The Sun.
London, England, 1842-12-02 00:00:00

der a free tradesgklimelandlord who has capital to lay
out on his land, or who could wait the transition state,
and could afford to let his land to a skilful capitalist
for nineteen or twenty years, to improve it, would be
no loser. Under a free trade, the value of such land
would increase rather than diminish. But how ?
Not merely by leaving the land, and going to Paris
or Italy, or remaining in London, haunting the scenes
which the aristocracy have been exhibited as frequent-
ing, and leaving his lands in the hands of voracious
agents. The process would be by acting like a man of
business, improving his property, and adapting
all the ameliorations that modern science can af-
ford, to produce the greatest quantity at the least
expense. It has been demonstrably proved that the
land of England is capable of producing double its
present quantity, if it was cultivated as some parts of
Scotland are now ; and where then would be the loss
to the landowner ?' Do you think it would be more
unworthy in him if, instead of being known at Crock-
ford's, Newmarket, and,Doncaster, or in the saloons
of the London Opera, he took his estates into his own
management, and assisted his farmers by adding his
superior intelligence to their less mental cultivation,
to aid them in the breeding of cattle, to look abroad
for stock to improve the English breeds, to go to the
sea-ports, and see if he cannot purchase a cargo of fo-
reign manure to divide among his farmers, instead of
leaving them to purchase it at a dear rate, by retail,
or by purchasing cargoes of seeds to enable them to
sow their land at a less cost ? Are these occupations
that would be less worthy in the landlord than riding
with a harlequin's jacket at the races, or exposing him-
self to the censures of the press for still more shame-
less proceedings in the vicious haunts of the metropo
lis ? Is there no economy that the landlord might ap-
ply in the management of his property—no lawyers,
with red tape, that might be dispensed with? Why should
the owner of acres be above letting them to tenants
himself, and being a party to an honourable transac-
tion between himself and his tenants ? Why should
he be above being a party to the receipt of his money
rents, the man who can soil his palm by receiving
the gains of the gaming-table or the winnings of the
turf? Why should not the landlord, like the manu-
facturer, be acquainted with every man on his estate,
and know whether they were proper characters and
worthy of his patronage ? See how the manufac-
turers in the neighbourhood of Manchester, the much-
maligned cotton-lords, do their business—men worth
150,0001.,000/., invested in bricks, mortar,. and machinery.
The Manchester man is on 'Change every Tuesday,
from twelve to one, when business to the amount of
five or ten thousand pounds is transacted with a nod of
the head, or a monosyllable. He goes to Liverpaol the.
next day, to buy cotton. He examines the staple, and
looks to the quality ; he brings away the invoice in his
pocket, and pays the money himself.—(Hear.) He
goes home, and do you think he goes a fox-hunting ?
He daily superintends the process of cotton spinning
and weaving. He has no lawyer with red tape to tell
him when a spindle is out of place, or he wants a
new loom. He knows where every strap and wheel
about his premises should be ; and if they are out of
order, he himself directs them to be properly adjusted.
And what does he do with his son ? 1)o you think
his son is sent to the Continent, to come beet: preco-
cious in the worst vices to be picked up there ? No ;
his son rises at the ring of the factory-bell ; is in the
factory at six in the morning; sees every man at his
post; and knows every one by sight and name. This is
the discipline of the factory-lord. How does the land-
lord, who has 150,0001. vested in his estate, which
consists of green fields—how does he manage his busi-
ness ? I should rather say, how does he mismanage
it ? He places his affairs in the hands, first of a land-
steward, and then of a law-steward ; and if the one
does not fleece him enough, then the other will finish
him off.—(Laughter and cheers.) If a new barn be
wanted on my Lord's estate, or a gate be off its
hinges, or a fence be broken down, or a homestead
out of repair, or a fold-yard want a wall or a pump,
the land-steward must be applied to, for lay Lord
must not be troubled; he is off to the opera with my
Lady, and his thoughts are filled with the last skip of
Taglioni.—(Laughter and cheers.) Does my Lord
let his farm as the cotton lord buys his cotton ?
Not he. He will not even condescend to know the
names of his tenants. The law-steward must travel
probably 50 miles, carrying a clerk with him, to carry
his papers and red tapes. He takes up his quarters at
the nearest town, where there is a good inn, and the
quality of the wine is very good. There he waits a day or
two, to see the applicants for the farm. He receives the
bidders, and may please himself whether he lets it to the
best man or the worst. His Lordship is above inquir-
ing into such matters. The farms are let, and the rent-
day comes again. The law-steward attends at the
hotel, and notice is given to the tenantry, that dinner
and punch will be prepared for such as are punctual.
We have heard grave censure on the smaller manu-
facturers, who pay their workmen at public-Iraises.
You have no idea with what holy horror the land-
lords—sweet innocents ! in the House of Commons
talk of the payment of workpeople at public-houses.
