The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-07-06 00:00:00

NORTH CHESHIRE.

NOMINATION OF CANDIDATES
YESTERDAY.

Yesterday the nomination of candidates for the representa-
tion of North Cheshire took place at the Sessions House,
Knutsford. There are three gentlemen aspiring to the honour
of representing this important division, namely, the lion. E.
J. Stanley, Pay-master of the Forces, Wm. Tatton Egerton,
Esq., and George Cornwall Leah, E►q. The two latter are
conservatives.

Processions of the friends of the candidates were formed
in Stockport, Macclesfield, and other places ; those in the
conservative interest were decidedly the most numerous.
Among the parties present we observed Sir Richd. Brooke,
Tatton Egerton, Esq., John Clare, Esq., John Dixon, Esq.
Rev. Hy. Legh, Rev. Henry Warburton, Henry Marsland,
M.P., Egerton Legh, Esq., John Clare, Esq., jun., Peter
Nicholson, Esq„ Chas. Marsland, Esq., Sir Philip Egerton,
M.P., Thos. Greenall, Esq., Thos. Wm. Tatton, Esq., John
Howard, Esq., Trafford Trafford, Esq., Wilbraham Eger-
ton, Esq., J. B. Glegg, Esq., Thomas Ashton, Esq., Da-
vid Cheetham, Esq., E. J. Lloyd, Esq., William Hind-
ley, Esq., E. V. Townshend, Esq., Major Townshend,
John Howard, Esq , E. D. Davenport, Esq., Thomas
Grimsditch, Esq., M.P., Rev. C. K. Prescott, Rev.
Daniel Vawdery, Rev. William Whitley, henry Wright,
Esq., Gibbs Crawford Antrobus, Esq., George Cornwall
Legh, Esq., Josiah Brookshaw, Rowland E. E. Warburton,
Ireland Blackburne, Esq., M.P., Rev. Christopher Bush,
Rev. John Clowes, Shallcross Jacson, Esq., Ralph G.
Leicester, Esq., Charles Cholmondely, Esq., France France,
Esq., Bev. J. Gibbons, John Okill, Esq., Thos Parr, Esq.,
Charles Ford, Esq„ Geo. Eaton, Esq., Rev. George Eaton,
Rev. Thos. Blackburne, Rev. Bertie Johnson, Rev. W. Fox,
Rev. Josh Harden, Edward Greenall, Esq., Gilbert Green-
all, Esq.' James Stanton, sen.. Esq., James Stanton, jun.,
Esq., John Harrison, Esq., Thos. \Vm. Tatton, Esq., Rev.
John Newman, Henry Trafford, Esq., Geoffrey Shakerley,
Esq., Peter Jackson, Esq., Hugh Wallace, Esq., G. Wilbra-
ham, Esq., M.P., Hugh Clare, Esq., Hugh Cholmondeley,
Esq., Jahn Garven, Esq., John Hoskin Harper, Esq.,
&c., &c., &c.
The formal part of the proceedings were gone through
within the Court-house, Mr. Edward Proctor, under-
sheriff, officiating for Mr. Ryle, the high sheriff of the county,
whose absence was caused by the unfortunate suspension of
the bank at Manchester and Macclesfield, of which he was
the head. An adjournment then took place to the outside,
and a scene of confusion followed, which it is impossible to
describe. There was not the slightest accommodation for
members of the press, and it was with the utmost difficulty
they could discharge their duties.
The UNDER SHERIFF having apologized for the absence
of the High Sheriff, and strongly recommended the observa-
tion of peace and good order by all parties, called upon the
movers and seconders of the candidates.
Mr. EDWARD DAVIES DAVENPORT, of CapeSthOrile, then
proposed the Hon. E. J. Stanley as a fit and proper person
to represent the Northern Division of Cheshire in the House
of Commons. Mr. Davenport delivered a very long address
in support of Mr. Stanley's claims, insisting chiefly upon his
being a member of the past administration which had ap-
pealed to the people to aid them in breaking down all
monopolies and class interests ; but owing to frequent inter-
ruptions, and to the extremely inconvenient distance at which
we were placed from the speaker, it was impossible to hear
his remarks.
