*■ : ■- • : '«t 
 
 y-' 
 
 »J* 
 
 
 
 
 r. ■ ": ->■
 
 -XI B RAHY 
 
 OF THE 
 U N IVLRSITY 
 Of 1LLI NOIS
 
 A £ iUZ^Zu r/tiJ/^ %y*//y ^/L/~o % 6/w£»~*4£ / s 

 
 • •
 
 TAMWORTH ELECTION. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 SIR ROBERT PEEL, 
 
 JUNE 28, 1841. 
 
 LONDON : 
 JOHN OLLIVIER, 59, PALL MALL. 
 
 MDCCCXU.
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 SIR ROBERT PEEL, 
 
 JUNE 28, 1841. 
 
 SIR ROBERT PEEL came forward amidst great cheer- 
 ing, and said — Gentlemen, this is the sixth time that I have 
 asked you to commit to me the important trust of representing 
 you in Parliament. (A voice in the crowd — " You never done 
 that/') Gentlemen, Mr. Knight, the seconder of Captain 
 Townshend, has drawn a contrast between my position in seek- 
 ing the suffrages of the electors of Tamworth and that of my 
 great political opponent, Lord John Russell, in seeking the 
 voices of the citizens of London. Gentlemen, I am not ashamed 
 of the contrast. (Loud cheering.) I might, gentlemen, if I 
 had thought fit, have now been seeking the suffrages of the city 
 of Westminster, but I preferred returning to my old friends and 
 to my old constituency. (Cheers.) And, gentlemen, what- 
 ever Mr. Knight may think of the citizens of London, and I 
 admit it cannot be denied that they are superior to you in wealth 
 and in numbers, I have that respect for your independence and 
 your integrity that I would not prefer a more numerous or a 
 more wealthy constituency. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, I trust that 
 I shall not be deemed guilty of arrogance or of presumption in 
 expressing a hope — in expressing a belief — that I shall be once 
 again placed in the same position that I owed last election to 
 your kind confidence. (Cheers.) I ask that confidence freely, 
 because I have no reason to suppose that your political senti- 
 ments have since undergone any change. And, gentlemen, if I 
 have not, I have the firm conviction that I have kept all the 
 public pledges I have ever made on the hustings, and I feel
 
 conscious that I have faithfully and to the best of my ability 
 discharged the duties you had confided to me. (Cheers.) I 
 have not suffered the temptations of pleasure or the love of in- 
 dolence ever to interfere between me and the discharge of my 
 public duties. (Cheers.) This even my political enemies must 
 admit. (Cheers.) Whatever delight I might have had in your 
 neighbourhood — and here all my delights centre — I have freely 
 foregone them all for my public duty. (Cheers.) Your local 
 and particular interests, it is true, come before Parliament on 
 very few occasions ; but when they did I never for a moment 
 neglected them. (Cheers.) I may not have been always suc- 
 cessful in my advocacy of them — I allude more especially to 
 your Railway Bill. There was in that case a most powerful 
 combination of parties against you — the canal companies and 
 the other railway companies. Your measures were defeated by 
 this combination, but that was not my fault. (Cheers.) Still 
 less was it attributable to any neglect on my part. I gave to 
 them all the attention that my public duties admitted of, and, 
 as I have said, if they failed it was not my fault. (Cheers.) 
 And, gentlemen, I hope I may safely say that when any of my 
 political opponents among you consulted me, I have never, upon 
 any occasion, allowed past election feelings to interfere with 
 their interests. (Hear.) Gentlemen, I have had the honour of 
 representing you in Parliament since the year 1830, and never 
 in the annals of this country has such an eventful and import- 
 ant period elapsed as since then. Gentlemen, it was at that 
 period that those events took place in a neighbouring country 
 — France — which exhibited to the world physical force tri- 
 umphant over established Government — those events which led 
 to a great revolution, not alone in that country, but in Europe ; 
 and which finally expelled a second time from the throne of 
 that kingdom the elder branch of the House of Bourbon. 
 Gentlemen, those events made a most profound impression 
 throughout the whole of Europe. It agitated all countries in 
 Europe — it led to revolution in some of them, and none escaped 
 their great influence. This country was not exempt from it. 
 There arose among us a strong desire for change in the ancient 
 institutions of the country ; and the consequence was a fun- 
 damental alteration in the constitution of the House of Com- 
 mons. Gentlemen, I then foresaw — for this alteration was 
 accompanied by a useless and eager desire for still further 
 change — I then, I say, foresaw the good that might result from 
 laying the foundation of a great Conservative party in the State, 
 attached to the fundamental institutions of the country— not 
 opposed to any rational change in it which the lapse of years
 
 or the altered circumstances of society might require, but de- 
 termined to maintain on their ancient footing and foundation 
 our great institutions in Church and in State. In order to form 
 that party, however, it was necessary, in the first instance, to 
 widen the foundation on which it should stand, to call into our 
 connection men from whom we had been separated in conse- 
 quence of differences which had no longer existed. 
 
 Gentlemen, the great object of my public life was not to gain 
 for myself a position of political, that is to say of official power, 
 but to build up that great party which has been gradually 
 acquiring strength in this country — (Cheers) — which has been 
 Gradually widening the foundation on which it stands ; that 
 great party which has drawn from time to time its support from 
 its opponents; that party which, at first not exceeding one 
 hundred in number, now presents a firm united body which 
 ranks a compact phalanx of three hundred Members of Parlia- 
 ment — (Cheers)— a body, too, gentlemen, be it remembered, 
 not even so strong in point of numbers as it is strong in the 
 confidence of the country. (Cheers and a slight interruption 
 in the crowd.) It may not be strong in your confidence (ad- 
 dressing the party who caused the interruption). I see here 
 below me two or three boys and girls who deny my proposition 
 — (Loud laughter and cheers) — but still I say that the Conser- 
 vative party have the confidence of the great proportion of the 
 intelligence and respectability of the country — (Cheers, and a 
 renewal of the interruption, during which a gentleman on the 
 platform, Mr. Marmion Ferrars, it is believed, addressed the 
 Right Hon. Baronet.) Now, gentlemen, I bear all these inter- 
 ruptions as you do, with the most perfect good humour. (Cheers.) 
 I wish to treat the constituency with the most perfect respect, 
 but it is difficult for me to be heard if I am interrupted. A 
 gentleman near me has just stated that I said that there were 
 no persons of respectability in the country that did not belong; 
 to the Conservative party. That arose from those interruptions ; 
 but I said no such thing. What I did say was, that a party 
 which had increased from one hundred Members in the House 
 of Commons to three hundred in a period of less than ten years 
 must be supported by the respectability and intelligence of a 
 great proportion of the people of the country. And, gentle- 
 men, ihat party has been pleased to entrust your representative 
 with its confidence — (Cheers) — and, notwithstanding all the 
 remarks that have been made at various times respecting dif- 
 ferences of opinion and jealousy among them, you may depend 
 upon it that they are altogether without foundation, and that 
 that party which has paid me the compliment of taking my 
 
 *UIUC J
 
 advice, and following my counsel, are a united and compact 
 party, among which there does not exist the slightest difference 
 of opinion in respect to the principles they support, and the 
 course they may desire to pursue. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, I 
 hope I have not abused the confidence of that great party. 
 (Loud Cheers.) I have not sought in my place in Parliament 
 to obstruct the course of the Government by a factious oppo- 
 sition. (Cheers.) I have never entered into an unnatural 
 coalition with men of extreme opinions in politics, nor sought 
 to court the popular favour by giving a popular vote against my 
 conviction. (Cheers.) I have never sought to exasperate the 
 public mind by exaggerating that distress, which, in all civil 
 societies, a portion of the people most unhappily ever endure. 
 I have never refused to bear my fair share of the popular odium 
 incurred by any measure which the Government brought for- 
 ward, and to which I had given my support. Many and many 
 a time have I even rescued the Government from the difficulties 
 by which they were beset, when I thought the course which 
 they pursued, the plan they recommended, was conducive to 
 the public welfare. (Loud cheers.) 
 
