The Sun.
London, England, 1842-09-02 00:00:00

qitt "Atn.

LONDON:

FWD 1Y MORNING, SEPTEMBER 2, 1842.

_....____

It seems, by the complaints in the Manchester
papers, that the Mayor. was absent in London
when the riots began; that Mr. MAUDE, the sti-
pendiary Magistrate, was nut informed of the in-
tention of the in-marching people in time to stop
them ; - and that Sir C. SHAW was not sufficiently
alarmed at the intelligence that they were com-
ing, which he had received, to give an emphatic
warning to the Magistrates. All these were for.-
timate circumstances, and the consequence was
that the people marched into Manchester, turned
out the mill hands, and had their holiday out in,
comparatively speaking, a very peaceable man-
ner. Not that we suppose Mr. NIELD, the Mayor,
a gentleman of great mildness of temper and
suavity of manners, had he been present, would
have taken on himself the awful responsibility of
causing a riot, which would most probably have
ended in bloodshed, by unnecessarily and wantonly .
interfering with the Turn-outs—not that we sup-
pose Mr. MAunE would have departed from his
considerr.te line of conduct, and begun an affray;
by assaulting the leading women of the party--
not that we suppose Sir C. SHAW could, under
any circumstance of zeal and interest, have com-
pletely forgotten those wise principles of forbear-
ance which have generally distinguished the
conduct of the Manchester Magistrates; never-
theless, as some accident might in the first
instance have provoked a collision between one
or all of these Magistrates and the Turn-outs, we
hold it to have been extremely fortunate that
the Mayor was absent, that Mr. MAUDE was
ignorant, and that Sir C. Saw was not bristling
with bayonets and zeal.

The consequence of not interfering with the
people, in the first instance was to place them
palpably in the wrong, and make their cause
appear erroneous to the bulk of the community;
while, had they been interfered with, had a col-
lision, attended with bloodshed, in the first in-
stance, taken place, passion and sympathy
would have enlisted themselves on the side of
the Turn-outs, and what might have been, under
such circumstances, their success aNd the public
disasters, it is impossible to foresee. Suppose
that a Tory Mayor had been on the spot, being
a mill-owner, or connected with mill-owners, and,
dreadfully alarmed fi)r the fate of his own and
his brother anill-owriers' property, had essayed
to stop the march of the Ashton and Staley-bridge
people, and had high words with them, had
caused the Riot Act to be read, had fired an the
people, had killed half-a-dozen of the singing
women in the front—had such been the case,
neither that Mayor nor any of his brother mill-
owners would ever have been forgiven; the
people would have been at once blown into a
flame, and a general rising throughout England
for the Charter might have been the consequence•
We esteem the absence of the Mayor, therefore,
and the non-interference of the Magistrates, in
the first instance, which our Contemporaries re-
gret or blame, to have been most fortunate cir-
cumstances fur Manchester and the empire. It
prevented a Peterloo massacre, and a Bristol con-
flagration.

A secondary consequence of not interfering
with the people was to prevent them forming a
very close union. .An attack would have bound
them together by grief and passion. They would
have been immediately inthaied, they would
have found amongst them eloquent tongues, loud
talk would still further have irritated their
minds, and instead of having a scattered, dis-
pirited, self-convicted mob of non-cohering indi-
viduals to deal with, the Magistrates might have
bad the whole population organised and in-
furiated. Then, instead of quietly dispersing,
they might in their anger have made a wreck of
Manchester, and given to the flames those
wonderful machines which are the just pride of •
the Manchester people themselves and ,the
honour of England. Again, we see reason to
say, that it Was extremely fortunate that the
Magistrates did not zealously interfere with the
Turn-outs in the first instance, for that in our
opinion has tended to suppress the insurrection,
and has saved Manchester front the flames and
England front confusion.

