The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-06 00:00:00

S 7 .A►.UG UST 6, 1846,
_ _

you have the same courage, which I trust you have,
you, the farmers and yeomanry, amongst whom I am
proud that I was horn, when the day of the next election
comes, will be able to do justice to yourselves. But I said
something about burdens. We have been told—endea-
vours have been made to prove that the agricultural
interest is rot subject to any peculiar burdens.
Why, I thought that tithe, and poor-rate, and land-tax
constituted three pretty heavy burdens, of which the
largest is paid by the land. Since we are told that the
cotton districts of Lancashire and the \Vest Riding of
Yorkshire are hereeforth to govern England, I thought it
as well to inquire what were the peculiar burdens which
Lancashire and the West Riding bore, to entitle that one
county and a-half to govern all England, Scotland, and
Ireland; and I find that the real property of Lancashire
and the %Vest Riding of Yorkshire annually assessed is
15,251,256/. ; while, turning to Norfolk, Suffolk, and
Essex, the amount of real property is only 6.727,449/.
annually assessed to the land-tax, tithe, and poor-
rate, to the amount of 1,285.5061.; and the 15.251.256/.
of Lancashire and of the West Riling of Yorkshire
was only assessed at 743,541/.—(Loud cheers.) So
that we have here these two counties, with more than
double the property, paying half the burdens only of
Norfolk, Suffolk, and Essex:—(Cheers.) Bit then
we are told that tithe is no charge at all on land ;
that tithe is of divine origin, and that it makes
no difference to a farmer whether before he pays
his landlord rent and before he puts money into
his own pocket a tithe of the produce is to be de-
ducted for the service of the church. We are told by the
manufacturing interest that though foreign countries pay
no tithe, it is no disadvantage to the land that we have
to compete with foreigners. I am not seeking to relieve
myself of tithe. I, for one, am willing to bear it for
the sake of tl'e religion and morals of the people.--
(Cheers.) But when we are told that tithe is no
burden on the people, I beg leave to say that the
manufacturing interest, and the towns were of a dif-
ferent opinion so long as they' were themselves formerly
subject- to the payment of tithe. Personal tithes, it
may be known to many of you, on the profits of in-
dustry of all descriptions, the profits of every trade, arti-
fice, and negotiation were, in former times, as much
within the power of the church as tithes on land. In
course of time these personal tithes were in towns or
changed for a tithe on houses.
"By the statute of 2 and 3 Edward VI., 1549-50, c. 13,
personal tithes enforced for the then future on every
person exercising merchandise, bargaining, handicraft,
&c., in such places as where within 40 years they have
been accustomably paid, excepting day labourers, and
allowing the ordinary to examine as to gains by all law-
ful means other than the party's oath. The Act not
to extend to London or Canterbury, and their suburbs,
nor to any other town where tithes have been paid en
houses. Niger, Bishop of London, made a constitution
in confirmation of ancient custom, establshing certain
payments for houses in London (according to the num-
ber of Sundays and apostles' days), which amounted to
about 2s. 6d. in the pound, on the rent. This con
tinned till the 13th of Richard 11. (1380), when
Arundel, A, chbishop of Canterbury, made an explana-
tion of Niger's constitution, by adding 22 more saints'
days, so that about 3s. sd. in the pound became theamount.
The citizens were very tumultuous, and great dissensions
continued till, by an Act of Henry VIII. (about 1520),
2s. 9d. became the sum. After the Great Fire of Lon-
don there was a new regulation by Act of Parliament,
and various sums from 1001. to 2001. a year were fixed
on each of the city parishes, to be fairly apportioned.