Mr. Jour CIIEETIIAM, manufacturer, of Staley-bridge,
seconded the nomination at considerable length. He strongly
condemned the corn laws, and the " abominable Weaver
churches job," and said that Mr. Stanley's opposition to
both was sufficient to entitle him to the support of the
freeholderi.
Sir RICHARD BROOKE, Bart., nominated, amidst loud
cheers, Mr. W. T. Egerton, the old and well-tried member
for the division.
Mr. J. B. GLEGG, of Withington, seconded the nomina-
tion.

Mr. R. A. A. WARBURTON, of Arley Hall, proposed Mr.
G. C. Legh.
TNhoeother
Hon. candidates
E.
j.
s TA beingNLE y ptrhoepno s ed,
Mr. JOSHUA BROOKSHAW, manufacturer, of Mottram,
seconded the nomination.
proceeded to address the
electors, and was received with mingled cheers and hisses.
He commenced by denying that he had been a candidate for
the representation of Dundee, as had been currently reported,
and said the independent electors there had chosen a most
excellent reformer for their representative, This was not the
first attempt hiropponents had made to mislead the electors.
They had been warned not to throw their votes away. He
believed they would not ; and it was his firm conviction
that, if they would give them to him, they would not.
Nine years ago they had elected him one of their
representatives, and during the whole of that period he was
not conscious of having done anything to forfeit the good
opinion of the constituency. He regarded the present
struggle against monopoly as second in importance only to
that great struggle which gained the reform bill. At that
eventful period they overthrew the monopoly of the borough-
mongers, and now they were called upon to overthrow a
a monopoly of the first necessaries of life • and if they did
not destroy it, it would assuredly destroy ;hem. The hon.
gentleman then entered into a laboured defence of the acts of
the present government, contending that during their term
of office they had reduced taxation to the amount of eight
millions ; and that among some other items they had reduced
their own salaries, a circumstance without any precedent
in the history of this country. After taking credit for the
policy of the government, with respect to India and the Le-
vant, the hon. gentleman discussed the corn laws, endeavour-
ing to prove that a fixed duty of 8s would be preferable to a
sliding scale. He referred, in answer to a call from the
meeting, to the Campbell job, observing, that Lord Camp-
bell would not be in the receipt of the pension attached
to the office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland, if the mi-
nistry were turned out. He supported the appoint-
ment on the ground that Lord Plunkett _was unable to
discharge the duties of his office with satisfaction• Mr. Stan-
ley spoke for upwards of an hour with considerable animation.
Mr. WILLIAM TATTON EGERTON then came forward, and
was received with tremendous cheering. He spoke as fol-
lows :—Brother Electors, I must first congratulate my ho-
nourable friend, Mr. Stanley, upon not having gone to Dun-
dee, but given the electors of this division of the county an
opportunity of expressing their sentiments by their votes,
for Ido not fear for the result. I must own that I was not
a little astonished at the complaints which came from the
gentlemen on the other side about the conservative and tory
attempts to monopolize the representation of the county.
You well recollect when out of ten members returned for the
county I was the only conservative. We, then, heard of no
monopoly of the representation. (Loud cheers.) I well re-
collect even then, that when obeying the call of no incon-
siderable portion of the electors I stood forward, a letter ap-
peared in the Macclesfield paper cautioning the electors not
to neutralize their votes. (Cheers.) He begged them to
give their votes in support of the Reform Bill, and to neu-
tralize Mr. Stanley's votes by returning me, but to return
Admiral Tollemache with him. And who was that letter
signed by? (Hear, hear.) It was signed by Edward John
Stanley.) (Tremendous cheering, and some uproar.) Can
you deny it ? Can Mr. Stanley deny it? (Renewed cheers.)
Mr. STANLEY.—WIIich letter do you mean?
Mr. EGERTON.—I mean your letter, which appeared in
the Macclesfield paper.
Mr. STANLEY.—When?
Mr. EGERTON.—Nine years ago.
Mr. STANLEY.—Oh, oh, oh. (Cheers from the whigs.)
Mr. EGERTON.—Perhaps your memory is short. (Laugh-
ter and cheers.) I see it is high time to refresh the gentle-
man's memory. Mr. Stanley finds it eonvenient to forget
the letter uow, just as he has forgotten the promises he made
to you at that time. (Uproar from the Stanlevites.) In
offering myself again for the fourth time as a candidate—
Mr. STANLEY.—I beg to ask the hon. gentleman what
promises have I ever broken ?
