The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-21 00:00:00

iii SUN, LONDON, THURSDA:I7 MORNING, MARCH 21, 1844

during, and subsequently to, the reign of Eliza-
beth; the authoress, Miss Costello, justly remarking
that it is scarcely possible to give the biography of
the females of England who have been remarkable
in their time, with any degree of accuracy, till the
sixteenth century. Among the memoirs we find one
of the Countess of Shrewsbury, celebrated for her
great skill and success in fishing for husbands and
hooking them. This shrewd, beautiful, and worldly
woman was married not less than four times, and by
each marriage she obtained a considerable accession
of fortune, until at length she became one of the
wealthiest individuals in the kingdom, and built that
well-known palace, Chatsworth, which has long been
one of the most splendid and spacious edifices in
Europe. Over all her husbands the Countess pos-
sessed nearly equal influence, and her fourth, the
Earl of Shrewsbury, was gaoler to the unfortunate
Mary, Queen of Scots,—a circumstance which ren-
dered his life perfectly miserable, by subjecting him
to the caprices of Elizabeth, whose distrust of even
her most devoted adherents was never wholly laid
aside. In the course of this entertaining memoir of
the Counte,s of Shrewsbury, we meet with several
incidental references to the egregious vanity of the
" maiden Queen," who even u hen past sixty years of
age, allowed herself to be gratified by compliments,
no matter how fulsome, on her beauty and her juve-
nility. " Wherever she appeared," says Miss Costello,
" new devices were contrived to flatter and delight
her; she could not step, but nymphs and shepherds
darted forth, falling at her feet, and uttering extrava-
gant praises, which were echoed by the courtiers
round her. In a certain masque she is called 'the
only light this age has granted to the world,' and the
Lady of May, acknowledged to be a divinity of
beauty, confesses her inferiority to the ' beautifullest
lady these. woods have ever received.'" The life
of the unfortunate " Arabella Stuart" cannot fail to
interest, if only for the pathos and simplicity with
which it is written but the most attractive memoir
in the two volumes, is that of the "Countess of Pem-
broke,"_ so well' known by Ben Jonson's famous
epitaph upon her. Our authoress, we see, speaks of
the " beauty" of this celebrated lady ; but the portrait
which is affixed to her memoir; represents her as a
perfect fright. Indeed, we do not know when we
have seen so intensely ugly a face as the painter has
supplied her with.

GRAND WEEKLY
ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE

larger proportion of the agricultural population.—
(Hear, hear.) Exactly in the same proportion as the
number of persons employed in agriculture have dimin-
ished, the number of those employed in manufactures
have increased. I find that, so early as 1570,
nearly three hundred years ago, some account was
taken of the population of the country. I find it was
then pretty nearly apportioned in the different parts
of the country. The country was divided into two
separate portions, the agricultural portion being one,
and the manufacturing and commercial portion the
other; and it happened, singularly enough, that what
may be called the manufacturing portion took in
fourteen counties, occupying an area of the country
which was one-third of the whole of these counties.
Now, the agricultural portion included 29 counties,
being two-thirds of the area of the country. Now,
in 1570 the population was divided into the same
proportions. The commercial counties were one-
third, and the agricultural counties were two-thirds.
The number of the population at that time in the
area of one-third occupied by the manufacturing por-
tion was 1,239,000 ; in the area of two-thirds occupied
by the agricultural portion the amount was 2,498,000,
being as nearly as possible one-third and two-thirds ;
but in 1801, the proportions were altered, and in the
manufacturing counties, which was one-third of the
country, the population amounted to 2,900,000, while
in the agricultural counties, occupying two-thirds of
the country, the amount of population was 4,400,000,
not quite equally divided, there being 47 per cent. of
the population in the one-third of the country occu-
pied by manufacturers, and 53 per cent. for the two-
thirds occupying the agricultural counties. This
was very unfair as compared with the different areas,
but at each successive period the proportion was
more unfair. In 1811 the proportion devoted to com-
merce and manufactures was 48 per cent. In 1821
it was 49 per cent. In 1831 it was 52 per cent., being
more than one-half of the whole. In 1841 it was 54
per cent.—that is eight per cent. more than half of the
whole, while it was only 46 per cent. for the part de-
voted to agriculture.—(Hear, hear.) This is a
manifest benefit to the whole country.—(Hear,
hear.) We know that the population of the
country will increase. We know, from melancholy
statements which have been lately made public—of
which there has been no denial, no refutation—that
the agricultural counties are overburdened with popu-
lation.—(Hear, hear.) We have lamentable accounts
of cottages so crowded with people that they suffer
both in health and morals.—(Hear, hear.) What,
therefore, can be more advantageous for the agricul-
tural districts than that that portion of the country
devoted to manufactures, which occupies only one-
third, should be able to absorb the superfluous agri-
cultural population ?—(Hear.) That this is a great
advantage to the agriculturists themselves will appear
thus, that the poor-rates in the manufacturing coun-
ties are less in proportion than the poor-rates in the
agricultural oounties. I have not been able to get
the returns of the total poor's-rate for a later period
than 1841 ; but that, you will recollect, was the time
when the census was taken. From this, it appears
that the poor's-rate paid in the manufacturing coun-
ties, occupying only one-third of the area of the
whole country, but containing more than half of the
whole population, was only 42 per cent., while
the poor 's-rate in the agricultural counties, occupying
two-thirds of the area of the country, but containing
only 46 per cent. of the population, was.sB per cent.