These sums were augmented by the 44th George 111.
from 2001. to 3001.—in one parish to 333/. Personal
tithes, 100 years vgo, scarce anywhere paid, unless for
profits, by mills or fish. Recognised by the statute of
9th of Edward 11. (1316), as to mills ; but decided that
corn-mills only were intended, and that other mills
were not within the statute, nor is tithe due
of such otherwise than by custom." Then
when the manufacturers and townspeople tell us
that tithe is no burden on land, I am bound to say that
I am of a different opinion, and if we pay tithes, which
the manufacturers do not, we are at least entitled to pro-
tection against the untithed produce of foreigners.—
(Cheers.) So it is with the poor, •rate.—(Hear, hear.)
Why, what did these noisy manufacturers con•ribute to-
wards the maintenance of the poor in this country ?
(Hear, hear.) At the present moment there was a re-
duction in the poor rate owing to the great and unpa-
ralleled prosperity of this country, not arising out of the
three years' free-trade measure of Sir R. Peel, but from
those great works which were prosecuted by his lion.
Friend, Mr. Hudson. The prosperity for which Sir R.
Peel takes credit belongs to those great enterprises
which my Hon. Friend, Mr. Hudson, has favoured and
promoted. But, how does the case as regards the poor-
rate stand? I find that the lands pay 52 100ths of all
contributions which are paid in this country for the
maintenance of the poor; while the manfacturers pay but
11 100ths.—(lIear, hear.) Such being the case, have
we not a right to say, that the landed interest pays.an
undue proportion of the local burdens? —(Cheers.) The
land-tax is the same, Look at Yorkshire. Yorkshire
pays sid. in the pound of land-tax, while Norfolk pays
Is. 54. ; Lancashire pays 2d. in the pound land-tax,
while Essex pays Is. Bd.—(Hear, hear.) When there
were such discrepancies as these in the burdens of the
people, have we not a right to claim protection from
the laned interest against the untithed produce of
foreign countries, which contributes nothing towards the
poor-rate of this country ?—(Cheers.) But I stand here
the representative, not of an agricultural, but of a com-
mercial borough.—(Hear, hear.) I sand here as the
re sresentative of the commercial marine of England,
and I ask how are these measures of tree trade likely to
affect your interests ?—(Hear, hear.) I have now in my
pocket a return showing that the corn carried coastwise,
of British and Irish growth, employed 53,000 British
sailors in 1845. I have also looked to see what the
foreign corn has done for you.—(Hear, hear.) I
regret to say that many of those connected with
the shipping interest are so misguided, as I
think, with aspect to their own interests, that
they have joined with the free-trade Minister, and
they hoped that their interests might be helped
by a free trade in corn with other countries. Now
I wish to examine this question, and I refer to the
foreign corn trade in the last year. There were
employed of British seamen, in carrying the
corn of Poland, Russia, and other countries in Europe,
to this country, only 5,000, and between 5,000 and 10,000
seamen of foreign countries.—(Hear.) Then I ask those
engaged in the commercisi marine of this country—l ask
not only the merchants but the seamen, whether they would
not suffer by changing the home trade for the foreign. It is
importing 2,000,000, or 3,000,000, or
4
foreignst heat in addition to that which we
aiooaoym oosntr
the real question at issue is nrteo a
already consume;
na ( )ef;
this—
whether the inhabitants of this country are to be fed by
wheat of English, Scotch, and Irish growth, or by
wheat
aske et
your
s
of Poland,-Russia, and America.—
the question.—(Renewed cheers).
whe glTireohtwhaetth is
sou think you will gain by exchang-
ing
your coasting trade, which employs annually 53,000
British seamen, for a trade which employs so few?