 Gentlemen, I have ever professed moderate opinions on poli- 
 tics. (Cheers.) I have appealed to the course which I pur- 
 sued on measures in respect to which a strong feeling might 
 naturally be expected to prevail among the Conservative party. 
 With respect to the Tithe Commutation Act — that measure 
 which I believe is well calculated to confer a great benefit on 
 the public, and also upon the Church — with respect to the Tithe 
 Commutation Act, I was the first person to call the at- 
 tention of Parliament to the subject, which it settled. (Cheers.) 
 Was I ever known to encourage religious animosity among the 
 people of this country? (Cheers.) When the conduct of the 
 Catholics was complained of, and it was suggested to renew 
 their former disabilities, did I stand forward in my place in 
 Parliament, and say that I repented the share I had taken in 
 removing them, and profess my readiness to repeal the Relief 
 Act? On the contrary, I came forward, and said that my 
 motives fo* relieving the Catholics were pure, and that, so far 
 from joining in the repeal of that relief, I never would consent 
 for a moment to re-enact their disabilities. (Cheers.) Then 
 again with respect to the grievances under which Dissenters 
 state they labour. When I was in office in 1835 I attempted 
 to relieve them, and I should have done so to a very consi- 
 derable extent if I had remained in power. No, gentlemen, 
 the principles I professed, the principles I adhered to, and shall 
 adhere to during my public life, whether in opposition or in
 
 power, are in perfect conformity with the prevailing good sense, 
 with the moderation and with the intelligence of the great body 
 of the people of England— (Hear, hear) — and yet gentlemen, 
 I am not allowed to speak my own opinions. (Loud cheers.) 
 My political opponents know so well that these opinions are in 
 unison with this good sense and this good feeling, that they 
 will not allow me to speak for myself, but every newspaper or 
 pamphlet that appears on their side is filled with extracts or 
 opinions from the speeches of other people ; and these they 
 call the manifestoes of Sir Robert Peel. There is scarcely a 
 subject on which I have not expressed my opinion in Parlia- 
 ment; but yet the organs of the government will not allow me 
 to speak for myself. (Cheers and laughter.) They seize hold 
 of extracts from speeches and addresses which I have never 
 spoken or written, for which I am in no wise answerable-^ 
 many of which I may never have heard of — and then they call 
 them the manifestoes of Sir Robert Peel. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what would be said suppose I took the 
 same course as that adopted, in this respect, by my political 
 opponents ? Suppose I choose to make her Majesty's Minis- 
 ters answerable for the opinions of their supporters. There 
 are sufficient matters of the kind, I assure you, that could be 
 used in this manner. I find, for instance, Lord Charles Rus- 
 sell, the brother of Lord John Russell, tells the electors of 
 Bedford that any alteration in the Corn Laws which would 
 have the effect of substituting a fixed duty for the present scale 
 Would be ruinous to the prosperity of the country. (Cheers, 
 and some interruption in the crowd before the Hustings.) You 
 don't understand what I say. (The Right Hon. Baronet ad- 
 dressed himself to the disturbing party.) You cheer at the 
 wrong place. (Great laughter.) Lord Charles Russell, I say, 
 addresses the electors of Bedford, and says that the substitu- 
 tion of a fixed duty on corn for the present graduated scale 
 would ruin the country and throw two million acres of land 
 out of cultivation. (Loud cheers.) Lord Charles Russell has a 
 perfect right to entertain that opinion. I do not differ from 
 him in regard to it, but could there be anything more dis- 
 creditable to me than to charge Lord John Russell with po- 
 litical duplicity for his brother's opinion? I give Lord John 
 Russell credit for the sincerity of his motives. I do not wish 
 for a moment to charge him with duplicity for this difference 
 of opinion on the part of his brother; but I claim the same 
 credit for myself — I claim the same interpretation for my 
 motivesr— and I claim, above all, to be answerable only for my 
 own opinions. (Hear, hear, hear.) Suppose, however, again,
 
 that I took the same course with respect to the other supporters 
 of her Majesty's Government. Suppose I took the opinion of 
 those who are advocates for a repeal of the union and for the 
 separation of the Canadas from this country, and charged the 
 Government with them as their own. Could anything be 
 more unfair? (Cheers.) Could anything be more unjust? 
 Let me then, I say to them, state my own opinions, and do 
 not make me answerable for those of any other person. Mr. 
 Knight, who has just addressed you, has said that there could 
 be no doubt on the subject of my public opinion. He was 
 right. There can be none. And I tell you now that I authorize 
 no other man whatever to speak them for me. (Cheers.) I 
 speak for myself — I am answerable for my own opinion, and I will 
 not be answerable for the opinions of any other person. Mr. 
 Knight complains that in the speeches of my proposer and 
 seconder there has been no particular reference made to those 
 great questions which have been so recently discussed in the 
 House of Commons. It has been my duty to state my opinions 
 in respect to them in Parliament ; but I think it is also my 
 duty to restate them here for my constituents, rather than to 
 refer them to my speeches on those occasions in Parliament. 
 And, gentlemen, if you give me your patient attention for a 
 little while, I shall refer to those great questions— those mea- 
 sures alluded to by Mr. Knight and Mr. Ingle ; and I hope 
 we shall enter on the discussion of them with that moderation 
 and good temper which I trust will characterize all our pro- 
 ceedings. Gentlemen, I allude more particularly to the pro- 
 position of her Majesty's Government to alter the duties on 
 foreign sugar and reduce the duty on foreign corn. I shall first 
 proceed to discuss the question respecting foreign sugar. Gen- 
 tlemen, in the course of the last session of Parliament a pro- 
 posal was made by the Ministers of the Crown to reduce the 
 duty on foreign sugar, and thereby allow of its introduction to 
 the markets of this country. Gentlemen, I opposed that pro- 
 posal, and my opposition to it I placed on these gronnds. I did 
 not oppose it on the grounds, remark me, that it was unwise or 
 improper to remove restrictions on commerce where such re- 
 strictions were not justified by circumstances. I clearly and freely 
 admit that those restrictions which cannot be justified should be 
 removed, and that the commerce of the country should be perfectly 
 free whenever it was possible it could be so. And when Mr. 
 Ingle alluded to the reduction which had taken place in the arti- 
 cles of wool and coffee, which took place in 1835, he reminded 
 me that I was then the Secretary of State for the Home De- 
 partment, and that I cordially co-operated with the late Mr.
 
