The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-06 00:00:00

MEETING

~;

,r;),
-
Ai a

AT COVENT-GARDEN THEATRE

The usual weekly meeting of the members of the
Anti-Corn-law League was held last evening at the
Theatre-royal, Covent-garden. The doors were
opened at seven o'clock, and within five minutes af-
terwards the theatre was densely crowded in every
part. The attendance of ladies in the boxes was
greater than it has been on any late occasion. The
pit and galleries were, as usual, devoted exclusively
to the accommodation of registered members of the
League.
Shortly before the commencement of the proceed-
ing, General Briggs, the late free trade candidate for
Exeter, accompanied by Mr. George Thompson, en-
tered the theatre. Both these gentlemen were loudly
cheered.
At half-past seven George Wilson, Esq., the Chair-
' man of the League, took the chair, amidst the most
enthusiastic plaudits. Mr. Wilson, on entering the
theatre, was accompanied by the Hon. Edward .Bou-
verie, the newly-elected ALP. for Kilmarnock ; John
Bright, Esq., M.P. for the city of Durham ; and
several other stanch advocates of free trade, who were
all loudly cheered as they made their appearance.
Among those present we observed—George Wil-
son, Esq., In the chair; the Earl of Radnor, Hon.
Edward Pleydell Bouverie, ALP., Richard Cobden,
Esq., M.P., Thomas Milner Gibson, Esq., ALP.,
John Bright, Esq., M.P. ; Benjamin Smith,
Esq., M.P. ' • General Briggs, Colonel Tucker,
Dr. Cooke 'Taylor, Dr. Epps, George Thompson,
Esq., Robert R. It. Moore, Esq., Provost Henderson
(Paisley), Bailie Murray (ditto) ; Messrs. W. A.
Wilkinson, P. A. Taylor, J. Booth, S. D. Driver,
li. It. Stainton, Charles Tysal (Manchester), W.
Thornborrow' H. Day, Wm. Lockett (Salford), John
Kay (ditto), IL Franklin, H. White, W. G. Gover,
Wm. Austin, Alex. Carruthers (Macclesfield), J.
Joulthard, 11. 11. Stansfield (Leeds), 'l'. E. Ward
(Sheffield), J. Moir Ware, It. Palmer, J. P. Bar-
nard, J. Ridge, Press Pranger, W. P. Longdill,
Win. Macmullen, Caddell, Eversley, Win. Cunning-
ton (Devizes), W. Butterworth, Felch, Geesin, G.
Aldeney (Ealing), T. Aldeney, P. Stuart (Liver-
pool), Charles Horsley, W. D. Starling, W. M.
Warden, Charles Marshall, &c.
The CHAIRMAN then advanced to the table and was
received with cries of " Bravo, Wilson," and loud
cheering which lasted for some minutes. The whole
house rose and greeted the worthy Chairman with
three times three and one cheer more. After the
audience had resumed their seats the cheering still
continued for a considerable time, and nothing could
exceed the heartiness of the welcome with which the
Chairman of the League was greeted after his long
absence. Silence having been in some degree re-
stored, he proceeded to address the meeting as fol-
lows :—" Ladies and Gentlemen,—You have lately,
had such a number of distinguished individuals oc-
cupying this chair and presiding over your meeting,
that an humble instrument in the cause of free trade,
like myself, who am merely a fellow labourer with
you in the glorious cause, may be well excused for
feeling some slight degree of trepidation in again as-
suming an office, the duties of which have been so
much more ably discharged by the Noble Lords and
Hon. Gentlemen, who week after week have sup-
plied my place.—(Cheers.) But if we are to take all
for granted that the monopolists and the monopolist
press have lately been in the habit of stating from
day to day, it is not of much consequence who takes
the post of presiding over our meetings for the short
time which they have allotted for our existence.— -
(A laugh.) If we are to believe what they state, the
League if not already quite extinct, is on the very
verge of dissolution—its treasury is exhausted, its
candidates have been defeated, and in every respect
it is quite a different thing from what it formerly was
—(Cheers and cries of " No, no")—in short it is
only talked of as a thing of yesterday. Now, although
it may be presumption to call in question
the truth of assertions made by such great authori-
ties, I confess that, after a careful inspection of our
position, I see no reason to believe that we have not
wined ground since I last had the pleasure of meet-
ing you in this place.—(Hear and cheers.) It is true
we may net have money sufficient in our treasurer's
hands to carry on the war against the monopoly to its
extinction, but we have more money in hand now
than all the protection societies have received, or will
receive, for the next twelve months to come.—
(Cheers.) We may not have carried every election
in every county and in every close borough, but yet
we can bring abundant evidence to show that when-
ever an election has been lost it has been attended with
such results—such traces have been left, such in-
fluences have been set to work as must prodlice fruit,
And secure to us the victory at the next election.—
(Cheers.) South Lancashire is no exception.—(Loud
cheers.) At the first contest for that county, in the
year 1837, which was a party election, two mono-
polists were returned to Parliament. At the general
election in 1841 no one could be found to come for-
