The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-28 00:00:00

his quarter of wheat, and therefore he said that the
manufacturers had done something for him in that
instance.—(Cheers.) There was a kindred article of
female wear.—(Cheers, and roars of laughter.) Well,
he would make shift to get through his argument
presently.—(Renewed cheers and laughter.) He
believed that with regard to both, the same propo-
sitions would apply.—(Laughter.) He would now
go the furniture of the house, and there the argu-
ment was stronger, for he believed that an infinitely
greater proportion of furniture would be got for the
quarter of wheat than what his grandfather before
him got.—(Laughter.) Then he would go to the
implements of trade, and he believed that he would
get from the Sheffield manufacturers a much greater
quantity of sickles and scythes and axes, and
other articles, for the quarter of wheat than his
grandfather before him.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Perhaps some amongst them might not be acquainted
with the farming tools, but he was, and what he had
stated was the' fact. Thus the farmer benefited by
the manufacturer in a direct way ; for he did not al-
lude to the indirect way in which they were
benefited, as being the best customers of the farmers.
—(Hear, hear.) They had done him, as a farmer in-
finite good.—(l-lear, hear.) He need not state the
other part of the case, because if he got more for the
quarter of wheat, of course he, as a farmer, gave the
manufacturers less than his ancestors used to give
them.—(Hear, hear.) But he was sorry to say it ap-
plied not only to those articles, but it would also apply
to the most material articles in farming occupations,
and one of the most expensive—it would apply to
labour also.—(Hear, hear.) He got more labour for
a quarter of wheat than his grandfather and his pro-,
genitors gbt before him.—(Hear.) He believed there
were onlytwo articles of farming expenditure to which
this ',would not apply in the same proportion—
the articles of rent and taxes.—(Cheers.) Now he
thought if Lemuel Gulliver had been dropped in
Great Britain instead of Laputa, he would have been
at no loss, if made acquainted with the circumstances
he had stated, in determining who made the laws
of the country.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) There
was another point which he would have no difficulty
in determining, namely who those were who profited
by the large expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) And he
had certainly one great quarrel with the agricultural
interest—which was that they had been always in
favour of a great expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) They
cheered that. Now he hoped they would not find
fault with him for telling them that they, the people
of London, were just as bad.—(Hear, hear, and
laughter.) They were a great deal too fond of pa-
geantry and a large expenditure.—(Hear, hear.) For
as soon as a man began to curtail the public expen-
diture and tried to effect a saving, then they
turned round upon him and said he was
a shabby fellow, who wanted to put up candle-ends
and cheese-parings.--(Laughter.) Now, seeing.that
the manufacturers had done so much for the farmers,
it was no more than fair play that they should call on
the farmers to do something Tor them, and say to
them, " If you will not or cannot do this for us, at
least permit those to do it who can and will."—(Hear,
hear, and cheers.) But the agricultural interest, or
those who call themselves so, smart a good deal at
this—(Laughter)—and they say " No, we will not do
either one or the other." They had some talk in the
House of Commons of Jack Cade legislation.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) Now he called this Friar Tech
legislation—(Much laughter)—and he would- tell
them why. He was reading the other day an account
about Robin Hood and his fellows, and it was stated
that on ow. occasion when they had taken a large
spoil, they appointed Friar Tuck to make a law
to distribute it. When this law appeared, it
was evident to every one of them that
the Friar himself got by far the largest share.—
(Much laughter.) Now, public opinion was against
the holy man.—(Continued laughter.) There was
an Anti-Distribution-law League formed against
him.—(lmmense laughter.) He met them boldly,
and openly asked, "For whose benefit the laws were
made?" and then, taking the opportunity, which was
sometimes very convenient, of answering his givn
question—(Laughter)—he said, "In the first place,
for the benefit of those who make them, and afterwards
as it may happen."—(Great laughter and cheering.)
But that was not all his answer, for he went on to
say that every law-maker was entitled to benefit by
his own law.—(Laughter.) Now, he liked that.—
(Laughter.) Friar Tuck was a straightforward
fellow.—(Laughter.) He was sorry to say that in
the present day there was only one straight-forward
statesman of the Friar Tuck school, and that was
Sir Edward Knatchbull.—(Much laughter.) He
advocated the corn-laws in a manly way.—
(Laughter.) He said they were necessary to enable
such gentlemen as himself to keep their station in so-
ciety. He thought that a most unjust outcry was
raised against him. They blamed the only sincere
man amongst the whole party. New, he had always
respected him for this. The rest of the party used
different language. To those who advocated the re-
PA tiaßtg9a3sle2A.Pa varti/bs"tlCAliletAciihinKtrriig,
that two and two make four. That is a proposition
which we do not absolutely deny, but it is a proposi-
tion which wise and far-seeing statesmen must take
with great qualification.—(Great laughter.) You
do not take a comprehensive view of all the interests
in the country." Now, as he was not able to under-
stand how taking a comprehensive view of all the in-
terests of the country could result in giving great
advantage to one interest over all the others, he
owned himself at once to be totally unable to argue
with those wise and far-seeing statesmen. He could
get no further than the simple proposition that
two and two make four, and he did not believe
he would get beyond it —at least, on the
subject of the corn-laws till the day of his death.