 8 
 
 Huskisson in those alterations which he then brought forward 
 for the greater freedom of commerce. But, gentlemen, I con- 
 sider the article of sugar was wholly exempt from the operation 
 of the principle of free trade. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Knight told 
 you that he held in the utmost abhorrence that baneful and 
 iniquitous traffic in human blood so recently abolished in this 
 country ; and that this country had acquired an imperishable 
 glory by that abolition. Gentlemen, it is now a matter of very 
 little difference whether the party who acted with Pitt was in 
 favour of the slave trade and slavery, or whether they were not. 
 The question now is this, whether, after the sacrifices which 
 this country has made for the suppression of the slave trade 
 and the abolition of slavery, and the glorious results that have 
 ensued, and are likely to ensue, from these sacrifices, whether 
 we shall run the risk of losing the benefit of those sacrifices, 
 and tarnishing for ever that glory by admitting to the British 
 markets sugar the produce of foreign slavery ? (cheers). 
 
 Mr. Knight, however, has said that we do not refuse 
 in other articles the produce of slave labour. He states that 
 cotton, tobacco, and coffee, are produce of that description ; 
 and he adds, ihat because we take these articles, it is obvious 
 the deduction that we cannot carry out our principle of the 
 exclusion of slave labour from the British market. The deduc- 
 tion in the abstract is correct ; the proposition in the abstract is 
 just. But follow it to its consequences. You cannot, without 
 endangering to the last degree, the manufacturing prosperity of 
 the kingdom, reject the cotton of the United States. But, 
 gentlemen, there is, however, a peculiar distinction to be taken 
 between sugar and the articles alluded to. Sugar has never 
 been admitted to consumption in this country, the produce of 
 foreign slavery. And the question is, whether or not there is 
 c sufficient supply of sugar from the free labour of our own 
 colonies to enable the working classes to have it in sufficient 
 abundance ; for I admit that it has almost become one of the 
 necessaries of life. Gentlemen, the character of this country 
 in respect to slavery is thus spoken by one of the most eloquent 
 writers and statesmen of another country. It is Dr. Channing, 
 of the United States, that speaks, and he speaks in these 
 terms: — 
 
 " Great Britain, loaded with an unprecedented debt, and 
 " with a grinding taxation, contracted anew debt of a hundred 
 " millions of dollars to give freedom, not to Englishmen, but 
 " to the degraded African. I know not that history records an 
 "act so disinterested, so sublime. In the progress of ages 
 " England's naval triumphs will shrink into a more and more
 
 9 
 
 " narrow space in the records of onr race — this moral triumph 
 " will fill a broader, brighter page." 
 
 Gentlemen, l'et us take care that this " brighter page" be not 
 sullied by the admission of slave sugar into the consumption of 
 this country by our unnecessary encouragement of slavery and 
 the slave trade. Gentlemen, of all other description of slave 
 produce, that of sugar is at once the most laborious and the 
 most destructive to human life. If you take the number of 
 deaths on a sugar plantation and compare them with those on 
 a coffee or cotton plantation, you will iind the increase infinitely 
 greater in proportion than on either. Gentlemen, if then you 
 admit slave-grown sugar to the British market — and here, ob- 
 serve, I again concede that sugar has almost become one of the 
 necessaries of life, and that a sufficient supply of it is therefore 
 a matter of the utmost importance to the working classes of 
 this country — what becomes of your efforts for the abolition of 
 slavery and the slave trade ? I am now only inquiring whe- 
 ther there wants that degree of pressure upon the supply of the 
 article which would justify us morally in encouraging slavery 
 and the slave trade by the admission of foreign slave-grown 
 sugar? If you admit it, it will come from Brazil and Cuba. 
 In Brazil the slave trade exists in full force; in Cuba it is un- 
 mitigated in its extent and horrors. The sugar of Cuba is the 
 finest in the world, but in Cuba slavery in unparalleled in its 
 horrors. I do not at all overstate the fact when I say that 
 50,000 slaves are annually landed in Cuba. That is the yearly 
 importation into the island ; but when you take into considera- 
 tion the vast number that perish before they leave their own 
 coasts, the still greater number that die amidst the horrors of 
 the middle passage, and the numbers that are lost at sea, you 
 will come to the inevitable conclusion that the number landed 
 in Cuba — 50,000 annually — is but a slight indication of the 
 number shipped in Africa, or of the miseries and destruction 
 that have taken place among them during their transport 
 thither. If you open the markets of England to the sugar of 
 Cuba, you may depend on it that you give a great stimulus to 
 slavery and the slave trade (hear). You are making a great 
 experiment in the West Indies — it has hitherto been more suc- 
 cessful than all the circumstances of the case warranted — the 
 industry of those colonies have been somewhat paralyzed by 
 the gift of freedom to the slaves. There is now some difficulty, 
 naturally enough, in finding for the present a sufficient supply 
 of free labour, and there is therefore rather a diminution in 
 our supply of sugar, for the negroes have not yet come round 
 to regular habits of working. It is, however, a diminution and
 
 10 
 
 difficulty only temporary, I apprehend, which will soon there- 
 fore he at an end. Bat your immense possessions in the East 
 Indies give you the means, and afford you every facility for 
 acquiring sugar, the produce of free labour, to an illimitable 
 extent (hear). And these considerations it was — the sacrifice 
 of that character which we have acquired by the abolition of 
 slavery with the whole world, and the prospect of an abundant 
 supply of the article from the East as well as from the West 
 Indies — that led me to the conclusion that it was not neces- 
 sary to open the markets of England to sugar, the produce of 
 slave labour (cheers). Gentlemen, I am happy to inform you 
 that the price of sugar has not augmented. At the beginning 
 of the present year no sugar, the produce of slave labour could 
 be admitted, you'll remember; sugar, the produce of the free 
 labour of our own colonies, Muscovado sugar, by the returns of 
 the past two months of this year, averaged in price 50s. a cwt. 
 exclusive of the duty. In the last two months the average 
 price has not exceeded 37s. to 38s. a cwt. There has, there- 
 fore, by relying on the produce of our own colonies, and though 
 we refused to receive sugar, the produce of slave labour, from 
 Cuba and Brazil, been a reduction in the price of the article 
 of 1 2s. a cwt. (hear, hear). And, gentlemen, I do confidently 
 hope and firmly believe, that with the increased facilities given 
 for the production of sugar in the East Indies — that country to 
 which we are under so many and such deep obligations — that 
 country whose markets for the home trade we ruined by our 
 manufactures — that country which it is our interest to advance 
 — that country whose only wish is to make her remittances in 
 agricultural produce. I say, gentlemen, I do hope and believe 
 that colony, together with our other colonies, will shortly be 
 enabled to give an abundance of sugar to the consumers in 
 this country at the advantage of a reasonable price (cheers), 
 I wish I had the calculation by me on which this hope and 
 belief of mine are founded. If I had I should give you the 
 whole data to judge for yourselves. (Some person in the 
 crowd here said something which did not reach us; the Right 
 Hon. Baronet, however continued). It is perfectly true that 
 the price of sugar last year was so high as to check its con- 
 sumption. I freely admit that fact, and I deeply regret that 
 it should have been so : but since then the price has been 
 very greatly reduced (cheers). At this time last year the price 
 was 57s. to 58s. the hundred weight; since then, however, there 
 has been a reduction of 20s. a hundred weight on that average. 
 So much for the article of sugar (cheers). I come now to the 
 more important article of corn. (Great cheering). I am obliged
 