of the whole poor's-rate of the kingdom.—(Hear,
hear.) The result is, that the poor's-rate in the com-
mercial and manufacturing counties is only 4s. 10d.
per head, whereas in the agricultural counties
it amounts to 7s. 10d. per head.—(Hear, hear.)
Therefore I say that the manufacturers, and the ma-
nufacturing interest of the country, are deserving of
the support of the country, not only for the sake
of the good things which they bring us from abroad,
and which they have obtained in exchange for the
products of their industry which they have exported,
but for the actual good which they do to
the great bulk of the country, particularly
to the agricultural portion of the country—(Cheers)—
by absorbing the increased population which must
otherwise become a burden upon the country at large,
more particularly upon the agricultural portions of it,
so as to become very injurious to the proprietors, and
likewise to the people themselves, who form a portion
of this increasing population.—(Hear, hear.)
There is also another good, on account of which,
I say, the manufacturing interest deserves the sup-
port of all classes of the people of this kingdom ;
and that is the great skill, the great ingenuity, the
great activity, the great science, the great perse-
verance, and the great industry which they exhibit in
improvements which they are daily introducing into
their machinery, so that those necessaries of life
which pass through their mills are gradually be-
coming cheaper, and more within the reach of
persons of small means.—(Loud cheers.) This
appears in a still more remarkable manner
when we consider the increased value of agricultural
produce.—(Cheeis.) I may be allowed here to say,
that I am the less unwilling to institute these sorts of
comparisons, because I am myself wholly and solely
connected with the agricultural interest—(lmmense
cheering)—and I have no connexion, except by pos-
sessing the acquaintance, and, I believe,.the good-will
of many gentlemen connected with the manufacturing
districts—except, I say, that I possess their acquaint-
ance, and, I believe 'good-will, I have no connexion
whatever with the manufacturing part of the coun-
try.—(Renewed cheering.) Many gentlemen who
are present here to-night, I will not say many ladies,
because to these things ladies are not, perhaps, much
in the habit of paying attention—(A laugh)—but
many gentlemen present know that annually returns
are made to Parliament of the value of the exports of
the kingdom. In these returns there are two
columns, one representing the official value of
the goods exported and the other representing
the real, or the declared value. Now, about 150
'years ago, in the year 1694, the practice first com-
menced of entering in the books at the Custom-house
the value of the exports of the country, and a certain
sum of money
was put down opposite each as its va-
lue per lb. or per cwt. at that period. That has never
varied up to the present period, but the real value of
these articles has varied very much. Of course, it is very
desirable to know the real value of the exports also ;
and for many years past, the practice has been to give
in these returns the declared value as well as the
official value. The declared value is the real value
at the present time ; the official value, of course, gives
you no idea of what the real value of any commodity
is at the present moment, but it shows what
would have been its value in the year 1694.
Now, it appears from these returns, and by com-
paring the declared with the official values, the value
of manufactured articles has since the year 1694 de-
creased 60 per cent., whilst on the other hand agri-
cultural produce has increased in value 143 per cent. ;
so that any given amount of agricultural produce
which in the year 1694 was worth 1001. is now worth
2431., while any given amount of manufactured goods
which in 1694 was worth 1001., is now not worth
more than 40/.—(Hear, hear.) Now, after this I
think that the agriculturists ought at least not to
complain.—(Loud cheers.) The result of all this is,
that at the present moment agricultural produce of
the value of 1001. will purchase as much manufac-
turing produce as 6001. worth would in .1694. Now,
I really think that ought to make the agriculturists
rather wish that manufactures should thrive and
flourish—(Cheers)—and if it does not make them do
so, lain sure I do not know what will.—(Loud cheers.)
The benefit is all on their side certainly.—(Renewed
cheering.) For these reasons I am anxious, and I
think that the country ought to be anxious also, that
manufactures should flourish, and it was in order to
profess that anxiety and to state the reasons why I
felt it, that I accepted the offer which was made to
me to address you from this place.—(Loud cheers.)
If I am not wearying you—(Cheers and cries of
" Go on")—I would wish to state to you two other
reasons why I came here this evening.— (Loud cheers.)
