The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-19 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, JUNE 19, 1845.1'

GREAT MEETING
OF THE
ANTI-CORN-LAW

With more luck than I had, he obtained his Committee,
And no doubt, when " the secrets of the prison-house" are
revealed at the close of the session, that they e bold be able to
show, from the mouths of the most intelligent farmers in the
country, that there was one harden which they considered
greater than all local taxes, highway-rate, county-rate, or even
poor-rate, and that was—the excessive burdens of the gamepre-
serves. Well, then, we had our friend Ward's motion, by way
of sweeping the ground clean for the great annual motion
of Mr. Vilhers. He proposed that they should give a Com-
mittee to inquire into those special burdens, and if there
were such to compensate, and have done with them. They
said, No inquiry. You have in London an old trick called,
" a dodge," which is sometimes practised in the streets on
the credulous and philanthropical.—( A laugh.) One of
those artful dodgers walks about the streets as a mendicant,
with his arm in a bandage—now, he has a special burden.
One of the visiting officers comes to him and says—let me
undo the bandage, but finds the artful dodger very loth to
comply. Well, now that is the case with our landowners.—
(" Hear," and great cheering.) They have been going about,
exciting the benevolent feelings of the community, alleging
that they labour under some serious disadvantages—some
great and heavy burdens—and when we come forward to relieve
them of the heavy burdens, like those impostors in the streets.
they take to their heels and run away.—( Loud cheers.) Bet
I must admit that we have not done so much for the cause as
has been voluntarily done by our opponents. On the grease
debate—(Laughter)—a motion was brought forward fur the
relief of local burdens. What do you think one of these local
burdens was ? That in a maritime country, where ships were
wrecked and accidents occurred, dead bodies were often washed
on shore, and the inquests upon them was one of the local
burdens on the country. Such is the argument of the great
landed interest. Then came the annual debate, brought for-
ward by my friend Mr. Villiers, who introduced it with his
accustomed talents and energy. Now we heard rumours in the
House. These things are always known—they are con-
cocted in the clubs—so we always know what is the
dodge in the House. There were, on this occasion, rumours
in the House that they did not intend to have any debate—no
speeches on the other side—the protectionists were determined
upon being silent; and I believe, if Mr. Villiers had not
alluded to three of the county members, who were then forced
to talk, not one of them would have opened his mouth in that
debate. But, however, three or four of them spoke, and the
most significant part of their speeches was, as the Irishman
would say, what they did not say.—(Laughter.) They did
not say one word about the farmers having an interest in the
corn-laws. What a change ! Three or four years ago, to my
own knowledge, they talked of nothing but the farmers,
and how they came there forthe interest of the tenant-farmers.
I am standing between two most extensive tenant-farmers,
Messrs. Latimer and Houghton, who would prefer no corn-law.
Nothing is now talked of in the Home but special burdens.
But the most significant part of the discussion I have referred
to, was the speeches of the leading men on both sides of the
House. By Sir R. Peel and Sir J. Graham on the one side,
and by Lord John Russell on the other. I was very anxious
to hear what Sir James Graham would say. He spoke on
Lord John Russell's motion a few nights before, and
in the most gratuitous mariner clearly showed, by
undoubted statistical returns, the moral, social, and
physical evils which resulted from a scarcity of food,
and that the country was most tranquil when food was cheap.
—( Hear, hear.) He showed by these returns that disease,
mortality, puperism, and crime were identified with scarcity et
food, and vice versa. Mr. Villiers followed, and with that
promptitude for which he has no rival in the House, applied
the admissions of the Right Hon. Baronet to the enforcement
of his free-trade doctrines. I thought Sir J. Graham would,
in the corn law debate, retract the opinions he had uttered ;
but, se far from doing so, he confirmed them, and reiterated
all he said before. Sir R. Peel followed, and, though he has
been going at a rather quick pace lately—(Cries of "Punch").
I hear somebody calling out Punch ; well, he is admirable
authority—an admirable critic and commentator is Punch—
( Cheers)—he is never wrong—Punch is infallibly right.—
(Loud cheers.) He showed us a few days ago how Peel was
going fast ahead of Lord John. Well, on this occasion,
his fast travelling seemed to have quickened. I
have contrasted Sir Robert Peel's speech on this
occasion with that which he delivered last year,
and I find how much he has advanced. Then he said every-
