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

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, MARCH 28, 1844

his quarter of wheat, and therefore he said that the
manufacturers had done something for him in that
instance.--(Cheers.) There was altindred 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.—(Hear, 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 got 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. Nov 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 for 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 Tuck
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 one 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 own
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. Now, he had always
respected him for this. The rest of the party used
different language. To those who advocated the re-
peal of the corn-laws, they said, " You take a narrow
view of the subject—you are just able to make out
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 mid settle the question. He did not
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 game 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 of its supporters, and the advo-
catesaawloay any
longer period could not do so for fear of
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 did not like to
interfere to regulate labour by law ; but, 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 rainndg
tmhaetnwNaysouthlde
—(Hear, hear.)
bonelyabwleatyo pthreoytecetouthldembseelyperso,teaeyted.
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, frequentyawasskemd,otuhledmbseelves/
when and by whom, the corn
pleased God to afflict
would be repealed whenever
re-
pealed. Now, his own belief was, that the corn-la
a merciful dispensation of Providence,
rest country with a bad harvest.—(
this
bßadutilarby_
ivaews would be fholelaorw.)ed
Abys the repeal of they wc ohronin-
they wy.
ould be repealed, perhays, they would be sur-
e _ •

prised when he told them that they would be repealed
by the party now in power.—(llear, hear.) He did
not know whether they knew his politics, but he
never hesitated to avow himself a downright Radical.
(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

no(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 g..) 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—C6 Draw thy sword and thrust us through,
lest t:iese 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. BRIGHT, 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, 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 ;
but he believed the case there was somewhat of the
same description as it was at Hastings.—(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
they 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 in a 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 Being ?
—(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
s'. 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 proper 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 working men were
who were received, as they were told, with such ac-
clamations ; the fact of his blistered 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
mstßhaslpxtaibri Noble
to suspicion ;
e hl,
who hea
forward by a tenant-farmer, because anything
coming from a landlord would be looked upon. with
uoi
andjthoseo alsorhdme.de
Hb mye believed,as
Aadlierdsome
was
they
a Scott, the
shn statementsshould
d.
e very si-
Mlroeomlia,btio to the
tf
0: ref
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

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. His
Hon. Friend Mr. Gisborne had alreidy 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 hy greater
skill, greater industry, and 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 burchns, and nobody had pointed them out, so
far as he was aware, except a Mr. Baker, of Essex,
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 Cernpara-
tively wretched condition he had, J)irnself witnessed,
whatever Cobden might say to the contrary."—
(Laughter.) The Dersetshire case, he believed, was
not disputed. The Rev. Mr. Osborne stated that to
send the labourei from Dorsetshire into the neigh-
bouring
,counties would be no advantage to him, see-
ing than in those no difference existed. He (Mr.
'Bright) could assert, that to send labourers to
Scotland would be no gain to them, for labourers
could there be bad for six shillings a week.—(Hear.)
It appeared to him that this Lord John Scott, living
as he did in luxury, and associating only with the
Duke of Buccleuch 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, with, ut 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 they
wanted to stop their mouths with bread itself, and
not with the cry of bread.—(Cheers.) It could not
be said that the manufacturers of this country dimi-
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 a recent debate. The
Noble Lord said that the manufacturers did
a great deal by the aid or machinery, and that
they got all their work done by women and
children, and that when the 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 ntisery. 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-
tensest 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 tenant 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. IVell, now where had the
b:li been since it was drawn? It had gone from Rot-
tc rdam 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

another case from the same party which was still
stronger. Here was another bill for 491. 17s. 11d.
It passed through several hand 4, and at
length it obtained the endorsement of the

Sheffield Banking Company. It was this
proved that it went to Sheffield to pay for some arti-
cles which had been sent abroad from that town.—

(Hear, hear.) Now here was another case-2451.
for 140 bags of carraway seed—all from Rotterdam.
There was another for 1251., having several names on
it, and last of all the endorsement of Mr. Leo Schus-
ter, a foreign merchant of the highest respectability,
carrying on business in Manchester, and who
shipped goods from Manchester to the Continent:

