History of the Anti-Corn Law League/Chapter9
CHAPTER IX.
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LEAGUE.
The delegates met again on Wednesday, the 20th, not convinced by the arguments which had been brought against their object in the "collective wisdom of the nation," not disheartened by the numbers arrayed against them, but with fresh determination to go on in their great purpose. They could not conceal from themselves that a great number of the 195 who had voted in favour of considering the question, would fall off when a total repeal should be asked for; and that it was necessary, before that demand could be made with any reasonable prospect of success, that the constituencies and the country in general should be further instructed and aroused. An address to the public was agreed upon, in which the following, amongst other measures, were recommended and adopted:
"Delegates from the different local associations to meet for business, from time to time, at the principal towns represented.
"With the view to secure the of unity of action, the central office of the League shall be established in Manchester, to which body shall be entrusted, among other duties, that of engaging and recommending competent lecturers, the obtaining the co-operation of the public press, and the establishing and conducting of a stamped circular, for the purpose of keeping a constant correspondence with the local associations.
"That, in addition to the funds subscribed for local purposes by the several associations, at least £5,000 should be raised to defray the expenses of the general League for the ensuing year, and that every sum of £50 entitle the individual, or association subscribing it, to one vote in the appropriation of the funds of the League, and that on all other questions the votes of the persons present be equal.
"That this meeting adjourn, subject to the call of the Manchester Anti-Corn-Law Association; that it be left to their discretion at what time to bring forward the substantive question for the total abolition of the Corn Laws before Parliament, and to adopt any other measures to secure the great object of the association which they may think fit."
The delegates then separated to agitate the question in all their various localities, not many of them, perhaps, thinking that they should have to meet again and again, often in every year, during a seven years' struggle, but all determined, whether the contest were to be short or long, to enter upon it with spirit, and to persevere until its accomplishment; and many of them disposed to combine with their demand for free-trade a demand for a more fair and free representation, although they saw the propriety of confining the movement to one easily defined object, for which all honest politicians could unite. Meetings were immediately held in nearly all the great towns which had sent representatives to the London conference, and the delegates became so many local missionaries to spread the doctrines that had been enunciated in the metropolis.
The Manchester association had put forth a number of hand bills and placards; it now began to publish more largely and systematically a series of pamphlets of uniform shape. Amongst these was "Facts for Farmers," with the view of removing from the minds of that class the prejudices against any change of the Corn Laws which had been fostered by the landowners. The "Facts" were contained in a closely-printed octavo of eight pages, and were supplied to distributors in all parts of the kingdom, at a rate just sufficient to cover the expense of printing and paper. Mr. Villiers' speech followed, in two sheets octavo, containing as much matter as an ordinary shilling pamphlet, but which was charged to the various associations at three-half-pence, its cost price. Mr. Poulett Thomson's speech, occupying sixteen pages octavo, was supplied at three-farthings. Of these first publications about 10,000 of each were printed. Subsequently the impressions were of 50,000 each ; and when the appeals were to the electors of the kingdom, during the height of the agitation, as many as half a million each of the more popular tracts were printed at a time.
Amongst those was one which I wrote. I had seen around me, as great cotton spinners, machine makers, manufacturers, and merchants, the sons of farmers, Richd. Cobden, Thomas Potter (Mayor of Manchester), the Bannermans, the Brothers Grant (Dickens' "Brothers Cherryble"), and a host of others, giving employment to tens of thousands. The title of the tract was, "An Address to Farmers, on the way in which their families are to be provided for." I told the class I addressed, that my father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and great-great-grandfather had farmed land on the same estate from the time of Queen Elizabeth; that I should have been a farmer myself, but that my father used to say to his four sons: "One of you will succeed me in the farm, and the rest shall have such an education as will enable them to shift for themselves. I cannot stock four farms for you, and if I could, I would not send three of you to bid against my neighbours, and to raise their rents upon them;" and that, from that time, I had been convinced that farmers took a very mistaken view of their own interest, if they thought it could be promoted at the expense of trade, in which a great portion of their families would have to seek for employment. I gave a history of twelve families personally known to me. In these families there were forty-seven sons, who all arrived at the man's estate, and only four of them remained farmers. There were thirty-two daughters, the youngest of them of a marriageable age, only four of whom married farmers. Thus, of the whole seventy-nine, only eight had any direct interest in agriculture. The farm was but the nest, from which the birds were to fly to find their food elsewhere. The instances were taken from families which held rather extensive farms, and the sons, by emigration, or by seeking other employment, had sustained their fathers' station in society, and some had risen considerably above it. But the children of the smaller farmers had sunk to the class below that of their fathers. They had become farm-labourers, masons, joiners, smiths, or weavers, and the daughters had married into the same class. The landowner had other means of providing for his sons; the bar, the church, the army, the navy, the colonies, and government offices were all open to them. " But how," I asked," are you, the farmers of Great Britain and Ireland, to find employment for your sons? Humble excisemen they may starving, like Robert Burns, on less than the salary of a valet humble curates they may be, like the author of 'The Sabbath,' with little other reward than the consciousness of discharging their sacred duties; post-office clerks, stamp-office clerks they may be, with such remuneration as was offered to John Critchley Prince, and refused by the poet, as pay not equal to that of a Manchester porter but while trade is depressed—while the capital employed in it yields little or no return,—and while the labour and skill exercised in it,receive no adequate reward, farmers' families must either sink into poverty or tear themselves from all they have held dear, and seek for independence in foreign lands."