—(Cheers). But it is said that all this is a mistake,
and that there is no reason why the British shipping
should not enjoy the same monopoly, under a
free-trade system, of carrying the corn of other
countries as of their own ; and that if the trade
is now uncertain, that all that is owing to the sliding
scale.—(Laughter.) Well, I turned my eyes to the
timber duties and to the timber trade. As you are all
aware, Sir R. Peel, in 1842, reduced the duties on
foreign timber to the amount of 30s. a load, by which,
in the course of the last year, he puts 17s. 6d. out
of the 30s. into the pockets of the foreigner,—(Loud
cheers.) It is true that he relieved the railway pro-
prietors of the tax of 12s. Gd. which they had before
to pay ; but, in doing that, he sacrificed, as against
the people of this country, 17s. 6d., which he puts
into the pockets of foreigners.—(Hear, hear.) This i 3
the way I look at it. In 1839 the British merchants and
the British seamen enjoyed the major part of the trade
in timber with the Baltic. The number of British ships
was 661, and of the seamen taking charge of them,
6,500. The foreigners had 640 ships and 5,900
sailors. I look in 1845, again, when Sir Robert
Peel's measures came into full effect, and when we
have all the blessings of free trade, as far as the
shipping interest is concerned, engaged with the Baltic.
What, then, is the condition of the merchants and of
British seamen ? Why the 660 British ships have
fallen to 640 ; and the British seamen, from being
6,500, or thereabouts, have fallen to about 5,000 or
6 000.—(Hear, hear.)
But I turn and look at the
other side of the account, and I find that the 630
or 640 foreign ships have trebled. in number, having
reached 1,890, and that the foreign seamen—Danes,
Swle7d, e9soo Germans,. Prussians, Russians, &c.—have risen
do for you—(Cheers)—and it that is what free trade
has done for you in the case of timber, take care that it
t o
does not do as much
for you in the case of corn.—
(Cheers.) It was, I think, in one of the hot days in June
that this infernal Corn Bill passed.—(Hear.) I rejoice to
see here my Noble Friend the Duke of Richmond. It was
he who told the farmers of England that they, who held
the power to put Sir R. Peel in offiee, had also the power
to turn him out.—(Cheers.) On the same day that
the free-trade Corn Bill reeived the Royal assent, we
kicked Sir R. Peel out of ofhee.—(Cheers.) It was said
that we had disgusted the people of England thereby, as
if the farmers of England were disgusted with
what Mr. Cobden describes as poetical justice
!
(Cheers.) I have seen a letter addressed to a gentleman
whom we all know, Mr. Brereton, of the house of Brere-
ton and Blakeney, in Norfolk, from his correspondent at
Liverpool, who, in terms of regret, informed Mr.
Brereton, who is a merchant dealing in corn, that hence-
forth all their commercial relations must cease, for that
Liverpool was so glutted with American flour that he
really did not know bow to continue relations with Mr.
Brereton in the corn trade, unless he could dispose of
some American flour in Norfolk.—(Hear, and laughter.)
Now, I ask the farmers of Norfolk, and I ask those en-
gaged in the coasting trade, what they think they will
gain by exchanging their former system for free trade?
—(Cheers.) But I am told that the shopkeepers Through-
out the country are in favour of free trade—this free
ps
sail-makers, and the slop-
-4
trade which, in timber and corn, supplanted British ship
ping
and
seawn, apd supplied their lace from foreign
cboaukiertrrsi,est.he Nboultve,hler‘se, ould a the grcoers, the
thebiscuit-
sellers, &c., of this town, whether they found most
money spent in the place when a ship of my respected
friend Mr, Bagge comes born and is paid oft' in the port

of Lynn, or when some Norwegian or Swedish ship,
with some outlandish name, which I cannot pretend to
pronounce, enters Lynn ? How much of thew ages of
these foreigners was distribu. ed among the people of
Lynn?—(Cheers.) Well, then, I turn to the farmers
of England and of Norfolk.— (Hear, hear.) This
is Tuesda)'s market, and I ask you all whether more
money is not spent in Lynn on the Tuesday's market
by the farmers of Norfolk and Lincolnshire than is
spent in all the week besides? and then I ask you if
you exchange the growing of corn by the farmers
of Norfolk and Lincolnshire for the growing of corn
by the farmers of Prussia, if you deprive them
of the commodity they must sell before they
can buy of you, I ask you all, not only
those I have mentioned, but those who are engaged in
the ironmongery trade, yvheelweights, and others, who
combine all the trades nearly of this borough; if you de-
prive the farmers of their markets, and the means of
purchase, I tells you, shopkeepers, though you may buy
bread at half price, which you can never have, whether
upon the change you would not be losers in the balance?