thing to conciliate these above him, below him, and on the
sa.ne bench, and everything that could be done was done to
insult free traders ; but now, how does he treat his former
friends ?—(Hear, hear.) He tells then that the principles of
free-trade are the true ones, and that he intends to carry them
out gradually and cautiously, but that still they must be car-
ried out. Lard John Russ-11 wag a eh us, though qualifying
his vote with a wish for a fixed duty, but next year I think this
little inconsisteney tall have disappeared, and he will be as
great a free-trader as any or us.—( Hear, bear.) He admitted
that the tax in corn was the most objectionable of all taxes.
Well, though the argument was all in favour of us, the vote
was against us. But this state of things cannot always last.
Public opinion must tell even upon protectionists, and if moral
force is to have any weight at all on the Legislature of this
country, the votes on the corn-laws must he soon reversed.
( Hear, hear.) Our principles are acknowledged to be right,
and what an argument are they establishing for the advocates
of force—what a dangerous precedent are they establishing—it
was for this the League met, discussed, petitioned, and legally
and peacefully agitated, for six or seven years. The country
was convinced that the corn-laws were bad—bublic opinion was
against them, but they would not be repealed until ten or
twenty thousand starving men assembled in Whitehall and
menaced the persons of the Legislature unless they abolished
the law, and then, and not till then, would it be abolished.—
( Hear.) The whole thing is, in fact, a question of time, and
the question narrows itself into the little word " when." The
Times, in an able argument, said this was the sole point to
which they would direct their arguments—to show the Tilley of
an immediate repeal. I have no objection to ace-pt the
challenge, and in doing so I trust you will bear with me whilst
I am detailing some heavy and uninteresting facts. Whilst I
am laying the foundation stone, those behind me will furnish the
Corinthian capitals and the other architectural beauties. It is
one of the peculiarities of this audience that they listen with the
same attention and in the same numbers as people in other
countries behold amusements—as the Spanish witness a brutish
fight, or the Romans used to witness a brutal one ; that the
audience here are as attentive whilst the simple dry truths of
political economy are being laid down, as other assemblies to
mere pastime.—(Cheers.) There are other ways of dealing
with this question, as Sir R. Peel would say ; first, by im-
posing a duty per quarter, to diminish Is. every year
until it was abolished altogether; secondly, by de-
ferring the repeal until it suits your party,
or until circumstances compel you ; and thirdly, at
once and for ever to abolish the corn-laws, which is
very plain. The Government acknowledged the principles,
but strove to stave off the debates, for if they controverted
principles so generally known, they would be hooted and
laughed at, at the corners of the streets. All acknowledged
the injustice of the corn-laws, but the protectionists will strive
to keep them up, until the land is desolated by another famine
such as occurred in 1840, when they will he swept away. But
should statesmen wait for such a crisis? No, they should not
wait for the evil day.—(Hear, hear.) Grandmamma, in an
article this morning, says, if there were no corn-laws, farmers
could not live, even if they paid no rents.—(Laughter.) A
sort of slip-slop twaddle, meant as an answer to the
able article in yesterday's Times. I appeal to
ray friends, Messrs. Latimer and Houghton, whe-
ther the farmers would not prefer the abolition of
these laws at once, to being held op by the tenter-hooks of
suspense.—(Hear, hear.) Party monopolists hold up this
raw head and bloody bones of reduced prices, whilst the
Pi ime Minister, whom they wish at the same time to sup-
port, denounces the principles by which these laws are main-
tained. Now, let us look to the second mode, which is by
enacting a fixed duty of Bs., or any other sum you please,
and allowing Is. to pass off every year. What would be
the effect ot this law upon the farmers? If we pass this fixed
duty of Bs., the farmer will be told by the land agent, or very
possibly by the landlord himself, Well, we have passed this
duty of Be., but you know you have been only protected to
the amount of 6s. or 7s. against the corn imported into
this country. And now what is the effect of this ! We need
not talk of continuing your leases, we need not speak
of draining, or of subsoil ploughing, or of clearing away your
hedge-rows, :for wheat is as high as this law can make it."
The conelusion is that nothing is done, but all must wait and
the farmer goes on as bofore, till the next rent-day brings the
agent and himself again together. " Ha ! farmer Hobson,
the new corn-law does not seem to make much change with
you. The wheat is much the same," and again nothing is
