The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-06 00:00:00

woset,aknthosse viilenstthoof
saolvl
erGoeiv.goem, manedntw‘s, mwpfea
aonfatrchehiyr caobuonvter!,
Poland—a country which had for ages, till the independency
mweasrel
vast population in a state of absolute pe 1 s every.
j Trade they had none, their capilaL , and the whole
lof their commerce in the hands of a few Jew pedlars. And
then we come down to the time when the foreign invader
pounced upon them, and when their country was partitioned,
then re-partitioned; it was conquered, and re-conquered;
and it was utterly enslaved, and is existing at the present
moment under a Government of which I will not trust my.
self to speak, because I do not wish to say anything which
it would be unbecoming an Englishman to say regarding the
proceedings of a foreign state. But they take this country—
the most miserable and oppressed; they take a country in a
condition of political slavery; and then they take another
country, which, for centuries, undoubtedly was the best
governed of any country in Europe—a country where per-
sonal slavery has been unknown for ages—a country which has
had the advantages of pure religion, a high state of morality,
and an enormous capital—a country which is secured by sea
against foreign invasion—a country which knows not what
it is to see an enemy, for I believe the oldest man alive has
never seen a foreign flag in this country, except as a trophy
—(Loud applause)—and under these circumstances, they pa-
rallel the two, and say that the inhabitant of Great Britain is
better off than the serf of Poland; and what can this be
owing to, but that the serf of Poland has cheap bread.—(Loud
laughter, and applause.) Was there such a way of reasoning
ever heard in the world? Is there a single blessing which,
in this way, I could not prove to be the greatest curse, or a
single curse which I could not prove to be a blessing?—
(Hear.) Take lameness, for example. I could show you
that lameness is a benefit; for is not many a lame man better
off in the world than men with two legs?—(Laughter.) In
the same way I could prove blindness to be a benefit; for
certainly we have all knee n many blind men whose condition
on the whole was more enviable than the man who had two
eves.—(Renewed laughter.) Absurd as this may appear,
thess men reason in this way. But the question is, would
not the blind man be better off if he had two eye;? and
whether the lame man would not be better off with his two
legs ?—and whether the Englishman would not be better off
if bread were as cheap in England as it is in Poland?—(Ap-
plause.) I am glad to allow that the common people of
Great Britain are infinitely better off than the Poles; but
I say they would be still better off if bread were as
cheap here as it is in Warsaw; and I say, that if the Poles
had the same price to pay for their food as we sometimes
have to pay, they would be a great deal more miserable; or
rather, they would not be miserable long, for they would
starve in millions, and perish.—(Hear, hear.) The real way
of deciding such a question is, by comparing the same com-
munity under a system of cheap bread, and a system of dear
bread ; and this we have ample opportunity of doing. We
have only to look over your history for the last ten years,
and if that history do not suffice to teach us, we are
past all teaching. Take the year 1845. Food was cheap
then, and the capitalist prospered greatly; but was the
labouring man more miserable than he is ? Is it not the fact
that he was better employed, and that wages were higher?
Well, then, we come to that change when, like Phareah's
dream, the thin ears devoured the full ears; when the lean
kine devoured the fat kine; when the years of famine de-
veined the years of plenty; we come to the time when
food was dear. The condition of the capitalist in 1841
was bad. He suffered ; but will any person tell me
he was the only sufferer, or the chief sufferer ? Do
we remember what the condition of the labouring po-
pulation was in 1841 ? Was not their condition such,
that philanthropic men were unwilling to enter a manu-
facturing town for fear of seeing the squalid naked-
ness of the masses ? Was not their condition such,
that politicians who never in their life were alarmed
trembled for the very foundations of civil society.
