classes should be included as members. Some apprehension was expressed that persons not disposed to demand the total repeal of the Corn Laws might join the association, and destroy its hold on public confidence by asking for a half-measure, to which the reply was that the very name the Anti-Corn-Law Association, which meant an association against any corn law, would be a guarantee against any future change of its purpose. The meeting had just closed when Mr. William Rawson, afterwards treasurer for the League, arrived, having come hastily from Liverpool on purpose to be present, and found two or three members with whom he conversed on the object of the Association.
The second meeting was held on the Monday following, and was attended by W. A. Cunningham, Andrew Dalziel, James Howie, James Leslie, Archibald Prentice, William Rawson, and Philip Thomson.
Subscriptions had been obtained since the previous meeting from about fifty persons, and the small committee felt assured that their still feeble association would not expire until its great object should be accomplished. In my paper of October 6th, I said:—"We believe that what might be thought to be apathy on the part of the merchants and manufacturers of Manchester upon the subject of the Corn Laws, has arisen from there being no organization for the expression of their opinions. They have expected that the Chamber of Commerce would commence the movement, but that self-constituted body, having ​satisfied itself with a single petition in seven years, seems to have fallen into another seven years' sleep. The necessity of a new association has forced itself upon the attention of many of the most influential friends of free trade, and we are glad to say that at their meeting, on Thursday evening, the names of nearly one hundred members were enrolled. They meet again next Thursday, and we trust that those who are already members will each bring a list with him of the names of half-a-dozen friends, so as to make the association at once formidable from its numbers and local influence."
In my paper of October 18th I find the following advertisement, announcing the formation of a committee, which contained the names of a number of gentlemen, many of whom became from that day prominent members of the association, and of the subsequently formed League.
ANTI-CORN-LAW ASSOCIATION.
PROVISIONAL COMMITTEE.
Elkanah Armitage, Cromford Court. John Bright, Rochdale. Robert Bunting, Ardwick Green. James Chapman, York-street. W. R. Callender, Mosley-street. J. C. Dyer, Burnage. Walter Clarke, Duke-street. John Dracup, Chapel-street, Salford.
Peter Eckersley, St. Mary's Gate. J. G. Frost, Water-street. George Hadfield, Fountain-street. Thomas Harbottle, Norfolk-street. Andrew Hall, Brown-street. Jas. Hampson,Great Ancoats-street.
Thomas Hopkins, Broughton Lane.
James Howie, King street. Wm. Harvey, New Cannon-street.
T. H. Williams, Greenheys. Alexander Henry, Portland-street.
James Kershaw, High-street. Thomas Lockett, Richmond Hill. Thos. Mollineux, Ancoats Crescent. James Murray, Ancoats Hall. Robert Nicholson, Market-street. James Chapman, York-street. Aaron Nodal, Downing-street. Robert Philips, jun., Church-street. Thomas Potter, George-street. Archibald Prentice, Ducie Place. S. P. Robinson, Tipping's Court. Jonathan Rawson, Cromford Court. W. Rawson, New Brown-street. Absalom Watkin, High-street. George Wilson, Shudehill. Henry Wilson, Walton's Buildings. Richard Wilson, Market Place. C. J. S. Walker, Longford. Henry Wadkin, Short-street
John Benjamin Smith, Treasurer.
​The association now felt itself strong enough to commence operations, and I was deputed to proceed to Bolton, and endeavour to persuade Mr. Paulton to favour us with a lecture or two in Manchester. He readily consented, and his first lecture was announced to take place hi the Corn Exchange. Next week, there was an announcement of the addition of the following names to the Provisional Committee:—
James Ashworth, High-street. Andrew Bannerman, Market street. Jno. Brewer, Newmarket Buildings. Matthew Binns, Cannon-street. James Carlton, New High-street. Richard Cobden, Mosley-street. Edmund Dodgshon, York-street, Cheetham. Edward Evans, Market-street, (Nicholson and Evans.) John Henry Fuller, 24, Bridgewater Place. Jeremiah Garnett, Guardian office, Market-street. J. S. Grafton, Mosley-street. Edward Hall, New Brown-street. Joseph Heron, Princess-street. James Hudson. John Hyde, Oxford Road. William Lockett, Richmond street. William Labrey, Market Place. John Mallon, Oldham-street. Henry Marsland, Fountain-street. William Neild, Friday-street. John Naylor, Piccadily. John Ogden, Marsden-street. John Shuttleworth, New Market Buildings. Robert Stuart, Pall Mall. Charles Tysoe, New Cannon-street. John Edward Taylor, Market-street. John Whitlow, Market Place. John Wilkinson, Shakspere-street, Ardwick. —— Whitehouse, Fountain- street. Samuel Watts, New Brown-street. William Woodcock, 26, Pall Mall.
