The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-06-22 00:00:00

done, and that we may eongratulate ourselves upon having
gained the most important victory which the walls of Liver-
pool ever saw. (Loud cheers, during which the noble lord
retired.

Mr. Curssweier, then rose, end the cheering was renewed.
The learned eentletnan repeatedly endeavoured to proceed,
but was so often interrupted by the vehement and enthusi•
astic applause of the meeting. At length, silence being in
some degree restored, he spoke, evidently under feelings of
heartfelt excitement, to the following effect :—My fellow-
countrymen! Electors of Liverpool! deeply, I nay say,
most solemnly, impressed with the importance of this meet-
ing—for I verily believe that on the result of the election
about to take place the fate of my country depends—l freely
coefess to you that I cause to this meeting labouring under
the deepest and almost unsupportable anxiety. (Hear, hear.)
But words are wanting to nee to express the joy and exulta-
tion I feel at what I have witnessed this day : joy, that I find
those principles, by professing which I gained your favour
and your votes, still prevailing strong as ever among you ;
exultation, that you still appear to think me worthy of your
votes. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, 1 have often said that I can-
not feel any personal pride in the position in which you have
placed me, apart from that which relates to my country.
This is my principal feeling, although I am proud to an ex-
cess I cannot mention, at perceiving that you still think my
principles are worthy of your applause. (Hear, hear, and
renewed cheers.) But how can I thank you personally or
individually ? How can I thank my noble and generous col-
league for the manner in which he spoke of me? Believe
me, and I know he believes nee, because he has spoken of me
in his own plain, straightforward manner, when I say, that I
trust he will ever find me such as he has represented me to
be—(hear, hear, and continued cheers)—and, gentleman,
do you also believe me when I say, that I am most deeply
grateful for the reception you have given me, and that it can-
not ever be effaced from my recollection. (Hear, hear, and
applause..) But enough. Let me not forfeit my character
for plain speaking, and let me come to facts. (Hear,
hear.) New, what is the question to be decided on at this
election ? It is not this or that isolated question. What you
have to determine, and what all England has to determine, is
this .—Shall the counsels of our Queen be guided hereafter
by Sir Robert Peel or by my Lord John Russell? (Tremen-
dous cheering for several minutes, and cries of " By Sir Ro-
bert Peel," at the close of which there was one solitary cry
from the boxes of " By Lord John Russell," which created
some disapprobation.) Mr. Creaswell continued—l am not
ashamed of anything I shall say—(cheers) ;—let him hear it.
But I see you bear in mind Sir Robert's principles. (Re-
newed cheers.) I need not call your attention to what they
are ; but permit ine:for a moment to draw a contrast between
him and his rival, Lord John Russell. (Hear, hear, and
cheers.) Sir Robert Peel professes a loyalty to the throne—
(cheers),—not conditional—(hear, hear),—not dependent on
' personal favours shown—(hear, hear),—not dependent upon
whether he was retained in, or rejected from, office—(hear,
hear, hear),—but a deer and sterling feeling of loyalty to the
Queen, and not to the Queen only, but to any other monarchs
whom he has served, or whom he may hare the honour to
serve. (Great applause.) He feels, and he has shown that
feeling by his conduct, a deep veneration for our institutions
of all kinds in church and state. (Cheers.) He has shown
a desire to improve, where he found them capable of im-
provement ' • but he has resisted their overthrow for any side
purpose whatever. (Hear, hear, and renewed cheers.) What
have been the principles of his noble rival since he held the
reins of government ? Steering without chart or compass—
(hear),—guided by no certain principles—(hear, hear)—blown
about by the popular gale in whatever direction it might blow
—(hear, hear, hear),—and making concessions, not be-
cause he thought they were proper, but because he thought
they would be profitable. (Great cheers and laughter.)
That is the contrast, shortly, between the two governments of
Sir R. Peel and Lord J. Russell. Have we not recently had
confirmation of it? Why, the very measures put forward by
the present dying government—(cheers and laughter)—the
very measures by which they hoped to delude and to deceive
you, are, according to my notions, the strongest possible con-
firmation that I have not taken an incorrect view. (Hear,
hear.) Under what circumstances, at what period of their
existence were those measures of cheap corn, cheap sugar,
and I will not say, cheap timber, but Baltic instead of co-
lonial timber, brought forward ? (Cheers, followed by ano -
ther solitary cry from the boxes of •‘ The operatives are out
of employment ! Very well, Listen to me for a moment.