done. The fanner goes on exerting himself to pay his rent
but what goes on abroad in the meantime ? The foreigner is
told that as soon :le the duty comes down to 2s. or 3'., when the
doors are opened far the admission of grain into England, and
the farmer here cannot look to artificial aid to keep up the
with this low duty, in pours the foreign
price of corn ; then,
corn into this country, swamping the farmers, and so it goes on,
until the month ot !flay or June creates a counter abundance.
—(Cheers.) But we come now to our principle of total and
immediate repeal.—(Great.cheering. ) Now, what is our an-
swer to the word " when ?" We say "now."—(lmmense
cheering.) The landlords may say that this will create a panic,
and in order that that argument may not wear out, set their
newspaper organs to work to frighten the farmer and keep it
alive. What is there to be afraid of in the total and imme-
diate repeal of the corn-laws? We are told that there is a
vast deal of corn lying abroad, ready to be poured into this
market if the corn-laws should be repealed. That argument
is so well dealt with in the Tames of 3 esterday, that I shall
read, if you will allow me, an extract from its columns.
" Count up every quarter of corn in every one of earth's
richest granaries; track all her winding shores, penetrate
every creek, and every stream ; measure every dawned delta
and every sheltered valley, the natural fertility of the plains
and the artificial productiveness of the hills; take the sum of
all the warehouses, all the heaps, and all the standing crops ;
and we entertain no doubt whatever that reasonable and cso!id
men will be astonished above measure at the universal ' naked-
ness of the land.' The Baltic and the Euxine, the Gulf of
Genoa, the St. Lawrence, the Mississippi, and even the rivers
that flow under our feet, are names of terror to some minds, as
if they flowed with corn. But rivers of corn are as pure and
impossible a fiction as rivers of gold. Once you begin to in-
vestigate, to measure, and to count, you find the most formida-
ble accumulations dwindle into a few months or a few weeks'
sustenance for such living and growing multitudes as London,
Manchester, or Glasgow. There is not too much corn
on earth, nor will there ever be till the saddest and
awfullest words that ever were spoken are finally
unsaid, which they never will be in this mortal world."
Now this is painting stern truths in all the charms of beautiful
and poetic language.—(Cheers.) I look to ages of experience
and I ask how have we been situated, when there has been a
smaller demand for corn ? In the years 1839, 1840, and 1841,
during all this period the average price of corn was 675. a
quarter. We ransacked the world for corn-1n those
years we swept nearly the face of the earth, driving
the corn of all nations into our markets ; and I
have here a list of the places from which we received
corn during that period. We have grain from Russia
and from Sweden, from Norway, Denmark, Prussia, Ham-
burgh, France, Germany, Portugal, Spain, the lonian Islands,
, Gibraltar, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers, the Cape of Good Hope,
' Australia, Canada, the United States, Chili, and Peru.
Every region on the face of the globe—Europe, Asia, and
America, and even Australia, were searched for food.
And how much of corn did we receive from those
countries when the price was 675. a quarter ?—(Hear, hear. )
In the year 1839 wheat, including flour, amounted to 2,875,605
quarters, or about one-eighth of the annual consumption of
wheat in this country. In 1840, when the Government had
given one year's stimulus to this import trade, 'he amount of
wheat sent into England was 2,432.765 quarters. In 1841
the import was 2,783,602 quarters. and the total amount dur-
ing those three years was 8,091,972, or above an average of
2,700,000 quarters i er annum, and this when corn was at 675.
—( Hear, hear.) This corn was kept back by our merchants
in England until the prices should rise to between 70s. and
80s., and when it could be imported from abroad at ls. duty.
sass, immediate
repeal
therefore, during those years a total and mmediate
repeal of the corn-laws, and you saw the result in the state of
our markets. If you pass an Act now for the total and imme-
diate repeal of the corn-laws, you will find yourself. in the very
same position that you were in during that period—(Cheers)
—for now corn is only 465., and not bis. as then. And
therefore, I say, where is the corn to come morn now, if we
were not inundated with it in that dear scason ( Cheers.)
No, there is no such thing as a store of corn in this world—
there is no such thing as a provision made for contingencies
that might be expected to arise during certain periods, and
there is no ground f a the idea that the grain produced would
be diminished by the rep. ai of the corn-laws.—( Cheers. )
There was no supply therehre except such as might be ex-
peated from the regular market, and if the repeal of the corn -
laws laws were carried out to-morrow there would be literally not

