The Sun.
London, England, 1844-12-12 00:00:00

THE SUN. LONDON', THURSDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 12, 1844.

barrassment, so much distress of late years, and so
many periodical returns of depression, that they
have led men of sense and business in this country
seriously to reflect upon the cause of them ; and I do
believe that thousands and tens of thousands have
come to the conclusion that, so long as there is this
constant legislative interference with those princi-
ples of trade which, if not meddled with, would be
wisely acted upon by the community itself, there can
be neither steadiness nor stability in commercial
affairs. —(Hear, hear.) I believe that most people
who have given their attention to this subject, are
satisfied that as long as the people of this country are
made to depend on their own soil for their supply of
food, and for the necessaries of life—so long as they
are made dependent on the instrumentality of an Act
Parliament which protects the owners of the soil
from competition—so long will the whole economy of
the nation be made dependent on the accident of the
,easons. For these reasons, I believe a very large
tarty in this country, composed of all classes—of all
those classes to whom my Hon. Friend the Chairman
has alluded—not of this or that class, but of all—
now identify the success of this great Association
with the promotion of the best interests of every class
in this country. The people of this country do not
take up ideas or opinions lightly, but when they do
see a great truth and embrace it, then one of their
most striking characteristics is the perseverance and
letermination with which they carry it through.—
(Cheers.) And I hope my Hon. Friends the Member
for Stockport—(Loud cheers)—and the Member
for Durham—(Loud cheers)—to whom this coun-
try is so much indebted (Renewed cheer-
ing) —do feel themselves encouraged by the
impression which it is obvious their abilities and
talents have made upon the country. The present is,
in my opinion, a moment when to free traders—those
who advocate those principles we have met to discuss—
there is something very gratifying in the confirmation
of thejustice of their views which the present state of
atfie country now affords. I think I may venture to
say that I am some little authority on what hare been
the difficulties to the discussion and argument of our
cause which have been offered us, having so often
brought this matter before the House of Commons,
having often attended those discussions, I have cer-
tainly been able to collect what have been the points
which our opponents have made with the most effect.
Questions have been raised in connexion with this
subject, that, in my opinion, ought not to decide the
matter, but which have been actively raised by
these who wished to prevent the discussion
of the principle itself.—(Hear, and cheers.)
In my opinion the question, whether the corn-law
ought to exist, should be decided on principle. No
man has a right to have his fortune increased at the
expense of the community, unless he can show.some
public advantage resulting from it. Ne one has a
right to prevent any man from exchanging his labour
freely with those who may wish to purchase his in-
dustry, unless some public good can be shown as
likely to follow the restriction. The question of the
corn-laws, then, is one of principle, and ought to be
decided upon that alone ; but the aristocracy and the
monopolists in general have artfully raised the ques-
tion as: to the effects that they allege will be produced
by the repeal of the corn-laws. Knowing that the
people of this country'are cautious of making changes,
they have started various notions, fancying they could
alarm some, and cajole the community into
supporting these laws, by working on the
fears they could excite in their minds. The same
things have been reiterated on every occasion; they
have addressed themselves to the fears of the people
of this country ; they have addressed the weak, the in-
terested, and the timid, by alleging the results they
said would follow from a change in these laws. But
there are three things which they have always
especially named. There has never been any diaeus-
sion without these things being repeated; they are
to be found in all the organs of monopoly, in every-
thing that has been written, printed, or said by them
on the subject. They hare asserted over and over
again that three things would follow the repeal of the
corn-laws. It would lower the price of provisions,
and from that would follow a reduction of wages, an
injury to the home trade, and the decline of
the public revenue. Over and over again have
these things been repeated ; to the poor man they
said, be careful how you suffer these laws to be re-
pealed; these laws raise the price of provisions, but
with them your wages also. Look at the men who
are anxious to repeal these laws. They are your
masters—your employers ; their purpose is to lower
your wages when they seek to lower the price of pro-
visions. To the tradesman they have said, maintain
us in all our splendour, allow us to have great esta-
blishments ; leave us all our wealth, our high rents,
our fortunes, which come from the corn-laws, and we
will be your customers on shall supply us with the
articles we consume. To the timid, to those who
perhaps live on the dividends received by the public
creditor, they have said, remember, it is the national
_debt that makes it necessary to maintain this system ;
it is, w• admit, bad in itself, but is rendered neces-
sary by the unfortunate incumbrance of the debt ;
you cannot collect the revenues necessary to pay the
Interest of that debt if you do away with the corn-
laws. They are bad ; but remember the wages of
the labourer, the profits of the tradesman ; remember
the credit of the country, and the necessity of main.