The pressure came on heavier; the mills were at first put
on short time ; the mills then ceased to work at all ; and the
people were-thrown out of employment, and they went to
pledge the little property they had. First they pledged
their little luxuries ; then their comforts ; then their M.
cessaries : then their hovels were stripped, until they Were
as bare of furniture as the hut of the dog or the red Indian;
while every shop with its three golden balls was literally
crammed from the cellar to the garret with the clothing and
Bibles of the poor. Don't we remember what a formidable
symptom of another kind was produced? I recollect the
strong effect which was produced in London that day, when,
for the first time, huge pieces of cannon were seen rolling
northward, not to encounter a foreign enemy, but to our
manufacturing towns. Well, you have had cheep bread
since that time. The capitalist profited by it, I know,
as certainly he ought to do ; but has the condition of
the labouring classes been getting worse ? Have they hot,
on the contrary, been getting better and better? Have we
nit seen their goods coming, back from the pawnbrokers—
have we not seen in their faces, in their clothes—have we
not seen in their very looks in the street a difference between
time of eheap food and a time of dear food? Take their
innocent pleasures, or their pleasures not merely innocent—
take their pleasures of intellect. There is your own intelli-
gent and useful citizen Mr. Robert Chambers. Ask him what
sale his works had in the year 1841 as compared with the
year 1845. I believe there is no exaggeration when I say,
that on a careful calculation which I know to have been
made, it appeared that within twenty miles of Manchester,
in one particular week in 1845, the sum issued in wages was
1,500,000/. sterling greater than in the corresponding week
in 1841.—(Applause.) This is undoubtedly a great im-
provement, and all must have seen it with heartfelt satisfac-
tion. They have gained by this, as a Government will always
gain when the people are prosperous. But I am convinced
it was an improvement which they did not bring about—
that it was an improvement which theirpolicy directly tended
to prevent. That prosperity was the effect of a cheapness
which our rulers have attempted to make dear. Under the
pretence of making this country independent of foreign
supply, they have given us a system which, instead of
making us independent, makes us dependent in the worst
possible form. As the Lord Provost has justly said, there is
a natural dependence between nations which we ought not
to forget. Providence has given different productions to
diffrrent nations for the due interchange of conunodities,
and in that manner to establish a beneficial commerce. But
not only are different productions given to different climates;
even in the same climate there are stages of civilisa ion
wh'cli are favourable to 'particular states of production.
There is a state of society which is best fitted for raising raw
material, and in which it would not be proper for men to tura
their attention from the cultivation of corn-fields to the
manufacture of stockings, and there is another state in which
industry and capital take other forms, and in which they are
in a condition to supply vast extents of country with manu-
factured products. The intercourse between these countries
is the most natural and healthful mode of dependence which
can be conceived. There is no injury in that dependance—
there is no degradation in it. There is thus a mutual depend-
ence, and it is exactly as important to one side as to the other.
Even if there ware any injury in it, we could not escape it.
We must be dependent on other countries for our supplies of
food. That question was decided when England ceased to be
an exporting country, and the question that remains is, how
are we to be dependent? The question was answered by the
Lord Provost. Go to Lancashire, and see those immense suc-
cessions of buildings, many of them so great as to be equal
in size to the capitals of some European kingdoms ; go in
and see the warehouses, with their stocks of goods, and look
at that machinery so wonderfully exact and exquisite. Look
at those great nurses of human beings all employed in pro-
ducing articles adapted for giving comfort to the people on
the banks of the Columbia River—to the population of the
Cape of Good Hope, or to that of Java and China. And
then, amidst all this condensation of industry, you will in-
quire, how are all these people to be fed ? But go to the
Ohio, and there see a change of scene. There you see a
new species of industry, equally extensive and equally
flourishing. There you see the desert everywhere receding
before the advancing tide of civilization ; there you see
the pioneers of civilization raising their log-hats, and
speedily surrounded by corn-fields that are capable of
supporting whole provinces ; and in every field the black
trunks of the forest are standing. And you cannot but
think of the concourse of population at home when you
see such forests which must in the course of a few months
be covered with food sufficient to support all Huddersfield.
Is not this, then, a natural and healthful dependence ?