It is we know, by the heated partizan3 of
coercion, who are blind with rabid zeal in favour
of the etnpb of terror as the only means of
governing society, that it was the duty of the
Magistrates to interfere, and to put down the be-
ginning of the turn-out for wages with a strong
hand. Possibly the law does prescribe that as a
ditty. But we know that Corn-laws—laws to
bang men for trifling offences—laws to keep the
Catholics out of the Constitution—laws to.de-
Trade the Dissenters, have all prescribed duties,
performing which inflicted a great injury on so-
ciety, and were much hetterleft unperformed. We
cannot, therefore, adopt the opinion, because the
law prescribed a certain duty at Manchester,
that gcod would necessarily have ensued from

r performing it. We have mentioned some
reasons for forming a contrary opinion, and
we venture to believe, after some consideration,
that it was very fortunate, if such a duty be pre-
scribed by the law, that it was not performed.
I An ounce of mercy and discretion, of kindness
and affection, in such a case, is in our opinion
more worth than a ton of law, and an army of sol-
diers; and we rejoice unfeignedly that the law
was not vigorously acted on in the first instance
at Manchester. It was vigorously acted on at
Kennington-common, and the results are by no
means favourable to the continuance of public
peace in future.

The Corn Returns show that the average price
of wheat, for the week ending the 27th ult., was
555., and the price, we rejoice to say, has since
continued to fall. The returns show that the
price in Lancashire, where it ought to rule high,
is only 475. 9d.; in Cambridgeshire it is only
51s. Bd.; and in Suffolk only 535. 6d. It seems
quite certain now, therefore, that the price of
wheat will be considerably below 50s. before
Christmas.

The recent issue by the Stamp-office, of a cir-
cular relative to levying the Income-tax on the
occupiers of land, in which the tithe rent-charge
finds a conspicuous place, reminds us that this is
the first year since the Tithe Commutation Act
was passed, in which the selling price of corn is
likely to be considerably below the price by which
the rent-charge is fixed. Our readers will
recollect that, by that Act, the average
price of the seven years ending with the
Christmas preceding, determines the rent-
charge into which tithes are commuted every
year. Now, the average price of wheat
for the seven years, 1835-1841, inclusive, was
51s. 6d., or above the present average price.
Hitherto the landowners and the farmers have
been tolerably well able to pay the charge, be-
cause the average price at which it has been
fixed has been less than the price at which they
sold their corn. This year the case will be re-
versed, and it may be doubted ifin many cases the
increased quantity will compensate to the farmers
for the fall in price. Of course it would, if
that had been exclusively determined by our own
produce ; but as the fall in price has been partly
caused by the large importation of foreign
wheat, it will be proportionably greater than
is required by the quantity of our own produce ;
and while the tithe-owner will rejoice at the
cheapness, the landowner and the farmer will
grumble not a little at what they will lose. To
the farmers and the landowners, that cheapness
which Sir ROBERT PEEL has done so much, ac-
cording to his own statements, to promote, will be
felt as a pure evil—to the tithe-owner it wi
be an unmixed good. The cheapness whic

is to compensate all other classes for the burden
of the Income-tax, will only exasperate that
burden for the agriculturists, and soon place
them amongst the most discontented classes in
the kingdom.

When we think of the stern and inexorable
demands of the tax-gatherer on the poor farmers
—at all times much averse from making prompt
payments—and think of those demands in con-

junction with falling prices, and the payment of
a heavy rent charge, we are compelled to pity
the poor farmers. How they will hate and curse
the Tories and Sir R. PEEL when the Income-
tax is demanded of them, and wheat at 405.! Poor
Sir ROBERT too, more wretched than ACTIEON,
who suffered from the wrath of a Goddess, he
has transformed himself, in order to be the leader
of the agriculturists, and he seems now to, be in a
fair way, like ACTiEON, to be worried by his own
dogs. We foresee that we shall have to defend
him from his followers before Christmas,
and we at once begin by declaring that the law
under which the landlords and farmers will suffer
was granted to their demands ; that Sir Ro..
BERT PEEL would have made a more liberal law
if the landed aristocracy would have allowed
him; and that the cheapness which they will as-
cribe to him is far more the consequence of a
bountiful harvest than of his measures.