taining faith with the public creditor! These things
were said on every occasion, and I do not deny that
they were said with very (Treat succeas. I have seen
this with great sorrow and regret, for the want of in-
telligence and independence on the part of those who
have been influenced by them. These assertions have
had great success; there is no possibility of denying
it ; and when I have heard them, I have turned to
many friends whom I could quote, Eind have said,
" Well, if men will be influenced by such arguments
as these, we cannot succeed at present; we must
wait till some happy combination of circum-
stance; when those effects shall be pro-
duced without a repeal of the cora-laws
which we assert would follow, if they did not exist ;
there may come abundant seasons, there may be great
importations of food ; such circumstances may arise,
that the price of provisions may fall, and food be as
abundant as if trade were free ; vee shall then be able
to put to the test what worth there is in the assertions
that have been thus urged." Now, the advantage of
the present moment is, that the time has arrived when
these things have occurred and we have a right to
claim all the ecivantage 114 the discussion we can de.
rive from having there Note before us, by which we
can test the truth or falsehood of what has been so
often reiterated. By the blessing of Heaven we have
had two abundant seasons —the last *specially w—
and we have bed a large irenort.ntin of pp, which
is at the expenee of the importers who gamble in this
trade, owing to the operation of the law.—(Hear.)
1% have had abundance of food brought
into the roarkg, and the prie.e of corn has
fallen below that which those who have given their
attention to this subject ever fixed for it if the trade
were free. Now let them tell us what is the value of
all these things the people have been deluded to be-
lieve ? It is not necessary for me to go into particu-
lars that are notorious; but I ask any man if it has not
become a familiar fact that wages have risen through-
out the manufacturing districts ?—(Loud cheers.)
I ask any man if he has not seen with joy and satis-
faction that there hgve been efforts maids by the
people in almost every department of industry to
raise their wages, and in almost every business they
have succeded; nay, I am happy to see that, only two
weeks ago, even the men on the sea succeeded in doing
so—oven the fishermen have had a strike for wages,
and have seeeeeded.—(fsend cheers.) Rut now,
shat becomes of alt that the people have
been cheated into believing ? A fall in the price of
provisions has occurred, and there has been a rise in
wages at the same time; every branch of the home
trade and internal traffic of the country hes ite:,proyed,
and all since the time provisions have fallen in price.
Why, it is labouring to prove that two and two make
four, to show that if a inan had more money in his
pocket after purchasing his supply of food, he was able
to spend it with the manufacturer; but if he exhausts
his wages in buying food, there would be nothing kit
for the manufacturer. But the revenue, it was said,
that would decline, if the price of provisions fell and
high rents were not paid. Well, the 6th of January,
which ie wirier-day, le pear at hand and when it
comes, remember what sires said at tabs meet-
hug. There is no mystery about the public
revenue ; there are official documents to
refer to. Just compare the state of the revenue on
the next 6th of January. lam speaking now of
what la to New. Compare the revenue on the qth
of January, 1846, with wfiiii; it was in 1842, and see
what is the effect of the price of provisions at the two
periods. lam now speaking in all confidence of facts
that can test this matter. In 1842 the price of wheat
was 675. a quarter • in 1845 wheat is 475. a quarter,
or e‘seP leas then tAt iand now do not pnly. ,oicyare
the vole; revenue, includink the property and income-
tax,
but take those portions of the revenue which in-
dicate the condition of the people. See then whether
the income of the State does not vary with the con-
dit:en of the people--see whether wh coa- en thqt
ditien improves, the revenue does not rise—then ask
yourselves whether the public creditor is not
better off when the labourer is well paid
and every man's condition improved, than when the
people are obliged to exhaust their money in paying
for food, and when trade is bad ?—(Cheers.) And re.
rneqeeee another thina—a most impel tant 6beeessation
to make nioriipn4 sibee thew is more abun-
dance of food, and provisions are cheaper, Is, whether
there is not less misery, less crime, less pauperism,
lees mortality, and less disease—lees. of those conse-
quences which we have always pointed out as the re-
sults of scarcity of ioed, and th© niftieulq- the people
have in procuring it ? We have always said that when
prices fall, and provisions are abundant, there is less
of human calamity than at other times; and
now watch this year, and observe if these
misfortunes are not diminished.—(Hear, hear.)
