The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-01 00:00:00

would be considered a good reason; atd -one which fully
justified the Committee in calling the present meeting, for
he was assured that there was not one present who would
not be of opinion that_the Association should be continued.
NV hen he referred to the peculiar character of the meet-
ing, and to the differences of opinion which existed amongst
the people, be did not object to public meetings, because
he thought they were the great cure for all evils in things
politic, and that although an error had been committed
he had no doubt but that in the course of One, and that
very shortly, that error would be perceived and corrected.
The people were misled—they lad been misguided—by
individuals who bad gained an ascendancy over them for a
time, but their good sense would soon perceive that if the
course which had recently been pursued at publie mee.-
ings were to be persevered in it would not be tolerated in
this country. It was against all the habits of the English
people.—( Cheers.) They were accustomed to express
their feelings fully, and allow ethers to do the same.
(Cheers.) But if a body cf men were to make a practice
of coming into all sorts of public meetings, net for the
purpose of discussing its objects, hut far the express pur-
pose of disturbing their proceedings, it would be consi-
dered the utmost stretch of tyranny, and Englishmen would
not bear it By such a system a few persons had it in
their power to put an end to fire discussion altogether.
When he objected to the course pursued by some portion
cf the people it was not that he dejected to the views they
held upon the Corn-laws, but to the manner in which they
attempted to carry their own views into effect. Or: the
contrary, he thought that their views—that their opiai Ins
formed a t cry fit subject for dismission —( Cheers.) They
were of opinion that no good could be done, or any evil re-
dressed, until they had a perfect reform of the representa-
tive system, according to the princi; les contained in the
Charter. They were for striking at the root of the evils
which oppressed them. That, in his opiei :n, was a very
fair question for discussion, and he was very much disposed
to agree with them that until there was some teeter distri-
bution of political power they would never obtain that jus-
tice to which they were etoiled.—( Cheers.) But ttat
was no reason why they should disturb all meetings cafe
for other purposes than those of the Charter. Ort the
contrary, it was a reason why such Associations should
meet wi h aid and encouragement. They claimed such a
reform as would give them a share in the representation,
but when they came and disturbed the meetings of such
Associa inns_Associations which were working in the
best manner for the amelir rstion of the condition of the
working classes--they showed an unfitness to be entrusted
with the power they desire. Many of them affected to
think that the Repeal of the Corn-laws would place the
working classes in a worse position. Why so ? They
acknowledged that the law was bad—it was because it
worked ill that the Association sought its Repeal. He
saw by the public newspapers that some persons calling
thernselse; Chartists highly approved of the Corn-laws,
and said that if they were repealed the wsges of the work-
man would be reduced—that they had given three cheers
for the Core-laws, and three groans for Villiers.—( A
laugh.) If these were their opinions they were defeatiag
their own purpose! and he knew no be:ter means of keep-
ing things as they were than by dereatinq all attempts at
public discussion by denying that they knew the first prin-
ciples of lib, rty, and by stating that those evils which
they recognised were not injurious to the public. He dis-
regarded nu man's opinion aiad he thought it ought to be
made known that when they said the people were asked to
join it, the demand for the Repeal of the Corn-laws those
who made the request had no desire or intention of lower-
ing wages. If that were to be the effect of the Repeal
of those laws he admitted that it would be a great and a
serious evil. But it could be demonstrated to a cer-
tainty that that would not be the effect of the
Repeal. How was it to be preyed that if
the pike of corn fell wages must also fall. The prices
could only Le affected by the scarcity or ths abundance of
the article. The proposition that the more food was abun-
dant the worse the people must be cif, was, to say the
least of it, a strange one. If that proposition was true,
so must also be its converse ; and that would be, that the
more scarce food was the better off people must he. But
he would ask, was any man fit to be loose, or nut of Bed-
lam, who would broach such a doctrine ?—(Laughter.)
We could not get more food from a foreign country, with-
out giving something in exchange for it; we could not get
that something, without creating a demand for labour.
The fact was, that every restriction which was retrieved,
every approach to free trade, extesded the trade of this
country, and every extension of trade created a demand
for new labour.—( Hear, hear.) Now, no man could be
sought for by two masters, without the value of his labour
being raised. It has been said that that was a Middle-
class question: It certainly was; but it was equally a
question which affected every other class in the country_
it was an enormous injury to every person in the commu-
nity. A large class was calling for the repeal of these
laws. That it should be said by any other class that they
should not have an oppertur.ity of expressing their opii.ion
freely, was a tyranny which would be intolerable to the
English people. Should the Chartists prove successful,
there would be an end tete all free discussion of the griev-
ances of the people. The Association had had great suc-
cess. They had dissipated the errors which bad existed
in the minds of millions ; and the resolution which lie had
to propose truly congratulated them on the fact. He had
much pleasure in moving—" That while the members of
this Association have much reason to feel satisfied with the

result of their efforts to enlighten the public mind on the
subject of the injustice and impoliey of the Corn-laws, and
for congratulation on the growing interest of the country
in the struggle against commercial restrictions and mono-
polies, they see in the great distress of the industrious
classes, and the continued depression of commerce and ma-
nufactures, the imperative duty of increased exertions in
the cause of the repeal of all prz,tective duties on the first
necessaries of life."
Dr. P. SaIITII said, that although it was foreign from
his habits to attend public meetings, still the question of the
Corn-laws was so extremely important,. that he couli not
help giving them his feeble support upon moral and reli-
gious grounds. The Rev. Doctor quoted several passages
from the Scripture in order to prove that denunciations of
evil had been frequently pronounced against the oppres-
sors of the poor. Considering the moral nature of the
question, be was surprised that he did not see as rr any
c'ergymen of London present as there were persons alto-
gether.