On calling on Mr. Robert Stuart for his name and his name and his five-shilling subscription, he said "You will soon need more than such sums—put me down for ten pounds." I have had the curiosity to see to what amount the individuals named as forming the Provisional Committee at that early stage of the movement, subsequently subscribed to the £250,000 League Fund, and I find that they had contributed £10,600, besides having been large subscribers during the previous seven years' arduous contest. Mr. Stuart was right when he said we should need higher than five-shilling subscriptions. But the small sums brought ​number, an element to success, and permitted constant additions of earnest workers, doing work which could not have been bought in the ordinary labour market.
On Thursday evening, October 25th, Mr. Paul ton delivered his first lecture to one of the largest audiences ever assembled in the Corn Exchange, every ticket of admission to the lecture room having been eagerly sought for and obtained by the public some hours previous to its commencement, and many applicants were necessarily disappointed. About seven o'clock the Committee of the Anti Corn-Law Association took their seats on the platform, and J. B. Smith, Esq., having been called upon to preside, in introducing Mr. Paulton, said he would take the opportunity of stating the objects for which the association had been established: "It had been established on the same righteous principle as the Anti-Slavery Society. The object of that society was to obtain the free right for the negroes to possess their own flesh and blood—the object of this was to obtain the free right of the people to exchange their labour for as much food as could be got for it; that we might no longer be obliged by law to buy our food at one shop, and that the dearest in the world, but be at liberty to go to that at which it can be obtained cheapest. It was an object in which men of all political opinions might unite without compromising those principles, and it was a fundamental rule of the association that no party politics should be mixed up in the discussion of the question. It might seem to be a work of supererogation to prove that a man had a right to a big loaf, but when we saw the nobles of the land, the majority of our senators, and men of wealth and education contending that the indulgence of "an appetite for big loaves was fraught with consequences no less serious than the ruin of the landowner, the farmer, the labourer, and ultimately of the nation, it was then that lectures like these became necessary to show the absurdity and fallacy of such ​assertions. Mr. Paulton was a big-loaf man, but if any of the little-loaf men, or any of the noble lords who occasionally came amongst us on visits of humanity, to inquire into the condition of the poor factory children, or the wretchedness of the hand-loom weaver, would favour us with a lecture to make us sensible of the benefits we derive from little loaves, as friends of free discussion as well as free trade, he thought he could promise them from the meeting a fair and patient hearing." The lecture occupied more than two hours in the delivery, but there was not the slightest appearance of weariness on the part of the audience, and Mr. Paulton retired amidst loud and long-continued cheers.
The second and concluding lecture of Mr. Paulton took place at the Corn Exchange, on Thursday evening, November 1st, to a still more crowded audience than before. Mr. J. B. Smith, in again introducing Mr. Paulton, said it was gratifying to notice the increasing interest which was manifesting itself on this question, as shown by the application of other towns soliciting his services to give lectures there on the Corn Laws. The committee were endeavouring to effect an arrangement with him for this purpose, and hoped to obtain his powerful aid in thus spreading the knowledge he was able to impart on this question. He reminded the audience that these lectures were given gratuitously, and said it was gratifying to observe that Mr. Paulton was actuated by no mercenary motives. Mr. Paulton again excited the enthusiasm of his auditors. At the conclusion of his lecture he quoted the following lines which have been frequently used by other speakers since:
"For what were all these landed patriots born? To hunt, and vote, and raise the price of corn. Safe in their barns, these Sabine tillers sent Their brethren out to battle. Why? For Rent! Year after year they voted cent, per cent.; Blood, sweat, and tear-wrung millions. Why? For rent! They roared, they dined, they drank, they swore, they meant
To die for England. Why then live? For rent! And will they not repay the treasure lent? No! down with everything, and up with rent Their good, ill, health, wealth, joy, or discontent. Being, end, aim, religion—rent, rent, rent!"
In my paper of the 10th of November, I had again occasion to congratulate the public on the rapid progress of the new agitation:—" The movement against the Corn Laws is likely to be the most formidable ever made. The apathy for which we have blamed the population of large towns has not existed, for all that has been wanted has been concentration of opinion, and this will be obtained by associations such as the one of which Manchester has set the example. There needs but a spark to ignite the mass of smouldering discontent. To supply this, let lectures be delivered everywhere, bringing into one view all the mischiefs that are occasioned by the starvation-creating laws, and the certain ruin of our manufacturers and work-people, by the refusal to receive agricultural produce in exchange for the produce of their capital and labour. The landlord papers in the metropolis have taken alarm, and are abusing Mr. Paulton in good set terms for the boldness with which he denounces the robbery. We rejoice to think that he will soon deserve a larger share of their abuse. On Monday the 26th and Wednesday the 28th instant, he will lecture in the Birmingham Town Hall, a magnificent building, capable of containing from 4,000 to 5,000 persons, and we have no doubt that it will be filled on each occasion. In the mean time invitations pour in upon the eloquent lecturer from the large towns in our neighbourhood, and he has been pressingly requested not to omit the agricultural towns in Norfolk, where the opinion is fast spreading, that the Corn Laws are injurious rather than beneficial to the farmers, the farm-labourers, and all with whom they expend their money."