The first is that I felt great anxiety to express here,
in the strongest possible manner, my adhesion to
what are now called the principles of free trade.—
(Immense cheering.) I believe that on the carrying
principles the happiness and welfare of
depend.—(Cheers.) And I believe that
tohuet
eoefutehtorsye
the Success of those principles depends mainly
on the exertions which you and other
persons are making and have made, on this
and on former similar occasions, at the meetings
which have been held in this theatre and elsewhere
in support of free-trade principles--(Loud cheers)—
for it should never be forgotten that we have resolute
and interested opponents. I believe that, as has been
said by others, the principles of free trade are the
principles of common sense—(Cheers and laughter)
—and 'I also believe that they are the principles
of benevolence, of charity, and sound policy.
—(Loud cheers.) I believe that they are the
soundest principles on which the policy of
any country can be conducted, and that they are
the principles on which eventually the whole coun-
try will, be governed.—(Loud cheers.) I have
heard it imputed to those who, espouse these
ciples, that they are hostile to the maintenance of the
credit of this country, and that they will violate the
national faith, because, it is said that if you carry out
the principles of free trade, you destroy the
national credit by taking away the means of
collecting the revenue, from which we are to pay
the interest of the national debt. I dispute that
proposition altogether. I admit that if we were
in precisely the state that we could wish, we might
very well desire to have no taxes at all—(Cheers and
laughter)—and, undoubtedly, it would be very ad-
vantageous to commerce that it should be debarrassed
from all Custom-house duties.—(Cheers.) But that
is not necessary to free trade. All that is neces-
sary for free trade is, that no tax should, be imposed
except for purposes of revenue, above all that no tax
should be imposed for protection--(Loud cheers)—
for the purpose in fact of protecting one interest
against another. That is really contrary to the prin-
ciples of free trade.—(Cheers.) Bilt" it iS said by

some, all those principles are good, true, and right in
the abstract—(A laugh)—but in the concrete—
(Laughter)—at all events, they ought not to be ap-
plied to articles of food. The article of food, it is said,
is so important that to it the principles of free trade
ought not to be applied. Now, it strikes me that if
the principle is right-and good, the more important
the article the more necessary is it, then, in respect
to that article the principle should be enforced.—
(Cheers.) If the principle is not good, why enforce
it at all ?—(Cheers.) If it is good, why exempt from
its operation the most important article ?—(Cheers.)
It is said that agriculture wants protection, and that
if it has it not it will be ruined. Whether or nut it
has been ruined under protection it may, perhaps, be'
worth while to inquire.—(Cheers.) Now let us see
what is said on the subject by those who advocate
protection. We are told that for hundreds of years '
past there have been always corn-laws. I admit that
when I look into the statute-book I find that as far
back as 600 years since I find laws regulating the
trade in corn. But I find this peculiarity about the
laws which were passed at that period. The corn-laws
which were passed in those ancient times had but
one object in view, namely, to secure a sufficient
supply of food for the people—(Hear and cheers)
—and to provide for the introduction of a plentiful
supply of food from abroad when there was a scarcity
of it at home.—(Cheers.) During the latter portion
of that period, however, legislation has taken a dif-
ferent turn. Shortly after the restoration of Charles
the Second, several clauses were passed for the pro-
tection of the landed interest—not for the purpose of
securing a proper supply of food for the people of this
country, but for the purpose of protecting the landed
interest ; and they have gone on legislating in the
same way: and for the same purpose, with one ex-
ception, ever since. The first Act giving protection
to the landed interest was passed in the 12th of
Charles the Second, and since that period.there have
been 100 or 120 different Acts of Parliament
passed, regulating the importation and the exporta-
tion of corn. Their number alone is a pretty good
proof that none of the doctors—(Hear, hear)—have
been able to hit upon the right remedy.—(Cheers,
and laughter.) Many of them have tried hard to do
so, however; for at the rate they have been going on
we have had, every two years and a half, or every three
years, a Bill regulating the importation and the ex-
portation of corn.—(Cheers and laughter. Divers
reasons have at different times been given for these
enactments. At an early stage of the business there
was no concealment whatever about the matter. The
object was clearly avowed. In the 15th of
King Charles 11., three years after the first Act was
passed, an Act o Parliament was passed, the preamble
of which stated that, for the encouragement of tillage,
and seeing that there were lands which could not be
so well employed as in the feeding of cattle, and as
vast numbers of cattle had been imported from fo-
reign countries, already fatted—the Act does not say -
that the people did not eat them—(A laugh)—and'
that in consequence such lands had much fallen, and
were likely to fall, in their rent and value—(Cheers)—
be it enacted, that certain penalties should be imposed
upon the importation of cattle.—(Cheers.) Here
they fairly avowed that the importation of fat cattle
had already caused rents to fall, and that the landed
proprietors required the protection of the Legislature
to prevent their importation.—(Cheers.) They con-
fessed themselves that this principle could not be car-
ried out effectually ; for, three years after, in the
year 1666, they passed an Act, reciting the former
Act, and setting forth that as the rents still con-
tinued to fall, the importation of cattle should be re-
garded as a public and common nuisance—(Cheers)
and should be so adjudged.—(Loud cheers.)