In accordance with the resolution passed by the League at its formation in London, an organ of the new movement, designated The Anti-Corn-Law Circular was published in Manchester, the first number appearing in April. In a few weeks it had a circulation of 15,000, with an unusual number of readers, for almost every one who received it made a point of lending it round amongst his neighbours, and then it was sent to some friend in an agricultural district, with the request that it should he lent to all that could be induced to read ; and much alarm was felt by protectionist landowners, when they found their tenants and their dependants conning the contents of that dangerous small sheet.
Numerous pamphlets, ten thousand of each, sent every where—a free-trade newspaper with a circulation of fifteen thousand, probably read every week by two hundred thousand persons—there needed only the vocal denunciation of the Corn Laws in the strongholds of the protectionists to increase the alarm. The lecturers soon followed the tracts and the free-trade newspaper. Many of the tracts were burned when found performing their silent mission. There was much disposition to dispose of the speaking missionaries in the same way. In May, Mr. Sidney Smith, and Mr. Shearman, lecturers of the League, were announced to appear at the theatre in Cambridge, as advocates of the repeal of the Corn Law, and were permitted to deliver their addresses without interruption. On the following evening, however, the students mustered in great strength, and, with the sound of trumpets and other discordant noises, prevented Mr. Smith from being heard. One gownsman, who made himself particularly prominent in the disturbance, roused the ire of the townsmen, who rushed to the boxes to turn him out. The gownsmen rushed to the defence of their fellow-student, a fierce battle ensued between "gown" and "town," and it required strenuous exertions on the part of the mayor and the police to put an end to the riot. Before this could be accomplished considerable damage was done to the panels and furniture of the building, which was found strewn with torn college gowns and caps, left behind after the rioters had been turned out. Of the lecturers the Cambridge Chronicle said: "It is rumoured that these fellows intend to pay us another visit but if so, they ought to have timely notice that they will be held responsible for any breach of the peace that may ensue—the forbearance of the peaceable (!) portion of the community may be taxed too far; and if the paid hirelings of a disloyal faction are to persist in inflaming the public mind, with sentiments destructive of all moral right and order, we cannot call too strongly, at the present crisis, upon the well-disposed portion of the community to assist the authorities in putting down those revolutionary emissaries."
The League had commenced its operations in earnest, and the monopolists were alarmed. In June "The Central Agricultural Society of Great Britain and Ireland," which title had been assumed by a combination of landowners to protect their monopoly, issued an address, in which it was stated that of the three first numbers of the the Anti-Corn-Law Circular, 10,000, 12,000, and 15,000 copies respectively had been put into circulation ; that an immense number of anti-corn-law pamphlets had been distributed, more especially in the rural districts; and that the work of agitation had been begun and vigorously carried on by hired agents, who had already delivered lectures in about fifty different towns and villages. This was all true although somewhat short of the truth, for instead of fifty towns and villages having had instruction, there had been one hundred large towns which had benefited by the lectures of Mr. Paulton, Mr. Sidney Smith, Mr. Acland, and Mr. Shearman, besides all the places which had been visited by members of the Leeds and other anti-corn-law associations. The Morning Herald, copying the address, said:—
These vituperations, given as a specimen of the sort of writing with which the protectionist press met the arguments of the free traders, show that the League had hit hard. It was now fully organised and in active operation—no longer a movement of London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Leeds, and Glasgow, but NATIONAL. There was hard work before it, but there were stout hearts for the work; and there were the results of other movements to help it on. The reduction, in 1837, of the newspaper stamp-duty, from three-pence one-fifth to one penny, had greatly favoured the diffusion of principles adverse to monopoly, either in representation or trade. The sevenpence newspaper had been reduced to fourpence-half penny or fivepence, and of the consequent increased circulation to the amount of fifty per cent., the greater portion was shared by papers advocating political and commercial reforms. After the publication of a few numbers of the Anti-Corn-Law Circular, the government required that it should have a penny stamp; but the payment of this tax enabled it to be sent post-free. Were the League to its tracts and its letters to every village in the kingdom, in the work of enlightening its obscurest corners, it was desirable that there should be a cheap postage. Rich Cobden, and other free traders of Manchester, had earnestly forwarded, by their evidence and their labour, the scheme of an uniform penny postage, originated and most admirably worked out by Mr. Rowland Hill, Mr. Charles Knight, Mr. W. H. Ashurst, and others, in London. It triumphed over the opposition of the government officials; and even the experiment of a uniform fourpenny rate, to precede the wider postal reform, was greatly favourable to the operations of the League, now in close correspondence with the leading friends of free trade in every large town. When the penny postage rate came, the correspondence of the League increased a hundred fold. The railways were rapidly spreading their ramifications, and, ere the contest was over, gave a seeming ubiquity to some of the more active members of the League.