It was lately stated at a meeting of the artizans
of Manchester, that the different classes of
work men had within a few years spent 3,000,0001.
in their endeavours, by strikes, combinations,
&c., to raise wages. It is now stated, that these
persons have still in their possession, as members
of Provident Societies, Burial Clubs, &c. &c.,
considerable sums, and we read of their recently
withdrawing 1,500/. from a Savings' Bank at
Stockport, and of their giving notice to with-
draw 1,0001. more within a week. We read, too
a number of ludicrous stories of members of dif-
ferent societies, under the influence of persons
who are at once ignorant and mischievous,
having hastily withdrawn their money from the
hands of bankers, with a view of promoting a run
for gold. So far as these circumstances indicate
the existence even now of a considerable degree
of welfare amongst the working classes, they
are extremely satisfactory, and reflect, we think,
much honour on them. That they have any
funds at all, after such expenses as they have
incurred, and after such privations as many of
them have endured for the last three or four

years, demonstrates unanswerably that they are
far, very far, from being that reckless, thoughtless,
improvident set of men their detractors have
pleased to describe them. Of what other class
of labourers, at home or abroad, could such fa-
vourable accounts be given, after four years of
interrupted employment ? They must have made
tolerable good use of the years of prosperity
which they have enjoyed—considering how com-
paratively small at any time are their earnings—
to have saved any thing, and to have applied the
sums they are said to have applied to the im-
practicable purpose of raising wages.
If these circumstances raise these men in our
estimation, they also make them formidable.
If they can undergo so much self-denial to ac-
cumulate funds against all the contingencies of
life—if they can mistakingly waste large sums
for an object which, by their mode of
proceeding, is unattainable, what is to
prevent their accumulating funds, and wisely
applying them to self-improvement and to
the attainment of political rights? In fact
a large and influential portion of them are bend-
ing their energies in that direction, and as their
habits enable them to accomplish much, with
comparatively small means, we may anticipate
for them a great, and not to be hindered, acces-
sion of political power. Their quietness, while
they suffer, and yet silently mature their plans,
is one of the least favourable symptoms we
have yet beheld of the present interruption
of the ordinary business of the community '
coming speedily to an end. We were willing to
hope that such would be the case; we have stu-
diously avoided using any language that might
encourage or provoke the continuance of the'
contest; on the contrary, we have endeavoured
to promote its cessation, though too ignorant of
the views and feelings of the parties 'to presume
to offer advice or admonition to either; but when
we see plans of at least passive resistance grow-
ing to maturity, and see some funds at hand to
carry them out, our hopes that the contest is at
an end are materially abated. Unquestionably
much has been done by the rhodomontade and
threats of the Tory Journals to keep alive fear,
auger, and hatred; and if society should not soon
relapse into peace, it will owe the continuance of
strife to their fire-spouting- articles.
Are d„lv

:eeply regret to learn, that some of the manu-
facturers in the disturbed districts—irritated by the
foul and calumnious obloquy cast upon them by the
Tory Press, and sanctioned by the Government—
manifest a disposition to suffer their mills, furnaces,
and other works to continue to stand idle, notwith-
standing the willingness of the operatives to resume
their employment. They expect to get rid of their
stock of goods on hand at increased prices ; and if we
may credit a well-informed Manchester Correspon-
dent, some of them propose—as manufacturers are de-
nounced as nuisances by the Ministerial organs—to
either throw the distressed poor on the parisher, or
send them back to the farmers in the country, and see
what they, in the plenitude of .their patriarchal
charity, will• do for them. Should any number of
them persevere in such a course, the result would be
most oiwitrous. And yet who that has heard the