# History of the Anti-Corn Law League/Chapter10

CHAPTER X.
THE CAMPAIGN FOR 1840.
The free-trade campaign, for 1840, was commenced with great vigour. It had been determined that a numerous meeting of delegates should be held in Manchester, and that on the occasion of their assembling, there should also be given to the opponents of the Corn Law, throughout the populous district surrounding Manchester, an opportunity of hearing the advocates of unrestricted commerce. There was no hall in the town large enough to contain half of the actual members of the local association. It was therefore resolved to construct one for the purpose. Mr. Cobden, who owned nearly all the then unbuilt-upon land in St. Peter's Field, offered it as the site of the erection; and thus it curiously happened that it was raised upon the very spot, where, in 1819, a peaceably-met and legally-convened meeting was dispersed by the sabre, because its objects were to petition for a repeal of the Corn Law, and for reform in Parliament. The survivors of that fatal day had seen the Reform Bill passed; and many of them, seeing on that blood-stained field, a great place of assemblage rising up, to be devoted to the purpose of abolishing, by peaceful and temperate discussion, the oppressive monopoly against which the older radical reformers were all united, began to entertain the hope that, in spite of the protectionists and their new allies, the physical force chartists, the time was coming when selfish ​monopolies would share the fate of the rotten boroughs. The erection of the temporary pavilion, afterwards to be replaced by the more permanent Free Trade Hall, was the work of one hundred men for eleven days. It is thus described in my paper of the time:—
Such was the demand for tickets to the banquet, that ten thousand might have been sold. Early on Monday morning, January 13th, indications of the approaching demonstration were apparent in most parts of the town. The arrivals of deputations from various towns in England and Scotland gave increased bustle and animation to the streets; and in the afternoon the avenues immediately leading to the pavilion were crowded. Hundreds of people welcomed the arrival of Daniel O'Connell, at the railway station, then in Liverpool Road, and received him with loud cheers. At five o'clock, the seats in the body of the hall were all occupied, and the galleries were filled with ​ladies. Soon after, the chairman, Mr. J. B. Smith, accompanied by Mr. Thomas Potter, the Mayor of Manchester, and most of the invited guests, entered the hall, took their seats on the platform, and were loudly cheered by the company, the band playing "God save the Queen." The ball at this period presented a most glowing and animated appearance. The spaciousness of the building, the brilliancy with which it was lighted, the long rows of tables along the vast area, the light and elegant drapery and flags, the illuminated devices and rnottos, formed a scene of magnificence and beauty unsurpassed at any former public assembly.
At half-past five o'clock the chairman rose, and called upon the Rev. Thomas Spencer, of Hinton Charter House, Bath, to ask a blessing on what had been provided. After impressively referring to the provision made, the reverend gentleman prayed that the divine Giver of all good would "give us this day our daily bread," and that it might be bestowed not only on those present, but that all the brotherhood of mankind might participate in the same blessing. He prayed for a blessing on the sovereign of these realms, that she might long reign, and in peace, that she might be an honoured instrument in promoting the honour and glory of God, and the welfare and prosperity of all her people. He prayed also that God would bless the great council of the nation, that they might rise to the dignity of their exalted station, that they might lay aside all party prejudices and personal feelings and animosities, that they might rise above all self-interest, and all desire for worldly power, that they might be men of whom it might be said that they sought to do justly and loved mercy, men who would govern a nation righteously, always remembering the solemn account which they themselves must give when the day of judgment should arrive,—and that the curse of those who withheld bread from the poor might not be realised upon them. He prayed for a ​blessing on that assemblage, and also that God would bless the eyes of the millions which were directed to that vast assemblage, and that he would crown their labours with the most abundant success. The reverential feeling manifested during this solemn address to the Giver of every good and perfect gift, afforded proof that the majority of that meeting felt that to support a movement which was to give bread to the people was a religious duty.
