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

SUN, LONDON, TurnsrtAv PA MARCH 28, 1844,

life had been increased 25 per cent. within the last 40
years. Then he said that there was no religious in-
struction
in those districts. Why, the very reverse
was the fact. So much for the facts by which it was
attempted to gull those who had attended
the meeting. But then it was said wages had de-
clined, now he could assert without fear of contra-
tion that they had increased.—(Cheers.) But it was
not so amongst the agriculturists of this country. llis
Hon. Friend Mr. Gisborne had already told them
that, since the days of his grandfather, the farm la-
bourers of this country had been receiving less and
less of the produce of the farms in exchange for
their labour. It was clear, that as far as manufac-
turers were concerned their duty had been performed;
that they had made everything cheaper by greater
skill, greater industry, alai greater intelligence ; that
all those who purchased the produce of that skill,
industry, and intelligence, could have more than they
had thirty years ago; whilst, with regard to the pro-
duce of the soil—that sacred property for which law
seemed to be alone made, that to which everything
else, it seemed, must bow—those who were employed
in the production of that, were not able to obtain so
much for their industry as they did thirty or forty
years ago.—(Cheers.) There was another Lord there,
Lord John Scott, a brother he believed of the Duke
of Buccleuch, who said, " To begin with the begin-
ning, he was sure that this meeting did not consider
the present amount of protection more than sufficient,
when they took into consideration the burdens of the
land in this country." Let it be borne in mind, that
they had asked them over and over again to point out
these burdens, and nobody had pointed them out, so
far as he was aware, except a Mr. Baker, or Essnc,
whose statements had been declared, by one of the
Members for the county of Oxford, to be grossly ex-
aggerated :—" Considering the burdens upon the,
land of this country ; the different state of society ;
the different food; the different clothing; the diffe-
rent habits of life among the labourers, whom they
would not wish to see brought back to the condition
of the labourers on the Continent, whose compara-
tively wretched condition he had himself witnessed;
whatever Cobden might say to the contrary."—
(Laughter.) The Dorsetshire case, he believed, was
not disputed. The Rev. Mr. Osborne stated that to
send the labourer from Dorsetshire into the neigh-
bouring counties would be no advantage to him, see-
ing that in those ne difference existed. He (Mr.
Bright) could assert, that to send labourers to
Scotland would be no gain to them, for labourers
could there be had for six shillingsva week.—(Hear.)
It appeared to him that this Lot& John Scott, living
as he did in luxury, and associating only with the
Duke of Buceleuch and men of •enormous wealth,
had altogether overlooked the real condition of the
farm labourers of this country; or, if not, with an
effrontery which could hardly be considered possible,
he came forward to assert that these labourers were
better off than the labourers of many continental
States. This nobleman further asserted that the bur-
den of the national debt was borne by land, and asked
how, until that debt were swept away, the agricul-
turists could maintain their position with free trade ?
Now, it always happened, that when the
corn-law was doing its work best, and giving
the best prices for corn, the revenue
of this country seriously fell off, and in order to
quiet the fears of those who had money in the funds,
the Parliament for the time being were called upon
to impose fresh taxes. If the corn-law paid off the
national debt, or the interest of it, how happened it
that it did not pay it in the years 1838, 1839, 1840,
and 1841 ?—(Hear, hear.) When the corn-law
for a time ceased to do its work, and by the blessing
of Providence they had bountiful harvests, which
brought them to the condition in which they would
be if there were no corn-laws, the taxes became more
productive, and the revenue rose instead of falling.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) Speaking of their funds,
Lord John Scott said they were determined not
to apply to them for the purpose of influencing the
elections, which would be infringing the Constitution.
—(Hear, hear.) Yet these very men insisted upon
their tenants voting as they pleased, and their class,
throughout almost every county in England, returned
Members to Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) It was a
piece of hypocrisy which one hardly knew how to
speak of. He could not understand how one of these
landholders could use such language in a meeting
where farmers, and especially where any independent
men, were present, without blushing to so deep a hue
that every person would perceive that he was stating
that which he knew to be uttterly untrue.—(Cheers,)
He (Lord J. Scott) said that the manufacturers
raised the cry of cheap bread, and said that
the people were starving—" The greedy manu-
facturer stopped the mouths of his workmen
with the cry of cheap bread." Now the'y
wanted to stop their mouths with bread itself, and
not with the cry of bread.—(Cheers.) It could n6t
be said that the manufacturers of this country dill+.
nished the amount of food. They did not prevent the
landlords from growing as much as they liked ; they
did not compel them to send any wheat out of the
country. It must, therefore, be the landholders and
their law which starved the people, and not the manu-
facturers, who were contending for that freedom of
industry which would enable the people to purchase
their food in the best markets.—(Cheers.) Well,
then, there was another statement which might as
well have been made during h, recent debate. The
Noble Lord said _ that the manufacturers di