Mr. EGERTON.—Your public promises. I say that Mr.
Stanley and the government to which he belongs have
broken their promises. (Great cheers.)
Mr. STANLEY.—I say I have broken no promises.
(Cheers and hisses.)
Mr. EGERTON.—I say this—when the government of that
day, which Mr. Stanley supported, came into power, they
promised you peace, they promised you economy, they pro-
mised you retrenchment, and they promised you there should
be no patronage. (Hear, hear.) I ask you, brother electors,
how have those promises been fulfilled ? (Hear.) I certainly
did not allude to Mr. Stanley in his private capacity. (Hear.)
I did not charge bins with having broken his private pro-
mises

A VOICE.—What promises then?
Mr. EGERTON.—Why, the promises which he made o
peace. (Hear, hear.) Have you peace at the present mo-
ment ! (Cries of " No.") I say the government of which
he is a member, have broken their promises to you
A VOICE.—Mr. Stanley was not in the government when
those promises were made. (Hear, hear from the whigs.)
Mr. EGERTON.—But he supported all along the govern-
ment which made those promises. (Cheers.)
A VOICE.—They do not like it—it's a sore point. (Ap-
plause.)
Mr. EGERTON.—No ; they don't like it. (Renewed
cheers.) The government which Mr. Stanley supported,
and of which he is a member, promised you peace, and I
wish to know in what way that promise has been kept?
(Hear.) Look at the state of our relations abroad; look
at
the position of the great marts for our manufactures in
America, the Canadas, in Asia, in China, and upon the coast
of Syria, and then tell me how they have performed their
promises of peace. (Hisses from the Stanleyites, answered
by conservative cheers.) You listened patiently enough
gentlemen when you heard the accounts of tory misdeeds,
but now, when you are touched on the raw at hearing of the
misdeeds of the whigs, you will not listen. (Cheers.) You
talk to me of your retrenchment, and Mr. Stanley has told
you of a number of offices the government has reduced, and
how they have reduced their own salaries ; but they quite
forget to tell you that this very year there has been an in-
crease of no less than 230 offices. (Renewed cheers.) lie
has talked to you of twenty millions being added to the
national debt, but he has not been good enough to tell you
that for the last five years the present administration
has so managed that there has been an excess of expenditure
over the receipts of seven millions. (Hear, hear.) He has
not told you that in the year 1835 or 1836, when they came
into power, they had a surplus of nearly a million, and since
that period you have have had a continuous deficiency till it
now amounts to seven millions—(cheers)—or something like
two and a half millions annually ! (Renewed cheers.) Then
he tells you of tory extravagance ! Yes ; but you must pay
the piper. (Hear, hear.) Well ; last year they increased
your taxes. (Hear, hear.) I should like you to know the
sort of meddling which is going forward at this moment in
your savings' banks. (Hear, hear.) That meddling has
been effected in such a way that it is impossible to know
what the national debt actually is, or what our deficiencies
are. (Hear.) I now conic to their promise of no patronage.
A VOICE.—The corn-laws.
Mr. EGERTON.—I will allude to them presently. I will
only say now that the present ministers keep to the sliding
scale with respect to their principles, whilst they are for a
fixed duty upon corn. (Cheers.) They came into power, I
was going to observe, professing the principle of no patron-
age. (Heart) You have seen pretty clearly how that pro-
mise has been fulfilled, in the commissions which have been
appointed every year, in every part of the county, at the cost
of hundieds of thousands. (Cheers.)
A VOICE.—The Weaver churches.
Mr. E oewroN.—l shall come to the river Weaver directly.
Look at their jobs ! (Cheers.) I venture to say that no
tory government ever perpetrated such jobs as this govern-
ment has. (Hear.) Look at the Campbell job. (Hear.)
My hon. opponent did not like to hear of that. My Lord
Campbell, he said, has no retiring pension now ; but when
he said this, Mr. Stanley blinked and evaded the ques-
tion. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) He will have
a pension as soon as one of the retired chancellors shall die.