ward to contest the county on Liberal principles. Now,
what took place at the last election ? The
county is divided into ten polling districts.
In six of those districts we have now a
majority.—(Cheers.) At the general election
in 1837 we had only a majority in two districts out
of those six. In 1837 in those districts the Liberal
candidate was defeated by a majority of 200 votes; at
the last election in those six polling districts we had
a majority of 800 on the poll, showing a change of
opinion to the extent of 1,000 registered electors in
those districts ai compared with 1837. In addition
to this, in three of the other polling districts we have
reduced their majority as compared with 1837, and
in one district only, the Ormskirk district—a purely
agricultural districas which is quite out of the in-
fluenee of trade or manufactures—in the Ormskirk
district alone have they increased their majority, and
in that district the voters have not changed their opi-
nions, they have changed their owners.—(Hear, hear.)
The property which qualifies them to vote, and which
was formerly in the hands of a Liberal, has changed
owners, and is now in the hands of a Monopolist, and
those very same tenants who in 1837 voted for a
Liberal voted at the late election for a Monopolist.—
(Hear, hear, and cries of " Shame, shame.") So com-
pletely are these people under the domination of their
landlord, that if the steward had gone to the return-
ing officer and told him to write off the names of the
tenants without going through the farce of an elec-
tion, the thing could not have been more completely
managed. But let us turn from South Lancashire to
Kilmarnock.—(Cheers.) What do the monopolists
say to Kilmarnock ?—(Hear.) It is true that the
League lost by death one of its oldest and staunchest
supporters in the late Member for Kilmarnock.—
(hear, hear.) In the House of • Commons, Mr.
Bouverie will only vote as Mr. Johnstone voted
before him.—(Cheers.) But in 1841, Mr. Johnstone,
the free trade candidate, was returned, after a severe
contest, by a majority of eleven votes. At this last
election there were two free trade candidates in the
field, and the monopolist hoped to slip in between
them, but he had been beaten by Mr. Bouverie by a
majority of ten votes, while the other free trade can-
didate had polled ninety-seven votes, which ought to
be added to Mr. Bouverie's majority, to show the
change of opinion which had taken place among the
electors of Kiltnarnock on the subject of free trade
since 1841.—(Cheers.) I might go over other
grounds to show the progress which we have made.
IVe wanted the election for South Lancashire in
order to know the strength which we shall be
able to put forth at the next general election.
We have torn down the monopolist flag
in six polling districts out of ten—(Cheers)—We
have lowered the monopolist flag in the the three re-
maining districts, and I have no doubt whatever but
that at the next general election we shall be in a con-
dition to clear the deck, and to return two free-traders
to Parliament.—(Cheers.) Let the monopolists re-
joice over their victories. Let them boast of our de-
feats—let them talk of Exeter and Salisbury, and
Hastings, and South Lancashire. Our reply is, Not-
tingham and Durham—(Cheers)—and Kilmarnock
anti Kendal, and though last not least London—
(Loud cheers)—
which is more than a receipt' in full
for all demands which the
monopolists may-have on
the League.—(Cheers.) There are other proofs of
the progress of free trade doctrines to which I will
briefly refer. Memorials have been presented from
various constituencies to their representatives, solicit-
ing. them to support the total and immediate repeal
of the corn-laws, and to vote for Mr. Villiers'
motion on that subject.—(Cheers.) These memorials
have not been got up with a view of awing Mem-
bers. They are intended as a respectful, but most
earnest request on the part of the constituencies to
to their Members, without reference to party, to
support Mr. 'Villiers' motion in the House of Com-
mons. Leeds is one of the places from which a me-
morial has been transmitted. In 1841, at the general
election, Leeds had returned one, with the mono-
polist at the head of the poll. The monopolist on that
occasion polled 2,076 votes. Now, the constituency
have. presented a memorial to him and to his col-
league, praying them to vote in support of Mr.
Villiers' motion. That petition was signed by 2,700
voters, being an actual majority of all the registered
electorsof 521, and 720 more than was polled by the
highest candidate at the last general election.
I might refer to many other places where
the change of opinion in favour of free trade
is equally satisfactory. I will allude to the Falkirk
boroUghs, the registered voters of which amount to
1,000, of whom 720 have signed a memorial to their
Flex; esentative requesting him to vote with Mr. Vil-
liers whenever thatgentleman shall bring forward his
inotien.—(Cheers )
ilt' Great Yarmouth—in Brad-
1. fvoiard,sTsitnlimieshaire--.-in fuddersfi^kl, and in many other
r results have been obtaitaed.—(Cheers.)
• ee
, s
. I -