Now. what had been the effect of the reduction of
the duty ? Before it took place there was no trade
in that article. What they consumed was grown
chiefly in Kent and Essex. It was used only, or
chiefly, by confectioners. There had been an im-
portation of 100 tons. The price had not fallen in
consequence, but carraway seeds were now applied to
several other purposes, and especially in manufac-
turing processes, to which they were not formerly
applied. It was evident that the goods which went
out in payment of these seeds would require ship-
ment. In short, that the alteration was an unmixed

good to the. industry of this country, and a complete
refutation of the absurd mil childish fallacies which

the landlords were constantly preaching up to their
tenants. Whilst upon this subject, he would refer to
canary seed, an article -with which most of the boys
had doubtless been familiar. Canary seed was used
in this country to the amount of 10,000 quarters an-
nually, and used, he believed, almost exclusively' for
the feeding of birds. The duty under the old tariff
was 60s. per cwt.—a duty entirely prohibitory. The
duty under the new tariff was 4s. per bushel, also
entirely prohibitory— Nearly all the canary seed
used in this *country was grown in Kent.
Sir Fadward `Knatchbiill, it was affirmed, as represen-
tatite Of Kent, and a Cabinet Minister, had, through
his overwhelming influence, protected the native in-
dustry of the men of Kent—resisted the threatened
inroad upon its agricultural prosperity—and pre-
vented the reduction of the duty on canary seed.
That seed was bought chiefly by hand-loom weavers,
journeymen tailors, shoe-makers, and others in various
parts of the country, by men who worked in their
own houses or shops, and kept birds to beguile their
toil with song.—(Cheers.) This magnanimous states-
man used all the influence which he possessed as a
Cabinet Minister to raise the price of the food of
these little innocent canary birds, and, to some ex-
tent, injured the men who worked at the businesses
to which he had referred.—(Cheers.) Now he (Mr.
Bright) believed that all the other fallacies which
these men had propagated might be disposed of with
equal facility.—(Cheers.) The principles of free
trade were so simple that no unbiassed man could
hear them and hesitate to admit their existence.