The importation of cattle, therefore, was to be ad-
judged a nuisance, because rents had fallen, and the
Parliament so voted it. This is the earliest time at
which we find Acts passed for the protection of the
landed interest, and from that time to this the Legis-
lature has been employed almost every other
year in passing Bills for the same 'purpose.
A Bill was introduced in 1689 which pre-
sented a new feature in the history of
protection. By that Act a bounty was given upon
the exportation of corn. That must certainly have
been Very advantageous to the growers of corn, but to
the public at large it was a general injury. Money
was in fact raised by taxes upon the people of' the
country to_ buy up the corn to send abroad, so as to
raise the price at home. I believe that nothing ever '
prospered under protection. It was remarkable
'that during the course of seventy or eighty years
they were obliged to suspend the operation of the
law seventeen or eighteen times.—(Cheers.) In the
year 1774 they passed an Act—which is the exception
to which 1 have before alluded—an Act diminishing
the protection to corn. That Act,' in fact, did away
with protection altogether, for it was enacted that
after wheat should have attained a price of 48s. a
quarter it should be admitted at a duty, of 6d. That,
in fact, continued to be the state of the law up to the
year 1815, for although two Acts were passed, modi-
fying the provisions of the law of 1774, yet the price
never fell so as to bring those Acts into operation ;
so that from 1774 to 1815; we may fairly say that in
this country we had a free trade in corn.—(Cheers.)
I believe that there is no period in English history in
which agriculture flourished more than it did during
that period. Towards the latter part of that period,
notwithstanding all the heavy burdens which we had
to-bear to sustain the warnotwithstanding the great
taxation imposed upon us, agriculture was in a flour-
ishing condition. In 1815 an extreme protec-
tion was granted to the landed proprietors. That
law was repealed in 1828, and another was passed
giving a protection not quite so great, but still very
great, to the landed interest; that law, we all know,
was repealed two years ago, and a protection some-
what less, but still very great, was again granted to
them. Now, under all this protection I ask, has
agriculture flourished ?—(Cheers.) Why, during
the whole of that period we have heard of no-
thing but complaints of igricultural distress, of
distressed farmers, and of distressed landowners, and
we have had Parliamentary Committees frequently
sitting to consider the subject of agricultural dis-
tress. So that if free trade will not be beneficial to
agriculture, at all events it appears that no system of
protection for the last 150 years has answered
its purpose.—(Loud cheers.) It is my anxious
wish to see every protection removed—(Loud cheers)
—and that is the reason why I wish to see a total aboli-
tion of the corn-laws.--(Loud cheers.) I have been
told of the ill effects which- will be produced by such
a measure ; and it will, perhaps, be well to see what
our adversaries say on the subject. There are few
persons, I presume,_ in this assembly who are not
aware that my Hon. Friend on my right,
Mr. Cobden—(Loud cheers)—made a speech the
other evening in the House of Commons, not exactly
on the corn-laws, but on a subject connected with
them. •That speech is admitted, even by his opponent,
to have been a speech of consummate ability.—(Loud
cheers.) Now let us take the speech made in answer
to it by Mr. Gladstone, a Minister of the Crown, the
President of the Board of Trade. Mr. Gladstone is
a gentleman of great talent and ability, and I, there-
fore ldoked with the greatest anxiety to see what
could be said in answer. I found but little, except to
this effect :—" You, Mr. Cobden, think so and so—
other gentlemen think so and so; the matter is of
great importance—it is creating great agitation in
the public mind—there is the greatest excitement
_existing; and, therefore,"—l concluded that he would
say, therefore we must inquire into the matter—
(Cheers)—which was all that Mr. Cobden asked ; but
no 1—" the matter is one creating intense anxiety—there
are great doubts about the subject—it is impossible
to say who is right or who is wrong, and therefore
we had better hush the matter up, and say nothing
more about it."—(Cheers and laughter.) That is the
substance of the greater part of his speech.—(Cheers
and laughter.) There is one part of it to which I
wish to draw your attention. I will read the pas-
sage to you :—" The Hon. Gentleman had argued the
question in one way; now there were many
Hon. Gentlemen who would- argue it in the other.
He had himself heard the Hon. Member for Wiltshire'
argue, with great ingenuity and truth, that one of
the immediate results of any change would be a sud-
den depreciation of the value of agricultural property."