He had a particular dislike to gentlemen who argued
in this manner, because they were not only wrong,
but they threw dust in one's eyes. He would much
rather encounter Sir Edward Knatchbull than the
whole members of the Cabinet, because with regard
to the one he knew what he would have to meet,
but with regard to the others there was no fixed point
to drive the nail and settle the question. He did hot
know whether many of those who heard him were
aware that when young men went to the University
they passed through a small preliminary examination
which they called a " little go."—(Laughter.) Now
they had a little go" in the House of Commons last
night.(Laughter.) Last year they let in corn from
Canada on certain conditions ; now he believed he
was very sincere in his opposition to the
corn-law, but he voted, last night, against
letting in Canada corn. It would give the
Buckinghamshire squire an ally on the St.
Lawrence.—(Hear, hear.) They were creating a
corn-law in Canada, because one of the conditions
upon which Canadian corn was to be admitted into
this country, was that the corn of other countries
should not be admitted into Canada. Now, he dis-
approved of all that; and, therefore, he voted against
it.—(Hear, hear.) Last night, a proposition was
made by a most excellent friend of his—a most
honest and sincere man, whose sentiments he trusted
they might soon have an opportunity of hearing, if
they had not heard them before— that their other
colonies might be placed on the same footing as
Canada. He had not stated the reasons why he
voted against it—no other person of his party enter-
tained the same views, and he found himself alone in
the old lobby with the great landed interest of the
country; they glared upon him with wondering
eyes ; and he believed that they supposed that he was
going to wheel round, and had already got his
left shoulder forward.—(Laughter.) But when he
was asked why he voted with them? he said, that as he
voted against " tinkering" last year, when it was
proposed from the Tory side of the House, so he voted
against " patching" this year when it came from the
Liberal side of the House.—(Hear, hear.) He did
not think that the corn-laws could ever be settled or
amended by any of those " tinkerings" or " patchings."
—(Loud cheers.) There was another question which
would come before them in a short period—he meant
the " Ten Hours' Bill." It was a corn-law question
—though it did not suit the advocates on either side
to argue it as such. The advocates of a "Ten Hours'
Bill" were afraid to argue it as such for fear of
driving away many of its supporters, and the advo-
cates of a longer period could not do so for fear of
offending a large party of theirs. Now he voted
against a Ten Hours' Bill, but he was quite ready to
take a Ten Hours' Bill if they gave him a repeal
of the corn-laws.—(Cheers.) He
interfere to regulate labour by
lawlid t
but,no like t
if they
repealed the corn-laws, they would then no longer
want inspectors to restrain persons from working
longer than ten hours—(Hear, hear)—because they
would be in such a situation of independence as
would make ten hours the utmost period during
which they would labour. Mr. Muntz, with some
eccentricity, but with an independent and manly
understanding, characteristic of him, told the House
of Commons that the labouring classes' were not in
love with long hours, nor did they wish their children
to work extravagant hours, but they were impelled to
work by the necessity of eating.—(Hear, hear.) Let
them give the people more to eat, and they would
remove the necessity for long hours.—(Cheers.)
When this was the case, the labouring men would
be able to protect themselves, aye, and that was the
only way they could be protected.—(Hear, hear.)
Let them make what laws they would for
their protection, and they would all fail ;
but remove the corn-laws, and they would be able to
protect themselves. There was one other subject to
which he would refer: those who were more actively
engaged in this agitation, frequently asked themselves,
when end by whom, the corn-laws would be re-
pealed. Now, his own belief was, that the corn-laws
would be repealed whenever it pleased God to afflict
this country with a bad harvest.—(Hear.) But, by
a merciful dispensation of Providence, this bad har-
vest would be followed by the repeal of the corn
laws.—(Hear, hear.) As to the person by whom
they would be repealed, perhaps, they would be sur-

prised when he told them that they would be repealed
by the party now in power.—(Hear, hear.) He did
' not know whether they knew his politics, but he
never'hesitated to avow himself a downrigheßadical.