There is no difficulty h ssoortaining thin—there are

plenty of official documents from which the informa- 1
tion may be derived and I say it is the duty of every
man to compare those documents and see if such an I
effect is not produced. I beg also that you will pre-
pare yourselves for a fallacy which your opponents
may urge, but which any well-informed man will at
once be enabled to meet. It may be said—True, these
misfortunes and calamities have diminished—ell these
evils are less in amonnt than they were, but it does
not follow that it is because the price of provisions is
lower. I then advise ou to put it to them
this way. Ask them, what did you say were the
causes of distress when all men were suffering?
What were the things which, three or four years ago,
you pointed out as causes, when speaking of the dis-
tress of the people P You said it was machinery—it
was over-production—it was agitation—it was hostile
tariffs—it was the new poor-law—it was the truck-
sTstem—it was, God knows what all.—(Laughter.)
IS ow, ask them if any one of these things have been
changed ? Whether any alteration has taken place in
these causes of distress since prices were high ?
There is more machinery now than there was three
years ago—there is more produced than there was
three years ago—and I do not think there is less
agitation.—(Loud cheers.) And is it the hostile
tariffs of other States ? There is hardly one
State with which it is important to us to
have a trade that has not raised its tariff against
us. It is not our foreign trade that has improved—
it is not the diminution of machinery—it is not the
lessening of production—l want to know from our
opponents what other cause they can assign, but the
reduction in the price of provisions, and a much
greater abundance of food than ever existed before ?
Why, I remember that that notable gentleman, whom
the borough of Knaresborough sent up as its repre-
sentative—(Loud hisses)—wished, like many people
of that sort, to divert the attention of the public from
the monopoly of his party, which he, as a good par-
tisan, was hound to support. He at that time came
forward with all kinds of charges and perso-
nalities against the whole commercial and
manufacturing classes, alleging against them
all sorts of crimes and misdemeanours—accus-
ing them of causing all the miseries of the peo-
ple. Ask him if any of these things have changed ?
Everything then existing remains as it was—even he
himself is just as he was.—(Cheers and laughter.)
He has been making a long speech lately, in which he
has been abusing everybody and everything, and
praising himself, just as he always did before. Ile
thought he had found a real mare's nest when he dis-
covered that the truck system was practised in this
county. lie procured a Committee of the llouse of
Commons on the subject, because he hoped that all the
members of the Anti-Corn-law League might be
proved to be prs.ctisera of the truck system. Evidence
was taken, and it has been before the house of Com-
mons for two sessions, but we have never heard of the
Hen. Member for Knaresborough on the truck system
since. Now I want to call your attention to those
persons who are supporting that system, which is a
system of artificial scarcity, for that is the character
of the corn-laws—they are not worth a struggle un-
less they do that. The simple purpose of the corn-
laws is to occasion a scarcity of food; this it is which
raises prices, and makes it valuable to those who profit
by it. Now, I want to know how these people can
escape from all the responsibility of the consequences
that have flowed from it? I want to know how they
can escape the charge of having caused all the mor-
tality, the misery, and the distress, that has occurred
in times of scarcity? How can they escape this
charge ? Men must look to the consequences of their
acts. Now, I ask if it is not something like setting
the rich against the poor, and the educated max
against the ignorant one, to go forth and tell them, in
the face of all experience, sense, and evidence, that
the higher was the price of food the better would he
their condition. What is this P Is it not a positive
and rank delusion, palmed upon people who do not
know better ? Is it not trick practised by the rich
upon the poor fur the purpose of making themselves
richer by it ? I ask any educated man if he can be-
lieve for one instant that a scarcity of food can make
the condition of the poor better ? Is it anything less
than saying that wages would rise if the price of pro-
visions rise, and that it is an injury if the price should
fall ? I ask, if it is not drawing too much on the sim-
plicity of the county to claim a character for being
more charitable and Christian-like if they go forth
and relieve some part of the sufferings which they cause ?
Are they better neighbours because they go about
asking what can the matter be—what can have
caused all this suffering, and recommending you to
relieve it? Ido not wish to use harsh terms, but this
seems to me as near to hypocrisy as anything can be.