On the right of the chairman sat the Mayor of Manchester D. O'Connell, M.P.; Mark Philips, M.P.; Edwd. Baines, M.P.; Peter Ainsworth, M.P.; Robert Philips, of Park; T. S. Duncombe, M.P.; Henry Marsland, M.P.; Sir De Lacy Evans, M.P.; Wynn Ellis, M.P.; John Fenton, M.P.; James Oswald, M.P.; G. A. Muskett, M.P.; Sharman Crawford; Dr. Bowring; Dr.Epps; William Ewart, M.P.; J. Easthope, M.P.; James Stewart, M.P.; N. A. Vigors, M.P.; R. Holland, M.P.; T. Chalmers, M.P.; J. Philpotts, M.P.; On the left of the chairman were C. P. Villiers, M.P.; T.M Gibson; H. Warburton, M.P.; George W. Wood, M.P.; H. Aglionby, M.P.; T. Thornely, M.P.; Richard Walker, M.P.; Joseph Brotherton, M,P. and C. Hindley, M.P. In the central part of the room, in convenient situations, the deputations were accommodated. The following were present, delegated by the towns named:—
"Bolton: H. Ashworth and five others. Mottram: R. Matley. Warrington: J. Rylands, Joseph Crossfield. Hebden Bridge: John Riley, John Crossley, James Hodson, Rev. Mr. Butler. Birmingham: Boultbee, Scholefield, M'Donnell, Geach, Edmonds. Sowerby: James Filding, M. Morley, John Wallace, Jno. Utley. Gloucester: Southern, Lane, Round. Sheffield: The Master Cutler, Samuel Jackson, Thos. Wyley, E. Smith, Pickers, W. Hobson, Eben. Elliott, S. Hadfield. St. Pancras: P. A. Taylor. Glossop: W. Platt, Kershaw, Lees. Taunton: Beedon. Kirkaldy: James Aytoun, Jno. Peter. Nottingham: Berry. Liverpool James Mollineux, James Mellor, H. T. Atkinson, Lau. Heyworth, Charles Holland. Kendal: Richard Wilson, John Holme, J. Thompson, jun., Edward Brown, G. Chamley, R. J. Hawkes, Edward Gibson Kendal Working Men's Association, John Gill, James ​Spedding. Derby: Johnson. Paisley: Rev. P. Brewster. Rastrick: Clay. Aberdeen: James Adams. Leek: Davenport, Birch. Hawick: Walter Wilson. Stirling: Wm. Rankin. Huddersfield W. Willans, Joseph Butler, R. G. Jackson, Kelly, Fred. Schwann, J. Robinson, T.G. Crossland. Dunfermline: Beveridge, Kidd, Inglis. Tower Hamlets: W.Coates, J. F. Gibson. Southwark: Redman, Alfred Roslin, James Gibb, Embleton, Wilson, Thomas Irwin, John Bowler, J. G. Harris, W. Mayhew, W. Bowler. Dudley: Blackwell, Palmer. Little: Thompson. Haslingden: Cockcroft, Dean, J. Rostron, T. S. Simpkess. Wolverhampton: W. Walker, James Walker, J. Wync, Ben. Walton. Edinburgh: John Wigham, George Sinclair, G. Thompson. Carlisle: J. Dixon and five others. Darlaston: Maddock, Rubrey. Manchester Operative Association, Fred. Warren. Dobcross: James Lees, Robert Shaw, John Bradbury, B. Bent. Horton, near Bradford: J. Clayton. Stranraer: T. M'Master. Wigan: R. Thicknesse, J. Acton, Taylor, Banks, J. S. Heron, Bevan. Burnley: J. Holgate, W. Roberts. Leeds: W. Smith (Mayor), H. Stansfield, P. Fairbairn, E. Baines, jun., John Wilkinson, George Wilde, John Waddington. Settle: Thompson. Glasgow Alex. Johnstone, Charles Todd, J. P. Reid, J. Tennant, Alex. Graham, Walter Buchanan, A. Duncan. Doncaster: Chadwick of Arksey, Leveson, Milner, Johnson. Ashton and Dukinfield: Samuel Robinson, Ralph Kershaw, Thomas Mason, Edw. Lees, Southam, Alfred Reyner, John Smith, Jos. Spenser, Geo. Higginbotham. Hanley: W. Ridge way, J. Ridgeway. Lane End: Charles Mason, jun., John Mason. Cheltenham: W. P. Gaskell. Bradford (Yorkshire): Robert Milligan. St. Mary-le-bone: Lord Nugent, Theobald Young. Shelf: Peel. Halifax: J. Baldwin, W. Dewhurst, Mich. Stocks, J. Houldsworth, John Gledhill, Henry Martin. Preston: F. Sleddon, J. Hawkins, Thomas Barker, W. Wilding, R. Ascroft, James Hegg, Geo. Smith. Stalybridge: W. Neven, Dakin Chatham, Jos. Tattersall, D. Cunningham, P. Auld, T. P. Madison. Stockport: The Mayor, the Town Clerk, Nelstrop, Hudson, Woollons, Ralph Pendlebury. Leicester: W. Biggs. Castle Douglas: John Hutton and another. Cleckheaton: Geo. Anderson, Christ. Goldthorpe. Idle: Geo. Oldfield, F. Audsley. Lees, near Oldham P. Seville, Wm. Halliwell. Rochdale: Henry Kelsall, John Petrie, Roger Fenton, John Bright, John Hoyle. Oldham G. Barron, Alex. Taylor, John Chadwick, J. Ashcroft, Scholes Brierley, John Bentley. Bilston Wm. Bow, Dunmock. Blackburn Joseph Eccles, W. Pilkington, Abbott, Willock."
