The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-15 00:00:00

was the county representation—or, rather, such was
the system of tyranny and oppression, miscalled
representation, under the landlord system. But that
system had been attacked by the League, and, as far
as they had gm', with great success; and though
they were threatened with being met in the most
formidable manner, he had no doubt but that the
issue would be most triumphant for the advocates of
free trade.—(Loud cheers.) On this question the
first Minister of the Crown had been charged with
cowardice and treachery to the cause that had brought
him into power. He (Mr. Villiers) did not believe
this was a true representation. He exonerated hi -n
from the charge of cowardice, and could not set any
treachery in doing that which, to him, appeared best
calculated to serve the interests of Vile country.
—(Hear, hear.) It had been said at certain protec-
tion meetings on a former °erasion, where the
policy of the Premier had beer,. reviewed, that they
(the monopolists) had made him, and could unmake
him when they pleased; for they had given him his
place, paid him Ilk's wages, and intended him to at-
tend to their washes, and do nothing that was con-
trary to tb,-;ir interests.—(Hear, hear.) When a
Member of the House brought this matter under the
consirleration of the Minister at the time it was de-

of in common with other classes in society that were
affected by the operation of the corn-laws ; and
at the meetings they had attended they declared
that the establishment of a free trade system
would not have the effect of doing them the
least possibly injury.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
Villiers) had had recently a great deal of communi-
cation frequently of late with men of the highest
respectability, who stood in the position of represen-
tatives of extensive landed proprietors; in fact, they
were the agents of some of the Peers of the realm,
who were amongst the largest landowners in this
country. To one of these gentlemen, in particu-
lar, he had addressed himself, and he asked
him if he concurred in the opinion that the repeal of
the corn-laws would be injurious to the tenant-
farmer; and his answer was that there was no gen-
tleman in the country more surprised than he was at
the strong feelings he had heard expressed amongst
the tenant-farmers in favour of the repeal of the
corn-laws.—(Hear.) That gentleman said to him
(Mr. Villiers) that he h a
oud
ld n repeatedly h eard
leas thet
farmers say that they w have the
fear a; to the result of a repeal of the corn-
laws, for they could not conceive how such a measure
could injure them.—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Villiers)
then asked the same gentleman what were the bene-
fits which he conceived would be likely to follow the
measure, or what the results expected to flow from it;
in fact, he asked him, if the corn-laws were
repealed, what was his estimate of the lose which the
farmer would be supposed to sustain ? The answer
of the gentleman was to this effect—That he
s had asked the same questions of the farmers ; that he
asked them, on behalf of the nobleman whom he re-

tection. They were then under the law of 1815
yes, in the very year when the corn protection was
at the highest. Again, in 1829 and 1830, when corn
produced the highest prices, they had in fact no corn-
law at all, for prices rose so that the duty was com-
pletely thrust aside. Then, with respect to 1836 and
1837, the price of corn was only 355. and 365. per
quarter. Why ? Not because of the corn-laws, for
they gave a protective duty of 38s. a quarter on
wheat.—(Hear, hear.) Then, how was it in 1840
and 1841 ? Why, then again they had no corn-
laws at all, and there was the utmost distress in the
country, and they were glad to get corn from any
part of the world.—(Hear, hear.) When corn was
at the highest price known in this kingdom—when
the corn-laws were the most stringent, then the
greatest misery, distress, and destitution prevailed
among the farmers. In 1835-6, a Committee of the
House of Commons sat on this subject, and after a
great deal of deliberation the result was, that they
gave no report at all, but said that the distress arose
from over-production—it could not be because of the
importation of corn from abroad.—(Cheers.) This
satisfied him that corn-laws had not effected what
they were intended to do; because it was not to make
corn dear or cheap that these laws were passed,
but to ensure some certainty in its prices.
Had they answered that end ? In 1835, the price of
wheat was 365., in 1841-2, the prise of wheat was
74e—(Hear, hear.) The conclusion they must come
to was, that when they had a beneficent season corn
was cheap, because abundant ; and when they ex-
perienced an unfavourable season, they were compelled
to get it from other countries. Now, he would in-
quire how the corn-laws had acted upon the interests
of the classes they were originally intended to bene-
fit? For instance, with respect to himself, he had
heard many say, that the repeal of them—what ?
they said that the repeal of them would ruin the
Church.—(Cheers, and bursts of derisive laughter.)
From that opinion he (Mr. Houghton) differed en-
tirely, and he differed for this reason—he loved
the Church ; and he would tell them another reason
also. He thought that the repeal of those laws would
be the first means of making all parties hold out the
right hand of fellowship to each other—(Bear)—for
in the eyes of all right thinking Churchmen starvation
in any degree could not by any possibility be good
for the country at large. At present large masses
met. About what ? About these measures, and they
were the one opposed to the other; therefore, he
said that the repeal of these laws would unite them
in the bonds of peace, and be productive of good to
all parties.—(Cheers.) Then, again, it was said
that this measure would ruin the aristocracy.—
(Hear.) He had a great veneration for that
body, but he did think that the alterations
of this law would do more to raise that body in the
opinion, the good sense, and the good-will of the
people, than any other possible measure.—(Cheers.)
Now he, for one, could not stand—what ? Why, to
hear that they, the farmers, were a privileged class.
He did not wish to belong to a privileged class, and
he would throw down the gauntlet and cultivate land
on free trade principles against any man.—(lmmense
cheering.) Let them but have free trade—(Con-
tinued cheering)—end fair play, and what Mr.
Villiers said that night, he (Mr. Houghton) would
repeat, that the burdens on the land might be heavy,
but let them see "the Bill;" and then they would be
able to settle the precise amount of them. And now he
would make one or two remarks with respect to leases.
11e himself held a great quantity of land, perhaps as
much as ony one man in England—(Hear, hear)—
and he held it all by leases—(Cheers)—and he would
indeed be a traitor if he were not prepared to come
forward. For what ?—To take leases for as many
years as the landlord would give him—(Great cheer-
ing)—aye, and at the same rents as he now paid for
them.—(Continued cheering.) Now he must be ex•
cused for offering a few more suggestions.—(Cries of
" Go on.") Then, in the first place, he maintained
that the fears now expressed by the landlords were
groundless ; but there was another question that he
would just refer to. It was said that land would go
out of cultivation. He once recollected the lamented
nobleman of whom he had already spoken, saying to
him, when the repeal of the corn-laws was mentioned
as a thing probable, " Let other countries
send over their wheat. We shall be as glad to furnish
a market for them as for ourselves. We shall, in
fact, be then one large family." Now, with respect to
the land going out of cultivation, he (Mr. Houghton)
did not believe anything of the kind. On the con-
trary, he believed that it would be the means of in-
creasing cultivation. He would now say a few words
with respect to leases ; and looking back to the last
thirty years, and judging by experience, whether
the state of the landed interest had improved or
retrograded, he should say that the great and many
changes in landed property augured very ill for the
prosperity of landlords and tenant farmers. These
changes, especially to the lattter class, looked any-
thing but profitable. And now he would look
to the condition of the labourer.—(Hear, hear.)
He did not think that the last thirty years
had been beneficial to them.—(Hear, hear.) He was
sure that a great change on the whole system as re-
garded them was wanted, and if the meeting would
allow him to say one word, he would tell them what
he thought ought to he done to bring about a better
state of things. And first, he would say that every
labourer ought to have a little land.—(Great cheer-
ing.) He considered also that great attention ought
to be paid to their dwellings, and he thought that
every man should be educated. He believed also that
it would be greatly for their interests to let them have
a lease, for then they would take care that the land
would not go out of cultivation. They would be
thrown upon their own resources, and in those sea-
sons when the labour was greater than the demand, they
would have something to fall back upon.—(Cheers.)
He thought that the land should be let exactly at the
same price to them, that it was in the same parish, and
the nearer they were to a town the better.—(Hear,
hear.) That would really be the means of benefiting
the labourer. Now with raspect to tenures, he
thought that tenure should be granted as a security
to the tenant. He saidseiurity to the tenant because,
although he (Mr. Houghton) had the very best land-
lords in the world, he would ask them for this security
of tenure—and why? Simply because of the uncer-
tainty of life.—(Hear, hear.) And he would ask this
also because he had a large farm under lease,
and a large sum invested in it ; and if he had
not this security of tenure, what could he claim as
security ? —(Hear, hear.) When another man com-
menced trade, if he had not the money, he perhaps
found a friend to assist him; but if a man commenced
farmer, and required a large sum to begin with, the
friend to whom he would apply would look rather
hard in his face—and why ? Because he had not the
security of tenure. Let them look to Scotland, where
the security of tenure had existed for years, and let
them observe the palmy state of agricultural pros-
perity there. Let them introduce it into Eng-
land, and the same results would follow.
That was his opinion with respect to tenure.
There was one other thing he would shortly state to
them—he referred to the exclusive burdens on land.
He agreed with Mr. Villiers that the landlords should,
however, bring in " the Bill." He argued that they
had some burdens which pressed rather heavily on
the land, but if they had a clear stage and no favour,
they would ask for no further protection.—(Cheers.)
But admitting that they had heavy rates, let them
see how the proceeds were expended; and he would
first take the county rates, and he would say of this
rate that no money could possibly be expended in
a more wasteful and extravagant manner. The county
with which he was himself connected—he meant
Berkshire—and there he would instance a point.
The meeting might have heard of the gaol of Reading,
where every description of architecture of the most
expensive character war exhibited. Why was this ?
Because the gentlemen of Berkshire thought it would
look well from the railway. If they had their ex-
clusive burdens, they were doubly mischievous from
the manner in which the funds arising from those
burdens were managed. There was another part of
this story which he would like to bring before them,
and that was with respect to Ireland. These laws
were made for that country, and he might state to
them that he was himself connected with that coun-
try. Now, after thirty years' experience. they had it
from the petition presented the other day to the Queen,
that the country was in a worse state than it had ever
been—that, in fact, its population was starving.—
(Hear, hear.) He did not think that these
laws could be deemed beneficial to the
country ; but he did think that bad legislation had
something to do with it, and that many of the mise-
ries of that country might be ascribed to this. He
asked for them what he would ask for himself, and
that was, that some alteration should take place in the
present system of the corn-laws. And he would ask
the gentlemen who were present at that meeting to
lose no time, to leave no stone unturned, until they
had given some relief to that unfortunate country.—
(Cheers.) He could tell them that by their united
exertions they would soon carry the repeal of this
measure. And now he would tell them of a fact that
occurred within his own knowledge in that country.
If true, he would call on her Majesty's Legislature to
remove the gentleman he would refer to from the
commission of the peace, and if false, then let them
take him to the Old Bailey—(Cheers and laughter)—
and there let him hang by the neck until he was dead.
He said, and he repeated, that persons in Ireland were
not fairly dealt with. They had county rates there
as well as in England, and they had treble the amount of
assessment. When a presentment was brought forward
by a gentleman for his own use and benefit, it was
tried by the judges, and it was thrown out and can-
celled. It was then taken before another judge, who
quashed it. What was the answer of that gentle-
man when remonstrated with on the subject? The
petition against the presentment, he might observe,
was signed by the most respectable of the cess-
payers. What was his answer ? He said, "He would
take care that these devils had not another pound of
limestone."—(lndignant orios of Hamel name)

