The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-04 00:00:00

referred the other night to what had been done by
the Legislature with respect to the slave trade. He
had since learnt that, within forty years, Mr. Pitt
had been beaten by a majority of 80 on that ques-
tion, on the ground that the change ought to be
moderate and gradual. How would the House of
Commons act if that question were now brought
before them ?.---(Hear, bear.) They had abundant
proof that the corn-law was an abundant source of
misery, and th-y were bound, therefore, to do all in
their power to procure its abolition as a nuisance and
calamity, by which the country was grievously
afflicted.—(Cheers.)

round to these custsmers, and demands payment,
but the linen draper says, oh, your cotton v'as f.' t' tk
frailer texture than was agreed for—the colours have
turned out fugitive. I expected to get such prices,
and have not realised them—l have lost by the
transaction." Suppose the traveller to he the-land-
lord, why he would in that case say, oh, it may he
perfectly true that you have lost, and that you have
had a had bargain, but petition the House of Com-
mons to appoint a Committee to 1 nquire into this
subject.—(Great laughter.) .And, following up the
simile, if the former demurred the traveller (or agent)
would tell the linen draper, in case he
persisted in refusal " You must pay Cobden every
farthing, for there is an Act of Parliament which em-
powers us to levy a distress upon your goods, and
until the last shilling be paid no other creditor can
be satisfied.—(hear, hear.) Did they think linen-
drapers would thrive upon such treatment as that ?
Would they not find themselves where farmers had
frequently found themselves—in the hands of the
auctioneer ?—(Hear, hear.) He should never despair
of the Lola fide tenant-farmers; they would find out
at last how they had been bamboozled, and
how they had been diverted by their landlords
from the real grievances which affected them,
and confused with a hocua pocus of Acts of Parini-
meat.--(Hear, hear.) But what did the landlord
now ask the tenant to do? Was it to petition Parlia-
ment to reform or redress existing evils—to consider
their condition with the view of bettering it ? No
such thing, but to keep things exactly where they
were. It was acknowledged on all hands that great
distress at present existed in the agricultural districts,
that there were large numbers of able-bodied men
ueemploved there, and standing at corners of roads
looking for work, or filling gaols or union work-
houses—the farmers oppressed beyond endurance
by the weight of the taxes and the poor-rates ; and
yet in this state of things the landlord had the auda-
city to ask the farmer and the farm labourer to peti-
tion Parliament to keep things, as they were.—(Hear,
hear.) Was it not a shameful imposture to tell farmers
that they should persevere in a course that would in-
fallibly lead to their own downfal?—(Renewed cries
of " Hear, hear.") It was said that he (Mr. Cob-
ben) had not the voice of the farmers. Well, all he
could say was, that in Dorsetshire and in other
places where he attended meetings, large numbers of
the farmers were present, and great numbers of the
mechanics resident in country towns. Many of the
farmers held up their hands in favour of tree trade
opinions. All the mechanics did. The landlords, in
a recent discussion, would not admit that the opinion
of the artisans should be taken as any indication of
those of the farmers, yet in the same breath they
stated that in considering the question of the corn-
"To keep his courage up." laws, not only the farmers should he considered,
but those mechanics and artisans who lived in towns
should be considered likewise. There was one ot lv,r
Whence the necessity for these assertions ? Why had and who were dependent upon the farmers for bread,
argument which he did not expect to hear even from
the landlords found out, on a sudden, that the far- should
Duke.—(Laughter.) A Noble Duke told them
mers were with them ? It must have arisen, he sup-
that the Anti-Corn-law League wanted to reduce the
price of corn in order to reduce the price of wr'::',;
posed, from some doubts pervading their minds as to
whether the farmers were really hoodwinked and
and that when the price of corn was high. wages
blinded by their professions.—(Hear, hear.) But
when they told him that the farmers—that the
tenant-farmers, rose spontaneously to form the Anti- were high ; and when corn was low io Tiricp usage
were likewise low. Well, he (Mr. Cotelen) mint
League Associations, he told them there, in the most
public place in the world, that what they said was not say, that he did not expect to hear this
statement thrown out and falsified as it
true, and that they knew it was not true.—(Cheers.)
He did not wish to be offensive, and, therefore, he had been, even in the House of Lords.