(Hear.) There are now two of them, Lord Manners and
Lord Plunkett, and when one of them dies, Lord Campbell
will have the pension. It serves very well for Mr. Stanley
to say, on the hustings, that Lord Campbell will have no
pension, but he ought to have stated that when Lord Man-
. ners or Lord Plunkett die, Lord Campbell will receive the
pension. (Loud cheers.) Mr. Stanley did not tell you o
another pet job—of the sort of way in which they got rid o
a Chancellor of the Exchequer when he was no longer abl
to manage the public business; he did not tell you how that

functionary gave up his seat in the House of Commons, or
how they prevailed upon one of their friends to give up his
pension that he might get it! (Hear.) This is the way of
the whigs. (Cheers.) Where are the benefits which they
promised to the working classes ?fill They promised you
cheap bread and good living at the time they came in;
but did they promise you the new poor law? (Hear,
hear, and hisses from the Stanley side.) What, are you
afraid of the poor law ? When opposition to that measure
was unpopularldid I shrink from it ? (Cries of " No, and
cheers.) I went out with only nine members of the House
of Commons against it. I have raised my voice, and 1
will raise my voice again against the harsh enactments of
that measure. (Tremendous cheers.) .1 say I will not con-
sent to transfer, as that bill has done, to commissioners at
Somerset House, from guardians. who are the legitimate
persons to exercise it, and who best know their neighbours'
distresses, the power of giving discretionary relief out of the
workhouse. (Hear.) I will not consent to see poverty
made a crime. (Immense cheers.) I will not consent to
see the distressed tradesman broken down by misfortune,
or the industrious, but unfortunate labourer consigned
to the same place as the common vagrants from the streets.
(Cheers.) If such, I say, are the past performances of the
whigs, if this is the way in which they keep the promises
they have made, I ask you, gentlemen, how are you to put
confidence in them ? How are you to trust them for men of
character and principle, when they now come down with
professions of cheap sugar, cheap corn, and cheap timber ?
Do they not make those professions to delude you ? I ask
you how you can consent to put faith in their financial pro-
positions \then they have so miserably mismanaged them, and
when they have a beggared exchequer ? (Cheers.) The fact is
they wish to avoid the question now at issue. (Cheers.)
They wish to delude you. (Hear.) What is the real point
at issue ? 1 will tell you. The real question is this—does
the present government deserve the confidence of the country
or not? • (Tremendous cries of "no.") It may suit the
purpose of my hon. opponent to hold me up as a monopo-
list, as an enemy to free trade, and to all measures calculated
to promote the public good. I deny altogether the aspersions
which are thus placed upon me. I say that I am as great
a friend to the extension cf trade as Mr. Stanley—(cheers)
—but I say this, that 1 will never consent to sacrifice
our domestic interests. (Hear, bear.) lam as anxious
as my honourable opponent can possibly be to see new chan-
nels opened for our commercial industry, but at the same
time I do not wish to see the old ones choked upa(Cheers.)
I am anxious that trade should be extended, that our mer-
chants should search out for fresh and independent fields for
their industry, but do not let us lose what we have at pre-
sent. (Hear, hear, hear.) Now to come to these measures
of cheap sugar and cheap corn. When Mr. Stanley taunts
me with opposing those measures, let me ask him how he
came to follow exactly the same course last year with regard
to sugar? (Hear, hear, and "loud cheers.) He tells you
how hard a thing it is to curtail the comforts of
the poor by raising the price of sugar. So say I ; but
why,..when the price of sugar was 20s. or 30s. per hundred
higher than it is now, and when Mr. Ewart brought forward
exactly the same propositisn, did Mr. Stanley oppose it.
A VOICE.—WiII you allow me to ask whether you then
supported 4?
Mr. EGE'RTON.—I opposed it exactly upon the same
grounds and Upon the same arguments that Mr. Stanley and
the government to which Mr. Stanley belongs opposed it
last year. (Loud cheers.) We opposed it because we
thought it unwise, impolitic, during the present experiment
of negro emancipation, to bring slave-grown sugar into com-
petition with that grown by the liberated blacks. (Hear.)
If the government thought it so important, why did they
oppose the very same measure last year? They then said,
" We do not think it right"—
A VOICE.—Why did you oppose it?
Mr. EGERTON.—Because I agreed with what the govern-
ment said last year ; because I agreed with them that it
would be unwise for this great nation for the sake of a saving
of not the fraction of a farthing in the pound—
A VOICE.-1 deny that ;it is more.
Mr. EGERTON.—Lord John Russell did not deny it in
the House of Commons; he assented to it. (Loud cheers.)
