The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-25 00:00:00

years before, this body lad petitioned Parliament re•
specting their distresses, and requested that
nuliainent should fix their wages at a certain
price.
And in accordance with their wish Parliament left
their rate of wages to be defined by the magistrates.
Let it be understood that this law applied to the
county of Middlesex only ; yet, in twenty years af-
terwards, as he had already said, 4,000 weavers were
idle. What was the consequence ? Why, that these
poor weavers fled from London to Paisley, and Man'
chester, and Glasgow, to establish the silk mane-
facture, and to avoid the evil consequences of the law
which, at their instance, had been created. Now,
_if
the Post, Herald, and Standard had their will, Pre:
cisely the same state of things would be brought
about, and the people of England would be obliged
to seek in a foreign country the means of subsistence'
In 1815 and 1816, when protection to the silk trade
was at its highest, the silk weavers were most
depressed. Then what did those who stated that
the principles of free trade, as applied t°
silk had been injurious? In that trade, et
all events, it could be demonstrated beyond a doubt,
that when protection was highest distress • wits
greatest. In 1824, Mr. Huskisson determined 0°
making a change in the silk duties.. He reduced die'
duty on the importation of thrown silk to 7s. 6d. eer
pound, and on raw silk to 3d. per pound, and on manu-
factured silk to 30 per cent. ad valorem duty. In.
1825 there were 780,000 spindles at work in this
country. There were in 1835, 1,180,000. In 18269
when the silk of France was prohibited, there were ten'
weaving establishments in Manchester, employing
300 hands each. In 1835, when French silk wee
admitted, there were thirty establishments employing
500 hands each. So that, whilst the French silks
were prohibited, there were 3,000 persons employed in
weaving silk, and when French silks were
admitted there were 15,000 persons.—(Cheers.)
With these facts before them, what did the protec'
tionists mean by standing up amongst the Spitalfiel,de
weavers to try to persuade them to join in a cry I°',
protection to British industry ? British industry
wanted no protection.—(Cheers.) British industeri
from the least skilled and worst paid labourer in Wl-
culture, to the best paid maker and inventor of ;
chinery in this country, needed no protection. 13
wanted liberty—it wanted room to work
wanted its right to, the fair share of the world'al:;„-ri
duce to be held sacred—it wanted- the peotecn,
which nature had given it when it made men wish
of
have in return for all they could snake, the bes.,,,'„-t
everything all the world over. —(Cheers.) 1";
the case of silk was not yet complete. In 1821, lgeo
and 1823, they used annually in this country
2,399,000 lbs. of silk in all their manufactories; ill
1839, 1840, and 1841, when the protection had been
reduced, they used 8,435,898 lbs. of silk, being
increase of 100 per cent. There was another in:
teresting point in relation to this silk question to which
he could not refrain from referring, as it settled the
question of total and immediate repeal. When,l°
1824, Mr. Huskinson proposed to admit the menu'
factured silk of France at 30 per cent. duty, of
manufacturers said, " No ; give us time to dispose ?II
our stock on hand, and let the change bebrie
in July, 1826. During those two years
.1!li
shall be able to dispose of our stock, and then we Ow'
be prepared for competition with France." Mr. gal:
kisson agreed to this proposal. Immediately two re.;
sults were produced. Our manufacturers found ;r
hard to sell, for both the shopkeeper and the bola
waited for the French silks to come in at a reducte
price.—(Hear.) The French, looking forward to t'
reduction in duty, waited double time, and laidl
large stocks. Six months before Mr. Huakisson's pt
was to come into operation, our manufacturers
to Parliament and said, " The French ha;,,e largeo.
stocks by them, but they are all of a partiO 0
length ; prohibit silks of that length, and then,
shall shall be quite ready to compete." Again Mr. Hass
son agreed. The French silks of this particular lengr,
were prohibited. But they worked harder than eves;
they made silks of short lengths; and the result "*.%
that the English manufacturers had their own sties
on hand, whilst the short lengths were admitted 1170.
the reduced duty.—(Hear.) Now came the cone
sion of this question. In 1823, we exP°l',cs
351,000/. worth of silk goods; in 1837, ten 9—d
after the alteration, we exported 917,0001. worth
w
silks ; and in 1839, we exported 410,300/. worth
to
the United States. Now, was it not clear that
silk manufacture had improved ?—(Hear, hello
that it had nothing to fear from a competition ? ell
American market was open to the French as :01.
0,0
as ourselves, and yet we sold there 40
worth of silk goods annually. The competition 6;ilcl
us great impetus. We took the French patternsi•od
improved upon the French looms. In 1824, td,
again in 1826, Mr. Ellice, the Member for Coee°4ll
stated, in the House of Commons, that the Fre.,,'n
looms produced five times as much silk as our
_,07,a,
and he asked for protection. Mr. Huskisson rennd
" We will give you the impetus of competition, the
then your looms will be as good as those of ;fit
French." They became not only as good, but be"-ts
than those of the French. The Legislature we,..
asked, not to lower the duty on French silks, lest aid
trade should become extinct. The Legislaturei
not listen to the parties who made '5
demand, but although they did not make the trdi,
entirely free, yet they took a step in the right ip
._
rection. In 1824 we sold 75,0001. worth of goonst.o,
France ; in 1841 we sold 181,0001. worth in the °° b.
kets of France. Under freedom the silk trade siwtbe
lished itself. Under protection it declined. Diu
protection to British industry benefit the peoplen;sl.