Ni-lawnotr h i e
a great deal by the aid of machinery, and that
children, they
gotand all
that their v
done by women and
children came to a cer-
tain age they were turned off, and the consequence
was that many became handloom weavers at ss. a
week. As children only were employed, these men
got married in order that they might have children to
support them, thereby increasing the population and
showing that as trade increased the greater must be
the amount of misery. Now he knew not in what
other order of society they could find a man who
could put together so many things which had no sort
of connection with each other.—(Hear, hear.) It
was scarcely possible to understand what he meant.
There were four or five things, all of which
were utterly untrue, jumbled together into
one sentence, making that which no man
living could get any sense out of.—(Great laughter.)
In the first place, that manufacturers kept no men
was an utter falsehood. It was notorious that in all
times of ordinary prosperity in the manufacturing
districts the labour of men was as difficult to obtain
as the labour either of women or children.—(Hear,
hear.) In 1835 and 1836 there was not a labouring
man in those districts, able and willing to work, who
could not have as much work as he chose. It was
perfectly absurd for men of this description to talk
about that of which they were wholly ignorant, never
having seen a mill or a chimney, except when travel-
ling by mail or railway. Lord John Scott further
said that the reduction of wages was what the League
were seeking for, and that reduction was to be made
upon the ruin of the agricultural interest. Now he
would not take up the time of the meeting by proving
for the thousandth time that a reduction of wages
would not follow from the repeal of the corn-laws.
The corn-law had, from the first been insidiously, but
most surely, reducing the wages of the operatives.
In all those years when the corn-law was
a dead letter, they had wages constantly rising;
while in those years when it operated with the in-
tengest severity, the people were thrown out of em-
ployment by thousands, and those who were employed
received less than their usual amount of wages.—
(Hear, hear.) After thanking the meeting for the
attention with which they had listened to his obser-
vations, this speaker congratulated the Government
that they had not submitted to an interested clamour,

and repealed a law this year which they made the
last. On the presentation of a protection petition a
few weeks ago in the House of Commons, in which

allusion was made to " interested clamour," there
was a general titter amongst those who sat on the
Ministerial side, arising, doubtless, from the con-
sciousness that they were the interested parties.—
(Hear, hear.) Now, a Mr. Dudgeon—the name
ought to have been Gudgeon—(Hear, hear)—in
speaking of the condition of the agricultural labourer,
said that he was now a better dressed man on a Sun-

day than the was some years ago. Who
dressed him ?—(Laughter.) If the landlords had imi-
tated the manufacturers in their improvements, not
one industrious individual would have been found

who would not have been fully supplied at least with
the necessaries of life.—(Hear.) Now he had there
a practical refutation of two fallacies which were
very often made use of at these political meetings.
One of them was, that if they were to take foreign
corn, manufactured goods would not be taken
in exchange ; and that there would, therefore, be
no increase of employment in the manufacturing
districts ; and the other was that they would be ob-
bliged to pay for foreign corn in gold. Now, a gentle-
man, who was extensively engaged in the City as a
seedsman and corn-factor, had given him a case,
which proved hoW utterly untrue were the arguments
of the monopolist.—(Hear, hear.) Carraway seed was
an article of very small consumption—used chiefly,
he believed, by- confectioners—but it had lately
become useful in several manufacturing processes.
Now, before Sir Robert Peel altered the tariff the
duty on carraway seed was 30s. per cwt., which was a
duty entirely prohibitory. By the new tariff that
duty was reduced to 10s. per cwt., and in conse-
quence of the reduction there had been a consider-
able importation of this article. Although the annual
consumption did not exceed 300 or 400 tons, there
had not been less than 100 tons imported during the
first year of the new tariff. He had invoices and
bills drawn for the payment of this seed. Here
(exhibiting it) was an invoice to the amount of
771. 17s. 6d., drawn by the party in Rotterdam on
the seedsman in London. Well, now where had the
bill been since it was drawn? It had gone from Rot-
terdam to Cephalonia. From Cephalonia to Corfu--
it then came to LOndon, where the transaction was
settled.—(Hear, hear.) No money had passed between
the seedsman and the Rotterdam dealer. But he had