The Sun.
London, England, 1844-10-18 00:00:00

tural labourers and small tradesmen were in distress.
- - -

Why were they in distress ? Was it because they were
lazy and indulged in drunken habits that they were in
want of the common necessaries of life ? Or was it

because they were starved by the unjust laws of unjust
men?—("Yes!") Was it in consequence of the taxation
on corn, on leather, on sugar, and on all other things ?
Yes, it was ; and they were taxed in an unjust degree.
The poor man with his limited means was taxed in a
greater degree than the rich man. The taxes bore the
most heavily on those articles which the poor man con-
sumed ; yet the gentleman could not eat more bread than
the poor man.—(Hear.) The taxes ought to bear most
on the rich, and least on the poor man.—(Cheers.)
Clever men had calculated tWat the labourer paid nearly
half his wages in taxes on articles of consumption. The
gentleman did not pay in anything like the same pro,
portion. This was one great cause of the hardships
under which the poor suffered.—(A voice—" That is the
only cause !") No ; it was not the only cause ; be-
cause,
by the laws restricting commerce, and therefore
lessening the demand for labour, the poor were deprived
of the means by which they might be able to pay
the taxes.—(frear.) This was foul play ; and he (Mr.
Edridge) would be ashamed if he did not denounce it
whenever the opportunity offered. One of the previous
speakers had recommended the labourers to form associ-
ations. He thought that was bad advice. No ; let them
come forward and attend public meetings. Let them
appeal to the gentry of England to lead them, and let the
gentry and the poor be orce more of one family.—
(Cheers ) The flock would fare badly without the shep-
herds ; but in this case the shepherds were all rogues.—
(A laugh.) Their Nob'e Chairman ought not to have
been left alone by the aristocracy to-day. If he (Mr.
Edridge) was charged with having dune wrong, as they
were charged with doing se, would he skulk in the
woods ? No ! But they were charged with cru.lty and
oppression towards the poor. If he were the subject of
such a charge, the first 10 or 12 men he met should be
his jury.—(hear.) The gentry ought to come forward
and see to the prior. Ii their horse or their foxhound
were ill, the doctor would be sent for, and the fine
genera rats animal would be cared for and physicked. But
if men—men made in the image of God, with wives and
children whose cheeks met together from starvation—
came to them, they would not give them a bit of bread !
—t Loud cheers.) They knew that the pe plc were
starving—(Hear)—yet they would attend to their horse
or their dog, but they would do nothing for the honest
industrious working man.—(Hear, hear.) The men who
allowed the wives and children of the poor to starve were
murderers. " The blood of thy brother be on thy head !"
It would be visited on them. —(Cheers.) lie (Mr.
Edridge) threw this out by way of hint. It was not often
they got such hints.—(Cheers.) There was nothing of a
rebellious or a sour spirit among those who had met
there that day. All the poor men wanted was to be able
to work for themselves and their wives and children.—
(" Yes, that is all we want, gentlemen.") He hoped the
gentlemen of England would come forward while it was
yet time.—(Cheers.)
WILLIAM COLE, of Lechlade, a labourer, next
mounted the waggon from the body of the meeting.
He said—We poor men are put upon very much indeed.
The farmers make poor souls work many hours more
than they ought, and give them nothing for it. They,
put taxes on poor souls, instead of which they ought to
take them off. If they took a little of the duty off malt,
it would be good for poor souls. Also if they took a
good deal away from the parsons.—(A laugh.) It
would be a good thing for the poor man to get his acre
or two acres of land. The farmer says he would not
work if he got it. That is not true. What the working
man wants is a little more wages, and then he would be
able to pay his rent and taxes,—(Hear.) The Lord will
be with the poor. and God knows what will become of
the gentlemen when they die. I'm sure I don't know.—
(Hear.) I hope the gentlemen will let the poor have a
little land. (A voice—" Yes ; but not at 6/. an acre !")
Let them have land for one year 'for nothing, and then
let it to them afterwards for a penny a lug (perch) more
than the others have it for.—(Hear.) The speaker
was going on to recommend that the tax should be
taken off tea and sugar, and put on thrashing ma-
chines, when it was intimated to him that he was
talking too long. Ile persisted, until Spackman, the
former speaker, stepped forward, and gave him a signi-
ficant look, upon which, turning round to Lord Radnor
and the gentlemen who had got up the meeting, he said,
" Gentlemen, I have said all I can to do good. I hope
it will be pleasing to you."
A person named CANDY, who was dressed like a me-
chanic, and wore an apron, and who said he came from
London, then addressed the meeting in a long and
rather violent harangue, savouring of Chartism. After
entering at some length into the condition of the work-
ing classes, he asked, " What are you going to do ?
Are you going to submit, or are you going to juin
heart and hand in putting down the demon power—
monopoly ? Unite—unite—unite ! Get informatiqn.
That is the groundwork of regeneration. All nature
around you is good and beautiful, testifying to the
handiwork of God, yet man, his noblest work, presents
this spectacle of woe. Yes, there are men, who have
reason to curse the hour that gave them birth.—(Hear,
hear.) Then, let us use our energies to put an end to
such a state of things. Let every man do all the good
he can. Ultimately a great and glorieus end will be
accomplished. God forbid that we should see here the
days of llanton, Robespierre, and Ararat. The English
people want no revolution. All that they want is a fair
day's wages for a fair day's work.—(Hear.)
The Earl of RADNOR said he wished to say a few
words before th- resolutions were put. tiorn,- of the
speakers had described the state in which the labouring