Now I know the Member for Wiltshire, and 1 know
his feelings on the subject. His sentiments do not
astonish me, for I remember that, before the Com-
mittee in 1814, on the Report of which the corn-law
was passed, the object of which was to keep up the
price of corn to 825., that gentleman gave it as his
opinion, in evidence, that corn could not be grown in
this country at a profit if the price was lower than
965. He would therefore, I presume, have had that
fixed as the price by Act of Parliament—a pretty
stout charge I think.-(Cheers and laughter.) The
Hon. Member for Wiltshire reminded them that land.:
lords must live.—(Laughter.) Well, I for one, have
no objection to that--(Renewed laughter)--but when
I read that I was reminded' of a story which I had
read of Cardinal Fleury. The Cardinal was one day
walking in his grounds, when he met a man who
presented a pistol at his head, and denianded his
purse 'The Cardinal remonstrated with him on his
conduct. " I must live," said the man. The
Cardinal, with great coolness, declared to the'
fellow that he did not see the necessity for that
at all.—(A laugh.) Now I will not apply that
saying of the Cardinal to the landlorda.—(A laugh.)
but the Hon. Member for Wiltshire goes on to say--
"The landlords must live, and, if they cannot get a
fair rent for their land,' they must make an effort to
effect that object by taking it out of the pockets of
the farmers."—(A laugh.) Now, that seems to me
very much like putting their hands in other men's
pockets—(Loud cheers and linighter)—and although
in that statement of the honourable Gentleman
there may be much ingenuity and truth, there,
is not much honesty, I think—(Hear and cheers). !
—and, with respect to the ingenuity, I dare say that,
within a certain area' of this -place, or of this town,
many-could be found most ingeniOus in that way.-7
(Great laughter.) Well, the Right Hon. Gentleman

went on farther to say that; if they pressed upon the
farmer, they would compel the landlord to adopt a
cheaper mode of cultivation. That may he all very
true ; but it appears to me that the gentleman who
farms his own land will be like the man who pleads
his own cause in a court of justice—(Cheers)—have
a fool for his client. The Noble Lord then proceeded
to read several other extracts from the speech of Mr.
Gladstone, and said—We sometimes read—mind you,
I don't hear it, because, at these protection socie-
ties, all is a secret ; but it has been thrown out
that these gentlemen—the manufacturers—have ob-
tained by their manufactures immense wealth.—
(Hear, hear.) They say, here' is Mr. Cobden, who
has made his 300,0001. or his 400,0001. by his mills,
but did you ever hear of a farmer doing that ? No;
and the reason was, that they had not a cheap mode
of cultivation.—(Cheers.) I •believe, that if this
question was settled, and there was any probable as-
surance of a certainty in the trade of agriculture—
in the trade of raising corn—if there was the same
certainty that existed in the trade of manufactured
goods, that there would be plenty of capital—
(Cheers)—that there would be plenty of money, of
science, and of knowledge, ready to em-
ploy in it—(Hear and cheers)—which was not
put forward now, in consequence of the uncertainty
which the corn-laws occasioned. To put an end to
that uncertainty is, in my opinion, and must be in
that of every thinking man, a very great object.—
(Cheers.) It is because great capital is employed,
directed by great science, knowledge, and attention,
that manufactures have risen in the way they have—
(Cheers)—and I have for one thought that if the
same science, capital, and industry, had been em-
' ployed in agriculture, it would have been productive
of the best effects.—(Cheers.) Mr. Gladstone then
went on to say that it was not wise or politic to
change the present -law, because it would cause a
violent alteration in the condition of the farmers.
Suppose it does, will it not be the best thing that
could occur at present ?—(Cheers.) Their condition
at the present moment, God knows, is not of the most
envious description.—(Cheers.) The arguments of
Mr. Gladstone put me in mind of a friend of mine
who has a great aversion to railways, because he
says they are subversive of inns, stage-coaches, and
post-horses— (Cheers) and many a time has
he in travelling been some days on the
road, because he thought that innkeepers and post-
horses ought not to be put a stop to.--(Cheers.) Mr.
Gladstone further stated, that assenting to the mo-
tion of my Hon. Friend, the Member for StoCkport,
would displease the farmers and the rural labourers.
—(Cheers.) Has any person present heard of the
state of some of the rural population in Dorsetshire ?
—(Cheers.) If they have, lam sure they will think
that it will not be a great misery to alter their situa-
tion.—(Cheers.) I believe that nothing will be more
beneficial to the agricultural labourer and the farmer
than the repeal of the corn-laws.—(Great cheering.)
I am afraid that I have detained you too long.—
(Cries of " No, no," and " Go on.") Well, I
must detain you a few minutes longer to
I state that, for the sake of the agriculturists,
themselves—for their best interests I believe the re-
peal of the corn-laws is necessary—(Cheers)—and
for their sakes I hope that event will soon take place.
—(Cheers.) But there is a reason that weighs with
me more in expressing that hope, and that is, because I
think the corn-laws and all protecting laws fly in the
face of Providence, and deprive the people of the be-
neficial arrangements made for them by their Creator.
—(Great cheering.) It has been most wisely arranged
by Providence that one country should be supplied by
others with the different necessaries of existence ; it
brings men into amicable relations with each other—
(Cheers)—it prevents hostilities ; and it makes na-
tions feel dependent on each other.—(Great cheering.)