But it is avowed by the whole of the cotton lords, by the
manufacturers, by Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright, that
Lancashire, and the West Riding of Yorkshire are to
govern England henceforth. The object is to rain new
markets in America, Russia, mad Prussia; but if they
do, it is by changing your markets, the markets of the
English farmers, for the markets of the foreigner.
They say, " Allow us to buy of the Americans, of the
Prussians, of the Poles, and of the Russians, and they will
take our cotton goods in return ;" but they forget that if
they buy the corn of Russia, of Poland, of Prussia, or
of America, they buy it instead of your corn, and if
they do, you must say " We cannot buy their cottons,"
for the simplest of all reasons, you will have no means to
pay for them when you have bought them.—(Cheers.) I
look at these things, and what do I find? I find that even
of one of those vaunted trades, the cotton trade, more than
3-sths of the whole are consumed in England, and that of
the wjallen goods of the far-famed'Westßiding not 3. 5 ths,
but !MN of the whole are consumed in England.—
(Hear, hear.) It appears to me, and this I have always
argued, that the first that will be ruined will be the manu-
facturers themselves. They -will change their customers
whose monopoly they at present possess, fur new cus-
tomers who are not pleased to take their cotton goods
at all.—(hear.) We were told by Sir R. Peel in an
early part of the session that Prussia was shaken ; but
she semis to be very firm, and determined to take nothing
from England but semi-manufactured articles. Free
trade now prevails ; but I have seen a return from the
cotton trade of Manchester, by Messrs. Gibson of the
state of trade until the 26th of July last, and they state
that for years their trade has not been so dull as in the
last month.—(Loud cheers.) It certainly seems by
Burns' cotton Chart that in the last half year, as com-
pared with that of the six months preceding, there has
been an increased export of between 8,000,000 and
9,000,0001 b. of cotton yarn, very nearly a raw material,
it is too much to say semi-manufactured; but in the last
six months, as compared with the six months before there
was free trade, there was a diminution in plain and printed
calicoes alone of not less than 33,000,000 of yards.—
(Hear.) It therefore does not seem quite so certain
that even the cotton-spinners will gain by this change.—
(Hear.) But I must not lose sight of the great object
before me. My great object here is to suggest to
you the course which is to be pursued under the guidance
of Lord Stanley—(Loud cheers)—if that able and power-
ful statesman, whom I have long been proud to follow
—to whose opinions I look with undeviating confidence,
and under whose confidence it is for me to take coun-
sel with you what we are to do for the future.—(Hear,
hear.) I say you must not sit down and fold your arms.
(Hear, hear.) If the landlords of England will not lead
you as they ought you must act for yourselves—(Hear)
—you must not he contented with canvassing the
county elections—(Hear, hear)—but you must canvass
in the boroughs and in the cities.—(Hear, hear.) You
must explain to them in language that cannot be mis-
taken, that if they mean to live they must allow you to
live also.—(llear, hear.) You must let them know that
your existence. and with yours that of the agricultural
labourers of England, depends upon them, and that
upon yours must depend their own.—(Cheers.) Sir
James Graham found it convenient to turn round upon
all his former speeches—(Elear, hear)—and to say that
this has ceased to be an agricultural, and has become a
commercial country.—(Cry of " No, no.") Yes ; Sir J.