Sufficient to meet the demand that might arise in consequence. •
But our opponents wish to produce an unnatural
price in the market by withholding and delaying this justice
to the farmer. They say, " wait till Sir Robert Peel is com-
pelled by the cry of eistress to repeal the corn• laws, because
you cannot et:st w raout some protection." These opinions
they try to spread, even to the Ukraine, and to every country
where their trash may be disseminated. Now, I have referred
to this subject only as it injures the farmer, but is there not
another class whose interests are affected ? Is this law not
most injurious and destructive to the great body of the people ?
This movement would not have taken place—we should not
have been able to originate au associatien composed of a vast
proportion of intelligence in the population of this country, if
this had been a mere question of political economy. It is be-
cause the question respects the food of all—it is not because it is
a farmer's or a landlord's question. I speak not in their names,
but I stand hese in the name of the great body of the people,
and if I show that the law is injurious, if I show that a large
majority of the people are unfairly and unjustly treated, then I
think I am fairly entitled to ask for the total and immediate
repeal of the law.—( Great cheering.) Who ever said that
this law was passed for the benefit of the great body of the
people? No one. We have heard it said, indeed,
and it has been attempted to be argued, that it is
a sort of compensation to the landlord for some peculiar bur-
den% to which he is liable, but we have fount out that this is
an imposture.—( Laughter and cheers. ) We must send the
Mentlicity Society's officers after them.—( Renewed laughter
and cheers.) It was rather hard to maintain an injurious law
for the benefit of the farmers, who were, after all but 250,000
out of the 27030,000 who form the population of these islands.
—( Cheers.) Yes, that is the proportion which the favoured
bears to the injured class.—(Great cheering. 1 But who ever
heard it urged that it was for the benefit of the people
that the law had been passed? It never ought to have been
passed, and those who did so ought to hide for very shame
their faces, that now we are compelled to demand the repeal of
it.—( Great cheering.) I say, if it was not passed for the be-
nefit of the people, why on earth should they not at once repeal
it without setting up some other interest? Sir Robert Peel
was very fond of talking of the great and important interests
which had grown up under this law.—( Great laughter.) I
plead for greater and more important interests. which are now
crushed to the earth by the pressure of this law—( Immense
cheering)—and if they want proof of this, why I bring their
own Home Secretary with his prison reports and his statistical
tables, and I put him into the witness-box, to show what the
law has done for that class which is the most numerous in
this land.—(Cheers.) I apply for the total and immediate
repeal of the corn-laws, on the ground of expediency, and be-
cause it could now be better effected than at another time. I
apply for it on the ground of justice, because if the law be a
bad one, it should be at once annulled.—( Cheers) And what
will be the effect on the great body of the people, when the
time comes which Government contemplates—for they are
going to repeal the law in a season of distress? And such a
season may come—aye, three weeks of showery weather, when
wheat is in its bloom, will repeal this corn-law ?
Bat how? We have the experience of 1839, 1840,
and 1841, and are the people of this country to
be subjected to another such infliction before this law is re-
pealed ? What provision is made for such a calamity ? This is
an important consideration at this moment. Divine Providence
may repeal the corn-laws by a bad harvest, but at present He
mitigates by his bounty the rigour of the landlord's corn-law.
—(Cheers.) Well, supposing a reverse to take place, as
within the last six years—convulsions such as the youngest
person here has seen during some part of his life—supposing
such to occur again, what provision is made to meet it? None.
I have told you how much corn could be got in 1839, after the
scanty harvest of 1838; and such would not be your supply
now. The maritime cities of the Atlantic are increasing in
importance, and consuming more and more corn, and we give
them no inducement to spread themselves abroad into the in-
terior, and therefore they are more and more in a condition to
consume corn greater than their increase.—(Hear.) I heard
in the House of Commons the other evening, Mr. Mitchell
make a very peculiar speech on this subject—a speech which
rivetted the attention of the House, as all speeches do, when a
man speaks only of what he well understands.—( ;ieoud cheers.)
11r. Mitchell exposed the bankrupt condition of this country
so far as corn went. Where, in the event of a bad harvest,
would Great Britain be supplied from ? Government gave no
answer to the question. It ought, however, to be thrust upon
them, and they would not have nerve enough to bear the re-
sponsibility, if this were continually done.—( Cheers.) Then,
let us look to the condition of the middle classes. Tine, the
poor feel the first effects, but the middle classes are not so well
placed as they, for the former in times of scarcity cannot
starve, but have a rieht to claim support from those above them.
What is done with the capital of the country ? Go to the
House of Commons, and in one of the lobbies there leading to
the Committee-rooms, in one of which I have the mi-fortune
to be engaged, you will find railway speculations extending
over the length and breadth of the land, occupying the atten-
tion of all parties. What effect would a bad harvest have on
this? Men have expended their thousands and hundreds of
thousands fur railway shares. and have peed the r subscript one
for them. How would a had harvest affect them? It is all

