The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-30 00:00:00

regular merchant can venture where the' lottery of
chances is thus made still more hazardous by the law.
It might be supposed that as the accomplishment of the
objects for which the late Corn-law was ostensibly
framed had utterly failed (namely, to secure an equal
and abundant supply independent of foreigners), giving
the framers of that law every credit for sin-
cerity in their good intentions, they would abandon
it entirely; but the reverse is the case and the
bondholdertenow cling to the retension of the name prin-
ciple, although their motives for so doing must now be
viewed as _solely of a selfish character. . They insist
upon being allowed to attempt to supply the inequality
which conessedly exists, between the two articles of
food, and the products of manufacturing industry ; to
do this they have only to take poorer soils into culti-
vation, which is the same.
,thing as using an inferior
medium. And then they turn round and complain of the
continued improvements in machinery, which the ma-
nufacturer makes. So long as the other products of
British industry are thus compelled to be exchanged for
food raised by this inferior 'machinery of production,
instead of being allowed to obtain the largest amount o:
food from the most fertile soils in every quarter of the
world, so long must the inequality of the supply of
food to that of other goods, or the so-called
over-production of machinery and under pro-
duction of agriculture, be felt, and our industrious
classes continue in the present state of distress.
Such a system cannot, in my opinion, be too strongly
reprobated, and the fact of one class in the community—
and that a small one—thus creating such a general de-
rangement of the state of our social body, and causing
the distress which we see around us, is sufficient to
arouse the indignation which is now becoming so gene •
rally expressed. But I think it should not be forgotten
that the power thus injuriously wielded by a certain
class is based upon their having possession of the land.
Now, the property in land is of that kind which has the
least right or title to be made use of for merely selfish
purposes, to the prejudice of the public. The right of
the State Government to a ground rent payable to it as
representing the public by the landholders, and the
way in which the latterhave contrived to get it converted
into a na:serably small annual sum, instead of paying in
proportion to the increased value of their rentals, has
already been sufficiently expressed to the world; but the
claimto a ground rent from the landholders to the State,
can never be extinguished by any such pretended com-
mutation for a fixed sum, and the principle itself dates
from the first institution of property, and we see it re-
cognised in all the States ofEurope. It cannot then, Isay,
be too strongly repeated and urged to the people of this
country, that it is at the hands of that very class who ought
to contribute more than any other to the comfort and well
being of the community—being in fact the farmers of the
soil for the public, and paying a ground-rent to the public
for the use of the same—that it is at the hands of this
class, in whose so-called property the public has such
an undeniable and prior interest, that they (the people) are
doomed to have famine inflicted on them, thus super-
adding insult to injury. But we are told by Sir R. Peel
that the principles of free trade, though undeniably good
in the abstract, cannot be carried out, owing to
existing interests—in other words the landholding mo-
nopoly interest. How far the presumed rights to injure
the public for their own supposed benefit may be carried,
when it has no other foundation than the robber's plea,
that of being the strongest, unless, indeed, a prescrip-
tive right have grown out the practice of it, remains for
the people of this country to determine ; but is it your
part, gentlemen, to arouse them to the facts of the case,
and to show Sir Robert Peel that there is a far larger
interest than any of those who resist the applica-
tion of right principles, namely, the interest of the
people of England, who demand justice at his hands.
It must be matter of much regret to all of us, that
principles thus admitted to be true by the Goverument,
cannot prevail by the mere. force of argument, but that
you should be called upon—by the declaration of the
Minister himself, that he cannot overcome the influence
of existing powerful interests—to have to continue an
appeal to the people on the one hand, and to the fears of
these opposing interests on the other ; yet is there no
alternative left us by the Government, and the progress
we have made, and the justice of our cause, leaves no
doubt of the result in my mind. Although lam well
aware that this Association cannot take up any
agitation of a political character, I shall venture to make
one remark in connexion with politics, particularly as
the subject was lately adverted to in a speech by one of
your members, namely, that it cannot be disguised,
that in all appeals to the people to accomplish some great
national reform, it does become an appeal to their
numbers, determination, and physical as well as moral
force, and that the Reform Bill and Catholic Emancipa-
tion were thus carried. It was a mistaken notion, it
now appears, that the Reform Bill would cause
the appeal to reason and justice in that House to
supersede the necessity of again agitating the
people ; but as all such agitations do place society
on the verge of convulsion and of disruption, and where
the rebellion of the belly may, as Sir James Graham
says, sweep away all the social barriers, if a famine super-
venes in our present distress, before any remedy has been
applied.—l do say, Sir, that I for one should very much
prefer to see the people admitted to the enjoyment of
political rights, and have all these questions discussed by
their representatives in a deliberative' assembly : and,
although I regret that I am aware this *Association can-
not, as a body, join the movement which has been
made in that direction, yet I trust no sentiments
adverse to such a movement will be heard here, and that.
in their individual capacity, we shall find numbers of the
middle class joining to obtain their rights for their
fellow men, and thus giving a pledge of their sympathy
for them, and of their indisposition to see themselves
compelled to resort to these appeals to the people out (if.