The first toast after "The Queen," was "The Immediate and Total Repeal of the Corn and Provision Laws," the chairman remarking that since the last meeting in ​Manchester, another year's experience had shown the evils inflicted by those laws, and confirmed the truth of the predictions of those who had demanded their repeal. "Look at America," he said "at this moment she owes us large sums of money. God has blessed her people with a most plenteous harvest, and if the Corn Laws did not prevent us from taking their corn, they would be able to pay us every farthing they owe." Mr. Mark Philips regretted that indisposition had prevented his being at the last year's meeting, and that his colleague in the representation of Manchester (Mr. Greg) should be absent from this from the same cause. Like the chairman, he pointed to the distress of the previous year, as a proof of the mischief inflicted by the Corn Laws, especially when we had deficient harvests at home, as the last two had been. It was now too late to talk of a fixed duty, the mischief had already been done, and the remedy ought to be immediate. The next toast was "The Hon.C. P. Villiers, the mover of the question for the consideration of the Corn Laws in the last session of Parliament, and the other members of the House of Commons who spoke and voted in support of the same." Mr. Villiers made a statesmanlike speech, in which he showed that while those laws were ruinous to the trade and commerce of the country, they were most injurious to the agricultural labourer, a delusion and a fraud to the farmer, and against the real and permanent interests of the landowners themselves.
In conclusion he said:—
Mr. Gisborne, then member for Carlow, followed, and congratulated the meeting that there was a small band in both houses of Parliament, who did not submit their judgment to squires' logic. Daniel O'Connell came next, and in a speech of mingled power, humour, and pathos, produced a great impression. "If the Corn Laws," he asked, "were good to rescue the people from wretchedness, why did they not rescue the people of Ireland? Were there not sixty or seventy thousand Irish in Manchester, driven there by destitution in their own country? If the Corn Laws gave employment and high wages, why did they not give them in agricultural Ireland?" Subsequently he asked, what the Corn Laws were for? "To put money into the pockets of the landlords—not the money of the Russians, the Danes, or the Swedes, but that of their fellow countrymen."
Mr. Cobden followed O'Connell, and occupied the time of the meeting only for about ten minutes, so little disposed was he to take that prominent part which naturally fell to him when, in the subsequent long and ardent struggle, each of the free-trade agitators had the place tacitly assigned him for which his peculiar talents fitted him. John Bright, also, had yet to find his proper place; he was but little known out of his native town, and on this memorable evening he was sitting down in the body of the Hall, undistinguished amongst the other delegates. Cobden's speech, though short, was not without proof of some of the qualities which were afterwards to characterize his career—his brief exposure of landlord fallacies was trenchant and conclusive, and he effectively asserted the worldwide interest of a question which had not often been regarded as more than one of conflicting interests in these narrow islands. "We have here," he said, "gentlemen ​from almost every region of the globe. We have here gentlemen from Mexico, and from the United States; from Paris and St. Petersburg from Odessa and Geneva. Indeed, I scarcely know a town within the German League which is not represented here to-night. They will unite the Baltic and the Black Sea, and cover their rivers with commerce as the rivers of England are covered. The object of the Anti-Corn-Law League is to draw together in the bonds of friendship—to unite in the bonds of amity, the whole world."