Shall we not expect men will avail themselves of this bene-
ficent arrangement? And can it be doubted that, in seasons
of scarcity, it would be highly desirable to see the manufac-
turing labourer of our own country breaking his fast on corn
of Ohio bread, and that it might easily be supposed that the
corn-grower would have an inclination to exchange a por-
tion of his produce for a Manchester cotton frock or shirt, a
coat of the woollen of Leeds, a Sheffield knife, or a Bir-
mingham spoon? Instead of this, the object of our Legis-
lature has been to make that sort of independence, that
while the people on this side of the Atlantic must submit
to- stated supplies of food, those on the other side are rivals;
and yet they will stand up in Parliament, and will write dis-
patches from the Foreign-office, marvelling at your igno-
rance of the principles of free trade.—(Laughter and ap-
plause.) These, however, I believe, are the merits of her
Majesty's present Ministers, as respects the prosperity which
the country has lately enjoyed. Good harvests have pre-
vented bad corn-laws from proving very bad. The Govern-
ment has been saved in spite of these laws.—(Applause.) It
has had a run of good luck ; and those who have not observed
them closely, have confounded that good luck with good
laws. But good luck will not last for ever.—(Applause.)
Providence will not send the rain and the sunshine in the
quantity which will be necessary to save the reputation of
short-sighted statesmen.—(Great applause.) I have reason
to believe we are on the verge of very unprosperons times.
I wish, however, to say nothing that can prejudice the minds
of the public, or excite undue alarm. I observe that the
defenders of the present Administration say there is no chance
of any great rise in the prices of grain, or any other kinds of
provisions , • ns • but that the Whigs and the Anti-Corn-law League
have been guilty of the vilest conduct, in attempting to raise
lf inst sch
a panic. I.therefore, that I may secure butwhat the Muini-
imputations, shall use no such language
sters themselves use•--(Applause.) I holdin my hand a let-
terto the Irish Go-
vernment, from Sir Thomas Fremantle, Secretary
in reference to thefailure of
desiring information
try. The view he gives of the
the potato crop in that country .
prospects of the coming yearthatpartof the U •in
Vions dem is worthy of attention. He says—" Her Majesty's
g
' Government, in seeking to learn the opinion of judges and
well• informed persons in every part of Ireland regarding
the possibility of the supply being sufficient for the support
of the people during the ensuing winter and spring, pro-
vided that care should be taken in preserving the stock, and
economy used in its consumption." Now, observe in this
letter, it is not even suggested that there is a stock, which,
with care and economy, will last even throughout the winter
and spring. Now, I ask you, when any Government can say
this at a time when the duty on corn is 151. (when that
letter was written it was 175.) is it necessary to say more
about the merits of the present system. When that system
was first brought before us, it was alleged to have that won-
derful sliding faculty which would keep. us from sacrificing
our interests; but You see just when it is required to fall it
stands stiff. You lave the Irish population crying famine,
while the index of your corn-law is pointed to plenty. It is
possible Sir Thomas Fremantle may be able to give some ex-
planation of this in the House of Commons, but what that
may be I confess lamat a loss to conceive. He proceeds to
recommend certain measures for securing the crop, and thus
they quietly leave the ports closed. But this bringsnme
\round again to my main argument. You see ive.a;:reill
be ow
again approaching a dear time—a time when food
I dear. Already, I believe, it is no exaggeration to say that
the price which the labouring man pays for flour and oatmeal
ago- Now, here
is half as much again as it was a few monthsfthose who say this is
we can bring to the test the doctrines of
has
no
question, and one in wheal the labourer
a capitalist's,
food . .
are the wages of the
interest. The price of has risen ,
they are falling.
labouring man rising? No, on the contrary,
I In numerous districts the symptoms of coming distress have
The manufacturers are work-
ing ' I already begun to be observed._
s_
rue
of
the past year, they
short time. Warned by timi i
li looking forward with
know well what is coming, and are
disappearance of the comforts
1 gloomy forebodings to t
heh
have enjoyed, and the return of
I which the working people a
' the distress of 1841. If this, then, does not make us wise,
we are beyond all teaching. Twice in ten years we have
seen the price of corn getting up, and twice the condition
of the labouring classes has become so much the worse;
twice in that period have we seen the price of food. going
down, and twice the condition of the labouring people de-
ing.—(Hear, and applause.) If this calamity await us,
however, there is at least one circumstance which affords
some consolation. lam assured, that in the manufacturing
districts the working classes have come to understand
this question; and there is now no danger that any per-