The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-01-23 00:00:00

CHAMBERLAIN AND XR.
JOSEPH ARCH.

On Saturday evening Mr. Joseph Arch, M.P., was
entertained at dinner by the members of the National
Liberal Club, in celebration of his being returned to
Parliament as the first direct agricultural represents-
dye. The dinner, which was held in the grand hall
at the Criterion, was presided over by Mr. Chamber-
lain. The toast of the Queen having been duly
honoured, the chairman, in proposing the toast of
the Prince of Wales and the other members of the
Royal family, said the Prince was a constituent of
Mr. Arch, but he was also a good landlord, and took
a foremost place in such works as the Royal Commis-
sion for the Housing -of the Poor. The Duke of
Edinburgh had also done good work on
the commission on the loss of life at sea.
The Hon. Evelyn Ashley proposed the toast
of the Houses of Parliament. He said he
owed that high honour to the fact of his recent
misfortune, having stood for a county and been
beaten. He owed it to many of those suffrages he
had sought, and who belonged to the class from which
Mr. Arch came, that they showed such fidelity to the
Liberal cause as augured well for their future. As
for the House of Lords, be hoped they would show
that adaptability to the wishes of the people, which
would enable them to long continue one of the in-
stitutions of the country. The Marquis of Ripon,
responding for the House of Lords, trusted that the
men.bers of that House would lay to heart the advice
given them by the proposer of the toast. If their
progress in the past had been slow, he httano doubt
in these days of railways that a quicker mode of pro-
gression was desirable. He was glad to welcome Mr.
Arch to the House of Commons, and rejoiced in the
great victory he had achieved. He held it of great
importasce that the working classes in the rural dis-
tricts should be directly represented in the House of
Commons. _ _ _

Mr. Chamberlain, proposing the toast of the even-
ing, said this was an historical occasion, as it wit-
nessed the opening of a new chapter in the life of the
agricultural population. It was like the movement
in the fourteenth century, which brokedown serfdom
and made a happy peasantry. The leaders of that
movement were less fortunate than the guest of the
evening. The leaders perished by the hand of the
executioner, but the evils against which they protested
perished with them, and it, was a long time before the
peasantry fell back into their old position. For a long
time there was no hope of improvement in their pcsi-
tion, and the first sign of a better day was the repeal
of the corn laws. The generation which had grown
up in the better day had elected their guest of the
evening to make good their demands in Parlia-
ment. John Ball, the mad priest of Kent, as the
landlords of that time called him, was a Lollard, a
Dissenter, and found in the precepts of the religion
he professed the great doctrines of religious equality
and brotherhood. It was a singular thing that all
the great movements which had freed the people
from oppression at different times there was scarcely
one which owed anything to the encouragement of
the great ecclesiastical Dower which claimed the care
of the people of England. It was from the Noncon-
formists in the villages that he had received the en-
couragement which had enabled him to persevere.
Their opponents, amongst their numerous miscel-
laneous misrepresentations, said that the Liberals
had taken an interest in this movement only
from political necessities. That was not true,
in his own case, at any rate, for he had known
Mr. Arch for many years. All who knew
him respected and trusted him, but it was
his eloquence and straightforwardness which
had placed him in the proud position he now held.
Their opponents were explaining their defeat by
saying the voters were bribed. The charge would
seem to have come with a bad grace from the party
that purchased the Irish vote by allowing the Crimes
Act to lapse, by dangling protection before the eyes of
the farmers, and that secured the support of the
clergy and the Protestant and Roman Catholic
Church by promising large additions to the State
grants for denominational education. The questions
of enclosure of commons—Church lands, and free
education had come to the front, and he counted on
the return of Mr. Arch to open a new era in legisla-
lation. It was in that anticipation he proposed the
health of Mr. Arch and the enfranchised labourers
(Cheers.)
Mr. Arch said he never had any hope when he
commenced to agitate for the rights of the cla.ses in
1872 that he would ever represert, them in Parlia-
ment. He would never have been able to fight this
battle had it not been for the generosity of the chair-
man and other gentlemen who sat near him. He had
a hard fight, but no candidate) could have had more
faithful and earnest workers in his behalf. He had
never canvassed, bribed, or threatened as his oppo-
nents did. The Prince of Wales, he knew, from a
very reliable authority took no part in opposing him.
Before the franchise was given, the agricultural
labourers were ignorant, but as soon as the bill was
passed everything was changed. It was from dark
ness to light. He had received a letter that day
from a clergyman in his district, stating that
many sober, honest labourers had been thrown
out of employment simply became they were
known to be supporters of himself. They
had passed the Corrupt Practices Act, but it would
nppa tn fuo olf.ararl lang Q 0 a alsa.:fe ma.
charge seven guineas for a polling-booth which a car-
penter erected for 14s. He called that downright
robbery. Something would also have to be done to
put down intimidation, or he would not long rest satis-
fied in the House of Commons. He thought the.
National Liberal Club was going to take steps sooner
or later in regard to these cases of intimidation.
Knowing the feeling in the rural districts, he said the
labourer believed in Mr. Gladstone and the Liberal
party. In spite of the cajoling of the Primrose
League ladies and the mock sacerdotalism of the
ceuntry clergy, the labourers had saved the Liberal
party, and now the labourers had a right to demand
that the Liberal party should do something for them.
The labourers must have free education. Poor and
ignorant as the labourers were, the great bulk of
them had as perfect a horror of pauperism as the
Prince of Royal blood. They were also de-
termined to know the reason why so many
of them had for centuries been divorced from
the soil. He admired the Duke of Westminster and
others for their generous purposes in this respect, but
as Liberals they must in Parliament take care that
this generosity did not put aside compulsory powers.
It was all "bosh " to talk about changing the word
from "compulsory" to "legally." It was the duty
of the State to step in and abolish poverty and crime
where it was created by men being divorced from the
soil. He challenged the untruthful statement of Lord
Walsingham that the Liberals had promised the
labourers three acres and a cow, and he asked him ,
where it was done. Another question the Liberals
would have to decide would be that of the Local
Government Board. There must be no qualification
for a man :to sit upon it, but working men of all
classes must be made eligible. Less than that would
never suffice. They must have the administration of
the charities placed in the hands of the Local Govern-
ment Board.