A Suffolk landowner, Thomas Milner Gibson, appeared on this occasion, for the first time before a Manchester audience, and by his youthful and gentlemanly appearance, and by the mingled good humour and pungency with which he demolished the arguments and statements of men of his own class, from whom he had come, out to make common cause with the people, made a most favourable impression. The other speakers were Edward Baines, jun., of the Leeds Mercury, a journal which had rendered good service to the cause of free trade; the Rev. Mr. M'Donnell, of Birmingham Dr. Bowring, who, in September, 1838, had given the first impulse to the formation of the great confederacy the patriotic Sharman Crawford; George Thompson, the eloquent advocate of negro emancipation; Ebenezer Elliott, whose vigorous "Rhymes had done much to rouse public indignation against the Corn Laws and the veteran reformer, and co-labourer with Joseph Hume, Henry Warburton.
Another magnificent banquet followed. On Tuesday evening five thousand working men dined together in the new pavilion, and the gallery was filled by the wives, daughters, sisters, and friends of those who sat below. The chair was taken by Mr. Frederick Warren, president and the of the Operatives' Anti-Corn-Law Association; and the the platform was occupied Mayor of Manchester (by public-spirited Thomas Potter), M. Philips, M.P., Joseph ​Brotherton, M.P., Daniel O'Connell M.P., Thos. Milner, Gibson, Col. Thompson, Dr. Bowring, Dr. Epps, George Thompson, Richard Cobden, with a large list of other gentlemen. The blessing before dinner was prayed by the Rev. Dr. P. Brewster, of Paisley. The most striking feature of this vast assemblage was the order, propriety, and general excellent demeanour of all the company. Their conduct throughout the whole proceedings, which lasted till near two o'clock in the morning, excited the highest admiration of the guests from a distance, and reflected great credit upon the working classes of Manchester. The speakers were Richard Cobden, Joseph Brotherton, M.P., George Thompson, Col. Thompson, Dr. Epps, the Mayor of Manchester, the Rev. T. Spencer, the Hon. C. P. Villiers, M.P., Daniel O'Connell, M.P., Henry Warburton, M.P., Thomas Milner Gibson, the Rev. Dr. Brewster, the Rev. Mr. Winterbottom, and Mr. George Greig, one of the lecturers of the League. The admirable conduct of the working classes, and the marked proofs of their intelligence were suggestive, and in my paper of the following Saturday I said:—
The delegates did not leave Manchester without deliberate conference on the means of promoting their great object. Mr. Villiers having agreed to bring forward a motion on the Corn Laws, on the 26th March, it was resolved that the various associations throughout the kingdom, now greatly increased in number, and animated with great zeal and determination of purpose, should be invited to send delegates to meet in London previous to that day, and that each should come prepared with statements as to the actual condition of the people in his own locality, as proof of the necessity of the instant repeal of a law which had involved the country in deep and constantly increasing distress. The delegates re-assembled in London, on Tuesday, March 24th, and deputations were appointed to wait upon Lord Melbourne, Lord John Russell, and upon influential members of Parliament, to represent to them the state of the country, and especially of the working classes, and to urge them to support Mr. Villiers' motion, intended to be brought forward on that day week. On Friday the delegates, more than two hundred in number, were received by Lord Melbourne at the Colonial Office, in Downing-street. Amongst them were ten or twelve individuals who annually expended in wages upwards of one million sterling. Mr. John B. Smith, the chairman of the delegates, opened the business by laying before his lordship a forcible statement of the injurious operation of the Corn Laws upon the industrial population, and their effect in increasing the poor rate. Mr. Cobden then called his attention to the difference of protective duties and duties levied solely for revenue, and reiterated the recorded ​resolution of the delegation to give up all protection upon manufactures if the tax upon the food of the people were removed. Mr. Joseph Sturge showed that if the duty were abolished altogether, and the ports thrown open, our farmers would be able to compete with foreigners who would be subjected to the expenses of importation, in themselves a considerable protection to the home producers of corn. Lord Melbourne inquired what was the object of the delegation? Was it repeal, or a modification of the existing system? They replied that it was immediate repeal. "You know that to be impracticable," said his lordship. Mr. J. B. Smith said there was a most material objection to the continuance of the present system,—under the fluctuating scale of duties it was impossible to prevent sudden drains of gold, which were followed by a serious derangement of the currency, and other most injurious consequences to the monetary system of the country:—
"Mr. Mark Philips briefly explained the difficulties to which the country had been exposed, and would continue to be exposed, from scarcities of grain, and showed that they would be avoided by the constant and regular trade which would be established under unrestricted importation. Foreign nations would then be enabled to calculate the probabilities of any deficiency of food in this country and make their preparations accordingly.