Graham said so. I heard him say, on the 10th June,
last year, that one-third of the entire population of the
empire were interested in agricultural pursuits, and
rested for their subsistence upon the prosperity of' agri-
culture. I will examine that statement now, and I find,
upon looking back to the official census, that he was
not mistaken. I find, that in the year 1831, that
census gives 18,000 and odd, not of persons, but of
families engaged in agriculture ; and, allowing five to a
family, which is the allowance always made, you have
9,000,000 persons in the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland engaged in agriculture alone.—
(Cheers.) I then turn to the same census to look
at the mass of the manufacturing interests,
and there I find that, including factories of
all, descriptions, not of families, but of persons
employed in all the factories, cotton, woollen,
linen, and silk, and in all the mines to-
gether, the number does not exceed 1,000,000.—
(Hear, hear.) Well, then, although I admit that more
children and women are employed than in agricultural
pursuits, if you take three in a family, it will give you
something like 4,000,000 persons engaged in manufac-
tures against 9,000,030 engaged in agriculture—( Hear,
bear)—and with all that before us we are now told that
Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire are hence-
forth to govern England.— (Cheers.) .But, my Lords
and gentlemen, I have now done with the commercial
question, and I come to the constitutional question—
(Cheers)—and eagerly as I have contested this question,
I will say that if the question of agriculture had been
honestly fought between the two contending parties
upon its fair merits, I should never have been heard in
the conflict—(Hear, hear)—but, as you all know, with-
out any personal interest of my own, I felt with the feel-
ing of an Englishman.—(Loud cheers.) lam accused
of rude, coarse, and violent language, and of using such
license as never before was heard within the walls of

Parliament or had disgraced its dignity.—( Hear, hear.)
In the first instance I was roused to vengeance by the
way in which I saw the whole agricultural constituencies
of the empire betrayed.—(Cheers.) If anything could
have justified a man in rising in rebellion it would have
been the conduct of the late Prime Minister of England.
—(Hear, hear.) If I used strong language, a license
that had never before been suffered in the House of
Commons, it was because neither in my own time nor in
the time of living men had there ever been an act of
such prodigious tergiversation—(Cheers)—of such
treachery, of such political profligacy, as was com-
mitted by the Government of Sir R. Peel.— (Cheers.)
Why, gentlemen—l know not how—but the opinion
appears to have got abroad that the constituencies are
fair game; that they are to be treated as the goods and
chattels of their representatives; that Members of Par-
liament arc entitled to come down with vows and pro-
mises, to break them and to depart from the engage-
ments entrusted to them, and then to sell the electors at
the bidding of the Minister or dictator of the day.—
(Cheers.) As long as there is spirit in Englishmen I
will defend them—l will rise in indignation against such
conduct as that. It has given me a tongue that for 18
years was silent in the House of Commons—(Cheers)—
and if I am to be told that I have used a license that has
disgusted the country, I answer that I believe that if I
spoke from my own heart, I spoke the language of the
hearts of the nation.—(Loud and prolonged cheering.)
I can see no difference between political and any other
lying.—(Cheers.) I see no difference whether a man
obtains political power, and with power all its emolu-
ments and advantages, by false pretences, or whether a
poor and starving individual in the streets, to save his
life and that of his family, obtains bread by false pre-
tences.—(Cheers.) Well, then, this is the position of
affairs now. lam blamed by many of my friends that I
have turned Sir Robert Peel out of power.—(Loud cries
of "No," and cheers.) Now, I avowed from the first
that if free trade was to prevail, it ought to be carried by
honest men.—(Great cheering.) We were told that this
measure was to be carried partly, I am sorry to think,
by the assistance of one to whom this country must ever
owe a debt of gratitude. I mean the Duke of Welling-
ton.— (Hear, hear.) I believe it was carried in a great
measure through his means, who told the Peers of Eng-
land that it was to save the Queen of England from the
government of Cobden that they must consent to vote
against their etnsciences.—(hear, hear.) Now, I say,
for one, that I had rather be governed by Cobden than
by Sir Robert Peel.--(Loud cheers.) We ask for an
open and an honest foe, and we find no difficulty in repel-
ling his honesty ; but we were betrayed by Judas pro-
fessing regard for the poor.—(Loud cheers.) I there-
fore call on you to exert yourselves now, and show that
you have still courage and manliness, and that you still
have the spirit that ever distinguished Englishmen, and
that you will not be made a base utensil to serve the
dirty purposes of every trading politician. The Noble
Lord then sat down amidst vehement and long-continued
cheering.