cle:red, and asked if such was a proper representation
of his position, he did, he (Mr. Villiers) was bound to
say, repel it with a proper spirit.—(Hear, hear.)
His words, on that occasion, were as follows :--
"It is my intention to act upon a sense of public
duty, and to propose those measures which my own
conviction of what is requisite for the public interests
shall make me think it desirable to propose. It is
right that there should be a distinct understanding as
to the terms on which a public man holds office. The
power of circumstances and a sense of public duty
have compelled me to take upon myself the harassing
and laborious office in which I am placed. What
can be my inducement to take office, and to make the
sacrifice the aeceptance of it requires ? What can be
my inducement but the hope of rendering service to
my country, and of acquiring honourable fame ? Is
it likely I would go through the labour which is daily
imposed upon me, if I could not claim for myself the
liberty of proposing to Parliament those mea-
sures which I believe to be conducive to
the public weal ? I will claim that liberty, I will
propose those measures, and I do assure
this House that no considerations of mere political
support should induce me to hold such an office as
that which I fill by a servile tenure which would
compel me to be the instrument of carrying other
men s opinions into effect. I do not estimate lightly
the distinction which office gives. It is not valuable
on account of the patronage which it enables its pos-
sessor to dispense, nor from the personal distinction
it eonfers upon him; it is only valuable to any man
fit to hold it for an hour, on account of the
opportunity it gives him of serving his country;
and the moment I shall be convinced that the power
of doing that, according to my conscientious sense of
public duty, is denied me, then I tell every man in
the country that he has conferred no personal obliga-
tion on me, by having placed mein this office ;but, free
as the wind, I reserve to myself the power of re4ing
from the discharge of onerous and harrassing duties,
which, under such circumstance, could no longer be
discharged with satisfaction to myself, or advantage
o my country."
A voice—" Three cheers far Sir Robert Peel."
Another voice—" No, not now ; at our next meet-
ing."—(A laugh.)
Mr. VILLIERS, in continuation, said, that he thought
the course proposed a very proper one.—(Hear, hear.)
He would revert to the statement made by Sir Ro-
bert Peel, in order to show that party had no claims
upon him, but that he was only bound to do his duty
to the nation at large. Sir Robert Peel showed his
disposition to perform his duty, and he (Mr.
Villiers) had no doubt that he would perform
it.—(Cries of " Hear hear.") He might say, in
justification of Sir Robert's consistency, that from the
time he made the statement he had been consistent.
Was it not seen that he had assailed the system of
protection, and, not only that, but he had assailed it
in every instance his office allowed him, and with it
the parties who thought to claim him for their humble
servant. They had had enough of public men not to
have any faith in them ; but when the party acting
had his duties and his interests combined, he would
not shrink from what his interest prompted him to
do. The gentlemen who wished Sir Robert
Peel to be a servant to them had, during
the last four or five years, been making
a noise in the country, and had been ready
to support their Minister in spite of his pur-
suing a course contrary to their inclinations—they
had acted as his supporters and friends, and they had
shared in the favours the Government had been able
to bestow on the Premier, but they had now become
very loud in their opposition to his measures. They
had, at one time, been opposed to a protective interest,
andprotection had been altogether withdrawn by them
from a great many, and the weakest had been treated
with the least scruple. They had been told that their
own turn must come next, and that their own
system would assail themselves; and they had answered
that they were prepared for it. They had on every
occasion, in Parliament, adopted opposite principles
from what they now adopted. Persons had gone
before them, and had said what the protectionists
are now saying. Men had had their produce destroyed
by competition, and they had claimed from Parlia-
ment what the protectionists are now claiming ; but
those men had always been disregarded, and Parlia-
ment had looked upon their sufferings with philoso-
phy. Thousands had been thrown out of employ-
ment by the introduction of machinery, and they
had gone to Parliament to ask for some pro-
tection, but they were told that individual
interest must yield to the general good.—(Hear.)
They were the hereditary lords of a good deal of pro-
perty, and they had been allowed to enjoy it freely,
but were they now to maintain that exclusive in-
terest to the annoyance of the community? Were
they able to point out any good result of their system
in the condition of their own people, and the general
condition of the country? One of the members of
that meeting had made an allusion to a meeting in
the county of Wilts; and would the protectionists
refer to the condition of the people who composed
that meeting as they appeared in the moon-
light? What had been said at Goatacre was
no novelty, for the protection system had existed
for a long time, and the condition of the people had
been the same for the last 23 years. In 1824 an in-
quiry was made by the House of Commons as to the
state of wages and labour, and by referring to the
report made they would find that the state of the
peasantry was such that it could not be worse, and
that any change must be for the better ; and the wit-
nesses examined had given it as their belief that it
was the wretched condition of the people that had
tempted them to crime. It was quite conformable to
those inquiries that these people should be almost the
last in the scale of society. Some years ago some
commissioners were appointed by Government to
form a scale of society, and the agricultural labourer
was literally at the bottom of the scale—below the
felon in gaol. It was 12 years ago that a gentleman,
the Member for Bedford, and a Conservative, made a
personal inquiry into the cause of the condition of all
labourers who were confined in gaol in many of the
agricultural counties for causing riots and incen-
diarism—(Hear, hear)—and, although a Conservative
in policy, declared that the condition of these unfor-
tunates arose from the low state of their
wages leading them into the commission of
crimes against their employers.—(Hear, hear.)
How could they prove anything • in favour of their
system, by saying that when the price of provision
was high that wages increased in proportion, and that
if foreign competition were introduced into the mar-
ket the land would go uncultivated? Why, the poor
men at that meeting in Wiltshire had declared that
during forty years, whenever the price of provisions
had increased, the wages had not been increased in
proportion, and that if the food or the means of getting
it were secured to them, they would take care that the
land would not go to waste.--(Loud cheering.)
If they could not point to these people as a specimen
of the benefit of the system of protection, how
could they even answer the question of
How have you supplied them with food ?"—(Loud
cheering.) Had these men been supplied with food—
('o, no.) Had no t the last four or five years
shown them thelallacy of their system ? They had
stated that the country of itself produced enough to
support the whole of the people, but let themprov
prove it
if they could.—(Hear, hear.) They brought
scien-
tific men to their protection meetingstwo oldthe
farmers what they " could, would, might, and should
do," if they adopted the measures recommended to
them, and that a public improvement would be the
result of those measures. What they all said was very
true, but they should let the land under circumstances
that would enable them to go to the trouble and ex-
pense of making these improvements. Lord Stanley
had once said in the House that the agriculture of
this country required a great improvement, but no
man could be expected to improve land unless a secu-
rity was given for the duration of his interest on that
land by means of a long lease, as the extent of their
improvements would depend very much on the time
they would have to occupy the land.—(Hear, hear.)
Re would ask if they had any prospect at
present of leases being more generally
given? At the meeting of the Agricultural
Protection Society, last Monday, they had said that
it was necessary for them to increase their influence
in the
counties
but would they do so by giving
leases to the farmers?—(No, no, and loud cheers.)
The fact was, that the farmers would never be allowed
of
leases. A committee inquiry had been asked for
in the House of Commons forte lastith three years by Mr.
Cobden, but one was never given, although he had asked
over and over again, and they wouldnrot grant one
were not used.
at all if more active measures we
Well, the farmers, too, had had their m
this question of free trade as well as othengs upon
others. The
farmers felt that they had their grievances to Compla •
ut