We read in history that the Emperor Charles V.
caused the Pope to be imprisoned, and then ordered
prayers to he offered up in all churches that a safe
deliverance might attend his Holiness, taking care at
the same time to recommend his gaolers to pay par-
ticular attention how they let him out.—(Great
laughter.) Something like this is the conduct of
those who support the corn-laws. They fetter the in-
dustry of the people--they bind it hand and foot--
anti when they perceive the miserable con-
sequences of this, they ask what can be the cause
of all the suffering—for God's sake relieve it as
quickly as you can. Ido not wish to east discredit
on their charity—l do not wish to discourage them
in relieving the suffering they cause—it is only some
indemnity to the poor, some restitution of what they
had been deprived of by their system. Let them con-
tribute their cash to charities—let them thus mitigate
some portion of the mischief done by the law ; but
I do say, this cannot be a recempense for the
living that might be gained by honest industry.—
(Cheers.) It is >i calumny that the people of this
country prefer charity to labour—it is quite against
the spirit of the people ; the very genius of the people
of this country is to be industrious, to become inde-
pendent. I believe, what the poor men of Wiltshire
the other day embodied in their petition, expresses
the sentiments of their class. They say, we do not
want charity, we want justice.—(Loud cheers,) They
wished to spare the great folks the expense of giving,
and themselves the humiliation of receiving, charity.
They wanted their rights—they wanted to exchange
their labour with those who were willing to employ
them, and to do so freely. They repudiated altogether
the principle that they were benefited by a
few persona being protected, and that sentiment
has been proclaimed and affirmed by all the
democratic party of the United States.—(Hear.)
'Utters they have repudiated the principle of protec-
tion to a few. They say there, " Protection for all or
for none."—(Cheere) You cannot protect the few
hut o,t the expense of the many—(Cheers)—and that
is not justice or wisdom, and they proved their sin-
cerity by the manner in which they acted...(l-lear.)
The great question in this country now is, How are
the people to he employed—how the great increasing
population of this country is to find employment ? If
you look at all the meetings that take place, all the
associations that are formed, you will observe the
great question is, How can the great body of the popu-
lation find employment? And that is the question which
ought to absorb the thoughts of every practical states-
man in this country.—(llear.) It is due time that
something should be done in this respect. The quan-
tity of poor which we have in this country is become
a scandal to the rest of Europe.—(tlear.) It is known
wherever is known, and foreigners cannot
understand it, for, with the wealthiest Church and
aristocracy in Christendom, they find a larger mass of
moral and physical destitution than is to be found in
any other State.—(Cheers.) And this question has
now beeomP Parrowea to this, whether this employ-
ment for the people can be best found by impeding
and restricting their commerce, or by setting it free 1'
That is the question which is now to be decided in
this country. That is the only great and comprehensive
way to meet the diffieultiee of our social position.
And thele ere write persons who believe, or profess to
do tio, that by impeding commerce, arid stopping up
the channels through which it flows, you will find
better employment for the people, and that you will
ameliorate their condition rather pseventing the
foreign customer floos i;cruung In, than by allowing a
free tirade. Why, if a duty was imposed on the ex-
ports of this country, no person could doubt of the
fact that it would be prejudicial to the industry of the
country. If any barrier were pleesd on the exports
of the eotietry, seery person would see that it would
be a reason why persons could not find employment.
But there was no difference between a harrier to ex-
porta and a barrier to imports.—(Bear, hear.) There
could he no export without an import. Eyery im-
port was a customer. Stop the evistoraer, and you
Kei9Lit the people from getting employment.—(Loud
cheering.) What is our case ? 'What do we do to
meet the question as to how the people are to be em-
ployed ? We say, allow free trade; let there be an
unrestricted interchange of the ptr4ucts of various
countries; allovf tide foreito enstother to come in, and
the produce.Ofieritieh labour will increase ; and, for
my part, I cannot see any limit to it.—(Hear, hear.)
Let the home producer get food in the cheapest mar-
ket he can, and he will soon find naarketa for
his labonts-s,.(Hear) Pelt J say that a free trade in
corouiero would improve the condition of the agri-
culturist more obviously than it would the condition
of the manufacturer, if you take the admissions of the
agriculturists themselves, and their evidence might be
taken as conclusive on such a subject. They say that
the system of agriculture is defective—that is going
4(4%ra-oe—that tSte boil wes Slut properly cultivated,
res if it were there would not be a labourer too much.