Mr. Serjeant BYLES, proposed the health of the Duke
of Richmond and the House of Lords.
The Duke of IlicHmoND, who was loudly cheered on
presenting himself; returned thanks in a short but im-
passioneespeech, in the course of which he called upon
them to adopt as their motto " No Surrender."
Mr. Locx, a yeoman of Norfolk, then proposed the
health of the Marquis of Granby.
The Marquis of GRANBY returned thanks.
The Hon. Mr. WILSON proposed the health of Mr.
Disraeli.
Mr. Disaar.at, who, for several minutes, could not
obtain a hearing, owing to the enthusiastic cheering
with which he was greeted, spoke as follows :—My
Lord Chairman, and gentlemen, if I had those mystical
powers of compelling silence which the person who
rings the bell has on several occasions demonstrated
with so much success, I would not have detained you so
long while I recaive from you a sympathy too flattering,
and which I wish I could believe I might ever deserve.
--(Cheers.) But I need not tell you, it would indeed
be rhetorical affectation were I to tell you now how sen-
sible I am of the honour which I have received to. day
from your hands, and that this is an occasion which
must ever rank in my life among those which I shall
ever cherish. You have met to-day to pay a deserved
homage to the representative you have long trusted, and
who never has betrayed yota—a(Cheers.) You have
seen him to-day, 'After events of. deep and

PRICE SD.

' terest, in which he has played a part the most promi-
nent. You have listened to-day to the Noble Duke near
me, who had every claim to your respect because he had
every claim to your confidence.—(Cheers.) You have
listened to-day to my noble friend Lord Granby, who
has displayed on thie occasion, as on others, when I
have observed him with delight in the House of Com-
moes—all the pure spirit of a high chivalric courage,
and the expression of a natural eloquence, which is
never excited with more eff ct than when it vindicates
the cause of the people.—(Cheers.) You have listened
to others well entitled to command and to charm ; but
I am a stranger among you—and known to you only
by some slight endeavours to vindicate the cause, which
my constituency ten years ago sent me to Parliament to
uohold—(Cheers)— and to which, even in its apparently
fallen fortunes, I can tell you—l hardly need tell you in
a scene like this—it is some consolation to feel that I
have never been recreant.—(Cheers:) Having this solid
claim, a claim shared by so many to your kindness—l
need not ,say I assure sou that I am not only deeply
sensible of your kindness, but much affected by it.--
(Loud cheers.) The circumstances which have occurred
in this country during the last eventful year are, I may
say, unpre.eedented in the history of England, and con-
sidering that we have enjoyed longer than any other
country a free constitution, I need not say that they are
unprecedented in the history of the world.—(Cheers.) I
should be ashamed of any rhetorical exaggeration, and I
do not mean to say that I have not seen changes as great
as we have witnessed lately—that there have not been
revolutions as vast, or in their effects even more signifi-
cant. I cannot forget that empires have fallen and never
appeared again; that constitutions hare been destroyed
and had never again been called into existence.—(Hear,
hear.) I cannot forget such events as the French revo-
lution; but these are not to be brought into parallel with
that to which I refer, which with so much ceremony and
silence has been perpetrated in England. Now, a
change so great in its conception. and it might be
so vast in its results, was brought about by such
means—(Cheers)—and carried into effect by such ma-
chinery.—(Renewed cheers.) In other revolutions there
had been a struggle between contending parties and the
weakest fell, but this is the first time of a great change
—no less than a revolution in the material system which
regulates the industry of the greatest nation in the
world—perpetrated in such a manner that I cannot com-
pare the strugg!e to a fair encounter—to the glorious
days of Waterloo, but to an expression which has been
used in another place—to a stab in the back. —(Cheers.)
