The Sun.
London, England, 1839-09-24 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

(Extract from Sir James Graham's Speech at the meet-
ing of the Netherby Agricultural Association, on the
17th insrant.)
We have met together under various circum-
stances, and on many trying occasions. Sometimes
you have partaken of my exultation on success, and
on other occasions you have met me to console me
under defeat ; but whether we have met under cir-
cumstances of prosperity or adversity this common
tie has always united us—your prosperity is my
prosperity, and your adversity is my adversity. At
the present moment there is a most abundant crop
upon the ground, but there is a great difficulty in
securing it. I do not wish to moralise, but I should
not be doing justice to my own feelings if I failed
to draw your attention for a few moments to the
awful circumstances in which we may possibly be
placed. It is always my wish to exclude politics
from this .meeting, because I think they are the
bane of Associations of this nature, and I trust that
the tone of the remarks I am about to offer will not
subject me to the charge of infringing the rule,
which I profess a desire to have observed. I
must declare, that I have heard with the deep-
est regret sentiments of extreme violence ut-
tered lately in many parts of the coun-
try. A declaration was made of an intention to
hold what was called a " sacred month," during
which all labour was to be suspended. The time
chosen for the execution of this project was the
commencement of harvest, for the avowed purpose
of defeating the bounty of Providence. Let me,
my, friends, call your attention to this remarkable
circumstance—never, perhaps, was there a year of
greater promise than the present. I have travelled
through the greater part of England and the South
of Scotland, and never did I see more abundant
crops on the ground. The declaration against
working has been rescinded—the cultivator of the
soil no longer fears that his crops will spoil for
want of reapers—the foolish and wicked decree of
man has prevailed not. But mark the stern decree
of Providence. The crops are plenteous—the sickle
is prepared, and the reapers are willing to work, but
the elements prevent them from gathering in the
ripened harvest. This is n. striking, an awful
warning ! I hope that irreparable injury is not
yet done to the crops. I hope that the hand which
can destroy as well as give increase may yet be
stayed, but I have felt it my duty to avail myself of
this opportunity of directing your attention to con-
siderations which have weighed heavily with me. I
look upon the present state of the harvest as a
striking warning which I hope will not be thrown
away upon the people of this country.—(Hear,
hear.) There is another circumstance connected
with this topic which I cannot altogether overlook.
It is frequently urged that the maintenance of our
domestic agriculture is a landlord's and not a te-
nant's question. I have always endeavoured in the
face of those who are the most powerful advocates
of that opinion to combat it.—(Cheers.) It is a
mistake to suppose that a tenant would take land
with the intention of being a permanent occupier of
it without expending, on the faith of his con-
fidence in the landlord, a large amount of
private capital. It is in vain to say that the
farmers might withdraw their capital from
the land and embark it in other kinds of business.
The capital sunk in agriculture cannot be withdrawn
from it, the more particularly at a moment when the
very existence of domestic agriculture was threatened.
What farmer would lay out his capital on a farm if
lie believed his landlord would eject him from it at
the end of two or three years ? And in like man-
ner who would be found to give a fair equivalent for
the capital invested in land if the Legislature should
pass an Act which would diminish the value of the
land's produce one-half ?—( Hear, hear.) If by a
rash and sudden act of the Legislature all protec-
tion should be withdrawn from the cultivators of the
soil, and this great community rendered dependent
on a supply of foreign grain, certain ruin would
await the great body of landlords, but their ruin
would be insignificant in point of numbers and
wealth compared with that which would fall upon
the mass of the occupiers of the soil, and not upon
them alone, but upon the agricultural labourers.
—(Loud cheers.) You all know by practical expe
rience how small a proportion rent bears to the out-
goings necessary in the cultivation of land.—(Hear,
hear, hear.) The larger portion of those out-
going is expended in labour. Think what would
become of those immediately dependent on the
cultivatOrs of the soil, if by a rash and sudden
alteration of the law you should be compelled to
cease employing them. A convulsion of the whole
social system would ensue if an immense number
of agricultural labourers should be thrown into the
market for manufacturing labour, thereby reducing,
the wages of those workmen now exclusively oc-
cupied in that description of labour. Those who
desired to try the experiment of depending upon a
supply of foreign grain, have, to a certain extent,
had their wish gratified. Last year there had been
a great demand for foreign grain owing to the
deficiency of home produce. The people of this
country have, by immense exertions, been able to
import, in the course of the last year, a larger quan-
tity of foreign corn than has ever been imported in
any previous year. I fear that in the pre-
sent year a deficiency of the home produce
will occur and again occasion a great demand for
foreign corn. Under these circumstances, therefore,
those who like the experiment to which I have just
alluded will have seen it tried upon a large scale. I
fear that it will be found to be by no means con-
sistent with national prosperity. But it may be said
this is a sudden demand, and that a different effect
would follow if the demand were constant and per-
petual. We cannot command a series of seasons of
abundance in this country. We know by fatal ex-
perience that we have constantly two or three seasons
together of an adverse character. Suppose that,
foreign corn being admitted, a much smaller quan-
tity was grown in this country (as would certainly
be the case), and that a succession of bad seasons
should render us wholly dependent on foreign supply,
what would be the situation of our immense popu-
lation of twenty-four millions crowded into the space
of two narrow islands, and looking for the supply of
their daily bread, not only to Europe, but to al;
parts of the world ?—(Hear, hear.) I believe that
the whole civilized world would be inadequate to
meet the extraordinary demand which would arise
under such circumstances, and that history could
afford no parallel to the scene of distress—to the
strife of angry passions, which would be called into
play when twenty-four millions of people, confined
within our narrow limits, should be reduced to the
extremity of want and actual famine.—(Cheers.)
My strong impression, therefore, is, that to domestic
agriculture we must look for security against horrors
which I cannot depict, but which must occur to
every one as the necessary result of a real famine
being experienced in these islands. Such being my
opinions, I have always, since I entered into public
life, both from inclination and duty, done my utmost
to favour domestic agriculture in every possible man-
ner, and to defend it from all assaults.—(Loud
cheers.) These are my general opinions, and I
have been aided by you in giving practical effects
to them. I have had other objects of ambition
which at times call me far away from you ; but to
my native estate—to my own home—l always re-
turn with the most heartfelt joy. My chief plea-
sure is to improve the estate I have inherited, and
in doing so I am certainly materially assisted by
the most industrious, the most true-spirited, and
most honest body of cultivators of the soil it has
ever been my happiness to be acquainted with.

