The Sun.
London, England, 1844-05-02 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, MAY 2, 1844.

the returns were not made out ; but if the same propor-
tion was observed, the number would be 240 out of every
thousand employed in agriculture, and 760 in other
trades. But the actual number engaged in agricul-
ture was also diminishing. In the year 1821 the
number employed in agriculture was 6,500,000, while
in 1831 it was 6,300,000. The only way:-be could
account for that was, that it having been found that, in
general, farms, to he advantageous, must not be small,
the landlords had been enlarging their farms, and
thus diminishing the numbers employed in that mode
of life. It should ever be remembered that, if a nation be
allowed a perfectly free commercial-intercourse with
other nations, an increase of population would always
lead to an increase of wealth—particularly where the
population was so industrious as that of England was.
Besides as the population increased the public burdens
were lessened to each. In 1811 the taxation was at
the rate of 3/ 10s. 3d. per head; in 1821, 21. 13s. 8d ;
in 1831, 21. 6s. 5d ; and in 1841, 1/. 18s. 10d. per
head, and the taxation had been reduced from sixty-
five millions to fifty-two millions. In 1821 the popu-
lation, divided into two classes, showed that 6,500,000
were employed in agriculture, and twelve millions
odd were engaged in other trades, and the sixty-five
millions of taxation were paid by those two classses
in the proportion of thirty-six per cent. by the agri-
cultural, and 64 per cent. by the other classes. Thus
they saw what ground there was for saying that the
agricultural body bore the heavier portion of the
burdens of the State, or was superior in point of
numbers to the other classes of the community. But
those agricultural folks took good care of themselves.
They had little or no direct taxation to pay. Their
dogs and their horses were untaxed. One certainly
could hardly blame them for taking care of them-
selves, for everybody would do it if he
could, and he asked his hearers not to
let those agriculturists do so any longer.—(Cheers.)
If the people of this country were determined in their
opposition to -the monopolists, they would yield, for
many of them knew they were wrong, and were will-
ing to give way if a bold front was shown against
them.—(Cheers.) They had been saddled with the
income-tax by reason of the restrictive laws which
had been maintained, against the opinion of Mr. Dea-
con Hutne and others, who, by evidence yet to be
contradicted, proved, before a Committee of the House
of Commons, that by lowering duties • the revenue
would be increased. With respect to that income-
tax, he remembered, when it was introduced, to have
heard Lord Melbourne say, in the House of Lords,
that it was a very good thing for a Minister to get
hold of; but he (Lord Kinnaird) did not think they
would readily get rid of it. As far as the prosperity
of the country was concerned, he must say
that, were it not for the inconne-tax, which was
a tax upon the capital of the. country, there
would be the same deficit now as on former
occasions in the national revenue. He had been told
that if they did away with the corn-laws they would
throw poor land out of cultivation. But to grow
wheat on poor land was a clear loss of wealth. (The
Noble Lord then entered into a statement of the pro-
duce and profits of a farm of poor land of his own,
upon which he did not grow wheat, and which re-
turned a larger profit than if he had sought to make
it produce wheat.) Among other things which the
corn-laws did was that they rendered farming a
gambling transaction.—(Hear, hear.) Now in his
opinion the weather and its changes was quite enough
for the farmer to contend with without the prices

hopping up and down asthey often did.—(Hear.) The
Act had been passed to keep up gambling, and he
supposed, by and bye, that something of the same sort
would be done with respect to corn, because it was
very well known that the great monopolists had told
the Ministry that if they did not do something for
them they would turn against them.—(Hear, hear.)
Every one who knew anything of the corn market
must know that the price to be obtained for wheat
was a complete gambling speculation, in consequence
of the mode in which purchases and sales in that im-
portant article of life were made. He (Lord
Kinnaird) was told gravely the other day by
a gentleman, when he said to him, " Why,
you were promised 565. for your corn, but
you do not get it," that he , did not expect to
get that exactly—he said they could pro-
duce wheat cheaper ; and that if they were only
given time they would be enabled to sell it for 455.
—(Hear, hear.) He said to him, " But, my dear
fellow, if you were told to go without your dinner
for some time, and that then you will have it cheaper,
how would you like that ?"—(Laughter.) He (tl:tg,
Noble Lord) had no hesitation in saying that, if the
trade was carried on regularly, there would be a
regular supply in the market. In the -year 1812,
when Napoleon tried to keep foreign wheat out of
the English market, five or six millions of quarters
were brought in, in defiance of him, though this
country had certainly to pay for it at no small rate.