 11 
 
 to you for the patient attention and the kind hearing you have 
 already accorded me, but I must claim your indulgence still 
 farther (cheers). It is quite impossible to discuss questions of 
 the magnitude and immense importance of these, without a 
 patient and attentive audience (hear). I come now, as I said, 
 to the most important question of all — the introduction of 
 foreign corn into this country. Gentlemen, I must here repeat 
 the opinion which I have declared here before, and also in the 
 House of Commons, that I cannot consent to substitute a 
 fixed duty of 8s. a quarter on foreign corn, for the present 
 ascending and descending scale of duties (cheers). I prefer 
 the principle of the ascending and descending scale to such 
 an amount of fixed duty. And when I look at the bur- 
 dens the land is subject to in this country, I do not consider 
 the fixed duty of 8s. a quarter on corn from Poland and 
 Prussia and Russia, where no such burdens exist, a suffi- 
 cient protection for it. (Great cheering.) Gentlemen, it is cer- 
 tainly a very tempting thing in theory to buy your corn at the 
 cheapest market. But, gentlemen, before you adopt that theory 
 in practice, you must, as a matter of common justice, compare 
 the burthens on the land in other countries with the burthens on 
 the land in this country. (Cheers.) The land in this country is 
 most heavily burthened ; you cannot conceal that (addressing 
 some disturbers in the crowd). Look at the amount of the 
 poors' rates as levied on land, as compared with that levied on 
 the productive means of manufacturing industry. (Cheers.) 
 Who pay the highway rates ? Who pay the church rates ? 
 Who pay the poors' rate ? Who pay the tithes I I say not, 
 perhaps, altogether, but chiefly, the landed occupier of this 
 country. And, gentlemen, if corn be the product of other land 
 not subject to these burthens, it surely would not be just to the 
 land of this country, which bears them all, to admit it at a low 
 duty. (Hear, hear.) The duty of 8s a quarter is proposed by the 
 Government, if this proposition be adopted I foresee this will be 
 the certain result. You will have a redundancy of foreign corn 
 when you are not in want of it, when your own harvests are pro- 
 fitable and abundant ; but when the time of scarcity shall arrive 
 it will be impossible for you to levy the duty of 8s. a quarter on 
 foreign corn. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, what provision, I ask you, 
 is to be made for that contingency ? (Hear.) If corn be at 70s 
 or 80s a quarter, will it be possible to levy the fixed duty of 8s a 
 quarter? (Hear, hear.) By whom is it to betaken off and 
 when ? Once off, by whom is it to be laid on again ? (Hear, 
 hear.) Gentlemen, Mr. Ingle has said that he has read with 
 care and attention every work that has been published on the 
 subject of the Corn Laws. (Great laughter.) Gentlemen, I have
 
 12 
 
 attempted to pursue the same course, and in doing so I have 
 not confined my reading to those pamphlets or speeches which 
 are in favour of the Corn Laws, but I have also directed it to 
 the perusal of those that are in favour of the change proposed in 
 them, and the substitution of a fixed duty. (A laugh.) But I 
 beg to call your attention to what Mr. Ingle has said. He 
 farms, he tells you, to the extent of 1,2007. a year rent ; and he 
 produces, he has stated, three thousand bushels of corn annually. 
 He is a skilful practical agriculturist, that I know myself, and so 
 do many of you ; but his title to be authority is not alone 
 derived from this fact, he is also a learned man on corn, for has 
 he not told you that he has read all the pamphlets and speeches 
 on the subject of the Corn Laws. (Great laughter.) Well, gen- 
 tlemen, what is it Mr. Ingle has told you? This gentleman, 
 who to the experience of a practical agriculturist adds the learn- 
 ing of a man deeply versed in corn-pamphlet lore! (Laughter.) 
 He tells you, gentlemen, that if you have a fixed duty of 8s a 
 quarter in place of the graduated scale, you will not effect a re- 
 duction of a farthing in the price of the loaf. 
 
 Mr. Ingle — I said a shilling on the bushel. 
 
 Sir R. Peel — Take a series of years for your averages — make 
 this experiment (so doubtful in its issue, to say the least of it), 
 and, after all, you will have, as he, the great advocate of the 
 fixed duty tells you, a reduction of only Is on the bushel of 
 corn. (Cheers.) What, then, becomes of the cry of " Cheap 
 bread ? " (Great cheering.) How will the poor manufacturers 
 of Nuneaton, whose distress I have heard of to-day, hope for in- 
 creased employment, and a reduction in the price of food, if the 
 change proposed to be made in the Corn Laws produces no 
 other effect than that expected by Mr. Ingle. Gentlemen, here 
 is a pamphlet in favour of the alteration in the existing law as 
 respects corn. It is written by one of the most intelligent and 
 able advocates of the fixed duty scheme. It is from the pen of 
 Mr. Macculloch, the author of the " Dictionary of Commerce," 
 and other works of that description. He takes a dispassionate 
 and able view of the case in question — he looks at it calmly, and 
 he reasons upon it closely and deliberately. I must begin by 
 telling you that he is a most decided advocate of the fixed duty. 
 (One of the crowd here raised the cry, " A big loaf," and the 
 Right Hon. Baronet addressed himself to him.) It is just that 
 I am coming to. (Loud laughter.) It is entirely with reference 
 to that cry that 1 am about to read this extract. I am obliged 
 to you for the interruption ; however — (Great laughter) — I will 
 now read it for you. (Renewed laughter.) Gentlemen, Mr. 
 Macculloch is a clever and able man, as I told you ; the great 
 advocate of a change in the Corn Law, and whose sole object is
 
 13 
 
 to obtain an alteration or abolition of it ; and this is what he 
 says. Like a sincere and honest man, he makes these admissions 
 with respect to land : — 
 
 " The price of wheat in England at an average of the ten 
 " years ending with 1820, was no less than 835. 6d. a quarter. 
 " Its average price has since, as we have just seen, been 
 " reduced to 56s. llje?. a quarter, and yet, notwithstanding 
 " this tremendous fall, a most extraordinary improvement has 
 " taken place in agriculture since 1820; so much so that we 
 " now provide for an additional population of at least seven 
 " millions, not only without any increase, but with a very con- 
 " siderable diminution of importation. Considering the vast 
 " importance of agriculture, that nearly half the population of 
 " the empire are directly or indirectly dependent on it for 
 " employment and the means of subsistence, a prudent states- 
 " man would pause before he gave his sanction to any measure, 
 " however sound in principle, or beneficial to the mercantile 
 " and manufacturing classes, that might endanger the pros- 
 " perity of agriculture or check the rapid spread of im- 
 u provement." 
 