(Flear, hear.) Bear in mind, that when two years ago the
people were out of employ, Lord Melbourne said that such a
measure would be madness. (Hear, hear.) He didn't want
votes then to be obtained. (Laughter and cheers.) Last
year, he said, that to agitate the question would stir society
to its foundations. (Hear, hear.) And last year, sugar
being dear and scarce, Lord John Russell was agatnst the
question for the reduction of the duties ; but this year, sugar
being abundant in supply and cheap in price, but votes being
scarce—(roars of laughter)—he introduces it. Now, let us
inquire a little into what is the true question as to British
agriculture. I take it to be this : shall there be protection
or an abolition of all protection. It is very true that, in an-
swer to the question in the House of Lords, Lord Melbourne
said he intended to protect agriculture, and I think Lord
John Russell said the same ; but the noble lord—the phan-
tom candidate in Liverpool—(hear, hear, and great laughter)
denounced the cern grower as a monopolist. Why, if the
corn grower is to be denounced as a monopolist, because
he happeqs to be protected, what becomes of the professions
of Lord Melbourne and Lord John Russell? (Hear, hear.)
And what did the Anti corn-law League, who brought their
philosophy and wisdom along with them to enlighten the
dunces of Liverpool—great laughter and cheers)—what was
their view ? Which was it, protection or the total abolition
of it? Why no doubt the total abolition of it. (Hear,
hear.) They called the corn grower a " vampire," a blood-
sucker," an " assassin," " a creator of typhus fever," and
Ido n't know what. They might as well have added that he
was a maker of Morison's pills. (Roars of laughter.) But
is this measure of total abolition consistent with justice ?
(Hear, hear.) See what burdens the corn-grower bears in
this country ? In the first place it is the property of the
country that supports the poor, by poor rates—that's charge
the first. (Hear.) Charge the second is the highway rate;
charge the third is the malt tax ; charge the fourth is the
church-rate ; and charge the fifth, and the most important
of all, is the maintenance of the clergy by the payment of
tithes. ([leer, hear, and cheers.) It will appear plain to
you, therefore, that you cannot reduce below Ili proeer level
the agricultural interest of this country without destroying
the church of your forefathers. (Hear, hear, and renewed
cheers.) Which of those gentlemen will come, let me ask,
and, upon the voluntary system, pay the aeiount of the
tithes? (Hear, and laughter.) And what, let ins ask, is it
that they want to put on a footing with the English corn-
grower? Why, the foreign corn-grower. But does he
pay your poor-rate, your highway-rate, your malt-tax,
your church-rate, or does he maintain your clergy ? Not a
penny. (Cheers.) Does the manufacturer pay those seve-
ral taxes out of his stock? Not a bit. (Renewed cheers.)
Remember this again : if by the decreased prices of agri-
cultural produce the corn lands of this country are thrown
out of cultivation what is to become of the labourers ? (Hear,
hear.) Why, they must either be maintained out of the
poor-rates, or carry their physical power into the manufac-
turing towns and districts, there to bring it into competition
with others. (Hear, hear.) If they remain on the land can
the landowner withdraw his capital so as to maintain the
poor dismissed from his service? Certainly not. (Cheers.)
Not so the millowner. He may employ hundreds ; he may
get a large per centage for his goods ; and he may turn off
hundreds ; shut up his mill, and leave somebody else to pay
the poor-rates for him. (Laughter and cheers.) lam not
entering fully into this question, for really argument after
argument crowd so fast upon one's mind against it, that to
give them utterance would occupy too much time, and there-
fore it is that I am only urging two or three of the main
points. But, waiving the justice, let us look at the policy of
the question. And here I shall go to the fountain head of
the political economists, and give you a passage ont of Adam
Smith on the " wealth of nations." He concludes his re-
marks in the following manner. He says :—The capital
employment in agriculture not only puts into motion a
greater quantity of productive labour than any capital em-
ployed in manufactures, but in proportion, toe, to the quan-
tity of productive labour which it employs, it adds a much
greater value to the annual produce of the land and the
labour of the country to the real wealth and revenue of its
inhabitants. Of all the ways in which a capital can be em-
ployed it is by far the most advantageous to society."