--(Hear.) Well, then, the question comes, How has
it come to pass in this rich and enterprising country
that the soil is not well cultivated, and thct the la-
bourers are not enTleyed 13 Why, it results from
thin. There Are arrangements made between the land-
lord and the occupier which preclude the cultivation
of the soil, and he is not stimulated to exertion by
eompetition as the other classes of the community are.
When he knows that he is protected by an Act of
Parliament, can you wonder that he does not exert
himself ?—(Hear, hear.) What would be the case if
you opened the corn trade ? One of two things would

happen—either the land would be properly culti-
vated, and the labourers fully employed ; or ifyou were
to have food from foreign countries, which you could
only have by exporting manufactures, your surplus
population would be absorbed by the increased labour
required for the production of those exports.—(Loud
cheers.) I say, then, the agricultural labourer would
feel the great benefit of having commerce free ; and I
ask when we are shocked by the details of distress
which we see every day in the newspapers, and par-
ticularly at this inclement season of the year, is it not
time that something should be done to relieve it, or
are we to go on from season to season, and from day
to day, in the same course of error, till we are roused
by another series of bad seasons, and have the events
that occurred three years ago again renewed—when
starving men broke into the tradesmen's houses, and
devoured the raw food which they found in the streets
to save themselves from death ?—(Shame, shame.)
It is not wise to be always depending on the strong
arm of the law, and not on the contentment of the
people.--(Cheers.) Is it wise, is it rational, is it pru-
dent, when everr season brings an increase of dan-
gers, not to avail ourselves of this precious moment
—not to avail ourselves of every influence, of every
privilege, of every right which we can bring to bear
in order to obtain that just and fair demand which I
am persuaded would so much improve the moral and
material condition of the people, and increase the
peace and prosperity of the country ?—(Cheers.)
Mr. Conners, M.P., then came forward, and was
received with the loudest demonstrations of enthu-
siam and good-will. After the cheering with which
he was received had subsided, he said,—Oh, I could
not help wishing, as I sat there, surveying this mag-
nificent spectacle, that all our friends who are scat-
tered over the length and breadth of the land were
here this night, that they might feel their pulses beat
in inison with yours, and look you face to face, and
join in the triumphant shout which augurs prosperity
to our good cause.—(Cheers.) We are here to-night
for business—l am almost sorry for it—for we have
many statistics which are not the most captivating to
the four thousand or five thousand persons assembled
together on this occasion ; and at this time I happen
to know we have a good many visitors among us
whom I am glad to see—many farmers from Smith-
field, who attempted, somehow or other, to smuggle
themselves in here.—(Laughter.) I am sorry I
cannot give a farmer's view of the question to-night,
but I ask them to look round on this assembly, and
let them go, on the day after to-morrow, on Friday
—an ominous day—(Laughter)—let them wend their
way to Bond-street, and attend the meeting of the
Duke of Richmond's Protection Society.—(Laughter.)
Let them survey the scene there, and count an odd
Duke or so—(Laughter)—with perhaps a brace of
Earls, half-a-dozen of Members of Parliament.
and a score of land agents, and then, with
a vivid recollection of the present scene, let them
ask themselves which cause is likely ultimately
to triumph.—(Cheers.) Let them compare the two
scenes, and remember they are but types of the com-
parative merits of our two causes, and then let them
go home—let the tenant-farmer go home and attend
to his own business, and not look to Dukes or Acts
of Parliament to help him.—(Cheers.) Let him take
a corn rent, such as the sagacity of the Scotch
farmer secured to himself twenty years ago, when
he saw how things were likely to turn out. Let the
English farmer also secure himself a corn rent, cal-
culated at a certain fixed price of corn, as found
by the averages let him do so, and he
will be better employed than in listening
to the Duke of Richmond at the Protection So-
ciety, or going to Acts of Parliament. I believe
we have another visitor here to-night. I have had
put into my hand since I came here a little tract pub-
lished by the enemy. In the title page there is a
quotation from the republican authority, Henry Clay.
I am glad they put this name on the frontispiece, for
let the working men remember (and this was ad-
dressed to the working men), that since this tract was
published, Henry Clay was rejected as the candidate
for the Presidency of America. He steed as candidate
for that high honour before 18,000,000 of free
citizens, on the ground of being the author and
father of the protective system in America. I
watched the progress of the contest with anxiety—l
received the newspapers by every packet—l saw the
accounts of their speeches and processions, and, I
must say, the speeches of Henry Clay and Daniel
Webster would do credit to the Duke of Richmond
or the Duke of Buckingham himself.—(Laughter.)