(Cheers.) But, he would not advise them to
look to the Radicals as the party who
would repeal' the corn-laws. They never would be
able to do so in his life-time. He hoped
they would be able to do so in the life-time of some
of those who now heard him, He believed they
would be repealed• by Sir R. Peel.—(Hear, hear.)And he would tell them why he thought so. There
was some discussion on the subject in the House of
Commons, and it was suggested by some person that
he would probably repeal the corn-laws. He dis-
claimed the imputation pretty earnestly, but he was
not a rash man, and he did so with some reservation
—(Laughter)—for he said it was impossible to say
what any man would, could, or might do.—(Laugh-
ter.) When a bad harvest came Sir R. Peel would
not be the last to perceive that the corn-laws could
not be maintained any longer. He would then say
that he was not the person who ought to repeal the
corn-laws, and he would go and beg of her
Majesty to accept of his resignation of the
place he held in her councils.—(Laughter.)
On some gloomy day, having done that, he would
feel obliged to call the agricultural interest together,
and he would make to them the same communica-
tion he had made to her Majesty, and heavy tidings
they would be to the agriculturists—(Laughter)—
but when they had recovered from the consternation
into which such a communication had thrown them,
they would address him as Saul did his armour-
bearer—" Draw thy sword and thrust us through,
lest these uncircumsised Philistines should thrust us
through."—(Great cheers and laughter.) The armour
bearer of Saul was inexorable, he refused; but he (Mr.
Gisborne) thought that Sir Robert Peel would not
refuse, because he believed that having drawn his
sword and thrust it through the Test and Corpora-
tion Acts—(Cheers)—that having drawn his sword
and thrust it through the Catholic disabilities, he
would draw it for the third time and thrust it through
the Protectionists on the subject of the corn-laws.—
(Great cheering.) Having now told them how the
corn-laws were to be repealed, he had only to thank
them for their kindness in hearing him so long, and
he would now make way for those who, he had no
doubt, would advocate this great cause much better
than himself. The Hon. Gentleman retired amid
tremendous cheering.)
Mr. BRIGUT, M.P., then came forward to address
the meeting, and was most enthusiastically received.
It was always to him a matter of very great conso-
lation to remember that wherever they were as the
advocates of the great cause of free trade, they not
only always saw around them, and about them, those
who were working in the same cause in which they
were engaged—(Cheers)—but that in every part of
the country there were men as anxious and earnest
as themselves in the prosecution of the great work
to which they had devoted themselves, not only in
this country but in other parts of the world—in
every commercial and civilised country there were
men, as far as they had the power, who were endea-
vouring to put down the wide world's curse by which
this country had been so long afflicted.—(Cheers.)
They had met there in the heart of that great metro-
polis—and they met there almost every week—to dis-
cuss this question of the repeal of the corn-laws. A pa-
per published at Plymouth had advertised that an intel-
ligent gentleman there was giving lectures in favour
of freedom of trade.—(Cheers.) And another paper,
published on the banks of the Tyne, stated that a
gentleman there was delivering lectures on the same
subject. At the present moment there were two
election contests proceeding. Those contests were
purely in agricultural districts, and in both those
constituencies the lessons of free trade were being
taught by those who were well able to enlighten
the inhabitants of those places upon that
which was calculated to improve their knowledge of
of what their real interests were. Hastings and
Christchurch were now called upon to send Members
to Parliament. Now he wished it to be borne in
mind that these two places were not fields the Anti-
Corn-law League had chosen out.—(Cheers.) It
required considerable arrangement when boroughs
were vacated to secure the return of Members, and
that difficulty was increased when two were vacated
at the same time. He had visited the borough of
Hastings during the present party contest, and from
that visit he was convinced of this, • that the consti-
tuency were not well informed on the question of
free-trade.—(Hear, hear.) They had been bandied
about from Tory to Whig, and Whig to Tory, and
had in short been made the instruments for returning
Members to Parliament—(Hear, hear)—who held
very frequently different opinions. At the present
election they had shown themselves most unconscious
of their electoral rights,a.or that upon the proper
exercise of them depended the best interest, not only
of themselves but their country.—(Cheers.) With
respect to Christchurch he could not say much, not
having been there, and not knowing much of it ;
tiela. '.,];cued the case there was somewhat of tsw
same deseriai“n it waa a+ _I-T—tliv.---(Hear,
hear.) Now the Anti-Corn-law League was a mu-
tual instruction society, and some of its members had
been and were going to Hastings for the purpose
of letting the electors know the truth of the
case, and they were also going to Christchurch
for the same purpose. The Anti-Corn-law League,
it should be remembered, had only pledged itself to
go to these boroughs, and inform the electors on what ,
their rights and duties were ; but they had not
pledged themselves to return free-trade candidates.—
Of this, however, he was sure, that, by the course
they were pursuing, they were weakening the interests
of the monopolist party—(Cheers)—and there could
be no doubt that the time was not far distant when

;hey would be obliged to yield to those whom they
now attempted to scorn, and even to despise.—
(Cheers.) What was the consequence of all the dis-
cussions that had taken place in the League ? Why,
the dispelling of the fallacies which the landlords had
most industriously spread.—(Cheers.) Some of the
largest landed proprietors, and even the clergy,
were about they very last to get rid of those fallacies.