It was indeed one of those perpetrations worthy of the
Italian middle ages, when the point of the stiletto, or
the poisoned mouth of the goblet, settled the fate of an
individual.—(Cheers.) Whatever may be the conse-
quences of this change, I will say that the change has
been conceived in panic and cansummated in treachery.
—(Cheers.) We find in it all the temerity of the pol-
troon, and all the courage of the assassin.—(Hear,
hear.) The protectionists had to fight in an unexpected
battle, and the difficulties we experienced were not
slight, fur when we assembled together we had to find a
commander, to form a staff, to educate officers, and to
discipline our army.—(Cheers.) You will readily be-
lieve that it was no agreeable event to find Parliament
assembled, and ourselves obliged to oppose men whom
we had assisted in placing at the head of affairs only
five years ago.—(Hear, hear.) To such as maintain
that we ought not to have so strongly opposed a Minis-
try we had before supported, I answer, if you ask a
man to dine with you, and detect him stealing silver
spoons, it is no breach of hospitality to show him to the
door.—(Cheers and laughter.) I confess that to be
nearly the case with the late Government. It may not
be very flattering to their feelings, that the necessary
consequence of their conduct accompany them, but when
I see them sitting on one of the most solitary Opposition
benches that probably ever existed, separated as if they
were in quarantine, not a single member hardly among
the janisaries or renegades venturing to take their places
among them ; when I see that those who enter into the
troublesome contagion walk about the House of Com-
mons as if they bore the yellow flag, I see a great moral
lesson ! and whether the principles of free trade aro
right or wrong, it is well for the morality of England
that these gentlemen were expelled from power, When
I talk of the scanty Opposition benches of.m those Mi-
nisters, punished as they have been—legitimately and
properly punished—(Cheers)—l do not wish you to sup-
pose I am at all inclined to support the policy of their
successors.—(Hear, hear.) The difference between the
sentiments of Lord John Russell and Sir R. Peel is not
so great in principle, but it is vastly significant in ex-
pression.—(Hear.) I should say, withoutany exception,
the most guarded free trader I ever became acquainted
with is Lord John Russell—(Hear)—but I pretend not
to prophesy, because if we are to judge by what he has
done he is ready fur everything.—(Laughter.) But we
must distinguish between the mature conviction of Lord
J. Russell and that puerile fanaticism which marked the
late Prime Minister of England—(Cheers and laughter)
—which, if it were developed by a youth instead of dis-
tinguishing a Prime Minister of more than mature
years—(A laugh)--e e could only regard as that
phrensy which results from meeting a particular ani-
mal in the dog-days.—(Laughter.) I say this be-
cause I do not wish our policy to be misconstrued if
Nye do not go into a mechanically violent opposi-
tion against the present Government. It was
sufficient to show to the people of this country
that we had all done our duty under an exigency so re-
markable. What we wished the people of England to
see was this—that although our chiefs had forgotten us,
we remembered our constituents—(Hear, hear')—and all
that we see in the present Government is but a further
reflex of the last, as the last was but an exaggerated
copy of the gentlemen of Manchester.—(Hear, hear.)
No sooner was Lord John Russell Prime Minister of
England than he repeated the tale of Sir Robert Peel. He
told you that the principle upon which he was going to
conduct the government of England with respect to its
commercial policy was the principle of buying in the
cheapest market and selling in the dearest. That was
the principle of Mr. Cobden, who stole it from Mr.
Deaccn Hume. From Mr. Cobden it came to Sir Robert
Peel, and it now becomes the principle of Lord John
Russell, as it was the principle of Mr. Cobden and Sir
Robert Peel.—(Laughter.) You remember in the
" Arabian Nights" that a hunchback swallowed a fish-
bone that stuck in his throat, and he became apparently
dead. He was then recommended to be thrown down
a chimney to remove the bone. It was done, but with-
out effect, and he was then thrown down one chimney
after another until he had gone through the street.—
(Great laughter.) Still it was all of no use, he re-
mained in the same condition. At this moment Lord
John Russell has the hunchback in his possession.—
(Laughter.) Whether he will extract the fishbone from
his throat or not I do not know, but I am certain of this,
that all those gentlemen who are so devoted to this prin-
ciple are too ready, when once they have served their turn,
to wash their hands of all responsibility.—(Hear, and a
laugh.) That principle, I believe, made a clerk in the
Customs a Secretary of the Treasury. It made Mr.