Their banners were inscribed with " Protection to
native industry," " Native manufactures and Henry
Clay." These things were addressed to the American
democracy, just as the protection societies speak to
you in this pamphlet; but there millions of them,
voting in the ballot box, rejected Mr. Clay, and sent
him to retirement.—(Laughter.) Now I think this
Protection Society, if they have got a large stook of
tracts on hand, will be disposed to sell them cheap.—
(Laughter.) They might do for lighting cigars, very
probably.—(Laughter.) Well, what have you now
in London ? You have heard something of what is
doing below in the north, I think. I have seen
some signs, not of opposition, but something very
like what I call a diversion. You have heard of some
great meeting here, having the professed object of
benefiting a large class of persons in London. My
Hon. Friend alluded slightly to the subject, and I
have a word or two to say on it. I have called it a
diversion, but it is rather an attack or charge made
against the victims of their own injustice. When in
Turkey, persons suffering under the tyranny of the
Grand Vizier, threaten to rise and avenge themselves.
It was an old trick of the Vizier to send persons
amongst the people, and to cry out that the bakers
were selling the bread too high, and that it would be
very desirable to nail the bakers' ears to the door-
posts.—(Laughter.) The monopolists have taken a leaf
out of the Turkish book. When there was great die-
tress in Manchester, there were persons who cried out
that it was the manufacturers who ground the faces
of the poor, and now, when the distress has come
upon the agricultural districts, the landowners meet
the farmers, and at their agricultural societies they
tell the farmers to lay out more capital, and to employ
the agricultural labourers. They tell them to drain
the land, but they never mentioned that they have
thoroughly drained their pockets themselves.—(A
laugh.) And when distress has invaded a large por-
tion of the most defenceless sex of your community,
I find a large and useful and respectful class of shop-
kitepers, who deal in clothes, assailed by the monopo-
lists for grinding the faces of the poor needlewomen.
Nov, I stand here as the advocate of the character of
those traders, and to fling back the charge on those
who thus assail them. I stand here to vindicate
'Aloes and Son.—(Laughter.) They were Christian-
like in comparison with those who assailed them.
There is this difference between Moses and Son and
those who vote for the corn-laws and then affect to
pity the let of the poor needlewomen, if Moses and
Son buy cheap they sell cheap, and they have not
got an Act of Parliament to secure themselves a mo-
nopoly.—(Hear, hear.) But the landlords of Dorset-
shire, while they pay 7s. a week for labour, have
passed an Act of Parliament by which they can sell
the bread that these poor peasants consume at an
artificial, enhanced, and unnatural price.—(Loud
cheers.) And there is a great scheme of charity,
forsooth, to atone for all this mischief; and you are
to have 50,000 people kept in employment, by a
society not of middle women, but of middle men—
and very middling men, indeed.—(Laughter.) Now,
I venture the prediction that the bubble will burst
before the meeting of Parliament, and that its
blowers will try and invent some other. They will
not fail to charge us, or any unprivileged class
of the community, with being the authors of
their own misdoings. They have set themselves
up as being more charitable than the rest of the
'eemmunity. My friend, Mr. Villiers, has properly
treated these charitable assumptions ; but I say that
even if the monopolists were charitable—more cha-
ritable than other people, I object to a large portion
of the community depending upen alms and living at
the expense of another.—(Hear, hear.) But I deny
that those monopolists are charitable. It is the free
traders—the much maligned political economists, who
are the most charitable persons in the country. There
was a meeting the other day in Suffolk, at which
there assembled a great gathering of your land-
holders, noblemen, squires, and clergy, in order
to do—lArhat ? In order to take means for relieving
the distress of the peasantry by means of a subscrip-
tion. Well, a subscription was, I believe, opened
before the meeting separated, but what has been done
in the matter since; how much has been given in
charity P I will venture to say that there is one
leaguer iu Manchester who has given more money
for the parka and pleasure-gardens in that town, than
has boom stibseribvd to beneM the ihtrving poor of

Suffblk by all the landowners of the county.—(Loud
cheers.) Now, do not misunderstand me, we do r°'
come here to boast, but to roll back the charges
made against a great body of the most 1"'
telligent portion of the middle classes, who take
scientific and enlightened views of what Govern.
ment ought to be. They call us political economist!
hard-hearted utilitarians. Let them: political CO*
nomists are the most charitable—free traders the most
liberal to the poor. But I call upon our opponents`,
if they will have it that the people are to live ;II
poverty—to give us a guarantee that the people
not starve, but that they shall be supported by the
alms they propose to give them.—(Hear, hear.) Aye
it is very convenient to give bad name to a sort
police who are looking after them.—(Laughter.)
we are a sort of political economists, and upon the
ground that we do not wish to submit our fellow;
countrymen to the eleemosynary support of any c 19311
of the community—(Cheers)—for, if we do, we she'
leave them, I fear, in a very hopeless condition indeed.