I say it would be unwise and unworthy of the English nation
to sanction a proposition which would add tenfold to the
miseries of slavery both in the Brazils and in Cuba, and tend
most effectually to promote that horrible traffic which every
man here will admit it is the glory of England to destroy.
(Cheers.) Now, with regard to the proposal for a fixed duty
upon corn. You heard what Mr. Glegg told you—how
he told you which were the opinione of Lord Melbourne,
the head of the government. Mr. Stanley told you
that you must have a free trade in corn, and a fixed duty,
to enable you to exchange your manufactures for foreign
corn but what does Lord Melbpurne tell you ? As Mr.
Stanley carries his edition of the Standard in his pocket I
I may as well do the same. (Laughter.) The hon. gentle-
man here read Lord Melbourne's words, stating that our
manufactures never could get to the markets of the continen tl
whether the corn laws were repealed or not. The continenta
governments would never relax their prohibitory codes in
our favour. He greatly respected the talents and
activity of Dr. Bowring, but the doctor was mis-
taken in asserting that the markets of the continent
would be thrown open to us. Suppose we repealed the corn
laws, they would say to us, " You repealed them for your
dwn convenience—how can you expect we should yield you
anything in return ?" There was no person attached to the
continental governments who would not say—" We will look
to the interest of our own country." (Loud cheers.) So
say I, contended the hon. gentleman. I say it is wise and
politic to continue the protection of the British farmer ; but
at the same time let it be only a fair and legitimate protec-
tion, for the moment you add one protection to it beyond
what is just and proper, you defraud the home consumer.
(Hear, hear.)
A Voice.—We want no protection.
Mr. EGeuTosi.---They will tell you so in Macclesfield.
(Hear.) Go to your own shopkeepers, and ask them whe-
ther they are willing to have their protection taken away ?
Why should not the land, then, have protection—a fair and
legitimate protection? (Hear.)
. A VOlCE.—Where is the working man's protection?
Mr. EGERTON.—It was the old noor law of Elizabeth that

you•shouhl look to the land. That was your protection,
and it is your , whigs who have taken it away. (Tre-
mendous cheers.) When they brought forward the new
poor-law what did they say? Oh ?" said they, "it will
decrease the rates upon the land, and it will be a great boon
to the farmers ;" and that is just the way they have hum-
bugged the country till this very time. (Rear, hear, hear.)
I have no doubt the new poor-law did lessen the burdens
upon land in the south, but it did not here in our own coun-
try. What was the report of one of their own commission-
ers ? He said that "in Cheshire the population is increasing,
and the poor-rates are decreasing;' therefore, I say, this
law is unfitted to the wants of the manufacturing popula-
tion. (Loud cheers.) Now for the corn laws. I support
a fluctuating scale because it ensures steadiness of supply and
steadiness of price. (Hear.) What was the evidence of Mr.
WCulloch himself, a free-trade doctor and economist? He

tells you that the variations of price under this system of
corn-laws, have been less than in the previous period—that
the variations are less than at Odessa, Dantzic, or in the
United States of America. (Hear.) But, at the same time,
experience may improve them. We have had ten years ex-
perience of them, and I say now as I have said before, that
the pivot may be safely lowered, the averages more satisfac •
torily taken in and in a less fraudulent manner. (Hear,
hear.) Instead of jumping so much they might be made to
vary more gradually. (Hear, and cries of " Oh, oh, from
the Stanleyites.) I am giving you my sentiments, and have
I not as good a right to my opinion as that gentleman who
interrupts me? . (Cheers.)
Mr. TRAFFORD poiuted out a person in the crowd who had
frequently interrupted Mr. Egerton and said, that if it were
repeated he should appeal to the under-sheriff.
Mr. EGERTON.—My opinion is, that these alterations may
be so made as to give a great benefit to the farmer. and
reduce the price of corn to the manufacturer. I oppose a fixed
duty upon corn, because I think a fixed duty is a fixed
injnstice, (Cheers.) Yon talk to me of the benefit of a
fixed duty, but I should like to know what benefit one of Bs.
a quarter would be to the British farmer when corn was
abundant on the continent? And what would be the ad-
vantage of it in time of scarcity, when the price of corn, to
the working classes, got up enormously? Would you be MAE
to keep the fixed duty and close your ears to the manufactur-
ing population crying out for bread? (Hear.) 1 say, there-
fore, that the gentleman who proposes—
A VOICE.—WiII you vote for the total repeal?