The real cotton-lord, a man of wealth and capital,
would feel disgraced by allowing his wages to be paid
at a public-house. Yet the landlord's rents are com-
monly paid there. - This is the rule—l do not say
there are no exceptions. The rents of the landlords
are paid in taverns, and it ends generally in a scene of
debauchery. Here you have the contrast between a
man of property, subjected to the wholesome breeze of
competition ; and the other, who has property, but
under the narcotic influence of protection. Is there
no good margin to turn in ? By getting free trade
in grain, landowners will be most strongly incited to
attend to their own affairs. They will take their
business into their own hands. (I cannot expect
that the lawyers will be in love with the League
after this.) Thus the landlords will be enabled to
compete with foreigners, as the manufacturel:s now
do. Not only will he compete successfully, but we
intend him great benefit by the process. We will
make him what every man must become, a man of
business. By giving him occupation, we shall render
him a more useful member of society, and entitle him
to self-respect, and the respect of his fellow-country-
men. I have now stated the case of that portion of
the aristocracy who are opposed to us. It is neces-
sary to understand this. We have heard talk of such
absurdities as that the Government intend to prose-
cute the Leaguers. After what I have told you of
the nature of our situation, you will see how absurd
is the report. All that I have told you is well-known
to Sir Robert Peel and the influential heads of Go-
vernment. They know that the Executive is placed
between two fires—the fire of the League, and the fire
of the mortgaged landowners. Do you not think
that, in this country, where there is some rem-
nant of freedom, that we have as good a right to
exist as an Anti-Corn-law League, as our opponents
have to exist as a Pro-Corn-law League ? This
is not for Attorney-Generals, but for public opinion
to decide. Therefore am I come here to-night, to ask
you to say, in this most influential town of Sheffield,
where, I may add, without flattery, that all classes
have a reputation for intelligence and order which has
been justified of late; and I ask you to throw your
moral influence into the scale of free trade against
monopoly.—(Loud cheers.) I want the moral weight
of your intelligence to support us in the House of
Commons, in the coming session. We can meet no
opponent out of the House— we can get up no con-
alone we now
opponents.troversa-. chaiso
Is, as
ey
offalcl so fl, ,
ons because we want
find men who dare, in the face of the world, to get up
and defend the bread-tax. If you want to know how
dbeerssteoeodn out of
edeoros;
r.
most effectually to put do
you can enable the huml)lestwirtildtihviedidiaelfeinndtehrastolptuhaset
ohanv
let
Let it be understood, when one of Mr. Villiers' party
tshasttett yquouest ies tehnol yr out tog nit
gets up to denounce this system, that he is armed
with the convictions, and, I may say, the holier pas-
sions of our countrymen. Let him who dare uphold
the system, speak under the withering consciousness
that he is frowned upon by the intelligence and moral
feeling of his countrymen and women. With this
view, let it be seen that you will no longer be content
with the passive endurance of this enormity. Look
at the state of your borough. I have heard that the
oldest inhabitant never knew it in such a state as it is
at present. lam told your prospects are worse than
ever before. Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, is there
no duty incumbent upon you under such circum-
stances ? If I may be allowed to leave one word of
exhortation with you before I go, I would say—
Throw away all party differences, and come to the
rescue of your poorer countrymen.—(Cheers.)
Roneour R. lt. MOORE, Esq.,'said,—The landlords
were leagued together to keep up the price of bread, to
keep down trade, and literally to root out the manu-
facturing towns. Their league was permanently
sitting in London ; it was a powerful league ; it could
spend five or ten thousand pounds to secure a single
election, knowing that every vote gained helps to keep
rLe
most
(Loud t
down your town of Sheffield. It came not before the
public, for it had no public truth to teach.—(Cheers.)
It held no tea-parties, knowing that the public could
not bear its falsehoods and its trash.—(Cheers.) Now
and then, at some meagre agricultural dinner to some
special tenantry, or some degraded county constitu-
ency, it put out its sophistries to perpetuate delusion.
The farmers were nominally. independent, but, in
the poor dumb drudges of their landlords.—
cheers.) This league of landlords numbered
at
thirty thousand persons, and was combined
against the vital interests of this town.—(Hear, hear.)
The Anti-Corn-law League strove for the preserva-
vation of the town ; it would restore to prosperity the
little masters, and light the fires again in cold forges;
it would restore the scissor trade, the edge .tool trade,
the cross :saw and the machine-saw trade ; in short, it
would restore Sheffield to prosperity.—(Cheers.)
All Sheffield should have been one great League, not
to war against any interest of the country, bUt to de-
fend their own, and defeat the efforts that were made
for their ruin. The Pro-Corn-law League taxed itself
to secure the power of making the laws, by which it
taxed the people to support its own idle scions. Lee-
- urers would be sent throughout the country to talk