But that truly noble and patriotic peer Lord Radnor
would only say it was not true in a logical sense. He
said it was not true, and he would prove it by reference had shivered these idle arguments to atoms.—(Lord
to facts. He would take the meeting at which his cheers.) It did require considerable moral courage
Grace the Duke of Richmond attended at Steyning, in such an atmosphere as the House of Lords, to
in Sussex. He knew something of Sussex, and ha
meet those misstatements ; but Lord Radnor, in the
fearlessly asserted that the meeting was got up by most clever and concise
manner, put the extinguisher
the aristocracy and squirearchy of Sussex.—(Hear.) upon the Noble Duke.—(Loud cheers.) He told
If they themselves did not go round and canvass the Duke what was an axiom, and what should
their tenants, their agents and land-surveyors did, be always borne in mind—that, if labour sunk
and the tenants wore canvassed and pressed to come so low that • man could not subsist, or less
to that meeting in just the same manner as than the price of that labour, the price of
they were canvassed at a general election; nay, labour could have nothing to do with the
more, the carriages, the horses, the vehicles, down price of corn, for if the latter sunk lower still in
even to the deer-cart, were put at the disposal of the price, the labourer would infallibly be starved. When
farmers, to carry them up to Steyning.—(Cheers.) labour reached the minimum of value, the labourer
What he said of the meeting at Steyning he asserted of was treated as a horse—a fixed quantity of bread was
almost every other meeting, purporting to be spon- apportioned for his use—if it were dear, as in scarce
taneous, which had been held in opposition to the years, the complement would be still the same—just
League. The tenant-farmers were moved by the
the same sum of money to be expended in oats whe-
landlords. They were canvassed by the agents and the ther the horses would live or die. Why labourers
surveyors of the landlords in every part of the were kept in a worse condition than the slaves of
country.—(Cheers.) In many cases the farmers did Cuba or Brazil, who dined on a stinted meal of rice
not even know what was the object of the meeting- and red herring.—(Hear, hear.) Was the price
What he told them was patent to the whole com-
of wages regulated by the price of food ?
munity. There was not an individual there from (A voice, " Yes. ") Somebody said " Yes,'
the counties where those meetings were got up Well, then, let them examine the state of the metro-
who would not testily that the tenant was polis. In 1839 and 1840 the price of corn was double
at the bidding of the landlord, either in his own .that it was in 1835 and 1836, but did the prig of
person, or second hand. And who were the men labour increase with the price of corn ? No, the
who had taken the lead at these meetings ? Could
reverse was the case.—(Cheers.) The wages of labour
they mention one bowl file, interugeet, sub tantial were greater in the cheap than in the dear years. All
he saw farmer, like his friend Mr. Lattimore, trades in the dear years felt the oppression—the
re, w horn
sitting on the platform ?—(Cheers)—or like Mr. citizen, of whatever description, received but the same
Josiah Hunt, who had addressed them there ? money in 1841 and 1842 ; even the poor boatman,
or like those two worthy men who had come out of who rowed them from Westminster to Black.
Somersetshire to deliver their sentiments ?—(Cheers.) friars-bridge, did not demand 2d. more because
But while there were no farmers of that stamp, the the quartern loaf was nearly twice dearer.
gs What had been stated by Mr. Robert Gardiner, a
persons who took a prominent part in the meetings
, Conservative, end a man of wealth, who was treasurer
would nearly always be found to he either an agent
an auctioneer, or a land steward. Why, who was of the Church-building Furd in Manchester, and
w
Mr. Baker, of Writtle, in Essex ? This was the man which had already erected ten churches there? This
who was put forward as their great leader, and who gentleman subscribed 1,0001. himself towards this
fund, but yet he was an advocate of free-trade prin-
saw his name advertised
tmheade
cause. speches ue and pamphlets in support of
a paper as the author ciples, and had nominated Mr. Brown as a candidate
in one column of at the South Lancashire election.—(Cheers.) Well,
of a pamphlet or a letter addressed to the
Protection what did Mr. Gardiner say—one of the Oldest and
Society ; while, in another column, he
most extensive manufacturers in Lancashire ? After
saw Mr. Baker, of ‘Vrittle, appearing as an auctioneer, an experience of thirty years ? Mr. Gardiner
who was going to sell up an unfortunate farmer who gave it as his opinion that wages always declined
had been ruined by the corn-laws.—(Cheers.) Did
with the increasing price of corn, and always im-
his Grace of Richmond, or the squirearchy in the proved with its declension of price. He said that,
House of Commons, believe that after the en-
lightenment and education which their great when corn was dear, labour was cheap, and labourers
in superfluity ; but when corn was cheap, labourers
peripatetic political university, the League, had were fully employed, and labour was dear. Mr.