Some countries are united on one continent, while
others are, as England is, separated by the great
waters of the ocean--(Cheers)—the great highway of
commerce.—(Cheers.) Now, I have never heard of
any island where the people were so little informed on
the subject of navigation that they could not use the
vast element of the ocean for the good of themselves
and their fellow -men.—(Cheers.) That vast extent
of water is the means of communication between
different countries and different climes—(Cheers)--
to cultivate friendly intercourse between mankind,
is the design of an all-wise Power, and we counter-
act that if we uphold any duties cir laws that deprive
our fellow-creatures of their daily bread.—(Cheers.)
'We have now seen an era of peace for nearly thirty
years, and I think it must be apparent to the whole
world, that the feeling of Governments, of nations,
and of mankind is, that war ought to end.—(Great
cheering.) I sincerely believe and hope that that is
the opinion of every nation upon the globe.—
(Cheers.) The Governments throughout the world
are, I believe, inclined to that opinion—they are dis-
posed to peace and amicable relations with all States.
—(Cheers.) But if Governments were disposed to
encourage war, such is, I believe, the progress of
knowledge among the generality of mankind, that it
would be found a most difficult task, on the part of
any Government, to excite them to wage war.—
(Cheers.) Nothing, I am convinced, is more likely to
produce peace than the free intercourse betwqen
countries ; and that is to be produced mainly
by the total abolition of all protective duties.—
(Great cheering.) It was intended by Providence that
one country should be dependent on another—
(Cheers)—and• of this I am sure, that nothing is
more calculated to create greater peace throughout
the world than putting an end to all restrictive duties.
—(Cheers.) By doing that, we shall do more to
civilise the lower orders of the people than by any
other course, and will bring about that which must
be the devoted wish of all mankind—" Glory to God
in the highest, on earth peace and good will towards
men." The Noble Earl sat down amidst tremendous
cheering.
Mr. LATTIMORE, of Whethampstead, Hertford-
shire, a tenant-farmer, was then introduced by the
Noble Chairman, and proceeded to address the meet-
ing. The Noble Lord who had taken the' Chair that
evening, had kindly introduced him as a tenant-
farmer, and if they entertained a doubt upon it, he
should be most happy to solve it. :(Cheers.) He
was a farmer by choice, he had adopted it from a
natural bias and inclination.—(Cheers.) He trusted
that as he had adopted that trade from choice, they
would give him credit for not wishing or attempting
to do any thing to injure it.—(Cheers.) He, how-
ever, entertained opinions like the Noble Lord, that
keeping up monopolies, so far from doing good to the
agriculturists injured them in the greatest degree.—
(Cheers.) He was convinced that in promoting the
cause of free trade they were promoting the cause of
agriculture. '1 hey had heard some observations that
had been made by the Noble Lord, upon the answer
of Mr. Gladstone to the speech of Mr. Cobden, and
from that they might see how the question of the
tenant-farmers had been shirked.—(Cheers.) It had
been said that free trade would displace the present
race of farmers ; he thought there • would not be
much harm if it did. But it was further
asserted that they would throw a vast
number of labourers out of employ, if the corn-law
were repealed ; his opinion was that the repeal of that
law would give much greater employment and confer
greater blessings on the country.—(Cheers.) He was
sure that a committee of intelligent farmers would
give that verdict.—(Cheers.) Then why was it not
put in force, it might be asked ? Why, because there
was the political part of the case—(Cheers)—and the
farmer had no interest in that.—(Cheers.) They had
no interest in the army and navy promotions.—(llear,
hear.) As a farmer he held that man as an enemy to
his country who attempted to keep up that line of
demarcation between manufacturers and agricultu-
ralists—(Cheers)—which the protectionists were pro-
moting.—(Cheers.) The Duke of Richmond, who was
at the top of all this, had said that he had all the
farmers and agriculturists with him; he (Mr. L.)
denied that such was the case. It might be true,
that the Duke of Richmorid had a few with him, but,
with the permission of the meeting, he would analyse
thein.—(Cheers.) There was a certain class of
amphibious farmers, land-agents, and auctioneers,
who might be with him.—(Cheers.) There weae
others also he might depend on, but the general
farmer gave that Noble Duke no support—(Loud
cheers)—and he only obtained it from those
who lived in his immediate neighbourhood.—(Hear.)
He wished to secure to the farmers political inde-
pendence; he wished they possessed it.—(Hear,
hear.) But under the Chandos clause of the Reform
Act they could not enjoy it. Would the Noble Duke
of Richmond give them the ballot ?—(Cheers.) That
was the question.—(Cheers.) To prove the insince-
rity of the professions of the protection landlords, he
invited the Noble Duke to repeal the 501. tenant-at-
will clause, or give the farmers the means of exer-
cising their votes conscientiously under it. Another
little thing not talked of at these protection meetings,
some of which he had had the pleasure, he would not
was say much about the honour, pf attending,
the subject of game. The .system of game-laivs
in this country did a vast deal of injury to the tenants,
and destroyed a great deal of agricultural produce.