Cobden the head of a great agitation movement. It
kept Sir Robert Peel in power when he did not know
how otherwise he might govern the country--(A laugh)
—and now, notwithstanding Lord John Russell's letter,
it has made him Prime Minister.—(Hear, and a laugh.)
The question is, having got the hunchback, how will he
get rid of him ?—(Laughter.) He has announced that
it is the interest of England to buy in the cheapest
and to sell in the dearest market. I will not enter

into any details on the subject ; it, is not
that I doubt the principle, but I not only deny
that it is the true principle of commerce, but I
deny that it is the principle of commerce at all. It is
the principle of trade, it is the principle of retail trade,
but it is not the principle of commerce, and like all al-
leged principles which are false, I will show you it can-
not be practised. The real principle of commerce is
barter, an interchange on equal terms of equivalent ad.
vantages.—(Hear. hear.) Why, some years back, this
was a favourite theme of the political economists. It
was received and hailed as an axiom. I accept it as such.
It is utterly antagonistic to the new, the pseudo principle
of commerce, now so much vaunted. Why, gentlemen,
if this rule be good at all, it is good for all ; the principle
is a general principle. Try it as such ; if it be good for
you it is good fur every other nation. If you sell in the
dearest market, they will sell in the dearest market ;
and, therefore, if you buy of them you will buy at the
greatest advantage, or you, according to this new
principle, will sell at the greatest advantage. What
you gain in one way you will lose in another. Why,
this is the " vicious circle" again, of which we have
recently heard so much. The political economists
used to allege against the system of protection that it
robbed Peter to pay Paul ; that it took from one pocket
to put it in another. Our answer to the political econo-
mists is, that the system of protection is not to be merely
or principally judged by its pecuniary results ; it pro-
poses to itself other objects than the wealth of nations ;
it thinks that the happiness of the people is a necessary
ingredient of the wealth of nations.—(llear.) Gentle-
men, our system may be right or it may be wrong ; the
meditation of every day the more convinces that it is
wise and just. But thee grounds cannot be alleged by
the political economists. Their system must be weighed
on its money results, and by none other. It aims at no
moral objects ; and I show you that, viewed in this
light—the only light in which it can be considered—this
great principle, which is the basis of all the new mea-
sures, which has distracted the mind and disturbed the
fortunes of England, is a fallacy, a self-confounding and
self-destroying fallacy.—(Cheers.) After this violation
of ull public honour and private faith—after all this,
we suddenly find the Government of this country in
the hands of Lord J. Russell, but he has confessed they
are in a minority in both Houses of Parliament, and
they do not pretend they are in a majority in the
country, or why do they not appeal to it?—(Cheers and
laughter.) Well then, what is the secret reason of all
this change?--(Hear, hear.) Why is Lord J. Russell
Prime Minister at this present moment? He comes
forward and tells you his reason is that he is seeking to
maintain a policy which is to allow Engle-Ad to buy in
the cheapest market and to sell in the dearest. Ask
Sir R. Peel the reason for his conduct, and he will
refer you to that apothegm. Ask Mr, Cobden, and ht
will also refer you to that axior.e.—(Laughter.) Nu
one can deny this, that it is a most unprecedented state
of affairs.—(Heal:, hear.) There is something mystical.
something cabalistic in that sentence to have produced
such 4 change.—(Hear, hear.) Where is the great agri-
cultural interest which is the basis of the polity
of England, and has been for centuries? I cannot
believe that this nation—and when I say this nation
I Mebll all classes—with their primary intelligence will