—(Cheers.) In the Morning Post there was an
account of a meeting of the Essex Protection Society.
That meeting was addressed by the Rev. Mr. Shep-
herd, who said that they did not wish to interfere
with any one, but to protect themselves and stop de-
solation from spreading through the length and
breadth of the land.—(Laughter.) He stated further,
that he thought that in attending that Meeting, he
was acting ina righteous cause.—(Laughter.) Why,
must not the Rev. Gentleman have known—if he
did not, he must have been living a most secluded
life for some years past—that the object of the Essex
Protection Society was to make food dear, although
thousands in the country were in want of a proper
supply of it ?—(Hear, hear.) Did not that Rev.
Gentleman every day—if he did not, he ought to do
so----read a prayer from which he must have learned
that, in what he said at that meeting, he was flying
in the face of the commands of an All-Wise Beino.?
—(Cheers.) But the Rev. Gentleman said, further,
that land had obligations upon it long before tall
chimneys were thought of. He alluded, he said, to
tithes and poor-rates, which amounted to no less than
Ils. an acre. As occupiers and cultivators of the soil,
they were bound to fulfil this obligation; and all
that he asked was, that the Government would enable
them to do so.—(Laughter.) But in saying that, he
forgot the woper conclusion of the sentence—" at
other people's expense."—(Great laughter.) Well,
the Rev. Gentleman, not content with all this, pro-
ceeded to state that the support of the poor was as
old as the Reformation. That might be all very
true ; but equally ancient was the maxim that
you should do unto others as you would be done
by.—(Cheers.) Now the Rev. Gentleman 'seemed
to imagine that manufacturers and shopkeepers had
no poor-rates to pay. It was true, that machinery
did not pay poor-rates, or goods in shops, and for
this reason that the quantities were always changing.
The farmer paid poor-rates for his land, but not for
his cattle, his stock, or his money at his banker's. So
that the manufacturer and the farmer were placed on
the same footing.—(Cheers.) Yet ignorant men,
like the Rev. Mr. Shepherd, were to he found com-
ing forward and making the statements he had re-
ferred to. But at the meeting a working man, of the
name of Williams, addressed them for the purpose of
exposing, as it was said, the sophistries of the League.
—(Laughter.) Now it was worth while and curious
to see at these meetings who these workin&- men were
who were received, as they were told, with such ac-
clamations ; the fact of his hlistered hands,
his working-dress, were all forgotten, or, if
the truth must be told, they did not exist,
because the fact was these men were sham working
men.—(Cheers.) They were men who knew not
what work was ; but who lived upon the pay they
received for the assistance they gave to the landlords
to keep up a delusion injurious to the working men.—
(Cheers.) But that was not all; there were other men
as bad as clergymen ; and in speaking of the clergy
he felt compelled to say, that the statement of Mr. Shep-
herd did not represent the opinions of the best and most
sincere of the clergy of this country. He (Mr. Bright)
believed that in that body there were thousands who
wished success to the Anti-Corn-law League, but who
dare not publicly state so.—(Cheers.) Now he
would refer to another case that was reported in the
Post, it was that of a meeting which was copied from
a Kelso paper, which took place at Jedburgh, from
which about 9-20ths of the county were excluded ;
and Lord Polwarth at that meeting stated, in moving
a resolution, that he would rather it had been brought
forward by a tenant-farmer, because anything
coming from a landlord would be looked upon with
suspicion ; and he also made some statements very si-
milar to those made by Mr. Scott, the Member for
Roxburgh, who he believed, was a near relation of
that Noble Lord's. He said they should look to the

mortality that had taken place In the manufacturing
districts since manufactures had been so much perse-
vered in. Why, in Manchester the average of human