—(Hear, hear.) He (the Noble Lord) was satisfied
that the farmers were becoming daily more alive to
the importance of consumers being able to buy ;
their eyes were beginning to be opened to
the fact that an injury to the consumer must
be an equal one to the producer.—(Hear, hear.) But
then it was said that there was no certainty that
other countries would take the manufactures of
this country foritheir wheat—now in his opinion there
could be no doubt about it. Before he sat down
he must make some observations on a pamphlet
written by Mr. Cayley. That gentleman was a most
honest man, but he (Lord Kinnaird) believed he had
been deceived, and the quotations he had made from
Adam Smith he could never have seen, or he would
not have inserted them. This pamphlet issued from
a society calling themselves a " Protection Society,"
but they would, in his opinion, be far more appro-
priately called " A Rent League."—(Cheers.) He
thought when he went through the quotations, the
meeting would be of opinion that it was a most
shameful thing that men should be deluded
by such false statements.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.)
(The Noble Earl then proceeded to comment
upon the different statements in the pamphlet, and
rebutted them most effectually, proving that the
statements of Adam Smith had been erroneously
quoted altogether.) Now, the leading members of
the Protection Society, as they called themselves, in
the House of Lords, adopted all that was stated in
that pamphlet, because it was the avowed supporter
of monopoly on which they lived.—(Hear, hear.)
He (Lord Kinnard) believed that if it was not for
Some of the members constituting that Society the
Prime Minister would go the whole hog.—(Great
hear.) The Noble Earl
hl aiumg ho tuetr .)
if
heßut
d ithey o
th
da do tt oh ledi r hhtimd d
nt heg, ya
nmd' o uhl
ed twu ra s
obliged to give way.—(Hear,n
afterwi thehthaenyk
cheering. nlegardthheimmeetingh e
dfo rt
hteheeh a
ivra tai emnicde taht
ChAalirrt.nßanlCAtonDtoh,e
atnhednwianstrordeuneeievdedby the
with
most enthusiastic cheers. He was well aware how
ill able he was to -supply the place of Mr. Cobden—
(Cheers)—a gentleman who bad done so much for
the cause—(Cheers)—who had always something new
to say—(Cheers)—and who, he was sure, would never
desert the great cause in which he had struggled so
long and so effectually while it required his assistance.
—(Great cheering.) He recollected an old story, in
which it was told how certain philosophers
entered into a controversy as to the posi-
tion of a certain building, and after expending
a great deal of argument on the subject, some one
suggested whether they had not better go and look
at it.—(Laughter.) Now, they had heard a great
deal about free trade. They had been told that the
enthusiasm on the subject was dying away. Now,
the answer he would give to those who made that
assertion was, "come and see."—(Great cheering.)
The League had told them, when they first began
the present agitation, not to be led away by any
dogma of any party—(Cheers)—not to listen to the
dicta of any class of philosophers, but to judge
for themselves by attending their meetings, seeing
with their own eyes, and hearing with their own
ears, and then to determine whether they were
"iitt suffering under a crying and grievous injustice,
which it was the object of the League. to
put an end to.—(Cheers.) The League had opened
what had hitherto been a sealed book.—(Cheers.)
They had made thousands, tens of thousands, and
hundreds of thousands of political economists—not by
appealing to the passions, but by clearly stating the
case, and asking the opinions of the people upon it.—
(Cheers.) That man must be a bold one who could
come there attempting to add anything to the state-
ments and views the League had laid before them,
or the convictions they had produced. There was
not a single injustice (and God knew there were
many) connected with the corn-laws that they had
not exposed and laid bare.—(Hear, hear.) He had
not presumption enough to attempt to make any fur-
ther exposition of the injustice that existed. He
came there fur no such purpose ; but he attended on
account of being disgusted with the place where their
cause ought to be discussed and redressed, but where,
instead of redress, the advocates of free trade met with
nothing but insult and ridicule. He came from the
oppressors to the oppressed—(Cheers) —to those who
were the victims of bad laws.—(Cheers.) He had
heard a good deal in that House about political eco-
nomy upon several occasions. He had heard it with
respect to corks, and he was surprised to see the una-
nimity that prevailed, until he discovered that no
cork-cutters were present.—(Great laughter.) He
had heard it with respect to plaited straw, but he
could discover no straw-plaiters behind the Treasury
curtain.—(Cheers.) The alteration of the duty on
currants had been well received there, but he had
never seen a currant bush in the place. They might
do all these things, but once let the straw hive
of monopoly break ouf, would come all the
drones that had been glutting on the honey which of
right belonged to the people—(Cheers)—and if their
sting
gthe people.
wasasbad as their buzz; it would indeed be bad
for
Now, how had they been treated in
the House of Commons ? Why, when first Mr. Vil-
liers brought forward the question of the corn-laws

he was met with such hootings and cacklings as were
a disgrace to the House of Commons; but when the
question became more important, then they began to
talk about vetted rights—(Cheers)—and when the
question went further, then they began to argue ; and
now that the League had taken up the subject with
such vigour and success, they had nothing but vested
interests to talk about.—(Cheers.) Now what did
vested interests consist of ? In his opinion it
was a taking of something by somebody that
did not belong to them.—(Loud cheering.)
