The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-01-20 00:00:00

FALSEHOODS OF THE LEAGUE

We have always been given to understand that the more
extensive of the tenant farmers of Scotland were in favour
of the repeal of the protective duties on corn. It has been
said again and again by the League advocates, " See,
even the poor cultivators of the inferior soil of Scotland
wish only for a fair stand-up fight against the foreigner,
and no favour—no ' protection' I " Our attention has,
however, been drawn to a report of an important meeting
of landowners and tenant farmers, composing the Border
Association for the Protection of Agriculture, held on
Friday week, at Kelso, which completely overthrows the
misstatements of the League, and the speakers at which
bring to bear upon the subject of the effect of free trade
upo❑ Scottish agriculture an amount of sound sense and
practical and statistical knowledge, which put to shame
tho absurdiqcs perpcti cased by greater men in the southern
counties of this country.
The most efficient speech delivered at the meeting in
question came from a tenant farmer, Mr. Dudgeon, the
occupier of land to the amount of from £l5OO to £2OOO
per annum rental. We regret that we cannot give even
an outline of the arguments and facts which this gentle-
man adduced in support of his position. His refutation
of the statement of the League, to which we have referred
above, is too good to be lost :
" It was only the other day he laid his hands upon a
Prize Essay of the League, wherein he saw it stated that
the whole of the farmers of Roxburghshire were in favour
of free trade (laughter), because one gentleman of that
class at the hustings had declared himself a free trader.
He did not think there were many more than one free
trader, among the tenantry of Roxburghshire. There
were not now more than half a dozen that he knew of."
Another portion of it, as to the amount of employment
to the labourer now afforded by improvements making by
the landowners and farmers, by draining, &c., on the
faith of the continuance of a reasonable protection, we
must give :
-

" Parties carrying on these operations were led to be-
lieve that the measure would stand, and it was in conse-
quence of this belief that these great exertions had been
made, and these works gone on, and so many thousands
been laid out in the improvement of the soil, and in the
employment of such a vast amount of labour. (Cheers.)
In calculating from what he had done himself in tbis
way, having been draining 200 acres each year, he found
that it would employ 100,000 labourers for 50 years to
drain all the land in this country that could be profitably
drained,—that is to say, all the land that, when drained,
would give a produce to remunerate for the expense of
draining. (Cheers.) He believed that was a number of
labourers far exceeding those employed upon the rail-
ways ; some might not think so ; but when men were
spread over a large expanse of country they were not
seen, nor their numerical imcortance appreciated, as when
collected together in large numbers at one spot. He be-
lieved there were at this moment more men engaged in
draining than were employed upon all the railways ' • and
if the protection they now received were retained, the
work would continue and go on at a rate affording em-
ployment fully equal to what the railways could do."

- -
These are facts from a practical man, which are worth a
host of platform speeches from men who don't know the
difference between a plough and a harrow.
Another most telling speech was made at the same
meeting by Lord John Scott, brother of the Duke of
Buccleugh ; but our limits forbid more than the follow-
ing extract :
" Mr. Cobden said be knew Sir R. Peel was in con-
stant communication with the more long-headed of the
aristocracy. He said Sir R. Peel was in deep communi-
cation with the leading men of the agricultural party, try-
ing to persuade them to allow him to settle the question,
and put down the League in the only way in which it could
be put down, by doing justice on the question of corn-law
repeal. 'ln these secret conferences,' said Cobden, I
know that the most cogent argument Sir R. Peel has to
use is this, " See what the League are doing ;" they have
taught the middle and industrious classes of the towns the
use of the power which has long been latent, and if you
force them by resistance to go on, year after year, the
counties will be torn, from you, and you will have no more
power, in your own counties, than so many labouring men ;
if you resist this body you will not only lose the power to
maintain the corn-law, but the men who are getting votes
to put down the bread tax are of a class that are very
likely to put you down.' What is- this but, if you do
not give me up your purse I will blow your brains out.'
(Cheers.) They must support Sir Robert Peel against
such a blustering menace as this. If they did not contri-
bute to the scheme of these men for starving the popula-
tion, they threatened to bring their money down upon
them and drive them out of the country which they owned
and tilled. He did not wish them to be alarmed at this;
but every one must think that this was a time when it was
necessary to speak out and call things by their right names ;
and that they had a duty to perform, and to see that their
representatives did their duty. An election might not be
far distant ; and it was their duty to be prepared to return
such men only as would support their interests in Parlia-
ment. But after this bluster, Mr. Cobden grew pathetic,
They may force Mr. Bright and myself,' he said, 'to en-
dure another three or four years domestic martyrdom, sa-
crificing our healths, and getting more grey hairs and more
wrinkles by this laborious labour.' Domestic fiddlesticks !
Why, this martyrdom' was the very life of these men,
the very food upon which they lived. (Cheers.) They
engaged in this ' laborious labour'—they went about the
country spreading their delusion—that they might destroy
the best interests of the country, and thereby add to their
own riches. (Loud cheers.) This laborious labour' was
the very thing they lived upon. It was cheaper labour and
more profit. It was part of the men's work ; and he did
not believe even the little Cobdens and the little Brights
would weep to see one more grey hair, or one more wrin-
kle in the heads of their papas. Domestic martyrdom !
The hypocrisy of the thing was loathsome. Domestic
martyrdom in adding to their already enormous wealth,
and oppressing the poor unfortunate wretches who minis-
tered to it ! Away with such loathsome and detestable
hypocrisy. It was an insult to common sense. Why did
not these men come forward and back Lord Ashley in his
nod hour bill, if they were so benevolent as all this ?"