plain sailing now. Everything is sunshine They get shares
to-day, sell them to-morrow, and reap for their labour 2O per
cent.—(Laughter.) But these shares dill he held by some
one at last, and if we have a failing harvest, what is to be done
then? I would recommend every spec,lator in railway cares
to keep a sharp look-out on the barometer.—( Laughter.) He
should take in two papers, a railway piper and the
Mark-lane Express—(Cheurs and laiwhter)—and when he
sees the price of shares then let him look at the price of wheat
in Alark-lane.—( Great laughter.) But if a had harvest
comes, then will be the season to exhibit distress in every sec-
tion of the community. That is the point I want to urge on
the Government, and on every member of it. As a Govern-
mant let us throw on them the responsibility. And now, gen-
tlemen, that is the point, the concluding point, of my case in
favour of the repeal of the corn-laws.—(Cheers. ) As the

lawyers say, gentlemen, that is my case —(Laughter.) Now.,
I want to know why we should not carry the repeal
of the corn-laws row? Merely because those men
cannot make up their minds to say that they have been wrong.
Now, what I want to do, is this—to open the door as wide as
possible for the conversion of our opponents. I wish that I
could burn " Hansard,", and all other books of debate, in order
that they might be allowed to alter their course of policy. But
they are afraid of being taunted with saying something diffe-
rent before from what they should now. But why should they
be ashamed to acknowledge that they had learned ? I hope
that they will learn something by this discussion to-night. I
trust that they may be induced to make a clean breast of it,
and they will never be taunted afterwards.—(Cheers.) Now,
gentlemen, I want to say one word on the important subject
of registration before I sit down. The next registration will
probably decide the fate of the corn-laws—(" Hear, hear,"
and cheers) and, therefore, let every one make it
his business, as much as the ledger or counter.
On the 20th of next month is the day for the counties, and I will
just direct your attention to Buckingham, where there are at
least 1,000, if not 2,000 bad votes. But no one thinks of ob-
jecting to them, because some man is called the Duke of
Buckingham ! Why, if they would only consider this
thing, the Duke of Buckingham is not more formidable in
a Registration Court than any other person here.—( Cheers.)
You are the members of a great body, by the advice of whose
leaders you are guided, and you are aware that that body is in
a position to place you morally, legally, and in a pecuniary
way, far beyond the reach of a hundred and fifty dozen Dukes
of Buckingham.—(Laughter and loud cheering.) Now, in
Surrey we have succeeded ; but let me ask why should they,
in East Surrey, be allowed to return two monopclists at the
next election ?—(Hear, hear.) Then there is the Borough,
and there is Lambeth ; in both those places there is not one in
one hundred of those who are entitled to have a vote whose
names are in the county list, while in the rural districts we
have managed so well that there is not more than one in every
forty whose name has not been registered.—(Hear, hear.) I
say it is the duty of every man who has a right to be on the
list to take care that he is so, and yet there are hundreds who
have a right to be on it who never give themselves the trouble
of thinking about it all.—( Hear, hear.) Now, we have pos-
sessed ourselves of Middlesex, and we will take care of it—

(Cheers)—and there are other places of which we hope to
give an equally agreeable account in good time. But even this
we do not consider doing much ; for, mark you, we have another

. . .
object in view besides the protection awl ti-ie increase of the
registration—we have in view the po,sibility, nay, the cer-
tainty of carrying some of the fighting counties.—(Cheers.)
And why not try to carry out our principles by contesting- a
county where there is a chance of v,uccess, as well as braving a
. .