There were thousands of tenant-farmers in this
country who were almost ruined by the game
system. The law itself was based on injustice, it was
founded on a false principle ; it made the game the
private • property of the landowner, but it did not
make him liable for the damage done by it to the pro-
perty of his neighbour; all must admit that this was
very unjust.—(Hear, hear.) There was another
law called the law of landlord and tenant ; by it
the property of the first party was clearly recog-•
nised by Parliament, denoting the influence of
the landowners in it ; but •there was no
law recognising the property •of the tenant,
protecting it from injury from game ; nor was there
any protection Bar the conscientious farmer by the
ballot. If that protection were given,' he had some
notion that they should, get on better. He had some •
Very strong opinions on that point';' -he happened to
have suffered under political' persecution, • The basis.
'of political liberty Was ' the fi.c4 .exereise-of the right

7

jl'..------a.,-.4
1(74- tr,:i.ilc>. 0

lof voting. The politieir binalor4s749lAblre was a
carry out the idett44#V-
great distinction betweiliMiliiiaVideivoured to
wished that the people of Iteftlt, hytbut one neck.
prn4s:tet•laligula,; who
that he might destroy them by one stroke. They
knew that the liberties of the people had but one
neck—the franchise—and they endeavoured to
sever that by one, blow.—(Loud cheering.)
The Noble Earl who presided over them that even-
ing, had lately been called on to speak on this ,sub-
ject. He happened to have a tenant who, was
unworthy, if he might say so, of such a landlord.--
(Hear, hear.) This foolish man having some .mis-
givings, instead of carrying out his own views, wrote
a letter to the Noble Earl, thus giving him an oppor-
tunity of stating his real feelings on the question.
The Noble Earl, in his reply to that letter said, "-You
will observe that when you give your vote for a
Member of Parliament, you are executing a sacred
trust reposed in you by the Legislature, not for your
personal benefit or advantage, not to indulge any
predilection for one candidate over another, not to
please the landlord, but for the benefit
of the people at large.—(Hear, hear, -an cheers.)
If you, ignorantly, give that vote in a manner not
consistent with their benefit, the fault may rest with
others ; but at the same time, if that ignorance is
wilful, arising from a neglect of the opportunities of
acquiring information, you are not .by any means
free from blame."—(Cheers.) These were the views
of the Noble Earl, and he hoped he would never
want a tenant who knew how to respect them and
carry them out.—(Cheers.) He. felt this the more
deeply, because he had been told that his own pro-
perty—vested in the soil of another, though
no political contract had been entered into—
was not to be reached by him ; he. was not
to be permitted to realise that to which justice en-
titled him. Such was the contrast between these tw o
species of landlords. It was necessary that he should
now say a few words as to the present state of the
farmers. When he was a boy, an old farmer, an
experienced man, bade him mark him, while he told
him that from his past experience he felt convinced
that if the present corn-laws were continued
for another twenty years, the present race—that was,
the then race—of farmers, with their capital
would be entirely annihilated. In the parish where
this was said, he had recently calculated the number
of those tenants and those farms; the number of
farms was twenty-one, and in the twenty years those
twenty-one farms had had, fifty tenants.—(Hear,
hear.) He had calculated also what had become of
the twenty-nine tenants who had ceased to be so.
Some had gone to their last account, 'but others
were in the union workhouse; some on the roads, in
a state of miserable dependence, their property de-
stroyed, their hopes blighted, their families
ruined.—(Hear, hear.) As a practical man
he felt convinced that the next three years, under the
present system of protection, would see more changes
than any three years preceding them.—(Hear, hear.)
With these facts before him, facts that nothing could
controvert, if he supported monopoly he must be an
unwise or a dishonest man. If the English farmers
generally understood the system, and continued to
support it, as the Duke of Richmond said they did at
present, he must say they exhibited a suprising fond-
ness for it.

" The beaten spaniel's fondness not more strange."
The abolition of the corn-laws naturally included the
abolition of all feudal privileges, the game-laws, and
other things connected with them. They might
fairly consider the corn-laws as a• rent question :
instead of protecting the farmers, it only annihilated
them, and swept them away from their occupation.
Another point that had been touched on was the posi-
tion of the agricultural labourers. They were told
that the corn-laws were necessary for the sake of the
labourers. Now, if anything could reduce the
labourer to a lower state than he was in at present,
it must bring him very low indeed. It was to him
a melancholy reflection, that in this country the re-
ward obtainable by industry was so small. They
had had heard something in this metropolis about the
small price paid for making shirts to the poor women.,
who toiled day and night, and yet could scarcely
obtain a miserable subsistence. But in the agricul-
tural districts the poor labourer, with his utmost
exertions, was scarcely able to obtain a sufficiency of
food. e knew cases in which a labourer, with a
family of six children, had to vegetate on 9s. per
week, 2s. of which had to be paid for rent, while
poor-rates had actually to be paid out of the
remaining 7s. There was another instance
in which eight persons had to exist. on 7s. per
week,- they might think it almost incredible, but it
was the fact, and he believed that, Had it not been for
the sympathy . and kindness of those around them,
they must have been lost for want. He should like
to see the Noble Duke, or any Noble Lord who ad-
vocated the bread-tax, go into such a place and take.
his tax in kind; if he could look upon the wretched
and shrunken forms of those children, and the stamp'
of misery that was upon their countenance, it would be
a study for an artist, and he thought would form an
excellent frontispiece to a Protection Hall. lie
had often" thought—might Heaven forgive him if he
were wrong—that more care was bestowed upon
their horses and does than upon their poor.—(Hear,
hear.) Under these circumstances, lie did not be-
lieve that any advantage was gained from the poor-
laws by the labourer. He was not making
any charge against the farmers 'for the small-
ness bf the wages they paid to the la-
bourer ; unless there was a greater demand for.
his produce, he could not give a higher rate.