presented (as kind and generous a landlord as ever
lived), whether they would wish, in the event of the
corn-laws being repealed, to have clauses inserted in
their leases enabling them to cancel those leases six
months after the corn-laws should be repealed ? The
farmers said they would take time to consider. They
did consider the matter maturely, and the result
was, that they all declared that they did not wish to
have the clause inserted.—(Loud cheers.). Well,
the advocates of protection said that such a measure
would he the ruin of the farmer—the total, utter ruin
of the farmer; but, in reply to that assertion, he
(Mr. Villiers) had the assurance to the contrary of
this gentleman of whom he had been speaking—
(Cheers)—a gentleman of the highest respect-
ability, honour, integrity, and one who, if he
were to be summoned before a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons to give
evidence upon the subject, every word he uttered
would carry with it weight and importance, by reason
of the position which he held.—(Hear.) He (Mr.
Villiers) would now read to the meeting an extract
from the speech of an agricultural gentlemen,delivered
at a recent meeting in the country of more than
20,000 persons, in order to show what the sentiments
of that gentleman were upon this question. The Hon.
Member then read the extract, which was to the effect
that he declared himself a country 'squire and extensive
farmer, residing in the neighbourhood of a manu-
facturing district; but from that fact, he did not
think it would be fair to make the state of the agri-
cultural labourers in that district a criterion by which
to judge of their general position, Rnd therefore he
had taken care to acquire information in counties
that were strictly agricultural ; and after having
made himself acquainted with the state of
the agricultural labourers' condition in Dorsetshire,
Gloucestershire, the Isle of Wight, and several other
agricultural counties, he had no hesitation in saying
that their condition was so bad, that it would have
been necessary for him to have sought in the work-
houses for many skilful labourers."—(Loud cheering.)
Now, he (Mr. Villiers) did think it was a very im-
portant fact that the farmers of this country, who
really understood their interest, had so powerful an ad-
vocate in their favour as the gentleman from whose
speech he had been reading that extract.—(Cheers.)
Such speeches were the more calculated to give con-
fidence to those who opposed the corn-laws, from the
fact that those who were opposed to free trade were
far from unanimous.—(Cheers.) They did not agree
amongst themselves even in their own speeches.—
(Hear.) He recollected that Lord Salisbury made
a speech at one of those protection meetings, in which
the Noble Lord declared that so far from protection
being excessive, his Lordship did not think they had
half enough of it.—(Laughter.) But Lord Essex
happened to be present at the same meeting, and
yet, strange to say, he did not utter a word upon
the subject.—(Laughter.) His Lordship certainly
did say, that with regard to the inferior descriptions
of grain, he was of opinion that the duty upon those
ought to be removed, and that-they should be admitted
duty free.—(Laughter.) But it was rather strange,
that while his Lordship was quite willing to admit,
duty free, all descriptions of agricultural produce,
that could be required for the feeding of cattle, he
had not said one word about that which was required
for feeding the people.—(Cheers and laughter.) Now,
with respect to the advocates for the continuance of
the burdens upon land, he (Mr. Villiers) would defy
any man who read their speeches to say that any two
of them agreed.—(Hear, hear.) Why did they not,
if they felt that they were right, bring in their Bill,
which they had so often been solicited to do ?
(Hear, hear.) Because they well knew that if they
did so, it would apply to the exemptions as well as
to the burdens ; and they also well knew that the
exemptions would be found to preponderate.—
(Loud cheers.) Men of even moderate politics
were in the habit of speaking of the proba-
ble effects of a Divine calamity or a scarcity ; but
now their argument was, that at the present moment
the country was never in a more prosperous state, and
that therefore no change was necessary. Some men
were advocates for changes in everything but the one
most required; but the moment it was proposed to in-
terfere with the corn-laws, then they insisted that
people should let well alone.—(Laughter.) Now, he
could not disguise from them who now heard him,
the fact that those were the class of men who, the
more universally advantageous any measure was
likely to be, which should be introduced into the
Legislature, the more strenuously would they oppose
it, and therefore the advocates of free trade should
leave nothing undone to defeat such opposition, be-
cause it was the opposition of the most interested and
unpatriotic party that ever arrayed itself against the
people. (The Hon. Member concluded amidst the
loudest acclamations.)
Mr. HououToN next came forward. He com-
menced by saying that he never once stood up to ad-
dress a public meeting under circumstances so pecu-
liarly embarrassing as those attending his appearance
on the present occasion. His embarrassment was
increased by the fact of the importance of the present
crisis, by the eloquence of those patriotic gentlemen
who had preceded him, and by the fact of his having
abandoned the opinions he had formerly entertained
upon this question.—(Loud cheering.) He would
have no hesitation in saying to the meeting
that, if he did not conceive he had had
sufficient reasons for changing his mind upon
this subject, he would deserve to be denounced
in language as strong as that which cha-
racterised the speech of a reverend gentleman recently
in Staffordshire, who had dencunced Sir Robert Peel
as a traitor to his country and his religious principles.
(Laughter.) Now, he (Mr. Houghton) was cer-
tainly a traitor to his country in that sense, because,
for twenty-five years, he had been expending his money
and his time upon his estate, and had also been ad-
vising those around him to do the same in the way
most approved by protectionists.—(Hear, hear.)
However, he had since changed his mind, and he had
no hesitation in saying that protection was the parent
of idleness.—(Cheers.) Let him ask when it had ever
been known to prosper. Look at it with respect to
the silk trade. When protection was about to
be removed from that article it was said that the re-
sult would be the ruin of that trade ; yet, strange to
say, that so prosperous had been that trade ever since,
that now the silk trade of England had hoisted the
flag of triumph even in India.—(Cheers.) The same
observations applied to the wool-growers. He was
an extensive -wool-grower, and upon that point he
had expressed his opinion to that great and good
nobleman, now no more—he'meant Earl Spencer—
(Cheers)—to the effect that the wool trade would be
ruined by the removal of the protection duty ' • but
that nobleman assured him that that trade in Eng-
land would be better than it everhraidghbte.—en,(Cahernedts.h;
result proved that his Lordship was
Well, let him now turn to another article, that of pigs.
Why, they wanted all the fat pigs they could get, and
if the Americans sent more of them, they in Eng-
land would be glad to receive them.--(Laughter.)
Then with regard to beef. What was the case
there? They, it seemed, had in the same country
beef always fat—oxen ready for the knife. But what
was the real fact? 'Was bacon cheaper? No; it
was as dear as ever. So was beef; and therefore he
contended, that all this fear was perfectly ground-
less.—(Hear, hear.) Then, again, wool was no
cheaper now that they had free trade in this article.
sHtaeted
waswould
good,
maintain
th e
y this,h ad thatsn e e it
the
e days
movement,
of protection,voieimu
saksti
sisvoans
been going backward, and ever
certainly as day followed night, lirad been ean 'step
as
nearer to free trade. Why, the very hat that he wore
was a French hat ; and had not the hatter in this
country an equal right to come forward and claim for
protection. But did he do so ?—(Cheers.) His own
opinion was this, and he would beg their patience one
moment while he stated it. They had now had the
corn-laws for thirty years. It was therefore no new
acquaintance. He had himself had occasion to give
evidence before a Committee of' the House of Com-
mons; he had also attended meetings when distress
had been the cause of their assembling ; and now for
some facts illustrative of the working of the protective
system. In 1822, when the corn-law was
most stringent, he would read them one
line of what took place at a meeting held in the
county of Kent, in consequence of unusual distress,
and they prayed for a change in the law.—(Hear,
hear) And yet this was in the very height of pro.

E SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING. JANUARY 15, 1846

That was the fact, and he could give the name if they
required it. The Irish farmer did not care for the
corn-laws. All he asked for was fair play.
The Irish did not think so much of the corn-laws as
the want of good roads, and in this respect he wanted
an alteration for them as well as for himself. If
what he had stated was not true, let the Government
send over to Ireland and inspect the roads, and see
the state they were in at this moment. The Irish
farmers, in fact, had no roads at all, and they were
often compelled to carry limestone on their backs to
burn upon the land.—(Cries of " Shame, shame.")
Now that was the state of Ireland, and he for one
said, and he hoped the meeting would join with him
in declaring, that the time had arrived when they
ought to be improved. He was sorry for having
detained them so long, but when he knew what he
did know, he could not help speaking out. Things
required to be alleviated as well in Ireland as in this
country, and he would tell them what he thought
would effect that object. Land wanted improve-
ment, and he asked Government to bring in a Bill to
sanction the raising of money upon entailed estates
for their improvement, at about 4 per cent.—(Hear,
hear.) There was another step they ought to adopt.
When an English merchant sent out a vessel to Ame-
rica, he was compelled by law to provide proper ac-
commodation for emigrants, if he carried any ; and
why should not the landlords cf. Ireland he compelled
to provide suitable accommodation for their depend-
ants ? For his part, he would have first, second, third,
and even fourth-rate dwellings for the Irish tenantry ;
and this plan could easily be carried out, if Government
would only adopt the plan he had just suggested.
And what would be the consequence ? Why, it would
give satisfaction to everybody, and the tenant would
live in a decent dwelling-house instead of a filthy
hovel. It would be the means of conferring great
benefit upon trade in that country, and would inter-
fere with no interest whatever. There was a ques-
tion in Ireland, too, as well as in this country,
respecti,Pg the Church. He once wanted to bring
to the notice of Sir Robert Peel a Bill that would
have enabled parties to rent land, which was Church
property, upon a fair and equitable tenure. Some of
the county Members approved of this plan, but de-
clined to support it, because they said it would have
the effect of interfering with the Church establish-
ment. What nonsense it was for men to talk in
that way. It would improve instead of injuring the
Church ; and if his plan were adopted they might de-
fend upon it they would have in Ireland less of agi-
tation and more of cultivation—less of agitation and
more of education.—(Cheers.)

consumption. Customers may be so increased as to
require all the imported corn, without causing any
diminution in the sale of corn grown at home. But

the protection party seem to me to be trying all in
their power to depreciate the value of their landed
properties.—(Hear, hear.) It seems very singular
for them to exert all their abilities in telling their
tenants that when the corn-law is repealed their lands
will not produce any rent. 'Will they not, when the
corn-law is repealed, come forward and ask to have
their farms for nothing ? Now, we free traders
have never said so. What was the case with respect
to estates ? Why, it was a fact that estates had been
lately selling in the public market by auction, and
had not these been purchased as mere investments ?
I ask, if these lands have sold for one year's less pur-
chase than when the agitation against the corn-laws
was not so rife as it is at the present moment ? Again,
it is a fact that the farmers are selling their farms by
auction at as high prices as ever they did. He was
himself aware of a case in which two farms

were sold at a higher price than they brought
two years ac,o ; and this was at a time
when the corn-laws was not as near being repealed

as they now are.—(hear, and cheers.) If there was
an idea on the minds of the farmers that the repeal
of this law would ruin land, put it in the same scale

as everything saleable, would they not be induced to
adhere to the same or a higher price in purchasing it ? '
—(Hear, hear.) If there were shares in a railroad
to be disposed of, it would greatly diminish their
value if there were any competing lines. And so it
vvocld be with land, if there were truth in the doc-
trines of those opposed to the free trade principles.
With reference to what has been said by Mr. Hough-
ton respecting tenants, I will offer an observation.
I myself am acquainted with four tenants in Suffolk,
who at the time when the recent change had taken
place in the Ministry, and the power was supposed to
be placed in the hands of Lord John Russell, in nego:.

