The Sun.
London, England, 1842-11-19 00:00:00

JAMES SILK BUCKINGHAM, Esq., commenced by
saying that amid the great variety of scenes which it
had been his lot to visit in every quarter of the globe,
he could call to mind none more magnificent than that
which he saw before him.—(Hear.) The object for
which they were met, the relief of suffering humanity,
the city in which they were assembled, the second
commercial emporium in the globe, the character and
complexion of the individuals composing the meet-
ing, the most respectable and intelligent persons of
the community—these, happily mingled too with
sympathy for the poor, and a desire to relieve their
sufferings, and a wish to dry up their tears, anda deter-
mination to arrest the progress of the evil which was
now overwhelming the land—gave to this meeting a
solemnity, a sanctity, and a holiness, which no temple
upon the earth which ever had existed, or which ever
would exist, let it be built where it might, and be
occupied by whom it might, could excel.—(Loud
cheers.) This question, indeed, was one as sacred
as Christianity itself, since Christianity was proclaimed
to men in order to teach them to love one another, to
have good will towards each other ; and that must
necessarily be hostile to love which kept bread
from the hungry; that must be destructive of
good will which saw the sufferer, and yet held
out no helping hand to his relief.—(Loud cheers.)
He said this was the cause of suffering humanity.—
(Hear.) The great peculiarity of the day in which
we lived was, that all classes, from the lordly pos-
sessor of hundreds of thousands of acres, down to tho
labourer who lived by his daily toil, complained of the
badness of the times.—(Hear.) All said, and it would
be found the universal answer if you appealed to them
upon the subject, that they were worse off now than
they were ever before. There must be a cause for this
universal evil. One cause was this—the population of
the country, continually increasing, had, at length out-
grown the limits necessary to supply them with food.
Imagine a family of ten individuals occupying a
square of a hundred acres, which yields to the whole
of the ten an abundance of food. Imagine an adjoin-
ing estate of the same extent and description, on"
which there is, also a family of ten persons. By and
bye the ten of one family intermarry with the ten
of the other; they knew the geometrical ratio in
which the population increased, that ten times ten be-
came a hundred. Suppose them, however, to have two
offspring each ;.in that case, the land not increasing,
but, the mouths
,to be fed continually augment-
ing, either new processes must be discovered to make
the land yield more food, or the parties themselves
have a diminished allowance of food, or else they must
suffer. This process goes on for years, and the meeting
would readily perceive that the power of multiplica-
tion in the population being greater than the power of
multiflication in the produce of food, they must of
necessity go beyond these two spots, and either bring
new land into Cultivation which had not been culti-
vated before, or they must eat each other.—(Hear,
hear.) Our population had, then, 'arrived at present
at that state. England did not yield more than six-
teen millions of quarters of wheat, which constituted
the chief food of the English population ; and there
were twenty-eight millions of persons in this king-
dom who ought to be able to earn bread in sufficient quan-
tities for themselves and families, and because the
supply from this country was insufficient they must
have it from others or perish. This, then, was one
cause of the present distress.—(Hear, hear.) He
asked them whether legislation which impeded our
trade—whether it arose in the House of Lords, or in
the House of Commons he cared not—was less offensive,
less unjust, or less insulting than if the impediments
had come from other hands?—(Great cheering.) He
held, on the contrary, that it was more so, because the
Legislature, whether the Members held their seats for
ever, as the hereditary branch did, Or sat by virtue of
election, as the other branch did, all acknowledged,
publicly, and on the hustings, that the people were
the legitimate source of all power, and that from the
Queen herself, down to the lowest among them, all ex-
isted only by the sufferance of the majority of the nation?
Mr. JOHN BRIGHT, of Rochdale, next addressed the
meeting, and his appearance was the signal for hearty
and unanimous cheering. He said he might commence
in saying that he had never before seen so magnifi-
cent an assembly as the present.—(Loud cheers)
As a member of the Anti-Corn-law League, it gave
him special pleasure to see that meeting;, but as a
citizen of our common country, he rejoiced far
mere to behold such an assemblyin Liverpool,
because it was so strong an intimation of the
growing feeling upon the subject of free trade—which
:was becoming so intense in every part of the country,
that we could not dispair of entire and very speedy
success.—(Cheers.) At a meeting of the Anti-Corn
Law League, some two or three weeks ago, he felt it
:his duty to make some observations with regard to some
portion (judging from the appearance of the meeting he
should say a very small portion) of the inhabitants of
Liverpool. It was in taking a view of the state of the
representation of this country ; and he alluded to the
extraordinary fact, that Liverpool should return to the
senate of this country men whose principal claim upon
the electors was that they went to support a system
which had crippled trade—to make a little trade—
and, considering the great source of the prosperity of
the borough which they represent, to the serious
loss of property of the citizens. He had had forwarded
to him some extracts from some of the newspapers
in this town, which supported the monopoly party,
in which extracts there were some curious notices.