Manchester had again the opportunity of asserting its free-trade principles by an election. Mr. Poulett Thomson accepted the appointment to the Governor-Generalship of the British Provinces of North America. He had found it difficult to reconcile his duty to his constituents with the support required to be given to the general policy of his colleagues in the government. In an extract from his "Journal," written when he had been a few days at sea, given by his brother in the " Life of Lord Sydenham," he says:—"Saturday, September 21, 1839. I have thought a good deal, within the last few days, of my position; and, upon the whole, I think I have done right, both on public and personal grounds. I have a better chance of settling things in Canada than any one they could have found to go; and if I had not taken it then, as I could not well have got out of the government, I should have shared in the disgrace of next session. It is a great field, too, if I bring about the union, and stay for a year to meet the united assembly, and set them to work. On the other hand, in England there is little to be done by me. At the Exchequer, all that can be hoped is to get through some BAD TAX. There is no chance of carrying the house with one for any great commercial reforms, timber, corn, sugar, &c. party and private interests will prevent it. If Peel were in, he might do this, as he could muzzle or keep away his tory allies, and we should support him. If he got in, and had courage, what a field for him! But he has not! On private grounds, I think it good too! 'Tis strange, how ever, that the office which was once the object of my highest ambition (the Exchequer), should now be so disagreeable to me, that I will give up the cabinet and Parliament to avoid it. After all, the House of Commons and Manchester are no longer what they were to me. I do not think I have improved in speaking—rather gone back. Perhaps in opposition, with more time to prepare, I might rally again; but I do not feel sure of it, I am grown rather nervous about it. The interruption and noise which prevails so much in the house cows me. I have certainly made no great speech for two years. It is clear, from what has passed, I might have kept Manchester as long as I liked. But till put to the test by my leaving it, one could not help feeling nervous and irritated by the constant complaints of not going far enough or going too far. The last three years have made a great change in me. My health, I suppose, is at the bottom of it."
This was written in a desponding tone for a man of acknowledged abilities, and only forty years of age. But he had been nine years in office, and believed that only in office could his talents be usefully employed. His despondency might be justly attributed to ill health, but he might have asked himself whether his want of health was not attributable to the conflict between his sense of duty to his constituents and his conception of the duties he owed to the government, of which he formed a part. A similar conflict must have been endured by Mr. T. M. Gibson, when, at a later period, he also represented Manchester and held office; but he wisely resolved to sacrifice his position in the ministry, in order that he might, by an untrammelled course, retain the confidence of his constituents. Thomson had the merit of carrying out the designs of Lord Durham as to Canada, and he died a peer. There was a brighter career before him had he left the government, which he could not influence to adoption of his measures, the and taken active part with Villiers in the house, and Cobden out of the house, to compel its attention to the things necessary to the public comfort and peace. The apathy upon the Corn-Law question of which he had so justly complained, no longer existed. A great movement had commenced, and he might have been at its head. He thought Peel could abolish the Corn Law, if he had the courage to do it; but Peel did not, until more courage was required to support than to repeal it. The emancipating measure was a matter of necessity with both whigs and tories. Mr. Thomson was an exceedingly useful pioneer, and it was deeply to be regretted that he did not see how still further he might be useful, by taking part, heart and hand, in the rapidly approaching battle.