I never knew of any great principle that ever yet'
addressed itself to the good sense of the people that
failed. It is impossible but what it must succeed at
last, and I feel convinced that the principle of free
trade is a principle so just and so great, that it must
ultimately be triumphant.—(Loud cheers.)
The Secretary then read the minutes of the last
meeting, which, on the motion of Mr. Bright, M.P.,
seconded by Mr. Aicknett, were confirmed.
The Hon. E. BOUVERIE, M.P., then came forward,
and was received with loud cheering. He thanked
them for those cheers, and felt gratified by them—
not that he took them peculiarly to himself, but be-
cause he looked upon them as intended to testify the
gratitude and sympathy of the meeting for the free
traders of the sister country, Scotland—(Cheers)
—especially for that portion of them who had re-
cently returned one whom he thought he might con-
fidently say was a good free trader to Parliament.—
(Loud cheers.) The opinion of a constituency
like that of Kilmarnock was, perhaps a far bet-
ter test of public opinion, f the feeling of the
country, of the individual judgment of the con-
stituencies throughout the country, than the
result of such an election as South Lancashire, or
such elections as those which he had fought twice on
the same ground at Salisbury, because in the coun-
ties in England and in many of the boroughs situated
in the agricultural districts of England, the ex-
pression of opinion by the constituency at the polling
booth was not their honest and real expression
of opinion, but the expression of the opinion
of those who at present had the majority of
the House of Commons, and who would maintain
that majority unless the people were determined to
get what they had a right to—(Cheers)—and if they
were so determined depend upon it they would have
it.—(Continued cheering.) He had heard nothing at
Kilmarnock of those complaints which he had heard
at Salisbury ; he had had no voters coming up to him
and saying, " We wish you well—we agree with you
in opinion on the subject of free trade—we believe the
corn-laws to be unjust—we are desirous of their
repeal, but we dare not vote for you. He had
heard nothing of the kind at Kilmarnock. There
were no squires and no squires' ladies there to drive
into the town, and tell the tradesmen " You must

vote this way or that way, and not as you like your-
selves."—(Cheers.) But there were honest, hard-
working, intelligent, industrious weavers there, who
thought deeply, and who, having formed their judg-
ment, acted on it.—(Loud cheers.) It was an uni-
versal feeling among-that intelligent class, that the
corn-law was a crying evil, and one which ought be
at once repealed. It was too true, and the result of
the South Lancashire election did not prove the con-
trary—that in the battle of free trade they had not
gained the victory. Much was yet to be done, but
much was not to be obtained from the present
House of Commons. When he had last addressed

them in that theatre it was on the eve of the meeting
of Parliament, and he had ventured to prophecy that
little would be done on the part of the Legislature of
the country to advance those principles which they
met weekly in that place to advocate, or to advance
the prosperity of the great mass of the population of
the country. If they looked back for the last three
months, they would find that he had been no bad
prophet. In the first place Mr. Cobden had brought
forward a motion for the appointment of a Committee
to inquire into the advantage of protection to the
farmer and to the agricultural labourer. It might
have been thought that those gentlemen who took an
active part in support of the corn-laws—who called
themselves the farmers' friends, and set up for
being the agricultural interest of the country,
although they had no more to do with agri-
culture than any of those present, they being
merely possessors of the land, and having nothing to
do with its tillage—(Cheers)—it might have been
thought that these gentlemen would have been but too
glad of the opportunity of showing the country the
advantages of this law which they so stoutly main-
tained, as they said, not for their own benefit,
but for the benefit of the farmer and the labourer.

Surely it could signify nothing whether the motion
were brought forward by Mr. Cobden or by the Duke
of Buckingham. An opportunity was offered for
inquiry, and they refused it because they knew that
if that inquiry were granted, it would show the ab-
surdity of maintaining protection for the benefit of
the really agricultural class. Inquiry would have
exposed the delusion. It would have shown that
protection was of no benefit to those classes—that it
was a plundering of the public for the benefit of those
gentlemen—(Loud cheers)—therefore they refused
inquiry—to them ignorance was bliss, and they loved
darkness be ter than the light—they dreaded the
light because their deeds were evil.—(Loyd cheers.)
But there was another measure which to a certain
extent tested the sympathy of the House of Common's
for the wants of the people—he meant the Factory
Bill ; and while they found a majority of the House
of Commons affecting a sympathy fur the wants of
the labouring classes, and voting in support of a pro-
position which said " the people are over-worked—
they do more than is consistent with the health either
of their bodies or of their souls—we see women and
children who are terribly over-worked, and therefore
we must vote for a law to limit the hours
of labour"—that very majority was the ma-
jority which maintained a law which com-
pelled the people to work in this manner.—
(Cheers.) It was the corn-law which said to the la-
bourer you shall not have the same means of subsist-
ence as you would have if the trade in corn were