 Gentlemen, I need not say that I fully agree with this sen- 
 timent, and I certainly think that a prudent statesman would 
 pause before he meddled with it. (Hear, hear.) Look at the 
 capital invested in land and agriculture in this country — look 
 at the interests involved in it— look at the arrangement that has 
 been come to for the commutation of tithes — look at your im- 
 portation of corn diminishing for the last ten years— consider 
 the burdens on the land peculiar to this country — take all these 
 into consideration, and then you will agree with Mr. Maccul- 
 loch, " that a prudent statesman would pause before he gave 
 his sanction to any measure, however sound in principle and 
 beneficial to the mercantile and manufacturing classes, that 
 might endanger the prosperity of the agriculture of this country, 
 or check the rapid spread of improvement." Gentlemen, it is 
 said that the state of the manufactures and commerce of this 
 country is so distressed, that it is necessary to change the pre- 
 sent Corn Law to revise and give them relief. No one feels a 
 deeper interest than I do in the manufacturing prosperity of 
 this country. Gentlemen, is it possible that I can recollect the 
 origin of my own prosperity — is it possible that I can reflect 
 that I owe all I possess— that I owe all I am to manufacturing 
 industry, and not feel the most lively interest in all that affects 
 the trade and manufactures of the country ? (Cheers.) No, 
 Gentlemen, I should be acting a most ungrateful part indeed if 
 1 forgot these circumstances. (Cheers.) is it possible that I 
 who owe all to the industry of the working classes should not
 
 14 
 
 be anxious for the adoption of every measure that would enable 
 them to command the necessaries, and, if possible, the luxuries 
 of life? (cheers.) Gentlemen, I have that feeling to its fullest 
 extent ; but I have also the deep feeling and thorough convic- 
 tion that their present distress is not attributable to the Corn 
 Laws ; and, moreover, that we should be acting a most unwise 
 part if, while labouring under temporary difficulties, we made 
 any alteration in the application of capital to the cultivation of 
 land, or disturbed its existing arrangement. (Cheers.) Before 
 we make the change we should be well convinced of the fact 
 that the distress which is complained of and for which we all 
 grieve, arises from the operation of the Corn Laws. (Cheers.) 
 Gentlemen, I admit the existence of manufacturing distress — 
 I admit and deplore it, but I do not despair. I have seen dis- 
 tress in manufactures and commerce before now. I think that 
 the causes of the present distress are but temporary, and I hope 
 I shall very shortly see the day when our manufactures will 
 once more revive, and when we shall again fill the place we 
 have always occupied, that of producers for the markets of the 
 world. (Great cheering.) Now let us consider the important 
 question as to how far the distress of the manufactures and 
 commerce of the country is fairly attributable to the Corn Laws. 
 (Cheers.) Gentlemen, in the course of the last year complaints 
 were made in the House of Commons of the want of attention 
 paid by the Government to the commercial and manufacturing 
 interests of the country, and on that occasion a Minister of the 
 Crown, in defending the Government against the charge made 
 against them, gave the following account of the trade and com- 
 merce of Great Britain. Mind you, it was the statement of 
 them only the last year. On the 22d of July, 1840, in this dis- 
 cussion Lord Palmerston said, " If Ministers had not paid at- 
 tention to the interests of British commerce, they had at least 
 been very fortunate in seeing it advance progressively. He 
 held in his hand a statement of the exports from the United 
 Kingdom. He would take 1830 as the first year. The total 
 official value of the -exports was : — 
 
 In 1830 - - - - £38,000,000 
 
 1831 - •• - 37,000,000 
 
 1832 - 38,000,000 
 
 1833 - - - 39,000,000 
 
 1834 - 41,000,000 
 3 835 - - - 47,000,000 
 
 1836 ... - 45,000,000 
 
 1837 - - 42,000,000 
 
 1838 - 50,000,000 
 
 1839 - - - 53,000,000
 
 15 
 
 And yet all this was under the opera ti@n of the Corn Laws — 
 (Cheers) — and Lord Palmerston said, and very justly said it 
 too, that the exports had risen between 1830 and 1839 from 
 the value of 38,000,000/ to the value of 53,000,000/, a very con- 
 siderable increase. It might be said that we exported without 
 being gainers by the process, either giving commodities away 
 or selling them at a reduced value. But if it appeared that 
 during the same time the imports had also increased in the 
 same proportion, it was quite clear that it would thereby be 
 established that the wholesome and substantial trade of the 
 country was advantageous while it had gone on progressively 
 extending. Lord Palmerston then gave the official value of 
 the imports of the United Kingdom for those ten years, and 
 here they are : — The official value of the imports for the same 
 period was as follows : — 
 
 In 1830 - - -£46,000,000 
 
 1831 - - - 49,000,000 
 
 1832 - - - 44,000,000 
 
 1833 - - - 45,000,000 
 
 1834 - - - 49,000,000 
 
 1835 - - - 48,000,000 
 
 1836 - - - 57,000,000 
 
 1837 -' - - 54,000,000 
 183S - - - 61,000,000 
 1839 - - - 64,000,000 
 
 Here, therefore, the imports had increased between 1 830 and 
 1839 from 46,000,000/. to 62,000,000/., a clear proof that, not- 
 withstanding the local and temporary checks which our com- 
 merce had experienced, on the whole it had gone on steadily 
 improving, and that between the two periods it had increased 
 not much less than from two to three. Gentlemen, that is the 
 opinion of the Minister of the Crown for Foreign Affairs as to 
 the increase in the trade and commerce of this country from 
 1830 to 1839, during the whole of which, you will remember, 
 the Corn Laws were in operation. (Cheers.) Now, gentlemen, 
 this makes me very much doubt whether the Corn" Laws can 
 fairly or honestly be assigned as the cause of the present manu- 
 facturing and commercial distress. (Hear, hear.) Lord Pal- 
 merston, it is true, was speaking last year, and he had not had 
 the report of the state of either for 1840 ; the returns were only 
 made up to 1839, and you may say it is possible since then that 
 a diminution of this increase had taken place, and that causes 
 now existed, arising therefrom, for a repeal of the Corn Laws. 
 Gentlemen, we have now a full account of the state of the trade
 
 16 
 
 of Great Britain for the year 1840— we have now the returns 
 for the year not included in the Noble Lord's statement ; and 
 what do they say ? The accounts of the value of the imports 
 and exports of this country for the last three years, bringing up 
 the returns to the latest possible period, the end of December, 
 1 840, are as follow : — 
 
 Trade of Great Britain with Foreign Ports, 
 
 Years. Official value of Imports. 
 