It was no reason to say that the thing was not pur-
loined because it was purloined a long time ago.
He supposed a great many of those who heard him
had been in France, and if so, they must be aware
there were regular dustmen there, called cheffoniers,
who were in the habit of picking up from the mass of
dust which was thrown before the door bits of pa-
per, and other things, which they carried away in
their bags to make a livelihood. At the time of the
cholera the French Government supposed those heaps
of stuff would cause that disease to spread, and they
resolved upon prohibiting them. But the chef-
foniers arose and said their vested interests should not
be touched.—(Laughter.) They had a vested inte-
rest; the Government was afraid to touch it, and so
there they are to this day.—(Hear, and laughter.)
Madrid afforded another instance. There were in
that city persons who brought water into the city
from a distance, and when it was proposed to bring
water into the city by aqueducts, which would con-
siderably diminish the expense, the water-carriers
protested they had a vested interest, and the citi-
zens of Madrid were obliged to buy dear water.—
(Hear and laughter.) But absurd and ridiculous.
as those instances of vested interests were, they were
not near so
,absurd, so wicked, or so mischiev-
ous as the vested interests of the landowners.—
(Cheers.) What was their origin? There was a
long war with France, which raised the price of the
necessaries of life. It was a curse to the people, but
it was a profit to the landlord—(Hear, hear)—for
when the war was at an end the landlords, in whose
hands all the power then was, came down and passed
the corn-laws, with, as the Chairman said, the aid of
those bayonets which had conquered the enemies of
the country.—(Cheers.) This law was the cause of
the artificial high price of corn. The landlords made
a vested interest for_themselves ; but if they had an
interest in scarcity the people of this country had a
vested interest in plenty, and they had a far higher
law for this than any Act of the Legislature—
(Cheers)—a law which said that the goods of this
world should not be confined to any particular spot
for the benefit of any particular persons, but which
enjoined that, by means of exchange, the
deficiency of one country might be supplied by
the superfluities of other countries, that each might
enjoy his portion of those blessings which it pleased
Almighty God to give for all.—(Cheers.) When
they knew those things—when they must stare every
tradesman, every manufacturer, workman, farmer,
and landlord, provided he be honest, in the face, was
it not surprising that the country remained quiet ?
Was it not surprising that such a state of things
should be suffered to continue, when the representa-
tives of the manufacturing towns stated that the
people were starving, that thousands were in the
workhouses ; and when they were told by an Hon.
Gentleman (he, Mr. Ricardo, should be sorry to have
it said of him that he made such a statement,) that
hundreds of thousands were rejoicing in oatmeal and
potatoes? When they were told, even by a Cabinet
Minister, that two millions of quarters of wheat were
rotting in the warehouses of America, which, he said,
he would consider a national misfortune if brought
here ?—(Oh, oh.) There was plenty of corn in the
Ukraine, in Pultowa, and in the ports of the Baltic,
which they might receive if the corn-laws did not
stand between them. When they were openly told
that this would be a national misfortune, did they
consider the consequences ?—(Hear.) Was it not
possible, when they were thus building fortifications
by means of iron laws around property, they ought to
take care they were not creating enemies to property
itself. Let them recollect what had been said, not
by a manufacturer, but by a servant of the Crown,
and what had been quoted by the Premier himself,
that the people of. this country had no objection to
any man keeping his property; but if they saw that
this' property conferred some peculiar advantages,
they might be given to think there was some anomaly
in property, which they might endeavour to obviate.
—(Hear.) He was driven to say these things only
in consequence of the mode in which they had been
treated. He must implore of the people to help
them. They could only insert the nail—it would be
for the people to wield the hammer which would drive
it in.—(Loud cheers.) He did not see the use now
in bringing any more free traders into Parliament.
If they had even 30 or 40 additional free traders
in the House of Commons they would not avail.
But there would be another election, and each man
in his own position ought to do the utmost.—(Hear.)
Their forefathers had obtained civil and religious
liberty for them at the point of the sword.—c Hear.)