free.—(Cheers.) The corn-law said to the labouring
man, you shall not have the means of employment.
The corn-law ground him to earth, and prevented
him from earning his daily bread by the sweat of his
brow, and compelled him to exert himself beyond his
strength to earn a scanty subsistence.—(Cheers.) But
that was not all—the majority having voted that pro-
position from an affected sympathy for the wants and
sufferings of the labouring classes, no sooner found
that the Minister declared that he would stand or fall
by the measure which he had introduced than their
sympathy disappeared.—(Cheers.) There was no
question as to the wants and sufferings of the work-
ing classes—they looked only to the continuance
of a certain set of men in power, and
at once voted that that which had been
black before was then white.—(Cheers.) But they
had some alterations in duties on articles of con-
sumption. They had made some little, faltering steps in
the good road. They had made an attempt to curry
favour with those who supported the doctrines of free
trade, by proposing somp slight alterations; but
these were merely the tithe of mint and of rue, and
touched not the weightier matters.—(Cheers.) The
people should reply to the House of Commons—
" These things ye ought to have done, and not to
have left the others undone."—(Hear, and cheers.)
They had made an alteration in the duty of currants.
—(A laugh.) They were entitled to the gratitude
of the lovers of pudding and cake for this reduction
in their currant expenditure—(Cheers and laughter)
—but there were other ingredients in pudding and
cake besides currants.—(Cheers.) He believed flour
was essential.—(Loud cheers.) That was a much
more important matter than currants, for many per-
sons were affected by the tax on flour who would never
dream of currants from one year's end to the other.
Then he believed sugar was required to make them.
—(Cheers and laughter.) There was to be an alte-
ration in the sugar duties, but it was not in the right
direction.—(llear, hear.) He would not say that
the change would be productive of no good, but still
there was a duty of lOs. per cwt., or a tax of
2,000,000/., to be levied on the people of this coun-
try, not to go into the treasury, but for the benefit of
those who were interested in the sugar monopoly,
who were maintained and supported by the present
majority in the house of Commons.—(Hear, hear.)
Therefore the alteration in the sugar duties was, in
his opinion, a fallacious one. Besides, every altera-
tion of this nature was looked upon as a settlement
of the question for a certain time; and when a
change was made at all, it might as well be upon a
sound principle as on a wrong one. He would not
detain them by dwelling on the distinction which was
made between slave-grown sugar and the produce of
those countries where labour was free. The fallacy
of such a distinction had often been refuted in that
place. There were some humane individuals who
thought such a distinction ought to be observed;
hut it was out of the question to carry it into prac,
tice, and they would boggle by legislating on such un-
sound principles.—(Hear.) Even if the principle were
sound, where, he would ask, were they to stop ?
(Hear, hear.) Were they to inquire into the moral
and social condition of every peeple with whom they
had commercial transactions ? Why, a great portion
of the corn admitted into the country came from Rus-
sia, where slavery to a great extent existed.—
(Cheers.) He was surprised the Protection Society
did not make use of this as an argument in favour of
the protection—that the repeal of the corn-laws would
he followed by a great increase of slave-grown corn
i'rom Russia..—(Hear, hear.) Slavery was an evil
which produced a degradation in morals amongst the
people subject to its influence, and he was sure that
most of the countries with which they carried on
condition. commercialtransactionslfthey v‘ mnt
ells' et. roe
make
ea
inquiriesdega de d moralof
this
kind, there was a countryse at no great distance from
cheers)--to which theynishoul
them on the other ofd
directt e C h
theiran Channel—(Loud
e l (L
attention.oud
There was a country with a
large industrious
tio
physical, wh o ,a
nbdy allm o
raaeic octionnt,si
t iwo
ne .r e Hee awvaes ryr edegraded
-
book written by a most intelligent traveller, who
stated that in Poland and Livonia, where so
much wretchedness existed, there was not near so
much destitution as he found in Ireland.—(Hear,
hear.) He supposed the protection folk would also
try to prevent the introduction of Irish corn and
cattle, and oatmeal and labourers, as they would pro-
hibit Russian corn. The distinction between slave-
grown produce and the produce of free labour was
absurd, and the public ought not to be imposed on by
those who made it. It was a very good debatable