diffused through the country, the people would Gardiner's observations had not been contradicted,
be gulled by their assertions that the tenant-farmers or even questioned, although he had ties
had risen spontaneously to join the Protection Asso- tered them in a place where most of his
ciations ?—(Hear, hear.) They appeared to him to hearers were conversant, Ns ith then, and where
be about as cunning as the ostrich which manyof them would nave beee happy to confute them it
had its head in the sand and thought they could. Therefore when inen said that the obj-et
that nobody could see its unfortunate body because of the Anti-Corn-law Leiigue in lowering the price
it could not see that body itself —(Great laughter.) of food was to lower the price of wages, and so ad-
He was jealous of their taking the name of the tenant- vantage themselves, they stated a fact contrary to all
farmers in vain.. They told them that they had been experience. lie was heppy to say that the League
abusing the farmers, and that it was for this reason was not confined to manufacturers—they were in a
he (Mr. large minority, but if there were any of
had always been the champion of their this minority who were so blind and be-
rights.—
tchoahtrie theyn had turned against them. Why
(pear, hear.) He was bred in a farm-house, sotted as to believe that they were further-
and, up to the time of his going to school, he saw none log their own exclusive and selfish interests by
but farmers and farm labourers. He should be a seeking a repeal of the corn-laws, they would be
traitor to his forefathers if he entered into a crusade most sadly disappointed, and were hoping against ex-
against one of the most deserving, industrious, and perience, and against reason.—(Hear, hear.) The
pains-taking classes in the community.—(Cheers.) League hal, indeed, snide wonderful progress. Did
Ho had said scores of times, in all parts of the country, they remeinher when, in 1839, they came from the
that he believed the tenant-farmers had been more manufacturing districts to London and went to
deeply injured by the corn-laws than any other class of Brown's hotel, in Palace-yard, what a cold reception
society. If they could but have the history of the they met with. If the people of London felt then as
tenant-farmers who had been ruined during the last they feel now,.a repeal of the corn-laws would have
thirty years by the blessed protection of the corn- been obtained in 1841 or 1842. What did the menu-
laws, it would form a dark calendar of woe and suf- lecturers come to London for then—were they in
feriog, not to be equalled by the history of any other want of labour ?—no, the price of corn was high, and
class of men. An enemy to farmers ! If he were so, labourers were idle in thousands in the districts from
at all events he had not thrust himself among them. whence they came. Did they want to cheapen labour?
—(Hear, hear.) He had challenged the monopolists Why labour was to be had for less than they re-
to meet him in any county in England, and take the quired it there—half the concerns in Stockport
question of the corn- were at that time shut up, and as a het
not acceptnnthe
the challenge, because remedy they sought for a free-trade in corn.
laws. sense ofT They
ye
w
they knew that, if they did, they would be outvoted. The condition of the agricultural labourers at
—(Cheers.) The corn-laws protect farmers! Why, that period was likewise distressing in the extreme.
the farmers paid their rents according to In fact, the condition of the labouring classes was
the price of produce.—(Hear, hear.) If the a state of degradation below that which should
corn-laws kept up the price of produce, they exist in any Christian country. (Hear, hear.)
kept up rents, and the question was, in fact, a rent What did Adam Smith say ? He said that " the
question. He had commenced his career in the wages of labour do not, in Great Britain, fluctuate
House of Commons by telling the landlords that they with the price of provisions; wages vary everywhere
were no more agriculturists, because they were land- from year to year, . frequently from month to month.
lords, than shipowners were sailors, because they But in many places the money price of labour re-
owned ships; and when the Duke of Richmond got mains uniformly the same, some for half a century
up and said the Anti-Corn-law League, by its abuse together. If in these places, therefore, the labouring
of the agriculturists, had set the farmers against poor can maintain their families in dear years, they
them, why, he told iim that he did not know the must be at their ease in times of moderate plenty,
English language, for, that the term agriculturist meant and in affluence in those of extraordinary cheapness."