The candidates for Manchester were Mr. Robert Hyde Greg, the brother-in-law of Mr. Mark Philips, and a member of the League; Sir George Murray, brought forward by the tories; and Colonel Thompson, brought into the field, greatly to the prejudice of that gallant veteran in the cause of free-trade, without any reasonable ground of expectation that he would be elected, but rather with the view of damaging Mr. Greg, who was considered not radical enough for Colonel Thompson's proposers. Sir George Murray came warily into the contest, and endeavoured to conciliate the free traders by declaring his conviction, that the greatness of this country Was founded upon commerce and manufactures, and that if any law was introduced, which should tend to drive them out of the country, it should be repealed. Mr. J. B. Smith asked the candidate, "What is the Corn Law?" and his reply was: " With regard to the Corn Law, all the agriculturists have a right to expect is, to have the same protection for their industry that the commercial and manufacturing men have for theirs. I am quite open to a fixed duty." "How much?" asked Mr. Smith, and Sir George's reply was, "I will not pledge myself exactly to that;" and thus he went on floundering:—
The Anti-Corn-Law Circular, commenting on this speech, said: "This wretched shuffle cooled many of the political partizans of the candidate, and animated into violent hostility those supporters of liberal opinions whom the corporation question, and the alleged finality policy of government had formerly decided to take no part in the contest at all. Such poor evasion as it manifested could not possibly succeed with strong-minded men, such as Sir George was solicitous to represent. 'Stick to the Corn Laws don't run off,' was truly a home thrust. He was, forsooth, in favour of a fixed duty. 'Aye, but how much ?' Was not the answer very easy? Could he not have said at once 8s. or 10s., or 15s. or 20s. per quarter? Instead of this of this, he turns round, and says, 'Mr. Prentice asks me how much. He asks me to go into the House of Commons as a fettered representative.' No, he did not. He only asked his present opinion on the subject, which, considering that the Corn Laws have been twenty-four years in existence, that Sir George was long a cabinet minister and that he is now sixty-five years of age, he surely has made up his mind about them now, if he is ever to do so on this side of time."
The precept for. the election had been addressed by mistake to the Boroughreeve, the old manorial officer, instead of the Mayor, and though it was recalled, he insisted on acting upon it. There were, therefore, two days' polling. On the 5th of September, the poll, under the Boroughreeve as returning officer, stood thus at its close: Greg, 3,102; Murray, 2,762; Thompson, 64. On the 6th, under the Mayor as returning officer, the poll stood thus at its close:—
| Greg, | 3,421 |
| Murray, | 3,156 |
Giving a majority in Greg's favour of 265.
The Anti-Corn-Law Circular, of October 29th, contained quotations from the following newspapers, all of which advocated the repeal of the landowners' monopoly, and many of them with an ability which produced a powerful effect on the public mind:—
METROPOLITAN.
The Sun.
The Spectator.
The Dispatch.
The Planet.
The Morning Chronicle.
The Morning Advertiser.
The Globe.
The Examiner.
The Patriot.
The Charter.
Athenæum.
Weekly True Sun.
PROVINCIAL.
Aberdeen Herald.
Arbroath Herald.
Ayrshire Examiner.
Aylesbury News.
Birmingham Journal.
Brighton Herald.
Bradford Observer.
Bolton Free Press.
Cheltenham Examiner.
Cheltenham Free Press.
Dundee Advertiser.
Durham Chronicle.
Devonport Independent.
Edinburgh Scotsman.
Edinburgh Observer.
Falmouth Packet.
Gateshead Observer.
Gravesend Journal.
Glasgow Reformers' Gazette.
Glasgow Argus.
Hampshire Independent.
Herts Reformer.
Kelso Chronicle.
Kendal Mercury.
Lancaster Guardian.
Leeds Mercury.
Leeds Times.
Liverpool Chronicle.
Liverpool Journal.
Manchester Times.
Montrose Review.
North Cheshire Reformer.
Portsmouth Independent.
Sturge's Circular.
Sheffield Independent.
Sheffield Iris.
Stirling Observer.
Scottish Patriot.
Scottish Pilot.
Staffordshire Examiner.
Star in the East.
Tyne Pilot.
Tyne Mercury.
Wiltshire Independent.
These were the journals quoted from in that one week. Many more might have been named which advocated free trade with much ability and earnestness. Besides the advocacy of free-trade principles, these journals did great service by reporting at length the numerous meetings, at which the Anti-Corn-Law lecturers were now carrying instructions into every quarter of England and Scotland; and agitation was further aided by forwarding to every Anti-Corn-Law Association, for distribution in each locality, the papers which contained these reports.