 1838 - - -£59,800,000 
 
 1839 - - 60,300,000 
 
 1840 - - - 65,800,000 
 
 Official value of Total Exports. 
 
 1838 - - - -£104,810,000 
 
 1839 - - - 109,700,000 
 
 1840 - 116,000,000 
 
 Last year, you will remember, it was alleged, was one of severe 
 distress among the manufacturing and commercial classes. In 
 perfect fairness, we must, then, give the unfavourable side of 
 the question as well as the favourable. The return I have just 
 quoted gives the quantity of goods sent out of the country, and 
 shews the increase that" had taken place ; but another return 
 that I hold in my hand gives also the real value. Here 
 it is : — 
 
 Real or Declared Value of the Produce and Manufactures 
 xof Great Britain exported. 
 
 In 1838, - - £49,640,000 
 
 1839, - - 52,701,000 
 
 1840, - - 50,900,000 
 
 So that, although, as compared with the increased quantity in 
 1840, there is a diminution of value in 1839, you will find 
 that, if you compare 1840 with 1838, there is an absolute 
 increase in the real value. (Cheers.) Gentlemen, these are 
 dry details, and they may appear uninteresting to many ; but, 
 after all, they are the only means by which a great question 
 like that we are now discussing can be satisfactorily settled. 
 It is by a reference to figures and to accounts that we can best 
 approximate to facts. I am now inquiring whether there is 
 such an alteration in the trade and commerce of this country 
 as requires a corresponding alteration in the Corn Laws ? I 
 take the navigation and shipping of the country for the last 
 three years, and in looking at them I cannot help thinking 
 that, if there was anything like an absolute decrease in trade
 
 17 
 
 and commerce, there would also be a decrease in the shipping 
 of the country. Well, then, what do I find? Here are the 
 returns on the subject : — 
 
 Navigation of the United Kingdom. 
 
 Vessels Built and Registered. 
 
 Years. Tonnage. 
 
 1838 - - - 241,000 
 
 1839 - - - 295,000 
 
 1840 - - - 333,000 
 
 Total Number of Vessels in the Foreign Trade. 
 Entered Inwards. 
 
 1838 - - - 4,000,000 
 
 1839 - - - 4,440,000 
 
 1840 - - - 4,650,000 
 
 Cleared Outwards. 
 
 1838 - - - 4,100,000 
 
 1839 - - - 4,490,000 
 
 1840 - . - 4,780,000 
 
 I take the tonnage of the vessels, because I think it the 
 fairest — the number of ships built or despatched would 
 be no sufficient criterion, because some might be- small and 
 others large. But the tonnage is a thing certain. Well, 
 then, here is an increase presented within the last three 
 years from 1,400,000 tons to 4,780,000 tons. Gentlemen, I do 
 not, as I have more than once stated this day, deny the exist- 
 ence of manufacturing distress in Nuneaton and elsewhere. I 
 admit it, and I regret it ; but on looking at these great ques- 
 tions, we are bound to take the most comprehensive views we 
 can, and by all possible means to avoid the serious error of 
 founding national legislation on imperfect data and confined 
 views. In so doing, in legislating for this district or for that, 
 for the purpose of one interest or another, we might run the 
 dangerous risk of undermining the foundations of our national 
 prosperity. And I do think that if you disturb agriculture and 
 divert the employment of capital from the land, you may not 
 increase your foreign trade, for that is a thing to doubt under 
 existing circumstances ; but will assuredly reduce the home 
 trade, by reducing the means to meet the demand, and thus 
 permanently injure yourselves also. Gentlemen, I said that I 
 did not deny the existence of manufacturing and commercial 
 distress, and I said likewise that I hoped it would be but tem- 
 porary — that the cloud would soon blow over, and that the 
 great foundations of manufacturing prosperity were not affected. 
 I repeat it ; and to this 1 moreover add that I see causes
 
 18 
 
 enough in the world as well as in this country why there should 
 be manufacturing and commercial distress at the present mo- 
 ment, irrespective and totally independent of the Corn Laws, 
 and which we should all bear in mind on any consideration of 
 the question. Gentlemen, I do fear that in the north of Eng- 
 land an undue stimulus has been given to manufacturing 
 industry by the accommodation system pursued in the joint- 
 stock banks. (Hear, hear.) I think the connection of the 
 manufacturer with the joint-stock banks gave an undue and 
 an improper impulse to trade in that part of the country; and 
 I think that, in consequence of this, there have been more 
 manufactures produced within the last two years than were 
 necessary to supply the demand for them. This I think is one 
 of the many causes of the manufacturing and commercial 
 distress at the present moment. But there are several others. 
 Look to the state of some of the countries of the world which 
 took at one time the greatest quantity of our manufactures. 
 Look to South America, for instance. What the operation of 
 the internal dissension in that country has been upon our trade 
 and commerce is, perhaps, incalculable. During the period I 
 have been speaking of, the ports of South America with which 
 our traffic chiefly lay, have been strictly blockaded by France. 
 Consequently, there has been a complete interruption to our 
 trade in that direction, and a consequent diminution in the 
 demand for our usual supply of manufactures. Now, let us 
 go further northward on the same continent. One of the best 
 consumers we have for our manufactures is the United States of 
 North America, a country with which I trust we shall long 
 maintain the intimate relations of friendship and peace. 
 (Great cheering.) And, gentlemen, I do hope that neither 
 country — that or this — will be mad enough to quarrel about a 
 boundary line, when peace can be preserved without detriment 
 to tbe honour of either, for the preservation of national honour 
 should be always the first consideration. And I do further hope 
 that the good sense and moderation of both countries will 
 avert any quarrel between two nations who boast of a common 
 origin, who speak the same language, and between whom any 
 collision could not take place without materially affecting for 
 the worse the best interests of humanity all over the globe. 
 (Cheers.) But, as I was saying, that great country labours 
 under a similar distress to our own, which also arises from 
 similar causes. The facility of accommodation afforded by 
 certain banks there gave an undue stimulus to industry ; this 
 produced extravagant speculations, many persons failed in con- 
 sequence, and trade necessarily then came to a stand still. That,
 