Sift,—The Corn•law humbug, out to
TO THE-I--1-'IDITO OF1
pT7clEevi:ueSlysaN:kb. , a s a
be revived ; be it so. But how,
with
practical man, and one deeply
on this as on
views and feelings of the working-classes.
conversant the
suc-
ceed without their (the working-classes) co-operation..
most other political questions, is the agitationto
It cannot ; common sense declares it to be impnss.ibnle,.,
Very well. "To be, or not to be, that's the question.`
s._
Will the working-classes assist in any way the agitator ?
Will they attend their meetings, or append their names
to their petitions? I say no—emphatically no ; and I
say it from a deep knowledge of the fact, having com-
municated with nearly all the principal towns on th(!,
subject. This being the case, what is to be done
That the approaching winter will be one of extreur
distress there cal be little doubt. What, then, 1
repeat, is to be done ? Are we to have revolution (for
rest assured the people will have that or bri-ad), or (as
grant Heaven we may!) Justic.•.? "Ye who toil tint,
neither do you spin," answer—watch? I have already
stated that I am deeply conversant with the views and
feelings of the working-classes on this as on most other
political questions, and that I am decidedly of opinion
that they will not assist, but rather (I would add) retard
the progress of the agitation. They cannot (neither
can I) see of what earthly advantage it would be to
cheapened by an
abolition of the " devil's laws, all 1) admit
, but would
them. That proviions would',

not that circumstance be the means of causing a re-
duction in the price of labour in the same ratio ? Most
decidedly it would ; political economists' assertions to
the contrary, notwithstanding. This being the case,
and believing there exist greater abuses to be re-
moved, and which can only be done by a Parliament
(f and for the people—that is, the people proper, the
" swinish multitude," as in Court phraseology they are
termed, they by whose sweat landlords batten and
masters (hated name!) become insolent, will never lend
a hand to such a barefaced, O'Connell-like fraud.
Arundel Coffee-house. PUBLIUS.

PRESBYTERY of AUCHTERARDER

AUCHTERARDER CASE.-The sentence of the Com-
mission was read and recorded. Some conversation
took place about the duty of the Presbytery in present
circumstances. One member moved that, in con-
formity with the sentence of the Commission, the Pres-
bytery do now refuse the prayer of the memorial of the
Earl of Kinnoull and Mr. Robert Young, requesting
them to take Mr. Young on trial, in obedience to the
decrees of the Court of Session. He said that it
was the Presbytery of Auchterarder, not the Commis-
sion of the General Assembly, that were the parties in
the civil action ; that the Presbytery ought and must
give some deliverance on the memorial ; that as no
other deliverance than a refusal can be given, the sooner
the opposite party have our answer the better, so that
we may know what course they may be advised to pur-
sue, and that the present collision may as soon as pos-
sible be terminated. He thought th►s course more
direct, and manly, and honest, than .i mere evasive de-
lay. Another member opposed this motion ; he saw
no necessity for taking this step, unless the Presbytery
were driven to it. Hitherto the Presbytery had done
nothing in opposition to Mr. Young, except in direct
obedience to orders from the General Assembly. He
thought it important to continue the same course, espe-
cially with the prospect before them of an action of
damages, or of imprisonment, and would prefer simply
to leave the memorial on the table. The other member
said he would not press his motion at this meeting in
opposition to the views of one he so highly esteemed.
It was agreed to allow the opposite party full extracts
of all the proceedings in the Presbytery.