Mr. EGERTON.—Ask Mr. Stanley whether he will vote for
the total repeal? You have as much right to ask him to vote
in that way as to ask me.
A VOICE.—We will take what Mr. Stanley offers as an in-
stalment. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. EGERTON.—You will take it as an instalment ! Is
that just to the farmer? You want now to get off only a part
of the duty, that in a short time you may go further. Is
that fair play? (Hear.) I say to British farmers, to British
labourers, and British manufacturers, listen, to this. They
tell you they wish to repeal the duty entirely upon corn ' • yet,
say they, " we go for a fixed duty of Bs. !" (Hear, hear.)
Is this the way that promises are to be kept and the govern-
ment carried on ? No doubt a large loaf is a very good
thing, and I wish you may all have one; but I ask you how
you will have your big loaf unless you get your wages bet-
tered ? Are you going to have your wages increased ? (Hear.)
A Voice.—We shall have more employment.
Mr. EGERTON.—I will answer that. Are you likely to
have more wages when you are thrown out of employment?
The labourer upon those lands which will be thrown out of
cultivation in consequence of the repeal of the corn-laws,
when he comes out of the fields into the towns, will compete
with you for employment, and they will take the bread out
of your mouths. You talk of more employment. why,
is not machinery every day lessening :your employment ?
What, too, are your manufacturers telling you ? They say,
" We want the corn-laws repealed, that we may lower your
wages." (Hear, and cries of " No, no," and " Yes, yes.")
I should like to know, then, for what reason it is that they
say, " We cannot compete with the foreigner in consequence
of the wages we pay ?" For what reason is it, then, that
they wish to bring you down to the continental level ? (Hear.)
A VOICE.--Look at Ireland.
Mr. EGERTON.—Yes, corn is cheap enough there ; but
why do not the people stay at home and buy it? Why, be-
cause they cannot afford. (Cheers.) Look to the continent.
They can bring their corn cheap enough; but why do they
not keep their corn to feed their over enormous popu-
lation ? Because they have not money to buy it ; they
are obliged to live upon rye bread, and have very little
clothing. When you tell me what is to be done by repealing
the corn laws I appeal to Dr. Bowring, and what dots lie tell
you ? " You may have, he says, Your free trade in corn, but
you will find very few to take your manufactures." The hon.
gentleman entered further into the subject of the corn laws,
but at such length that we have not space to follow him. He
next referred to the government of the Whigs and defended the
conservatives from the charge of having obstructed their mea-
sures, resorting that theybyought in measures which they had
no intention of carrying, Just to create a stock of good inten-
tions to trade upon for another year. After a few further
remarks, the hon. gentleman expressed his intention to sup-
port a government composed of such men as Sir Robert
Peel, Lord Stanley, and Sir James Graham, because it would
not be a government based upon ultra opinions, because it
would be a strong government, and because he believed it
would enjoy the confidence of the sound and intelligent por-
tion of the middling classes. I will only add, concluded Mr.
Egerton , that should yogi, for the fourth time, return me as
one of -the representatives of this division of the county,
you will find in me the same zeal for your interests
and the same anxiety to promote the welfare of every indi-
vidual connected with this great manufacturing division,
which I believe I have hitherto exhibited. (Renewed ap-
plause.)
Mr. GEORGE CORNWALL LEGH then proceeded to address
the electors, and he met with a most gratifying reception.
After some introductory remarks in reply to several attacks
upon his character, Mr. Legh observed that a good deal had
been said about the advantages to be derived to trade, and
upon the necessity of encouraging the manufacturing indus-
try of this country. He fully and entirely concurred in that
sentiment, but he did not think that at the present moment
this was the only question the electors were called upon to
decide. The great question for their decision was, who should
be the government to whom their interests should be confided
for the future ? The present government had appealed to them,
and they had chosen a moment for it when thete was
destitution in the manufacturing districts, caused by the long
stagnation of business, when distress had been exciting the
minds of our poorer fellow subjects, and created a sort of
irritability which prompted them to cling too much to false
hopes, and to listen to seditious political agitation. At the
same time he would yield to no man in the desire to increase
to the greatest possible extent the manufacturing industry of
the country. He would ask them whether they thought the
present administration one to which they could safely intrust
their interests ? (Loud cries of " No, no," with faint
responses of "...Yes.") If they said yes, he would ask those
who said so by what did they judge ? Was it from their
professions, their acts, or their principles ? (Hear, hear.)