 19 
 
 as I have stated, was one of the causes of our own manufacturing 
 distress. Well, then, look at the state of Canada. I hope and 
 trust that that country has now settled down quietly, and that all 
 symptoms of rebellion are at an end there ; but you will easily 
 conclude that a rebellion could not have taken place in any 
 country without producing a stoppage in the demand for ma- 
 nufactured goods, and a correspondent depression in commerce. 
 Look next at the state of the Peninsula, the condition of Por- 
 tugal and Spain, both internally convulsed and both still 
 unsettled. This could not exist either without also affecting 
 the demand for your manufactures. Range then along the 
 shores of the Mediterranean and pass on to the coast of Syria. 
 On that coast no doubt the British arms have been triumphant, 
 as I trust they will always be; but unquestionably the war 
 affected the demand for your manufactures. Egypt, too, was 
 in a state of warfare, another cause of depression in trade and 
 commerce. Go then to China. Under the present circum- 
 stances it was impossible but that the relations in which we 
 stood towards that empire should affect the demand for our 
 manufactures as well as our entire commerce. And then to 
 come back again to Europe. Look at the state of France 
 during the last year. Look at the enormous outlay of money 
 made by her on military preparations, which sum was, con- 
 sequently, a diversion of capital from useful purposes. In the 
 great kingdoms of the middle and north of Europe it was the 
 same as in France. All these causes combined could not 
 exist without essentially affecting our commerce and manu- 
 facture. When you come to consider the undue stimulus to 
 industry in the manufacturing districts of this country — when 
 you come to consider the condition of the United States, the 
 position of Egypt, the state of China, the way in which France 
 has been— -when you put these things together, all causes, mind 
 you, affecting the market for your goods, and then combine 
 them with the two or three defective harvests we have had of 
 late, I ask you to answer me the question whether or not they 
 have not been sufficient to account for the depression of ma- 
 nufacturing industry, and then to say are we called upon, 
 under such circumstances, to substitute a fixed duty on foreign 
 corn for the present ascending and descending scale? (Cheers.) 
 Gentlemen, it is by a careful consideration of these facts that 
 I have come to the conclusion that the existing system should 
 not be altered; and that, moreover, we should, as much as 
 possible, make ourselves independent of a foreign supply. 
 Seeing, then, how rapidly agriculture has increased, and that, 
 according to Mr. M'Culloch, you are enabled to support
 
 20 
 
 7, (X 0,000 of people more than you did 20 years since with 
 only the same resources, I, therefore, come to the same con- 
 clusion with him, "that a prudent statesman will pause before 
 he disturbs the principle of the existing Corn Laws" — of those 
 Corn Laws which, when you have an abundance of your own, 
 excludes altogether the foreign supply, and which when the 
 price rises in this country freely admit it. I say, gentlemen, 
 this system proposed has a manifest disadvantage over every 
 other, that when corn rises to a height in price inconvenient to 
 the people of this country it will not be possible to levy the 
 duty of 85. a quarter. (Cheers.) Now, gentlemen, I hope I 
 have redeemed my promise, and stated fully and to your satis- 
 faction the grounds on which I came to the conclusion I have 
 arrived at on the subject of the Sugar and Corn Law ques- 
 tions. Gentlemen, it was mainly in consequence of these 
 proposals that her Majesty's Government appealed to the 
 people of this country. Two years since, in consequence of 
 the power ofthe Conservative party in the House of Commons, 
 that Government tendered their resignation to her Majesty, 
 The ground on which they tendered it was that we had pre- 
 vented them from destroying the free representative Govern- 
 ment of Jamaica. (Cheers.) It was proposed by them to sub- 
 stitute a form of government in that island by which it would 
 be governed by the power of the Crown alone, without a re- 
 presentation. 1 opposed it — my friends opposed it. We said 
 it would utterly destroy all public confidence in the West 
 Indies, and we said it was against the principles professed by 
 a Whig Ministry to destroy the representative system of 
 government, and substitute in its place a government by orders 
 in Council. The Government, as I have stated, tendered their 
 resignation on the ground that they had not the confidence of 
 the House of Commons. It was accepted. They returned to 
 power ; but have they had any increase of confidence since on 
 the part of the House ? (Cheers.) There has been no falling 
 off of our power. They were able to carry no measure since 
 that was not believed by us to be for the good of the country. 
 Power they possessed none. (Cheers.) They failed in their 
 proposition respectiug the sugar duties. (Cheers.) They failed 
 in many others which I shall not now enumerate. Under 
 these circumstances, it appeared to me that it was not paying 
 due homage to the principle of representation that a Govern- 
 ment should attempt to continue in office while deprived of 
 the confidence of the representative body. I, therefore, sub- 
 mitted the case to the consideration of the House of Commons, 
 and the House of Commons declared — by a small majority it
 
 21 
 
 fs true, but still by a majority — that they had not its confi- 
 dence. But it is for the people of this country to say whether 
 they concur in opinion with the past Parliament on this point, 
 and whether they will give to the Administration that con- 
 fidence which has been withdrawn from it by the last House 
 of Commons. I am glad that the appeal has been made to 
 you by the Government. (Cheers.) I gave them every ad- 
 vantage to make it. (Cheers.) They boast of the confidence 
 of the Crown— they have every means at their disposal which 
 official influence can command to exert in their own behalf. 
 An appeal has been made by them from the House of Com- 
 mons to you, and it is for the country to decide the question 
 at issue. (Cheers.) They have made an appeal to public 
 feeling on account of cheap sugar and cheap bread. My firm 
 belief is that the people of this country have not at all re- 
 sponded to that cry. (Cheers, accompanied by some interrup- 
 tion. Addressing himself to the person who interrupted him, 
 the Right Hon. Baronet continued) — You will see to-morrow 
 about three o'clock, when the poll will be concluded, and you 
 will then be able to determine whether or not I have the con- 
 fidence of the constituent body of Tamworth. (Cheers.) 
 
 The Interrupting party — If you only act in one or* two things 
 as we wish, it would be all Peel and nobody else. 
 
 Sir R. Peel — My opponent says that such is his confidence in 
 me that if I adopt certain measures it would be all Sir Robert 
 Peel and nobody else, (Cheers.) It is perfectly allowable to 
 entertain different opinions on different subjects ; but this gen- 
 tleman says that if on one or two questions I adopt his opinions 
 it will be all Sir Robert Peel and nobody else. (Laughter.) I 
 shall, however, refer to the voice of the constituent body to 
 determine whether or not I have their confidence ; and even 
 if that body was still more enlarged than it is, I should not 
 shrink from an appeal to it on this occasion ; for I think they 
 would say, like my friend there, we are all for Sir Robert Peel. 
 (Cheers and laughter.) With respect to the measures of the 
 Government on the subjects of corn and sugar, give me 
 leave to tell you — whether they were wise or not I'll not now 
 question — but give me leave to tell you why I think they have 
 had any effect but that of conciliating respect or esteem for them. 
 There is a strong impression abroad, gentlemen, that these mea- 
 sures were not prepared on a deliberate consideration of their 
 merits, but that they were somewhat suddenly adopted, on a 
 moment of emergency, for the purpose of conciliating the pub- 
 lic favour in the ensuing elections. (Cheers.) I said so in the 
 House of Commons ; but when I was assured by Lord John
 