a cultivator of the land, and, therefore, could not pos- The Duke of Cleveland had lately quoted the pam-
sibly be applied to any one except the tenant-farmer. phlet of Mr. Ceylon, one in which Lord Kinnaird, at
It was not only in this way that they had heard it a meeting of this body clearly showed that Adam
pointed out that the corn-laws injured the farmers— Smith's " Wealth of Nations" had been most sadly
the corn-laws did not merely tempt the farmers to mutilated—something, in fact, in the same way in
make bad bargains, by expecting Act of Parliament which the atheist had quoted Scripture to show that
high prices, but by distracting their attention from there was no. God. He quoted from the passage in
other grievances that lay nearer , home - and were the Psalms, `,The fool says in his heart, there is no
really of importance--keeping their attention fixed God ;" but he quoted only " There is no God,"
upon an ignis fatuus, which always evaded their pur- and upon this garbled quotation based his argu-
suit, and which would not benefit them even if they ment. But there was no need whatever
could grasp it.—(hear, hear.) The farmer wanted for quoting any 'authority. Experience, the surest
a cheap tenure for his land—he wanted a lease, he guide, clearly demonstrated that the corn-laws were
wanted to plant good hedge rows, and to rid , injurious to trade, to commerce, to the labourer to
the ground of noxious weeds, which were i the shopkeeper, to the farmer, and, in fact, to all 'but
devouring the produce of industry
.and of capi- 1 the landlord.(Hear, hear.) The Chairman would
tal.—(Hear.) The farmers wanted improvements tell them that the weekly meetings of this body were
in their homesteads--they wanted draining—they drawing to a close; but they had the satisfaction of
wanted, in short, a variety of concessions from their knowing that they had made their cause popular,
landlords, and how were they met ? Why, the far- and had excited sympathy for their exertions, not only
suer could not approach the land agent or steward to 1 in England and in Europe, but in America, and every
ask for assistance or redress, without them telling quarter of the world. They wanted free trade in
him—" Oh, that is not the matter which concerns corn, and they. sought free trade in this prime
you; go and oppose the Anti-Corn-law League."---- necessary of life, 'not only for its own sake, but be-
(Laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear.") Name any i cause it would lead to the abolition of all monopolies.
other class treated in that way but farmers. Did it i They wanted to bring corn down to its natural price
happen with any other portion of the commu- '
! —to that price which nature, and nature's God, in-
nity that they could not seek any, arrangement tended it should be, and then they would be satisfied.
of a business nature without having an Act They did not believe that- a free trade in corn could
of Parliament constantly thrown in their teeth?. He injure the farmer; he believed it would beeefit the
had often illustrated this to the farmers in the agri- . tenant-farmer as much as it would any trader or ma-
cultural
districts, and as he found that they compre- i nufacturer in the country. They believed it would
hended and approved of the illustration, he would ' benefit the agricultural labourer, by enlarging the I
now repeat it. He had often said to the farmers, market for his employment, not only front • the ins-
" Your dealings with your landlords are very diffe- provements which the agriculturist would have to
rent from mine with the lineadrapers, my cos- ' adopt, but also from the general rise in the prosperity
tomers. I will tell you how the linendraper and I of the neighbouring towns, which would give
manage our business. Ares goods are di s- to the young peasant a chance of choosing
posed of to the draper at certain prices. Imtweet, labour in the iLids and 14bour h, the towns..
My traveller, at the end of six mouths, goes They believed it would not injure the landowners,

Mr. COBDEN said that, after the narrative which
their friend had given them of the past pro-
ceedings of himself and others in the
House of Commons, in connexion with this great
question, he was sure it would be as acceptable to
this meeting as it would be pleasant to his own feel-
ings, if he expressed their gratitude to him for the
manful support which for the last six years, in spite
of all sinister influences, he had given to the cause
of the League.—(Cheers.) He had told them that
the progress which he had made in the House had
been measured by the progress of their agitation
out of doors ; and really, when he remarked what
the Anti-Ciarn-law League was six months ago, and
when he considered the progress which that move-
ment had made in this country since that time, he
could not help thinking that it afforded evert encou-
ragement to them to proceed.—(Cheers.) Six years
ago. all the members of the Anti-Corn-law League
might have been put into one of the stage-boxes.—
(Hear, hear.) Year after year they had seen the
progress of this movement, not merely in _Manchester,
but in every provincial town, until they found them-
selves landed in the midst of this mighty metropolis,
where they had been holding meetings for the last
six months, almost weekly, in that vast theatre,
which seemed still to excite unabated interest. If
this were not a proof of the wivance of free-trade
principles, he knew not where to go for one. Their
friend Mr. Villiers had referred to the arguments
used in the Houses of Parliament in opposition to
their claims. Now, he was not so jealous of any as-
sertions made in Parliament as of one which had
been made on the previous night by his Grace of
Richmond. He was now continually repeating in
the House of Lords that the tenantry of this
country rose as one man to oppose the League. He
had heard the same 'thing from the squires in the
House of Commons so often that he confessed that,
of itself, it would, if he had known nothing of the
subject, have made him rather suspect the assertion.
—(Laughter.) It very much reminded him of the
schoolboy whistling on his way through the church
yard,