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

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-
lav tit all, for prices rose so that the duty was com-
pletely.
tthrust 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 price of wheat was
74s.—(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—(Hear)—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)—and 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.
He 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 be 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 respect to tenures, he
thought that tenure should be granted as a security
to the tenant. He saidse 'urity 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 hail 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. lie
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."—
(Indignant cries of " Name, nom")