classes wi,re. Ile f areal that in thst iteighbou-',...d the
poverty which had been stated to ..xi•t wa. not at. all
uncommon. The agricultural lebourer suffered con-
siderable privation. Not only was there a deficiency in
the demand for labour, but the wages given also were
most inadequate to supply the wants of the people. At
the same time it appeared to him most unjust t_o brim;
charge against the landowner and the flouter for giving,
insufficient wages. No man was bound to give fee any-
thing more than he could get it for. 'ehey had heard a
great deal about the new poor-law.—(Hear.) Noe, he
had always been, and still was, a zealous friend to the
poor-law. He thought it was a wise measure. They
all knew what abuses there were under the old poor-la w.
The present law was based on the most strict philo-
sophical principles, and the more stringently it was car-
ried out, the better he believed it would be for all per-
sons to whom it was intended to apply. At the same
time he was free to admit that the poor of this country
were labouring under great difficulties and grievances,
for which some remedy might and ought to be found.
He believed that the poverty of the working man arose
from the labour-market being overstocked, which was
owing to the demand for the industry of the country
being restricted by the laws affecting trade, commerce,
and manufactures. He believed (that what the country
wanted was free trade.—(hear, hear.) But a great deal
had been said about the allotment system, and it was said
that the labourers paid too high rents for their allot-.
ments. He thought the argument was unjust. Why
should land be let to one man for less when another was
ready to give more ? It would be to deprive the land-
owner of his right to his property. The real cause of
the high rents was, that there was a great demand for
allotments, and people were ready to give more for them
than perhaps they ought to do. He for one was alto-
gether opposed to the principle of the allotment system.
That principle prevailed almost universally in Ireland,
and yet there was no people on the face of the earth that
suffered more from poverty than did the peasantry of
Ireland.—(Hear.) The Noble Earl concluded by advo-
cating the repeal of the corn-laws, which, by opening a
larger market, would increase the demand for labour, and
therefore the wages of labour.
Mr. PHIPPS said he was in favour of allotments, and
thought it was of no use talking about free trade. It
was of no use to send the labourers to Manchester. They
bred too fast there already. He was for allotments, but
they should not be at rents too high for the people to
pay. They should not be treated as the Noble Earl in
the chair treated some tenants of his, when he enclosed
a strip of waste land at the bottom of Blunsden-bill, and
let it in allotments at Bd. the lug (equal, to 51. Gs. Bd. an
acre), and, when the tenants had worked the land, and
improved it, turned them out to make room for others ;
putting them on fresh allotments for them to cultivate at
the same high rents.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
The speaker entered into some details which seemed to
be understood and taken up by the working men in the
body of the meeting ; but his statement was so rambling
and unconnected, that it was not possible to understand
it clearly. At length he was called to order by
The Earl of RADNOR, who said he would tell them
exactly how the matter stood as to the allotments at
Blunsden-hill. The fact was, that although many years
ago he was bitten by the allotment system, he was now
wholly opposed to it. One reason was, that itis..ead of
it making the poor man independent, as it professed to
de, it really made him dependent, for it required super-
intendence and management, all of which took away
from the poor man's independence. As to his own al-
lotments, the case was this—there was a large strip of
land by the side of the turnpike-road, which was tak-n
in for him by Captain Bradstock, the surveyor of the
roads. Captain Bradstock let it out in allotments, tied
, chiefly to workmen employed on the roads.— (A vieice—
• " Yes, but who receives the rents ?") If they would let
him finish he would tell them. The rents were paid, and
he (Lord Radnor) received them.—(Laughter.) A gen-
tleman in the neighbourhood disputed his right to the
land, and the rents (as we understood) were therefore
for a time not paid to him. But as soon as the question
was settled, which was next year, he reduced the rents
25 per cent., and notice was given that there would be
further reductions, if the tenant managed the land we 11.
The Noble Earl then repeated his previous objections to
the allotment system. It was either merely a means of
eking out the wages of labourers, or it afforded a temp-
tation to greedy landlords—(Heae, hear)—to drive hard
bargains, and get more than the real value of the land.
That was the case in Ireland.
A VOICE.—Let us have the land at the same rate as
the monopolising farmers.
The Earl of RADNOR—Who is to fix the price ? If
a man is willing to give eightpence a lug, of course I
shall take it.—(A labourer—" Yes, but you won't benefit
the poor, my Lord.") If I could get eightpence a lug
and I let it to you for fivepence, of course I should be
making you a present of the difference.—(A voice—
" The poor don't want the land cheaper than anybody
else.")
Mr. PHIPPS—Lord Radnor was born a nobleman and
bred a nobleman, how can he know what the feelings of
the poor are ?—(Hear, hear.) What the Noble Chair-
man said might be all very well, but how could the poor
man help giving the high rent ? He could not move his
family to another parish, as he might pigs to another
market.—(Cheers.)
Mr. LAWRENCE (a shoemaker, who was saluted as
the " village lawyer") here came forward, and declared
he had been a tenant of Lord Radnor at eightpence a
lug. He was also bound to clear the ditch. If a man
kept his allotment drained and paid his rent, ought he to
be turned out because another man was ready to give
more rent, after the place had been worked upon !
(Cheers.) No, let thorn keep the land they had dug.—