He had said that shipowners stood in the relation of
carriers. This newspaper said he had sneered at them
as carriers, as if carriers were not as respectable and
honourable men in their station of life as those who

" tore up rags, mixed them up with devil's dust, and
sold them in the shape of calico."—(Hear and
laughter.) lie did not sneer at them as carriers ;
but it was a simple fact, that if shipowners were
carriers from one land to another, and from one con-
tinent to another, it followed very clearly that if there
was an extension of trade, by which we under-
stood that there would be a larger quantity of
goods produced, to be carried across the ocean, that
these shipowners must receive some benefit from this
extension of commerce.—(Hear.) But, said this organ
of monopoly, these men "would not mind having this
extension of trade if they could be assured that their
ships could carry all the goods."—(Loud laughter and
cheers.) They would help us to destroy one great
monopoly, if we would but grant them another great
monopoly.—(Loud and long-continued cheering.)
Why was it they did not carry all our goods ? Why,
for the simple reason that other persons had ships too,
andj they must live. If they had not supported
so long the Canada monopoly, by which they had
bad and exprisive ships, and the corn monopoly, by
which they expensively provisioned them, then they
would have had as good ships, sail as cheaply, and
take goods at as low a freight, and upon as good
terms as any shipowners in any other country ; then,
whatever pods there were to be carried, they would,
at least, have had their fair share of them.—(lear.)
Liverpool, unfortunately, was connected with mono-
poly ; therefore it was not to be wondered at, that
there should be some people here who were in favour
of the perpetuation of this greatest of all monopolies.
—(Hear.) Nothing could be more certain than this,
that the sugar monopoly was doomed suddenly to fall.
The Anti-Corn-law League had taken their stand on
the right place ; they had attacked the corn monopoly
first, which was the key-stone of the arch, and they
might rely upon it, that, if that monopoly were once
overturned, the farmer and landlord would soon find
out that theyhad no special interest in maintaining the
West India and Canadian monopolies.—(Cheers.)
Why did the farmers return the men they did ? Not
because they had any favour or bias whatever, but be-
cause they believed that a certain political party was
identified with protection, which protection they be-
lieved to be essential to their interests ; and without
considering any other question, they voted for that
man who said he would support corn monopoly.—
(Hear.) Let that monopoly be once abolished which
was now fostered, and we should find these men as
anxious for the abolition of all monopolies as we our-
selves were; instead of having them as opponents, we
should have them among our warmest friends ; and
the next time they came to express their opinion at
the hustings, instead of being driven up there as usual
like cattle, to vote for the Squire, they would vote for
any one else whatever.—(Cheers.)
Mr. COBDEN here rose, and was received with most
enthusiastic cheering, which was again and again re-
peated. When silence had been restored he spoke to
the following effeet :—lie said—Mr. Chairman, Ladies,
and Gentlemen, if I should feel, under ordinary cir-
cumstances, some embarrassment in addressing you, it
has not been a little increased by the kind manner in
which my Hon. Friend has introduced me, and the way
in which you received me, coupled with the fact that
much of what I intended to say has been antici-
pated by those who have spoken before me, and that
I am unwilling to indulge in repetitions. I have
heard on this occasion an expression of satisfaction,
which I must be allowed to repeat, that we meet here
in the presence of ladies this evening. Now, as an
old agitator on the question of free trade, and the
Corn-laws in particular, I have laid it down as
a maxim, that no town or borough can be con-
sidered to be sound and safe in the true faith
until the ladies join the gentlemen in demon-
strations at the tea table.—(Loud cheers.) My
friends have thought it necessary to go out of
their way to justify the ladies in appearing on this
occasion. Why, every one knows that whether the
ladies take sides or not in public, they take sides in
pii‘a• .* •te —(Great laughter.) I have heard an old
electioneering campaigner say, in a contested election,
that for every man that was- publicly canvassing there
were two ladies canvassing secretly on one side or the
other.—(Cheers and laughter.) But on the Corn-
law and the Bread- tax in particular, I hold that the
ladies are following their duties, their household duties
—in agitating for the cheap loaf.—(Cheers.) Even
if they were not called upon by the- claims of huma-
nity and charity so to do, there is another ground
upon which the ladies have an ancient and hereditary
title to become agitators for the poor, of which many
of them may not be aware. The very name of "Lady'