The advantages of a repeal of the corn-laws to the
labourer consisted in this, that the labourer had no-
thing to do with the prices. His object was only trs
obtain a fair proportion of the necessaries of life, and
unless they gave that, all the party sentiment they
held out to him was of no avail. .He could not help.
remarking on the gross hypocrisy of those who ev-
pressed an anxious desire to promote the welfare of
the poor, while at the same time they lessened their
supply of food. It was in vain they desired their
mental improvement, unless the demandS of nature
were first complied with.—(Hear, hear, and cheer-
ing.) In the savage state, men advanced by
slow degrees to civilisation, and from civilisation to
refinement. Men in every state were always cooks
before they were gentlemen.—(Laughter.) With
these convictions, he felt that the only chance of
raising the condition of the labourer was the total
abolition of all monopolies. There were other features
in this case which ought to have their influence on
the minds of every intelligent man. By the abolition
of all monopolies they were taking the surest means
of promoting a kindly feeling between themselves and
every country in the world, because they wel.e
thereby making all nations in advance of intelligeree
feel a mutual dependence and sympathy with each
other, which in time the Government would not be
able to resist. The hostile tariff of America was
caused entirely by the operation of the corn-laws.
Take away this law, and throw open the trade of this
country with America and the whole world, and they
would soon see that the good sense of :the.
American people would cause them to rescinst
this obnoxious tariff, and to hold out the•
hand of amity to England. He said that, as a farmer,
he felt that he was much injured by this continual'
call for protection. Was an occupation, which had
been honoured in all ages—which had been the em-
ployment of a Camsar—which had occupied the leisure
hours of a Cicero--which had engaged the eloquent
pen of a Virgil, a pursuit which had nourished the
mind of thepatriot Cincinnatus, and which, in modern
times, had been the occupation of a Leicester, of n
Spencer—(Cheers)—a Ducie, a Kinnaird, amid
many others, was it not an- insult to the intelligent
farmers of this country to tell them that their goodly
vessel of British agriculture dared not put to sea save
under • the rotten flag of protection—(Cheers)—lest
some paltry bark of competition should board
that stately vessel and make all the crew
prisoners ? He told them as an, agriculturist,
that they had resources within themselves
if they would only abolish these monopolies,
give them freedom of trade, unaccortipiinied by
political degradation ; if they would unshadkle them.
of their feudal privileges, which crippled and de-
stroyed their energies. He hailed therefore with
delight the intellectual discussions which were con-
tinually taking place within these walls. He con-
gratulated them on their magnificent meetings, which
showed that they wished to promote the interests of
the poor as well as the happiness of the hillier classes.
He was confident of the issue of this struggle. If
they allowed the principle to develop its elf, provided
it had its roots in nature, it was certain to
wax strong, and bear fruit in due season,
although that time might be a. distant one.
There was nothing in agriculture. Which made him
look with envy on the happiness .of another man.
They were all dependent on one another, and it was
their bounden duty to promote feelings of kindness
and good-will, and to cherish tklem without any dis-
tinction of class, manufacturer's or agriculturists. He
would say to them, in the *words of his celebrated
namesake, "Be of good cheer, for by that day's dis-
cussion they had so B.upprossed discord, so crushed
dissensions, and kindled such a flame ofbrotherly
love, kindly feeling, and tiniversal -good.-will, as he
tresied, with the blessing of Providence, _would never
--liever be extinguished."--I(Lond cheers.)
'The Noble CHAIRMAN then announced, amid loud
and general cheering that 'Mr. Hunt, anot'ner tenant-
farmer, a Quaker, would next address the meeting.
Mr.•Hurrr came forward and VW warmly received.
He.kaid that he did not appe/Lr before them on the
present occasion from any co' nviction that he would
be able to do"much service •to the cause the League
met weekly to advocate. Fie came . there at the re-
quest of some friends, and ' was willing to throw in
his humble mite to forwi .ird the ' goal! Cause,-
-
(Cheers.) He did not in.ti end to tieuble.them with
many observations, but before he preiceeded further he
would state that he was stenant-farmer, and, coin-
paratively speaking, b. at a:' .per • tenant-farmer.—
(Loud cries of " Hear,- 'fiear,''-ited..; renewed-cheering.)

1!", '