What we say is, let the Government of the country
be so conducted that every man shall he able, by tl'e
labour of his own hands, to earn a subsistence on
independent wages. Now, these gentlemen of who
lam speaking have had a meeting to-day, an
meetings of a similar character are becoming rife In
all directions, and upon all sorts of subjects-21°Y!
excepting the right one.—(Cheers and laughter.)
Well, all sorts of men met to-day at Exeter Hall, to
devise means, and to form a society for looking of set
the health of towns. They will give you ventilatioa
—they will give you air—they will give you water":
they will give you drainage—they will give Ye-,
open courts and alleys—they will give you 'all
thing and everything but bread.—(Loud cheer'''
So far as the Lancashire district goes, nothing is e°,
clear—for we have it on the authority of the rests
trar-general's report of deaths in that district—n°th,'ll
is more certain than that the amount of mortal
rises and falls year after year with the price of f° g;
This narration may he traced as clearly as if it
given in evidence before a coroner's inquest. Ito
proved that three thousand persons have died la "lye
dear years more than have perished since corn. A
come down to more natural prices—and this 111,,
comparatively limited district of Lancashire alone'
(Hear, hear.) And yet the gentlemen wh°
these benevolent societies will talk of air and 've'ee
or about anything rather than bread, the staff g. 7,
support of life.—(Hear.) Now, I have no objectlf
to charity—l advocate charity—but I say, ustr)
first, and then let charity follow in its wake.—(lleB;te
I have no doubt but that these gentlemen are actus`o
by very benevolent motives—l will not charge °let,
even with hypocrisy—but Ido say that we shall e-na
pect them to meet this question of the corn-401,60e
not to shirk it.—(Cheers.) I am complaining al .0,
class of the landed aristocracy, who set up for suPerio,
benevolence, but who, I am well assured, are g°,,
science-stricken at their own deeds—who vote in fe'e
port of the corn-laws, and yet who refuse to discilio
their merits or record their opinions of them. I allude
particular to one nobleman, who professes great ;Yor
e
pathy with and for the poor--who did not attenuAir
debate upon Mr. Villiers's motion—who did not
~,%.
cuss the question, but who came in at the last
ment, just as the division was about to take Ple:pe
and who voted against the motion.—(Heer,
groans, and cries of " name.") Well, I will meats
i/e
)'
his name, it was Lord Ashley.—(Renewed grf
Let us, at all events, while we admit the gnot
tentions of such men, let us stipulate for this'.,,,e
the question shall be discussed by them as ellest/1-5e
of washing or of fresh air are discussed.--(tdo
hear.) I say do not let them shirk it.
they do in matters of ventilation ? They call 4::,
scientific men to aid them. They go to Dr. St;
wood Smith and others, and say, " What is the to
plan to remedy admitted evils ?" Well, we in tv
demand of them with respect to questions of sarf;.o
ing the people with food and employment, that tvev,
too they should call into their councils scientific
men who have devoted their lives to the consideret'r
of these questions, and who have left on reearcil°loil
niens which have been received as sound and alce.,b
all over the world. Let them consult Adam SO' .0
well as Southwood Smith.—(Hear.) And, ah°lere
things, let them either prove that Adam Smith's pit
plea were wrong, or let them vote in accordanceteeit
his opinions.—(Cheers.) It won't do to wriag.,
hands, and wipe their eyes, and fancy that in ~
oip
telligent and intellectual age sentimentality vri!' ttg
the Senate.—(Hear, hear.) It may pass jnia
boarding-school—(A It
laugh.) But what sh°ll't file
say, if those who lament over the distressei °
people and yet refused to take the advice of scieli
ci
councillors for a remedy for the evil—what shoe'
say were these people to go to a hospital, a!q
find the patients writhing under their baaug./
after having undergone the ordeal of surgical:l:e
what would we say if they tore away the basu'ole
turned out the surgeon and apothecary, as bend
blooded utilitarians, and, after wringing their to
and turning up the whites of their eye", et
eeep.