 22 
 
 Russell that such was not the case, but that they were the result 
 of careful consideration, I, of course, was bound to believe it. 
 But still, gentlemen, I cannot help think that it is somewhat 
 unfortunate that they were brought forward at that moment ; 
 and I must say that I certainly think there were grounds to 
 suppose that they had been put forth as a set-off to political 
 differences. (Cheers.) That was denied ; but still I think it 
 unfortunate that they were not produced at an earlier period of 
 the session ; that mention had not been made of them in the 
 Queen's speech, especially as they were stated to be, as they 
 really were, of the most vital importance to the country. 
 (Cheers.) Why, gentlemen, with respect to sugar, I opposed 
 no later than last year the introduction of foreign sugar into 
 this country; and I opposed it on what perhaps some here would 
 consider worthy company — I mean the whole of her Majesty's 
 Government. (Cheers.) When a proposal was made to reduce 
 the duty on it I voted against it, in company with the whole of 
 the Ministers. I voted against it on these grounds. On the 
 25th of June, 1840, Mr. Ewart, then Member for Wigan, made 
 a motion for the reduction of the duty on foreign sugar from 63s. 
 to 34s. per cwt. The motion was negatived by a majority of 
 122 to 27. I was one of the 122, and so were the whole of 
 her Majesty's Government. (Cheers.) On that occasion Mr. 
 Labouchere, the President of the Board of Trade, said the price 
 of sugar was then unexampled ; that it was 20s. a cwt. more 
 than in the time of war, and that the consumption was dimi- 
 nishing. He then stated his reasons for opposing the motion : — 
 
 " A broad distinction, however," he added, " existed between 
 V the importation of sugar and the importation of tobacco and 
 " cotton. The two latter articles did not enter into competition 
 " with any similar articles produced by free labour in this coun- 
 " try. He attributed the deficient supply to local and tempo- 
 " rary causes; to the unwillingness of the emancipated negroes 
 " at first to labour and to a season of peculiar drought. But, 
 " he said, the people of this country required the great expe- 
 l< riment of emancipation to be fairly tried, and they would not 
 " think it fairly tried if at this moment, when the colonies were 
 " struggling with such difficulties, we were to open the flood- 
 " gates of a foreign supply, and to inundate the British market 
 " with sugar the produce of slave labour." 
 
 That was the language of her Majesty's Government — this the 
 course they had taken last year. That is the language and that 
 is the course I hold now ; and I ask you is it not too bad of 
 them to turn round and accuse me of faction for doing still 
 what I did in their company last year— for using, in short, their
 
 23 
 
 own language ? And then with respect to the Corn Laws, 
 what has heen their course— what the language they have em- 
 ployed? (Cheers.) On June the 11th, 1840, Lord Melbourne 
 spoke thus, in a debate on the subject : — 
 
 " Whether his Noble Friend's (Lord Fitzwilliam) object was 
 " to have a fixed duty or an alteration as to the ascending and 
 " descending scale, he saw clearly and distinctly that that ob- 
 " ject would not be carried without a most violent struggle — 
 " without causing much ill blood and a deep sense of grievance 
 " —without stirring society to its foundations, and leaving every 
 " sort of bitterness and animosity. He did not think the advan- 
 " tages to be gained by the change were worth the evils of the 
 61 struggle." 
 
 It is language such as this, gentlemen, that has prevented the 
 Government from acquiring that strength with the country on 
 questions so captivating as cheap bread and cheap sugar. 
 (Cheers.) They said last year it was necessary to give the ex- 
 periment of emancipation a fair trial— and that the benefits to 
 be derived from a change in the Corn Laws was not worth the 
 struggle for it. (Cheers.) They have since changed their tone, 
 and there is now no sufficient objection to the introduction of 
 slave sugar ; and they are, moreover, content to run the risk of 
 a struggle on that great question of corn, so exciting at all times 
 as between the manufacturing and the landed interests of this 
 country. (Cheers.) I retain my opinions unaltered — I think, 
 as they did, that the great experiment of emancipation in the 
 West Indies should be fairly tried ; and I deprecate a struggle 
 on the subject of the Corn Laws, because I think, as Lord Mel- 
 bourne did lastyear, the advantages are not sufficient to counter- 
 balance the risk ; and I ask your free suffrages with this frank 
 and explicit declaration of my opinions. Gentlemen, I have 
 done. I have thought it my duty to trouble you at length, be- 
 cause, although you are not equal to the city of London in 
 wealth or in numbers, you are as much entitled to some consi- 
 deration from your representative as the largestand most wealthy 
 constituency in the kingdom. Gentlemen, on every question 
 connected with your local and particular interests I have speci- 
 ally avoided adverting to irritating topics, and I maintained a 
 profound silence. I shall still maintain that silence, as the ab- 
 sence of Captain Townshend would be a sufficient motive for 
 me to do so had none other existed. It is my wish that our 
 difference in political opinions should lead as little as possible 
 to the interruption of our private friendship ; and I am anxious 
 to imitate the example of Captain Townshend's proposer in the 
 avoidance of all irritating topics. I wish to introduce as little
 
 24 
 
 of private or personal animosity as possible into the contest — 
 for I hold it to be wholly unnecessary. But I have other rea- 
 sons. I love to be in the midst of you ; I wish to consider you 
 all as my neighbours ; and if not as my political, I would fain 
 behold you as my private friends — (cheers) — to whose welfare 
 I feel the deepest interest. Gentlemen, I have done what I 
 could to fix the foundations of my family in your town — 
 (cheers) — and it is a grateful task to me to continue and confirm 
 this intimacy for my children. 
 
 A voice in the crowd said something about the payment of 
 the poor, which did not reach us. 
 
 Sir Robert Pell — Gentlemen, you don't suppose that this 
 foolish overgrown fellow — (a laugh) — whose only complaint 
 against me is about a debt of 16s. can interrupt or disturb in the 
 slightest degree the good humour and the harmony which pre- 
 vails this day among us. (Cheers.) As I have said, I have 
 brought up my children in your neighbourhood, and inculcated 
 on them from their earliest infancy an attachment for your town. 
 But independent of this, I must say that during my canvass I 
 have met with so much personal regard, even where there was 
 political difference, that gratitude would prevent the introduc- 
 tion of any irritating topics. I heve met in my canvass persons 
 who refused to vote for me on conscientious grounds ; but I 
 must say that on all occasions they diminished my regret at 
 their refusal by the assurance on their parts of great personal 
 good will. (Cheers.) On that account, and for that reason, 
 I should adhere to the course I had chalked out for myself — to 
 avoid all causes that could concur to personal animosity. I feel 
 confident that I shall be replaced in the honourable situation of 
 trust that I have hitherto held at your hands ; and I hope that, 
 even with those who oppose me politically, I may be able to 
 resume the kindly intercourse of neighbourhood, and that, if we 
 cannot be political friends, we shall > at least, not meet as private 
 enemies. (Cheers.) Thanking you most cordially for the at- 
 tention with which you have heard me, I conclude by inviting 
 you to appear at the poll to-morrow, to convince the country 
 that I have not forfeited the confidence of that constituent body 
 which, so long as I shall have a seat in the House of Commons, 
 will have a paramount claim upon my acknowledgment and my 
 gratitude. 
 
 The Right Honourable Baronet, who was just two hours 
 speaking, then retired amidst the most enthusiastic cheering. 
 
 J. OLLIVIER, PRINTER, 59, PALL MALL.

 
 
 r^m- 
 
 kMri- 
 
 r.-\ w - 
 
 ■*' 
 
 
 %*? 
 
 
 'aft: