The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-12-13 00:00:00

MR... READ, M.P., on the AGRICULTURAL

LABOURER and the POOR LAW.
On Mon iay evening, Mr. C. S. Read, M.P., ad.
dressed a wllattended meeting of the Fawners Club
at the Baliehury Hotel, Flett-strnet, London, Mr
R-vi commenced by raying that the arricultural
lab mrer mei the po r law bad tor many years b-rn
closely j tined together, and he knew td no period
when th, y merited more conaideratiou than at the
present time. Their° could be no doubt tri,t in years
Past the wages of the ~grim tura' labourer had been
tie low, but in the two years precedir g 1871 there
hod been a general rise in labourers' wages, wii 11,
however, be OM not think was to be attributed to
the effect of the uhiou. When he first heard Mr.
Arab la London, en 11 good setae trail:swine vaymeot
tor Pie•ce worg and the clawinc thin of labour wee
Uttered by him, that he (Mr. Reed) fatly agreed in
What h.. heard; but since that time the Agricultural
Lab,trers' Unit. had entirely adopted the trades'
nMon programme, and had gone back to the principle
ti day work, which he thought was the curee of the

agricultural labourer. He believed It rested with the in.
dividual himself to impr .vi, hie position. The labourer,
Mr. Read considered, had a p. elect right to combine,
Lut it was ura toms-dub .4 against natural! .w,• and the
true princip,ei of political ec ironly. The unions might
succeol for a Wu; but they must end in lotsery rut
Ire, for it wool i drive trade into other eh omelet aroi
Rome of it out of the country. The threat of 1.1. r. Arch
to the farmers of Anglarro, that be would take all the
labourers away, would, if carried nut, turn the country
into pasture land, from wirch the people wool I get no
were, meat and would get no corn at all. Referring to
the opinion that the farmers made great profit out of
their property, the speaker said that such was the ex-
ception, The labourer, he considered with his 15e. a
weer, his perquisite; cheap iiviug, easier work, and
shortsrhonrs, was as well oifs' the wanin the town earn-
ing 25s or more per week. Having got onion; some rug •
,:esteei that the f aTmers should not employ labourers who
were ruembens •,f them; but he was of opinion that no
difference should be made between unionists and non-
unionists, He /Armed that there was a poseibidty of
doing with a It-se number of workmen by an extended
adoption of macldnety. In tracing the origin and rise
of the poor law he stated that the abolition of out-door
relief Lad coushlerably reduced the poor rate, and after-
wards the in discriminate olministrath•n of out dour re tief
had kept the labourer an a state of semi- pauperism. The
ohionists now looked upcn the union as a sort of bent fit
club, the poor law enoiuraging improvidence. A great
tout it the middle class, he thought, was the bringing
up of the young to the genteel calling of clerks, anti he
should bite to see an example set by many o t the
Parents causing their BOW to learn to besskilleat artisans.
The franchise, he did not think, would be of much
benefit to the labourers -the fanners had not reaped
touch good from it. He concluded by advocating a
conciliatory action on the part of the farmers towards
those labourers who &sired to leave the union.