tiating leases with their landlords, did not one o
them say a word respecting the corn-laws. Now i'
is not our business, as advocates of free trade, to
counsel persons whose property it is said is about to
be injured. But I must say that it is strange that
the la.ndlords should be endeavouring to create a panic
to depreciate their own property.—(Hear, hear.) I
will recommend this view to Noble Marquises
and Dukes, if they do not wish to make
a sweeping measure.—(Cheers.) When speaking
of Dukes, I mean those who have that propensity to
deliver themselves of corn-law speeches, who, I must
say, are not the most wise persons in the world.—
(Hear, and laughter.) They appear to be persons of
very homely wit, and it is difficult to single out one
more foolish than another. It reminds me of a
French Duke who applied at Court fora place for his
friend, saying that he was deeply indebted to him ;
and on being asked as to the nature of his obligations
to him, replied that, but for him, he would be the
ugliest man in France.—(A laugh.) Now, so it is
with those noblemen ; for it would be difficult to
single out one that has made a more foolish
speech than another, for they have kept each
other in countenance with their nonsense ; not
however, that he despaired of making some
of them disciples of the League. Even the Duke
of Norfolk was not a hopeless case, and
perhaps when that Noble Duke spoke of curry pow-
der he meant rice, for they were mixed together in
India. Now, we have another Duke, who says that
anti-corn-law meetings should be treated with the
contempt they deserved.—(Name.) He was well
known, for he was at one time engaged in a corre-
spondence with- the chairman of the League.—
(Name, name.) It was the Duke of Cleveland,
whose speech was in this day's Times. He says that
the country was convulsed from one end to
the other by the agitation that was car-
ries on. And so it was, but it was with laughter at
the nonsense uttered by Noble Dukes at protection
meetings that it was convulsed.—(Laughter.) As I
have alluded to a correspondenee that has taken place,
I will take the liberty of reading those letters,
which are important documents, as showing that
they were as anxious as those who were deficient in
knowledge of this matter. The Duke of Cleveland
delivered himself of a speech, at Raby Castle, which
appeared in the Mark-lane Express, upholding the
corn-laws. The Chairman of the League wrote to
the Duke this letter :
"Hy Lord Duke,—ln an account of a meeting of
your Grace's tenants, you are reported, in the Mark-
lane Express. to have warned your tenants against the
doctrines of the League, and that they (the tenants)
could not compete with the foreign growers. As chair-
man of the League, I believe you have made these state-
ments in ignorance, and [ forward you some tracts of the
League that will give you information on the subject,
which will show you that the land does not bear those
burdens that you have asserted, and that it is not so
heavily taxed, and that income derived from land is a
small compensation ; and I trust that you will take the
earliest opportunity of correcting your (error.
"I am, &c., GEORGE WILSON,
" Chairman of the National Anti-Corn-law i.e Tue."
To this letter the Duke returned the following
answer :
" Sir,--I have received a letter which has followed
me to the Highlands of Scotland, and has filled me with
astonishment. The writer signs himself Chairman of
the League.' However despicable that faction has be-
come in the consideration of the country, I could not
conceive that any one of its members should have the
boldness to lecture me on what I have thought fit to say
at a private party at which no member of the press was
present. I know nothing' about the Mark-lane Ex-
press, and treat your observations with the contempt
they deserve."
Now this was a very unhandsome reply to the letter
that was framed in very courteous terms. He con-
tended that they had a right to investigate the opi-
nions of those who were hereditary legislators, and
in whose hands the transactions of affairs affecting
their interest was confided. Now, he would assert
that it was false what had been stated about the land
being more taxed. It had been shown by Mr. Hume
in the House of Commons, that. the taxes pressing
peculiarly upon agriculture amounted to sotnething
about 8,000,0001. a year; and they would have now
yielded about 30,000,0001. be the revenue. When
the deputation of the Central Committee waited on Sir
R. Peel, they could not answer 1 hart when he asked them
what were the peculiar burdens that pressed upon lands.
Now he himself was counted wale the landed interest,
though to a small extent, and should feel very loth to
have, as had been suggested this evening, a bill fur-
nished for the amounts received o ff the land. My Lord
Beaumont had said that real property in Enland
bore about 8,000,000/. taxes • and that he would set
that 8,000,0001. in one scale an,d the corn-laws in
the other, and they ought to be' satisfied. But did
not the Noble Lord know that houses, mining pro-
perty, and shares in companies, were as much real
property as land? So much for that portion of the
subject. Then the argument that if corn from fo-
reign countries were to be admitted, it would have a
fond of declar-
livanergrly,yt ihmnajetunirtfiiorounosel
Polish
bad
rne
endacdtyh.we mdvehrayd been particu-
would become like Poles ; to us e the expression of
yerFwe°aeladreimitted, their labourers
a venerable labourer in this cams'', Col. Thompson, if
they admitted this Polish corn -they would begin to
speak the Polish tongue.—(leatighter.) This arose
from the different circumstances; of the two countries,
and what was applicable to Pc gland could not be aise
plied consistently to Great ;E:ritain. This great
question now agitated is no, pecuniary question.
The landed proprietors are jeal oats of the advance of
the mercantile community of this country; they do
not like their heels trod upon by a class whom they
have been taught from their cra ff.le to look down upon.
They like to depress the mercanetile community. Yet
this cannot be from a pecuniary motive. From their
love of power, their love of ascendancy, and their love
of aristocratic privilege, they 'wild) to keep down the
middle classes of this country. Now, however, that
this question and its merits are clearly developed in
the sight of the country—now that free-trade is almost
obtained, that it is so near their lands that they can
reach its fruits—Englishmen ought to be branded as
slaves if they do not throw off tt6te yoke which a proud
landed aristocracy have pressed upon their necks.—
(Immense cheering.) When veva consider the great-
ness and universality of the cauese now advocated, it
is evident that the mercantile community cannot throw
off the yoke without their act being felt throughout
the whole world. It will be felt. not in this nation only
—it will be felt through all the civilised nations of the
world. Ties which link them in mutual union
and interests, which bind them together, will be
drawn closer, and more beneficially interwoven—
commercial freedom will be " peace on earth
and good will to men."— (Cheers.) The first step
to this is the abolition of the British corn-laws. It
is not true what has been asserted by our oppo-
nents, that we seek protection. for certain branches
of manufacture, and that we will not give it to agri-
culture. I deny the truth of this. I, who am a
representative of Manchester—the men of Man-
chester—the men of the greatest manufacturing town
in the kingdom, desire no such thing. The merchants in
the Chamber of Commerce in Manchester, and the
petitions, all of them that have issued out thence, have
prayed for the total abolition of the corn-laws, and of
all restrictions on free trade.—(Cheers.) There is a
gentleman, a Mr. Stuart, about to become the repre-
sentative of the constituency of Newark, the represen-
tative of the Duke of Newcastle—(Laughter)—who
has said so much, namely, that those who demand free
trade are seeking protection for themselves. I must
tell that gentleman that it is not to be tolerated, after
we have asserted so often that we seek the abolition
of the corn-laws, free trade, and no protection—it is
not to be tolerated that he should write letters, and
ainncsetrryucbtiaornrsis._ter(Lofausogmhteeprr.)actimcer:
give the authority of his name to such statements
tr,
in:Ghvloeliethaeg i,dle:htsor
n,
hotnloewat
rnl s eakeehi
make
eieeseruidv cepi
hsg, r
too,aooa
ipCniesghr
change
I d o
rather sharp practice; and his brief has
leavingnino t
hisk nNewarkpoowl
c;
y buta-ss
if( Sir —(Laughter.)
Whither
at present, the probability is that the League may
hue to find a seat for him.—(Laughtvr)