What have the repeaters of the corn-laws to urge against
that? (Hear, and renewed cheers.) We have the father of
their system assuring that " of all the ways in which capital
can be employed, agriculture is by far the most advantageous
to society;" and the reason is obvious : it is because nature
works along with the capital, and makes it more productive
than capital ernplovnieut in any other mode. (Hear and
cheers.) There is this advantage also, that the manufacturer
who exchanges with the house-=rower pays his fellow-coun-
tryman for his corn, but if he exchanges with a foreigner,
he pays a foreigner; therefore, in every way the application
of capital to agriculture is most beneficial. (H a r and
cheers.) What are the anticipated advantages of the aboli-
tion of the corn-law and all protection on agriculture ? I
shall state to you, in a few words, that the advantage, if any,
would accrue entirely to the mill-owner—the master menu-
facturer—(hear)—and that it would afford none to the opera-
tives, or to any other class of society. (Hear and cheers.) In
the first place, the manufacturer argues in two ways. First,
he says he will be able to manufacture cheaper, and, the -
fore, that he will be able to compete better with foreigners ;
but I beg to know how he can manufacture cheaper unless
labour is cheaper—(hear, hear)—and bow can labour be
cheaper unless wages be lower? (Hear, hear, and cheers.)
There is, however, another point of view in which he puts
the question. He says he can dispose of more manufactured
articles to foreigners, because, he alleges, he can get core
in exchange. These are the two modes in which he thinks
a repeal of the corn laws would be beneficial. As to the
cheapness, I say we cannot manufacture cheaper unless wages
be lower; and so my noble lord read you a passage from Mr.
Huskisson, to show that this was his doctrine also, namely,
that farming servants would be thrown out of work, and that
the consequence would be that wages would fall more rapidly
than the price of corn. (Hear, hear.) But your Anti-corn-
law League men deny that, and that's the way they treat all
authorities. They go with them so far as it suits their pur-
pose, and then they discard them. (Hear.) Now I cannot
imagine why Mr. Huakisson should be thus treated. (Hear,
hear.) Why should Igo 100 yards with him and then stop
e, and cheers.) His testimony,short, or why should those gentlemen go with him a part of
capable
the way and not go all ? ((Hear,ar,
however, in this respect, is quite right and o
demonstration.
(Renewed cheierss.) But I proceed now
to their second allegation. .( ear, hear.) It is clear in
believe that the supply of labour greatly
exceeds the demand,
this country, and happily it is so—it is so in all old
counties,
the more especially
where the labour is
not of a severe kind, and where a little physical strength only
is required • because when
a number of persons are out of
employ, if there is a species of labour to which they can de-
vote themselves without much physical power being nieces-
sary, a great portion o
f them will go to that. (Hear.) When
the supply exceeds the demand, wages are reduced to the
lowest point at which a labourer can subsist. (Hear, hear.)
If you offer less than he can subsist upon, he will go to the
he can maintain
workhouse, but so long as himself, he will
work. Repeal the corn-laws,, however, and then every ma-
nufacturer will be fond of having labour cheap, and therefore
the wages of labour will be depressed to the lowest point of
for the notion subsistence. (Hear.) So much of the ope-
ratives being benefitted by the manufacturer being able to
manufacture his goods cheaper. (Cheering.) I say, accord-
ing to Mr. Huskisson, that wages in such a case would fall
more rapidly than the price of corn. (Great cheering.)
But they say we can manufacture more goods in exchange
k " Can you ma* •
for corn, and then they as _ maintain that wages
wont rise when the aemandbiancreases ?" No, they won't,
if the supply be faster than the demand. (Hear, hear, and
cheers.) And how would this bear on it, and what would be
the result, if all protection on agriculture he abolished ? I
shall tell.--you. The labourers in agriculture exceed by far
six millions in number. Destroy agriculture in England,
and two or three millions out of those six will be thrown out
of employ. (Hear, hear.) Do the manufacturers say that
if they had foreign corn coming into England they could give
employment to two or three millions more than they do at
present ? No such thing. Well, the fact of those two or
three million labourers going to the manufacturing districts
to look for work would increase the supply of labour, and all
the labour in the factories being capable of being accomplished
by women or children, not one of them would have mere
than women or children's wages, which wages would still
continue to fall if the supply exceeded the demand. (Hear.)
I like to have an authority en this point. (Hear, and a laugh.)
You know it is the way of oar profession, and if we cannot
find a parallel case in our law books we are generally apt to
find the opinion of a great lawyer on it. (Hear, hear, and
great laughter.) The opinion I am about to read is not,
however, that of a great lawyer, but that of a great states.
man. Speaking of the political economist's school, the ma-
nufacturers, and the enemies of humanity, with a kind of
sarciestic sneer, he sere.," They esre notfor the diferenea be,
tween an agricultural and a manufacturing population in all