The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-03 00:00:00

,:sfits

LONDON:
WEDNESDAY MORNING, AUGUST 3, 1842.

Our paper of yesterday recorded tho last meeting of
the Anti-Corn-law Conference ; and we cannot witness
its separation, warmly as we welcomed its assembling,
without saying one word of its conduct. It has, we own,
rather disappointed us. We expected from it, as we
think it once promised, an organized plan to resist the
Bread-tax. The members had proclaimed that tax to be
iniquitous ; they had shown, with an overwhelming
force of facts and arguments, that it is ruinous ; and
we anticipated that they would have followed their prin-
ciples and facts out to a just conclusion, and refused
obedience to such a law. We believe that they might
have evaded or overturned it, but they had no heart for
such work. They knew that they would gain no support
for measures which took the hue of disobedience, and,
when they had said their say, their task was at an end.

We do not blame their caution ; it is evident that the
Conference is not well supported in the country. It
has not spread its roots far and wide through the land.
We see in the provincial papers that employers of labour
are bent on reiucing wages. The tarn-out of the col-
liers, " caused by such a general reduction, is one
example, but it is by no means the only one. The
middle classes, it is_ plain, prefer making common cause
with the landed aristocracy to promoting the welfare
of the people. Instead, therefore, of making a vigorous
and united effort to procure the repeal of the Corn-laws,
they are struggling to save their fortunes at the expense
of the working classes. Such being unhappily the views
and conduct of the middle classes in the manufacturing
districts, it is plain that the Conference would have
found no sufficient support in carrying out the vigorous
measure it once hinted at, and it prudently confined itself

to explaining to the public and to the Parliament the pre-
sent condition of the manufacturing districts. We re-
peat that we do ni)t blame the Conference, but, never-
theless, we are disappointed at the meaningless results
of much expense and trouble.
The members of the Conference are not singular in
being apprehensive of bold and vigorous measures. There
are other classes who have been buffetted, deceived, and
insulted, and yet, fJr a reason somewhat similar to the
fear of the half ruined manufacturer, they bear such con-

duct- with patience. We all remember the Duke of Ricu-
MOND'S threat against Sir R. PEEL. Sir ROBERT has abated
the agriculturiSt's protection ; he has allowed corn to be
ground in bond; which, in principle, annihilates it ; and
the proud Dukes and Squires, even though prices are
falling, have scarcely murmured their disapprobation,
much less turned out their Premier. He has run counter
to their expectations on the question of education, and
still he is as quietly obeyed and followed as if he had never
deceived a hope. The landowners, like the middle classes,
dread any thing like agitation or commotion, and they
submit to be gulled and snubbed by a clever official man
rather than run the smallest risk of endangering the
Government. Like travellers in the Alps, they quiet
all their emotions, and almost suppress their breath, lest
they bring on themselves the avalanche of revolution.
They are mean and tame, because they know that the
system they are intent on supporting is no true thing.

" The sales of cotton," says the Liverpool Times of
yesterday, confirming the accounts of revived trade
which we have already borrowed from the Manchester
Guardian and the Leeds Mercury—" the sales of cotton
last week were very great, and the improved feeling
amongst the commercial classes still continues." The
weather is remarkably fine; all the accounts from the
country speak favourably of the harvest; and we would
fain hope, therefore, that the protracted suffering of the
community has reached its extreme point. Amendment
is about to commence with the bountiful harvest, and
plenty— the great source of gladness—which has latterly
been denied to us, though not by Providence, is again
to lessen the distress of the people.
We give no credit for this to Sir R. PEEL. He has
not bestowed sunshine and fertility on the land. We
owe him nothing for the harvest, be its amount what it
may ; we are only indebted to him for a law which has
lessened that plenty, the approach of which lightens up
the countenance of the people. Till the year 1842 the
curse of inflicting dearth and starvation belonged to
other law-makers; now, it belongs exclusively to him, and
will cling to him to reatote posterity. But for his law
the food at our command might at this moment be
increased to the extent of 1,500,000 quarters ; and but
for him organising and leading the monopolists on to
victory, it is impossible to tell to what extent abundance
would now be the lot of our yet starving people. To
him we are indebted for that stagnation of trade, which
was caused by his uncalled for plan of revising the
whole tariff. In February the nation was in distress,
and he sharpened its agonies by stopping trade, in order
apparently to make the little relief he was ultimately
to give more sensible. For the improvement which we
hope is coming, the nation is, we repeat, in no wise
indebted to the Parliament or to him, who guides its
decision.

Except the inhabitants of the United States, there

never was perhaps a people more intent on promoting
their own welfare than the English. The go-ahead

principle is almost as active here as .on the other side
of the Atlantic. From the Prime Minister himself to
the humblest agricultural labourer, there is a strong
desire to improve the condition of the individual. To
attain this end there is a universal struggle. The enter-
prise to which it gives rise is boundless, the energy un-