Their professions were •abandoned day after day ; their
principles were not known; and as for their acts he would
ask the electors as rational men if the measures they
proposed were so essential to the manufactures, if they
were to be the panacea for all the evils that existed,
why were they not proposed last year or early in
the present? (Hear, and loud cheers.) If they thought at
the beginning of the late session, that these principles
were absolutely necessary for the manufacturing interests,
why did they not mention them in the Queen's speech ?
Why did not her majesty's ministers come forwaid with a
specific and fixed plan for relieving that distress at an earlier
period ? Why had they not mentioned these things until
they were in the very throes of impending political extinc-
tion—and then only by a mere clap-trap upon abstract prin-
ciples on which all were agreed, but the application of which
required grave consideration? (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
It was merely to delude the people. (Cheers.) Why should
he be stigmatised as an ignorant monopolist and as an enemy
to all trade? (Hear, hear.) Let him ask the electors of
this country, why his honourable opponent, when he enjoyed
the powers of office, and must have known perfectly
well that his poorer constituency were suffering from
distress, did not in his place in parliament advocate the
cause of that distressed constituency? (Hear, hear, hear.)
Why did he not tell the administration, of which he was a
member, that some alleviation must be provided for that
distress? (Hear, hear, and cheers.) He would now shortly
refer to the one great question which was agitating the
public mind, namely, the corn-laws. He had' no hesitation
in saying, that he was as averse to monopoly upon on one
side as be was averse to doing away with protection upon the
other. He was no monopolist. He had maintained, and always
would maintain, that so far as protection was concerned,
one fraction of a farthing beyond what was absolutely
necessary to protect. The home produce should not be in-
flicted, because it was an injury to the home consumer—
(cheer)—but he was prepared to oppose, to the best of his
power, any proposition for a total repeal of the corn-laws.
(Loud cheers.) He certainly would not support the
government scheme of eight shillings a quarter duty;
but he was not prepared to say that the present corn-
laws were perfect. He thought very material alterations
might be made in them, with advantage both to the agri-
cultural and the commercial classes. He objected to
the method of taking the averages, and he thought that
the two principles ofi a fixed duty and a sliding scale
might be so combinell as to satisfy the just claims
of the manufacturers, atid protect the interests of the agri-
culturists. Should such a measure be brought forward by a
government in which he could place reliance, by a govern-
ment which was determined to carry measures for the ame-
lioration of all classes, he would tell the electors, as
a man of honour, he would give it Isis most decided sup-
port. (Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) He had a firm and a
decided intention to support the manufacturing interests.
(Cheers.) He had never said any thing to the contrary. He
derived great advantage from their success, and it was im-
possible for lihn not to wish for the fullest possible develope-
ment of trade. (Cheers.) In conclusion he would only say
that the result of this contest was now in their hands. He
had been requested by a large number of freeholders to come
forward. (Hear, hear.) From the promises he hid made
of support, he confessed he did not feel any great doubt
upon the subject ; but still, whatever might be the result of
the contest, if he should retire • gain into private life, be
should continue to do his duty as an independent
country gentleman in the best way he could for the good of
his country ; but, on the other hand, if the electors should
decide that he was a proper person to represent their inte-
rests, lie would promise them fearlessly and zealously to take
care of those interests to the best of his power, and he sin-
cerely hoped and trusted' they would never be ashamed of
their choice. (Tremendous cheering followed the conclusion
of the hon. gentleman's eloquent address.)
The UNDER-SHERIFF then called upon the meeting for a
show of hands. About one-third or, perhaps, fewer, held
up their hands for Mr. Stanley ; for Mr. Egerton and Mr.
Legh there was a perfect forest. The Under-sheriff imme-
diately declared the show to have been in favour of those
gentlemen:
Mr. JOHN HOWARD, of Brereton, demanded a poll on
behalf of Mr. Stanley.
The poll was of course granted, and it will take place on
Thursday and Friday.
A vote of thanks was then presented to the under-Sheriff,
and the electors separated.