Mr. T. M. Ginsosr, M.P., then came forward, and
was received with great applause. When silence was
restored, he said—Mr. Chairman, Ladies, and Gentle-
men, after the excellent speech of Mr. Villiers, and
the very practicable and useful address of our friend
Mr. Houghton, an extensive agriculturist, it would
perhaps ill become me to trespass long upon your
time, but this I will remark, that it seems you have
not thought, from the vast assemblage collected in
this house this evening, that it is wise at pre-
sent to consider the measure of the repeal of
the corn-laws entirely carried. It has occurred, I
dare say to many, and it has been remarked by some
in my hearing, that it is hardly worth while to attend
a meeting on the corn-laws now that the leaders of
the two parties, Sir Robert Peel and Lord John Rus-
sell, have taken the question into their care ; but let
me beg of you to remember that the question is still
in your hands.—(Hear, hear.) From this fatal mis-
take of considering questions not finally carried as
not being in the hands of the people, have
there been many disappointments to the cause
of liberty. The liberties of a nation were
never given—never yielded by rulers to the
people ; they have been always rung from rulers by
the steady, the persevering, and the unshaken ex-
ertions of the people themselves.— (Cheers.) Who
knows that Sir Robert has yet decided what question
he shall submit to the Legislature, and who knows but
that this very assemblage here this evening may give
him power to dictate better terms to the Cabinet
Council ? Who knows that this assemblage may not
have great weight in inspiring Ministers with the
courage to propose, and the ability to carry, a good
measure ?—(Cheers.) We are in the position of
a person standing by the bed-side of some
worthy matron. We do not know whether
it is to be a boy or a girl.—(Cheers and
laughter.) We do not know yet what is to be had,
therefore I say it becomes us not to desert our duty,
but to watch and be satisfied with nothing but a per-
fectly healthy child.—(Cheers and laughter.) Our
worthy Chairman named that child, and it is the total,
the immediate, and the unconditional repeal of the
corn-laws.—(Cheers.) This assemblage ! what a
contrast is it with those poor and pitiable meetings of
our opponents. Why, your Chairman has maintained
that at some protection meeting, that a eat might be
discovered if she went amongst the listeners ;
but here I will venture to assert, that if the
whole of the Central Society for the Protection
of British Agriculture, that assembles in the front par-
lour of No. 17, Old Bond-street, were put into this
theatre, you would rot know they were here at all.—
(Cheers and laughter.) Perhaps some of them are
here, and I wish they may be. They are going, it
seems, to fight the League with its own weapons.
They are going to try the registration courts ; they
are going to try the manufacture of votes, as it is
called. Thus, though they condemned such a course
as highly immoral and unconstitutional, yet it seems,
they
tipnhrgeotme
persons,cot are
protection,
n,
morals—(Hear,
going ih(nat
igveeato
who,
r,
ntatohnr try it
great
rait
though favourable
atgtfhm
laughter)—and
tveoo:bss
ier—leavebeatl
isneo.
dnt
os Tot
uohnt These
yeal
xaaa
exrr
dee.
going to use our weapons. Well, then, perhaps we
may live to see a rival house—not Drury-lane. Let
me advise them not to be so aspiring as all that at
first. They had better try a smaller house, and I will
suggest to them the Strand.—(Hear, and laughter.)
I am quite sure our excellent friend, the Chairman, if
they are unwilling to try at first a theatre upon their
own account, would let them some portion of these
boxes to some of the principal members of the Central
Society for the Protection of Agriculture, wlien they
might attend and speak for themselves. We would give
them a patient hearing, and we would reply
fairly and dispassionately to their arguments
—(Hear)—and if we do not convince those
of them who are capable of being convinced that our
cause is one of justice, one of humanity, and one of
right, then I can only say that 1 should despair of
ever triumphing in the cause we are advocating.—
(Cheers.) What an extraordinary thing it is that
we should have this mighty opposition to the proposi-
tion we make. What is it we are proposing? Why,
we are proposing to take off a tax. If we were as-
sembled in these great numbers for the imposition of
a tax upon the people, then I could perfectly under-
stand that there might be meetings of those people
who would be unwilling to bear our burden. But
our object is nothing of the kind. Our object is to re-
move a tax ; and what a strange notion—what a
strange perversion of just political principles—is it
that there can be such a tax existing, that, when you
propose to remove it, you have great numbers of per-
sons coming forward, saying the tax is a benefit to
us—it is a tax that is putting money into our pockets,
and therefore we will not consent to relieve the na-
tion from the burden. Does it not strike every one
that a tax ought to be a general burden, and ought to
be levied for the general purposes of the State, and it is
impossible that a rightful tax can be imposed for the
benefit of any portion of the State's subjects? But
this it at once a burden on the nation, and a benefit
to a large portion of the nation, according to their
own showing. Therefore I say their opposition to the
removal of this tax is of itself proof that there must
be something dishonest in its operation—there must be
something at variance with the true principles of
taxation when you have a tax that is a burden upon
some and a benefit to others.—(Cheers.) We have
never made this question a question of mere price ; on
the contrary, we have treated the corn-laws as a
question affecting the food of the people. The high
ground we have taken is this—that we have a right
to the freedom of exchange. We demand of the
Legislature—the landed proprietors who have
been, from time immemorial, the ruling party—
to desist from obstructing the corn trade. 'We
say the corn trade is a legitimate pursuit ;
we say that Englishmen have a right to
invest their capital in a foreign trade, and we say
they have a right to bring corn into England to sell
it at a profit, if it suited their interest and convenience
to do so. We say they ought not to be obstructed from
doing so to suit the private or pecuniary interest of
any class of their fellow-subjects. We do not put it
upon the mere ground of price, but upon freedom of
exchange, which was the most obvious right. We
say, if there is to be any article thrown in the way of
foreign corn, the same burden ought to be placed on
home-grown corn, and let the home corn grower bear
his proportion to the tax. There would be justice
between them ; not that we say that corn is a fit
subject of taxatTaii—nothing of the kind. 'We think
the food of the Ile ople ought more than anything to
be exempted from taxes, but I am anxious to dwell
upon this point, b ecause so much has been said by
our opponents of certain alleged inconsistencies in
the statements of ;free traders with reference to what
would be the prig e of food after the repeal of the
corn laws. I ails tit, as I have done before, that
our demand rests mot upon price, but still the price
may be a matter for our speculation.—(Hear.)
Be the price what it may, we contend for
cspoemeumleartcioianl
ufrnedeoculamt in the corn trade. Speculation
as to the price, v vhen that freedom shall be obtained,
would be a curioi Ls speculation, and an interesting
if price be the primary ques-
tion; but it does nc .t form the basis upon which the
just and righteous a demand is made. Now, with re-
gard to price, our excellent friend, Mr. Houghton,
does not anticipate a fall of price from a repeal of the
corn-laws. True, there may be no fall of price,
yet there may be a great increased consumption of
food. Imported f9od may not be substituted for
be for additional
whit 15 grown at; luome. It may

Gladstone, indeed, is the best man among them. As
for Sir Robert Peel, he has been taught by a proper
preceptor—he has learned from experience ;in the
Cabinet he is the best supporter of our cause. But,
after all, it signifies little what Cabinet Councils may
do, it is you, you only, with the aid of the people of
this country, that must carry this question ; but you
will not succeed if you show the slightest flagging in
your exertions to gain the point. If it were supposed
that you had allowed yourselves to be lulled into a
false security of success, the League would have for
many years to continue in the struggle. But I know
you must triumph—(Cheers)—l know the con-
test is between justice and oppression—between
right and guilty privilege—and you must prevail.
I believe you will succeed in the present year also,
and this hope I draw from the condition of the two

parties. What is it? On the side of the one party,
on the side of protection, there is division ; on our
side there is unity ; on our side there is confidence—
on theirs, suspicion; here, reason—there, passion;
here we have the use of experience and philoopky—
there they are supported by none but those who
have maintained feudal tyranny, and every abuse on
the statute-book of the kingdom. Considering both
parties in the contest, comparing their condition, there
was everything to hope, and everything to stir
energy and encourage perseverance till a triumph has
been achieved.—The Hon. Gentleman sai, down amid

great and prolonged cheering.
Mr. it. It. MooRE then came forward, and said he
would rather the chairman had allowed the
meeting to break up after the closing of
Mr. Gibson's address, for nothing more could
be added to what had been sail. If anything was
necessary in addition, it was to urge them to continue
their activity in increasing the number of free trade
votes in Middlesex, East Surrey, and Hertfordshire.
Middlesex was won-1,700 free trade votes had been

.4

I tell you. what must be done. The labour `best
Wiltshire must again meet at Goatacre after
day's work, and not only have their speeches repo.7ol,
but choose delegates to their class in other sgris
tural counties—the twelve or thirteen coutie,
which the Rev.. Sidney Godolphin Osborne, ftio,
Hanover Rooms, said they were in the 58100.1'00f
'We must have deli ;aces from the labourers in 0.
one of these counties, marching up to London+ cbeigis
ing audience of Sir Rob.,!rt Peel, and appearn,g., bees
him to refute the assertion that the corn-law 'loaf
for their benefit. It is the first time a deputebegeo
agricultural labourers in Downing-street oust rcist
coming to ask their own, demanding from thebood
Minister that, living upon God's bo.tni.-iful suell ipso'
earth, they should have as much of its b°ll,ptidus,
duction as their own strong arms, hard 'to tbel°
willing minds could earn for them. Foali."„50;
Protectionists, let them not talk aboue'tile
\\Thy, between 'the present time and the nie,eo,ooo
Parliament— between this and the end of to
—you have a great responsibility thrown Oil rots
protect the interests of these labour
rut
A it!
with you to stand by them. The duti foil:0114
thrown more closely on you. It may bel,„08.1
Robert Peel cannot carry his measure, or tie
att,!enpting some measure short of the 0;tt0
that he shall be defeated. I trust in that case 0,00
country is ready for the awful responsibiliti clod
will be cast upon it.—(Hear.) I believe that too
ready to return four free traders, and Middlesesiitlo.l
I cannot but believe that by the 31st of J 12000!,
registers of East Surrey and Hertford Will ,
a position as that those two places betivviclori
will be ready to return five free traders. pit f
lieve that this new year will be the brigb titid
happiest that England has had for a
Thirty-one years ago there was joy in Europe,of
one potentate was overthrown. There was
cause he who was opposed to England vill„.1 00;1
and because there had been more men 1i1D,70 R. 4
side of their opponents than had been It e'
their own side. Now there was better cause of,
approaching. There-was a more important 44105:
at issue. It was whether this great couirYoo
ceasec to he nursed and spoon-fed by J-1„,,
ommons ? They could not watch with wis,/4'
interest the coming events. They 1 oked f°
the time when they should free trade
from which every man should be able to 613:d 6
live. They looked forward to the tatia //".- isty.
ditional repeal of the corn-laws. No les"
would he stifficient.—(Loud cheers.) we '
Mr. Wur.sos then announced to the 111'"
the meetings of the League would be rrtOreit
than they had been hitherto, and that the Pe-
likely be held on that night fortnight.