contest where we are not certain the return will be in our fa-
vour ?—( Hear.) Why should we not have in every parish an
active man or two who would make it his business to bring up
every man to register his vote who was entitled to do so, and
at the election make that man exercise that privilege without
putting the candidate to any expense ?—( Hear, hear.) If

„ s
this were done we could not only carry the places wella.:e
carried heretofore, but we could also contest, at a compara-
tively trifling expense, those counties where we might cal-
_. .

eulate upon a fair chance of success.—( Hear.) On the other
hand, let me ask how' does the monopolist propose to recom-
mend himself so as to call upon the count. to return him at their
expense ?—(Laughter.) In what position does he present
himself as a claimant for the popular .upport? Why, so
far from his having a claim of that sort, when he is returned.
and those who are returned upon the same interest,
very soon begin backbiting each other in the lobbies and com-
mittees, and such places.—( Laughter.) One is accused of
having voted for Peel, and another of having voted against
him ; and thus they begin to fight with each other like so many
village gossips.—( Laughter and cheers. ) I say, then, it is the
duty as well as the interest of every ma❑ to give his attention
to the registration, and see that it is effectively carried out.
If this be only done, steadily and perseveringly, there is not
the least. doubt but we will repeal the corn-lhws within a very
short period, and that, too, in a manner that will set a glorious
example to all future time.—(Loud cheers.) I was going to
say, and I must be pardoned for saying it, that I hardly regret
that this agitation has continued so long. If the repeal of the
corn-laws had been carried in the years 1830, or 1840, or 1841,
so soon after that agitation had begun, then, perhaps it
might be thought that its success had been owing to sudden
and multitudinous clamour ; but the agitation has gone on for
such a length of time steadily increasing., that it is now quite
apparent that we have been teaching the people something more
than merely the necessity of demanding a repeal of the
corn-laws. We have been teaching the farmers to think well
upon what they are about, and to look clearly and steadily at
what is really. their own interest. We have taught the mo-
nopolist that he cannot much longer expect to persevere in his
course; and if we only persevere as we have done, there can-

not be the least doubt that we will, in a very short time,
achieve that which we have been organised to accomplish.
The Hon. Member sat down amidst loud cheers.
Mr. BRIG HT was next introduced to the meeting, and was
received with those demonstrations of applause which
usually greet his appearance at this meeting. He
said—On every occasion of our meeting together in this
theatre, it appears to me that something has occurred during
the interim which supplies us with some new cause for re-
joicing, and that we find some additional reasons for congratu-
lating each other since the previous meeting. Two months
have now elapsed since the last regular meeting was held
here, under the usual forms of Chairman, Secretary,
&c. ; but I cannot help looking back with feelings of
deep gratification at the extraordinary meeting that
was continued to be held in this hall for eighteen days
during that interim—( Cheers.) I think that meeting might
indeed well be called a monster meeting.—( Hear, hear.)
The 120,000 persons who visited the theatre during that time
might be called such with great truth, for it was the largest
and most important of all the free-trade assemblages that has
taken place since the commencement of the agitation of that
question.—( Hear, hear.) During that time we had exhibited
here specimens of the industry and ingenuity of our country-
men engaged in every branch of trade, and the vast variety of
the produce of their skill there exhibited, seemed to me to
make a mute but powerful appeal to the Government of this
country on behalf of the millions by whom those specimens
were contributed.—(Cheers.) We had specimens of the pro-
ducts of free trade, not only of this country, but from foreign
countries. Those whose works they had, met face to face ;
they seemed to shake hands in mutual concordance of principle,
while they looked on at the progress the movement had been
making in this country, and to regard it as a symptom
of the manner in which Englishmen were resolved to
regard that sacred pledge, solemnly taken, not to relax in their
efforts, until all restrictions upon their industry had been re-
moved.—(Cheers.) I need not here enter into any panegyric
on the exertions of those of our countrymen by whose extra-
ordinary sacrifices the late exhibition and the bazaar have been
carried to so successful an issue. In another place, where their
sacrifices and their virtues are not known or appreciated,
have taken care to speak.—( Cheers.) But it may be enough
to say here, simply, that from our hearts we thank them—
(Cheers)--and that we look upon what ,they did upon that oc-