Everything around him—everything recorded in
history—everything which he saw in the arrange-
ment of the universe—everything which came within
his own cognizance—everything which prompted
him in his own heart—told him that the principle of
free trade was that which Providence intended to
direct the world, and not the impotent, mis-
chievous, and imbecile system of monopoly
which they were then endeavouring to overthrow.
They asked that the wide world should be their work-
shop and their market ; and they were persuaded
that public opinion was rolling on with a power
and a rapidity which nothing could now stop—
(Hear, hear)—and that that princple must in conse-
quence very soon be adopted by the country, and
from this country its adoption must quickly
spread to every civilised country in the world.—
(Hear.) The land-owners, by infringing on that
principle, had got themselves into almost inextricable
confusion. They made paupers by thousands, they
rendered life and property insecure—they desolated
the homes of thousands of the population, over whom
they ought to be guardians, and of whom they ought to
be the defenders.—(Cheers.) They had themselves ac-
knowledged a law which gave to the pauper the right of
a maintenance from the land on which he was born ;
and when those paupers multiplied to such a degree
that their rents were threatened, then those land-
owners quarrelled with the law they themselves had
made, and the principle they had adopted ; and they
endeavoured, by means unreasonable and harsh in the
extreme, to prevent paupers coming upon them for
support. They were about to pass a new poor-law,
which, whether it were just or unjust, would be ut-
terly impracticable as a measure suited to the great
amount of pauperism in this country ; for the Com-
missioners were compelled, from time to time, to relax
the stringency of the law in particular localities, and
now the Government itself was preparing to make
considerable relaxations. But if the tide of pauperism
were not checked in some way, this new Poor-law
Bill would be found quite as bad as the other. Those
men of whom he spoke knew well enough what was
right, but they would not go to it. Like a man in
the mud, who the more he struggled the deeper he
got, they kicked about in all possible directions, and
they set up a false scent for the people to run after.
They spread fallacies the most childish, and affected
to believe them themselves. They did all that for
the purpose of saving themselves for a time from that
which was at last inevitable—an honest, wise, and
just course of policy.—(Cheers.) Why, some time
ago the Prime Minister had not hesitated to throw
out some insinuations as to machinery being in some
sort injurious to the people, and the cause of manufac-
turing distress. That charge at all events could not
be brought forward in proof of agricultural distress.
—(Hear, hear.) But they had now got upon the
scent, that if the people worked less they
would be the better for it. To show the fallacy of
such a position, he need only instance the cotton
trade, of which the whole world was the market.
Five-sixths of the cotton produce of this country was
sent abroad, and he should like to know how their
new law could affect calicos in foreign markets.
Mr. James Deacon Hume, an authority held in the
highest estimation by both Sir R. Peel and Lord J.
Russell, in writing in 1834, declared that the distress
of the manufacturing classes arose from their being
compelled by natural causes to seek foreign markets
as sellers of the goods they produced, whilst they
were prevented by artificial causes from going into
those markets as buyers of the goods they wanted. He
showed that the agriculturist had the advantage of
selling his goods at home, in a market insufficiently
supplied, whilst the manufacturer constantly sold
his goods in a market which was always
glutted ; and from all he wrote it , appeared
clearly that the last two or three hours per
day of the toil of the working man was imposed
on him by the monopolies which the landowners
created by those burdens, which, if the Legislature
were wise, just, and honest, they would immediately
remove.—(Hear.) In the manufacturing districts of
the north there was a disposition to work shorter
hours, and they would work shorter time when it was
possible for people to live, and trade to be carried on,
with a shorter number of hours, The young men in
shops were insisting on the closing at earlier hours,
and in Manchester the young men in warehouses
compelled their employers to close their ware-
houses one afternoon in the week, and was it
possible, that whilst such alterations were
going on in the midst of a factory population,
the operatives there should not think of having some
relaxation from the protracted hours of toil and atten-
tion to labour ? There was not a population in this
country to which the landholders owed more—there
was not a population which deserved more perfect
justice from a landowning Government—there was
not a population which had given more to the re-
venues of the country, •or had more increased the
rentals of the landowners, than the working men of
Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. He
thought it a principle which no man could dispute,
that interference with free labour ought to be at-
tempted with the greatest possible caution, or it
might lead to inextricable embarrassments. He
thought that there could be no law in this country
for the purpose of fixing the maximum and
minimum of wages. If they were to fix
wages as they were in Dorsetshire, at 6s.
or 7s. per week, he should not like to fix them for
the county in which he lived.—(Hear, hear.) What
they ought to do was to try the strength, the virtue,
and the efficacy of every known good principle, be-
fore they had recourse to any " tinkering" and tam-
pering with principles acknowledged to be bad.—
(Hear, hear.) They had that principle set forth, as
he had stated, throughout the world. He was one of
those who were persuaded that free trade would do,
for all the working classes in this country, all that
which the most benevolent and humane man desired ;
and he believed that it would throw down the
barrier which was now upreared between benevo-
lence and humanity, and the objects on which
those virtues would exercise themselves. He was
persuaded, from the condition of the population
amongst whom he lived, and from the temper
and disposition of the manufacturers, that there would
be in those districts a state of harmony and good
feeling—a condition of prosperity and general com-
fort, under a system of perfectly free trade, such as
never yet existed in this country; and he believed
had never yet been seen in any part of the United
Kingdom.—(Cheers.) They asked of the Legisla-
ture that they should no longer presumptuously
interfere between the laws of nature and of Provi-
dence and the industry of the people over whom they
ruled. That principle was gaining ground every
day ; and not only in the metropolis but in the most
remote towns and villages every day added to their
ranks intelligent, energetic, and hard working indivi-
duals who would stand by this struggle to its final
issue. He believed there were some distinguished
individuals from foreign countries present that night,
and he said in their presence, that the principle of
the corn-law had been long scouted from every coun-
try but this; and there was not an intelligent foreigner
who would not point out the corn-law as the worst
stain on the legislation of any country ; and with all
our enterprise, patriotism, and virtue* it must be a