work and treated the patients after their own fas'ad
—(Loud cheers.) Oh, I like these Covent-0; 01
meetings, and I'll tell you why. We are 6 5°,0 •
intellectual police. Lord Byron said that his did'
canting age ; and, perhaps, there is nothing se e‘'
cult to check as cant--(Hear)—but if anyth'ngtee
planted a sound and wholesome tone in the °tee
polis, it has been the great gatherings and Wit re,)
cussions in Covent-garden Theatre.—(Loud chest
You have another meeting to-night. You 1:1
meeting to-night to present a testien°°l'l 01
Sir Henry Pottinger. Now, I want t° het
a word to you about that. First of all' Tel
has Sir IL Pottinger been doing for these 11)°
lists—l mean those merchants and millionaire'' peel'
as Baring and Co., who subscribed .501. at Liceirefeo
and will do something of the same kind here- 004
has Sir Henry Pottinger done for those °el' bee°
monopolists and princes of the City ? He haeoel4.
to China, and extorted from the Chinese Governtxill"
for the benefit of the Chinese people I admit, a
vjee
What is that tariff? I will tell you. It is f°elleer
on three principles. The first is, that no duties "rtei
ever shall be enforced on corn or provision W 1: fr'
into the celestial empire. Nay, if a ship 01:10011
loaded with provisions, that there should be
no duty enforced on the cargo, but the shiPeeet
empted from port charges, and that is the only e'ciple
tion of the kind in the world. The second p, ,n ed
is, that there should be no duties for proteeti°ll,o'ere
the third is, that there shall be moderate duties ' vea
venue. Why it is for that very tariff we have teeti
contending at the Anti-Corn-law League Pr via
five years.—(Loud cheers.) The only diffsrenceifeetif
between my friends and myself, and Sir , ree°,
Pottinger, that while he has succeeded, hr°eecit''
arms, in conferring on the Chinese this het'peet'
change, we have endeavoured, by force of argu
to extort a similar boon, for the benefit ,°r Ana
English people from our aristocrecy.—(llear.loryolio
a further difference is this, that while our 111°.afgeaf
merchants are ready to make demonstrations!'" the!
of Sir 11. Pottinger for his success in Ch for
have met us with obloquy, opposition, and silo tbe
endeavouring, although without success, to ;cid?
same thing here. And why have we not succ met)
Because we were opposed by the inconsistancio Pc
who are now toasting and shouting free tril. Pe
China. Now I will ask here a question or t°l, beer
these gentlemen believe that this tariff will be tile!
1'1641 to the people of China ? Judging 11 stole lie
have said here, I cannot believe it. They 9t rs
da
that to lower the price of provisions by a fr,eoo.eti'l
in corn would injure the working classes by 1° oat;
wages? If they think this tariff a benea ir oot
why refuse to grant the same advantages totelof g
fellow-countrymen ? But if it is not, then 414
no Christians, because they do not do to the d e
as they would be done by.—(Loud cheers,t tee°
leave them on the horns of that dilemiaa--1
fettle 3if
teke which they choose. There is some lot o
lusion and fraud by the way in which they Teets
our " commercial treaty" with the Chinese' sit
is no commercial treaty exclusively with us'
Pottinger imposed on the Chinese a treaty nt 0, Oleo !
cable to 115 alone, but to the whole world. ;en
freert
monopolists'trade,
providedcry is,
ththater • tbhee ya have
oeureeh
of other countries, yet they hip, h'P'
e„ thol'ee,
bumpers to Sir Henry at the London.Tseiethr'''out
he had impoeeel on the Chinese a tariff oath' e
procity with any country on the face of lu:rivg,tstele,
(Cheers.) Well, now, will Mr. Thomas 11 leteelY,
again for the City of London, think you ?--l°l' t tiyllB
_ldif
--(Renewed laughter.) If he should 0,"
Lie said, you know, you were a very low PA e,

,---
-,(Load
w•e do n°
charge!

most iIY
who take

Govern'
conoMist°

tics! eel?
s the roost
ponents"
to lire in
eople w'
:d by the
ar.) Aye
a sort
,ter.)
upon the
it

-- 1
, any 0-A
5
we shall
on indeed.

---
e country
)le, by tie
istence on