A STRANGER Legged to ask whether the price of corn
would not be reduced by a larger growth of the article
in this country. He was about to enter into the currency
question, which he said was inseparable from the Corn
question, when he was called to order, the Currency
question not being connected with the object of the meeting.
The resolution was then put and carried unanimsusly.
R. STUART, Esq., AI. P., had been invited to attend
the meeting, and as the reproscntative of an agricultural
constituency, he thought it his duty to attend. He was most
happy to say that his constituents resided in the first agri.
cultural county in the kingdom, and he was most happy to
state that the great majority of the enlightened farmers in
that district, together with the whole of the labourers,
were in favour of the repeal of the Corn-laws, and had
attributed their distress to these larva before the Committee
on that subject in 1837. It had been proved before the
Import Committee, that the Corn-Liws formed one of the
meat objectionable features of our most objectionable
tariff, and that the extra duty which the monopoly
gave, calculated only at five shillings per quarter,
eas a tax upon the consume; of c l,v n millions, not one
farthing of which went into the pubic revenue. lie
called upon the Asscciie ion to join with the repeal agi-
tation, an agitation for the total rrpcal of the t o:ff.
He hid much pleasure in moving " Th it this Asseciation
gratefully acknowledges the valuable labours of a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons during last Session, in
eliciting in its Repent on the Import Duties, a mass of
valuable evidence on the subject of the Corn-laws; and
regards, with great satisfaction, ti.e rceent declaration of
a coiniieratle section of the representatives of the people
of their determination to support the l ractical applicaton
of the principles recommended in that Report, in all rnea-
SW C 3 of fiscal legislation."
Mr. RICARDO seconded the motion with great cor-
diality, as one engaged in commercial pursuits, and deeply
impressed with the manifold evils of our present fiscal
system. Their enenles had now resolved the struggle
into one between agriculture and commerce. Now
although comae ce was not a part of agri.
culture, still agriculture formed a part of commerce.
Whenever capital was employed fer the purposes
of gain, it was employed in commorce—( Hear, hear)
—and there was no fairness in crippling the eec to benefit
the other. As well might they tax the tailor or the boot-
maker for the benefit of the butcher or the baker.--( Loud
laughter.) Commerce bound nations together—even now
commerce has served us from a frightfal and cruel war.—
( Cheers.) Commerce has been the founder of our

- . --- .....••••..“• ..••
caries, the supporter of the revenue, the main,.
spring%O of
our civilization ; and they were nos called on to release
it from those fetters which prejud c 3 bad thrown around
it ; they weie called on to effect a commercial revolution.
Mr. FORSTER supported the resolution H:. had long
been engaged in commerce as a British mer-
chant, and most sorry was he to ace the supineness
of his fellow-merchants in tee city of London.
Foreign travellers used to be wholly unknown in this
country, but now they were to be seen every day, and our
merchants were cbl'ged to purchase from them, their pii.!es
being so much lower than the nr.t:ve manufactures, and
they were progressing at such a rate, that if the Corn-laws
were not abolished, our manufictuiers would be completely
excluded from the markets we bad been in the balk of
supplying. Only yesterday he had conversed with a ma..
chant Loar New (Hemet. In thst market flour was 17e.
a barrel ; the same quantity packed in the same manner in
tl.is country, would cost from 464. to 47,4.—(Cries of
" Shame.") The merchant very naturally inquired whe-
ther, as we would not take their produce, we could be sur-
prised at their turning their attention to manufacturer.
The result of his experience and reflection was, that if
those laws were continued, the commercial prosperity of
h
countrytc!aucw:htaeisontdoomed to destruction.
The resolution was then put and carried unanimously.
i‘
Ir. EV/ART congratulated the meeting upon the pro-
gressis
theda i the
whichh
repeal
.d
clofa
ptsh, the
,Ci
.o:en
The Report of the Import Committee haltaandv'esiglrro hwand
made
last
meeting.
upon the evidence of a Conservative, 'rho had for fiily
jeers sat at the bar peculiarly provided fel the intere ti
t.f tro le, that there laws were destrnctive of the best inte-
te.ti of the country. Ile regretted that attempts hal be:n
made in ce,taM quarters to put a stop to that pr, greet,
because one great cvii ext,ted,
acknowledged to be so by the parfes
oevvlidl'uot Le allowed to be abolished ? If the
but he would ask whether,
Lachni:l;trib'teicsrlt's.eg:'eeasrhte true to their own principles they must go
Lyon still further.
Mr. WATKINs, a Chartist—If that body were to be
condemned, and its proceedings found fault with, he would
insist on al opportunity of replying.

Mr. EwAtti was not accusing ail-
.r .
body. He had been
reasoniog strictly to the purpose, for he had been ender.
vouring to show by reason only, that the Lest course the
Chartists could adopt -
wcstojoin them in their demand
for the repeal. If they pleased
Et them show by reason
also that the best course the Corn-law Repeaters
could adopt was to join them in their demands for the
Charter. Tne proceedings which they had adopted of
late would go to resist the attempt to remove any Re_
knowledged ablate—it would be putting a lock on all poli-
tical machinery. However, ho denied that they repre.