"Mr. J. B. Smiih said that Belgium, France, and Naples, had closed their ports against the transmission of grain to this country, and we should be constantly exposed to similar proceedings from other governments, unless there was the security of a regular demand.
"Lord Melbourne replied that the trade in corn never could be a regular one, depending as it did upon many and varied contingencies.
"Mr. Sturge observed that the greater the extent of the trade, and the wider the intercourse with other countries, the less would it be liable to the contingencies alluded to,
​"Mr. J. B. Smith said that had they fifty markets to resort to instead of one the trade would be almost uniformly equable.
"Mr. Aitken, of Liverpool, an extensive shipowner, said he was in the habit of sending his ships to be victualled abroad, provisions there being lower in price. On an average they were one-third lees. The law would not permit provisions to come to the people, but it could not prevent their going to the provisions.
"Lord Melbourne (as if he had detected a fallacy) Then, according to your argument, a repeal of the existing laws will lower the price of corn here?
"Mr. Aitken: It will tend not so much to lessen the price here as to equalize it everywhere. The present law has raised the price here and depressed it abroad.
"Lord Melbourne: Then, considering your own individual interest, the existing system is most desirable?
"Mr. Aitken said that the excessive inconvenience and and loss of time much overbalanced the seeming advantage.
"Lord Melbourne observed that were the ports free, foreign nations would not relax their protective duties upon native industry. Their manufactures were a great deal too important. If they would consult their own interest was against it might be otherwise, but the general opinion of the world was against free trade. To give all first was not the way to commence negotiations for reciprocal advantages. There could be no question that their principle was right; but nations did not always see their own interest.
"The Mayor of Carlisle (Mr. Dixon) next addressed his lordship and drew a most heart-rending picture of the deep distress pervading that city and its neighbourhood. The working men were compelled to expend their poor pittance of wages almost entirely on food. While it remained at its present high price they could get no clothing, and the home trade had fallen off in consequence. For forty years back there had not been such deep distress.
"Lord Melbourne (doubtingly): Do you mean to say that they are in a worse condition than you ever remember?
"Mr. Dixon (emphatically): I have come here to state that fact. The wages are lower than I ever remember them to have been in the cotton trade.
I was not present at this interview. I found, on my arrival in London, two or three days afterwards, that Lord Melbourne's reception of the deputies had excited the strongest indignation. His ignorance of the main bearings of the question, and his notion that the consumers of this country should pay a monopoly price for corn because, possibly, other countries might not take our manufactures in exchange, only created astonishment; but his manner, which was not reported, there being no short-hand that can give looks and tones, excited a feeling little short of disgust, especially when, with a smiling and incredulous air, he listened to the plain and straightforward, but feeling and pathetic description which Mr. Dixon gave of the distress prevailing in Carlisle. Mr. Walker, of Wolverhampton, gave instant expression to his own sentiments on the occasion, by declaring that, in his part of the country, both whigs and tories should be set aside, and that a new system of agitation would commence throughout the iron districts; and he was responded to, notwithstanding the etiquette and formality of Downing-street, in the presence of the prime minister, by an almost universal cry from the deputies, that the new agitation would extend to all the manufacturing districts. This feeling was more unequivocally expressed at a subsequent meeting of the deputies, when an allusion by Mr. O'Connell to the necessity of reorganizing the House of Commons, or, as he expressed it, of putting new machinery into it, was received with loud cheers. A deputation to Sir Robert Peel and Sir James Graham was not more satisfactory than that to Lord Melbourne. Sir James talked a great deal about land being thrown out of cultivation were the Corn Laws repealed, and about foreign nations taking undue advantages of us at any favourable opportunity. The possessor and ​the expectants of the premiership were alike adverse to the thorough commercial reform demanded, alike regardless of the wants of the many, alike disposed to support the selfish monopoly.