gained in that county—but East Surrey and Hertford-
shire must be won. He recollected, in urging this
upon them, that they had been charged by a Noble
Duke with using unconstitutional means to gain their
end. He had the best ground for denying that, and
for retorting it upon the author and his party. Tee
unconstitutional means which the nation had to com-
plain of, was the interference'of the House of Peers
with the representatives of the nation. It is not the
League, but the other party that boasted of the power
they had in returning a representative, and the num-
ber of farmers they could drive up to the poll.—
(Hear, hear.) The Earl of Salisbury boasts his
sway over Hertfordshire, the Duke of Richmond over
Chichester and Sussex, Londonderry over Durham
city and south Durham county. The Duke of Marl-
borough had had three representatives for Woodstock
in two years, and two of them his own sons ; Newark
was in the power of the Duke of Newcastle, where the
majority of the voters are free traders ; the Duke of
Buckingham for Buckingham, Winchester, and
Aylesbury ; the Marquis of Exeter for
Stamford ; Lord Sandwich for Huntingdon ;
Lord Egremont for Midhurst ; the Earl of
Bathurst for Cirencester, *and various other names
that may be found in The Sun of the sth January.
It is this kind of tampering with the election of the
people's representatives that must be put a stop to.
The Duke of Richmond said the other day
that the gentlemen of the Anti-Corn-law League
threatened, and were determined to carry the
elections by means of fabricated votes,
and by no other means. Mr. Moore believed it was
the Corn-law League which proposed such a course
for themselves—that league in which is the Duke of
Norfolk, and the Duke of Buckingham—meeting at
17, New Bond-street. Their only hope was by
means of fabricated votes. Ti.ey made uncoil •
stitutional use of the register of this country.
The agents of the Anti-Corn-law League had gone
and taken the register, and purged it of the fabricated
votes put on it in favour of protection. One man
in Highgate claimed a 40s. freehold. Where was it ?
In the churchyard.—(Laughter.) Who was the
tenant there that paid rent ? He was struck off.
Nor had they restricted their doings with the regis-
tration to this ; they had taken care to have many
recorded of the right kind, and in the legal way,
to all of which the other party had opportunity
of objecting. Yet, though that party had a right to
expenses had they been successful against them, from
all those recorded in Middlesex they had got but 2/.
of expenses. He (Mr. Moore) hoped many would
continue to apply at 67, Fleet' street, with a view to
qualification as freehold voters. For 561. they could
have a 403. freehold, and thereby re-
ceive four per cent. for their money, be-
sides the opportunity they had of benefiting the
country. The League had not spent their 100,0001.,
and their 50,000/. of the year before, in giving free-
holds gratis—they had used that money in
spreading abroad right information among the
people on the great question occupying their atten-
tion, and on the means of qualification as voters.
There was some talk of compensation with the other
party. Compensation, continued the speaker, to those
who, in spite of a petition signed by the citizens of
London in one day to the amount of 44,000, enacted
that law ! Compensation to the men who rode down
the poor people assembled at Peterloo in 1819 to peti-
tion for the repeal of this law ! Compensation to
those who have oppressed industry for thirty-one
years ! Was there ever such an instance of audacity
heard of before ? Do you imagine that any men will
be found to stand up in the House of Commons and
ask for compensation ? That there can be any
serious idea of putting in such a claim ? Do they
come forward and say, " You gave twenty millions
to the slaveholders to take their grasp off their fel-
low-creatures, give us something to let their bread
be free," we reply, do you want to stand in the
same category with the slaveholder ? We have re-
viewed our verdict as to that grant. We say that
that twenty millions should have been given to the
slave.—(Loud cheers.) It should have been taken
not from our purses to be given to the slaveholder,
but from the pockets of the slaveholders to be given
to the men whom they had wronged. These protec-
tionists talk of compensation ; we tell them to be
content ; that we ask for nothing but forgetfulness of
the past, and the total and immediate abolition of the
law. If they speak of compensation, we will tell
them to go over to our penal colonies, and see if they
cannot find some men there whom poverty and
hunger, the result of the scarcity of food made by
those laws, tempted in the beginning to that criminal
course which ended in their transportation to a penal
colony. We ask if they can compensate them—if they
can bring them home, and restore them to the situa-
tion they held, before want drove them into a course
that ended so lamentably ? We will ask them to go
and look at our Gazette for the last thirty years,
since they enacted this lawJand trace the history of
those merchants, shopkeepers, manufacturers, and
others whose names are inserted there, and find out
which of them has been broken down struggling for
independence, in spite of the most heroic endurance,
perseverance, and industry, by the crippling of trade,
the result of these laws. Who can compensate
theni? We will tell them to go into our orphan asy-
lums, and try if they cannot find some children there
whose parents were worn out before their time by
want, from endeavouring to work when they
had not food enough to sustain them in their auxiety
for the support of their families, and let them
try if they can compensate those children for the
loss of their parents. We will tell them to go into
our union workhouses, and endeavour to find old men
and women there scarcely knowing whether they
have a friend on earth left to protect them, left with-
out home in their old age, notwithstanding they had
worked hard in their youth to earn an honest inde-
pendence, who had a right to expect it from their
work in their old days. We ask them to look if
there are no young persons in those workhouses
brought down to that by the perpetually crushing
effect of these corn-laws, and we will tell them to
compensate them. When they have done all that, let
them go out over the broad land into those counties
where they keep their agents ever busy at work on
the register ; let them go out into the neighbourhood
of the boroughs which these Noble Lords influence—.
irito the counties of Dorset, Devon, Norfolk, Suffolk,
to Essex, Hants, and %I-ills, and tell us if there
are not whole sets of farmers who have
been swept off farm after farm, having agreed to
give high rents, believing that the corn-law
would enable them to realise such prices as
would enable them to pay those rents by pressing the
whole population down ; and let them tell us if these
parties can be compensated ? Then let them take
the climax of the whole—let them go out amongst
their own agricultural labourers—" a bold peasantry,
their country's pride"—the labourers whose health
they drink—the labourers to whom they give prizes
for rearing their families upon the least possible
amount of provision—the labourers that they are for
ever talking of as if they were their especial fa-
vourites—to go into their wretched hovels that do not
keep the wind and rain out—and let them go amongst
the 500 or 600 labourers amongst whom the beds were
distributed, which were subscribed for by the free-
traders in Wiltshire, Dorsetshire,Hampshire, Oxford-
shire, and elsewhere—let them go into the cabins of
their own peasantry and see how they live—
let them recollect that much of the anxiety
felt at the present moment is on account of the rot
amongst the potato crop. It is proved that five
millions of agricultural labourers, four millions in
Ireland, and one in this country, live upon potatoes,
and are likely to starve in consequence of the failure
of the crop. How do they propose to compensate
these labourers ? Can they compensate men for years
of unrequited toil ? Can they compensate men who
have grown old before their time, working while it
was daylight from year's end to year's end, and
living, after all, on nothing better than pig's food—
potatoes ?—(Cheers.) Can these protectionists com-
pensate these injured men? Let them talk of com-
pensation ! There is a dark and heavy account of
responsibility lying at the doors of those who maintain
the corn-law. If they speak of compensation—if they
retard the repeal by QUO day 'a debate fox compensation,