He did not require such a sacrifice ; but if they
exerted themselves properly there was another
freedom which they might bequeath to their sons,
and that was commercial freedom.—(Cheers.) If
they did that, he was quite convinced not one amongst
them would have reason to regret any sacrifice of
time or trouble.—(Hear, hear.) Their names would
be written in the annals of their country, and their
posterity
who achieved the commercial freedom of our
co
Mr. SOMERS, a tenant-farmer, next addressed the
untry.—(Louoludd sayof them, these were the men
cheers.)
meeting. After begging
the indulgence of the great
meeting he saw before him, that they would hear
patiently what a person in his humble situation in
life might address to them, he said there were various
classes of farmers in Somersetshire, to which county
he belonged. There was, first, the land agent, who
was also a tenant and land surveyor, but who soon
found out that it was more advantageous to value
lands than to cultivate them. He did not belong to
l laugh.) ar He didhe r e not
was belong
knew as Farmer So-and-so—who
lived by means of Lawyer So-and-so, his neighbour.
sthate colfasws.hoTmhehree was another class of farmers—
some
—(Aanother
etloastshoaftfcarlasmiersof
farmers,
called tenants at will.
When an election took
place they were expected to vote for the candidate
who was pleading to the landlord, and they did so.—
(Hear, hear.) He was happy t o say it was not his lot
to belong to that cl (
Cheers.)There was an-
other class who possessed landed estates, and who oc-
cupied the same. He was sorry to say it was not his
lot to belong to that 1 ) There was c ass.—(Laughter.
another class, but they were a poor crop, who took
out a license to think for themselves, and who obeyed
the convictions of their own minds. It was his plea-
sure to be able to say that he belonged to that class.
—(Cheers.) He looked to principles and not to men.
He did not look to individual interest, but to what
might turn out to be the interest of the many.—
(Cheers.) Having stated to what class of farmers he
belonged, he would n now state what his feelings were
with regard to free trade. On one occasion he was
asked by a Somersetshire magistrate what were his
sentiments with regard to free trade. He said he
was for free trade in everything all over the world.
—(Loud cheers.) He was a friend to free
trade, because he had heard there was a great
quantity of wheat in bond •for which there
would be plenty of Consumers if they could get
it out, and he thought the system under which this
was done, must be iniquitous. He was of the opi-
nion of Earl Spencer, who said that free trade would
increase labour, and consequently increase wages.—
(Hear.) It would enable the working classes to sup-
port themselves in greater comfort. It had been said,
that if the farmers stopped, all must stop. He could
not see the thing in this light. He was of opinion
that if the farmer stopped, it was because all others
stopped before him.—(Hear, hear.) He believed the
farmers and manufacturers were bound together like
the links in a chain; they were like the horses of the
farmer's plough, but the manufacturer was the fore
horse, the farmer was the hind horse—(Hear, hear)
—and if the first stopped, the second must stop.—
The order of day was the
(Hear, hear.)protection,
but as the Divine word said, the tree was known by
its fruit. Now what fruit had the tree of protection
produced ? He knew little of the state of manu-
factures, but he was sure the manufacturers would
not spend their time in agitating this question if
they were in a flourishing state.—(Hear, hear.) He
knew little of the state of the artisans, but he was told
they were more ignorant and worse off than the agri-
cultural labourers.—(Laughter.) lie believed that
was a grand mistake; but the condition of the artisan
was at best not an enviable one. Did they hear no
mutmuring among the agriculturists? Why many
of the tenant-farmers in Somersetshire were on the
very brink of insolvency. He came next to the agri-
cultural labourer. It was said that his condition
would be rendered worse by free trade. Let him
remind them of valet the wages in Somersetshire
were. Taking it at the highest average they did not
exceed Os. a week. Out of this Is. must be paid for
rent (which was sometimes lower), then there were
Bs. to support a man and his wife and four children—
to find them in food, in fuel, and in raiment.—(Hear,
hear.) He asked them whether it was not downright
hypocrisy to say that it was possible to injure the con-
dition of such miserable people?—(Great cheering.)
It was stated that the corn-laws would reduce
them to pauperism—they were already in a condition
far worse than the paupers.—(Hear, hear.) He had
been a guardian of the Bridgewater union from the
commencement, and the average expense of support-
ing the inmates of the workhouse there was not less
than 2s. 4d. per head per week.—(Hear, hear.) Then
it should be recollected that the food for this work-
house was purchased at the viholesale price. The
poor labourers of Somersetshire—and they were not
the worst off—were obliged to subsist on the three-
fifths of 2s. 4d. ; and surely the poor men who.tugged.
hard all day in the field, required as much sustenance
as the pauper in the workhouse.. —(Bear, hear.) lie