A considerable accession was made to the number of deputies in consequence of the indignation which had been excited in the country by the perusal of Lord Melbourne's replies to the delegation. Amongst these were two gentlemen from Derby, who, when called upon in the previous week to proceed to London, had declined to do so, on the ground that their presence would not be necessary, as they could not believe that ministers would be adverse to repeal; but who, so soon as they heard of the premier's opposition to the principles of free trade, hastened to Palace Yard, and swelled the contributions towards a three years' agitation, by the subscription of £100 a-year each. The origination of this fund to ensure a contest of so long a duration was a proof, at once, of the determined purpose of the delegates, and of their conviction that, with the leaders of the two successively governing factions in Parliament against them, there were formidable difficulties to be overcome before they could attain their object.
On Tuesday, Lord John Russell, Mr. Baring (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), and Mr. Labouchere (the President of the Board of Trade), having agreed to give an audience to the delegation, they proceeded to Downing-street in a formidable array, more than one hundred and fifty in number, and completely filled Mr. Baring's office. Lord John Russell was unable, from indisposition it was alleged, to be present but Mr. Baring said that his lordship was favourable to "a moderate fixed duty up to the famine point." He must have seen, from the countenances of his auditors, what impression this had made; for, with a good deal of hesitation and stammering, he corrected himself, "by substituting the phrase, a vanishing point," when the ​price of wheat reached seventy shillings. The whole conduct of the delegation ought to have made a deep impression on ministers, had they ever looked beyond the limits of their parliamentary power. Mr. J. B. Smith began the conference in a modest and respectful but perfectly firm manner, and then called on Mr. E. Ashworth, who gave a deeply distressing account of the state of Bolton, and boldly advocated repeal, not as a manufacturers' question, but as a measure of justice and humanity. He was followed by the Rev. P. Brewster, of the Abbey Church, Paisley, whose position as a clergyman having disposal of the scanty parochial fund doled out to relieve the poor in Scotland, gave him ample opportunity of observing their wretched condition. The Mayor of Carlisle was next called forth, and gave an affecting account of the state of the working classes there. He said that its peace was preserved mainly by the hope that the Anti-Corn-Law deputies would be able to effect something for their relief, and if that hope should be disappointed, an agitation of a very different kind would no doubt commence. Mr. John Brooks, the worthy Boroughreeve of Manchester, followed, and stated, unmoved, many instances of serious depression in the property of men of his own class; but when he came to give a detail of the distresses of the working classes, and to describe one particular family, the members of which, after a life of economy and industry, had been compelled to pawn articles of furniture and clothes, one after another, till nothing was left but bare walls and empty cupboards, his feelings completely overpowered him, convulsive sobs choked his utterance, and he was obliged to pause till he recovered from his deep emotion. The tears rolled down the cheeks of Joseph Sturge; John Benjamin Smith strove in vain to conceal his feelings; there was scarcely a tearless eye in the multitude; and the ministers looked with perfect astonishment at a scene so unusual to statesmen and courtiers. Mr. Labouchere's ​reply was not of a kind to elevate his reputation as a statesman. He said he would not so far alter long existing policy by withdrawing all protection to agriculture; that ministers could not negotiate with other countries, as they were not assured, in the then state of party feeling in the legislature, that their negociations would be confirmed, and that, whatever might be the opinion of the cotton manufacturers, he very much doubted whether other manufacturers would abandon protection to themselves in exchange for free trade in corn. On this latter point, I replied that at Macclesfield, where I had been on the previous week, the silk manufacturers and their workpeople had unanimously resolved to petition for the total repeal of the Corn Law, and had declared that if they had free trade in corn, they would ask for no protection to the silk manufacture. Mr. Ellison, of Dewsbury, and Mr. Holland Hoole, of Salford, proved that the Corn Law and the New Poor Law could not exist together; for, while bread was so high, and the price of labour was so low, the guardians could not refuse to give food to the able-bodied labourer who could not find employment. Joseph Sturge made a powerful appeal to the ministers, placing the whole question upon the eternal principles of justice and humanity, which, he said, were shamefully outraged by a tax on the food of the people. The conference, if such it could be called, where unpalateable truths were forced upon the attention of unwilling ears, was appropriately closed by some bold and really eloquent remarks from Mr. Cobden, who told the ministers that their decision would become a matter of history, and "would stamp their character as either representatives merely of class interests, or the promoters of an enlightened commercial policy."