05'
THE TWO FORTY—F-1r
A DRAMATI..; SCENE.
(From the Punch of ti2is day) •
DRAMATIS PERSON. „0,
SEVENTEEN FORTY-FIVE. A rebellious. ego. r his it
EIGHTEEN FORTY-FIVE. A modern gentleo7l'
son.
SCENE.—The Past. t.)
Enter 1845. (Years walking abou
Seventeen Forty-Five. Welcome ameeg,,,A
me to introduce you to a few of the fat°':„.l:ossAl
Remarkable years, very.-1776, let me int,„"erG
—(So voce) Year of the declaration of
dependence—a headstrong rogue, not quit,,edell?:)l
1789, though, yonder ;—the year with the.,t-„000)
head, and that copy of " the Rights of 33.6"1.6
out of hiS pocket. Don't allude to France befll,eg
dead cut between him and 1830, that long 1174 j
with " Glorious Three Days" on his hat, snrrio 7
Bill" in large letters on the placard he
hand.
Eighteen ..Fo' ty-Five. A very odd-looking 5t ,/
feet Guys in the matter of dress ! pjal'
Seventeen Forty-Five. Revolutionary,
111,0'1V
in their notions.' I prefer civil war myself*,„ 10111'
of the " Legitimists." The only one oftu„"
much to say to is 1815—old " Holy Allially-'of
him—though even he has rather low notion 1
rogative. Great changes up alTive,, eh ? jasfe
Eighteen Forty-Five. Yes; I think things j
for the better since your time, old gentlenOn'oos.
Seventeen Fort:,-Five. So every year has. t'ildo
I walked out of the Present. How's Legit°34
f Eighteen Forty Five. At a discount, 4
DUKE OF BORDEAUX— r1)44
Seventeen Forty-Five. HENRY THE
please—duel
Eig/leen Forty-Five. Is the peg to lisl3g r
on ; nothing more. f'lefJl
Seventeen Forty-Fire. What ! none to 'nab
Eighteen Forty-Five. Bless your stupid °
Seventeen Forty-Five. Dear, dear-;-o,t 0 oi
Things change ! Lord, I remember ol3‘;,fel,
made for poor CHARLES EDWARD !
ened the Hanoverians ! 250,0001. Wits 'ba
GARRAWAY'S for raising a regiment for t
the City ! to
Eighteen Forty-Five. Ah ! I began' /1
250,0001. for a more peaceful revolution
the rs;"
Young '46 will have the credit of that,
Seventeen Forty-Five. I remember, aos,
day, the 27th of November, when the u'a--d
the bridges over the Mersey, and Mllitc"ueAgsd"
chester. How the poor weaving rogues P 5 al
when the blue bonnets marched 10. AO tid
Eighteen Forty-Five. The " weaving rce,-00
call them, have increased the wealth of End' e 0
and it is to them I owe the first Test
250.0001.
Seventeen Forty-Five. L )rd, Lord To
to;i
they ran—with their webs on their backs. SO
Eighteen Forty-Five. They would have shogi
carry off now, if another such visitation 001
them. Square mil, s of mills—thous:o.'o,A/
sands of tons of machinery—warehouses
of or„,
Seventeen Forty-Five. Only to thinku rof
What marching the Highlanders had--stletio'
they did their twelve miles a day notwit-ek
Eighteen Forty-Five. Ah! I'd have 135"„ t 5:44
a railway train and whisked them away
three hundred miles in the twelve hoer'
summed up all revolutions in itself.
Seventeen Forty-Five. What's steam ? I;! ?
Eighteen Forty-Five. There's a quest'eofft9
explain that to you by-and-by. I must beeo Ofy
up my account. My books are pretty lot
though things look rather queer for the, last)
two. However, '46 may settle all that, ir
his business. Good morning, old gentle°3-01
[E're

ero
[ADVEttTISEMENT.]—BAD LEGS AND II?
ALL RINDS SPEEDILY CURED BY HOLM:" by
AND PILLS.—If these very valuable incrlicieelo
ther, according to the directions given with the,,l6,
case, however obstinate, bad, or long-stag..„diffsVO
shortly cured by their surprising efficacy. I,"` sop
sons, who had been patients of large hospitsto,4
care of the greatest surgeons of the day,
vvithogoo
least benefit, as a last resource use Hollows?. josij
Pills, which always cure them, and frequentlfhe lor/
as a cut finger would require when treated in, WI
Sold by all druggists, and at Professor gob°
mont, 244, Strand, London. thesl
Tun DUKES—We understand thst,,,,t)
Bedford, and one or two other Dukes, area ,30;j1
her Majesty for leave to lay aside their titled
cs 9
take a plain Mr., the Duke of Norfolk to iio,l
Dukes having brought the nominal digniy of opl
bad odour. The Duke of Bedford has alreal jfiAl
card-plate, simply inscribed—" Mr. Russell. oe rif
Dneosa.—A sum of money which oille!

same place. 11, 'IP
On the 3d inst., at St. James's, ClerkenlL.
Woolley, of Pentonville, to Miss Eleanor O' f,,
street, Hackney. relit L 7
On the 13th inst., at Paddington CIAO
Colonel Vivian, Ist Madras Fusiliers,
relict of the late Captain H. Gordon.
On the 13th inst., at St. James's, 017"
Burnaby, Esq., of Asfordby, Leicester, to
daughter of the Rev. James Williams.
DIED.
On the Ist inst., in Linden-street, 03- A,
widow of the late J. Strothcr, Esq. sue'
On the Bth inst., at East Grinstead,
Rogerthe 10ts, aged 70. f ro,
On h inst., Mr. Lucas, solicitor, 0 „ of
On the 12th inst., Thomas, the seconds°' ito'
Fisher, Blandford. Dorset. fr°l
On the 13th inst., at Camberwell, Alfred 01'
son of Mr. Henry lioene Smithers, jun.
,irgeOlb
On the 13th inst., Matthew Giuseppi, 8" Al
street. Ofiv
On the 11 th inst., at Sheffield, Charles rod,
son of C. Timm, Esq., M D., of Bath. Doe f
On the 12th inst., at Tredegar-square, tot
Jonas, Esq., aged 61. . of 6
On the 12th inst., Robert Stewart, Lscl'' Alv
street. of 140:,
On the 12th inst., Mr. Peter King DuOcaciesird r
On the 12th inst., Mr. H. Bramley, late
On the 13th inst., in Wimpole-street,
to
Esq., M.D., F.A S., aged 69. :Os°
On the 13th inst., at Kingston-upon
0r
wife of Alexander G. Pooley, Esq.
Alice
On the 14th inst., at Sise-lane,
daughter of A. B. Brandram, Esq.

• fO9
- --- • oo 4,
London : Printed an Published by M,' 0 ita
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The ~144 ;0 v.-
Strand, in the Precinct '4,,f the Solo;
Thursday, Jimmy A

ILErUJI.I•.---a. sum Or money win..-,,,psa
into the hands of another ; a piece of 51"; et '-
during the railway mania, became very gi7f9
Roman law, the refusal to return a del," Li
with infuntia, or infamy ; and in the preseo
good deal of infamous conduct with refereac
return of the deposits.—Punch.
10 e
THE BISHOPRIC OF JBRusALFM.-- " to weys
Gazette publishes intelligence from Berlin, ther
the Prussian Government, which now llas, J
appointing a Protestant bishop to the see co 10.,
made choice of M. Belson to fill that post• bpi
ginally belonged to the Jewish persuasion?
braced Protestantism.
BIRTHS.
At Bellfield, Cupar-Fife, on the 11th ill Of
Lieut.-Col. Moncrieff, Scots Fusilier Guards° ibi '
On the Ist inst., at Florence, in Tuscatift
Campbell Scarlett, of a son. i
On the 13th inst., at Duchess-Street, Port/P-
Slaughter of a son.
On the 13th inst., at Haverstoek-place,
Mrs. John M. Duffield, of a daughter.
MARRIED ,
On the 2d ult. at Tynemouth parish chill'ico,oo
Jones, Esq., 31.15., of Monk Seaton, near fiett,'' )41
Mary Ann, second daughter of William Pa' ti/
.1111 P mare_Cnlm I.