doors to force measures of justice from the!Govrninenl-
. Mr. INfooliu rose fiwthe- yurpose;of calling the atten-
tion of the meeting po the effect which .the Corn-111.A
had upon Ireland, whiCh.was solely and purely an agri •
cultural country. If agriculture—meaning thereby far-
mers and labourers—were to derive protection and support
from the protective system of the Corn-laws, then the
farmers and labourers of Ireland ought to be the most
prosperous in the world. It was now some years since
Henry David Inglis made the tour of Ireland, and wrote
an account of his journey. . Speaking of the rate of re-
muneration received by the labourer, that gentleman said
he was quite confident that if the whole yearly earnings
of the country were divided by the whole number of
labourers, the result would give under 6d. a day for each
labourer in Ireland ; in speaking of their habitations, he
said the only difference between the best and the worst
of the mud cabins was, that some were water-tight and
some were not ; airtight he saw none—windowless all
scarce any chimneys ; no such thing as furniture
to be seen, unless a broken stool or two and
an iron pot can be considered furniture. In Lein-
ster, Munster, and the lower part of Connaught,
beds were far from common, and bed-clothes were
not nearly sufficient. He went on to say that the
destitute, infirm, and aged formed a large part of the
population, and that three-fourths of the people died of
destitution. " Their present condition," he said, "is
shosking for humanity to contemplate, and a reproach
to any civilised country." He (Mr. Moore) would now
beg to refer them for a moment to the evidence given
before the Irish Poor-law Commission. From inquiries
made of that Cork:mission it appeared that the wages of
the best labourers of Ireland, in the best parts of
Ireland, and at the most favourable times, were lod. a
day for three days a week, or only sd. a day ; that
gave to the labourer an annual income of 61. 10s. ; th..re
was no source whence his wife or children could earn
a farthing ; and out of that 61. 10s. he would have most
probably to pay a rent of 11. 10s. a year for his cabin.
It was further stated in this book that 3,000,000 night
be taken as the average number of people in Ireland who
would need relief or parish assistance in the winter, and
from the months of May to August. Now that was
from an authority that must be credible. It was not
prepared by an Irishman seeking to gain something
for Ireland ; it was not prepared by a Corn-
law repealer, but it was prepared by an English Poor-
law Commissioner, sent over there to inquire into the
state of the country. 'That was the condition of the
country, and that was the condition of the labouring
population, as protected by the Corn-laws. He now came
to the small farmers, and their condition was little better
than that of the labourers. The small farmer had scarce
a better house, and scarce better provisions, than the
'labourer; he was obliged to sell the whole of his produce
to pay his rent. The Corn-laws did indeed keep up the
price of fubd in their markets, but it gave the whole of
their produce to the landlord. The farms of Ireland
were very small—an acre and a quarter was considered
a good-sized one—and if a man once got such a one, he
would consider himself happy and comfortable, and
settled fur life ; and they were thus minutely subdivided,
As stated by Mr. Cobden in his "England, Ireland, and
America," to meet the desperate competition of a people
who had nothing but the land to resort to for employ-
ment. They had then the labourers in a state of absolute
destitution—for they could'not consider a man earning l Od.
a- day three days a-week in any other condition, and they
had the farmers, as a mass, in constant and unnecessary
destitution. Then the whole of the farming and labouring
population of Ireland were protected in a state of con-
tinued destitution by the Corn-laws.--(Hear.) There
was no amount of money scarcely that could not be ob-
tained for the land. He,(Mr. Moore) had known 1001.
offered for the good-will of a farm of five acres, paid
simply for being allowed to enter and live there ; a rent
of thirty shillings an acre was paid besides. A man had
no outlet there for his family but the land ;
.sons and
daughters must either have land themselves or become
labourers on the land for others ; and as the condition
of the occupier of a small piece of land was a little bit
better than that of the labourer, they preferred having
a little land themselves to becoming the serfs of the serfs
of the landlord. Ireland had no occasion to continue in
that condition ; her sons were active and industrious—
her soil the richest in the world,—(Hear, hear.)
The fact was, that wheat cropping was unfit
for Ireland, that the Corn-laws held out unnatural
inducements to continue wheat cropping, that the land-
lord, keeping out of the country, never turned his at-
tention to agriculture, and that he knew nothing at all
about his land, save that he received so much from it
every year. These were the causes to which Ireland's
ruin was to be traced ; the people would be slow to give
up their present habits, but they must do so before Ire-
land regained her place am,:ng the nations. (Mr.
Moore then read a letterfrem a, practical farmer, to
show what might be obtained from the land, if the pre-
sent system of wheat cropping was abandoned.) That
letter showed that their present system of agricul-
ture, fostered under the Corn-laws, kept the farmer and
labourer in incessant poverty, and proved indisputably
that whilst manufactures advanced in this country, and
whilst the means of being useful extended in every thing,
agriculture had not kept pace with the race of Improve-
went. The people were becoming more and. more im-
poverished ; and those who were connected "with the
land, thought they did all they could if they wrung from'.
the workman upon the land- the whole of the profits he
could.raisefromit. - Non;.; sac wink would be the effects
upon Ireland if the Corn-laws were repealed. Tb
great product that Ireland seemed fitted to prOduce -was