Mr. Paulton, who, before the formation of the League, had bestowed his gratuitous labours in the cause of free trade, was now earnestly at work under its sanction. On his return from an exceedingly successful tour of agitation in Scotland, where persons of all ranks had crowded to his lectures, a public dinner was given to him at Bolton. in November, by a hundred and twenty persons. Amongst the speakers, besides the guest of the evening, were Mr. J. C. Darbishire, the Mayor of the Borough, who presided, Mr. P. Ainsworth, M.P., Mr. Brotherton, M.P., Mr. Cobden, Mr. J. B. Smith, who had accompanied Mr. Paulton on his tour immediately after the establishment of the Manchester Anti-Corn-Law Association, Mr. Henry Ashworth, Mr. T. Ballantyne of the Bolton Free Press, and Mr. John Bright, of Rochdale, a young man, then appearing for almost the first time in any meeting out of his own town, and giving evidence, by his energy and his grasp of the subject, of his capacity soon to take a leading part in the great agitation.
Dr. Bowring, towards the close of 1839, did much to confirm the Lancashire and Yorkshire manufacturers, in the principles which he had impressed upon them on his visit of the previous year. In November, a special meeting of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce was held, to hear him respecting the state and prospects of our relations with the countries comprised in the Prussian Commercial Union. He attributed the formation of that League to the refusal of our government to receive the products of Germany, and entered into a great variety of details to show the effect of our restrictive commercial policy, in raising rival manufactures on the continent. There was no debate, for the chamber was now constituted of free traders, but Dr. Bowling's views were strongly corroborated in able speeches by Mr. J. B. Smith, the president,Mr. Cobden, Mr. Thomas Bazley, Mr. Henry Ashworth, Mr. Robert Gardner, Mr. Samuel Stocks, and Mr. Benj. Pearson. The report of the meeting's proceedings appeared in the German papers, and gave rise to much discussion on the continent. "If," said one of the German journals, "the opinion of the Manchester people and of Dr. Bowring were to be found in English legislation, that would be something, but neither represent the government nor the Parliament." Certainly neither did. The object was to make both the government and Parliament yield. Dr. Bowring proceeded to Leeds, where there had arisen an active agitation against the Corn Law, and addressed its Chamber of Commerce very effectively. The Mayor, Mr. Baines, M.P., Mr. J. Holdforth, Mr. George Wise, Mr. John Sykes and Mr. John Waddingham, took part in the proceedings, the report of which was widely circulated in Yorkshire.
There had been formed in Manchester a Working Man's Anti Corn-Law Association, with its own officers and its own lecturers. This body (sending its lecturers to towns and villages seeming to require instruction), looking at the outrageous conduct of some of the working men at the meeting to receive delegates in the Corn Exchange, thought it would be well that they should receive some enlightenment, and with this view invited Dr. Epps, of London, to give them two lectures. The meetings were crowded and much instruction was conveyed, and much incitement was given to action.
The borough of Manchester declared itself for repeal at a great meeting held in the Town Hall, at which Mr. H. Hornby Birley, a gentleman whose connection with the attack on the people assembled in St. Peter's Fields on the 16th August, 1819, made it little likely that he would have a favourable reception, moved, amidst many cries of "Peterloo," that in the opinion of the meeting the only change of the Corn Law should be to a moderate fixed duty, but that the change should not be permitted to be made by a ministry in which the people had no confidence. He was seconded by another conservative, and supported by two chartists, but the motion was negatived by an overwhelming majority, and the original resolutions were carried unanimously.
A volume might be filled with the vituperation poured out in the press against these manifestations of public opinion. A specimen or two may be given. The Morning Post said: "But the manufacturing people exclaim, 'why should we not be permitted to exchange the produce of our industry for the greatest quantity of food which that industry will anywhere command?' To which we answer, why not, indeed? Who hinders you? Take your manufactures away with you by all means, and exchange them anywhere you will, from Tobolsk to Timbuctoo but do not insist on bringing your foreign corn here untaxed, to the ruin of your countrymen engaged in the production of corn. If nothing will serve you but to eat foreign corn, away with you, you and your goods, and let me never see you more. We do not want to drive you away. You are welcome to stay if you will; but remember, if you do, that 'live and let live,' is a fair, and honest, and English mode of proceeding."
The London Standard spoke as plainly: "The present cry against the Corn Laws is, at bottom, the work of a few commercial swindlers, though aided, no doubt, by the exertions of political swindlers, who see the benefit of an agitation calculated to disturb public attention from the misconduct of the (whig) government. It is well, however, to remember that the commercial swindlers are the prime movers because the honest class of traders, who would be the very first victims of a repeal of the Corn Laws, may be entrapped into joining the suicidal movement by what they believed to be good commercial names."