Did they think that they could impose on the SPLe
fields weavers? No honest weaver, either in spi:o,
fields, in Manchester, or in Paisley—no lined
who read and thought—no man who had
ois,
long enough to recollect the corn-law of I°.tilds
no man who recollected his feelings of ritigoci
to Mr. Huskisson, so great, that when he visited ,c,olc
clesfield, the weavers, throwers, and spinners, la
the horses out of his carriage, and drew food
triumph through the town ; no man of this vs,
would be found joining them in their cry for pry to
tion to British industry.—(Cheers.) And then not
their second point, that the working classes werefed,
with them, he would answer that statement inttro
few words. There were 500,000 registered menncell.
the League in London. Were they all of the ix beep
boa
classes ?—(Hear and cheers.) He (Mr. M.) haut
fire
in nearly
nths, h every town in
meetings dto raiseg contribu tbe
to the 100,0001. fund, and nothing could exceed
the
interest which the working-men had taken
cause. Twenty thousand copies of the League P ool)
were circulated every week, a very large proP°ool.
of which were read by the working it;
Tho working men , had stood by tbel° hsa
in Durham, Salisbury, and Hastings. Theicsal
stood by his friend General Briggs when becitY°3
forward in the cause of free trade in the
Exeter. They had canvassed for them thelhad
carried about the report's of their speeches; theiode
made incessant efforts to insure their success• ti.d
did not intend to make this movement for freew tl)
a class movement ; they had no wish to orgaTio of
working class separately from any other lor'• •ejol
the community. They had the best of evert 94
from the Marquis of Westminster and thcs.do
li
of Radnor, down to the poorest man who fi've/
honest living by his hard toil in this country.lostifiel
One more point, and he would conclude. Mr;., bofo
said he was a friend of free discussion and heal
it would never be put down ; but 'he w°' iote's:
shrink from declaring that he considered tbic.„ooo
ference of the Anti-Corn-Law League at e; 011 ed
and its expenditure of vast sums of money jaPS;e
occasions, unconstitutional, and fraught with o`,
to the franchises of the people. Nothing couldribease
unconstitutional, said a writer in the Exeter
Aube op
in allusion to the contest in that city, than Loid:ne
jf
duct of the Anti-Corn-law League, and he ro 1
Constitution must surely have given some attefei.
against it ; and he added, that it was a °ID l'af.oll3
just complaint, which ought to be laid bef°l)oo.l',o
ment. The only way in which he could ,nlid tViciee
these men was by supposing that they vvia"ehe °jib'
to be carried on in the spirit of
times. He supposed that the write; ,etwris
Exeter Gazette and Thomas Baring would iithehed
Parliament thus :—" Whereas elections havestsblissil
been conducted on certain known and eiverstscli'
principles, public-houses being open to all ?",be co.ote,
the drink being paid for by the agents of Ong v
et'
dates ; and whereas certain poor men bf'coe,fel
have been in the habit of receiving certain
c9ol°bii
tions for them; and whereas, it has been
.x,p110"1,011
that there was no need for a candidate tote 1.00
rot,
conduct to his constituents; and whereas to Periio
have come here, having the audacityd Otos,
publish, and circulate information ; skit eresseo
their meetings are attended by grettio 'll° obe,
and there is not a drunken man sly
among them ; and whereas we are so el°,6 ;0 000
that we cannot bribe the people ; for the
we beg your Honourable and Righb,., P yo"
House that you will put down Weal
or provide such other convenient rera.tioner es'
stPe
may think best against this uncoil legs g,,)
terference with the rights and Priv' et cheer orkl,
pirants to seats in Parliament."--(Gr ? res.?l
Unconstitutional ! What did they u° • tiagr VIP
pro .•tO
means were their tongues and the, rootio tioe
their money was spent in diffusing 1111°,. nrotec_la 11°
Mr. Baring, one of the advocates 013'4 sbo.lmeloce+
British industry, mean to say that ',as a pre
teach the people that the corn-law too Pj fru' e
and that it injured the working ,e, 00,
venting him from deriving Woe bau.,,,eeti°P,
of his industry ?—(Hear, hear.) ~na • the
~'l",t tr
with the protectionists. But he its had, dew;
un
ptho e feeld at
Hdasisatipnpgosinantead
Exeter.bec auseihho,el,, 'didv oi;c0,0 1,1! a:
to conquer who would not risk deiff";iot.- firsgitthe4
they deserve to triumph if they d",ll.o‘siic.'ilst 10'3
teach the people; Let them tell those,:r.t sip
had been beaten in'Hastings arid in-F4
had maiehed hitO`the country oft