They chose the former, and five years of further deep national distress, and symptoms of consequent danger were required to convince them, then out of office, that ​the promotion of general rather than of class interests was the legitimate business of legislation.
On Wednesday, Mr. Villiers brought forward his motion, "That the house resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration the act of George IV. regulating the importation of foreign corn." The motion was seconded by Sir George Strickland. The Earl of Darlington, abused the League, and said the press was in its pay. Mr. Labouchere said, if it were in his power, he would have a duty of from 7s. to 8s. to fall to 1s. when wheat rose to 70s.! but he did not mean to say that, for the sake of compromise, he would not have a higher duty! The debate was adjourned to Thursday, when Lord Morpeth declared in favour of a fixed duty, in preference to the sliding scale. He acknowledged that the people were in deep distress, and, looking at the increasing prevalence and power of their demands, he thought the time was not far distant "when a freer and more unrestricted access of foreign corn would more amply repay the efforts of our domestic industry, and secure and extend the harmony of nations." The debate was adjourned to Friday, April 3rd, when, after Mr. Brotherton, Mr. E. H. Greg, and a few other members had been heard, Sir Robert Peel objected to the motion on three points:—First, That the Corn Laws had nothing to do with the drain of bullion. Second, That there was no inequality of prices under the existing law which would not take place under any other; and, Third, That the depression in trade was not proved, because the exportation of manufactured goods had increased within the last year. An end was put to the debate, by Mr. Bradshaw cunningly moving to adjourn it to Monday week, when it was known that the house would be otherwise occupied. Mr. Warburton, to avoid a division when many of the supporters of the motion had gone away in the belief that the house would not be divided, moved that it should then ​adjourn, and the motion became a dropped order. It was easier for the supporters of monopoly, whig and tory, Lord John Russell and Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Labouchere and Sir James Graham, to let the discussion thus drop than to meet the arguments of the free-trade advocates. Curious enough that those obstructives should, in a few years more, be contending which amongst them were the best free traders!
The delegates met at Brown's Hotel, on Saturday, the 4th of April, when the following resolutions were passed:
"That the delegates are not discouraged by the result of the late debate; that they derive new determination, as they find new motives for exertion, in all that has occurred; that they feel their various arguments are unanswered—their cause strengthened—their confidence in ultimate triumph unabated; and they pledge themselves to one another, and to the nation, not to relax until the mighty grievance, under which the community is suffering, be removed."
The last resolution was not passed without deep deliberation. Many of the whigs in office, before the passing of the Reform Bill, had been opponents of the Corn Laws, and it was believed that they continued to be favourable to free trade, although, during their continuance in office, they never found the fit and proper time practically to exhibit their attachment to its principles. There was a belief that in the struggle to destroy the landowners' monopoly the whigs would lend a friendly hand; and there was great unwillingness to embarrass an administration of ​which such hopes were entertained. It required, therefore, some firmness of resolution to declare that, in future, no distinction should be made between whig and tory candidates, and that none should be supported on the hustings but those who would pledge themselves to vote for the repeal of the Corn Laws. The men in office cared little for the declaration. They had a happy indifference to what other men might regard as signs of the times. For eight or nine years they had found that the cry of "do not embarrass the administration," and "keep the tories out," had drawn around them those who had occasionally shown a disposition to diverge into more radical courses. They thought the same cry would serve them in any emergency, and they laughed at the notion that the assertion of an "abstract principle" would withdraw any of their usual supporters from their party allegiance.